Climate and energy

From Reuters:

LONDON (Reuters) – Solar energy costs will drop by half in 2009 while other low-carbon technology costs will see their pre-subsidy costs drop by 10-20 percent, renewable energy analysts said on Monday.

Prices for renewable energy equipment, including wind turbines and solar panels, fell this year, but they were offset by higher financing costs in the wake of the global economic slowdown, New Energy Finance said in a quarterly research note.

“As capital markets loosen up and equipment prices continue their decline, we will see the levelized costs decline, finishing the year 10 percent below the end of last year across the board and far more than that in solar,” said Michael Liebreich, London-based New Energy Finance’s chairman and CEO.

Levelized costs for solar energy, or the lifetime cost per kilowatt hour before government subsidies, will drop this year, with thin-film solar power generation rates falling to as low as $3 per watt, the report said.

Chinese and European solar power companies were upbeat about next year, saying last week that demand for clean energy systems was rebounding after a dismal 2009.

Wind turbines have dropped to their lowest level in several years, shedding 18-20 percent of their cost in 2009, New Energy Finance said, adding that equipment prices could be offset by higher construction costs as developers build in deeper waters.

Geothermal energy rates also eased as low oil prices caused many drilling rigs to sit idle, meaning more equipment was available.

Geothermal uses underground hot water and steam to spin turbines and generate electricity.

New Energy Finance said drilling costs, having dropped by nearly 50 percent earlier this year, recovered somewhat alongside oil prices in the third quarter.

The U.S., Europe, China and South Korea lead global renewable energy spending plans after committing about $500 billion to push ‘green’ technologies under wider plans to stimulate their own economies.

-posted by Eileen Horn, climateandenergy.org

From E&E News (by subscription only):

By Peter Behr

The spread of wind and solar power is being held back by fragmented policies on paying for new transmission lines to carry renewable energy, said a group of leading transmission providers in a petition to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Members of the WIRES association called on FERC to establish “on an aggressive schedule” clear, comprehensive national guidelines covering the complex and politically charged issue of allocating costs among consumers for new multi-state transmission lines.

FERC has solicited views of industry, environmental and consumer groups on transmission planning and cost allocation policy, with a filing deadline today, indicating to industry officials that the commission may seek to break new ground on the issue.

FERC Chairman Jon Wellinghoff told a conference Friday that transmission costs must be spread more widely. “We need to see how we can do it across interconnections.”

Two decisions this year by separate U.S. courts of appeal, and different approaches taken by the full House and the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, threaten to stymie transmission expansion for renewables.

FERC’s traditional, case-by-case approach to regional transmission line cost determination — relying on informal, consensus-based negotiations — is not working for new long-distance power line proposals that cross regional grid boundaries, said the WIRES group. Its petition was filed with FERC Thursday by its president, Paul McCoy, who is also the president of Trans-Elect Development Co., and WIRES counsel James Hoecker, FERC chairman in the Clinton administration.

31 states in search of a plan

“The lack of transmission infrastructure is among the critical obstacles to the development of wind, solar, and other forms of renewable energy which are frequently located far from major electric load centers,” the WIRES petition says. Whether Congress ultimately adopts national renewable electricity standards or not, 31 states have done so, and these targets can’t be met in many cases unless power can move across regional grid organizations, it adds.

“The ‘clean energy economy’ will necessarily await a better Commission resolution to this challenge,” said the WIRES group, which includes the grid operators in California, the Great Lakes and most of the mid-Atlantic region.

FERC’s policy review comes amid an expanding debate over how high-voltage lines should be planned, sited and paid for.

At the beginning of this year, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and renewable energy advocates supported a national “green superhighway” concept — an overlay of new lines to deliver wind and solar energy. State regulators and transmission owners pushed back, arguing that planning decisions should come from existing regional organizations.

Seminal question: Who pays for the lines?

“Siting, cost allocation and planning issues are often controversial because in many situations, someone’s gain comes at someone else’s expense,” said David Coen, commissioner of the Vermont Public Service Board and the incoming head of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, in testimony to Congress in June.

In general, new transmission lines should be paid for by generators whose new projects require more transmission capacity, he said, except where a broader sharing of costs is approved by individual states.

Renewable energy advocates say that state vetos could cripple plans for long transmission lines that carry wind from and through sparsely settled states to urban centers.

Read the rest of this entry »

This time of year, many Kansans take to the fields and lakes of our state to hunt.  However, it’s not just Kansans who appreciate the state’s wildlife viewing and hunting opportunities – tourists flock here as well -  to the tune of $541 million.

That revenue is in jeopardy though, as climate change alters the migration patterns and habitat of Kansas wildlife.

The National Conference of State Legislatures is a bipartisan organization that provides research and technical assistance to state legislatures.  One of their reports, Assessing the Costs of Climate Change – Kansas, looks at the potential economic impacts of climate change for Kansas.  In addition to the agricultural and health impacts that we frequently hear about, the report also details the impacts to Kansas hungers and anglers:

“Diminishing or changing wildlife populations could affect some aspects of tourism and recreation, including hunting, fishing and bird watching. In 2001, the fishing and hunting industries brought in $541 million from both out-of-state tourists and Kansas residents.  Kansas wetlands are critical to migratory waterfowl navigation. It is estimated that half of all migratory shore birds in the United States stop at Quivira National Wildlife Refuge in Stafford, Kansas.   Rising temperatures could shift the stopping point for these birds northward, taking with it revenue from birdwatchers and nature enthusiasts. Thus, deteriorating habitat due to climate change jeopardizes not only wildlife populations but also a source of tourism revenue.”

The NCSL also provides an energy legislation database – that tracks energy and environment legislation to bring you up to date, real-time information on bills that have been introduced in the fifty states and the District of Columbia.

-posted by Eileen Horn, climateandenergy.org

The green energy tax credit could provide a boost to Kansas manufacturing companies looking to re-tool to serve the wind industry.   The Department of Commerce, the Blue Green Alliance, and CEP have all partnered to bring wind manufacturing information to Kansas companies.  Check it out at:  www.kansaswindindustry.com

From the Hill:

By Ben Geman

Bingaman wants to double green energy tax credit in planned employment bill

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) is pressing leadership to use the planned jobs bill to double a popular new tax credit for domestic manufacturing of green energy equipment.

The recent stimulus law created a credit for investments in manufacturing of components for wind power, solar and many other “advanced” energy technologies.

But applications for the 30 percent investment tax credit have already outstripped the $2.3 billion cap in the stimulus law. Bingaman said an additional $2.5 billion of credits should be included in new legislation.

“I have made that suggestion to leadership as one of the things we ought to consider as part of a jobs bill,” Bingaman told The Hill on Thursday. He said there should be another $2.5 billion worth of credits. Bingaman also heads a Finance Committee panel on energy and infrastructure.

Bingaman, while pressing to use the jobs bill as the vehicle, said lawmakers should look at other bills if needed. “Wherever we can do it in the remainder of this Congress,” he said.

Several senators and House members are also pushing a plan that would provide new investment tax credits for manufacturing solar equipment specifically.

From today’s Washington Post:

Corn-based ethanol producer says it will soon compete with gasoline

By Steven Mufson
Washington Post Staff Writer

The nation’s largest producer of corn-based ethanol said it has slashed the cost of producing cellulosic ethanol from corn cobs and that it will be able to compete with gasoline in two years.

POET, which currently produces 1.5 billion gallons a year of ethanol from corn, said its one-year old pilot plant has reduced the cost of making ethanol from corn cobs from $4.13 a gallon to $2.35 a gallon by cutting capital costs and using an improved “cocktail” of enzymes.

Moreover the company said that it can use a byproduct called lignin as fuel and that it would provide all the energy needed for the cellulosic plant as well as 80 percent of the energy that would be needed by a conventional corn-based distillery making twice the amount of ethanol.

“Two years ago I would have told you this was a long shot,” said POET chief executive Jeff Broin. “Now I’ll tell you that we will produce cellulosic ethanol commercially in two years.”

POET launched the cellulosic ethanol pilot plant one year ago in Scotland, South Dakota and Broin said that the plant had figured out how to cut capital costs by 40 percent, cut the amount of energy used in pre-treatment stages and lowered enzyme costs.

He said that farm equipment manufacturers were already designing, and in two cases selling, equipment needed to collect the corn cobs from farmers’ fields.

For farmers, the advance could mean extra income. Broin said that an acre of corn field could produce 480 gallons a year of corn-based ethanol and 55 gallons more from processing cobs, leaves and husks.

While a large step forward for POET, the advance would still not assure the United States of enough motor fuel supplies or meet the congressional mandate that refiners use 16 billion gallons a year of cellulosic ethanol by 2025. Broin estimated that the nation currently could produce 5 billion gallons a year of cellulosic ethanol from corn cobs — about 3 percent of current motor fuel consumption — and perhaps 10 billion gallons eventually.

Other companies are doing research on how to make cellulosic ethanol from other raw materials such as wood chips and switch grass.

Broin also pressed the Environmental Protection Agency to relax rules limiting the amount of ethanol that can go into regular gasoline. That limit now stands at 10 percent though ethanol makers have applied for an increase to 15 percent. Broin said that EPA must issue a decision by Dec. 1.

“It’s critical to move the blend wall for cellulosic ethanol to become a reality,” he said.

Oil companies can sell a separate product for vehicles with 85 percent ethanol, known as E85, but that requires special equipment at gasoline stations and E85 pumps are still rare. In addition, many automobiles are not designed to use large amounts of ethanol, which can damage certain parts. Many vehicles, however, are designed to use either E85 or regular gasoline.

-posted by Eileen Horn, climateandenergy.org

Jim Rogers, CEO of Duke Energy–the third largest utility in the United States and one of the country’s biggest carbon emitters, is one of many voices in the utility industry calling FOR cap-and-trade.  In the interview below, Rogers outlines his reasons for supporting emissions controls – and how partnering with China, and developing more nuclear power are the way forward for the U.S.

From an interview with the Council on Foreign Relations:

Securing U.S. Energy Supplies
Interviewee: James E. Rogers, CEO, Duke Energy
Interviewer: Roya Wolverson, Staff Writer, CFR.org

November 18, 2009

The Obama administration is pushing for domestic consensus on climate change ahead of December’s UN Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen but proposed legislation continues to generate intense debate among energy industry leaders and politicians. Jim Rogers, CEO of Duke Energy–the third largest utility in the United States and one of the country’s biggest carbon emitters, says he expects cap-and-trade legislation to become more flexible on energy allowances, which permit a certain level of CO2 emissions. Rogers, who supports emissions controls and alternative energy investment, says boosting nuclear power supplies is the best option for expanding the country’s alternative energy portfolio, given the current limits in coal decarbonizing technology. He also says partnering with China is critical to learning which green technologies are suitable for commercial use.

As the country’s third largest carbon emitter, why is Duke supportive of putting a price on carbon?

Because our carbon footprint is so large and because we believe that we need to get started addressing the problem to build a bridge to a low-carbon world sooner rather than later. The best policy mechanism, we believe, is to put a price on carbon and a cap on emissions and maintain the integrity of the cap. We know the transition is going to be expensive. We know it’s not going to be easy, because every technology that generates electricity needs advances to be an equal contributor in a low-carbon world. We know that it won’t be quick. But we believe that the transition needs to be fair and the cost impacts to consumers need to be smoothed out over a period of time so it’s not disruptive to U.S. businesses or families. The most important thing we believe is that we need to start now.

What role should coal play in the U.S. energy economy?

Fifty percent of electricity in the United States comes from coal. And coal has been a great resource for our country, in terms of basically allowing the industrialization of our country in the twentieth century. The question is: Will coal continue to play the same role it played in the past, where it’s been affordable, allowed us to provide reliable electricity, and quite frankly [is] cleaner than burning it in fireplaces as we did almost a hundred years ago? In a sense, how we’ve used coal has actually cleaned up the environment, if you could have seen the world in 1909 versus today. As we move to a decarbonized world, coal’s role will only be significant if we’re able to develop the technology that allows us to take the carbon out of coal. If we fail in developing a technology that’s cost-effective at taking carbon out of coal, we could find ourselves in 2050 where coal has a limited role, if any. There will be stricter rules on sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury, and fine particulate. The ash pond issue will [see] more regulation; the water discharge is an issue; [and] the whole concept of mountain-top mining is an issue. Decarbonization of coal is just on top of that. If you asked me today based on current technologies–and assuming we have no advances in technology with respect to decarbonization of coal–I would say nuclear would trump coal because it produces zero greenhouse gases, it provides power 24/7, and, probably most importantly, it probably produces more jobs than even solar or wind on a per-megawatt basis.

Why is that?

In an operation of a nuclear plant, there [are] .64 jobs per megawatt. The wind business–and we have a very large wind business–is .3 jobs per megawatt. In the solar business–and we’re installing solar panels–it’s about .1. But the difference in the jobs is quite different, because if you’re wiping off a solar panel, it’s sort of a minimum wage type of job, [with] much higher compensation for nuclear engineers and nuclear operators. If our goal is to rebuild the middle class, nuclear plays a key role there, particularly if coal is out of the equation. Neither solar nor wind, both of which are intermittent, provide power at a low cost 24/7. Job one for me is affordable, reliable, clean, 24/7, 365 days a year. So, given the technologies that we have today, nuclear is the only 24/7 product we have–unless you do natural gas, which has 50% of the carbon footprint of coal. And its price is quite volatile.

Read the rest of this entry »

Here are some energy-saving tips to ensure that your Thanksgiving celebrations stretch your pants, not your wallet!

1. Match your pan size to element size when cooking. For small pans, use a small burner and for large pans use a large burner. Using the wrong sized element will cause you to use more energy to cook than when the pan size fits the element size.

2. Using glass or ceramic pans instead of metal when cooking in ovens can reduce your energy usage. By doing this you can reduce the cooking temperature by 25 degrees and your food will cook just as quickly.

3. Use your garbage disposal sparingly – compost instead and save gallons of water every time.

4. Check your door seals on refrigerators and freezers. Place a piece of paper in the door as you close – if it does not hold firmly, the seal is worn and needs to be replaced. A refrigerator door that does not close tightly will increase heat gain and cause the refrigerator to run more.

Want more energy saving tips? Visit climateandenergy.org.

-posted by Eileen Horn, climateandenergy.org

From the AP: Calif. requires TVs to be more energy-efficient

By SAMANTHA YOUNG (AP) – 11 hours ago

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California regulators have adopted the nation’s first energy-efficiency standards for televisions, a move that will eventually ban power-hungry sets from the state’s store shelves.

Wednesday’s action by the California Energy Commission could lead the way in a general reform of standards for an industry increasingly focused on wide-view, flat-screen, high-definition sets.

The 5-0 vote by the California Energy Commission is just the latest effort by the state to secure its place in the forefront of the environmental movement.

California represents such a big consumer market that environmental groups hope the new standards will lead manufacturers to make energy-saving TVs for the rest of the nation, just as California’s stringent fuel standards for cars and trucks forced automakers to produce more efficient models for all of the U.S.

“Once again, California is leading the way, and we hope others will follow,” said Noah Horowitz, senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Some manufacturers warned that the regulations will cripple innovation, limit consumer choice and hurt California stores, because people could simply buy TVs out of state or online. The industry also complained that manufacturers will be forced to make televisions with poorer picture quality and fewer features than those sold elsewhere in the U.S.

“Instead of allowing customers to choose the products they want, the commission has decided to impose arbitrary standards that will hamper innovation and limit consumer choice,” said Jason Oxman, a vice president with the Consumer Electronics Association. “It will result in higher prices for consumers, job losses for Californians, and lost tax revenue for the state.”

Californians buy about 11 percent of the 35.4 million TVs sold in the U.S. each year, according to industry figures. The industry group said it was already working with the federal government to promote more efficient TVs through the federal Energy Star program.

“We have every confidence this industry will be able to meet the rule and then some,” Energy Commissioner Julia Levin said. “It will save consumers money, it will help protect public health, and it will spark innovation.”

At least one TV manufacturer has said it could meet the standards — Vizio Inc., the largest seller of flat screens.

The regulations requiring televisions to be more efficient will be phased in beginning in 2011.

The new standards will apply to new televisions up to 58 inches. Those larger than 58 inches, which account for no more than 3 percent of the market, were left out in a concession to sellers of high-end home-theater TVs. But the commission is expected to regulate them in the future.

The commission estimates that TVs account for about 10 percent of a home’s electricity use. The fear is that energy use will rise as people buy bigger, more elaborate TVs, put more of them in their homes, and watch them longer.

The average plasma TV uses more than three times as much energy as an old cathode-ray tube set. Liquid-crystal display, or LCD, TVs use about 43 percent more energy than tube sets, according to Pacific Gas & Electric Co., the state’s biggest utility. LCDs now account for about 90 percent of the 4 million TVs sold in California each year.

Under the rules adopted Wednesday, all new 42-inch TV sets must use less than 183 watts by 2011 and less than 116 watts by 2013.

That is considerably more efficient than flat-screen TVs placed on the market in recent years. A 42-inch Hitachi plasma TV sold in 2007 uses 313 watts, while a 42-inch Sharp Liquid-crystal display, or LCD, TV draws 232 watts, according to the Energy Commission.

The energy commission previously set aggressive energy-efficiency standards for refrigerators, washing machines and other household appliances, paving the way for more efficient models sold nationwide.

E&E News (subscription only): Coalition begins push to add building provisions to climate bill

By Alex Kaplun

A coalition of business, labor and energy groups said today that it will push lawmakers to include provisions in the climate bill — or some other legislative measure — that would put the country on a path to retrofitting 50 million buildings by 2020.

Organizers of the effort, named Rebuilding America, unveiled a blueprint for achieving that target at an event on Capitol Hill this afternoon and said they will look to move the provisions through one or more of the legislative items currently sitting before Congress — including the climate bill and a potential jobs bill. The coalition includes groups such as the Center for American Progress, the AFL-CIO, the Consumer Federation of America and the Energy Future Coalition.

A handful of lawmakers — including Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) — also appeared at the event and signed onto the proposal.

Reid Detchon, executive director of the Energy Future Coalition, said the groups had already sent a letter to every member of the Senate asking for inclusion of their proposal in some legislative package. Representatives of the effort have also met with White House energy adviser Carol Browner and will meet with some lawmakers. “We’re going to look for whatever opportunity we have,” he said.

Both the climate change bill that the House approved earlier this year and the version that is currently being considered in the Senate already have some efficiency provisions, but officials from the coalition said they would like to see lawmakers implement a number of other policies.

Specifically, the groups urge Congress to establish a stand-alone, national energy efficiency resource standard of 10 percent by 2020; direct at least one-third of utility allowances toward energy efficiency and increase the state allowance allocation for renewables and efficiency; support financing tools for energy efficiency; and establish provisions for accelerated depreciation and investment tax credits for a number of energy-efficient technologies and appliances.

The groups estimate that if their plan is fully implemented, it could sustain more than 600,000 jobs and eliminate at least 42 million tons of carbon emissions each year.

E&E News (subscription only) : Evangelicals partner with scientists on climate concerns

By Dina Fine Maron

With international talks in Copenhagen fast approaching, religious leaders are joining the chorus of groups speaking out on the importance of addressing climate change.

At a meeting on Capitol Hill, evangelical Christians and scientists partnered up to call for U.S. action on climate change, though they did not formally endorse any legislation on the issue.

“We are speaking with one voice because human behavior is imperiling life on Earth. We have a deep and fundamental reverence for all living things,” said Eric Chivian, a Harvard Medical School professor who founded the alliance between the groups in partnership with the Rev. Richard Cizik, president of the “New Evangelicals.” The delegation of scientists and evangelical Christians met with Obama’s chief science adviser, John Holdren, and the director of the Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships earlier in the morning.

Cizik called denying the link between human activity and global warming “willful blindness” and said that he believes evangelicals, though historically aligned with the Republican Party and more unwilling than others to take steps to fight global warming, are accepting the science behind global warming in greater numbers than in the past. He says that climate change is one of the top five issues most important to young evangelicals.

Still, a survey last spring from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life found that only about 1 in 3 white evangelical Christians accepts that global warming is largely caused by human activity.

The ‘human rights issue of the 21st century’

Other religious groups have also preached on the importance of sustainable environmental action, and leaders from all the world’s major religions have called fighting climate change a “moral imperative.”

The Telegraph newspaper reported earlier this month that Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom hosted an interfaith dialogue on climate change at England’s Windsor Castle earlier this month sponsored by the United Nations and Prince Philip’s Alliance of Religions and Conservation. Baha’ism, Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Shintoism, Sikhism and Taoism were all represented.

At the conference, leaders shared some of their strategies to address climate change. Notably, the grand mufti of Egypt committed to a seven-year initiative to make the Muslim faith more eco-friendly and unveiled an immediate plan to make the city of Medina the first Islamic city to go “green.”

Catholic leaders, too, have a long history of calling environmental preservation a “moral concern” and emphasizing the need to preserve the Earth for future generations. The Vatican, home to the Holy See, became the first carbon-neutral sovereign state in 2007. Its buildings were fitted with solar panels to supply electricity, and an eco-restoration firm donated enough trees in a Hungarian national park to nullify all the carbon emissions of the city. Pope Benedict XVI supported both measures.

At the event in Washington, the Rev. Gerald Durley, a Baptist civil rights leader who has fought for racial, housing and human rights equality, said, “What good is it if we have those rights if we’re dead?”

“[This] is the human rights issue of the 21st century,” Cizik echoed.

Inspired by the popularity of its Cash for Clunkers program, the administration is considering a similar program to encourage homeowners to capture the energy wasted by leaky homes.

States are already pursuing home energy efficiency improvement programs with Recovery Act funds, and the yesterday, the Kansas energy office unveiled its program, Efficiency Kansas. Read the Wichita Eagle’s coverage here.

From Reuters:

“Cash for Caulkers” Could Deliver $23B for Home Energy Efficiency

By Justin Moresco

Step aside “Cash for Clunkers,” and make way for “Cash for Caulkers.” The White House is reportedly considering rolling out a two-year, $23 billion program to encourage homeowners to undertake weatherization projects such as adding air sealing, insulation and energy-saving light bulbs. The program would be called Home Star -– playing off the name Energy Star, the Environmental Protection Agency’s widely recognized energy efficiency program. The New York Times, in a story published last night, reported Rahm Emanuel, President Obama’s chief of staff, as saying that it’s one of the “top things he’s looking at.”

Here’s the gist of the proposed program, as outlined by The New York Times:

* $6 billion would be set aside for people who undertook at least two weatherization projects, like the air sealing or insulation previously mentioned. There would be a list of some 10 eligible projects, and households that completed at least two of them would be eligible for up to $2,000 in subsidies; four projects would yield up to $3,500. But the government money could not pay for more than half of any project.
* $12 billion would go to incentivize households that did weatherization projects that reduced energy use by at least 20 percent, which would bring in a $4,000 subsidy. There would be $1,500 more available for each additional 5 percent reduction achieved by an energy retrofit, and government money could pay for no more than half the cost of the project. Matt Golden, president of San Francisco-based energy retrofitter Recurve (formerly Sustainable Spaces), tells us that an energy retrofit costing between $4,000 and $6,000 could typically reduce a home’s energy use by 20 percent, though the price tag is highly dependent on the condition of the house and its location.
* $2 billion would go toward auditing a portion of the projects to ensure they did what they were supposed to do.
* $3 billion would pay to incentivize retailers like Home Depot and building contractors. Few details were given about this pot of money, but it sounds like it would be used to encourage these companies to embrace the program. Home Depot, say, might designate a portion of its store for Home Star upgrades with Home Star representatives on hand to help customers.

The home energy retrofit industry is unsurprisingly head-over-heels in love with this program. Efficiency First, a trade association for the industry, says it would support 5.9 million home energy retrofits and create more than 500,000 new jobs. The association didn’t say if this job creation number accounts for those lost as a result of the increased taxes needed to support Home Star, however. Efficiency First estimates that energy improvements covered by Home Star could reduce “energy waste” in most home by 20-40 percent and, if combined with low-interest financing, could be cash-flow positive once the projects were completed.

Read the rest of this entry »

Salina, one of the six Take Charge Challenge communities, is taking their Holiday lighting to the next level – replacing 5,000 holiday light bulbs with energy-efficient LEDs.  Click here for the Take Charge Challenge standings – 6 months into the Challenge.

From today’s Salina Journal, New Lights to Brighten Downtown:

By GARY DEMUTH Salina Journal
Dorothy Oldridge liked the “old nostalgia bulbs” that once lined the historic buildings in downtown Salina, but she can understand why a change was needed.

“The maintenance was hard — bulbs would burn out, so you wouldn’t have a whole string,” said Oldridge, owner of The Enchanted Cottage, a gift shop at 112 S. Santa Fe. “The uniformity of the new ones will be nice.”

Oldridge was speaking of the new warm, white LED rope lighting that has been installed along the 100 block of North Santa Fe Avenue and the 100 and 200 blocks of South Santa Fe Avenue to replace the previous Christmas roof lighting in the downtown Lee District.

More than 5,000 light bulbs previously in place along the rooftops of downtown Salina buildings were replaced during the past few months with 4,450 feet of energy-saving LED lighting.

The change is one of the ways that downtown Salina is “going green,” said Phyll Klima, executive director of Salina Downtown Inc.

“The new LED lights will use one-twelfth the energy of the old lighting,” she said. “It’s going to cost less to run these lights year round than it did to run the old ones a month and a half.”

The new rope lighting system will be unveiled Saturday during the annual downtown Christmas Parade of Lights.

The new system cost about $40,000, Klima said. The cost was divided between downtown business and property owners, who contributed about 20 percent; private contributions that totaled about 35 percent; and Salina Downtown Inc., which made up the balance.

Salina Downtown board members developed a cost-share program to assist property and business owners with initial costs and have established a perpetual maintenance and repair agreement to keep the lights in operation.

While the other Christmas decorations will be removed after the season, the rope lighting will stay up year round, Klima said.

Also being prepared for the holiday season will be 285 garland-wrapped poles in the downtown area. The poles were wrapped this past weekend by a team of volunteers that included adult citizens, cadets from St. John’s Military School and members of the girls’ and boys’ basketball teams at Salina Central High School.

Garlands have been draped across downtown crosswalks by workers from Cox Communications, and about 32 decorated banners contributed by the city of Salina are to be placed on light poles by Westar Energy before Saturday’s events.

“We already have red banners, and the new banners will have abstract Christmas trees on them,” Klima said.

When people see the decorations and new lighting system during Saturday’s parade, Klima predicted they will be “ecstatic.”

“I hope they appreciate the time and effort and financial support that’s been contributed to make it happen,” she said.

Carla Welsh, co-owner of Yarns, 148 S. Santa Fe, understands why the change in the lighting system was done, but she preferred the old bulb lighting system.

“They’re not as bright as they were last year, and I don’t think they’re as exciting as the individual bulbs,” she said. “But it’s probably good that the lights are more consistent now. Last year, some turned on and some didn’t, which made it kind of spotty in places.”

Cathy Gabay, owner of The Toy Parade, 119 S. Santa Fe, thinks the new lights look awesome.

“I like the uniform look — they look really classy,” she said. “When everyone’s (store) windows are done, it will look really beautiful here.”

nReporter Gary Demuth can be reached at 822-1405 or by e-mail at gdemuth@salina.com.

EVENT: Annual Downtown Christmas Parade of Lights.

WHEN: 6 p.m. Saturday.

WHERE: Santa Fe Avenue, between Ash and Prescott streets.

INFORMATION: 825-0535 or www.salinadowntown.com.

Other Saturday activities include: cookies with Mrs. Claus, 2-3 p.m., Mokas Bakery and Bistro, 109 N. Santa Fe; antique fire engine rides, 2-4 p.m., Sunflower Bank, 176 N. Santa Fe; Christmas coloring contest, 2-5 p.m., First Bank Kansas, 235 S. Santa Fe; carriage rides, 2-5:30 p.m., 249 S. Santa Fe and 157 N. Seventh; visits with Santa and Mrs. Claus, 4-5 p.m. Campbell Plaza Stage; and live entertainment, 1-5 p.m., and toy train displays, 3-6 p.m., both at the Stiefel Theatre for the Performing Arts, 151 S. Santa Fe.

-posted by Eileen Horn, climateandenergy.org

Despite upcoming Copenhagen Climate negotiations and the U.S. – China clean energy plan unveiled yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that climate legislation would not be considered until Spring.

Senate to Put Off Climate Bill Until Spring

By IAN TALLEY

Senate Democratic leaders said Tuesday they would put off debate on a big climate-change bill until spring, in a sign of weakening political will to tackle a long-term environmental issue at a time of high unemployment and economic uncertainty.

Legislation on health care, overhauling financial markets and job creation will be considered before the Senate takes up a measure to cap emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases linked to climate change, Senate Democratic leaders said Tuesday.

Climate legislation will be taken up “some time in the spring,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said Tuesday after a Democratic caucus meeting.

The delay was “just a matter of reality, they can’t get anything done at this time,” said Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.), who has previously supported climate legislation. He has said he wouldn’t support the current Senate proposal because of disagreements over its handling of nuclear energy.

The climate-bill delay sidetracks one of President Barack Obama’s top domestic priorities. Mr. Obama has said action to curb greenhouse gases would unleash investment in clean-energy technology and create jobs.

White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said Tuesday Mr. Obama was working with lawmakers to move the legislation as quickly as possible.

“This is an economic opportunity for the nation that will create millions of clean energy jobs while reducing our dangerous dependence on foreign oil, and it’s an opportunity that other countries like China and India are racing to take advantage of,” Mr. LaBolt said in an email.

Momentum for a climate bill has been undermined by fears that capping carbon-dioxide emissions — the inevitable product of burning oil and coal — would slow economic growth, raise energy costs and compel changes in the way Americans live.

“It’s really big, really, really hard, and is going to make a lot of people mad,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill (D., Mo.).

Democrats looking ahead to the 2010 midterm elections are concerned about a backlash from voters in industrial and heartland states dependent on coal. Republicans are portraying Democrats’ “cap and trade” proposals, which call for capping overall U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions and allowing companies to buy and trade permits to emit those gases, as a “cap and tax” scheme.

Meanwhile, the administration is moving ahead with a plan to have the Environmental Protection Agency declare greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, a danger to public health. That would trigger potential regulations that could affect a wide swath of the economy.

Earlier this week, Mr. Obama and other world leaders scaled back ambitions for a global climate summit next month in Copenhagen.

United Nations leaders had called for a new, binding global agreement in Copenhagen to set caps on greenhouse-gas emissions. But at a meeting in Asia, leaders including Mr. Obama said they would try instead to use the Copenhagen gathering to forge an agreement that is “politically binding,” with specific commitments by countries to reduce emissions and help poor countries fight climate change. A legally binding deal would come later; diplomats point to mid-to-late-2010.

The Senate Finance Committee likely won’t begin deliberations on the climate bill until January, according to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D., Calif.), one of its sponsors. The bill was passed by the environment panel earlier this month.

The Commerce Committee may also weigh in on some of the bill’s provisions. The panel’s chairman, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D., W.V.), is opposed to strong emissions limits.

“By the time we turn around, it’s March,” Ms. Boxer said of the likely timetable.

The House of Representatives narrowly passed its version of a climate bill in June, with dozens of Democratic lawmakers from industrial and coal-dependent states voting no.

-posted by Eileen Horn, climateandenergy.org

Details about the new Efficiency Kansas program, unveiled yesterday in Topeka, can be found here. On average, Kansas families can expect to cut heating and cooling costs by 20%, utilizing local contractors and energy auditors.  The full program manual (pdf) is also available for download.

From today’s Topeka Capital-Journal, by Tim Carpenter:

State Launches Energy Program
Kansans can borrow funds to improve home energy efficiency

Gov. Mark Parkinson flipped the switch Tuesday on a $34 million revolving loan program designed to help Kansans finance energy-efficiency improvements to their homes and small businesses.

The program — Efficiency Kansas — begins immediately and is open to Kansans of all incomes. It makes use of funding sent to the state under the federal economic stimulus act. The state will funnel this pile of cash to assist property owners with low-interest loans for replacement of furnaces, install insulation, seal doors and windows, and make other changes designed to shrink electric and natural gas bills.

Parkinson previously contemplated this type of partnership among government, banks and energy-related companies, but he couldn’t identify a source of money to make it a reality. The new state funding will be made available to private lenders, which will be responsible for initiating loans to consumers for energy upgrades.

“Energy efficiency is about more than just installing compact fluorescent light bulbs in your home,” the governor said. “It is about making comprehensive improvements according to sound building science principles.”

He said the initiative would deliver “meaningful improvements to your home that will not only keep you warmer this winter but save you energy and money for years to come.”

Under the program, participants must obtain an audit to determine cost-effective options for altering a building’s energy profile. The state will provide the first 1,000 participants with a $350 rebate to offset the cost of the energy audit.

Individuals will work with private lenders to qualify for a loan. State Treasurer Dennis McKinney said 14 Kansas lenders, including Capitol Federal and Sunflower Bank in Topeka, signed up for the program. The maximum interest rate is set at 4 percent.

McKinney said the state would rely upon banks to screen loan applicants and market the program to keep the government footprint small.

“We think we’re engaging good, private-sector resources to make sure the money’s used efficiently and effectively,” he said.

The maximum loan is $20,000 for homes and $30,000 for businesses, state officials said. The average loan is expected to be $5,000 to $6,000. Energy savings will vary, but the typical Kansan could trim heating and cooling costs as much as 20 percent. Participants would repay loans from savings on monthly energy bills, meaning they won’t have to grapple with out-of-pocket expenses.

For more information on the program, go online at www.EfficiencyKansas.com or call (877) 448-3185.

-posted by Eileen Horn, climateandenergy.org

Today in Beijing, President Obama’s and Chinese president Hu Jintao announced a clean energy plan – including a Clean Energy Research Center, a US-China Electric Vehicles Initiative, Energy Efficiency Action Plan, and a focus on 21st Century Coal research.

The Wall Street Journal Environmental Capital blog looks at the % of Texas’ power being produced by wind. A couple weeks ago – October 28th to be exact – wind turbines provided about 25% of Texas’ power consumption, which, according to a recent report, may soon begin to drive down Texan’s power bills.

And the “Green Impact Zone” in Kansas City Missouri is pursuing unique partnerships to spur energy efficiency in the region.  (story below)

Green Impact Zone Inspires Change to Homeowner Energy-efficiency Rebate Program
Kansas City Info Zine
Optional payment feature will benefit homeowners both in and out of the zone

Kansas City, Mo – infoZine – The Metropolitan Energy Center, Kansas City Power & Light and Missouri Gas Energy have developed a unique program to help homeowners make their homes more energy efficient. KCP&L and MGE customers in the Green Impact Zone and throughout Missouri are eligible to participate.

The Home Performance with ENERGY STAR® program was designed as a rebate program where homeowners would pay for an energy audit and qualified improvements, then be reimbursed for up to $600 through credits on their electricity bills. MGE and KCP&L announced a joint partnership in September that would increase the available bill credits to $1,200 — $600 from each utility.

Attendees at a Green Impact Zone committee meeting held in late summer discussed ways to encourage homeowners — many of whom may find it difficult to pay for the work up front and wait for reimbursement — to take advantage of the HPWES program. As a result of this discussion, as well as feedback from participating auditors, contractors and other project partners, the utilities expanded the program option that allows all participating customers to authorize KCP&L and MGE to use the credit that would have gone on the customer’s gas or electric bill to make direct payments to a third party such as a participating contractor — with no out-of-pocket expenses for the homeowner unless the work exceeds $1,200. This is an optional feature that may not be offered by all certified companies.

Residents who want to participate in the HPWES program begin by selecting a certified company — listed online at www.hpwes.net — to perform an energy audit on their homes and determine what energy improvements are needed, such as added insulation, new energy-efficient windows and doors, and air-sealing work. Many of the certified auditors are also contractors who can complete the necessary work. The online application includes an area where the homeowner can authorize the contractor to receive payment of up to $1,200 directly from KCP&L and MGE.

While many homes may need more than $1,200 to reach maximum energy efficiency, the energy audit provides a road map that will help homeowners plan and budget for additional projects over time.

The Green Impact Zone is a 150-square block area of Kansas City, Mo. — stretching from 39th Street to 51st Street and from Troost to Prospect and Swope Parkway — that has experienced severe abandonment and economic decline. The Mid-America Regional Council is leading a coordinated effort by neighborhood groups and other community stakeholders to target resources, particularly federal stimulus funds, in this area to make it a national model for building stronger neighborhoods, providing jobs and economic opportunities, and improving energy efficiency.

-published by Eileen Horn, climateandenergy.org

Halfway through the Climate and Energy Project’s Take Charge Challenge, six Kansas communities are proving that energy efficiency works!

Six months into this year-long contest, the standings are as follows:

1. Merriam (partnering with KCP&L)
2. Kinsley (partnering with Midwest Energy Cooperative)
3. Quinter (partnering with Midwest Energy Cooperative)
4. Mount Hope/Haven (partnering with the Kansas Power Pool)
5. Wellington (partnering with the Kansas Power Pool)
6. Salina (partnering with Westar Energy)

* Partner utilities track each community’s electricity use compared to last year and to a selected control area this year. Towns are ranked by largest percentage drop in use.

Together, measures taken in these six towns will save over one million kilowatt hours of electricity – enough to power 1,100 homes for a month – and avoid pollution equivalent to taking 140 cars off the road.

“Every one of these towns has brought creativity, leadership, and a great community spirit to this competition. We congratulate Merriam on their impressive achievement. With all six towns still in the game, we look forward to working with each to save money, save energy, and show what the Heartland can do when we put our minds to it,” said Nancy Jackson, Executive Director of the Climate and Energy Project.

Residents and business in all six communities have switched light bulbs, weatherized, installed programmable thermostats, and traded in their old appliances for more energy efficient models.

Merriam’s winning strategy: Residents have switched over 10,000 bulbs to energy efficient CFLs, and have worked with KCP&L to get new programmable thermostats and new air conditioners installed in hundreds of homes. “Merriam’s community spirit has been the key ingredient to our success in the Take Charge Challenge. Our residents are saving energy, saving money, and supporting the local economy. It’s a win-win-win,” said Ken Sissom, mayor of Merriam, KS.

The six towns range in size from 40,000 residents in Salina to 800 in Quinter. Each takes a unique approach to slashing energy bills and winning the Challenge:

In Kinsley and Quinter, sixty residents and small businesses have taken advantage of Midwest Energy’s nationally-recognized How$mart energy audit and efficiency retrofit program. On average, this program results in yearly savings of 2,100 kilowatt hours per customer, which would save a typical family between $150-$200 each year. Quinter is also in the lead on takechargekansas.org, with 1,500 bulb switches – enough to light 77 of their neighbors’ homes for a year!

In Merriam, 82 residents have signed up for KCP&L’s Energy Optimizer program that provides free programmable thermostats to participants. Over 40 Merriam residents have replaced their old air conditioners through KCP&L’s Cool Homes rebate program. By switching bulbs and participating in KCP&L’s programs, Merriam residents have undertaken measures to save 438,000 kilowatt hours, saving their community $45,000.

Mount Hope and Haven are participating in the Kansas Power Pool’s new appliance rebate program. KPP rewards customers for replacing their old air conditioners and refrigerators with new energy-efficient ones. In Mount Hope, 23 rebates have been redeemed. By replacing their old appliances, these Mount Hope residents will save over $7,000.

Salina is partnering with Westar Energy. Westar’s energy educators have taught in K-12 schools, hosted “Energy Drops” to distribute CFLs at Wal-Mart, and advised USD 305 and other big energy users on how to slash their bills. Downtown Salina has replaced 4,550 of their holiday lights with LED rope lighting to for their Annual Christmas Festival and Parade of Lights. Westar’s new programmable thermostat program, WattSaver, will roll out in Salina early next year, giving Salina residents a real chance to gain some ground.

Wellington has also worked with KPP to encourage residents to switch to energy efficient CFL bulbs. In all, 8,000 light bulbs have been distributed. Wellington City utility staff provides free home energy audits to residents who want to learn how to save energy in their homes. An impressive 71 rebates for new energy-efficient appliances have been redeemed through Kansas Power Pool. These energy saving measures will save Wellington $22,000 and energy to power 261 homes for a month.

Salina, Quinter, Kinsley, Mount Hope/Haven, Wellington, and Merriam are all participating in the Climate and Energy Project’s Take Charge Challenge, a yearlong contest to see which town can save the most energy. The town that most aggressively reduces energy use will get to choose an energy-saving prize: a solar panel for a city building, a wind turbine for a school or $10,000 to use toward an energy efficient project for the city.

Salina-based Philips Lighting has designed a website, takechargekansas.org to track the lighting switch efforts of these towns. Thus far, Kansans have changed over 23,000 bulbs to energy efficient CFLs, saving them $195,000 in avoided energy costs.

#########

-posted by Eileen Horn, climateandenergy.org

Farmers growing electricity along with their crops

WIMER, Ore. (AP)–Vern and Gianaclis Caldwell do a lot of the typical things that make a small farm self-sufficient.

Besides the 40-some dwarf Nigerian goats they milk to make artisanal cheeses, they also raise chickens for meat and eggs, a steer for beef, horses to ride and vegetables for the table.

Unlike most small farms, their heat and electricity is entirely home grown. They produce electricity from solar panels when the sun shines, and a micro-hydro turbine when winter rains put water in the creek. Oak and fir cut from the farm fire a boiler that heats the cement floors of the dairy and cheese making room, as well as the hot water to wash the goats and themselves.

“We thought we should be responsible for our own energy,” said Vern Caldwell, a retired U.S. Marine Corps aircraft maintenance officer. “So that drove a lot of everything else that we did–where the buildings were placed, how they were placed, taking advantage of passive solar, how we were going to heat, how we were going to cool. All those issues then got driven by this one decision to be off the grid.”

Pholia Farm is unusual in the degree to which it is energy self-sufficient.

But more farms are installing renewable energy, said Stephanie Page, renewable energy specialist for the Oregon Department of Agriculture. The motivation was sparked by the 2008 spike in fuel prices, and is being fanned by a range of grants and tax credits handed out by state, federal and private agencies.

“As they exhaust energy efficiency projects on their farms, then they are starting to look more at renewable energy,” she said.

Just how many remains unclear, but the motivation seems to still be a desire to be green more than the bottom line, despite an increasing array of financial incentives.

No one really knows how many U.S. farms use renewable energy, such as solar photovoltaic panels, hydroelectric generators, and methane digesters. The 2007 Farm Census found 23,451 out of more than 2 million farms–about 1 percent–generated some kind of electricity or energy, but just what that means is unclear. The agency is doing a more detailed count this year.

But indications are that the numbers are rising.

Overall renewable energy production rose 5 percent from 2007 to 2008, according to the Energy Information Administration.

And there were $9 million worth of applications for just $2.4 million in grants authorized by the 2008 Farm Bill for farm energy audits, a precondition to applying for alternative energy grants, said Bill Hagy, special assistant for alternative energy policy for the secretary of Agriculture.

In fiscal year 2008, USDA Rural Development funded 197 renewable energy projects, and projections are for 385 projects in fiscal 2009, said spokesman Jay Fletcher.

At Persephone Farm in Lebanon, Jeff Falen and his wife, Elanor O’Brien, raise organic vegetables. They have been building up their solar array since 2004, and the latest installation should bring them up to 100 percent of their annual electricity use, which includes a plug-in electric tractor. A boost in the Oregon state tax credit from 30 percent to 50 percent, spread over five years, made the latest addition easier. A 30 percent federal tax credit is also available.

“We are basically harvesting the sun when we’re farming,” said Falen. “That’s what our crops are doing. This is just another way of doing it.”

Read the rest of this entry »

From Senator Bingaman’s November 5th press release:

Chairman Bingaman this week detailed the ample job generating potential of the energy bill that this committee reported in June. In a Senate speech, Bingaman made clear that, in addition to helping shift our country to cleaner and more secure sources of energy, the bipartisan American Clean Energy and Leadership Act (ACELA) will create entire new career fields and skill sets for millions of Americans — exactly the economic shot in the arm our country needs.

Mr. President:

I would like to speak today about the need for additional policies to create jobs in the United States, and about how energy legislation can help accomplish that goal.

First, despite the recent positive economic news, Congress must take additional steps to create jobs in the United States. The economy has lost 7.2 million jobs during this recession — one out of every 20 jobs in the country. In percentage terms, that is the biggest job loss since the recession in 1948 and 1949.

These job losses add to the jobs deficit that has been accumulating over the past nine years.

The country needs 12 million new jobs to bring employment back to where it was at the end of the Clinton administration. Economists expect the jobs report this Friday will show even more jobs were lost in October.

We should not, however, overlook the positive news about the economy that was reported over the past week. Gross Domestic Product jumped to 3.5 percent in the third quarter, a complete turnaround from the 6.4 percent decline in the first quarter. It is reported that the Recovery Act has created or saved one million jobs, 640,000 through direct spending alone. The Recovery Act is working, but Congress still must do more.

Read the rest of this entry »

From yesterday’s NY Times:
Leaders Will Delay Deal on Climate Change
By HELENE COOPER

SINGAPORE — President Obama and other world leaders have decided to put off the difficult task of reaching a climate change agreement at a global climate conference scheduled for next month, agreeing instead to make it the mission of the Copenhagen conference to reach a less specific “politically binding” agreement that would punt the most difficult issues into the future.

At a hastily arranged breakfast on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit meeting on Sunday morning, the leaders, including Lars Lokke Rasmussen, the prime minister of Denmark and the chairman of the climate conference, agreed that in order to salvage Copenhagen they would have to push a fully binding legal agreement down the road, possibly to a second summit meeting in Mexico City later on.

“There was an assessment by the leaders that it is unrealistic to expect a full internationally, legally binding agreement could be negotiated between now and Copenhagen, which starts in 22 days,” said Michael Froman, the deputy national security adviser for international economic affairs. “I don’t think the negotiations have proceeded in such a way that any of the leaders thought it was likely that we were going to achieve a final agreement in Copenhagen, and yet thought that it was important that Copenhagen be an important step forward, including with operational impact.”

With the clock running out and deep differences unresolved, it has, for several months, appeared increasingly unlikely that the climate change negotiations in Denmark would produce a comprehensive and binding new treaty on global warming, as its organizers had intended.

The agreement on Sunday codifies what negotiators had already accepted as all but inevitable: that representatives of the 192 nations in the talks would not resolve the outstanding issues in time. The gulf between rich and poor countries, and even among the wealthiest nations, was just too wide.

Among the chief barriers to a comprehensive deal in Copenhagen was Congress’s inability to enact climate and energy legislation that sets binding targets on greenhouse gases in the United States. Without such a commitment, other nations are loath to make their own pledges.

Administration officials and Congressional leaders have said that final legislative action on a climate bill would not occur before the first half of next year.

After his breakfast meeting in Singapore, Mr. Obama was scheduled to meet with Asian leaders and to hold a number of one-on-one sessions, including one with the Russian president, Dmitri A. Medvedev.

After his meeting with Mr. Medvedev, Mr. Obama will attend a symbolically important regional meeting of Southeast Asian nations, in which representatives of Myanmar’s government will also be present. Mr. Obama, who has made a point of his willingness to engage with adversaries, noted that for the first time an American president would be at the table with Myanmar’s military junta. But he has also called on the government to release the leader of the country’s beleaguered democracy movement, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.

APEC summit meetings are not known for accomplishing much that is substantive. The most memorable moments often involve the photo opportunities, in which leaders wear colorful matching shirts. And often communiqués issued on dismantling trade barriers are undermined by the attending countries almost as soon as they are signed.

Speaking to world leaders at the APEC summit meeting Sunday morning, Mr. Obama said he would hold the 2011 gathering in Hawaii.

“The United States was there at the first meeting of APEC at Blake Island when President Clinton started the tradition of having leaders wear outfits picked out by the host nation,” Mr. Obama said. “And when America hosts APEC in a few years, I look forward to seeing you all decked out in flowered shirts and grass skirts because today I am announcing that my home state of Hawaii will be hosting this forum in 2011.”

This year’s meeting promises more of the same, complete with charges and countercharges of protectionism.

President Felipe Calderón of Mexico got things going early Saturday when he lashed out at what he called politically driven protectionism in the United States. He complained that Congressional coddling of the Teamsters had prevented the United States from opening its borders to Mexican trucks, which it was supposed to do years ago after it signed Nafta.

“Protectionism is killing North American companies,” Mr. Calderón said in Singapore. “The American government is facing political pressure that has not been counteracted.”

Mr. Obama is facing high expectations, which may be difficult to meet. For instance, while he has spoken about reducing trade barriers, he also talked during his speech in Tokyo on Saturday of making sure that the United States and Asia did not return to a cycle — which he termed “imbalanced” — in which American consumerism caused Asians to look at the United States as mainly an export market.

There are also high hopes among American companies and some Asian countries that the United States will commit to joining a regional trading group called the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Although Mr. Obama did open the door during his speech in Tokyo on Asia policy, he did not explicitly say that the United States would join the pact. A formal announcement that the United States is beginning negotiations would undoubtedly kick off criticism from free-trade opponents in the United States and pushback from Congress.

Mr. Obama spoke, instead, of “engaging the Trans-Pacific Partnership countries with the goal of shaping a regional agreement that will have broad-based membership and the high standards worthy of a 21st-century trade agreement.”

That line left many trade envoys already in Singapore scratching their heads: did Mr. Obama mean that the United States would begin formal talks to join the regional trade pact, which presently includes Singapore, Brunei and New Zealand, and could later include Vietnam — an addition that could lead to more Congressional pressure at home?

Many regional officials have been waiting for the United States to join the initiative as a demonstration that Washington will play a more active role in the region. But the Obama administration has yet to establish a firm trade policy, as it is still reviewing its options.

White House officials were not much clearer on what Mr. Obama meant when they were pressed on this after the speech. Mr. Froman, the deputy national security adviser, said that what Mr. Obama meant was that he would engage with the initiative “to see if this is something that could prove to be an important platform going further.”

-posted by Eileen Horn, climateandenergy.org

In this month’s Agriculture Research magazine, plant physiologists share their findings from experiments conducted in high CO2 environments.  Basically, weeds thrive, but it’s a mixed bag for wheat, corn, and rice.

As CO2 Levels Rise, Plants— and Humans—Respond

Agricultural Research Service plant physiologist Lewis Ziska has found that poison ivy is thriving—and becoming more toxic—because of increased carbon dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere. And when pollen wafts through the air, science pundits cite Ziska’s work showing that global climate change is ramping up the production of ragweed allergens.

But Ziska believes global climate change creates challenges that far exceed formidable weeds. “We need to know how these atmospheric shifts will affect our ability to feed people around the world,” he says.

Ziska works at the Crop Systems and Global Change Laboratory (CSGCL) in Beltsville, Maryland, and often collaborates with CSGCL plant physiologists Richard Sicher and Jim Bunce on food plant research. “Increased CO2 for most crops is a positive,” says Sicher. “You can double CO2 and almost anything will grow. The detrimental changes can be more subtle.”

Ziska’s findings on soybean growth are a case in point. In a typical production year, almost all soybeans planted in the United States are those genetically modified to resist herbicides, such as glyphosate, so farmers can eradicate weeds without harming their crops.

Ziska found that with typical precipitation levels, growth of genetically modified, glyphosate-resistant soybeans is stimulated by elevated CO2 levels—but so is the growth of weeds that are typically kept in check by the herbicide. So producers may need new strategies for managing soybean weeds as CO2 levels rise.

Rice May or May Not Be Nice

Ziska also worked with Anna McClung, research leader at the ARS Dale Bumpers National Rice Research Center at Stuttgart, Arkansas, to assess how strains of cultivated and wild red rice respond to elevated CO2. A weedy relative of cultivated rice, red rice can constrain production of rice grown for food.

The scientists found that elevated CO2 levels increased growth in both types of rice but more so in red rice. Significant differences in the rates and amount of growth were visible just 27 days after the seeds were planted. These growth differences indicate that, as CO2 levels increase, so too might competition between wild and cultivated rice. One way of preventing this would be for breeders to identify genetic traits in wild rice that support increased growth and breed these traits into cultivated varieties.

Ziska also partnered with scientists in China and concluded that when there was enough nitrogen in the soil to support growth, cultivated rice production was enhanced by rising CO2 levels. But when soil nitrogen levels were low, barnyardgrass—a common weed in paddy rice—was able to thrive at the expense of cultivated rice.

Wheat and Corn Findings

Ziska also conducted a 3-year field study to see whether the modern wheat line Oxen was as sensitive to rising CO2 levels as Marquis, a wheat line widely cultivated in the first half of the 20th century. At current CO2 levels, Oxen seed production exceeded Marquis seed production. But at the higher CO2 levels expected in the next 50 to 100 years, the two cultivars didn’t have a notable difference in seed yield. And for 2 of the 3 years, Marquis exceeded Oxen in overall vegetative biomass production. Ziska believes these findings indicate that the ability of different wheat lines to respond to CO2 may depend on how the plants process the additional carbon.

Meanwhile, Sicher and two other CSGCL colleagues—soil scientist Dennis Timlin and research leader Vangimalla Reddy—partnered with ARS plant physiologists Dennis Gitz and Jeff Baker to study the interrelated effects of elevated CO2 levels and temperature on corn. Soo Hyung-Kim, who is now an assistant professor at the University of Washington, was also one of the principal investigators.

The team grew corn in sunlit-controlled environmental chambers at five different temperatures and at two concentrations of CO2—current levels and doubled levels. Data on photosynthesis rates, leaf appearance, aboveground biomass accumulation, leaf area, and enzyme activity essential for sugar production was gathered and used to develop a model to predict corn response to elevated temperatures.

The data indicate that higher levels of CO2 do not stimulate the growth of corn plants. But as CO2 levels rise, so do air temperatures. Warmer conditions cause leaves to develop earlier, but above-ambient temperatures cause leaves to expand more slowly, and aboveground biomass accumulation is suppressed. So rising CO2 concentrations won’t have much direct impact on corn growth and production, but warmer temperatures due to CO2 enrichment can adversely affect plant growth.

This kind of information could help farmers and policymakers develop more nuanced strategies for dealing with climate change.

Studies that Sicher and Bunce conducted on wheat indicate that it matures earlier when CO2 levels are elevated. Although elevated CO2 treatments can increase yields depending on the variety, a shorter growing season is known to reduce wheat’s yield potential. Wheat yields are also expected to fall as ambient temperatures increase.

“It’s a double whammy for wheat,” Sicher notes.

Sicher and Bunce also found that in barley, leaf levels of amino acids decreased when CO2 levels were elevated. Since amino acids help produce proteins key for photosynthesis, the plant’s ability to grow and thrive is reduced.

What About Weeds?

Ziska has also collaborated on work showing that cheatgrass and Canada thistle flourish when CO2 levels rise. Cheatgrass is an invasive annual that has become a major headache for rangeland managers in the western United States because it fuels wildfires and outcompetes native grasses. Canada thistle is an aggressive perennial weed that reduces forage consumption by cattle in pastures and rangeland.

Weeds in the wild have acquired a diverse genetic pool that helps them adapt to environmental challenges such as pests, disease, or extreme weather conditions. For these plants, global climate change is just another evolutionary contest.

“The greater range of responses observed for weeds in increasing atmospheric CO2 and temperatures may be related to their greater genetic diversity relative to crops,” Ziska explains. “In other words, the greater the gene pool, the more likely it is for a species to respond to a rapid environmental change.”

Bunce found that different dandelion genotypes vary in fitness when CO2 levels are elevated and that some varieties could adapt rapidly to rising CO2 levels. “It’s possible that dandelions, which are a cool-season, quick-growing, springtime perennial, could have traits we could introduce into cultivated crops that have similar profiles,” he says.

“There’s a tremendous response variation in plants of the same genus and species,” Ziska concludes. “We need to see if we can utilize these traits to meet our future food needs.”—By Ann Perry, Agricultural Research Service Information Staff.

This research is part of Global Change (#204), Plant Biological and Molecular Processes (#302), and Air Quality (#203), three ARS national programs described on the World Wide Web at www.nps.ars.usda.gov.

To reach scientists mentioned in this article, contact Ann Perry, USDA-ARS Information Staff, 5601 Sunnyside Ave., Beltsville, MD 20705-5129; phone (301) 504-1628, fax (301) 504-1486.

“As CO2 Levels Rise, Plants—and Humans—Respond” was published in the November/December 2009 issue of Agricultural Research magazine.

-posted by Eileen Horn, climateandenergy.org

It’s Vampire Power awareness month, and  iGo has created this great video to illustrate the concept of Vampire Power.  Plus, you can calculate how many kWh you “bleed.” And there’s a nifty iPhone app too!

Enjoy!

It is gradually becoming clear that this December’s UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen is unlikely to produce a full, legally binding treaty for the countries to ratify.  The slow pace of U.S. climate legislation has been cited as a key roadblock.

This week, President Obama told Reuters that he would travel to Copenhagen if that would to secure a global compact.

Also, today’s Post reports that the administration is considering endorsing a limited short-term climate pact and deferring more ambitious action until next year. (article below)

Meanwhile, the Church World Service is urging people of faith to let the administration know that for them, it’s more than just an agreement is at stake.

Their Pledge urges people of faith to tell the administration: The people who are suffering the most from climate change are the poorest of the poor in both industrialized and developing countries. It is time for the countries that benefit most from activities that cause climate change to acknowledge this injustice and take the steps necessary to correct it.

Post:  U.S. weighs backing interim international climate agreement
Smaller-scale approach seen as first step toward full pact

By Juliet Eilperin
Friday, November 13, 2009

Less than a month before negotiators will meet in Copenhagen with the lofty goal of crafting a deal to curb global greenhouse gas emissions, the Obama administration is considering endorsing a limited short-term climate pact and deferring more ambitious action until next year.

The scaled-back strategy is driven largely by the realities of domestic politics: The administration is hampered in making an international deal because Congress has not passed climate legislation. So any global pact would be postponed until next year when it would be constrained by whatever domestic climate legislation Congress enacts.

Backing an interim agreement — which would fall far short of what many European and developing nations envisioned when President Obama took office — would be an attempt to keep the U.N.-sponsored talks from being viewed a failure, say administration and congressional officials.

They emphasize that the trimmed-back approach should not be viewed as a withdrawal of U.S. commitment, but rather as a first step: “An interim, operational deal is not meant to be seen as a substitute for a real agreement,” Todd Stern, the U.S. special envoy on climate change, said in an interview. “It’s meant to be seen as substantive building blocks to a full, legal agreement, and perhaps the best chance of getting such an agreement.”

At the heart of the interim pact, first outlined in a speech last month by Danish Prime Minister Lars Loekke Rasmussen, are “political commitments” from key nations outlining their targets to reduce their own greenhouse gas emissions as well as the amount of money richer countries will spend to help developing nations adapt to global warming and curb their own emissions. Such an approach could provide the incentive for major developing economies such as China and India — both of whose leaders Obama will meet this month — to sign onto an international climate agreement, according to experts.

Read the rest of this entry »