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.
Offshore wind farms have the potential to create jobs in struggling states like Michigan, but uncertainty in the permitting process continues to slow projects down.(Photo courtesy of the US DOE)
It’s been nine years since developers first proposed a wind farm off Cape Cod. You can now find offshore wind proposals in just about any state with a coastline. But these are still just proposals. Dustin Dwyer has a look at what needs to change before the U.S. can tap into its offshore wind potential:
Transcript
It’s been nine years since developers first proposed a wind farm off Cape Cod. You can now find offshore wind proposals in just about any state with a coastline. But these are still just proposals. Dustin Dwyer has a look at what needs to change before the U.S. can tap into its offshore wind potential.
One of the newest plans for offshore wind in the U.S. is in Michigan, a state that’s desperate for the kind of jobs that an offshore wind project could create.
But local landowners don’t want to have to look at the turbines – it’s the same problem Cape Wind confronted nine years ago. And the process for getting offshore wind projects approved remains murky.
Steve Warner is CEO of Scandia Wind, which is proposing the Michigan project. He says the response from state government so far has been confusing.
“In the absence of understanding the process and what it entails, people want to hesitate and we understand that.”
There is an effort underway in Michigan to clarify the permitting process for offshore wind. But as that effort drags in many states and at the federal level, developers are left waiting.
A volunteer cuts insulation for a home in Alaska. Under a proposed federal program, homeowners could get rebates for making their home more energy efficient. (Photo by Ben Brennan courtesy of FEMA)
President Barack Obama is pushing for a new federal program that would create a Cash-for-Clunkers like rebate for people who make energy-saving home repairs. The Environment Report’s Orlando Montoya covered the President’s announcement:
Transcript
President Barack Obama is pushing for a new federal program that would create a Cash-for-Clunkers like rebate for people who make energy-saving home repairs. Orlando Montoya covered the President’s announcement.
The program would be called HomeStar. In it, homeowners would be eligible for up to $3,000 in rebates if they hire someone to seal up their attic, install new windows or make other repairs to cut down on home energy use.
The President made his announcement at a community college in Savannah, Georgia. In the audience were contractors that he said could do some of the energy-efficient work.
“These are companies ready to take on new customers. They’re workers eager to do new installations and renovations, factories ready to produce new building supplies. All we got to do is create the incentives to make it happen.”
Administration officials say, the program could cost six-billion-dollars. Mr. Obama wants the HomeStar program included in a bill jobs bill being drafted by Congress.
Opponents say the law should not be implemented until California’s unemployment rate is much lower.
(Photo courtesy of NASA)
There’s a new ballot initiative
underway that is trying to repeal
the nation’s leading global warming
law. The law seeks to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions by
close to a third by 2020. Mark
Brush reports the opponents of
the law say it will cost jobs:
Transcript
There’s a new ballot initiative
underway that is trying to repeal
the nation’s leading global warming
law. The law seeks to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions by
close to a third by 2020. Mark
Brush reports the opponents of
the law say it will cost jobs:
Conservatives and some Republican lawmakers are behind the petition effort in California. If they’re successful, they’ll suspend the state’s Global Warming Solutions Act. They say the law should not be implemented until California’s unemployment rate is much lower.
Supporters of the law say it’s the one thing that’s actually driving innovation and creating jobs in the state. Tom Soto is with Craton Equity Partners which invests in clean tech businesses. He says the backers of this ballot initiative are hanging onto the past.
“I think it is a shameless last ditch effort of the oil companies and industry who are clinging by their bloodied fingernails onto something that simply is no longer sustainable.”
Opponents of California’s global warming law are hoping to capitalize on growing skepticism about climate change science.
The White House is pushing
a new clean energy plan as
a way to deal with reducing
greenhouse gases. Mark Brush
reports this new plan might
help future climate legislation:
Transcript
The White House is pushing
a new clean energy plan as
a way to deal with reducing
greenhouse gases. Mark Brush
reports this new plan might
help future climate legislation:
The White House says this new energy plan is all about green jobs. There’s more money for so-called clean coal, and for biofuels, like ethanol.
The government had limited using corn for ethanol. The thinking was using food to make fuel was probably not such a great idea.
But the industry has not been able to move away from corn ethanol as quickly as hoped. So now the Administration is saying, corn ethanol can be okay – if the refineries are more efficient.
Lisa Jackson is the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
“So this really unlocks the door for advanced biofuel producers, including advanced corn ethanol producers, to make investments and create jobs.”
Allowing more corn to be used for ethanol and investing in new technologies to clean up coal could win the White House some support if and when a climate change bill comes up for a vote.
Tom O'Neill (in suit) develops new businesses for Exelon,
an energy company best known for its fleet of nuclear power stations.
The Chicago solar project is the company's largest to date.
(Photo by Shawn Allee)
Forty acres of formerly abandoned industrial property on Chicago's
South Side are prepped for the arrival of photovoltaic solar panels.
(Photo by Shawn Allee)
Exelon communications specialist Paul Elsberg stands
beside a pylon that will support the Chicago project's solar panels.
The photovoltaic panels hang between the pylons along an axis. The
axis turns throughout the day, so the panels always face the sun directly.
(Photo by Shawn Allee)
There’s a commercial-scale solar project
that’s getting some buzz in Chicago and
beyond. The builders promise to use up
some abandoned industrial space within
the city limits… and hope to provide
some local jobs. City governments across
the country like both of those ideas.
Shawn Allee looks at why this
urban solar project’s falling into place,
and whether it might get repeated across
the country:
Transcript
There’s a commercial-scale solar project
that’s getting some buzz in Chicago and
beyond. The builders promise to use up
some abandoned industrial space within
the city limits… and hope to provide
some local jobs. City governments across
the country like both of those ideas.
Shawn Allee looks at why this
urban solar project’s falling into place,
and whether it might get repeated across
the country:
Carrie Austin is a Chicago alderman, and, as she says, she’s constantly dealing with problems unique to Chicago. But she’s convinced she’s got one problem a lot other cities face, too: what to do with vacant industrial land. She’s got 200 acres of it in her neighborhood.
“The environmental issues left from the company, left us with such devastation without any regards to human life. That has been our fight all these years. ”
Austin says, even with some clean-up in recent years, it’s been tough getting someone to come in with some work – and jobs.
“We’ve talked to FedEx, Kinkos and many other corporate offices. Even to Wal-Mart, bringing some of their distrubution to such a large piece of land. But to no avail.”
Austin says there’s a portion of this land she’s not so worried about now. The energy company, Exelon, is putting up solar panels on about 40 acres. And for the first time in a long time, there’s the sound of new construction there.
“This site’s been vacant for thirty years.”
That’s Tom O’Neill – he develops new businesses for Exelon. We’re walking along a padded-down field of soil where there used to be factory walls, machines, and concrete floors.
“What’s changed is you don’t see the brush and the shrubbery and there was a building that used to be here. The whole site is now graded and you can see signs of the construction where the foundations are going to come out. If you look further west, you can actually see the foundations going in for the solar panels, so it’s changed quite a bit.”
This is a transformation a lot of cities would envy, but I’m curious why Exelon’s doing this in Chicago and whether it’ll repeat it in other cities. On the first question, O’Neill says Exelon’s putting up the panels because it’s got a plan to cut its own carbon emissions.
“This project here will displace 30 million pounds of greenhouse gases per year. So it is a part of our low-carbon initiative.”
This Chicago solar project qualifies for federal loan guarantees and tax credits, but even with that, it’s not clear Exelon will make a profit. So, the question is: will Exelon repeat this? O’Neill says he’s hopeful.
“It is a demonstration project to show what can be done and with its success will come other successes.”
To get an industry-wide view of whether other cities might get urban solar farms, I talk with Nathaniel Bullard. He analyses solar power markets for New Energy Finance, a consulting firm. Bullard says cities are eager to re-use land that can be an eye-sore, or even cost a city money to maintain. For example, some southwestern cities have old landfills – and they’re planning to put solar farms on top.
“We’ve actually see those go much larger than what’s on the books right now for Exelon.”
Bullard says companies are taking a closer look at solar power because states are mandating utilities buy at least some. And the US Congress changed some tax laws recently. Exelon is taking advantage of that.
“First thing to note in the Exelon project is that it is Exelon itself which is going to own its project. If this was a year ago, they would be purchasing the electricity on contract. Now, with a change in policy, investor-owned utilities is allowed to own the asset itself and take advantage of tax benefit.”
Bullard says we’re likely to see more urban solar projects like Chicago’s – if the technology gets cheaper and government incentives stay in place.
Bullard has this joke about solar power that he swears is true. He says, in the solar industry, the strongest light does not come from sunshine – it comes from government policy.
Anderson and Abbe Turner are in the midst of adding a creamery to their goat farm so they can make cheeses. (Photo courtesy of Lucky Penny Farms)
A lot of companies have been slowing
down and cutting back because of the
economy. But tough times aren’t
stopping some new businesses in the
midst of the ‘local food movement’
from moving forward. More than a
year ago, Julie Grant spoke with the
owners of a goat cheese farm. She
visited them again this year. Now,
they’re opening a new creamery, despite
lots of economic obstacles:
Transcript
A lot of companies have been slowing
down and cutting back because of the
economy. But tough times aren’t
stopping some new businesses in the
midst of the ‘local food movement’
from moving forward. More than a
year ago, Julie Grant spoke with the
owners of a goat cheese farm. She
visited them again this year. Now,
they’re opening a new creamery, despite
lots of economic obstacles:
Abbe Turner just quit her day job. She’s had a good-paying
university job – with benefits – for many years. But today
she’s waiting for the delivery of a $5,000 dollar pasteurizer.
“There we go. There’s my pasteurizer.” (cheering)
The truck arrives with a six foot round stainless steel tank.
“I never thought I’d be so excited by a 3,000 pound hunk of
metal in my entire life. But…” (laughter)
Abbe and her husband, Anderson Turner, started dreaming
of goat cheeses three years ago. This big hunk of steel will
help them finally to get their creamery off the ground.
“The pasteurizer will allow us to make cheese in small
batches, artisan cheeses. We’ll do some cheves in the
pasteurizer, some tommes and probably a goat gouda.”
The Turner’s dream started after they bought a few goats for
their hobby farm. They made a little cheese for the family.
And they liked it. So they kept getting more and more goats.
Now they have more than 160 Nubians, La Manchas, and
Alpines. Abbe and Anderson had been getting up before
dawn every morning to milk them. By hand. Then they
would get their 3 kids ready for school and head off to their
full-time day jobs.
The Turners wanted to automate milking, to make things
easier and faster. They even had a group of 23 investors
chipping in to renovate their barn into a milking parlor. But
that was last fall.
“Unfortunately, with the stock market crash, the calls kept
coming in. ‘Hi. We really believe in what you’re doing.
Unfortunately, I’m watching my investments tank and a goat
cheese operation is not something I can write a check for
right now.’”
Some people thought it would be smart to forget about
starting a new creamery in the midst of a recession. Matt
Ord used to sell the Turners feed for their goats. But he had
to shut down his family business when the economy
crashed. Now he’s working with Abbe to build her goat farm
and creamery – even though he’s not convinced it’s the right
time for this kind of venture.
“She’s nuts. But I hope everything goes good for her, I really
do. She’s got a lot of patience and a lot of nerve starting this
business right now. It’s a very scary time. And I know
things are very tough for everybody.”
Abbe likes to think of her family as bold, rather than nuts.
And most of her investors have come back on board since
last year.
Her husband Anderson Turner is glad she’s starting full-time
to get the creamery off the ground instead of waiting for the
economy to turn around.
“I can’t think negatively about opportunity. My time is now.
My opportunities are now, my life is now. So, this is the
cards I’m dealt with. I’ve got to deal. So, let’s go.”
The Turners believe that the local food trend is just getting
off the ground, and that support for local foods will more than
compensate for the tanked economy. They say restaurants
have already put in orders to buy their cheeses.
The filmmakers want more Americans to understand that when we flick on a
light switch – it is not a meaningless act. It takes electricity. And
that takes coal. (Photo courtesy of Coal Country)
When the Senate picks up debate
on the climate change bill, it
will be – in part – deciding the
future of coal as an energy source
in the U.S. About half the nation’s
electricity currently comes from
coal. And a lot of it comes from
the Appalachian region. A new
documentary film sets out to show
how mining for coal affects the people
who live in Coal Country. Julie Grant
spoke with the film’s producers:
Transcript
When the Senate picks up debate
on the climate change bill, it
will be – in part – deciding the
future of coal as an energy source
in the U.S. About half the nation’s
electricity currently comes from
coal. And a lot of it comes from
the Appalachian region. A new
documentary film sets out to show
how mining for coal affects the people
who live in Coal Country. Julie Grant
spoke with the film’s producers:
Mari-Lynn Evans and Phylis Geller set out to make the movie Coal Country
because they wanted to show how different people are affected by coal
mining.
They found lots of activists, and regular citizens, who would talk with
them. Plenty of people were willing to show the thick black water in their
toilet tanks. They wanted to show the black soot covering their cars.
They wanted to talk about the health problems they live with. And they all
blamed the coal industry.
Evans also wrote to coal supporters – to get their side of the story on
camera. The answer?
“No. That was their response. I sent out requests to the coal industry,
to coal companies and to suppliers of the coal industry.”
Evans brother is a coal miner. He supports mountain top removal.
(sound of explosions)
As we see in the movie, that’s when coal companies blow off the entire
top of a mountain to get to the coal. Many people consider it the most
polluting and environmentally devastating type of mining.
But Evans says not even her own brother would do an interview about it.
“And when I said, ‘why won’t you talk on camera? You feel so
passionately that coal is wonderful and mountaintop removal is actually for
the environment as well as the economy.’ And his response to me always
was, ‘oh I would never speak on camera without getting permission from
the company I work for.’”
The filmmakers heard that a lot. And no coal miners ever did get
permission to talk on camera.
In the movie, we do hear from Don Blankenship, head of Massey Energy. He
spoke at a public hearing about the need to ease environmental restrictions
on coal mining.
“We had nearly 800 employees up ‘til Friday. We had to lay 8 off. I
think that might be just the tip of the iceberg if we don’t our rules
changed how we mine in the state.”
Anti-coal activists at the public hearing explain how the coal companies
use that kind of intimidation to control miners.
“I think people are scared that they will lose their jobs and be flipping
burgers. You look out and that’s all you see. You see mining and
flipping burgers. And, I argue, that the coal companies want it that way.
They want that to be the only option. That’s the only way they could get
support for how they treat their workers and how they treat this land.
This would never happen in a place that wasn’t poor. Never.”
In the movie, some coal miners stand up at the public meeting to defend the
companies they work for. One explains the coal industry has provided him a
good salary.
Miner One: “For the last 14 years, the coal industry has supported myself
and my wife and my 3 children.”
Miner Two: “When the last one of you so-called environmentalists leave
the state, when the rest of us leave for North Carolina, turn out the
lights. Oh, wait a minute, there won’t be no lights. No coal, no
lights.”
(music)
The filmmakers want more Americans to understand that when we flick on a
light switch – it is not a meaningless act. It takes electricity. And
that takes coal.
And, as anti-coal activist Judy Bonds says in the movie, coal is tearing
apart West Virginia.
“It is a civil war; it’s families against families. It’s brother
against brother.”
Or – in the case of filmmaker Mari Lynn-Evans – brother against
sister.
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced the biggest state-funded green jobs training program in the nation. (Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
California is putting together
a huge green jobs training program.
Lester Graham reports it will mean
thousands of workers trained for a
growing part of the economy:
Transcript
California is putting together
a huge green jobs training program.
Lester Graham reports it will mean
thousands of workers trained for a
growing part of the economy:
Last week, lost in the news of wildfires and state budget problems, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced the biggest state-funded green jobs training program in the nation. California is leveraging federal stimulus dollars with state money and public-private partnership matching funds.
“This $75-million program will train more than 20,000 workers for clean and green jobs in the future.”
Green jobs – such as repairing hybrid and electric cars, installing solar panels and building wind turbines.
Governor Schwarzenegger says this Clean Energy Workforce Training Program is where economic growth starts.
“There are still people out there who think that protecting the environment will slow the economy down, but it’s quite the opposite here in California and all over the United States.”
Some business leaders say the green sector likely will be the only growth sector in this economy for a while.
Groups are arguing over whether the climate change bill in the Senate will create jobs or kill them. (Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
America has a big decision coming up. We have
to decide whether we want to keep spending our
money on energy from fossil fuel sources such as
coal and oil. Or, do we want to invest more in
renewable energy such as solar, wind, and bio-fuels?
Lester Graham reports the next stage for the
national debate will be when the Senate considers
a climate change bill late this month:
Transcript
America has a big decision coming up. We have
to decide whether we want to keep spending our
money on energy from fossil fuel sources such as
coal and oil. Or, do we want to invest more in
renewable energy such as solar, wind, and bio-fuels?
Lester Graham reports the next stage for the
national debate will be when the Senate considers
a climate change bill late this month:
The U.S. House has already passed a version of the bill. It includes a carrot and stick plan to cap greenhouse gas emissions and put a price on them. It will mean fossil fuels will become a little more expensive to use. Revenue from the program will be invested in clean energy and energy efficiency projects.
President Obama’s Secretary of Commerce, Gary Locke, says using that money America can reinvent itself and, in the process, create jobs.
“The technological innovations needed to combat climate change, to reverse it, to mitigate it, can spawn one of the most promising areas of economic growth in the 21st century.”
Environmental groups believe that. And labor unions believe it. And some progressive businesses are counting on it. They’ve been joining forces in groups such as the Apollo Alliance, and then there’s the United Steel Workers Union and the Sierra Club’s Blue/Green Alliance.
Leo Gerard is the President of the United Steelworkers.
“We need a climate change bill that is focused on creating jobs and cleaning up the climate. With a lot of conservation, a lot of investments in the newest technologies, what we’ll end up doing is taking a huge amount of carbon out of the atmosphere and creating a lot of good jobs.”
Business groups say all carbon cap-and-trade will do is make coal, gas and oil more expensive.
“This legislation is a job killer.”
Keith McCoy is a Vice-President with the National Association of Manufacturers. He says the government should not penalize businesses that rely on cheaper fossil fuels.
“So, if you’re a company that’s reliant on natural gas or oil or even coal in the manufacturing process, these companies suffer the most.”
Business says drop cap-and-trade. And just use the carrot. The government should just offer incentives for energy efficiency and invest in technologies such as nuclear power and carbon capture and sequestration for coal-burning industries.
So the two sides are rallying the troops.
The unions and environmental groups are urging their members to push for cap-and-trade for the sake of the planet and for the promise of green jobs.
Business groups are launching TV ad campaigns against it. Oil companies are using a front group called Energy Citizens to hold public rallies oppsing cap-and-trade. They raise the spector of high gasoline prices and higher electricity bills and throw in the threat of losing as many as 2.4 million jobs.
Ed Montgomery is President Obama’s Director of Recovery for Auto Communities and Workers. He says a clean energy policy is not going to hurt the US, it’ll save it.
“Something’s gone wrong. Our manufacturing sector isn’t able, and hasn’t been able to compete and continue to create new and effective jobs. And what a clean energy policy opens up for us is a whole avenue forward. It’s a way to create both new jobs, to open up new avenues of competitiveness, the competitiveness that uses the strengths of our workers – who know how to make product.”
But first, the debate will devolve into shouting matches about whether global warming is real and, if it is, whether cap-and-trade will do anything to slow it. There will be distortions on both sides about the end of the economic good of the country, and the climatic end of the world as we know it.
And because of all the complexities, the arguments will leave a thoroughly confused public about whether we should use government policy to shift from reliance on carbon-emitting fossil fuels to banking more on renewable energy.
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)
