Half a million jobs, 25% drop in utility carbon pollution for just 2 cents a day per household

Back in May 2008, I reported on an amazing study on U.S. wind potential by the Bush Adminstration (see “Bush DOE says wind can be 20% of U.S. power by 2030 “” with no breakthroughs).” The study concluded 20% penetration was straightforward:

• Annual installations need to increase by only a factor of three from current levels by 2018.
• Costs of integrating intermittent wind power into the grid are modest. 20 percent wind can be reliably integrated into the grid for less than 0.5 cents per kWh.
• No material constraints currently exist.
• This would require 300,000 MW of wind, delivering electricity for about 6 to 8.5 cents per kilowatt hour, unsubsidized (i.e. no federal tax credit) and including the cost of transmission to access existing power lines within 500 miles of wind resource].
• The 20% Wind Scenario could require an incremental investment of less than 0.06 cent (6 one-hundredths of 1 cent) per kilowatt-hour of total generation by 2030, or roughly 50 cents per month per household.

We are well on our way toward that target (see “EIA projects wind at 5% of U.S. electricity in 2012, all renewables at 14%, thanks to Obama stimulus!“).  In the rest of this post, Tom Kenworthy, Senior Fellow at American Progress, updates the story with the latest study from the Department of Energy:

Read more

Yesterday, the Wonk Room profiled several candidates for the Democrat joining Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) in her campaign to prevent Clean Air Act regulation of greenhouse gas pollution. Today, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) has announced that she is the Murky Dem supporting the lobbyist-directed effort to prevent action by President Obama to slow global warming. Because she “believes the Clean Air Act is not meant to be applied to carbon dioxide emissions,” Landrieu is collaborating to craft what environmentalists are calling the Dirty Air Act:

“I am considering that right now,” Landrieu said when asked whether she backed Murkowski’s plan. “I have been working with her on it.”

Landrieu, like Louisiana’s Republican governor Bobby Jindal and Senator David Vitter, has pledged allegiance to the pollution interests who have given her over $1.5 million instead of her own people. Last month, Jindal “filed objections with EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson” over the proposed climate rules, claiming the standards would have “profound negative economic impacts on the state of Louisiana.” In September, Vitter submitted an amendment to block funding for centers that study and prepare for the impacts of climate change.

Landrieu’s actions are quite simply morally indefensible. The Mississippi Delta is under extraordinary threat from global warming, as seas rise and storms intensify. According to a recent analysis published in Nature, “an additional 2 degrees of global warming” — to which our business as usual commits the planet — would cause “6 to 9 meters (20 to 30 feet) of long-term sea level rise,” which would “permanently submerge New Orleans and other parts of southern Louisiana.”

This is not just a future threat. Climate change significantly intensified Hurricane Katrina, which cost this nation $80 billion, killed thousands, and displaced a million people. As hurricane scientist Kerry Emanuel has explained, “Probably if Hurricane Katrina had happened in 1980, the levees would have held.”

The Senate needs to kill this polluter-funded, polluter-crafted pro-pollution amendment

Say No to the Dirty Air Act.

You just can’t keep a dirty industry down (see Polluters work with Lisa “fiddle while Nome burns” Murkowski on amendment to thwart EPA GHG regulations that might help save her state).

The Senator from Alaska has been getting a little help from her friends (see Politico: “Lobbyists led meeting on Murkowski EPA amendment”).  And, make no mistake, these are friends with benefits — big benefits (see Sen. Murkowski now top fundraiser from utility industry).

Today’s Progress Report further explores what “The Dirty Air Act” would mean and who supports it:

Read more

The Democrats were always going to need Republican votes to pass the bipartisan clean air, clean energy jobs, livable climate, energy security bill.  And that was always going to be a challenge in this political climate, see “The central question for 2010: Will anti-science ideologues be able to kill the bipartisan climate and clean energy jobs bill?“).

Last week, the Reid underscored his commitment to act in his must-read speech to a clean energy conference (see Senate Majority Leader expects to cons bipartisan energy and climate bill this spring: It “may be the most important policy we will ever pass”).  Perhaps that’s why he delivered the following remarks this morning on the floor of the U.S. Senate (as prepared for delivery).

Read more

Unlike health care reform, the clean air, clean energy jobs bill that cuts oil use and pollution is a bipartisan political winner in every poll.

The amazing table above comes from a new Allstate/National Journal/Heartland Monitor poll of 1200 Americans conducted January 3 to 7 .  Even after a multimillion dollar disinformation campaign funded by big oil and corporate polluters, the public still understands that the climate bill would help the U.S. economy (unlike their view of the bailout bills or even healthcare).

What is particularly stunning about this poll is that, as you can see, this is how the bill was described:

A cap and trade system to address climate change by allowing government to set limits on the total amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted nationally.

That’s right, people were asked about what is widely considered to be a straight political loser — “cap and trade to address climate change” — with no mention of the many benefits of the bill that typically poll far better — increasing energy independence, generating clean energy jobs, and reducing pollution.

It may well be that stupefyingly bad analysis and decisionmaking in the wake of the MA special election weakens support for the bipartisan clean air, clean water, clean energy jobs bill — a bill that also puts us on the path to energy independence (see EIA: Clean air, clean water, clean energy jobs bill would make America more energy independent, cutting U.S. foreign oil bill $650 billion through 2030, saving $5,600 per household).

After all, bad analysis gave us the grost mismanagement of health care “reform.”   But before rehashing that bad analysis, let’s note that politicians would normally fall over themselves to pursue legislation that simultaneously energizes their base and has strong support among independents.

Poll after poll makes clear this bill is a winning political issue:

1. Swing state poll finds 60% “would be more likely to vote for their senator if he or she supported the bill” and Independents support the bill 2-to-1 (9/09)
2. New CNN poll finds “nearly six in 10 independents” support cap-and-trade (10/09)
3. Voters in Ohio, Michigan and Missouri overwhelmingly support action on clean energy and global warming (11/09)
4. Overwhelming US Public Support for Global Warming Action (12/09)
5. Public Opinion Stunner: WashPost-ABC Poll Finds Strong Support for Global Warming Reductions Despite Relentless Big Oil and Anti-Science Attacks (12/09)

Let’s reexamine each of these polls in more detail:

Read more

Abu Dhabi project tries saltwater farming for aviation fuels

A new biofuels project at Abu Dhabi’s Masdar Institute of Science and Technology will unite Boeing, Honeywell and others in search of a system to produce fuel and other useful products from biomass and seawater.

The Sustainable Bioenergy Research Project is focused on integrating aquaculture and farming to create a closed-loop system that thrives in areas where fresh water is scarce.

Waste from the aquaculture project will be used to fertilize mangrove forests and plantations of another saltwater plant, and the resultant biomass will be used to make aviation biofuels and clean energy.

Read more