The jury is out on whether Saudi Arabia actually has enough excess or spare production capacity to continue to control the price of oil.  I  discussed that at length in two posts this year (here and here).

What is clear is that the Saudis want to create the impression that they control the price of oil — and that they don’t want oil prices so high that Americans make the shift off of our billion-dollar-a-day addiction too quickly, which is to say, fast enough to preserve a livable climate for our children and countless future generations.

If you need proof, Ben Armbruster of Think Progress Security has this remarkable video of Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal on CNN:

Read more

Lakewood Church, an evangelical Christian megachurch in Houston, Texas, saved $360,000 on its annual utility costs through better energy management.  SOURCE: AP/Pat Sullivan

CAP’s Marta Cook has the story of how congregations are cutting pollution while saving money.

Can you imagine what a church might do with $360,000 in extra money—especially if it is saved without laying off staff, canceling programs, or increasing contributions from parishioners?

Lakewood Church in Texas, an evangelical Christian megachurch, has the pleasant task of deciding where to direct exactly that amount of money, which they were able to save from reducing their annual utility costs through better energy management. Lakewood Church is not alone, either. Across the country, churches large and small are working with the Environmental Protection Agency to reduce their energy bills and use the savings to live out their message of financial and environmental stewardship.

The EPA’s Energy Star program provides technical information and support to congregations interested in lowering their utility bills and being more environmentally responsible. They also provide public recognition to houses of worship that dramatically reduce energy usage relative to the square footage of the worship buildings. Energy Star has even developed energy management technical tools, such as their Portfolio Manager, to address the specific challenges a building faces in becoming less energy intensive, from a small business building to a church’s facilities.

Read more

Our guest blogger is Bo Webb, of Naoma, WV. The documentary film The Last Mountain opens in New York City and Washington, DC this Friday.

Bo Webb

Over a period of two weeks I watched as bulldozers knocked trees down the mountain, pushing them into huge piles. Acre after acre of the mountain was stripped of its forest cover and vegetation. These piles of mountain ruin were then doused with fuel and burned. Next, they drilled hundreds of holes deep in the earth and filled them with what I later learned to be a mix of ammonium nitrate and diesel fuel explosives. I watched as they bombed the mountain, loading dirt and debris into behemoth “rock trucks” as they dumped the mountain’s carcass into the valley streams. They did this over and over until reaching a seam of coal often only a few feet thick, pausing long enough to load the coal into trucks and then back to the bombing and dumping process. This 400 million year old mountain was being annihilated. My battle began as I joined an ever-growing citizen’s movement opposed to mountaintop removal.

My journey has taken me from the hollers of West Virginia to the halls of Congress, to the conference rooms of the United Nations, and yet mountaintop removal continues escalating. A coal industry public relations machine aided by corrupt politicians and coal baron friendly judges has managed to keep these Appalachian sacrifice zones from being exposed to the American People. But, through citizen’s persistence in a cry for justice we have managed to gain the attention of some, and none too soon, as our beautiful Coal River Mountain is now targeted for destruction.

When the film crew for The Last Mountain called and told me of their interest in making a documentary about mountaintop removal, and our last great mountain, Coal River Mountain, I felt that perhaps our work was beginning to pay off, but was it too late? When next they informed me that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. would be a major part of the film, I felt like maybe our prayers had been answered. I had met Bobby Kennedy briefly at a speaking event that I helped organize and he understood how mountaintop removal was ruining our communities. I knew he was appalled by the injustice of this act, but to now have him involved in this struggle gives me great hope that America will soon learn about our fight and the urgency we face to end mountaintop removal.

The Last Mountain accurately tells the story of the victims of mountaintop removal fallen to a greed so great that it wills to place profit above humanity. Those of us that live (and die) beneath this assault on our mountain communities are counting on “The Last Mountain” to give rise to Americans everywhere, to demand an end to this disgraceful abomination that is taking place within our own borders.

Our guest bloggers are Michael Conathan, Director of Oceans Policy, and Richard Caperton, energy policy analyst at the Center for American Progress.

Lillgrund Offshore Wind Farm, Sweden's largest

Approximately 3,500 oil rigs and platforms were operating in U.S. waters at the time of the BP disaster. There were also over 1,000 wind turbines generating clean, renewable electricity off the coastlines of northwestern Europe. But not a single windmill yet turns in the strong, abundant winds that abound off our shores.

Wind power cannot immediately replace the energy we still generate from the oil and gas produced on the outer continental shelf. But America’s unwillingness to clear the way for permitting a proven, commercially scalable, clean source of energy is a major black eye for a nation that purports to be a leader in technological development.

Denmark constructed the first offshore wind facility in in 1991. In the intervening two decades 10 other countries installed offshore wind farms — eight nations in northern Europe, plus Japan and China:

Unfortunately, in the United States, the lack of a clear regulatory structure, inconsistent messages from other ocean stakeholders, congressional budget battles, opposition to specific project siting, and instability in financial markets have all played a role in preventing domestic offshore wind from becoming a reality.

Securing cheap, clean, domestic, energy sources is a universal goal. And yet, as a country, we continue to drop one roadblock after another in front of one of the world’s most proven renewable energy technologies.

More than 40,000 megawatts of offshore wind energy capacity have been permitted around the globe, but the United States accounts for barely 1 percent of that and we have yet to generate our first watt of electricity from this abundant, carbon-free source of power.

The longer we wait to begin developing this technology and creating the infrastructure and knowledge base that go along with it, the further we will fall behind the rest of the world and the harder it will be to bring the economic development and environmental benefits to our own shores.

Read more at the Center for American Progress.

AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes

With gas prices just below the $4 per gallon mark and possibly climbing to $5 per gallon later this summer, Americans are demanding more fuel-efficient automobiles. But U.S. automakers are having trouble keeping up with that demand, according to a poll by Reuters:

Higher car prices and a shortage of fuel-efficient vehicles likely threw a roadblock in the U.S. auto industry’s recovery path in May, when the Japan crisis had its biggest impact on U.S. sales so far.

If forecasts prove true, this will be the first time the annualized sales rate has dropped below 13 million since February. The sales figures, expected Wednesday, come as analysts are raising concerns about a slowdown in the broader economy.

Problems in the sector have been exacerbated by the earthquake in Japan that disrupted supply of components for smaller, more fuel-efficient automobiles. Manufacturers are now sitting on a rising inventory of American-made gas guzzlers and a dwindling supply of cars that consumers are demanding.

Read more

Energy efficiency is the most important climate solution for several reasons:

1. It is by far the biggest resource.
2. It is by far the cheapest, far cheaper than the current cost of unsustainable energy, so cheap that it helps pay for the other solutions.
3. It is by far the fastest to deploy, without the transmission and siting issues that plague most other strategies.
4. It is “renewable” — the efficiency potential never runs out.

This post focuses on #1 — the tremendous size of the resource, especially here in the United States, the Saudi Arabia of wasted energy. Part 2 explains why it is The limitless resource, Part 3 explains why efficiency is The only cheap power left, and Part 4 explains How California does it so consistently and cost-effectively. Part 5 explains why efficiency has the highest documented rate of return of any federal program.

Read more

Three years ago, Climate Progress published “Should you or your kids keep a cell phone pressed against your heads for hours?“  My answer back then was “no.”  It still is.

A year ago, I published, “Are cell phones safe? The verdict is still out.”  It still is out.

The Washington Post reported yesterday:

Read more

Obama names Bryson for Commerce; Republicans will try to block him

President Obama said yesterday he will nominate a California utility executive, John Bryson, to head the Commerce Department.

If confirmed by the Senate, Bryson would replace Gary Locke, Obama’s pick to become the next U.S. ambassador to China.

Trained as a lawyer, Bryson helped co-found the Natural Resources Defense Council in 1970 and headed California state commissions governing utilities and water during Gov. Jerry Brown’s (D) first administration. Bryson retired as chairman and CEO of Edison International, the parent company of electric utility Southern California Edison, in 2008 after 18 years.

Calling him “a fierce proponent of alternative energy,” Obama said that experience would serve Bryson well in the Commerce post. Although the department’s duties include promoting economic growth and issuing patents, the bulk of its budget goes to an agency focused on the environment — Read more

The U.S. offshore wind industry has enormous potential, but also faces significant permitting and financing challenges.  CAP’s Michael Conathan and Richard W. Caperton have a detailed analysis.

For 87 days in the spring and summer of 2010, an undersea gusher of oil continuously reminded Americans of the toll energy development can take on our oceans.

Approximately 3,500 oil rigs and platforms were operating in U.S. waters at the time of the BP disaster. There were also over 1,000 wind turbines generating clean, renewable electricity off the coastlines of northwestern Europe. But not a single windmill yet turns in the strong, abundant winds that abound off our shores.

Clearly wind power cannot immediately replace the energy we still must generate from the oil and gas produced on the outer continental shelf. But America’s unwillingness to clear the way for permitting a proven, commercially scalable, clean source of energy is a major black eye for a nation that purports to be a leader in technological development.

Denmark constructed the first offshore wind facility in in 1991. In the intervening two decades 10 other countries installed offshore wind farms—eight nations in northern Europe, plus Japan and China (see chart).

Unfortunately, in the United States, lack of a clear regulatory structure, inconsistent messages from other ocean stakeholders, congressional budget battles, opposition to specific project siting, and instability in financial markets have all played a role in preventing domestic offshore wind from becoming a reality.

No permitting process existed when America’s first offshore wind developer, Cape Wind, began efforts to build a wind farm off the New England coast. It was 2005 before Congress acted to define a clear permitting process for offshore wind facilities and to extend key financial incentives to help the industry develop. Then it was nearly six more years—over a decade in total—until Cape Wind at last received the final green light from the Department of Interior to begin construction.

That decision was announced on April 19, perhaps not so coincidentally just one day before the first anniversary of the BP oil disaster. Yet, in a move achingly typical of the three-steps-forward-two-steps-back cycle that has plagued U.S. offshore wind development, the Department of Energy stepped in less than a month after getting the Interior Department’s green light to say that the project’s application for a key piece of financial assistance would be put on hold, potentially stalling the project yet again.

This brief will provide an overview of offshore wind permitting and financing in the United States, update the status of a few key projects, and ultimately make recommendations on how to clear a few of the remaining hurdles to promoting offshore wind development:

Read more

Our guest blogger is Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org.

350.org is a little more than three years old; it was born with NASA scientist Jim Hansen’s crucial paper showing that 350 ppm co2 is the most we can safely have in the atmosphere if we want a planet “similar to the on which civilization developed and to which life on earth is adapted.” We do want that—and we think that one reason we’re not getting it is the lack of a mass movement around global warming.

It’s not that we haven’t had an environmental movement—we have, with big, well-respected, well-funded, and powerful groups centered in Washington. But not big enough or rich enough to take on the fossil fuel industry—that was demonstrated last summer with the demise of cap-and-trade efforts, despite every compromise and conciliation. Senators can tell when there’s not enough juice behind the smart and committed green lobbyists; we need to generate that juice, and fast. Since we’ll never match the oil industry in money, so we have to find a different currency: bodies, creativity, spirit.

We’ve been a kind of beta test for that movement. Beginning with myself and seven college students and no resources, we’ve managed to at least demonstrate that there’s a chance to build something big: our first day of action, in October of 2009, coordinated 5200 rallies in 181 countries. Last year, in the fall of 2010, we hosted an even bigger Global Work party: 7400 events in every country on earth save North Korea. People everywhere—most of them poor, since most of the world is poor—are joining around that scientific target to demand real action. We don ‘t exactly ‘organize’ all this—it’s more like a potluck supper, where we have a date and a theme, but where tens of thousands of volunteers do the work, knowing what’s possible in their place. And then we bring the images together to make the whole thing more than the sum of its parts. If you want some hope, look through a few of the 30,000 pictures in our Flickr account. You’ll notice that they’re wildly diverse, except for that wonky scientific data point that everyone is organizing around.

You might think it’s odd to take a number as a rallying cry.

Read more

There’s a common myth perpetrated by the anti-clean energy crowd that renewable energy standards and carbon-reduction polices will make energy costs skyrocket and derail the economy. But experience proves exactly the opposite.

Two reports released over the last month show that these policies cost ratepayers very little; and, when factoring in the inherent benefits of a cleaner, more efficient energy system, actually save ratepayers money.

The first piece of proof came from a great story in Midwest Energy News about the impact that wind is having on Midwestern states. The story was written shortly after the Minnesota Free Market Institute and the American Tradition Institute released a joint report projecting that Minnesota’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) – 20% renewable electricity by 2025 – would cause rates to jump by up to 37% by that date. According to the report, the average household would pay over $1,800 more for electricity due to Minnesota’s RPS.

The real cost impact so far? Next to nothing, says Xcel, a utility with one of the largest wind portfolios in the country:

Xcel Energy, the state’s largest utility, has come up with a much smaller number: $0.003. That’s the difference Xcel forecasts between its projected per-kilowatt-hour energy price in 2025 under its proposed wind expansion plan compared to a hypothetical scenario in which it stopped adding new wind capacity after 2012.

Asked to comment on the Free Market Institute’s study, Xcel Energy spokesman Steve Roalstad said, “It doesn’t seem to be moving in that direction.” The cost of adding renewable energy sources, especially wind, continues to fall and has become very competitive with traditional generating sources, he said.

Read more