Iowa Global Warming

Benjamin Julian, Environmental Law & Policy Center’s Iowa intern; wrote a letter to the editor for the “Des Moines Register” published in the Sunday Feb. 7 “opinion” page.

A New York Times Jan. 31 article, “China Leading Global Race to Make Clean Energy,” discussed how China is getting ahead of the curve when it comes to clean-energy production.

Though many would find this ridiculous – due to China’s history of environmental degradation and frenzied industrial development – the consequences are very real.

Now, more than ever, green jobs are moving overseas due to a concerted effort to stall clean-energy development in the United States.

In no way are President Barack Obama’s plans for clean energy perfect, but the United States is falling dangerously behind on creating a favorable market for renewable energy.

The ideological battle between Republicans and Democrats in Washington has severely hampered the nation’s ability to produce the next generation of infrastructure and energy. Instead, we have instances of Chinese companies contracting out to wind farm operations in Texas.

Of Iowa’s five major wind-turbine manufacturers, two are from Europe. When will America catch up when it comes to renewable energy?

By Julie Schmit, USA TODAY 

The number of clean-energy jobs in the U.S. would more than double by 2025 if the nation adopts a plan to get 25% of its electricity from renewable energy sources, says a report backed by energy firms.Nationwide, 274,000 jobs would be created in the wind, solar, hydropower, biomass and waste-to-energy industries by 2025 if a 25% standard is adopted, says research firm Navigant Consulting. Those sectors now support about 196,000 jobs.

Navigant did the study for the RES Alliance for Jobs, a consortium of renewable energy companies and others that recommends national renewable electricity targets of 12% in 2014 and 20% in 2020.

Unlike three dozen other countries, including China, the U.S. doesn’t have a national standard to drive use of renewable energy, although it’s being debated in Congress. President Obama has pushed for 25% renewables by 2025. Meanwhile, 30 states have renewable standards. Five have set goals.

But company executives say state standards are often unenforceable and lack the punch of a national standard that would more forcefully drive use of renewables. That would entice companies to put manufacturing and operations in the U.S. as opposed to other countries, they say.

“We’re building this industry right now,” says Don Furman, senior vice president of Iberdrola Renewables, a leading wind farm developer. “We’re really in a footrace with China and Europe to secure these jobs long term. When you create demand, you really create jobs.”

Losing jobs to China

Navigant’s research, based in part on interviews with dozens of energy firms and suppliers, found that every state would see job growth with a 25% standard.

The biggest winners include states already strong in wind power generation or manufacturing, including Texas, Pennsylvania and Colorado. California, a leading solar state, would also be a big beneficiary.

The Southeast, meanwhile, would gain jobs in biomass, which includes turning wood and agricultural products into energy, Navigant says.

On the flip side, many states will lose clean-energy jobs if no national standard is passed, Navigant says. Texas, for one, could lose more than 2,500 jobs given its already big presence in wind and expiring tax credits for wind projects, Navigant says.

Without a strong national standard, Furman says, the U.S. wind industry could even lose jobs, especially to China. Last year, China became the No. 1 maker of wind turbine equipment. It’s also the No. 1 maker of solar cells for solar panels.

While the federal government pumped $150 million in stimulus funds into renewable energy, China is moving faster, Obama told governors Wednesday, while calling for more ethanol production and technology to limit pollution from coal.

Southeast raises concerns

A national electricity standard has faced opposition from Southeastern lawmakers, who fear that it’ll benefit states with big wind and good sun. Southeastern states are largely dependent on coal and nuclear power.

“We’re not opposed to renewables, but we’re of the opinion that states should come up with their own plans,” says David Wright, past president and current commissioner of the Southeastern Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners. If the Southeast benefits from growth in biomass, he wonders if it’ll lose jobs if coal plants close.

Renewable energy also remains more expensive than coal. Mandates that drive up its use could result in higher energy prices, which could result in lost jobs, says Max Schulz, analyst at the Manhattan Institute, a free-market think tank.

“There’s no question that if you have a national standard, you’ll see an increase in green jobs,” Schulz says. “But you’ll also have harmful effects.”

 Full story here

The climate talks in Denmark produced serious talk among top carbon emitters about doing something, but little action that will directly affect Iowa, observers here say.

What happens next could affect everything from Iowa weather to how much the state’s residents pay for electricity.

Iowans who watched the Copenhagen Accord take shape from the ground in Denmark found important symbolism in President Barack Obama’s steps to move the United States into the middle of the discussions. They also point to real meat in an agreement of nations to spend $100 billion a year by 2020 for aid to poor countries and to countries facing the biggest climate-related effects.

But the agreement contained no hard targets for reducing heat-trapping greenhouse gases or specific emissions-reducing measures.

“It’s a beginning,” said Andrew Snow of the Environmental Law and Policy Center, a nonprofit group. “It’s a very positive thing considering ourselves and others were worried they wouldn’t reach a deal at all.”

Read the rest of the story here.

On July 21st, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart focused extensively on the American Clean Energy and Security Act and then Jon interviewed Secretary of Energy Steven Chu.

Watch the episode on Hulu here.

Last Friday the House of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy & Security act on a close vote. This legislation promises to jump start our renewable economy, reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, and reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. Now the bill faces a tough battle in the Senate before it can be signed into law by the President.

We are going to keep building the Iowa grassroots pressure for real solutions to climate change. That is why the Iowa Global Warming Campaign will be collecting “declare your independence from fossil fuels” postcards from concert-goers at the 80/35 festival in Des Moines. The postcards will be mailed to our Senators letting them know what the people want. The 80/35 festival will be held July 3rd and 4th at 13th and Locust Avenue. This is a great opportunity to volunteer with the campaign and make a real difference in getting our country off of fossil fuels. At least 15,000 people are expected to attend the concert featuring Public Enemy, Ben Harper, and many others (http://80-35.com/). Send an email to dveysey@iowaglobalwarming.org if you are interested in volunteering!

Drew
dveysey@iowaglobalwarming.org

In October 1977, this magazine ran a cover story on the promising field of renewable energy. From today’s vantage point, the article is noteworthy mainly for how uncannily its description of the country’s energy crisis and possible solutions applies to the crisis we’re in now.

The article took as its starting point the national debate that had arisen over a 29-year-old physicist named Amory Lovins, who had come to prominence a year earlier, when he published an essay in Foreign Affairs called “Energy Strategy: The Road Not Taken?” Lovins argued that the country had arrived at an important crossroads and could take one of two paths. The first, supported by U.S. policy at the time, promised a future of steadily increasing reliance on dirty fossil fuels and nuclear fission, and it carried serious environmental risks. At a time before Al Gore was even in Congress, Lovins noted: “The commitment to a long-term coal economy many times the scale of today’s makes the doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration early in the next century virtually unavoidable, with the prospect then or soon thereafter of substantial and perhaps irreversible changes in global climate.” He dubbed this “the hard path.”

The alternative, which Lovins called “the soft path,” favored “benign” sources of renewable power like wind and the sun, along with a heightened commitment to meeting energy demands through conservation and efficiency. Such a heterodox blend of clean technologies, Lovins argued, would bring a host of salutary effects: a healthier environment, an end to our dependence on Middle East oil, a diminished likelihood of future wars over energy, and the foundation of a vibrant new economy.

Read the rest of The Atlantic article here.

In a triumph for President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled House narrowly passed sweeping legislation Friday that calls for the nation’s first limits on pollution linked to global warming and aims to usher in an era of cleaner, yet more costly energy.

The vote was 219-212, capping months of negotiations and days of intense bargaining among Democrats. Republicans were overwhelmingly against the measure, arguing it would destroy jobs in the midst of a recession while burdening consumers with a new tax in the form of higher energy costs. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated the bill will cost households an additional $175 in energy costs in 2020.

The House’s action sent the measure to a highly uncertain fate in the Senate, where Majority Leader Harry Reid said he was “hopeful that the Senate will be able to debate and pass bipartisan and comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation this fall.”

Read the rest of the story here.

As a nation, we have the choice of a variety of energy futures. For example, there is a future where we essentially do nothing and continue to rely on fossil fuels. Or there is a future where we transition and rely instead on clean energy.

We can put some basic prices on getting to those future scenarios, realizing that no scenario comes free. By doing some comparison shopping, it is clear that the best bargain in town is a clean-energy future, where we use resources such as wind, solar and energy efficiency and avoid the worst effects and costs of climate change. But this bargain is not available forever. We need to put the right energy and climate policies in place now to take advantage of it.

Moving to this clean-energy economy will require significant investments. These include an infrastructure of new technology, such as wind turbines, solar panels, new or retrofitted green buildings and passenger rail, as well as research, training and education. But these investments will generate real benefits, including new jobs, and avoid substantial costs associated with unabated climate change.

Please read the rest of the article here.

The House of Representatives will vote this Friday on the American Clean Energy and Security Act, and we need your help. The bill will jumpstart our economy, reduce carbon pollution, and break our dependence on foreign oil. And the bill will create thousands of jobs here in Iowa. Honestly, it’s a no-brainer. Congressman Boswell is a key vote; please, call 202-225-3806 and take one minute to tell him to vote YES on the American Clean Energy and Security Act.

Calls are important because it’s a clear signal that there is a strong demand for action; but if you haven’t yet, you can also use this link to send an email message: http://actionnetwork.org/campaign/Iowa_ACES

This could be the most important single minute you spend this week!

DES MOINES — U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced Monday that Iowa will get $16 million for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects, an amount that likely will grow to $40 million as the state ramps up its efforts.

Chu said officials will monitor the initial state spending before allocating the rest of the money, but that the funding — part of the federal stimulus package — needs to be spent quickly.

“I want to shove this money out the door as quickly as possible,” Chu said at a news conference with Gov. Chet Culver and U.S. Rep. Leonard Boswell, both Democrats.

Chu said Iowa is among the first states to receive the energy money. He planned to travel to Michigan later Monday to make a similar announcement.

Culver said Iowa has prepared a detailed plan for the projects and that he was confident the state would receive the remaining money from the Energy Department.

Read the rest of the story here.