Copenhagen Accord: Now what?
December 23, 2009

Parsing of last week's outcome of the international climate conference in Denmark began within moments of the announcement of a non-binding agreement, dubbed the Copenhagen Accord.

Was it a tragic failure to tackle the looming threat of climate change or a valuable if insufficient step toward doing just that? Proponents of both viewpoints have spoken out.

Who was responsible for the fact that a more dramatic and definitive agreement was not reached? President Barack Obama? The U.S. Congress? China? All came in for blame from different quarters.

If one thing is certain in the aftermath of the much-anticipated, closely-watched summit, it seems to be that the path ahead for multilateral action against manmade global warming is uncertain.

Will Copenhagen hurt or help the chances of climate-energy legislation in Congress, which might help lead to a binding accord to reduce greenhouse emissions? Does the conference outcome suggest that the U.N.-sponsored diplomatic process on climate change, which also produced the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, is not an adequate vehicle for dealing with the climate issue?

Such are the questions being asked as attention turned in the climate arena to what may lie ahead, especially at major diplomatic meetings scheduled in 2010. Moreâ–º

Texas Comment
EPA, coal, Copenhagen
December 15, 2009

Editorial writers and columnists have had a good deal to say in Texas newspapers lately about recent developments related to global warming and the attendant policy debates.

In this entry of TCN Journal, we present the first in an occasional series of posts that will summarize and provide links to some of what is being said by opinion journalists, op-ed writers and bloggers.

News events that provided a basis for recent commentary in Texas newspapers included the continuing international climate conference in Copenhagen, the Environmental Protection Agency's designation of carbon dioxide as a hazard to public health and the environment, and the U.S. Energy Department's big grant for carbon-capture technology at a plant where coal will be turned into gas at Penwell, near Odessa.

A staff editorial in the Dallas Morning News took positive note of the Energy Department announcement in the context of the EPA's CO2 decision, getting in a dig at Gov. Rick Perry in the process:

Last week's announcement that Summit Power has won a $350 million federal grant to build a coal gasification plant in West Texas positions our state as a leader in developing the next generation of power facilities. In Penwell, Summit plans to build a cleaner coal plant that captures carbon dioxide emissions. The CO2 then could be sold to oil companies to enhance petroleum recover. ...

What's more, the EPA's announcement Monday that it would pursue limits on carbon dioxide emissions only underscores the urgent need to pursue clean energy options.

Gov. Rick Perry continues to characterize attempts to regulate carbon as senseless. But his 38-page rebuttal, submitted to the EPA, is probably a futile exercise. Federal officials have made clear that soon, Texas will not be permitted to pollute with impunity. Texas' future, Gov. Perry, is in Penwell. This is one change we can embrace without getting dirty. Moreâ–º

Houston, DFW top EPA's Energy Star list
November 11, 2009

Now there's more evidence indicating that Texas – contrary to some statistics and some perceptions – is a leader in energy efficiency.

According to some criteria, at least.

Last week, TCN Journal highlighted the findings of a national report from an efficiency-promoting group, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, that ranked Texas only in 23rd place for state policies boosting efficiency but second-best in improving household efficiency per person.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reported data that added more luster to the state's leadership credentials in the home-efficiency category.

The occasion was the EPA's announcement that its Energy Star program had logged the construction of the millionth home that qualified for the Energy Star label for meeting strict efficiency guidelines. The home-labeling effort started in 1995.

The EPA said that the two cities where the most such homes have been built since that time were Houston, with 144,000, and Dallas-Fort Worth, with 103,000. Houston had the sixth-largest metropolitan population in 2008 and Dallas-Fort Worth the fourth largest. Moreâ–º

Texans say no to cap-and-trade bill,
yes to state efficiency rules in new poll
November 5, 2009

A new poll has found that a plurality of Texans oppose a federal cap-and-trade bill to reduce greenhouse emissions, while a sizable majority favor state rules requiring efficiency measures to accomplish the same goal.

The survey results [pdf] were published Wednesday by The Texas Tribune, a non-profit news venture that was launched this week. They were part of what the new online publication described as "the inaugural University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll."

Respondents were asked their opinion of "the proposed 'cap and trade' legislation that would impose limits on the amount of greenhouse gases that a company can emit and cause them to buy permits when they need to exceed their limit." (A bill featuring that kind of regulatory system won narrow passage in the House in June. The Senate is now considering a similar measure.)

Forty-four percent said they oppose such a law (36 percent "strongly" and 8 percent "somewhat"). Thirty-seven percent said they support it (15 percent "strongly" and 22 percent "somewhat"). Nineteen percent answered "don't know."

Pollsters also asked this question: "In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, what is your opinion on the Texas state government requiring new homes, commercial buildings, and industrial plants to be more energy efficient?" Moreâ–º

Texas a leader on energy efficiency?
November 2, 2009

Is Texas a national leader on energy efficiency or is it lagging somewhere in the middle of the pack? 

The answer is yes to both questions, according to a new report by a prominent efficiency-promoting group. It depends on what criteria are used to do the measuring.

In its third annual 50-state scorecard on "policies, programs, and practices," the  American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) recently put Texas in 23rd place (tied with Florida and Utah). 

That was a drop for Texas from its 19th-place slot in the group's 2008 scorecard, which "examines six energy efficiency policy areas: (1) utility-sector and public benefits programs and policies; (2) transportation policies; (3) building energy codes; (4) combined heat and power; (5) state government initiatives; and (6) appliance efficiency standards."

Regarding the states that improved their rankings the most from 2008 to 2009, the lead author of the report, ACEEE's Maggie Eldridge, said in an announcement:

"The most improved states are stepping up their efforts in several ways, such as adopting new building energy codes and setting aggressive new energy savings targets. By highlighting these most improved states, we hope to encourage others to step up their efforts to implement energy efficiency as their first-priority resource." Moreâ–º

"Smart grid" projects get stimulus funds
October 29, 2009

Five Texas electric utilities – companies and co-ops serving the Houston, Amarillo, El Paso and Denton areas – secured almost $260 million in federal stimulus funds this week for "smart grid" projects aimed as boosting their systems' efficiency and reliability.

The U.S. Department of Energy said in an announcement:

The end result will promote energy-saving choices for consumers, increase efficiency, and foster the growth of renewable energy sources like wind and solar.  

The $3.4 billion in grant awards are part of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, and will be matched by industry funding for a total public-private investment worth over $8 billion.

The Texas utilities that will receive grants and details of the funded project, according to the DOE:

• Houston's CenterPoint Energy – $200 million for a $639 million project to finish installing 2.2 million "smart meters" for all its customers, which allow them and the company to monitor power usage as it occurs. The grant will also be help the company pay to "further strengthen the reliability and self-healing properties of the grid by installing more than 550 sensors and automated switches that will help protect against system disturbances like natural disasters."
  
  
• Houston's Reliant Energy, an electricity retailer – $19.9 for a $65 million project to "install a suite of smart meter products, enabling customers to manage their electricity usage, promote energy efficiency, and lower overall energy costs." Moreâ–º

"Global cooling" idea draws rebuttals
October 28, 2009

The idea that the global average temperature is actually cooling – not warming, as most climate scientists believe – seems to have a fair number of supporters on the Internet.

To confirm that impression, just check out readers' comments to a typical news story that touches even tangentially on the subject of climate change influenced by greenhouse gases. The "Earth-is-cooling" argument shows up often.

In response to this assertion, there have been recent signs of what may be an accelerating rebuttal of the cooling concept. 

One example is an article this week by Seth Borenstein, a national science reporter for the Associated Press. Another is a blog post last week by John Nielsen-Gammon, the Texas state climatologist and a professor of atmospheric sciences at Texas A&M University.

The AP's Borenstein reported the responses of four statisticians, whom he had asked to review recent years' temperature numbers – though without being told the numbers represented temperatures:

Have you heard that the world is now cooling instead of warming? You may have seen some news reports on the Internet or heard about it from a provocative new book. Only one problem: It's not true, according to an analysis of the numbers done by several independent statisticians for The Associated Press. Moreâ–º

Village of Kivalina, Alaska

One of the lawsuits was brought by Mississippi landowners. The other was brought by residents of an Alaskan subsistence fishing village. Defendants in both cases include major Texas-based energy companies, and a lead attorney in the Alaska case is a partner in a prominent Houston law firm. 

Both the Mississippi and Alaska suits involve claims related to sea-level rise attributed to global warming. Both are based in part on the U.S. Supreme Court's 2007 ruling in a lawsuit by Massachusetts and other states that greenhouse gases qualify for regulation under the federal Clean Air Act – something the Obama administration is now moving to do. (The environmental group Public Citizen is also using arguments like those employed in the Massachusetts case in a lawsuit seeking to force Texas officials to regulate greenhouse emissions.) 

In the Mississippi case, a panel of the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that plaintiffs could pursue their legal claim, filed just three weeks after Hurricane Katrina, that greenhouse emissions by defendants had increased the storm's destructiveness by boosting sea-level rise. 

Companies named as defendants in the case [PDF] include Texas-based Shell Oil, ExxonMobil, Kerr-McGee, Total PetroChemicals, Pioneer Natural Resources, Total Gas & Power, Anadarko Petroleum and Apache. Moreâ–º

Coal controversy about to reignite?
October 9, 2009

Is Texas, the state with the biggest coal consumption, headed into another round of high-profile battles over new coal-fired electricity generation?

That seems increasingly possible.

In 2007 an anti-coal coalition including environmentalists and dozens of Texas mayors celebrated victory over Gov. Rick Perry and other coal proponents when Dallas-based TXU Corp. scrapped plans for eight of 11 new coal-burning power plants.

Alhough the coal issue hasn't been getting the same level of media attention as it did leading up to the resolution of the TXU fight, environmentalists and their allies have continued efforts against other proposed coal plants in the state.

Now, a series of potentially interactive events in the air quality arena point to the possibility of a return to greater prominence for the coal issue.

More generally, these developments also raise the prospect of major reductions in existing air pollution emissions in the state – both in conventional, already-regulated pollutants and in not-yet-regulated greenhouse gases – from coal-using power plants and other industrial sources. More►

Cities' solar claims aren't readily comparable
October 2, 2009

City governments, like other human institutions, like to be seen as doing a good job.

In several of Texas' major cities this year, achieving that goal has involved letting the public know about their new solar power initiatives – often in superlative terms that don't always readily lend themselves to simple comparisons.

On Sept. 24, for instance, Houston announced it had picked NRG Energy "to develop, own and operate the largest solar project in Texas to date."

The project would have the capacity to generate about 10 megawatts (MW) of solar power, which a city press release said "is equivalent to the energy required to power over 7,000 homes" (or 700 homes per megawatt).

The headline on the release said the city and NRG were "developing (the) largest solar farm in Texas."

In March, Austin's City Council approved building what its city-owned utility said would be the "the largest solar system in the nation and among the 10 largest in the world."

The Austin utility said the 30 MW system would generate "energy each year sufficient to power about 5,000 homes" (or 167 homes per megawatt). Moreâ–º