Climate and energy

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