Most Americans don’t realize just how much coal they own.

Consider this: coal accounts for two thirds of resources extracted from public lands for electricity generation. And Americans also own most of the Powder River Basin, a region stretching across Wyoming and Montana that accounts for roughly 43 percent of America’s coal.

With all that coal being the property of U.S. citizens, you’d think the taxpayers were getting a lot of revenue from selling the resource to the coal companies. Not so much.

A new report concludes that uncompetitive leasing and poor oversight has denied American taxpayers up to $28.9 billion since 1982.

According to an analysis from Tom Sanzillo, director of the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, the government allows coal companies operating on public lands to purchase the resource at a price far below market value by supporting “auctions” with only one bidder.

This is a problem that environmental groups have raised for some time. But the new analysis shows just how much it’s costing American taxpayers:

As a result of policy choices and an inherently subjective and flawed fair market value appraisal process—the problems of which are exacerbated by the agency’s failure to consider changing market dynamics—the U.S. Treasury has lost approximately $28.9 billion in revenue throughout the last 30 years. Despite past political scandals and promises of programmatic reform, neither the DOI nor the BLM coal leasing activities have been audited or the subject of any major publicly available, external review regarding the sale of PRB coal for almost thirty years. As applied by the federal government in the case of federal coal leasing, the term “fair market value” rings hollow.

Since 1991, the Bureau of Land Management has issued 26 leases to coal companies. According to Sanzillo, only four of these leases have ever featured more than one bidder. And in the cases where there was actual “competition,” the auction featured two bidders.

Today, as coal consumption drops in the U.S., companies are now purchasing coal from taxpayers at ridiculous discount rates and selling the dirty resource to the highest bidder on the international market — thus subsidizing the boom in global warming pollution in Asia. (See: The BLM’s Corrupt Coal Leasing Program: Billions In Subsidies To Peabody, Gigatons Of Carbon Pollution For The Rest Of Us.)

After a recent auction of Powder River Basin coal in which Peabody Energy was the only bidder, Grist’s David Roberts did some simple and shocking math:

The winning price in Thursday’s sale? $1.11 per ton.

Again: $1.11 per ton.

The price of a ton of Powder River Basin coal on U.S. spot markets? $9.15 per ton, as of May 11.

The price of a ton of coal exported to China? It averaged $97.28 per ton [PDF] in 2011. It’s now up to $123 per ton.

So, to summarize: You, the U.S. taxpayer, just leased another huge chunk of your land to Peabody Coal at $1.11 per ton of coal. Peabody will strip-mine that land and take the coal to China, where it will sell it for over $100 per ton. Peabody pockets enormous profits*, the U.S. taxpayer gets devastated land, and China accelerates global warming.

And it’s all being pushed through by the Obama administration.

Until now, the government has done nothing about the lack of competition in these auctions. But now that analysts, environmentalists, and lawmakers are finally elevating the issue, the Government Accountability Office is now set to do an audit of the leasing program.

Meanwhile, the BLM is set to “auction” another 721 million tons of taxpayer-owned coal from the Powder River Basin next week.

So here is what the European Commission thinks is the way to get girls more interested in science:

Apparently, the Commission thinks the defining aspect of girls who are interested in science is that they wear lipstick and high heels — and love sexy dance music. I guess they never saw Dr. Frank N. Furter in Rocky Horror Picture Show. Rimshot! [OK, that's technically a "sting."]

Seriously, though, the Commission does seem to have a thing for lipstick, as their “Science: It’s A Girl Thing!” website makes painfully clear:

As you can imagine, the video didn’t go over well with actual scientists of both sexes. The L.A. Times reports:

Appalled scientists said the video was a sexist bit of advertising based on the idea that only fashion could get girls interested in test tubes.

“It’s as if Disney channel male execs do ‘science Barbie,’” geologist and blogger Sharon Hill tweeted in disgust. “Terrible.”

Ben Goldacre, author of the Guardian‘s “Bad Science” column, joked, “The EU have funded a campaign to make women in science wear shorter skirts.”

Could the ad be “a fiendish ploy to highlight the stereotyping of women and scientists?” University of Bristol climate scientist Tamsin Edwards quizzed the campaign through Twitter.

Though apparently embarrassed enough to [try to] take the video down, the Commission seems to be of the there’s-no-such-thing-as-bad-press school:

Read more

Experts predict average gas prices may fall below $3 this fall after dropping 14 cents in two weeks. When prices hit a record high, Republicans attributed sole responsibility to President Obama, even though there is no evidence that factors like drilling impact what consumers pay.

Just two months ago, Republicans said Obama shouldered the blame for rising gas costs, and that only he had the “key” to lower gas prices:

Mitt Romney, March 18, 2012: “He gets full credit or blame for what’s happened in this economy, and what’s happened to gasoline prices under his watch, and what’s happened to our schools, and what’s happened to our military forces. All these things are his responsibility while he’s president.”

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), April 6, 2012: “The president holds the key to addressing the pain Ohioans are feeling at the gas pump and moving our nation away from its reliance on foreign energy. My question for the president is: what are you waiting for?”

Boehner, April 6, 2012: “The president’s own policies to date have made matters worse and driven up gas prices.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Feb. 28 2012: “This President will go to any length to drive up gas prices and pave the way for his ideological agenda.”

Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), March 13, 2012: Obama is “fully responsible for what the American public is paying for gasoline.”

Are Republicans now reversing their rhetoric and giving Obama credit for falling gas prices? Of course not.

Former Virginia Sen. George Allen, who is running to reclaim his old seat, is another lawmaker who has misled on the gas prices. Last month, ThinkProgress reported that Allen is pushing a graphic that not only compares gas prices to an artificially low amount, but lists a “current” price from April, even though Virginia gas prices are now more than 40 cents lower per gallon.

Obama’s policies haven’t changed since April: the Keystone XL pipeline has not been built, drilling hasn’t drastically changed, and the same regulations are in place. Yet gas prices have fallen. Economics says he isn’t responsible, either way.

Will countries heed Clinton's call for more action on SLCPs? AP Photo/Victor R. Caivano

by Rebecca Lefton

Despite the flop in the official negotiations, Rio+20 stimulated many new commitments and reinvigorated international conversations about how to redirect growth in a more sustainable manner.

Governments, business leaders, and civil society demonstrated new models for innovative partnerships for addressing sustainable development and emphasized alternative approaches to solving global threat of climate change.  The Climate and Clean Air Coalition is an excellent example of such an approach.

The Climate and Clean Air Coalition brings together partners to apply already-existing solutions to cut short-lived climate pollutants that will cut in half the rate of global warming in the near-term. Short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) — such as black carbon, soot, methane, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and tropospheric ozone — are shorter lived than carbon dioxide, but much more potent and account for around one-third of global warming. Some of these potent greenhouse gases are deadly: Each year millions of people die prematurely and more are diagnosed from a high incidence of dangerous respiratory disease.  They also accelerate melting of the Arctic and are responsible for extensive crop losses each year.

US Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson provided an update on the CCAC during the Rio conference as an example of a multilateral effort toward sustainability.

“The Climate and Clean Air Coalition is driven by the potential to do great things for our environment, our health and economy and make sure we are taking advantage in cost-effective solutions … especially in disproportionately impacted areas where solutions are needed,” said Jackson.

The coalition has nearly tripled in size from an initial 6 countries to 16 members since the launch in Washington four months ago — including all G8 members, plus the European Commission, United Nations Environment Program, and the World Bank.

“This is not a talk shop, not a treaty organization, not a place where we are tying to negotiate a treaty. This is a place where we are doing things,” said Todd Stern, US Special Envoy for Climate Change, speaking at Rio+20.

The CCAC is already advancing concrete results and initiatives.  Last week in Rio the CCAC supported the launch of a learning network to help local governments reduce methane from solid waste management in partnership with the C40 and The World Bank.  Waste is one of the largest sources of methane emissions in the world.

Read more

A mild snow-less winter, an unusually dry spring, and debilitating heat in May and June have created serious drought conditions in parts of Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, and Indiana, among other states.

Despite recent severe storms that dumped more than 7 inches of rain on Duluth, Minnesota, last week, (causing chaos, especially in the city zoo), much of the Midwest is experiencing severe water shortages exacerbated by record high temperatures. According to the National Weather Service, there is no end in sight.

Global warming directly worsens droughts because hotter temperatures dry out soils and lead to earlier snowmelt, which reduces vital streamflow during the dry season (see here). As Texas state climatologist, John Nielsen-Gammon, explained last year:

“There is evidence that global warming has had an effect on the drought, primarily by increasing the surface temperature, which increases the drought severity by increasing evaporation and water stress, and by decreasing stream flow and water supply

Global warming also shifts the precipitation zones, expanding the semi-arid subtropics. And there is emerging evidence that warming in the Arctic drives more extreme, prolonged weather events in the northern hemisphere “such as drought, flooding, cold spells and heat waves.”

Heading into the typically dry summer months, the average rainfall over many Midwestern states has been down dramatically. Rainfall in Carbondale, Illinois is less than 50 percent of normal levels at this time of year; in  Akron, Ohio rainfall is five inches below average, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal:

“Going into that dry period already dry is not looking good,” said Jim Keeney, weather program manager for the National Weather Service in Kansas City.Swaths of Texas and the western U.S. have faced drought conditions for much of the year, including parts of Colorado where wildfires continue to burn. But drought conditions only recently have built in the Midwest—a sharp change from a year ago when heavy rains and swollen rivers led to historic flooding.

Jeff Scates, a farmer in Southern Illinois, said about 75% of his family’s farm was underwater last spring, and he didn’t finish planting his corn crop until early June. This year, he got his crop into the ground by late April, but dry conditions are now causing damage and reducing the number bushels his fields will produce.“I don’t remember anytime when it was this dry, this early,” the 42-year-old farmer said.

According to US Drought Monitor, streams are low, ponds are shrinking, and crops are stressed throughout the region. The Drought Monitor [below] shows that an extreme drought has now developed in parts of Missouri, Indiana, Illinois, and Kentucky. A severe drought is already underway in “most of Arkansas and … in southern Missouri, Illinois, and Indiana, [as well as] western Kentucky and Tennessee.  Islands of D2 (severe drought) appeared in northern Missouri and Indiana as well as central Illinois”:

Read more

by Greg Rucks, via Rocky Mountain Institute

On this first day of summer, many car owners are likely to experience the following scenario: enter your car to leave work for the day and the temperature is sweltering—much hotter than outside. The ignition, steering wheel, and seat surface are almost too hot to touch. You roll down your windows or turn on the air conditioner (or both) to get some air moving to quickly mitigate the sauna-like conditions.

Cars are a classic case of the greenhouse effect: visible light is absorbed by the various surfaces within the vehicle. As those surfaces re-emit that energy as heat, glass—opaque to the long-wavelength radiation associated with infrared heat energy—traps it inside.

This is more than just a nuisance on hot days. Of the oil consumed by U.S. passenger vehicles, 5.5 percent is used for air conditioning. For today’s average internal-combustion-driven vehicle, air conditioner use results in up to a 26 percent reduction in mpg. For an electric vehicle, this translates to a 36 percent reduction in range.

Vehicle air conditioning systems are sized to handle worst-case temperatures such as the hottest of hot summer days, with interior temperatures well in excess of 110 F. Stringent human comfort standards require that the temperature be brought within a comfortable range—typically around 70 F—within minutes. A rarely-encountered, temporary condition thus determines the permanent capacity, size, weight, and cost of the evaporator, coolant, fans, ducts, and compressor that make up the air conditioning system. Given their mostly unused excess capacity, these systems then operate at suboptimal efficiency in moderate conditions—the majority of the time.

By using approaches that harness an understanding of heat transfer, human physiology and psychology, and advanced technology, thermal comfort (not to mention fuel economy and EV range) can be improved in tomorrow’s vehicles—while making a substantial step toward U.S. oil independence.

Finding the Leverage Points

Imagine the possibilities if our cars took lessons from nature. For example, a parked car’s cabin temperature could be maintained closer to the outside temperature by passively drawing in outside air. Termites make use of this technique in Africa and Australia, inducing passive convection airflow to cool the interior of their mounds by up to 20 F.

A 2007 study conducted by the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) indicates that strategically-placed vents that induce natural convection airflow could do something similar for vehicles, reducing interior cabin temperature on hot days by 11 F, and allowing a 25 percent reduction in air conditioning compressor power and a significantly downsized air conditioning system. This zero-energy approach provides nearly equivalent benefit to forcing outside air into the cabin by running the ventilation fans at medium power while parked.

If worst-case maximum cabin air temperatures could be reduced, drivers would not only save on fuel costs associated with blasting their air conditioners, but would further benefit from the increased space and reduced weight and cost of a downsized (but equally capable) air conditioning system. Best of all, drivers would experience increased comfort due to experiencing cooler temperatures upon entering the vehicle, and have to worry less about leaving their groceries or dog in the car on a moderately warm day.

Read more

Protesters at Rio+20 lament the weak negotiated text. Photo: Youthpolicy.org

As the crowds at the Rio+20 Earth Summit dwindled and attendees left the conference hall late in the day Friday, a small group of people sat around a lunch table in the cafeteria engaged in spirited conversation.

They weren’t talking about the failed negotiations. They weren’t complaining about diplomats, the UN process, or the lack of a strong agreement at the summit. Rather, they were debating the barriers faced by entrepreneurs delivering solar to under-served populations in India.

The group consisted of Carl Pope, former executive director of the Sierra Club; Jigar Shah, former CEO of the Carbon War Room; Simon Bransfield-Garth, CEO of Eight19, a company developing an off-grid solar lighting and battery system; and Mayank Sekhsaria, co-founder of Greenlight Planet, a firm helping entrepreneurs deploy off-grid solar technologies in India.

“What people don’t understand is that this isn’t about demand for solar, it’s about supply. If you could theoretically service these markets all at once, you’d solve the problem immediately,” said Sekhsaria, describing the different deployment bottlenecks within the off-grid Indian market.

Over the next hour, as world leaders projected on the large television screen at the front of the cafeteria spoke about the need to address the world’s environmental problems, these experts debated the real, on-the-ground problems for the solar industry in the developing world.

For many, the Rio+20 Earth Summit will go down as one of the greatest diplomatic failures of our time — a squandered opportunity for the international community to take real action on our looming environmental problems. But for some attendees, the negotiations are only a small piece of what’s really going on.

“I’m not here following the different funding commitments or the text, I’m here to meet people and talk about solar and connect with new people all over the world,” said Sekhsaria.

This is the other side of Rio+20. The summit is usually billed as place where negotiators come to hammer out broad agreements in stuffy rooms. And that’s what a lot of attendees are focused on. But with more than 45,000 people attending hundreds of side events on every sustainability subject imaginable, it’s also a place where people come to learn from one another.

“Unfortunately, what people focus on are the negotiations,” said Jacob Scherr, director of global strategy and advocacy for the Natural Resources Defense Council. “But that part of the meeting is a remnant of the 20th century. What we see now are mayors, governors, activists and civil society groups all participating and creating new coalitions. To me that’s the value.”

Scherr, like every other representative of the environmental community, is deeply disappointed in the outcome of the official negotiations.

Read more

By Jessica Goad

A new report released today by the Center for American Progress takes a critical look at how public lands and waters owned by American taxpayers are used when it comes to electricity.  It finds a serious disparity between coal and renewable energy from resources from the federal estate:

We found that federal lands predominately provide coal for electricity—currently, approximately 66 percent of the electricity generated from the resources that belong to all Americans comes from coal, while 15 percent comes from renewable resources, including hydropower, and only 1 percent is derived from solar, wind, and geothermal projects combined.

The report offers a variety of solutions to this problem, including a proposed new “clean resources standard” that would require 35% of electricity from resources from public lands and waters to be renewable by 2035.

Other policy proposals delineated are:

-  Put a carbon price on coal mined on public lands

-  Reform the leasing process for coal mined on public lands to achieve fair market value

-  Establish renewable energy zones on public lands and waters

-  Include public lands and waters in the executive order on sustainability to better track the government’s carbon pollution

-  Ensure that all federal environmental analyses include scientific carbon pollution studies

The predominance of coal when it comes to electricity from public lands is problematic for many reasons.  First, coal is in many ways not in the public good — it is a major cause of climate change, it contributes to health problems like asthma and mining it can permanently damage landscapes.

Also, the prioritization of coal mining over renewable energy neglects a major opportunity to use public lands for ushering in a clean energy future.  The vast scale of the public estate, along with the existing authority of federal agencies to manage it, could allow these places to help jumpstart American clean energy development.

The current imbalance between coal and renewables begs the question—why should our lands be used to produce artificially cheap electricity that has significant health and environmental impacts?  As CAP’s report further argues:

It defies common sense that we would continue to heavily subsidize a dirty fuel that burdens Americans with environmental and health costs, while at the same time benefiting large, wealthy corporations.  The public should not foot the bill for the consequences of coal mining on public lands, especially if coal companies plan to enrich themselves even further by exporting American resources overseas.

Jessica is the Manager of Research and Outreach for the Public Lands Project at the Center for American Progress Action Fund

A round-up of the top climate and energy news.

Vestas Wind Systems A/S shelved plans to build one of Europe’s largest offshore-turbine factories in southeast England as the wind industry calls for clarity on subsidy programs. [Renewable Energy World]

Forecasters on Sunday issued a tropical storm warning for Alabama’s Gulf Coast to the Florida Panhandle as Tropical Storm Debby gained strength. [Boston Globe]

A fast-growing wildfire in Colorado forced 11,000 people from their homes at least briefly on Sunday and threatened popular summer camping grounds beneath Pikes Peak, whose vistas helped inspire the patriotic tune “America the Beautiful.” [Reuters]

Twenty. That’s the number of wildfires officials believe recreational shooters have caused so far this summer in Utah. One of those wildfires — the Dump fire 40 miles south of Salt Lake City — prompted 2,300 evacuation notices and has led to a 6,023-acre blaze. [Los Angeles Times]

The impact of climate change on maternal health as well as its associated effects on global health through changing patterns of disease, water and food insecurity among others, has again come to the fore. [All Africa]

A review of over 100 recent research articles has concluded that with continuing rise in CO2 and global warming, South Asia can expect generally more rainfall, due to the expected increase in atmospheric moisture, as well as more variability in rainfall. [ZeeNews]

Two Conservative cabinet members have asked the prime minister to do more to boost investment in low carbon energy and other green infrastructure. [Guardian]

A top Interior Department official says regulators are confident that BP is now committed to offshore drilling safety, two years after the catastrophic spill that dumped several million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. [The Hill]