The following is an excerpt from the August 2007 volume of Science for Democratic Action, the newsletter published by the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER). The article was written by Arjun Makhijani,Ph.D., President of IEER.

The entire newsletter centers around the path that the U.S. needs to take in order to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions and help to curb global warming.

"After a decade of global division, the necessity for drastic action to reduce CO2 emissions is now widely recognized, including in the United States, as indicated by the April 2007 opinion by the U.S. Supreme Court2 that CO2 is a pollutant and by the plethora of bills in the U.S. Congress. Many of the solutions offered would point the United States in the right direction, by recognizing and codifying into law and regulations the need to reduce CO2 emissions. But much more will be needed. Moreover, most of the solutions being offered are likely to be inadequate to the task and some, such as the expansion of nuclear power or the widespread use of food crops for making fuel, are likely to compound the world’s social, political, and security ills. Some, like production of biofuels from Indonesian palm oil, may even aggravate the emissions of CO2."

To read the entire article, visit http://www.ieer.org/sdafiles/15-1.pdf.

Potential Carbon Emissions Reductions from Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by 2030

American Solar Energy Society
Charles F. Kutscher, Editor
January 2007

Forward:

"Climate change is happening. Animals know it. Many are beginning to migrate to stay within their climate zones. But some are beginning to run out of real estate. They are in danger of being pushed off the planet, to extinction.

"Even humans are starting to notice climate change. And they are learning that unabated climate change poses great dangers, including rising sea levels and increased regional climate extremes. Yet the public is not fully aware of some basic scientific facts that define an urgency for action. One stark implication—we must begin fundamental changes in our energy use now, phasing in new technologies over the next few decades, in order to avoid human-made climate disasters.

"Indeed, a quarter of the carbon dioxide (CO2) that we put in the air by burning fossil fuels will stay there “forever”—more than 500 years. This makes it imperative to develop technologies that reduce emissions of CO2 to the atmosphere.

"At first glance, the task is staggering. If we are to keep global temperatures from exceeding the warmest periods in the past million years—so we can avoid creating “a different planet” - we will need to keep atmospheric CO2 to a level of about 450 parts per million (ppm). Already humans have caused CO2 to increase from 280 to 380 ppm.

"The limit on CO2 must be refined, and we may find that it can be somewhat larger if we reduce atmospheric amounts of non-CO2 pollutants, such as methane, black soot, and carbon monoxide. There are other good reasons to reduce those pollutants, so it is important to address them. However, such efforts will only moderately reduce the magnitude of the task of reducing CO2 emissions.

"When I spoke at the SOLAR 2006 conference in Denver last summer, I was pleased to see the progress being made by experts in energy efficiency and renewable energies. This report contains a special series of nine papers from that conference. The papers show the great potential to reduce carbon emissions via energy efficiency, concentrating solar power, photovoltaics, wind energy, biomass, biofuels, and geothermal energy.

"Clearly these technologies have the potential to meet the requirements to reduce our nation’s emissions, consistent with the need to reduce global emissions. No doubt the cost and performance of these technologies can benefit from further research and development, but they are ready now to begin to address the carbon problem. To bolster our economy and provide good, high-tech, high-pay jobs, it is important that we move ahead promptly, so that we can be a world leader in these developing technologies.

"Some climate change is already underway, but there is still time to avoid disastrous climate change. The benefits of making reductions in carbon emissions our top national priority would be widespread, especially for our energy independence and national security.

"Most people want to exercise responsible stewardship with the planet, but individual actions, in the absence of standards and policies, cannot solve the problem. In my personal opinion, it is time for the public to demand effective leadership from Washington in these energy and climate matters. We owe that to our children and grandchildren, so that they can enjoy the full wonders of creation."

James E. Hansen, Ph.D.
Director, Goddard Institute for Space Studies^*
January 2007
New York City

^*Affiliation for identification purposes only. Opinions regarding climate change and policy implications are those of the author, and are not meant to represent a government position.

Click here to download the PDF and read the entire report: http://www.ases.org/climatechange/climate_change.pdf

Carbon emissions in the United States are spiraling upward. As Global Warming is well-documented and the human impacts resulting from Global Warming can be severe, it behooves Indiana and the nation to address Global Warming quickly and efficiently. Current energy efficient technologies for homes and businesses coupled with renewable sources of power can achieve significant carbon dioxide emission reductions while bolstering the economy.

This article consists of an excerpt from reports published by U.S. PIRG (US Public Interest Research Group) and Environmental Law and Policy Center (ELPC). Although the ELPC is dated, it is still relevant. Indeed, given the significant advances in wind turbine technology and Indiana's significant wind capacity (unknown at the time of the report) and advances in energy efficient technology, the results can be even more impressive.

Excerpts from:

1. “The Carbon Boom”, by Emily Figdor and Alison Cassady of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG) Education Fund, 2006; and
2. “Repowering The Midwest”, by the Environmental Law and Policy Center of the Midwest in Chicago, Illinois, 2001.

GLOBAL WARMING AND CORRECTING ITS NEGATIVE IMPACTS

The Midwest Clean Energy Development Plan is a sustainable energy plan that will reduce pollution, improve reliability by diversifying our power supply and create new “green” manufacturing and installation jobs, as well as provide new renewable energy “cash crops” for farmers. Developing clean energy efficiency and renewable energy resources is the smart and sustainable solution to the Midwest’s pollution problems, to power constraints at summer peak demand times and to challenges in meeting the region’s overall electricity needs. Clean energy resources are the modern technologies for our 21st century energy future. The cost of renewable energy is plummeting as wind, biomass and solar power technologies have improved dramatically. There are also abundant opportunities to install cost-effective modern energy efficiency technologies ranging from improved residential and commercial lighting to new industrial motors. When it comes to wind power, the flat lands of the Midwest are valuable assets. Wind power is the world’s fastest growing energy source, expanding about 35% in 1998. Tremendous design improvements in wind turbines have led to a huge drop in the per-kilowatt price of installed capacity. The cost is now less than one-third of the 1981 price and close to competitive with conventional power sources. Six of the 10 states with the highest wind power potential are in the Midwest, according to the American Wind Energy Association. Iowa and Minnesota are leading the way with more than 500 megawatts of wind power coming online since 1998. That includes the world’s largest wind farm, which provides enough energy to power 64,000 typical homes in northwestern Iowa.

More clean energy means more green jobs. Not coincidentally, two leading wind power businesses have recently located in the Midwest, providing well-paid manufacturing jobs and capitalizing on current and future market opportunities. Also, if the right policies are put in place, Midwestern farmers can be counted on to grow high-yield “energy crops” to help power the economy. Expanding biomass power will create new rural jobs and provide new markets for crops while reducing air and water pollution and deterring soil erosion.

Other advanced technologies such as fuel cells and industrial and commercial co-generation systems, which generate electricity and heat simultaneously, can also diversify our energy supply in the near term. Even in the often-gray skies of the Great Lakes, solar photovoltaic panels that convert sunlight to electricity can play a growing role, especially on sunny summer days when peak electricity demand is highest and in hard-to-reach remote areas where solar power provides a way around costly transmission and distribution line extensions. Natural gas plants are not entirely clean, but are generally less polluting than coal and nuclear power.

Regarding the demand side of the equation, many clean energy efficiency improvements are smart, economical and waiting to be tapped. Inefficient energy use continues to waste money and cause unnecessary pollution. That can be changed by deploying new, more energy-efficient heating and cooling systems, lighting, appliances, and building designs and materials. Taking advantage of these opportunities will save money, relieve electricity demand pressures and improve our quality of life.

Unfortunately, the electric utilities have failed to keep pace with these improvements and opportunities. Even though new technologies can generate power cleanly and efficiently, a staggering 95% of the Midwest’s electricity is produced by coal and nuclear plants – the two fuel sources with the worst environmental and public health impacts. These old power plants produce pollution that causes smog, acid rain and global warming, and they generate radioactive nuclear wastes and other toxic pollutants.

The early effects of global warming are already evident across the U.S. and worldwide. The year 2005 was the warmest on record. Left unchecked, temperatures will continue to rise, and the effects of global warming will become more severe. The failure to limit emissions from burning oil, coal, and natural gas has allowed global warming pollution to grow out of control.

Human activities over the last century – primarily burning fossil fuels – have changed the composition of the atmosphere in ways that threaten to dramatically alter the climate in the years to come. In a December 2005 speech, James Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, stated, “The Earth’s climate is nearing, but has not passed, a tipping point, beyond which it will be impossible to avoid climate change with far ranging undesirable consequences.” These consequences, he said, would “constitute practically a different planet” and include seal level rise, heat waves, drought, more intense hurricanes, decreased crop yields, water scarcity, and the spread of infectious diseases.

The United States is by far the larges worldwide contributor to global warming, releasing a quarter of the world’s carbon dioxide, the primary global warming pollutant. Power plants, cars, and light trucks are the largest U.S. sources of carbon dioxide.

Existing technology could substantially reduce global warming pollution by making power plants and factories more efficient, making cars go farther on a gallon of gasoline, and shifting the country to clean, renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass. These solutions also would reduce our dependence on oil, reduce air pollution, protect pristine places from oil drilling and mining, and save consumers money.

Unfortunately, the U.S. has rejected mandatory limits on global warming pollution, opting instead to allow global warming pollution to increase unabated. As a result, carbon dioxide emissions have skyrocketed nationally and in most states.

According to data from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory: 1) Between 1960 and 2001, U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide almost doubled, jumping from 2.9 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide in 1960 to almost 5.7 billion metric ton in 2001, an increase of 95%; 2) In the 1990’s carbon dioxide emissions grew more quickly than in the 1970’s and 1980’s, increasing steadily at an average rate of 1.5% each year. The Energy Information Administration estimates that emissions grew by 1.7% in 2004, increasing to almost 6.0 billion metric tons; 3) Regionally, carbon dioxide emissions rose most rapidly in the Southeast and Gulf South between 1960 and 2001, increasing by 163% and 175%, respectively; 4) Among the states, Texas ranked first in the nation for the highest emissions of carbon dioxide in 2001, releasing 12% of the nation’s total carbon dioxide emissions; 5) Twenty-eight states more than doubled their carbon dioxide emissions between 1960 and 2001. The 10 states that experienced the largest overall increases in emissions in this period include Texas, Florida, California, Georgia, Louisiana, Indiana, Kentucky, North Carolina, Missouri and Arizona.

A dramatic growth in oil emissions from the transportation sector and coal emissions from electricity generation fueled the rapid increase in U.S. carbon dioxide emissions between 1960 and 2001. Carbon dioxide emissions from oil combustion jumped 1.1 billion metric tons from 1960 to 2001, accounting for 40% of the total increase in U.S. carbon dioxide emissions. The transportation sector drove this rapid increase. Carbon dioxide emissions from coal climbed 1.1billion metric tons between 1960 and 2001, accounting for 40% of the total increase in U.S. carbon dioxide emissions. Increased electricity generation from coal-fired power plants fueled this rapid growth.

The longer we wait to reduce global warming pollution, the harder the task will be in the future. Key components of an action plan to limit and hopefully reverse the negative effects of global warming include: 1) Establishing mandatory limits on global warming pollution that reduce emissions from today’s levels; and 2) Reducing dependence on fossil fuels by making homes and businesses more energy efficient, making cars and SUV’s go farther on a gallon of gasoline, and generating more electricity from renewable energy sources. The Midwest Clean Energy Development Plan is visionary, and it is practical and achievable. It will require a dedicated and concerted effort by politicians, legislators, regulators, the electric power industry, consumers and citizens to replace current, outdated power plants and practices with modern clean technologies and policy innovations. The Clean Energy Development Plan is a smart policy and technical strategy for the Midwest that can lead the way for the rest of the country – from the nation’s heartland.

Excerpts from:

1. “High Court mulls greenhouse gas regulation”
   by H. Josef Hebert, A.P. Writer
   June 26, 2006

2. “Researcher alleges climate cover-up”
   by Jim Erickson, Rocky Mountain News
   June 8, 2006

3. “As Prospect of US Carbon Regulations Near, UtiliPoint International and Global Change Associates Examine Potential Impacts on Utilities”
   by PRWeb International
   June 8, 2006

4. CAC report on Duke Energy

Taking Aim at Global Warming

Global warming, even most skeptics have concluded, is unfortunately a measurable reality. The only real question that remains is: How do we as Americans, who represent 5% of the world’s population that produce 25% of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions, plan to correct the destruction of our habitat?

States Force Issue of Carbon Regulation

The U.S. Supreme Court recently decided to hear a case regarding a pollution battle between the Bush administration and twelve states, i.e. Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency. The Court will decide whether the E.P.A. is required under the federal clean air law to treat carbon dioxide from automobiles as a pollutant harmful to health. This will be the first major statement by the Supreme Court on climate change. And even though the case does not specifically involve carbon releases from power plants, environmentalists said a court decision declaring carbon dioxide a harmful pollutant would make it hard for the E.P.A. to avoid action involving power plants which account for 40% of the carbon dioxide released into the air.

Bush Administration Muzzles Debate on Global Warming

The American public is not hearing the full story on global warming because Bush administration officials are muzzling government scientists. Warren Washington, a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, CO., said that Bush Appointees are suppressing information about climate change, restricting journalists’ access to federal scientists and rewriting agency news releases to stress global warming uncertainties. Washington said in an interview that climate cover-up is occurring at several federal agencies, including N.A.S.A., the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the U.S. Forests Service. Washington’s comments echoed statements made by N.A.S.A. climate researcher James Hansen in a January 29 article in the New York Times. Hansen said the Bush administration tried to stopl him from speaking out after he called for prompt reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases linked to global warming.

Trigg Talley, acting director of the U.S. Office of Global Change, claims the Bush administration is serious about reducing heat-trapping greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide. He cited FutureGen, a ten year, $1 billion, U.S. led international effort to build the first zero-emission power plant, as an example of that commitment. New York University physicist Martin Hoffert responded to Talley’s statement by pointing out that 850 new coal-fired power plants are planned for the U.S., China and India, and none of them would capture and sequester carbon dioxide emissions. One highly touted FutureGen won’t do much to counter the “oncoming wave of carbon” from those 850 plants, he said. “First of all, we should be spending $10 billion to $20 billion a year to develop alternative energy sources – similar to the Manhattan Project or the Apollo programs,” said Hoffert, a professor emeritus. The Bush plan is just another example of how the administration is misleading the public.

Wall Street Gearing Up for Carbon Regulation

Global warming has, in most parts of the world, become a seriously recognized scientific fact. So serious that two major consulting and analysis firms to the energy and utility industry have announced a new multi-client study to address how mandatory greenhouse gas regulations will affect the utility companies. UtiliPoint International and Global Change Associates will provide guidance to corporate America and particularly, electric utilities, on what the impact of mandatory greenhouse gas regulations will be. They will examine market opportunities, market sizing, regional and national markets, project finance opportunities and review how prepared the industry really is. They will be providing this expertise for companies such as Southern California Edison, A.E.P., Excel Energy and Duke-Cinergy.

Duke Energy: Talking the Talk But Not Walking the Walk

The new Duke-Cinergy touts its interest in addressing global warming and supporting alternative energy resources. Although alternatives exist that are far superior in terms of job creation and environmental quality improvements, indications are that Duke-Cinergy has no interest in fundamentally changing its traditional approach to providing power: coal, nuclear and natural gas plants. This strategy boosts company revenues and retains ironclad utility control over how electric power is generated and delivered, but represents a significant financial burden and public health threat to ratepayers.

The company’s strategy is steeped in coal-based technology. The strategy appears to be to keep antiquated, uneconomic power plants running while adding new base load coal, incorporating all other alternatives in its rationale as mere peripheral considerations. As actions speak louder than words, Duke-Cinergy has consistently ignored:

1. the looming economic crisis facing many of its customers;
2. its impact on global warming;
3. its own public statements relative to global warming and meeting electric demand;
4. the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission in terms of diversification of its energy mix;
5. the toll on public health its coal-based energy delivery system is exacting on the Hoosier and national population;
6. least cost planning; and,
7. assessing the market potential for energy efficiency and renewables and implementing comprehensive measures.

Conclusions

Global warming is, without a doubt, a proven, scientific fact. And even though our destiny regarding global warming is influenced by the multiple branches of government in conjunction with special interests, we cannot lose sight of the fact that we have the technology to effectively address global warming in an economically viable manner and that the public can effect change through strength in numbers. Our goal, as citizens of the most powerful and rich country in the world, should be to awaken and spread knowledge to as many as possible, through whatever means available, on a daily basis. In doing so, we will eventually be able to achieve our goal of improving public health, environmental quality, and financial stability for all of us.

Revised report says climate change affecting Great Lakes even more than previously thought.

Contacts:

• George Kling, Professor of Biology, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, 734-647-0894, gwk@umich.edu
• Don Wuebbles, Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Illinois, 217-244-1568, wuebbles@atoms.uiuc.edu
• Steve Clemmer, Union of Concerned Scientists, 617-547-5552, sclemmer@ucsusa.org
• Grant Smith, Citizens Action Coalition of IN, 1-317-205-3535 or gsmith@citact.org
• Tim Maloney, Hoosier Environmental Council, 1-317-685-8800 or tmaloney@hecweb.org

A revised report, originally released in 2003, finds that Indiana and the entire Great Lakes region may suffer from the effects of a changing climate more than previously thought. A team of leading scientists from Midwest universities and solutions experts at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) recently found that extreme heat events are occurring more frequently, heavy precipitation events, both rain and snow, are becoming more common, air quality may deteriorate due to harmful gases released during more frequent forest fires and the number of summer pollution days may be on the rise. These changes will bring challenges to residents in Great Lakes cities as well as in rural areas, highlighting the need for action to forestall many of the most severe impacts.

Report co-authors, Dr. George Kling, University of Michigan, Department of Ecology and Biology, and Dr. Donald Wuebbles, University of Illinois, Department of Atmospheric Sciences, and recently updated Confronting Climate Change in the Great Lakes Region: Impacts on Our Communities and Ecosystems and found new evidence of the impacts of climate change on the region.

"While updating the report we found several directly relevant studies published since the original findings were made public," says Kling. "Most of the recent evidence corroborates the findings and flavor of the 2003 report. New findings include the fact that extreme heat events are occurring more frequently as are heavy precipitation events."

The report finds that a warming climate will also increase the severity, and potentially the number, of pollution/ozone episodes in region. Lake-effect snow may increase as a result of warmer lake surface waters and decreased ice cover, burdening many cities with increased cost for snow removal. Increased drought and flood events in the spring and summer may also put a strain on municipal budgets for sewer infrastructure.

"A hotter, drier climate will create ideal conditions for the start and spread of wildfires," comments Kling. "And an increased number of forest fires can exacerbate drought episodes by reducing rainfall as smoke particles absorb solar heat and interfere with the cycle that generates rainfall in the region."

Fortunately, clean energy solutions are readily available to help curb global warming pollution while boosting Indiana's economy. A recent UCS analysis, Renewing America's Economy, found that a national standard requiring that 10 percent of U.S. electricity come from renewable resources by 2020 would reduce global warming emissions by 5.5 percent. "Through greater use of renewables and energy efficiency, Indiana can reduce its carbon emissions and generate millions of dollars in clean economic development," said Brian Wright, HEC's Coal Policy Director.

Grant Smith, Executive Director for the Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana believes "Indiana relies too heavily on coal to generate electricity. Keeping aging coal-fired power plants running and building new ones - as is the state's predominant approach to energy policy at the moment - will not only raise electric rates through the roof, it will exacerbate the global warming problem we face as a nation. The State of Indiana needs to change the focus of its energy efforts by concentrating on making our homes and businesses more efficient users of electricity and supporting investment in renewable sources of power like wind, solar, and biomass. Only by diversifying our energy mix can we effectively address global warming and keep electric rates under control."

The report, Confronting Climate Change in the Great Lakes Region can be found at www.ucsusa.org/greatlakes.

If you would like additional information, or if you are unable to make connection with contacts listed above, please contact: Lynn McClure, 847-242-0015 phone, 217-855-8904 cell.