The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), in an order issued on September 18, 2009, has sided with the operator of the New England electricity system (ISO-NE) in a dispute with Dominion, the owner of the Salem Harbor Power Plant.

Here is the basic situation:  Dominion has “de-listed” the Salem Harbor Power Plant in the upcoming “Forward Capacity Auction”.   This means that it is virtually certain that in the 2012-2013 period that the plant will not be obligated to run and will not received capacity payments that power plants receive when they have such an obligation.   While the plant could still run and be paid for the electricity it made the act of de-listing means that the owner of the plant thinks there is a significant chance it will not be running during that year.  If, however, ISO-NE, finds that one (or more) of the  power generating units at the plant are “needed for reliability” then Dominion would receive payments set at the level of the “de-list bids” submitted this year.

Here is the dispute:  ISO-NE argued that Dominion had set the amount of its “de-list bids” to high.  Dominion had calculated those bids assuming that all pollution control equipment put into the plant would have to be depreciated (basically paid off) within three years.  ISO-NE argued that this was inappropriate. Local newspapers took note of this dispute.

CLF, and the Massachusetts Attorney Generals office, agreed with ISO-NE that Dominion’s bids were inappropriate.  CLF, pressing beyond the polite wording of ISO-NE’s filing, argued that the only appropriate circumstance for the “super-accelerated depreciation” being sought by Dominion would be appropriate only if Dominion were proposing to permanently de-list the plant.  The absurdity of Dominion’s position was highlighted by the fact that it was contradicted by public statements of its own spokesman in a local newspaper.

The Mass. AG, supported by CLF, also raised concerns about the lack of public disclosure of key information about the plant and the lack of auditing of the representations that plant owners like Dominion made to ISO-NE.

FERC, in the order resolving the dispute, accepted the basic logic that ISO-NE and CLF presented, requiring use of the longer depreciation period proposed by ISO-NE.   FERC stated that it could not consider converting a de-list bid from being one-year to permanent at this point in the process – which is essentially a moot point as CLF floated that as an idea that would only apply if the shorter depreciation period was accepted, which it was not. Also, FERC did not squarely address the issues of public disclosure and auditing, relying on earlier decisions that will be continued to be criticized.

But in the end this was squarely a defeat for Dominion: their bluff of calculating costs as if the plant was shutting down, but not actually committing to do so, was called.

These battles will continue.  The likely next dispute will center around “reliability” as all of these numbers games are meaningless if ISO-NE recognizes that the improved transmission system, new generation and rising amounts of energy efficiency and “demand response” (slashing energy use at peak hours during the summer) means that the plant can retire without causing any shortages in the regional electricity system.  They are very close to doing so (having found that other nearby plants can safely retire) and are likely to reach the right result here – although it might take some encouragement.

At the just-concluded meeting of the New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers in Saint John, the capital of the province of New Brunswick in Canada, the governors of the New England states adopted a “Blueprint” for electric transmission to facilitate development of wind power.  The idea was to sketch out a basic plan for supportive infrastructure needed if the region is going to meet its renewable energy and climate goals.

The plan, which is available at the website of an interstate organization known as the “New England States Committee on Electricity” (“NESCOE“) is not perfect.  It does not appropriately consider the impact of rising CO2 prices on the price of electricity and underestimates the reductions in electric demand as we become more efficient.  But it is a good start to the very serious discussion about renewable energy and transmission that is needed in order to confront and win our climate challenge and meet the targets that science tells us we need to hit.

The governors are, among other things, trying to strike a balance here between meeting our goals through imports of renewable power from outside the region and through homegrown renewable energy projects.  In the long run it is very clear that we need to do both in order to meet our stated goals and reduce our emissions in the manner that science tells us is needed – but getting that balance right is tricky, as can be seen in this NY Times blog entry which describes the very blunt take of Arnold Schwarzenegger on the subject . .

Tar sands activists unveil massive banner in Alberta, Canada

Pop quiz: Which country is the biggest exporter of oil to the United States?

Venezuela? Mexico? Saudi Arabia? None of the above. The correct answer is America’s neighbor to the north, Canada.

In a story that will almost certainly not make headlines in mainstream American news outlets, a group of activists blocked tar sands mining operations in Northern Alberta. The activists unveiled a massive banner and chained themselves to equipment.

Most of Canada’s oil comes from the tar sands – a bitumen rich deposit of sand, clay and water the size of England. It is the single the largest industrial project in the world.

Creating usable petroleum from the tar sands isn’t easy – or environmentally friendly – and has only been feasible in light of higher oil prices and newer technologies.

According to Greenpeace:

Tar sands Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, already nearing those of Norway, could soon more than triple to 140 million tonnes a year, as outlined in a Greenpeace report by award winning author Andrew Nikiforuk released this week. At that point they would equal or exceed those of Belgium, a county of 10 million. These numbers account only for the production of tar sands oil, and do not account for the massive additional GHG impact of burning the fuel.

Tar sands mining has other detrimental impacts on the environment, including toxic runoff and deforestation. CLF’s work on the Low Carbon Fuel Standard is intended to, among other things, reduce use of bitumen mining.

The activists hope to put the tar sands in the spotlight as President Obama and Canada’s Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, meet in Washington, DC today.

The Boston Globe today presents an excellent editorial on the misguided proposal for the power plant in Somerset Massachusetts:

ONE OF THE state’s “Filthy Five’’ coal-burning power plants is trying to turn itself into a Cinderella of clean-burning electricity generation. Since the makeover includes a first-in-the-nation commercial use of a certain technology to reduce dirty emissions, the state should give it a closer environmental review. (MORE)

This particular proposal is one that CLF is engaging in many ways, including in a pending court case (somerset-sc-clfs-memo-suppt-of-jdgmt-8-10-09).  And earlier on in the legal process this plant was (among other issues) discussed in an Op-Ed by Dr. James Hansen.  It has been the subject of ongoing upset, protests and opposition.

If you want to support our work on cases like this – go for it – or just comment below if you have a local coal fired power plant giving you gas.

I always say that mantra number two for a climate advocate is “Yeah, we have to do that too.”  As in, “We need to be more efficient AND we need to build wind farms AND we need to build transmission lines to support the wind farms AND we need to build sidewalks and transit so people can drive less, etc . . . “  You get the point.

And mantra number one is: “The scary part is . . .” because every time you think you have seen it all, something worse and new comes along.

The latest comes to us from the National Center for Atmospheric Research:

Arctic temperatures in the 1990s reached their warmest level of any decade in at least 2,000 years, new research indicates. The study, which incorporates geologic records and computer simulations, provides new evidence that the Arctic would be cooling if not for greenhouse gas emissions that are overpowering natural climate patterns.

Excellent discussion of this at Joe Romm’s Climate Progress blog.  And here is the NY Times article.

Will this motivate you to take action?

Sage advice from Freddie Mercury.

There may be days when the air quality in urban areas is bad, but the summer is still a great time to get outside and ride a bicycle; to work, to the store, or just for fun. Doing so will also help improve the air quality, assuming you are biking instead of driving a car, and if you can find a decent route you should breeze past the gridlock and thereby avoid sitting in the car traffic, inhaling the exhaust of the vehicles around you. It will only get more pleasant as the temperature begins to cool during the fall months, and if your employer is a member of a Transportation Management Association you could even win prizes for riding your bike to work!

Boston is making a big effort to improve the cycling infrastructure by adding many miles of on-road bike lanes and many new bike racks. This will all serve to make biking safer and more convenient. In addition, the City is poised to rollout a city-wide bike sharing program in the near future. Soon, even if you don’t commute to work from home on a bike, you will still be able to make trips during the day by bike, all over the city.

Parallel to these efforts, MassBike is conducting an online survey regarding the behavior of cyclists and drivers. The results will hopefully help to shed light on issues that result in reasonable frustration as well as misplaced anger. Anyone who rides a bike or drives a vehicle in Massachusetts should take the survey.

When you’re done with the survey, turn off the computer and get outside! This Friday, August 28th, is the final BikeFriday event of the summer. It’s time to stop procrastinating and start enjoying your commute.

Well the advent of serious heat and humidity means that all of us up here in the tailpipe of America (the Northeast generally and New England in particular) must face the seasonal reality of dangerously bad air.

During the summer we face “ground level ozone“  which is created when substances like nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds are created by cars, power plants and the burning of gasoline, diesel fuel, coal and other fossil fuels interact with sunlight and heat.   Many states, like Massachusetts, New York and Maine are happy (in addition to the Feds) to give you the gory details – but the bottom line is that ground level ozone harms the lungs of just about everyone but can cause the most trouble, increasing asthma attacks, heart attacks and even death in very vulnerable folks – like the elderly, the very young and people with various health problems.

A different problem is the dangerous haze of “particulate matter” that can be trapped in our air, particularly on a hot and muggy day.  The potentially dangerous microscopic solids and liquid droplets less than 2.5 microns in size are known as “fine particles”.  Like ground level ozone this pollution can be traced back to the burning of fossil fuel in cars, trucks, power plants and industrial furnaces. In cities around the world particulate matter is a major threat to the health of residents of inner city neighborhoods.

The states and the federal government continue to debate and consider new rules about the amount of this kind of pollution that is safe.  The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection has proposed new standards regarding these pollutants – and CLF filed a comment urging adoption of tougher standards than what has been proposed.

If you want to see how bad your air is today and how bad it is predicted to be tomorrow then check out this handy government website full of national and regional maps with links to state-by-state information.   And don’t let the “moderate” label fool you – since some real harm is possible at those levels of pollution it is worth paying attention before the pollution crosses over the line into “unhealthy for sensitive groups” let alone “unhealthy”, “very unhealthy” and the (fortunately unusual but terrifying) “hazardous”.

And of course as average temperatures rise due to global warming we will see more of this kind of bad air quality – as the pollution combines with hotter air.  This is just one of the many health effects anticipated as global warming unfolds.

All the more reason to look towards cleaner energy sources for our electricity and our transportation needs.

There’s a lot of talk about 2012 being the end of the world. And if it’s not 2012, it’s the swine flu.

But how will it really end? If the latest scary climate science is any indicator, it looks like humans may be to blame. We know that climate change is happening all around us, but it looks like things are changing a lot quicker than any of us expected. As such, it’s time for a climate change reality-check. Did you know?

• Temperatures are already on the rise. Since 1970, winter temperatures in the Northeast have increased by an average of 1.3 degrees per decade—changing and damaging marine life, forests, agriculture, recreation and human health.
• Extreme storms are becoming more frequent. Boston and Atlantic City, for example, can expect a coastal flood equivalent to today’s 100-year flood every two to four years on average by mid-century, and almost annually by the end of the century.
• The oceans are rising. Scientists project that sea levels could rise another 4.5 feet by the end of the century—inundating our coastline and claiming countless low-lying communities from Portland, Maine to Boston to Hyannisport and beyond.
• Heat waves are expected to increase. Within our children’s lifetimes, Northeast cities like Boston or Hartford could experience 20-30 days above 100 degrees causing pain, distress and even increased mortality for our vulnerable citizens.
• Our snow season is becoming shorter and shorter. By late this century, the length of the snow season could be cut in half across northern New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine, and reduced to a week or two in southern parts of the region, a trend that may have already begun.
• Plant and animal populations are shifting northward. Species like the fir and spruce are expected to all but disappear from the region by the century’s end. The Baltimore oriole, American goldfinch and song sparrow populations will become much less abundant.
  (Source: NECIA’s “Confronting Climate Change in the U.S. Northeast: Science, Impacts, and Solutions”)

The facts speak for themselves. It’s clear that the road on which we’re traveling is a dead end. Fortunately, we have the opportunity to make a u-turn—but it’s going to take your help to turn this country and this planet around.

What can you do about it?

As we catapult towards the point of no return, it’s time to hit the brakes. Confront the climate threat today and demand a new energy and climate law now!

It takes less than 30 seconds to use and customize our pre-written letter to your Senators urging them to pass a smart and effective “cap and trade” climate law. Click here to do your part.

In a blog post that follows up on a New York Times newspaper story about the groundbreaking McKinsey report on the enormous opportunity for energy efficiency as a resource for tackling global warming there is a nice discussion of the statewide energy efficiency utility in Vermont.

A few key points about the McKinsey report:

• The report shows that a comprehensive approach to making the United States more energy efficient could save consumers $1.2 trillion by 2020.
• The report finds that this approach could also cut overall energy consumption in the U.S. by 23% in the next decade, eliminating the need for expensive new coal plants and dramatically reducing our carbon emissions by up to 1.1 gigatons.
• The study cites research suggesting that energy efficiency could create 600,000 to 900,000 sustainable green jobs in twelve years.

The Efficiency Vermont model, that CLF helped build and grow, as well as other successful models like the programs administered by conventional utilities in Massachusetts, and efforts on the regional level, have made New England a national leader in this critical area – but there is so much more that can be done . . .