Enjoy this very short video of Presidential hopeful, John Edwards stumping about two weeks ago. In my view, John Edwards has the strongest ecopolitical platform of any of the candidates. He is the only one gutsy enough to call for a moratorium on any new coal-fired power plants. The question that raises, however, is will that matter in the end? And if so, how? I am considering caucusing for Edwards in Colorado on the Feb. 5th. If he doesn’t get the required 15% in the first preference poll, I’ll have to realign with another candidate (but not without letting my fellow precinct members why I chose Edwards). A piece of advice to the candidates’ strategists and advisors: Pay attention to the Western vote (not just CA).

If any Democrat wants to do well in the purple states of the mountain west, they must start talking about issues that westerners care about (i.e. energy and enviro issues). If, come election time, the Democratic nominee is not talking about these issues, they will not catch the swing voters, indies, and Republicans who are considering casting a vote for a Democrat. How do you think Gov. Bill Ritter (D) got elected in CO? Three words: New Energy Economy.

For some background on the very contentious Cape Wind saga:

1. On The Daily Show
2. Polling data showing support for cape wind
3. Sneaky Wind Politics
   
4. Cape Wind Opponent to Step Down

The version of the farm bill passed by the Senate on Friday contains a small wind tax provision - the first in more than 20 years. The provision is a 30% investment tax credit (up to $4,000) for the installation of small wind systems. The credit is available for farmers, small businesses and homeowners for new wind systems up to 10 kw. This may be another piece of evidence of a farm bill in energy bill’s clothing.

The tax-credit has remained a part of the farm bill despite an attempt to scuttle it. Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO) and others defeated an amendment sponsored by Lamar Alexander (R-TN) that would have limited the small wind investment tax credit to farmers and small businesses, thus excluding owners of rural residential property and commercial property suitable for small wind from taking advantage of what has traditionally been viewed as a burden. It comes as no surprise to see Sen. Alexander championing the anti-wind cause once again. The Senator from Tennessee has been surprisingly outspoken about wind energy policy in the U.S., even going as far as suggesting that it ruins mountaintops (to say nothing of the practice of ‘mountaintop removal’ in TN and other coal-heavy states). It is also interesting to note that Alexander owns property on Nantucket Island in MA, not far at all from the proposed Cape Wind project and that he has been a vocal opponent and unlikely ally of Sen. Edward Kennedy. Coincidence?! I think not.

I suppose I shouldn’t be trumpeting this small victory too loudly, President Bush hasn’t signed the bill into law yet, so I suppose there is also a chance that the small tax credit will get axed from the bill just like all of the other renewable energy legislation.

Obama says he’ll bring energy leadership… Somebody needs to.

Stumble It! • Digg This!

How much do you pay for your electricity?

If you don’t know, take a look at your most recent electric bill. If you can’t find one, find your utility’s rates online. If your electricity is included in your rent, it is pretty easy to find out how much your local provider charges per kwh.

I included the U.S. rate map below for general reference but I certainly encourage and welcome submissions from other countries as well.

Source: Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-861, “Annual Electric Power Industry Report.”(2005)

Check back in a couple weeks for complete results.
Thanks!

The globalized trade of products like gold, bananas, pork-bellies, sugar and wheat, to name a few, creates a market where consumers do not know where the good was actually grown, mined, plucked, or processed. Not only that, but it may not be so easy to buy something even though it is all around you (as my search for locally-grown soybeans proved). Why does this matter? It all boils down to consumer choice. On one hand, the modern globalized economy consists of consumers that are primarily concerned with getting a given commodity for the best price possible. On the other hand, some consumers may want more than whatever is cheapest.

There are some consumers who will want to weigh such variables as the ecological sustainability of a good and the process of manufacturing it; the human rights records in the country the good is produced; workplace health and safety records; environmental practices, or any of a number of monetary and non-monetary variables. Consumers who choose to shop with their conscience are faced with tough choices every day, and they usually go something like this: Pay more for a product because it is organically grown, or fair-trade certified and feel better about how your money affects the larger social, ecological and political climate, or, pay less for virtually the same product and spend the difference on something else you wanted.

As consumers, we are constantly being bombarded with choices that can challenge the strength and conviction of our beliefs. Most of the choices seem minute, but depending on how loud that little voice inside your head shouts, other choices may present some rather sticky cognitive dissonance at an uncomfortable level. Don’t believe me? What is the first thing you think of when you are faced with the ubiquitous ‘paper or plastic?’ Concerned about the consequences of all that Styrofoam, do you calculate differences in total resource depletion when asked ‘dine-in or carry-out?’ Do you buy organic or conventional fruits and vegetables? always? why? why not? Do you buy your gas at Exxon/Mobil or BioWillie? do you care? Would you rather have a Budweiser or a Fat Tire? Do you prefer Starbucks, the coffee cart, or your French press? Would you rather go to to WAL-MART or AL-MART?(*) Would you choose fresh, crisp apples from New Zealand or last autumn’s apples from upstate? Would you like bananas that were grown by a company that pays extortion money to violent crime syndicates? or would you rather have no bananas at all?

As electricity consumers, we have no way of determining exactly where the electricity that powers our homes and businesses is generated. Unless you live off the grid or you’ve got the ability to completely disconnect from the grid and generate your own electricity, you cannot distinguish between an electron generated from coal and one generated from wind, natural gas, solar, hydro, or any other source. We can determine the probability that our electricity is of a specific mix, but that is about it. Electricity consumers also often lack any specific knowledge of when electricity is expensive and when it is cheap; we generally know that electricity is more expensive in the morning and in the evening but most of us do not have the ability to monitor those price fluctuations and act accordingly. However, as the issues of energy use and its relationship to climate change are achieving greater acceptance among the general public, consumers want more control over how the energy they consume is produced and how they consume energy. People would be much more interested in the production cost of coal if they were paying the actual cost of coal-fired electricity. Energy generated from “traditional” fossil fuels is only cost-effective because the formula used to determine those costs omits too many of the social and ecological externalities of production.

The current and projected costs of coal do not adequately account for the increased volume and intensity of resources that will be required to extract coal from perennially deeper deposits in increasingly remote regions of this planet. As long as the pathological miscalculations dominate energy pricing, the real costs of fossil-fuel production will remain hidden… (to be continued).

(*) AL-MART is located at 10,353 feet above sea-level in Alma, CO.

Last week I attended a sold-out conference in downtown Denver that addressed the future of Colorado’s ‘New Energy Economy.’ In the absence of any substantial federal legislation to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, state-level government initiatives in such states as California, Vermont, New Jersey, Minnesota, Massachusetts and Colorado to name a few, are giving shape to a technological ‘race to the top’ scenario where states are competing with each other to attract the type of businesses that can spur the development of a regional new energy economy.

While renewable energy technologies are receiving much needed attention from Wall St. to Main St. and from Cape Cod to Capitol Hill, the consensus at the conference seemed to be that planners, policymakers and investors should focus their immediate gaze on the ‘low hanging fruit’ of energy efficiency.

A rather interesting group was assembled for this event; it attracted CEOs of major utilities, well-known environmental advocates (and lesser known ones), coal advocates, reps from big oil, governors, farmers, mayors, contractors, energy researchers, policy wonks, etc. It is these sort of interdisciplinary events that have the effect of expanding the green movement beyond the constraints of its traditional boundaries.

In a smart political move, the Governor’s Energy Office and the Colorado Public Utilities Commission have already posted links to PowerPoint presentations and high-quality audio of the conference sessions. I have no intention of pouring through the entire conference agenda for you, but if you are interested, I can suggest some worthwhile speeches and panels. The morning began with a pep-talk from Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter who touted a few of the state’s legislative initiatives passed in the last session which included a doubling of the renewables portfolio standard (rps) for publicly owned utilities. Ritter delivered his remarks in a high-energy, high-spirited address that started the event off on the right foot. The governor did hint at the proposed policies in his new climate change initiative, but refrained from getting too specific about the details, which will be appropriately announced Monday at Coors Field in Denver. If you do listen to the Governor’s talk, pay attention to the Q&A at the end and see if you can pick out which one of the questioners was yours truly! Other worthwhile talks in the morning plenary session came from Ron Binz from the Co. Public Utilities Commission, and from the Director of the Governor’s Energy Office, Tom Plant.

If you are interested in traditional fuel sources, you might be interested in listening to the session titled “Coal and Gas: What are the Challenges…” I personally did not attend this session but instead attended the “Consumer Demand” session which featured political analyst Floyd Ciruli and was moderated by the excellent environmental historian Patricia Limerick. During the same time period there was another session for the technically-minded featuring “New Generation Technologies.” In the second afternoon session I attended “Meeting Future Demand” which featured some spirited debate between Matt Baker, Executive Director of Environment Colorado and Jim Sims, who is best known as being a part of Vice President Dick Cheney’s infamous energy task force (you remember, the one that was criticized for being cloaked in secrecy). This last session was informative but, unfortunately, the equivocating and loquacious Mr. Sims prevented too many questions from being asked by the audience because he was too busy reiterating his redundant messages.

Image Credit: Alexsandar Rodic