Location/ Time: House floor, Monday evening
Legislative body: House
Issue: proposed Holcomb coal plants
Bill No.: SB 471
Summary/ Action (will be filled out later): Amendment to add Holcomb issue to SB 471 passed; SB 471 passes . Next steps: Final action on SB 471 will be tomorrow.
I was taking notes by hand when the brouhaha started, so I will type the transcript up later. To summarize what happened: um… I think I just saw a bunch of Kansas legislators vote to implement the first carbon tax in the nation.
Keep in mind, I don’t have my hands on a copy of the amendment. I doubt many legislators do, actually - they all seemed clustered around only a few copies, in clumps up near the front of the room.
The scene: We kind of thought the night was over. We were about to pack up to go. There was only one bill or so left - SB 471, on tax credits for expenses incurred in live organ donation, and adoption (done separately, I have to assume). Then Rep. Aurand brought in an amendment that essentially said the following:
There will be a $37 per ton of CO2 excise tax levied on coal plant operators of 350 MW or more who emit over 110% over the state average of carbon dioxide emissions, measured on a per MW hour basis. The proceeds from this excise tax will be offered as a tax credit for those plants who emit less. There is a price per ton of carbon, but bill supporters swore up and down that this was not a carbon tax, because there were carbon mitigation provisions in the amendment that could offset the emissions from dirty plants. They also swore up and down that even though these credits could be traded, this had nothing to do with cap and trade, because there was no cap.
A pause. To collect myself. That was actually more like a dream sequence. I’m still not sure I really heard “$37 per ton of carbon” Take that with a grain of salt, until I somehow track down the amendment.
The amendment passed by 78-42, roughly the same margin as the original vote on Holcomb I, SB 327, which was vetoed by the governor.
Who does this amendment affect? Essentially, KCPL, Westar, BPU, and Sunflower. KCPL and Westar in particular will be affected, because they have older plants that emit more per MWh. Sunflower has newer plants that emit less per MWh - but if the proposed Holcomb plants will be by far the largest total emitters in the state, if they are built.
If this is green, it is green in an incredibly fuzzy math, tortured kind of way. Note, carbon dioxide emissions are not measured by total volume. You can emit as much carbon dioxide as you want, as long as your plants’ per MWh average from your plants is lower than that of another facility.
Let’s be clear - in particular, KCPL, Westar, and BPU RATEPAYERS will be affected, suddenly and drastically, by the legislature, without any cushioning by the Kansas Corporation Commission (KCC), Citizen Utility Ratepayers Board, etc. Eastern Kansas ratepayers will be paying for western Kansas electric generation.
Is this punishment for KCPL and Westar for not supporting Sunflower’s bid to build the Holcomb plants? Is it a way for Sunflower to finance the costs of meeting the Governor’s compromise of a 660 MW plant? Could be both. And while there are probably ways to work out the money issue, this seems a punitive way to do it.
The provisions do not appear to provide permission to build the Holcomb plants. However, those could conceivably be amended on in conference committee.
I’ll type up my notes on the transcript of the debate tomorrow.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
Multimedia: More Photos from Clean Energy Day
March 31, 2008
Thanks to George Jerkovich of Salina, CEP now can share even more wonderful images of Clean Energy Day at the Capitol. His pictures do an especially nice job of getting across the beauty of the (ongoing) Capitol renovation.
The new pictures are posted in our Flickr account, but I have also shared a sampling below.
Clean Energy Day participants pack a hearing on the bill known as HB 2949. Titled the Kansas Energy Plan, it proposed to lay out a plan for Kansas’ energy needs by focusing on baseload needs - encouraging coal and nuclear, phasing out natural gas, and defining wind energy in statute as intermittent generation. Businesses, utilities, and environmental groups all testified for the need for more flexiblity in Kansas energy policy. HB 2949 was later reformulated into a non-binding resolution, HCR 5038, which is still awaiting passage in the House.
Representative Tom Hawk, member of the House Committee on Energy and Utilities, meets with constituents at the Clean Energy Day lunch. Fifteen legislators attended.
Beautiful shot of the Capitol Rotunda.
I have a lot of memories of Clean Energy Day, but one in particular stands out - and it might not be the one most folks would think.
Since I’m around the Capitol a fair amount, I have come to know some of the staff members who work for legislators involved in climate and energy issues. After lunch and before the House Select Committee on Energy and Environment hearing - about 75 Clean Energy Day participants showed up there alone - a wonderful woman I know stopped me and asked a question.
“Have you heard about all the protestors?” she asked, and then named someone who had called her to “warn” her.
I tried to figure out what she meant. Then I realized.
“Um,” I said. “I don’t think they are protesters. They’re citizens, and voters, and they are coming to meet with their legislators on topics that really matter to them.”
Then we just kind of looked at each other.
In the past few weeks, I’ve thought a lot about that interaction.
Our country has a long history of constitutionally protecting the people’s rights to protest- primarily the First Amendment’s provisions for freedom of speech, the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Politically, in the abstract, everyone would agree that these are good things.
Practically, though, making your voice heard has somehow become - if not a bad thing, then at least a suspect activity. The fear of somehow being considered extreme has probably helped shut up a lot of normal everyday people, and kep tthem from fulfilling their obligations as citizens. If you want those rights, though, you also have to accept the obligations. No matter what other people might think.
I would submit this: If you’re having trouble being heard anyway, you really have nothing to lose by being polite, well-reasoned, and moderate. At least start there.
On Clean Energy Day, that’s what a lot of people did.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
Legislative Update: Veto clock on SB 327 (Holcomb I), and keeping an eye peeled for SB 148 (Holcomb II)
March 31, 2008
SB 327, Holcomb I. When you have a question about a veto clock… who better to call than the experts. Ie, the wonderful staff of the Kansas Legislative Hotline, 1-800-432-3924. According to this source, here’s how the process and the timing works:
The Governor vetoes a bill, and sends a message that she has done so. Governor Sebelius vetoed SB 327, the first Holcomb bill, on March 21. This started a 30 day clock ticking (30 calendar days) for the chamber of origin - in this case, the Kansas Senate - to take up an override vote.
Theoretically, this gives the Senate until Sunday, April 20. However, the legislature finishes the regular session this Friday evening, April 4 (or early Saturday morning) and goes on break. The override vote would thus have to happen by this Friday. Legislators do not officially return to Topeka until the veto override session begins on Tuesday, April 29.
The Senate vote then triggers a thirty calendar day clock to start ticking for the House, to hold their own override vote. If that happened on Friday - if the Senate holds the veto vote till the last possible day, to give the House some wiggle room to have the clock tick over the break - then the House’s thirty days would expire on Sunday, May 4.
However, keep in mind - 
I’ve heard several variations on this theme. We are all off by a day or so, which really matters in this sort of thing. We think we know… but we might be surprised.
SB 148, Holcomb II. At this point, this second Holcomb bill does not really have enough substantive differences from SB 327 to make the difference in the needed votes to pass the measure. SB 148 is still “below the line” - meaning it is not yet officially scheduled for a vote on the House calendar (although apparently all it would take is a motion, if someone really wanted to make it an action item for today, for example).
There is some talk of trying to green SB 148 some more, in order to get it passed. However, considering what has counted for green so far, in the minds of the bill’s supporters - I doubt this is a big concern.
Also, no matter how much you add to the bill, the point is that you would have to take some significant things away, to make it even remotely palatable. And that doesn’t seem likely.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
News Update: coal money and climate change
March 31, 2008
Historic climate pact under negotiation. This week, representatives from 163 countries are discussing the first streps necessary to produce an upcoming international climate pact to take effect in 2009 (CSMonitor). Quotable:
“And unlike talks that led to the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, which applied only to developed countries, these talks must set some type of binding greenhouse-gas emissions objectives for developing countries as well.
More players are facing decisions that involve significant changes in long-established patterns of producing and using energy, of economic development, and of delivering economic and technological aid to the developing world.”
As this is going on, scientists have discovered that between 2000 and 2005, greenhouse gas emissions rose four times faster than they had during the previous 10 years.
What sort of emissions reductions are needed to head off catastrophic climate change? If implemented, an emissions objective arrived at an earlier UN conference in Bali would require industrial countries to “reduce emissions from 25 to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.”
That represents a benchmark along the path to stabilizing global emissions so that by century’s end, global average temperature increases will be held to around 3.6 degrees F. Carbon dioxide, the key player in human-triggered warming, remains in the atmosphere for up to 200 years. Stabilization of atmospheric concentrations implies that emissions eventually must fall to virtually zero…
… “There’s a huge gap between what the scientists say is necessary” to hit the 2-degree mark “and what the political process can deliver,” Mr. Diringer says. “The challenge is to narrow that gap,” even if it isn’t slammed shut.
Kansas, coal, and climate change. The KCStar investigates Sunflower Electric’s connection to groups that have spent large sums to deny the existence or risks associated with climate change. They also report that:
… the effort to swing votes has turned into the most expensive lobbying fight in state history. Annual lobbying expenditures have topped $1 million for the first time. More than half of the $1.17 million in lobbying expenses reported to the state in 2007 came from energy companies and utilities.
Expansion opponents, including natural-gas-producing giant Chesapeake Energy, have kicked in more than $400,000. Proponents, led by Sunflower Electric Power Corp., which proposed the expansion, spent an additional $100,000, in addition to an unknown amount for advertisements that weren’t required to be reported to the state. Sunflower and its allies spent $127,000 more in January.
Humans contribute to climate change by burning fossil fuels like coal, oil, and natural gas. When burned, these fuels release carbon dioxide long sequestered from the earth’s regular carbon cycle. When carbon dioxide accumulates in the atmosphere, it leads to global warming and climate change.
Some costs on nuclear. Although Sunflower Electric’s proposed coal plants at Holcomb have dominated energy news lately, Kansas has seen a nuclear power debate stirring this legislative session as well. During the conversations that have taken place, there has been at least one very large, missing ingredient - how much would a new nuclear power plant cost?
As reported on NPR, Florida Power and Light just got two plants approved - price tag, $24 billion. Progress Energy, with another approved application, estimates $14 billion.
Wind power. WSJournal’s Environmental Capital blog looks at international picture of wind industry. Verdict:
“Wind power is already the fastest-growing source of new electric power in much of the world, the U.S. included, where wind power accounted for one-quarter of new generation capacity installed last year. And that will continue unabated—provided the industry can finally solve the turbine-supply problems that have plagued it for the last few years.”
Problem: Looks like they yanked the image for the article off Wikipedia… and, um, I think those are pretty old turbines. Which if memory serves, have the towers that are contribute to increased bird deaths, in part because of the perching potential. I really don’t think that picture represents contemporary turbine design. Small but important point.
Green, huh? Governor Sebelius and the TCJournal go a round over whether the second Holcomb bill, SB 148, is greener than the first, SB 327. CEP already offered its own opinion on the green/ not green thing. We were pretty underwhelmed.
TCJ started it, last Friday (sorry, I don’t seem to be able to get to the link without a subscription). Essentially, they argued that SB 148 represented concessions by Sunflower.
The larger point - that this is a special interests piece of legislation targeted at one single company out of the entire Kansas energy industry - seemed not to concern the Capitol-Journal. To quote an editorial in the Salina Journal: “This legislation addresses only one specific situation: the Sunflower plant. Drafting bills on a case-by-case basis is not good statecraft.”
This weekend, Governor Sebelius finished the discussion. Her comments - which were fairly crisp:
This most recent bill is not a concession — it’s an attempt to offer the same negative elements that caused me to veto it in the first place.
The “green energy provisions” the editorial writers championed are practically rendered obsolete by what’s in the rest of the bill…
… The so-called “green” provisions don’t reduce the amount of CO2 the two coal plants will emit. They discourage additional wind power by allowing utilities to shut off a consumer’s power if the wind stops blowing. And while they require a utility to develop an energy efficiency plan, they don’t say what kind of energy savings need to be accomplished by the plan. The statute would actually allow an energy efficiency plan that doesn’t decrease energy use. How is this compromise?
Creation care. Grist reports on the young Southern Baptist theologian who pushed for the conservative faith’s recent declaration of creation care principles.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
Energy issues in Kansas are actually much broader than the narrowly focused debate over Sunflower Electric’s proposed coal plants in Holcomb. One example is the largely untold - and more positive - story of the KCPL energy efficiency bill (as it seems to be known around the Capitol). Basically, the bill is about about using energy more wisely, instead of building additional new generation facilities.
This legislation stands a good chance of making it into law this session. However, it’s been a long strange trip - and it ain’t over yet. The bill started out as HB 2632, but at last tally, some version of its language appeared in at least four other different bills (or “vehicles”):
SB 586 - HB 2632 language was added to nuclear power bill allowing utilities to recover “prudent costs” of developing nuclear power. (See bill, supplemental note, and fiscal note). Passed by House and Senate and will go to conference committee. After committee, returns to House and Senate floors for votes to concur or non-concur - no amendments can be added at that time.
SB 580 - Language was added to weatherization bill. Passed by House and Senate and will go to conference committee. After committee, returns to House and Senate floors for votes to concur or non-concur - no amendments can be added at that time.
HB 2632 - Original bill, now has an air permit amendment (see below). (See amended bill, plus supplemental note and fiscal note.) At this moment, doubtful this version will go any further.
SB 327 - Was added to the first Holcomb bill in conference committee, as attempt to green the initiative. Vetoed by the Governor, now awaiting override vote to start in Senate and move to House.
SB 148 - Was included in the second Holcomb bill as part of the original SB 327 (new provisions were added to second Holcomb bill, nothing was taken out). Was sent to blessed committee on Thursday to avoid dropping dead in face of procedural deadlines. Will probably be back in General Orders for the House to consider on Monday.
Pretty wild list - but hey, that’s democracy. More of the twists and turns will emerge as the story unfolds below, but generally:
Why does energy efficiency matter? What’s in the KCPL language - how does it help achieve these goals, and what are some other suggested options? How did one bill get so complicated (although that’s actually not so unusual), and how did it get tangled up in the Holcomb issue along the way?
To find out the answers, read on.
Below, Dr. Ted Scambos of the University of Colorado at Boulder, Lead Scientist at National Snow and Ice Data Center, explains the significance of the recent ice shelf collapse in western Antartica (also read about it in the British Antarctic Survey’s press release).
The footage is pretty dramatic, but an eyewitness account helps capture the sheer scale of the break-up:
Jim Elliott was onboard the BAS Twin Otter to capture video of the breakout for Vaughan and colleagues. He says,
“I’ve never seen anything like this before – it was awesome. We flew along the main crack and observed the sheer scale of movement from the breakage. Big hefty chunks of ice, the size of small houses, look as though they’ve been thrown around like rubble – it’s like an explosion.”
The breakout is the latest drama in a region of Antarctica that has experienced unprecedented warming over the last 50 years. Several ice shelves have retreated in the past 30 years - six of them collapsing completely (Prince Gustav Channel, Larsen Inlet, Larsen A, Larsen B, Wordie, Muller and the Jones Ice Shelf.)
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
Legislative Update: What’s happening with the new Holcomb bill (SB 148) and the old one (SB 327)
March 27, 2008
SB 148, the new Holcomb bill. Why - after all the drama and the rush and the build-up - did the second Holcomb bill get passed over last night for floor debate in the House, and then get kicked off the House schedule for today? HCR 5038, the resolution to develop baseload power in Kansas, suffered a similar fate. The two bills are still on the House calendar, but are buried way below the “line.”
(The meaning of that term: All of the bills needing action are on the House calendar, so it is a big document - but the line is drawn below the number of bills the House hopes it can process in a day. Sometimes they make it to the line, but sometimes they don’t.)
So. Basically, the Holcomb issue that has been roaring right along is now treading water. There could be many reasons why. I have heard many theories. One, the new Holcomb bill was so unimpressive that it risked losing votes on the issue, not gaining any. Second, there is still vote pressuring going on and SB 148 will be held until something shifts.
A great example of pressures happened last night. I think I recorded that nothing happened on the bill - but in fact, things happened around the bill. Supporters of Sunflower want to break the Governor’s veto on SB 327, and/or get votes on SB 148, and they need a minimum of seven votes to make either of those happen. In particular, they would like to swing the delegation from Wyandotte County, apparently by brandishing both carrots and sticks. Reporter John Hanna reported the carrot:
House Speaker Melvin Neufeld, an Ingalls Republican, has said he expects opponents to tell him what they want, but he’s also said he isn’t trying to cut deals himself. Sebelius has accused him of opening a legislative “auction” and playing ‘Let’s make a deal.”‘
McKinney, other legislators and lobbyists have said they’ve heard discussions about Sunflower supporters accepting passage of a bill to rewrite workers’ compensation laws to overturn a December 2005 ruling from the state Court of Appeals. The decision said workers who suffer two related injuries aren’t automatically entitled to benefits calculated as if they have a whole-body disability. Business groups and many Republicans were pleased with the ruling, while many Democrats and labor organizations were upset.
Separate bills making the change Democrats have favored are stuck in committee. Two weeks ago, the GOP-controlled House voted 70-52 against pulling one of them out. Such a deal was, by some accounts, designed to attract votes from the six Wyandotte County Democrats who voted against the coal-fired plants in the House. But Rep. Tom Burroughs, a Kansas City Democrat who leads the county’s delegation, said it doesn’t intend to trade votes and, if it were so inclined, “We’ve got a whole lot of quality-of-life issues.”
Last night, we witnessed some of the stick. There was a KPERS bill on the floor, and someone attempted to amend it to do away with casino gambling - obviously, gambling is an important issue to Wyandotte County. Evidently while the amendment was being debated on the floor, it was communicated to the Wyandotte delegation that the amendment would go away if they voted for Holcomb.
This backfired. The delegation wasn’t scared, and they didn’t go for it. They are apparently sticking with the Governor, and will vote to sustain the veto. They also defeated the amendment.
So SB 148 is waiting in the wings. And WyCo is hanging in there.
SB 327, old Holcomb bill. Apparently, it is sitting in a drawer. The Governor vetoed it, and now the bill has thirty days to be overridden.
That sounds really simple but it isn’t. No one really seems to know what D-Day is for the override.
Apparently, the timing is a matter of interpretation. The Governor had ten calendar days to override the veto. The legislature has thirty days… calendar days? Legislative working days? Does the clock stop ticking over their break (they adjourn April 4 and reconvene for the veto session on April 30 - I think) or does it keep going…? The override vote must start in the Senate, but when they use their thirty days, does the House get an additional thirty days…?
Everyone you ask has different interpretations. Main point: SB 327 is still out there, still active, and an override vote could be called at any time.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
CEP proceedings summary (live blogging after the fact) on the House floor - SB 586, nuclear power incentives and energy efficiency
March 27, 2008
SUMMARY: This morning Eileen was awesome enough to fill in for MH and cover SB 586 (bill, supplemental note, and fiscal note) as it was brought to the House floor.
CEP has been covering the content of this bill in a couple of different formats. The original SB 586 was introduced by Sen. Roger Reitz, Republican from Manhattan. It authorized the KCC to allow utilities to adjust their rates to recover the costs of “prudent expenditures” incurred in the course of exploring the possibilities of developing nuclear power. Nuclear power has been a live issue this session, although not as much as coal, and CEP tracked it through KCC and House Select Committee on Energy and Environment proceedings, and also offered our own thoughts on the issue.
SB 586 passed the Senate Committee on Energy and Utilities, passed the Senate, and then was sent to the House Committee on Energy and Utilities. There it was amended to add the contents of - original HB 2632! the KCPL bill on energy efficiency!
If you are thinking that that bill shows up in more places, you are correct. I did not link the original bill because it was significantly amended in Senate Committee on Energy and Utilities. More on that later if I get to it. In essence, this language allows utilities to rate base the costs of developing and implementing energy efficiency programs to help their customers save energy.
In the proceedings below, SB 586 passed. There was, however, some interesting discussion.
Frightening factoid - Sunflower plants’ CO2 emissions would equal emissions of 1.65 million cars, twice as much as all cars in Kansas
March 26, 2008
Kansas really, really is popular these days, in terms of our high profile re new coal generation. Representatives of the Union of Concerned Scientists - who also testified at the Holcomb hearings, which is probably part of why they are keeping an eye on us - just crunched some interesting numbers.
The proposed Holcomb plants will emit 11 millions tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year, but UCS used ten million tons for their calculation. From an email sent to one of my coworkers:
How much is ten million tons of carbon dioxide? Ten million tons of global warming pollution/yr is about as much as 1.65 million cars emit per year, according to the EPA’s emissions calculator. According to the most recent government data, there are only 857,000 automobiles registered in Kansas. So the new Sunflower coal plants would emit as much as almost twice as much CO2 each year as all the cars in Kansas.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
while waiting on the House to vote on SB 148…
March 26, 2008
Kevin Grandia of DeSmogBlog has an interesting post on Sunflower Electric CEO Earl Watkins’ lobbying efforts.
The link is a bit dicey, so scroll down to read the relevant text.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
CEP live blogging from the House chamber, waiting to see if SB 148 moves onto the floor today.
March 26, 2008
SUMMARY: Nothing happened on Holcomb II, SB 148. The House Minority Leader passed over the bill today, and didn’t put it on the schedule for tomorrow. The absence of a floor debate is very, very interesting. CEP has heard rumors that the bill is stalling out. John Hanna’s article seems to confirm this, as well as other rumors about vote trading (Hays Daily News).
Also, HCR 5038 - the former baseload bill, HB 2949, which was turned into a resolution - was taken out of General Orders as well.
*****************************
11:00 a.m.
Don’t get too excited! On the House calendar, there are sixteen bills under General Orders before SB 148, the new Holcomb bill, comes up for debate on the floor. The House goes into session at 11:00.
They could get to SB 148. Or they might not. The House sergeant-at-arms seemed to think that the session could last until seven or eight tonight, with a possible recess in the middle.
Unofficially, I think I know. This is a perfect example of the Meatloaf Rule in action. Tonight, my husband was going to make meatloaf. He makes great meatloaf. (It’s my recipe and he does it better than me and I’m cool with that.) But whenever there is a House vote I am interested in, and it is a meatloaf night -
- I am late for meatloaf.
Stand by. We await the opening gavel. CRACK. I won’t blog the whole thing, I’ll just lurk and wait.
Exception. Something posted for my husband, a former Marine: Honey, Marine Sergeant Birnbaum just got honored for saving the life of Sergeant Daniel Gilyeat, the Kansas City Marine and father whose leg was blown off in Iraq (Leatherneck.com). ABC Extreme Makeover also redid Gilyeat’s family’s home last fall.
The Chamber gave Birnbaum a standing ovation for a very long time.
More of note. Rep. McLaughlan, as a veteran and Kansan, speaks on behalf of passing HSub226 - the act on funerals, stating that Kansans have a right to grieve in private at funerals, and not be harassed by hate groups - as has been happening across the nation as the Kansas-based Phelps family protests at military funerals, claiming that the war in Iraq is… well, why give that claim air time.
Bill passes unanimously.
They got thru HB 2920. We are recessed until 2:30.
News Update: SB 148, there went an ice shelf, wind and reliability, and sounds like what?
March 26, 2008
Reminder - today is the wind summit out in Kingman, run by the Kansas Rural Center and co-sponsored by several entities, including the Sumner County Economic Development Commission (I’d be there meeting wind folks, but - well, I’m not. I’m here in Topeka at the Capitol. There is a very outside chance that House Substitute for SB 148, or the bill informally known as Holcomb II, will be run on the House floor today).
Highlight of my morning. The quote from Donn Teske of Kansas Farmers’ Union, when a reporter asked him his opinion of the new Holcomb bill, which has a very interesting provision that would offer utilities the ability to penalize users of wind energy as automatically having interruptible status (Hutchison News).
“Sounds like bull crap,” said Donn Teske, president of the Kansas Farmers Union, whose group supports community wind energy projects. “Wind has gone way beyond being a token fad. And it’s time they start looking at ways to address global warming.”
Lowlight of my morning. A 160 square mile chunk of the Wilkins ice shelf in western Antarctica suddenly collapsed yesterday. It was seven time the size of Manhattan (the one in NY, not the home of K-State - I don’t see why the NY location should always be assumed) and had been there for as much as 1500 years. Researchers confirm that the collapse was the result of global warming and is indicative of triggers, or a tipping point, in the earth’s climate system (LJWorld).
Birds and towers. The issue of bird deaths and cell phone towers is related to the issue of bird deaths and wind towers, so this article from CS Monitor on new bird and tower lighting research is well worth a read. Evidently, how towers are lighted can drastically impact bird deaths.
Our technologies - all of them - have environmental impact. If we want the benefits of technology, then we should also accept the burden (I actually first typed “birden”) of our responsibility to lessen those impacts on the voiceless ones, like birds.
Wind and Intermittency. The American Wind Energy Association allowed Renewable Energy Access to reprint an interesting portion of their newsletter regarding wind power’s reliability. This issue has popped up yet again because of the recent incident in Texas where wind power went offline for a while. This dip was predicted in several forecasts, but grid procedures apparently did not yet fully allocate for this occurrence. Then when baseload power was called upon for back-up, a baseload provider was apparently not able to respond in time.
There were clearly a few slips in the chain, and the incident provides a great teaching and learning moment for how all parties can work together toward better practices of wind integration. However, many folks not favorable to wind have seized upon this as a blame moment. Thus wind is getting dissed. Thus AWEA must say things like:
Is Wind Less “Reliable” than Conventional Generation?
No. Conventional resources occasionally shut down with no notice, and these “forced outages” require operating reserves. For example, a power system that has 1,000-megawatt nuclear or coal plants will typically keep 1,000 megawatts of other generation available, to be ready to quickly supply electricity if a plant unexpectedly shuts down. The power system can still be operated perfectly reliably in this fashion. Thus, “reliability” is not specific to any single generation facility, rather it is measured on a system-wide basis.
As noted by Jon Brekke, Vice President of Member Services for Great River Energy, a utility that operates in Minnesota and Wisconsin: “Wind energy is a valuable part of our diverse and growing energy portfolio. When partnered with other traditional generation resources, wind energy is an effective way to provide reliable, clean and affordable power to our member cooperatives.
Geographic diversity of wind energy helps even out the variability of wind energy in the regional market. In addition, wind farms are typically made up of many individual turbines, which reduce the impact of outages. For instance, there are 67 1.5-MW turbines at our Trimont Wind Farm, so if one is down for maintenance only 1.5% of the total wind farm’s generating capacity is lost.”
Changes in wind energy output are not instantaneous, as are conventional generator failures. Because of the geographic diversity inherent with large numbers of wind turbine installations, it typically takes over an hour for even a rapid change in wind speeds to shut down a large amount of wind generation. This is a significant benefit when compared with the instantaneous tripping of conventional units. In addition, wind forecasting tools that warn system operators of pending major wind output variations are becoming widely used and better integrated into system operations.
Facts are always welcome, but sometimes you have to overcome folks’ biases before the facts can penetrate. A popular bias against wind seems to stem from an all or nothing mindset - that wind has to somehow justify itself as a stand alone source of power, perfect and dependable in every way.
However, wind advocates are not in fact promoting wind as Prince Charming (a smarmy, smooth-talking storybook character that no one really trusts). Wind is simply a renewable resource that helps balance the traditional fossil fuel and nuclear power generation portfolio.
Let’s try another metaphor - would you cook chili with only meat, and no beans or spices or onions or chiles? I hope not. (That would be “ground beef.” Tasty but definitely not chili.) Would you base the security and reliability of any power grid around one generation source only? Again, I hope not. That would be less than smart.
Innovest update. CEP covered the Innovest report on Sunflower Electric yesterday, as part of the wave of coverage now saturating the blogosphere. I imagine it will receive a great deal of attention today as well.
Obviously the report says some important things about Kansas and risks to ratepayers. I get that. On the other hand, as a Kansan I’m also not really crazy about seeing any Kansas corporation or cooperative called out like this, on a national (even international) level. This coal discussion has gone to whole new levels. Since our state has such a high profile on the issue, I understand we make a good case study to illustrate the pressures around new coal generation. Still.
For some reason, throughout history Kansas has often played the role of a controversial case study. It’s a little ironic, considering we are generally pretty mild-mannered people. I hope we continue to remember that, as the debate marches on.
Dog poop icicles? I’m always in need of a lighter note upon which to end these news updates… and Christina, the CEP staff member who organizes the rest of us, found one for me! Here is a consumer product that no one - no one! - really needs to purchase.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
Fishing for feedback
March 25, 2008
Hey all. It’s that time of year, when bloggers employed by nonprofits have to report to their bosses on the results of their activities, and quantitatively and qualitatively prove that said activities are productive, valid, and a good way to leverage charitable dollars for the highest possible return of social, cultural and environmental benefits…
This basically means - please help me out! If you have feedback on the CEP website or blog (positive, negative, constructive, all of the above, it’s all welcome) then please either leave a comment and/or shoot me an email at “hazlett at climateandenergy dot org.” (I write the email address out phonetically so as to avoid spam.)
Please be as specific as possible - do you want Nancy Jackson to write more? Eileen, should she chip in more often? More live blogging? More CEP Conversations, News Updates, whatever? Less of something? Do we rock? Do we stink? Does it depend on the day? Are there topics you are interested in that we are not covering? Etc.
Please let us know. Thanks in advance!
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
Walk the Talk: No Driving Day
March 25, 2008
I always think I’ll love it when this happens - when I get a day to work at home.
My boss makes it a point for her family to have at least one No Driving Day per week. I aspire to this. Since my husband and I live out in the sticks, my commute is anywhere from 12-35 miles one way, depending on where I need to be. However, since such a high proportion of my job is online, there are days I don’t have to go anywhere.
It all sounds great. In fact, I used to work at home all the time. I got used to it and it didn’t bother me in the least. In fact, if the Kansas legislature hadn’t chosen this particular spring to get all interesting on energy issues, I might never have had to leave my house more than once or twice a week. My co-workers at CEP are more the ones to get out in the public eye. However, we are a tiny staff so when things started popping recently, due to my tech skills and typing skills, I got tossed into the mix and ended up covering energy issues at the Capitol in Topeka.
That only began in January. However, now I know all too well the seductive pleasures of driving anywhere, anytime, and the concept of “no driving day” is giving me a bit of trouble.
Straight from the press release from Innovest Strategic Advisors:
Sunflower Electric’s Expansion Proposal Illuminates Carbon-Risk Exposure and Financing Challenges of New Coal-Fired Power Plants in Light of Impending Climate Legislation.
25 March 2008 - Innovest Strategic Value Advisors, the world’s #1 provider of financial research that quantifies hidden risks and value, today released a case study on coal-plant financing called ‘Sunflower Electric Power: Carbon Risks Outweigh Benefits of Holcomb Expansion’. The report examines how current and proposed regulatory scenarios, alternatives to coal-fired generation, regulatory and stakeholder opposition, and rising construction costs continue to shift the competitive balance away from coal-fired electricity generation.
Innovest examined the economics of the transaction and determined that under the most plausible regulatory scenarios the decision to build new coal generating capacity will put Sunflower Electric’s ratepayers – who in this particular case are the actual owners – at significant risk. The report concludes that Sunflower’s management has not adequately addressed the competitive and financial risks associated with climate change in deciding to pursue the expansion of its Holcomb Station power plant.
The full report can be downloaded here.
Who is Innovest, the firm that carried out the research? According to the Solve Climate blog:
“Innovest Strategic Value Advisors are leading global experts of all things related to carbon risk. The firm has been the research arm of the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), which represents investors with $57 trillion in assets and collects greenhouse gas emissions data from 3000 of the world’s largest companies. Innovest has also developed analytical tools and models for evaluating the carbon risk of companies — intelligence it sells globally for a growing roster of clients.
Why did Innovest pick on Sunflower? My guess is that the Kansas coal debate has been so noisy, that we attracted enough attention to warrant our consideration as a cautionary case study for anyone else considering new coal generation.
In fact, Kansas and Sunflower Electric are not alone in the tough energy choices that we face. The world faces this same challenge - how to find low-carbon baseload fuels that will bridge us over a critical gap in energy technology (the lack of available carbon capture and sequestration technologies that can render coal a more viable option for a carbon-constrained world).
Energy efficiency and conservation, increased generation of renewables: These are examples of viable bridge fuels. Coal, a high carbon fuel, is not. The costs of energy are changing. In the future, coal will not only no longer be cheap - but it will also carry additional financial liabilities, due to its high carbon content and excessive emissions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, which leads to global warming and climate change.
Background: Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius vetoed SB 327 last Friday (aka, Holcomb I) and also issued Executive Order 08-03. That bill is awaiting a veto override attempt. It is veto-proof in the Senate but apparently not in the House.
Thus, over Easter weekend the original supporters of SB 327 put together a second vehicle for the legislation (which that would allow Sunflower Electric to build two coal-fired electric generation plants whose carbon dioxide emissions would come to eleven million tons per year).
This morning in the House Committee on Energy and Utilities, a Senate bill was gutted - House Substitute for SB 148 (hereafter SB 148 or Holcomb II, because I refuse to type all that every single time) - and the vetoed bill SB 327 was thrown back into the SB 148 vehicle. Again, the bill was passed with no hearings, no presentations by experts, and it passed out of committee with minimal discussion.
There are four major new provisions - (1) nitrous oxides, sulfur dioxide, and carbon dioxide emissions limits for the Sunflower plants, (2) a retail wind tariff that would subject purchasers of wind power to the status of interruptible power users, (3) energy efficiency, and (4) requiring utilities (except for munis) to create voluntary programs for businesses to carry out greenhouse gas emissions inventories. I’ll discuss these provisions further below.
The apparent reasoning for resubmitting a vetoed bill with these particular changes: My assumption is that these provisions are to try and make it more palatable. Some of the criticisms of SB 327 were that its green provisions were not in fact green.
To define green a little better in this context, green would at least have to mean a fair, balanced, comprehensive, and long-term energy policy for the state of Kansas as a whole, one that also prepares us to face - even take advantage of - a carbon regulated world, where greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced significantly.
Following this reasoning, these new provisions should probably try to approach this standard.
Let’s see how they do.
Legislative Updates: Nope, you didn’t just imagine that
March 24, 2008
Yep! A thirty-seven page bill - Holcomb II, why don’t we call it, aka House Substitute for Senate Bill 148 - just passed the House Energy and Utilities Committee with a minimum of discussion, no testimony, no presentations by experts, and with far-reaching consequences for any hope of a comprehensive, long-term Kansas energy policy. It passed the Committee by a 10-7 vote, with one member who left the room at a crucial moment. CEP covered the committee meeting (note, not a hearing) this morning. No, it is not our policy to name names in (non)voting situations.
The bill is not online yet - this is another gut-and-go (I’m starting to feel so cool, using legislative slang like I actually know what it means). SB 148 is a bill that at one time in its life, made it past the Senate Committee and chamber, but never made it out of the House Committee. So it has been hanging around, waiting for a new life…
… and it got this one! Since it passed Committee, it will have to be read into the House record before the House can take action. If the House passes the bill, the Senate doesn’t have to mess with it, it will just go straight to conference committee. Then back to House and Senate floors for final votes to send to the Governor (but no amendments are possible at that juncture).
And now here is a break in the action - MH is going to take some time, sit down with the new bill, let it sink in, and post more later. If you’d like to read that statement to mean I am also going to pick the brains of much smarter people than I - please feel free.
Look for a more “content-rich” post later in the day. Right now, I have 37 pages of fun.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
Don’t get too excited. It’s Monday a.m., I am dreadfully short on brain juice, and may have no idea what I am talking about. Easter really takes it out of me.
But if I’m not too out of it, I did hear scuttlebutt (isn’t that a great word?) saying that this was the time and the place for the Holcomb bill to be introduced.
If not, we’ll just fake our way thru it, right? And I’ll catch up with the bill, wherever it is, later today. Anyway, this Committee never lacks for interesting material. Speaking of the Committee, we await their presence. Hit refresh on your browser to check back in when need be. Kick-off is at 9:00 a.m. (I think).
Members include: Representatives Johnson, Flora, Mast, Sloan, Long, Moxley, Faust-Goudeau, Swanson, Proehl, Keuther (Ranking Minority), Holmes (Chair), Olson (Vice Chair), Svaty, McLachlan, Fund, Knox, Hawk, Light, Neighbor, Morrison, and Myers.
Lots of people here. Lots of chat. Like a cocktail party with no drinks. Not even coffee. Same room circulation patterns, though, you know how it works. It always amazes me that these folks are up, dressed very nicely and everything matches, and functional enough to politic - all at this hour of the morning. At any hour really. I stand in awe. I can look halfway decent and type, but that’s about it.
Chairman Holmes has entered the room.
But… we are still waiting. Oh well. There is always a reason, even if I never know what that reason is. They do have a quorum.
Here we go.
News Update: water shortages and their complications, farmers’ costs of doing business, and a little coal
March 24, 2008
Snow flurry! On Easter. Up at MH’s house in Jefferson County. Didn’t last long, didn’t stick, but still got our attention. Along those lines, the Midwest is experiencing some weird weather beyond its usual - watch out for flooding, folks (AP/ Yahoo). One meteorologist described the problem as in part due to a “jet stream on steroids.” Lot of moisture currently cycling all around us.
Speaking of moisture. Climate change adds another dimension to ongoing global concerns about water shortages. A lack of water doesn’t just mean fewer drops to drink, it also means less water for agriculture, industry, power generation, transportation, etc. (CSMonitor). According to one UN official:
“While I’m always cautious about ‘water wars,’ certainly the potential for water to become a trigger for more tension and, where there’s already conflict, to exacerbate conflict, is another issue that’s not hypothetical.”
Right now, the world is also depending on water more than ever before, to help us make the transition from fossil fuels. Producing ethanol, for example, takes a lot of water (and a lot of power, for that matter). Quotable:
The water required for an alternate fuel vehicle to travel a certain distance can be up to 100 times that required for a gas-powered vehicle. This extra water use stems from the irrigation of crops like corn that are turned into ethanol, or in the production of the electricity for recharging hybrids.
Careful of the disconnect. There’s been a lot in the news lately about the high prices of commodities like corn and wheat.
Unless I’ve missed it, though, I don’t think there’s been as much coverage of this fact: that while farmers are getting record prices for some crops, they are also paying record prices for diesel fuel, insecticides, etc. According to Liberal Online (Liberal, KS):
In some instances, diesel fuel has increased approximately 68 percent. Gas and propane are up nearly 54 percent. Fertilizer has jumped 99 percent and potash tops them all at 125 percent….
The ever increasing cost of fuel impacts the Thomas County producer’s bottom line. His farm has been in the family for four generations. While cropping inputs are increasing all the time, corn, wheat, milk and other commodities are trading at record highs, too. Wheat prices are up approximately 116 percent, corn is up 30 percent, soybeans 93 percent and milk 18 percent.
While these prices for crops have surged during the past year, they haven’t gone up as high as the prices for inputs necessary to run the farm.
While catching up on family this Easter weekend, I heard exactly this same story, but about extended family down in the Reno County area. Sure, they’re getting good prices for the crops - but they are getting killed on the inputs of fuel, fertilizer, etc. Apparently the cost of RoundUp has gone up by a factor of five. And while the commodity prices will probably fall sometime, those input prices typically don’t.
When I read the bit in the Liberal article about the farmer switching his irrigation engines over from diesel fuel to electricity because of cost (and knowing that the price of bought electricity is probably about to increase, too) - I thought to myself:
This is one of the reasons why Kansas needs net metering. We need to do everything possible to allow our farmers and businesspeople the option to install their own wind turbines, to produce some of their own power and help hedge against these rising prices. (For CEP testimony before the legislature on one of this session’s failed net metering bills, click here. For the NREL legislative briefing on net metering, click here.)
In case you haven’t yet had it with coal talk - we hear a lot about the high prices of oil, but coal prices are skyrocketing as well. According to the Washington Post, “world consumption of coal has grown 30 percent in the past six years, twice as much as any other energy source. About two-thirds of the fuel supplies electricity plants, and just under a third heads to industrial users, mostly steel and concrete makers.” China is burning more than the U.S., Europe, and Japan all combined, and is now a net importer of coal. The price of coal is shooting up all over the globe.
Sure, there’s lots of coal left in the ground - however, coal is a very infrastructure-intense commodity. (I’m not sure if I said that right, but I don’t know how else to put it.) Coal comes with a lot of overhead - mines, railroads, heavy industrial equipment, etc. Countries with coal reserves aren’t always able to get it out of the ground cheaply, so they import it from countries who can. Even though in the U.S. coal plants are apparently on the outs at this moment, U.S. coal suppliers like Peabody are making increased profits from exports.
There’s another rub - construction costs for new coal-fired plants. As Karen Dillon explores for the KC Star, the costs have recently gone through the roof. One source is quoted as saying that over the past four years, the cost of building a power plant has gone up 30 percent.
Favorite headline of last week. (only now I don’t remember where I saw it) - “Regulatory uncertainty killed the dinosaurs.” I think the person who originally wrote the headline, though, meant it as a parody of Secretary Bremby’s decision and the Governor’s veto - which is not the sense in which it made me laugh.
But hey, on some level, we both thought it was funny. Surely that’s a start.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
(Posted in time for Easter - MH)
Thad Holcomb, a native of rural Oklahoma, has run the Ecumenical Christian Ministries (ECM) at the University of Kansas for decades. In 2005, ECM won the Campus Ministry of the Year award for the South Central Region, by the National Campus Ministry Association.
Thad has long been interested in the issue of religion and the environment. He was raised Presbyterian and attended seminary at San Francisco Theological. He holds degrees in biblical studies and social ethics, as well as in clinical psychology and theology.
Maril Hazlett, CEP: Why don’t you start out by telling us a little about yourself, and how you got interested in these issues.
Thad Holcomb: I was brought up in rural Oklahoma - the cross-timber area of north-central Oklahoma. That was a sacred spot in my life. It influenced who I am and what I think and feel, and it moved me, really, into a religious understanding of life. Probably first from a mystical point of view. Then that broadened out into spirituality. That formed into faith, and then my faith turned into identity with a religious tradition.
MH: Was there any major turning point for you?
TH: I had a really profound experience when I was an adolescent, as far as nature and my connection to the larger powers. What was going on in our church at that time gave me a way to understand it - I was attending church in a small Presbyterian church. The pastor was a graduate of Princeton. More than anything, he emphasized the connections between religion and storytelling - narrative. I look back now and I see how he realized that narrative is so important in the biblical tradition. Just by telling a story, people can really identify with the characters and their situations and choices – they make up stories about others, they join in other stories…
That was my really important formulation of who I really was. My peers and I, we knew we were different. We didn’t identify with people in the city.
MH: Well, what is your story?
TH: I was probably fourteen or fifteen. On the ranch I would go out birdwatching a lot, particularly during the fall and spring, to see bird migrations. Sunrise or sunset was best. I’d go out to a farm pond, a large dam pond of ours, with my binoculars. I’d just curl up and watch wildlife.
One evening – it was fall - I was there watching ducks. Right before my eyes just an incredible explosion of wings occurred. I didn’t know what happened. Then I looked over – something was rustling in the shrubs. It was a bobcat. It had a duck by the neck. The bobcat went up to the top of a hill, it sat and it turned around. I thought it was looking right at me. Of course it wasn’t, but… Blood coming was dripping down, a little bit, from the duck. And then the bobcat just faded away, just faded away –
That affected me in a way that I had to… well, I think at any age we have questions about suffering. Watching the bobcat, I think it took away all the romanticism I had about nature. Instead, it put me into nature in a profound and spiritual way. I was no longer an observer. That day I somehow became a participant.
Because I said to myself - that is suffering. The suffering of another species, of the wild.
So that is a question that I took into kind of my faith journey. I was trying to understand that, that question.
