kelpiewilson

Greens Take Heart at Final Energy Bill

By Kelpie Wilson
t r u t h o u t | Report
Thursday 06 December 2007

When the Democrats took the helm of Congress last January, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi vowed to make energy independence a top priority. Democrats will "energize America," she said, and get the country off of imported oil.

Last summer, both houses of Congress passed energy bills oriented toward increasing energy efficiency and boosting renewable power and biofuels. But there were major differences between the House and Senate versions: The House version had no Corporate Average Fuel Economy program (CAFE) car mileage mandate due to Michigan Rep. John Dingell, (an auto industry champion), and the Senate version had no Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) due to strong opposition from Senate Republicans. Green-leaning energy advocates and environmentalists wanted both mandates in a final bill.

The Democratic leadership had a job in front of them to reconcile these two versions and get a final bill to the floor, especially since Senate Republicans refused to appoint a conference committee. But it appears they have finally done it. And not only that, it is a bill many greens think is worth supporting.

Just a few weeks ago, the chances of Democrats bringing a strong bill to a vote looked slim. Before Thanksgiving, Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that to smooth the way toward passing a bill by Christmas, they would drop the RES. Advocates for renewable energy reacted strongly, calling the move a "lump of coal" in their Christmas stocking.

Hey Bubba, Where You Going With That Oil?

By Kelpie Wilson
t r u t h o u t | Environment Editor
Thursday 29 November 2007

Last weekend, a Reuters report revealed that the US military has stepped up its logistics to move a large amount of additional fuel supplies into the Persian Gulf.

Correspondent Stefan Ambrogi reported: "A Gulf oil industry source said the charters suggested there would be high naval activity, possibly including a demonstration to Iran that the U.S. Navy will protect the Strait of Hormuz oil shipping route during tensions over Tehran's nuclear programme."

According to the report, the US Military Sealift Command appears to be moving at least double the ordinary volume of liquid fuels for aviation and shipping into the Gulf. Ambrogi says that, "In the past ... fuel movements have provided advance clues of U.S. intentions." The report was based on information that came from an anonymous oil industry insider.

As concerned citizens worry about our president possibly launching another war in the Middle East, we ask ourselves: how can it be that the only way for us to find out our government's intentions is to intercept a semaphore signal like this?

Wearing My Hair Shirt

By Kelpie Wilson
t r u t h o u t | Environmental Editor
Thursday 29 March 2007

Al Gore is really doing it, bringing climate awareness to the doorsteps of opinion makers and forcing them to consider all of its implications. Of course, no good deed ever goes unpunished in this country.

Aside from all the sniping about his annual home power bill (which turns out to be so high partly because he spends an extra five grand or so to buy windpower and might also have something to do with a vice president's security needs), lots of the usual "free market uber alles" types are accusing him and all green-minded folks of forcing them to wear the dreaded "hair shirt" of mandatory reductions in their energy use.

Incredibly, those who aren't complaining about the sacrifices are indignant about Gore making it all seem too easy. In Robert J. Samuelson's New York Times editorial last week titled "Hollywood's Climate Follies," he accuses Gore of painting the issue as "saints vs. sinners" and failing to acknowledge that: "The lifestyles that produce greenhouse gases are deeply ingrained in modern economies and societies.... Those who believe that addressing global warming is a moral imperative face an equivalent moral imperative to be candid about the costs, difficulties and uncertainties."

It's hard to tell exactly what triggered Samuelson's outrage, but it seems to be a line from Gore's Oscar acceptance speech where he said: "We have everything we need to get started, with the possible exception of the will to act. That's a renewable resource. Let's renew it."

But what will it take to renew that resource? Everywhere the conventional wisdom is that Americans will never give up their big cars, big houses, air conditioning set at 65 degrees on hot summer afternoons and incandescent light bulbs blazing throughout the house. This is the American way of life, and the idea that it cannot last seems to drive some people into hysterical fits. Don't just do something, panic! Al Gore and the greenies want to send us back to the 1970s!

Renewables Can Turn the Tide on Global Warming

By Kelpie Wilson
t r u t h o u t | Environmental Editor
Friday 02 February 2007

On Thursday, the American Solar Energy Association (ASES), with the backing of several US representatives and a senator, released its new nuts and bolts approach to reducing carbon emissions with a combination of renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies.

The report comes at an opportune time: the release of the IPCC's latest climate change report is expected to finally clear up any lingering uncertainty about the role fossil fuel burning and other human activities have in changing the Earth's climate. As the deniers and obstructionists lose all credibility, the debate now turns to solutions.

The ASES report, titled "Tackling Climate Change in the US - Potential Carbon Emissions Reductions From Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by 2030," makes this extraordinary claim: "Energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies have the potential to provide most, if not all, of the US carbon emissions reductions that will be needed to help limit the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide to 450 to 500 ppm."

The ASES report was presented at a press briefing in the Capitol with the support of Senator Jeff Bingaman, Chair of the Senate Energy and Resources Committee, Representative Henry Waxman, Representative Chris Shays, Sierra Club president Carl Pope, and NASA's chief climate change scientist, Dr. James Hanson.

Hanson's backing is especially important, because the report is aimed at meeting a target for emissions reductions that he and other scientists agree is the minimum necessary to preserve a habitable planet. The target is to keep the global average temperature from rising by more than one degree Celsius, and to do that, it will be necessary to limit atmospheric CO2 levels to 450 to 500 ppm. That means reducing US emissions by 60 percent to 80 percent by mid-century.

In Love With the Lusty Wind

By Kelpie Wilson
t r u t h o u t | Interview
Wednesday 31 January 2007

Kelpie Wilson talks with wind energy expert Randall Tinkerman.

Give me a spirit that on this life's rough sea
Loves t' have his sails filled with a lusty wind ...
- George Chapman

More and more people are waking up to the fact that the world is in a period of great crisis and opportunity around the issue of energy generation and use. The fossil fuels we rely on for power are poisoning the atmosphere and threatening the stability of the Earth's climate. We've known about this problem since the 1970s, but vested economic interests have retarded our progress in developing alternatives.

Fortunately, a small number of dedicated people have continued their work, despite minimal support, to develop technologies for renewable solar and windpower for the past thirty or so years. Today, peak oil and global warming are beginning to change the economics of power generation and the world is looking to these pioneers for solutions.

Randy Tinkerman is one of these pioneers, and he agreed to answer some of my questions about the status of windpower today. Randall M. "Randy" Tinkerman co-developed the world's first utility-scale windplant, in the Altamont Pass near San Francisco. He is one of the pioneers profiled in the recent book Reaping the Wind, by Peter Asmus (Island Press, 2001). He currently is advising banks, investment houses and funds regarding windpower. He has lived in Germany, where he supports that nation's efforts to build a global sustainable economy, since 2002.

Before answering my questions, though, Randy asked that we dedicate his interview to another wind pioneer who is recently deceased. Randy's wish is, I believe, a testament to the devotion of a small group of engineers and scientists who have persevered to coax the dream of renewable energy into reality:

I dedicate this interview to Dr. Forrest "Woody" Stoddard, windpower aerodynamics pioneer, turbine designer, company founder, teacher, and good friend, without whom there would be far less of a wind industry globally.
- Randall M. Tinkerman

Q: Randy, I know that windpower has been going through a big growth spurt recently, but I was surprised to learn that installed US windpower grew more slowly in 2006 than it did in 2005. Is that because of the uncertainty about the wind production tax credit? Congress has not provided a longterm production tax credit for windpower and it has had to be renewed on an annual or a semi-annual basis. Is this uncertainty causing the slow growth in US windpower relative to windpower growth in Europe?

2006 Top Green Tech Ideas

2006 Top Green Tech Ideas
By Kelpie Wilson
t r u t h o u t
Friday 05 January 2007

In 2005, Americans woke up to the reality of peak oil, the predicament first described by geologist M.K. Hubbert in which world oil production would reach a peak, followed by an inevitable decline. Three things worked together to set off the alarm.

First was a steep rise in gas prices. Although gas prices had risen before, they had always been followed by a drop as production rose to meet demand. 2005 was different, because respected oil analysts such as Kenneth Deffeyes and Matt Simmons spoke up to tell us that not only were the super giant oil fields of the Middle East slowly petering out, but the pace of new oil discoveries was down as well.

What finally opened many eyes to the likelihood of peak oil was the growing realization that the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with WMDs or the war on terrorism. And if it wasn't about those two things, then why else would oilmen Bush and Cheney have conned us into the Iraq adventure? It had to be because they were desperate to control one of the last places in the world where cheap oil could be had.

With the rise in peak oil awareness came a desperate search for a silver-bullet solution - proponents of nuclear power, ethanol, coal, tar sands and oil shale all argued that these energy sources would fill the gap left by declining oil reserves and keep the American way of life intact. Too many people, deep down, agreed with Dick Cheney's assertion that the American way of life was "not negotiable."

But there is no negotiating with a hurricane, either. Hurricane Katrina, whipped into ferocious strength by a warming ocean, convinced many that the warnings about global climate change were to be taken seriously. And taking climate change seriously means that tar sands, oil shale and coal are off the table as solutions to the energy crisis, because these fuels are all far more carbon-heavy than the crude oil we currently rely on.

So in 2006, we started seeing more attention to the two paths that can lead us forward: energy efficiency and renewable energy. As Democrats take over Congress in 2007, promising action on energy and climate change, it is important to look critically at the available options. The news about climate change looks grimmer every day, alerting us to the fact that we have no time to waste and we can't afford to invest precious resources in false technology promises and energy dead-ends.

Fortunately, a lot of brilliant minds are at work on these problems, and a number of good ideas have surfaced in 2006 that are worth further investigation. Below I list five technologies that seem especially promising. I'll be keeping an eye on these technologies to see where they go in 2007.