Critics of the new bill say Kerry and Lieberman are giving too much away to polluting industries to attract more votes. (Photo courtesy of Tim Pearce)
Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman unveiled their climate and energy bill. It has support from some big fossil fuel industries. And several environmental groups say… it’s a good first step. But Mark Brush reports, critics are arguing it gives too much away to polluting industries:
Transcript
Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman unveiled their climate and energy bill. It has support from some big fossil fuel industries. And several environmental groups say… it’s a good first step. But Mark Brush reports, critics are arguing it gives too much away to polluting industries:
The American Power Act sets a national goal for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. And it would stop states from setting their own greenhouse gas standards.
It also provides billions of dollars to the coal industry to develop carbon capture technology. And it encourages more offshore drilling by offering states a share of royalties.
Kieran Suckling heads up the Center for Biological Diversity. He says by trying to attract more votes – Kerry and Lieberman are giving too much away to polluting industries:
“If all those giveaways and buyoffs got you the votes you needed, so you could actually pass the bill, you might hold your nose and say o.k. But it’s not even working. So you have all the giveaways and then you still get massive opposition.”
So far – despite the concessions – no republicans have stepped forward to support the bill.
While there are tax credits for spray insulation, credit is available for the material only, so the contractor should separate out the material and the labor costs.(Photo courtesy of the NREL)
When people talk about making their home energy independent, they often talk about solar panels and wind turbines. But before all of that, a home has to be tight. That’s not as exciting, but necessary. Lester Graham is following Greenovation.tv’s Matt Grocoff as he tries to make his home the oldest net-zero-energy house in America.
Transcript
When people talk about making their home energy independent, they often talk about solar panels and wind turbines. But before all of that, a home has to be tight. That’s not as exciting, but necessary. Lester Graham is following Greenovation.tv’s Matt Grocoff as he tries to make his home the oldest net-zero-energy house in America:
The note on Matt’s door told me to come on in and head for the basement. Matt’s 110 year old home has what’s called around here a “Michigan basement.” Basically, cement floor, stone walls, low ceilings. Not glamorous.
Matt is spraying expanding foam insulation up in that area where the floor framing sits on the foundation. The sill plate… which is basically nothing more than one-and-a-half inches of wood between inside your home… and the great outdoors.
“There’s no insulation between your house, or your living part, and the foundation itself.”
Maybe you’ve been in the basement of an old house and sometimes you can actually see daylight through the sill plate in places. Those leaks need to be sealed. That could be done with caulk. Then the area needs to be insulated. That could be done with fiberglass insulation.
“What we decided to do is to do both at the same time, seal and insulate, is to use a do-it-yourself spray foam insulation kit from Tiger Foam. There’s plenty of professionals out there, and for most people, that’s what I’d recommend you do, go to the professional. If money is an issue or if you’re a really handy person, these spray foam kits are fantastic.”
The foam insulation kit costs about 300-dollars. It’s basically two tanks -each about the size of a propane tank you’d use for an outdoor grill. A hose from each tank is attached to a spray gun that mixes the chemicals. The chemicals mix as they come out and the make a sticky foam that expands into nooks and crannies and then hardens after several minutes.
“Way easier than I thought they were going to be, by the way. I was actually terrified. I went back and read the instructions three – four times. And when I started spraying, it wasn’t that bad.”
“You still ended up with a goof, though.”
“I did have a goof. There was a little bit of foam there, dripping, when I forgot to turn on one of the canisters, but what ya– c’mon Lester.”
Matt’s goof means he’s going to have to wipe up some of the mess and spray again. But it’s not a disaster.
If you’ve got a big job… maybe new construction or a remodel that takes it down to the studs… you might want to consider a professional.
John Cunningham owns Arbor Insulation in Ann Arbor, Michigan. He says, sure, if you’re up to it… do it yourself.
“You could assume that it’d be cheaper to do it yourself and the kits are a really good option, especially for people that have smaller projects or they’re looking to do the work in a very specific time frame or in a distant location for instance.”
But the professionals are recommended for those big jobs. And right now there are federal tax credits for spray foam insulation– 30-percent up to 15-hundred dollars. That credit is limited though.
“The tax credit is available for the material only, so the contractor should be separating out the material and the labor. Also, there are additional incentives from some utilities and more incentives coming down the pike.”
Some states and even municipalities are considering incentives.
One final note… to use the spray foam, Matt Grocoff is decked out in a white haz-mat suit, latex gloves, goggles and a respirator…
“You’ve got to take all the safety precautions. You’ve got to wear your goggles, your suit. And it also can be messy too. Any overspray that gets in your hair will stay in your hair.”
And as he zips up, I get the hint that Matt has to get back to work.
“I do. I’ve got 30 seconds before this nozzle sets up. So, Lester, thanks again.”
“Sounds like my cue to get out of here. That’s Matt Grocoff with Greenovation-dot-TV. I’m Lester Graham with The Environment Report.”
President Obama says we need to harness traditional sources of fuel even as we increase production of new sources of renewable energy. (Photo courtesy of the US Mineral Management Service)
President Barack Obama is lifting a moratorium on gas and oil drilling off the nation’s coasts in certain areas. Lester Graham reports some environmentalists don’t like it. And conservatives don’t like it either.
Transcript
President Barack Obama is lifting a moratorium on gas and oil drilling off the nation’s coasts in certain areas. Lester Graham reports some environmentalists don’t like it. And conservatives don’t like it either.
Environmentalists say allowing drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, off the coast Virginia, and areas of the Arctic Ocean north of Alaska is a disaster for wildlife and climate change.
The President says we can’t get from fossil fuels to renewable fuels overnight.
“And the only way this transition will succeed is if it strengthens our economy in the short term and the long run. To fail to recognize this reality would be a mistake.”
Conservatives say all offshore waters should be opened to drilling. The President says that still wouldn’t solve the problem.
“Drilling alone can’t come close to meeting our long-term energy needs. And for the sake of our planet and our energy independence, we need to begin the transition to cleaner fuels now.”
The President stressed we need to use all energy options to become energy independent.
Despite recent findings, political interests in Washington are working to extend corn ethanol subsidies set to expire at the end of this year.(Photo courtesy of AmandaLeighPanda CC-2.0)
For a long time, corn growers and the corn ethanol industry have claimed their fuel is low carbon. That is, it’s lower in the greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming. A second study is out which disputes that claim.Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
For a long time, corn growers and the corn ethanol industry have claimed their fuel is low carbon. That is, it’s lower in the greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming. Lester Graham reports… a second study is out which disputes that claim.
This study published in the journal BioScience also found corn is being used for ethanol instead of exported to other countries. Those other countries are plowing up grasslands and rainforests to plant corn for food. Less rainforest means less CO2 is being taken up by plants.
Thomas Hertel is a researcher at Purdue and lead author of the new study.
He finds ethanol from corn is not a low-carbon fuel when you include that indirect effect.
“It results in a figure which [is] not significantly lower than emissions associated with gasoline.”
But, political interests in Washington are working to extend corn ethanol subsidies which are set to expire at the end of this year.
European consumers have been quicker to adopt new technologies, like hybrids and efficient diesel cars. Energy Discovery -Innovation Institutes might change that. (Photo by Michael Pereckas, Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons)
Making the shift from fossil fuels to cleaner energy will be a long-term, expensive effort. But, there is the opportunity for jobs, energy independence and reducing the greenhouse gases that cause climate change. This week a report from the Brookings Institution proposes a way to help get us there: Energy Discovery-Innovation Institutes. These institutes would take a big picture view of the change and help researchers and businesses avoid pitfalls and false starts along the way. Lester Graham spoke with a supporter of the idea, Gary Was. He’s the Director the Phoenix Energy Institute at the University of Michigan:
Transcript
Making the shift from fossil fuels to cleaner energy will be a long-term, expensive effort. But, there is the opportunity for jobs, energy independence and reducing the greenhouse gases that cause climate change. This week a report from the Brookings Institution proposes a way to help get us there: Energy Discovery-Innovation Institutes. These institutes would take a big picture view of the change and help researchers and businesses avoid pitfalls and false starts along the way. Lester Graham spoke with a supporter of the idea, Gary Was. He’s the Director the Phoenix Energy Institute at the University of Michigan:
Gary Was: Energy is a very complex topic. It’s a social issue as much as it is a
technological issue. In addition to the technological challenges of coming up with
new energy sources and proving energy efficiency, we also have a lot of social issues
involved as well. The business sector is heavily involved. Economics is a big issue.
Social behavior and social preferences are big factors in our energy use patterns and
our habits.
Lester Graham: Give me an example of that.
Was: Well, one example is plug-in hybrid electrics. There’s a lot of questions to
how these plug-in hybrids are going to function, and whether they’ll be successful. A
lot of that depends upon people’s preferences. The idea of plugging in, when you
can plug in, how long you have to plug in, how complicated or how difficult it is –
can make a big difference. We’ve seen examples of that with diesel. In Europe, half
the cars are diesel powered. We have the same technology here. There are no diesel
powered cars here. It’s a social issue, not a technological issue.
Graham: Steven Chu, the new Energy Secretary, has spent a good deal of his career
in research. What do you expect his reaction will be to your suggestion of tying
together this energy research?
Was: I think it will be quite positive. Dr. Chu has a background both in the
academic setting as well as in the National Laboratories, and I think he appreciates
well the capabilities of each institution. The meat of this whole proposal, and of this
whole concept, is that the National Laboratories alone, or universities alone, or
industry alone – the three principal research institutions in the US – really aren’t
prepared to handle a challenge of this breadth, and depth, and complexity. And that
we need a new paradigm. We need a new way to be able to take basic science,
accelerate it into development, and push it through technology, transfer it to the
private sector. None of these institutions alone can do that really highly successfully.
Graham: What is this going to do require? Is this government money to get this
launched? Is this going to be another scientific layer of bureaucracy when we get
finished? How do you handle this to make sure it’s effective?
Was: One of the problems we have with energy in the country is that, overall,
regardless of these institutes, this institute concept, its terribly underfunded – in terms
of its comparison to the impact on the economy. The energy business is a 1.5 trillion
dollar business in the US. It’s comparable to healthcare. In healthcare, there is
approximately ten times the amount of federal funds going into research than there is
in energy. So in comparison to the impacts on our lives, it’s underfunded by almost
a factor of ten.
Graham: If we’re to invest in these kinds of institutes, and invest in more research
into energy and how we use it, what kind of return might we see on our tax dollars
that we shovel over to you guys?
Was: Well, that’s a very good question. These discovery institutes, these will be
regionally situated, and each one might be on the order of 200 million dollars a year
funding, and so the entire price tag would be maybe 5 billion dollars. So what do
you get for 5 billion dollars? We expect that the transformation will be much more
rapid, it will be with fewer false starts, and left turns, or dead ends, and it will be
much more efficient than we’re able to do right now. Right now, the system is such
that technology advancements tend to sort of diffuse through society in an uncharted
and undirected way. The objective here is to sharpen that diffusion so that we can
pull these technologies out, translate them into useful products much more quickly.
Graham: Gary Was is the director of the Phoenix Energy Institute at the University
of Michigan. Thanks for coming in.
Many large cities throughout the Midwest have been struggling with issues such as urban sprawl. Getting workers from one area to the jobs in another has become a transportation challenge. Building multi-lane highways only seems to encourage more sprawl, so many cities have worked with surrounding suburbs to build mass transit systems for the entire metropolitan region. For one major city, political leaders are just now getting around to making that happen and as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jerome Vaughn reports… even now it’s not going to be easy:
Transcript
Many large cities throughout the Midwest have been struggling with
issues such as urban sprawl. Getting workers from one area to the jobs
in another has become a transportation challenge. Building multi-lane
highways only seems to encourage more sprawl. So many cities have worked
with surrounding suburbs to build mass transit systems for the entire
metropolitan region. For one major city, political leaders are just now
getting around to making that happen. And as the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Jerome Vaughn reports… even now it’s not
going to be easy:
Detroit is the 10th largest city in the country…and it’s had more than
its share of struggles over issues such as chronic unemployment, poverty,
and pollution.
Finding solutions to those intractable problems has long been a goal of
government leaders in the area. But over the past three decades…they’ve lacked
one tool… used by most other metropolitan areas
around the country…that can make a difference. A regional transportation
system.
But that’s about to change.
Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm has joined Detroit Mayor Kwame
Kilpatrick…and the heads of the three largest counties in Metro
Detroit…to announce the formation of the Detroit Area Regional
Transportation Authority…otherwise known as DARTA.
The new regional transportation authority is backed by local governments,
business interests ..and mass transit proponents. The government leaders have
signed an agreement to work towards the regional transportation
system. Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick says the new deal will benefit the
city AND suburbs.
“This is a real people thing today. It’s also an economic thing…and it’s
rare when these two things come together. This will drive the economic
engine of the state. To move people to jobs…leads to economic
independence.”
The agreement is the first step towards ending decades of debate over how
best to get workers from their homes to their jobs. With many Detroiters
living below the poverty level…owning a car is impossible. But that can
mean taking several buses over a span of three hours just to get to work
each day.
That type of commute is what DARTA proponents, like such as Attorney Richard
Bernstein hope to end. As a blind man…he’s unable to drive to get
where he needs to go. He says Detroit’s lack of coordinated mass
transportation pushed him to become a transit activist a couple of years
ago.
“As a disabled person who can’t drive…I struggle for my independence and I
struggle for my freedom. And DARTA is the only hope that someone like me
has in order to lead a quality of life here in Southeast Michigan.”
Bernstein says he’d like to have that extra measure of independence. But he
says…right now…it’s impossible for him to get around town on his
own…given the current state of mass transit in Metro Detroit.
“For me right now …it isn’t that regional transit is difficult to
use…it’s that it’s non existent …that is the issue. Ultimately, if I want
to get from my house …or my apartment to my office. There is no bus I can
take. There is no bus I can take from my office to court.”
But Bernstein’s passion for regional transportation isn’t uniformly shared.
The original measure creating DARTA was vetoed by former Governor John
Engler last year as one of his final acts in office. The state legislature
tried to resurrect the bill in January…but it has subsequently
stalled…pushing the new governor, Jennifer Granholm and Detroit Mayor Kwame
Kilpatrick and others to find alternate ways routes to create a working agreement.
The opponents say the regional transportation system is not fair. State
Representative Leon Drolet opposes DARTA because he says his more rural
constituents shouldn’t be taxed for a bus system they’ll never use. He wants a
provision that would let communities “opt-out” of the DARTA if they choose. The
Republican legislator says he also concerned because there’s no plan to pay for
DARTA yet. And he says no one’s convinced him that such a system is really
needed in Metro Detroit…home of the Big Three automakers..
“Macomb, Oakland suburban Wayne communities…those are built around the
car. Everywhere there’s a parking lot. Boston, Washington DC, New
York…those communities…mass transit is very viable in the inner areas
because it costs 30 bucks a day or 50 bucks a day to park your car. And
that’s what drives people to mass transit…the inconvenience of driving
your car.”
But automakers say they want the regional mass transit system. The
Southeastern Michigan Council of Government’s Transportation
Expert…Carmine Palombo…says many of the region’s businesses are having a
hard time getting workers from their homes to their jobs. And that includes
the Big Three automakers…who have come out in favor of DARTA.
“The auto company themselves employ people who need to have good transit in
order to get to their jobs…and so they’re feeling the pinch…just like
every other employer is who wants to get…make sure they get to the jobs
they have to offer in a stable environment. So the car companies aren’t the
problem.”
(sound up – bus)
While the Detroit Area Regional Transportation Authority agreement has been
signed….the work is just beginning for transit activists in
Metro-Detroit. The current agreement only provides for planning a
regional transportation system. There’s currently no money for
implementation of ANY plan.
And DARTA opponents such as Leon Drolet are still on the job, too. He’s
charging that the chairman of his county…had no authority to sign
the DARTA agreement…and is asking the State’s Attorney
General to investigate.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jerome Vaughn.
Critics of the new bill say Kerry and Lieberman are giving too much away to polluting industries to attract more votes. (Photo courtesy of Tim Pearce)
