+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 51
Latest: JUST4TheFACTS
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 14157
Total Topics: 268
Most Online Today: 31
Most Online Ever: 137
(April 21, 2019, 04:54:01 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 10
Total: 10

Author Topic: Fossil Fuels: Degraded Democracy and Profit Over Planet Pollution  (Read 13470 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
The Fossil Fuel Government OWNED UNLAWFUL COURT SYSTEM just passed the lion's share of the bill to clean up New Jersey Pollution (caused by EXXON) to WE-THE-PEOPLE. It 's the EXXON Valdez law suit PITTANCE award all over again.

Quote
A long-fought legal battle to recover $8.9 billion in damages from Exxon Mobil Corporation for the contamination and loss of use of more than 1,500 acres of wetlands, marshes, meadows and waters in northern New Jersey has been quietly settled by the state for around $250 million.
The lawsuits, filed by the State Department of Environmental Protection in 2004, had been litigated by the administrations of four New Jersey governors, finally advancing last year to trial. By then, Exxon’s liability was no longer in dispute; the only issue was how much it would pay in damages.

...

Exxon did contribute $500,000 to the Republican Governors Association in May 2014, when Mr. Christie was serving a one-year term as its chairman; the company has contributed annually to the group since at least 2008, records show.

...

A spokesman for Mr. Christie referred questions about the settlement to the attorney general’s office. A spokesman for the acting attorney general, John J. Hoffman, said on Thursday that the office had no comment, as was its practice with pending litigation. Exxon also declined to comment on the settlement.

Democracy? Constitutional Law? A Court System that defends the right to health and well being of American Citizens?

 




Fri Feb 27, 2015 at 06:46 PM PST.

Christie Settles $9 Billion NJ Pollution Case Against Exxon for $250 Million
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/02/27/1367541/-Christie-Settles-9-Billion-Pollution-Case-Against-Exxon-for-250-Million

 
The Courts WILL NOT STOP EXXON AND FRIENDS FROM CONTINUING TO DO WHAT THEY DO (see below)..


Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Quote
Net primary production—the biomass that plants make from photosynthesis every day, all over the world—is the basis of all wealth and food security. It underwrites all other human and animal activity.

Could Fracking Spark a Modern-Day Dust Bowl? 


Tim Radford, Climate News Network | April 28, 2015 11:25 am
 
Oil wells and natural gas may have made individual Americans rich, but they have impoverished the great plains of North America, according to new research.   


A farmer and his sons struggle through a dust storm in 1930s Oklahoma. Photo credit: U.S. Department of Agriculture via Flickr

Fossil fuel prospectors have sunk 50,000 new wells a year since 2000 in three Canadian provinces and 11 U.S. states, and have damaged the foundation of all economic growth: net primary production—otherwise known as biomass, or vegetation.

Brady Allred, assistant professor of rangeland ecology at the University of Montana’s College of Forestry and Conservation, and colleagues write in the journal Science that they combined years of high-resolution satellite data with information from industry and public records to track the impact of oil drilling on natural and crop growth.

They conclude that the vegetation lost or removed by the expansion of the oil and gas business between 2000 and 2012 added up to 10 million tonnes of dry vegetation, or 4.5 million tonnes of carbon that otherwise would have been removed from the atmosphere.


Loss of fodder

Put another way, this loss amounted to the equivalent of fodder for five million cattle for one month from the rangelands, and 120 million bushels of wheat from the croplands. This wheat equivalent, they point out, adds up to the equivalent of 13 percent of the wheat exported by the U.S. in 2013.

Net primary production—the biomass that plants make from photosynthesis every day, all over the world—is the basis of all wealth and food security. It underwrites all other human and animal activity.

Human wealth depends ultimately on what grows in the ground, or what can be dug from the ground, and most of the latter—such as coal, oil and peat—was once stuff that grew in the ground.

The same net primary production is the basis of what economists sometimes call ecosystem services on which all civilisation depends: the natural replenishment of the water supply, pollination of crops, provision of natural nitrogen fertilizers, and the renewal of natural habitat for wild things.

And what worries the conservation scientists is that this loss of net primary production is likely to be “long-lasting and potentially permanent, as recovery or reclamation of previously drilled land has not kept pace with accelerated drilling.”


“This is not surprising because current reclamation practices vary by land ownership and governing body, target only limited portions of the energy landscape, require substantial funding and implementation commitments, and are often not initiated until the end life of a well.”

They say that the land actually taken up by wells, roads and storage facilities just between 2000 and 2012 is about 3 million hectares. This is the land area equivalent to three Yellowstone National Parks.


The hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” used to extract oil and gas is between 8,000 cubic meters and 50,000 cubic meters per well, which means that the total quantity of water squirted into the ground at high pressure during the 12 years to 2012 could exceed 33,900 million cubic meters. At least half of this was used in areas already defined as “water-stressed.”

New wells

The researchers considered the drilling of new wells in Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan in Canada, and in Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Wyoming in the U.S.

Although there is legislation, it is limited to lands subject to federal jurisdiction, and 90 percent of all drilling infrastructure is now on privately-owned land—at least, in the U.S.


A tanker drives past a flaring oil well in North Dakota. Photo credit: Tim Evanson via Wikimedia Commons

The study’s authors want decision-makers to confront the challenges of this kind of ecological disruption. There are lessons from history in all this, they warn.

“In the early 20th century, rapid agricultural expansion and widespread displacement of native vegetation reduced the resilience of the region to drought, ultimately contributing to the Dust Bowl of the 1930s,” they write.

“It took catastrophic disruption of livelihoods and economies to trigger policy reforms that addressed environmental and social risks of land-use change.”

http://ecowatch.com/2015/04/28/fracking-dust-bowl/

Agelbert NOTE: You can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality. As those CONSEQUENCES arrive, expect the fossil fuelers to make SURE WE-THE-PEOPLE PAY for consequences of their biosphere trashing, profit over planet CRIME. Have a nice day.
Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n26xYHj81s&feature=player_embedded
Earthquake Drills are now part of Oklahoma school routine. Guess why?


Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Texas Passes Ban on Fracking Bans (Yes, You Read that Right)

http://ecowatch.com/2015/05/05/texas-ban-on-fracking-bans/
Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Understanding Fossil Fueler Speak

Whenever a fossil fueler claims they are "saving the planet" (see MKing and friends    ), what they mean is that they are SAVING THEIR ASSES in order to keep the profit over planet,  suicidal, dirty energy gravy train going.

Whenever a fossil fueler claims they want to "cut wasteful energy subsidies", what they mean is that they want to CUT the RENEWABLE ENERGY tiny subsidies and leave the giant dirty energy visible AND INVISBLE "subsidies" (THEFT from we-the-people on behalf of fossil fuel welfare queens for the last 100 years or so  ) ON BEHALF OF the Fossil Fuel Welfare Queens.

Here is a snippet of a bill now before Congress designed to "save the planet" (see above) and "Cut wasteful energy subsidies" (see above).

Quote

114th CONGRESS
1st Session
 
H. R. 1901


To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to phaseout and repeal the credit for electricity produced from certain renewable resources, to reduce the corporate income tax, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

April 21, 2015

Mr. Marchant (for himself, Mr. Pompeo, Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas, Mr. Perry, Mr. Flores, Mr. Shuster, and Mr. Scalise) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means


A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to phaseout and repeal the credit for electricity produced from certain renewable resources, to reduce the corporate income tax, and for other purposes.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


SECTION 1. Short title.

This Act may be cited as the “PTC Elimination Act”.

SEC. 2. Phaseout and repeal of credit for electricity produced from certain renewable resources.    

 
(a) Reduction of credit and phaseout amounts.—


(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 45(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking paragraph (2).
 

(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Section 45(e)(2) of such Code is amended—


(A) by striking “the inflation adjustment factor and” in subparagraph (A), and
 

(B) by striking subparagraph (B) and redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B).
 

(3) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this subsection shall apply to electricity, and refined coal  ;), produced and sold after December 31, 2015.  


[/font][/color]

Agelbert NOTE: The EFFECTIVE DATE ENSURES that all future investment SCHEDULED RIGHT NOW (these things have one two and up to three year lead times) are CANCELLED in order to STRANGLE more renewable energy investment for AT LEAST the next three years while maintaining the TOTALLY UNNECESSARY fossil fuel subsidy THEFT. THAT is how they did it in Reagan's day. THAT is how they keep trying to DESTROY RENEWABLE ENERGY TODAY.

MKing supports this bill. Most people who lack empathy for their fellow earthlings do as well. This is why:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GDmhVD5GMs&feature=player_embedded
Did you know JFK wanted to repeal the Oil Depletion allowance? The "depletion" (LOL!) allowance is still there...
Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Are We Sunk? The Electric Utility’s Titanic Problem  ;D

 John Farrell 
 May 06, 2015  |  14 Comments 

In my recent report on the utility business model of the future, I laid out 5 pillars of a democratic energy system. It’s hard not to notice the contrast between this vision of the future and the 15-year business plan laid out by Xcel Energy in Minnesota, the incumbent monopoly serving about half the state’s electric customers. Like those of its peers, it’s a plan that attempts to straddle the inevitable transition toward clean energy while keeping its existing centralized power system running for as long as possible.

This inconsistency gave me the sudden image of the “Titanic,” engines thundering, smokestacks spewing, rushing toward the iceberg of financial insolvency and climate catastrophe. We’re all aboard this ship, short of life rafts and about to test whether it’s truly unsinkable.

The impending titanic impact (pardon the pun) mirrors the original naval disaster in other disturbing ways. For one, the electricity system fascination with large scale systems (like huge nuclear power plants) without making enough alternative “life boats” (like distributed solar). For another, the notion that a large ship or a large utility are both too big to fail.

But today’s electricity system differs from this ill-fated ship in one key respect: we still have the power to avoid the collision.

Too Many Years of Incremental Change

Even though most electric customers see themselves as helpless steerage passengers, the truth is that we’re in a time of tremendous opportunity to turn the ship or, failing that, set sail on some new life boats.

We’re at this moment for two reasons. First, the original rules of the electric system, made by legislatures and enforced by Public Utilities Commissions, set a course toward affordable and reliable electric service, whatever the (environmental and equity) cost. Over time it became clear that affordable and reliable were insufficient principles for organizing an electricity system with better technologies for energy efficiency and distributed renewable energy. But when we tried to change the system, it became clear that utilities that can exercise market power can also exercise political power over the rules of the system to defend their fiefdom.

So instead of seizing the opportunities presented by new technology with a wholesale course correction, we’ve nudged the direction of the “unsinkable” monopoly vessel. Renewable portfolio standards have reduced emissions, but not enough to avert the climate crisis. Energy efficiency standards have reduced, but not eliminated, growth in electricity use. Nor, in leaving the incumbent utility largely in charge, has either policy sufficiently diversified control over the electric system.

For example, the Rocky Mountain Institute illustrates that building energy use could be halved by 2050, and yet Xcel Energy’s 15-year plan includes a demand forecast that increases energy consumption.

Xcel’s 40 percent renewable forecast by 2030 seems ambitious, except that the 2,400 megawatts of solar they propose by that year represents less solar than could be installed on residential and commercial rooftops, competitive with their electricity prices, by 2022.

And, like many others, Minnesota’s titanic utility has been reluctant to change course. Just last week the utility learned that they’ll be held responsible for massive cost overruns on a retrofit to their Monticello nuclear power plant (despite numerous advance warnings). This power plant — a legacy of a utility-centric, command-and-control electricity system — is largely incompatible with the shift toward a cleaner, more distributed electricity system.

And so we surge forward toward the iceberg of climate catastrophe and electric system insolvency, because too few of the passengers realize they actually have a choice.

Avoiding the Impact

Having been put behind the wheel of the utility system decades ago, the incumbent utility has been perfectly happy to maintain a system that is (unfairly) economically and politically rewarding. But the rise of distributed generation like solar and the plateauing of energy sales have made even utilities realize that this course is unsustainable. The problem is, they don’t even understand how to change. Over half of utilities participating in a recent industry survey said that they see an opportunity in distributed energy resources, but that they don’t know how to build a business around it.

The 21st century electric utility has to be substantially different from its predecessor. In a recent report, ILSR outlined 5 pillars of an energy democracy system that overlap and go beyond the “Utility 2.0″ conversation. These pillars illustrate the primary principles that should govern our electricity system.

Five Pillars of Energy Democracy



The incumbent utility  won’t implement this new course   , especially since the rules they operate under don’t encourage it. Instead, the rules have to change, which means that legislation and regulation has to change to enable this new route toward a more democratic energy system. Regulators in New York are Reforming the Energy Vision, envisioning a complete overhaul to make the ship nimble enough to avoid the economic and climate pitfalls ahead. They’re joined by regulators and legislators in other states — including Minnesota, Vermont, Maine, California, and Hawaii — trying to re-engineer the driving force in the utility system.

This is a big, substantive change. It threatens utilities used to monopoly control and monopoly profits. And because there’s plenty of evidence that the utility monopoly no longer makes sense, many utilities are now fighting back.

If the Ship Can’t Turn…


what happens if policy change can’t save us from the iceberg? Electric customers have some compelling alternatives.

For one, the cost of distributed renewable energy has fallen so sharply that many people are reducing their reliance on the electric utility.
The Rocky Mountain Institute suggests that as energy storage costs start to fall with mass adoption, there’s a real possibility for (wealthier) individuals and businesses to defect from the grid, i.e. commandeer the lifeboats.

More promising is the rise of collective action. In Boulder, CO, the city has opted to seize the ship, by orchestrating a city-driven takeover of the local energy system in order to deliver more clean, local power. In Minneapolis, MN, grassroots action has driven the electric and gas utilities into a clean energy partnership with the city under the intention of meeting the city’s climate and equity goals. Citizens in Santa Fe, New Mexico, are also asking how a city-owned utility could dramatically shift investment toward a more efficient and cleaner electricity system.

We built the electric system into a fleet of centralized, monopoly Titanics
at a time when all we wanted was affordable and reliable power. But technology has radically changed the horizon. There are major obstacles ahead and electric utilities aren’t likely to act quickly enough to avoid them.

We shouldn’t expect them to, because they’ve never really been in charge.

To the extent that there is a “market” in electricity, it’s entirely the creation of public policy. We christened these Titanics and gave them the power to bring light and energy to our economy. And it’s time to wake up and walk up from steerage and get behind the wheel.
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2015/05/are-we-sunk-the-electric-utilitys-titanic-problem?cmpid=WNL-Friday-May8-2015

Agelbert NOTE: A revealing graph from the "Democratic" Governor's Association will guide you in understanding who has REALLY BEEN IN CHARGE of "public" policy in the USA for the last century or so.   
 




A. G. Gelbert
 
 May 8, 2015 

John Farrell is RIGHT! The bottom line is that the "business model" world view of EVERYBODY needs to incorporate the REAL WORLD called environmental cause and effect.

IOW. the original rules of the electric system, made by legislatures and enforced by Public Utilities Commissions, that set a course toward "affordable' and "reliable" electric service, whatever the environmental and equity cost, were NOT "practical" or "profitable", as Mr. Wootton might claim. Those rules were a 20th century profit over planet pipe dream, compliments of the fossil fuel and nuclear power dirty energy industries, PERIOD.

It's time to leave the pseudo practical "do the math" LA LA LAND of exploitation without reflection that celebrates the egocentric and the suicidal stupidity that environmental costs can be offloaded onto the poor in general and the biosphere in particular.

John talks about democracy and distributed energy. I'm all for that. But this issue goes way beyond that. This is about a flaw in human thinking that must be corrected. Doing something because we CAN is not an excuse for doing it. Of course it's immoral to exploit without reflection. But it's also illogical, stupid and suicidal too!

So for you folks that like to be "practical" and oh so careful about rocking the status quo boat, I recommend you reassess your view of the Industrial (pollution) Revolution and the "miracle" of 20th century energy products.

We DID NOT have to "remain in the caves" to avoid using dirty energy, no matter what you victims of dirty energy brainwashing may believe.

But, of course, that is polluted water under the "bridge", so to speak.

We do not need a "NEW" business model for energy because we NEVER HAD ONE. What we need, as John Farrell says in so many words, is to plug the environmental and equity costs of energy production and use into our planning and thinking in order to avoid extinction.

Accuse me of hyperbole if you like. You are wrong.
Quote

Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." -- Aldous Huxley
Quote
"We can’t have a healthy business on a sick planet.” Ashley Orgain, manager of mission advocacy and outreach for Seventh Generation, Burlington, Vermont
Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Painting with a Broad Brush

Quote
The core responsibility assigned to governments in democracies is the public welfare, protecting the human birthright to basic needs: clean air, water, land, and a place to live, under equitable rules of access to all common property resources.

It is astonishing to discover that major political efforts in democracies can be turned to undermining the core purpose of government, destroying the factual basis for fair and effective protection of essential common property resources of all to feed the financial interests of a few. These efforts, limiting scientific research on environment, denying the validity of settled facts and natural laws, are a shameful dance, far below acceptable or reputable political behavior.

It can be treated not as a reasoned alternative, but scorned for what it is – simple thievery. —George M. Woodwell, WHRC founder


Can We Afford Not to Address Climate Change?
Dr. Philip B. Duffy
President & Executive Director
Woods Hole Research Center


SNIPPET:

Opponents of environmental protection argue that we ‘can’t afford’ to safeguard our health and that of the planet we live and depend on. The latest example  involves the EPA’s proposed regulation of existing coal-fired power plants, which a member of Congress (from a coal producing state) recently claimed would result in “electricity rate increases, reduced electrical reliability and other harmful effects.”

It seems so logical that regulation would increase costs that few people question the idea. But history shows that it’s often not true. For one thing, it’s wrong to focus narrowly on the purchase price of automobiles, electricity, or whatever is being regulated.

Pollution has real costs in terms of damage to the environment and to human health. (Because of this, polluting is a way of shifting costs onto others). For example, the Clean Air coalition estimated that fine particle pollution from existing coal plants caused nearly 13,200 deaths in 2010, plus 9,700 hospitalizations and more than 20,000 heart attacks, with a total monetized value for these adverse health impacts exceeding $100 billion per year . (I should add that these numbers used to be much higher but have been reduced by successful regulation of coal plants.)

But even if we focus exclusively on purchase prices, regulation can have surprisingly positive impacts.  Refrigerators provide an interesting example.

Excellent Article in the Woods Hole Research Center Newsletter revealing the thievery, duplicity and mendacity of the dirty energy producers and their political lackeys at link below: 

http://whrc.org/news/newsletter/pdf/WHRC_Newsletter_May2015.pdf
Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Reality-based conspiracies  :(


                          



Welcome to DYSTOPIA
Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution


Santa Barbara Oil Spill: Another Reminder of the Price of Fossil Fuels  :P

It's happened again. On Tuesday as much as 105,000 gallons of oil spilled near Santa Barbara, Calif., sending an estimated 21,000 gallons into the Pacific Ocean, creating an oil slick about 9 miles long in the Pacific Ocean and fouling major stretches of the beach. The crude leaked from a broken pipe and flowed into the Pacific via a culvert.

 The spill happened in the same area as an oil spill in 1969 that was the country's largest until the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska in 1989. Wildlife rescue teams and cleanup crews have spent the past two days responding to the spill.

 "Time and again we've seen oil foul our coasts, whether it's Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico or Santa Barbara," said the Center's Miyoko Sakash ita. "Oil spills are part of the ugly cost of fossil fuel development, made even worse by aging domestic infrastructure.  >:( It doesn't have to be this way and it shouldn't. We need to start aggressively moving away from fuel sources that are devastating for wildlife, people and our climate. If we don't, we risk continuing to see spills like we just saw in Santa Barbara."

http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/center/articles/2015/christian-science-monitor-05-20-2015.html

Agelbert NOTE:
OF course, the profit over planet Modus Operandi ENSURES that we-the-people PAY for pollution costs IN ADDITION to "subsidizing" (see THEFT) dirty energy. 






 

The Fossil Fuelers   DID THE Climate Trashing CRIME,   but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and conscience free crooks, they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!     Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on!
Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Agelbert NOTE: Some may question why I posted this story here. Well, this is an example of a PITTANCE going to renewable energy (see PRETEND support  ;)) while the BIG MONEY from the taxpayers is going to more fossil fuel CRAP.    Particularly galling is how the fossil fuel natural gas crooks have infiltrated a corporation that has been championing renewable energy.   >:(

06/01/2015 01:47 PM     

California Families Get Free Solar Thanks to Cap-And-Trade


SustainableBusiness.com News

1600 lower income families will be outfitted with solar by the end of next year thanks to California's cap-and-trade program. 

10% of the money raised in the program is funneled into the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund for projects that reduce greenhouse gases in the state or that improve the environment in low income neighborhoods.

 Non-profit GRID Alternatives, which is coordinating the solar installations, was awarded $14.7 million for the next two years. Local manufacturers donate the equipment, job-training programs provide the installers and homeowners either help with the installation or feed the crew.

California's cap-and-trade program, called the Western Climate Initiative now that Quebec and Ontario have joined - has raised $1.6 billion so far.



Since 2007, SunPower has donated about $2 million in  equipment and cash from its foundation to support GRID Alternatives' work. A new investment is for the group's new high school education program.   

Besides donating solar panels, SunEdison is investing in GRID's programs that foster greater diversity in the solar industry. The company donated $1.2 million to launch the Women in Solar Initiative, and is following up with $5 million to expand that and launch the RISE initiative, which focuses on racial and ethnic diversity.   


Read our article, How California Will Spend the $5 Billion a Year From Cap-and-Trade.

Natural Gas versus Renewables Still An Issue


 Last week, California approved a spanking new natural gas power plant
    to replace the old Carlsbad power plant built in the 1950s.  At $2.2 billion   ,  people are wondering why the state didn't install a whole lot more renewable energy instead. 

The new plant is necessary    since the San Onofre nuclear plant closed in 2013. San Diego Gas & Electric, which is buying all the power, says natural gas is still needed to fill in gaps left by solar and wind energy. 

 Also interesting is that NRG Energy is building the plant - the utility that's most involved in and committed to renewable energy in the US . And they were given the project without competing bids.  ;)
http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/26321

Message to San Diego Gas & Electric from We-the-People that KNOW how to add and subtract using BIOSPHERE MATH.

Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution

3 Arrested in Denton As Oklahoma Joins Texas in Banning Fracking Bans

http://ecowatch.com/2015/06/02/oklahoma-bans-fracking-bans/

Agelbert NOTE: Don't miss the comments!  


Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31139
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Josh Fox Gets Kicked Off of Fox News While Exposing Misleading Coverage of EPA Fracking Report  >:(

Lee Ziesche, Solutions Grassroots | June 8, 2015 4:56 pm

Varney said he wouldn’t frack his own land in upstate New York because it’s in a “watershed” but promoted, on air, last week (while not letting Sandra Steingraber finish a sentence) that we should frack the rest of New York.


When Fox called him out on the hypocrisy and questioned Varney’s claim that he lit his tap water on fire, Varney became irate and told Josh, “The interview is over. You are outta here young man.”

“If you said to me earlier that you would not want fracking in your own neighborhood, it’s irresponsible for you to say on air that the rest of America should frack,” Fox can be heard saying to Varney as he’s being faded out.

Fox was on the program to address untrue headlines most of the mainstream media ran with claiming fracking was safe, following the release of a long-awaited U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report on the practice.

In the report, the U.S. EPA publicly confirmed for the first time that fracking contaminates groundwater. However, the EPA’s press release led with the misleading headline saying that EPA has found no “widespread” evidence of water contamination.

As Fox explains on the show this is not the first time we’ve seen the EPA release a report where the science says one thing and then their PR department slaps on a press release that says something else.

“EPA went into Dimock and said to people ‘do not drink your water,’ in private letters and then in the press they came out and said well actually this water is safe,” Josh said on the show.

Watch and share as Fox takes on the misleading EPA report, Obama administration’s support of fracking and FOX host NIMBY: 


http://ecowatch.com/2015/06/08/josh-fox-news-epa-fracking/
Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. Pr. 13:12

 

+-Recent Topics

Doomstead Diner Daily by Surly1
November 22, 2019, 06:08:01 am

Money by AGelbert
November 21, 2019, 05:58:03 pm

🚩 Global Climate Chaos ☠️ by AGelbert
November 21, 2019, 05:43:57 pm

2020 Presidential Election by AGelbert
November 21, 2019, 02:19:08 pm

🌟 IMPEACHMENT SCORE 🌠 by AGelbert
November 21, 2019, 02:14:16 pm

Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) by AGelbert
November 21, 2019, 12:59:14 pm

Sustainable Farming by AGelbert
November 21, 2019, 12:41:09 pm

Batteries by AGelbert
November 20, 2019, 08:11:15 pm

Wind Power by AGelbert
November 20, 2019, 01:53:46 pm

🦕🦖 Hydrocarbon 🐍 Hellspawn Mens Rea Actus Reus modus operandi by AGelbert
November 20, 2019, 01:22:57 pm