Coen Brothers Take On Clean Coal

As we look for and implement alternative energy programs, it can't be stressed enough that "clean coal" is anything but clean. Compared to wind, solar and geothermal sources, coal needs to be phased out of our energy economy, not enhanced.

45 By 15 Is More Of What We Need In NY

The numbers make you think of a clock. In a way the program presented by the Governor is a way of helping beat the clock presented by our climate crisis. We all need to do our part to conserve and be efficient with our energy usage but our government needs to help provide clean energy so that coal and oil are eventually thrown to the wayside. Forty-five percent clean energy by 2015 is a great start to making that completely clean energy future a reality.

From PolitickerNY:

Paterson unveiled a new goal of having 45 percent of the electricity generated in the state from "clean and renewable sources" by 2015. He said the measure would produce 50,000 jobs. "We are going to have to make New York a more energy efficient and more energy independent state," he said. This would be done by converting public buildings to alternative energy sources, and providing incentives for homeowners. He also hoped that upstate New York could be the home of the development and manufacture of renewable energy sources.

Clean energy proponents are behind the Governor on this one and state legislators should follow suit. Newbie Senator Daniel Squadron likes the plan, so that is at least one politician in the bag. Although we aren't going to get all the changes New Yorkers wish to see in their government, at least there seems to be a chance of passing through this vital bill for the good of our environment....and as a bonus, tens of thousands of jobs in order to get it done.

NBC Spotlights The Truth Behind "Clean Coal"

The speeches made about "clean coal" during the campaign are long over, but the myth of "clean coal" persists. Both Obama and McCain are to blame for continuing it, but NBC actually did something to show the reality of where the technology is today. This edition of their "Green Week" was more than just showcasing the dreams of energy companies but a honest assessment what it is and where it's at.

From The Huffington Post:

Brian Williams began with a remarkable lead-in:

"Coal. While you might have heard the phrase 'clean coal' during the presidential campaign, it's actually an oxymoron. Wishful thinking. Coal does not burn cleanly and it's hugely expensive to make it burn that way..."

And Anne Thompson herself offers an equally honest lead-in:

"Coal: the fuel the world burns to make electricity. Plentiful and polluting. A major contributor to climate change."

She then profiles a $100 million CCS pilot project in Spremberg, Germany operated by Vattenfall. It is located adjacent to a what Thompson calls a "dirty coal plant." The pilot project apparently captures 95 percent of its CO2 emissions and stores the liquefied CO2 in giant tanks -- before it is trucked 200 miles away and pumped underground.

Thompson then notes that "this process could increase electric rates by 50 percent."

And the icing on the cake? A German environmentalist calling the burning of coal without CCS a "crime against the climate."

The one thing missing of course was talking about where the coal comes from in the first place, such as mountain-top removal that occurs in Applachia with maximum damage to the environment. Besides not talking about extraction, the segment did a fantastic job in telling us what the candidates did not. The great majority of coal plants do not have CCS and getting the technology to them will take decades. Meanwhile they'll continue to pollute our planet while the much more cost-effective and planet-friendly alternatives like sun and wind powerplants are cheated out of crucial investment dollars.

Please, let's leave the rest of the coal in the ground and get to work on projects that will give us a cleaner Earth and energy that is 100% renewable.

A Tiny Bit Of Green In Times Square Amidst A Sea Of Carbon

Times Square is known around the world for its theater, outrageously expensive fast-food cuisine and gargantuan amount of brightly lit advertising. Tourists come from all over the globe to take it in and get suckered by GrayLine buses and walking tours. Retailers pay ridiculous sums to rent space here and it is generally well worth it. The same companies also lay out thousands of dollars a day to paste themselves up above the street with no amount of electricity spared to make the biggest splash. However, one billboard about to go up is going to cut against that grain and go completely green.

From Yahoo News:

NEW YORK – This winter, New Year's Eve revelers will have a close-up view of Times Square's first environmentally friendly billboard powered entirely by wind and sun.

But the billboard might not be quite as dazzling as some of its high-powered neighbors along the Great White Way.

Construction on the 35,000-pound sign advertising Ricoh Americas Corp. is to begin this month across the avenue from the building where the ball drops on New Year's Eve.

Powered by 16 wind turbines and 64 solar panels, the sign is expected to save $12,000 to $15,000 per month in electricity costs. Ricoh, an office equipment and document storage supplier, estimates the sign will also keep 18 tons of carbon out of the environment.

The sign is still massive, measuring 126 x 47 feet so it won't look out of place. It'll still be a tremendous step forward in environmentally-sound advertising and a model for the rest of the big boys who spend cash on Times Square space to follow. Of course, that doesn't mean I'll actually head up there to see it, that place is still a complete zoo with or without solar panels and wind turbines.

Bloomberg Sees Windmills In The Big Apple

Speaking at the Las Vegas conference on alternative energy last night, Mayor Bloomberg envisioned a New York skyline that had wind turbines from the Hudson River to Jamaica Bay and beyond. Bloomberg is known as a man with big ideas and as the Times points out, ideas that have failed. However, except for some feelings of NIMBYism, wind power is not the same as congestion pricing or a West Side stadium.

From The NY Times:

Mr. Bloomberg said he would ask private companies and investors to study how windmills can be built across the city, with the aim of weaning it off the nation’s overtaxed power grid, which has produced several crippling blackouts in New York over the last decade.

Mr. Bloomberg did not specify which skyscrapers and bridges would be candidates for windmills, and city officials would need to work with property owners to identify the buildings that would best be able to hold the equipment.

But aides said that for offshore locations, the city was eyeing the generally windy coast off Queens, Brooklyn and Long Island for turbines that could generate 10 percent of the city’s electricity needs within 10 years.

The Times author Michael Barbaro goes on to talk about the problems of the plan, such as the price of setting up a turbine system, legalities of leasing federally-owned offshore land and that Bloomberg's term will be up at the end of next year. Yet as I stated from the top, this isn't congestion pricing or a stadium, we are talking about the long-term health of our planet and what the nation's preeminent city intends to about it. Bloomberg might not get it done by the end of 2009, but we as a city must make sure that we wean ourselves off of oil, coal and gas.

Al Gore's Speech Goes Beyond The Moon

Al Gore Sounds A Lot Like JFK

As I was flying over from New York to Austin for Netroots Nation, I caught Al Gore on CNN (thanks to JetBlue) and he had a lot to say on this hot July day about climate change. More importantly though, he had something JFK-esque about the important issue and it was certainly inspirational to anyone that gives a damn about the health of our planet.

From The SF Gate:

Just as John F. Kennedy set his sights on the moon, Al Gore is challenging the nation to produce every kilowatt of electricity through wind, sun and other Earth-friendly energy sources within 10 years, an audacious goal he hopes the next president will embrace.

The Nobel Prize-winning former vice president said fellow Democrat Barack Obama and Republican rival John McCain are "way ahead" of most politicians in the fight against global climate change.

Rising fuel costs, climate change and the national security threats posed by U.S. dependence on foreign oil are conspiring to create "a new political environment" that Gore said will sustain bold and expensive steps to wean the nation off fossil fuels.

"I have never seen an opportunity for the country like the one that's emerging now," Gore told The Associated Press in an interview previewing a speech on global warming he was to deliver Thursday in Washington.

Of course he mentioned John McCain in there because the group he chairs is bi-partisan. The Alliance for Climate Protection transcends partisanship and works hard to make sure that we become good stewards of Earth. For far too long we have been incessantly polluting our little spot in space and it has to end before we pass a tipping point that is rapidly approaching. While Bush and the G8 patted themselves on the back for the pledge to reduce carbon outputs by half in 42 years, Al Gore wants the nation to rid itself of those chemicals by 2018.

As gas prices edge up towards $5 and higher, people can only do so much by conserving, but it takes a government that can boost private industry to quickly convert itself to a pollutant-free economy in a relatively short time. Going to the moon was great for the 1960s, but here in the 21st century, we must strive to be the very best, for ourselves and the atmosphere, hydrosphere and terrasphere that we all share.

"New Energy" For America, Brought To You By Obama

From Barack Obama, his latest campaign ad focusing on our energy crisis. While showing McCain to be another George Bush, Obama's plan will provide real change for our country and our relationship with the energy we need to keep moving:

Mercedes-Benz Is Going Completely Green

Mercedes-Benz has been a world-class automotive maker for over 120 years and now they are trying to lead the world in the 21st century. Their cars have led the way in performance, safety and for the most part, looks. Now with the energy crisis becoming more important by the day, they are shedding their fuel inefficiency by producing all their cars without the need of gasoline.

From EcoGeek:

In less than 7 years, Mercedes-Benz plans to ditch petroleum-powered vehicles from its lineup. Focusing on electric, fuel cell, and biofuels, the company is revving up research in alternative fuel sources and efficiency.

The German car company has a few new powertrains in the line-up that European journalists have had the opportunity to test out in their facility in Spain. One vehicle includes the F700, powered by a DiesOtto engine that combines HCCI and spark ignition to get nearly the same efficiency as diesel, but minus the expensive after-treatment systems. The engine can run on biofuels, and we may have a purchasable vehicle by 2010 – a year that seems to be popular for the debut of a lot of new alternative fuel car models, making ’08 and ’09 simply thumb-twiddling years for consumers. I don’t know, maybe car makers just like the roundness of “2010.” The company’s next big step will be to launch a Smart electric car which is fuel and emission-free.

Anyway, Mercedes is looking into electric vehicles, both battery powered and fuel cell powered. Not only are models in development, but we’ve also seen the company making steps towards their zero petroleum goal right now, from better cabs in London to Li-Ion battery improvements. The company also has about 100 Smart electric cars undergoing testing in London, with that favorite 2010 year as the projected market release date. Mercedes is making serious investments, already putting nearly $4 million into the pot of their long-term Sustainable Mobility plan, with another over $14 billion going in before 2014.

Europe is definitely the place to be for more fuel-efficient and zero-emission automobiles. The other side of the pond has understood the implications of global warming for some time now and we are just beginning to catch on. With the help of companies like Mercedes, we can achieve the goal of creating a better world for our children and all future generations. They may not be perfect at the moment, but all of us need to pitch in to help, whether it be by purchasing greener cars, driving less or simply buying local products (that do not have to travel far, thereby reducing the use of gas).

Energy Self-Sufficient Households Are A Reality

Can you live in an American house, drive an American car yet not contribute one single gram of carbon-based pollution into the atmosphere. Most people would automatically answer no, but not Mike Strizki of Central New Jersey. His home is completely self-sufficient and does not require outside power or gasoline for his car, the Earth does it all for him, for a "small" set-up fee.

From Scientific American:

EAST AMWELL, N.J.—Mike Strizki has not paid an electric, oil or gas bill—nor has he spent a nickel to fill up his Mercury Sable—in nearly two years. Instead, the 51-year-old civil engineer makes all the fuel he needs using a system he built in the capacious garage of his home, which employs photovoltaic (PV) panels to turn sunlight into electricity that is harnessed in turn to extract hydrogen from tap water.

Although the device cost $500,000 to construct, and it is unlikely it will ever pay off financially (even with today's skyrocketing oil and gas prices), the civil engineer says it is priceless in terms of what it does buy: freedom from ever paying another heating or electric bill, not to mention keeping a lid on pollution, because water is its only by-product.

"The ability to make your own fuel is priceless," says the man known as "Mr. Gadget" to his friends. He boasts a collection of hydrogen-powered and electric vehicles, including a hydrogen-run lawn mower and car (the Sable, which he redesigned and named the "Genesis") as well as an electric racing boat, and even an electric motorcycle. "All the technology is off-the-shelf. All I'm doing is putting them together."

He paid $100,000 coupled with $400,000 in various grant money. Now he pays nothing for gas, electric and anything that is needed to power all of his appliances, gadgets and whatever device that requires fuel. Zero pollution is fantastic, but who can afford such a heavy price tag? The public utility commissions of America aren't going to grant everyone nearly half a million dollars. However, if our national government could divert a fraction of the money going to death and destruction in Iraq and move it to building industry that can increase the supply of this technology, the price of self-sufficiency would look a lot more affordable.

Sebelius Scores A Major Victory Against Coal Power

Who doesn't love a piece of good news here and there? Happy stories are even sweeter when they come from unlikely places and if it concerns the environment, seeing something out of Kansas is definitely a great sign of things to come. The hat tip goes to their incredible Governor Kathleen Sebelius, for standing up against the coal lobby and the majority of Republicans in the State House that were in the pockets of those who profit from that dirty black crap that comes out of the ground.

From The Kansas City Star:

TOPEKA | Opponents of two power plants proposed for western Kansas won a stunning victory Thursday that they hope signals the end of a six-month war over coal.

The Kansas House failed Thursday night to muster the 84 votes needed to defy Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and approve the plants over her veto. The vote was 80-45.

But plant supporters said they would keep trying until the legislative session ends.

“We’ll do something. We’re not through,” said House Speaker Melvin Neufeld, a major backer of Sunflower Electric Power Corp.’s project. Asked if Thursday’s vote was the last on the issue, the Ingalls Republican said, “Not hardly.”

Plant opponents called the vote historic, saying it may go down as a turning point in which Kansas becomes a leader in the movement away from old energy sources toward sustainable, environmentally friendly technologies and energy efficiency. They hoped Thursday’s vote was decisive.

I hope so too. We all know that with the money and power behind coal and all unrenewable resources, this won't knock them down in one punch. However if this attitude shown by Kansans holds steady, in the long run the environment and that of which our children and children's children will live in, things are looking on the up and up.

The most important side-story in all of this was how the veto override failed. The overwhelmingly Republican institution lost a few key votes from their own caucus thanks in part to constituents that pressured their lawmakers to side with them and not the coal industry. When citizens speak loudly and consistently, their representatives do hear them.

It's Time To Regulate Bio-Fuels

Bio-fuels are commonly touted to be better for the environment but the people doing the touting are often those that benefit most from the production and consumption of it. However, many, many more people suffer the consequences. The thing is, bio-fuel producers say that it saves our planet's oil supply by using ethanol but in reality it takes oil to transform the corn into fuel. Not only that, the consequences on a human scale are simply horrific.

From Avaaz.org:

Increased demand for biofuels is driving up food prices and accelerating climate change, as rainforests are destroyed to grow fuel. But with strong global sustainability standards, we can ensure that biofuels help, rather than hurt.

This weekend, the twenty biggest economies, responsible for more than 75% of the world's carbon emissions, will meet in Chiba, Japan to begin the climate change discussions leading up to the G8 summit this summer. Before the summit, let's send our leaders messages urging the adoption of global standards for biofuels.

Sending your message is easy. Enter your information below, and your leader will automatically be targeted in the form to the right. You can then either type your own message, or send our pre-written version. Either way, join a global cry for biofuel change--urge your leader for biofuels standards now!

Be sure to send a letter in support of Avaaz's efforts, it only takes a moment. There are better ways to power our planet, such as using more solar and wind sources. Our farms should be providing food to those that need it, especially in developing countries that are desperately lacking in arable land that can feed their people. It should be just as profitable or more so to grow crops that are consumable rather than to be put into cars.

Stop Children, Whats That Nuclear Sound?

It doesn't take an artist to tell you nuclear power is wrong when the availability of wind and solar power is so plentiful, so just sign the pledge here.