The more things change...

...the more they stay the same. In the year since I started this blog, we've witnessed many substantial changes, events, and progressions on the energy/climate frontier. And yet, on the whole, it seems American policy hasn't evolved much at all. Three examples illustrate this frustrating truth*.

• As you may have heard, this week is the one-year anniversary of the blowout at the BP's Macando well in the Gulf of Mexico. Described (accurately) as the worst environmental disaster in American history, the months-long fiasco spilled tens of millions of gallons, endangered local enterprise, public health, and demonstrated the terrifying and disproportionate disaster potential of our fossil fuel addiction. However, a year later, and Congress has yet to react to the Gulf catastrophe with any kind of legislation. Not only did we fail to come close to passing a cap-and-trade bill, but we couldn't even pass policy changes increasing the liability of oil companies in damages caused by accidents from $75 million to a more reasonable figure or widening the purview of regulators to oversee offshore oil drilling. For perhaps the most-reported non-nuclear energy accident in history, its legacy in American policy will apparently be shockingly empty.

• Last April, energy and environmental advocates cheered the Interior Department's approval of Cape Wind, the nation's first offshore wind farm. The victory came after a decade-long battle (the project was first proposed in 2001) against NIMBYism and obstructionist tactics to block construction. This past week, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement approved the project's construction plans. While technically good news, the Cape Wind saga demonstrates the unacceptable time frames with which we measure success in the Energy Quest, and as Alexis Madrigal pointed out, it is unclear how we will overcome these infrastructural challenges.
  

• Finally, we return to cap-and-trade. As I mentioned, last summer witnessed the upsetting (but not super surprising) failure of the American Power Act, which was originally Senators Kerry and Lieberman's cap-and-trade legislation. Californians, on the other hand, celebrated the defeat of Proposition 23 in November, whose backers sought to block AB 32, the state's own cap-and-trade policy ... until a coalition of environmental groups, the Association of Irritated Residents, blocked AB 32 in court. Keep in mind that these environmental groups were instrumental in campaigning against Prop 23, and proceeded with an about-face to reject the environmental policy on the grounds that it would concentrate non-uniformly mixed pollutants like NOx and sulfur dioxides in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods. Dave Roberts explains why this probably isn't true. From a big picture perspective, this example illustrates the difficulty of advancing energy and climate policy, even in California, "America's laboratory."
  

These and other distressing stalls and defeats show plainly that standard operating procedure in American energy policy is not working quickly enough. Tackling the problems of our fossil fuel addiction, national recession, increasingly violent resource wars, and climate change will require a change in dynamics. The sooner we transition to a policy agenda based on technological innovation, workforce and STEM education, and cohesive infrastructural progress, the better.
______________________________________________________
*Yes, I'm cherry-picking. Please, PLEASE give me examples of why I'm wrong!

Energetics Cliff Notes - Wednesday Edition

All your riveting climate/energy news in one convenient place.

• Greentech Media recaps this weekend's Berkeley-Stanford Cleantech Conference, featuring keynote speaker Steven Chu (see my Twitter timeline for overly detailed liveblogging).
  

• Chu stuck around after the weekend to attend a bill signing by Jerry Brown at a SunPower manufacturing plant in Milpitas. The legislation will require California utilities to get 33% of their power (an increase from 20%) from alternative energy technologies by 2020.

• Bill Weihl, Google's green energy czar and a founder of google.org's fan-favorite Renewable Energy Cheaper Than Coal, on a prototype mirror design that could cut the cost of large solar thermal plants in half.

• Grist's Dave Roberts explains why environmentalists blocking CARB's implementation of AB 32 (featuring California's cap-and-trade program) are a little misguided.

• This (long-ish) post by Barry Brook is one of the best reactions pieces I've seen to the Fukushima nuclear accident.
  

• Big cuts are expected as the latest CR to fund the government unfolds -- high-speed rail is just one of the many unfortunate choices taking hits.
  

Environmentalists sue to halt AB 32. Wait...what?

Someone please explain this to me:

A California judge put rules on hold implementing the state's greenhouse gas laws including cap and trade rules adopted last year [under AB 32].

...

The board and those who brought the lawsuit, an alliance of environmental groups led by the San Francisco-based Center on Race, Policy and the Environment, have until Tuesday to respond before the court makes a final ruling.

Basically, an "alliance of environmental groups" is suing to have the California Air Resource Board's authority to implement its carbon reduction measures as set up by AB 32 interrupted. Based on the little reporting available so far on this news, I can't determine with any kind of assurance if CARB broke any serious guidelines in creating and adopting its cap-and-trade policy. However, I have to wonder about the wisdom of the Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment in challenging (and potentially delaying indefinitely) one of the most ambitious environmental programs in California's already impressive history by accusing CARB of not achieving proper environmental review.

I haven't kept secret my opinion that cap-and-trade has serious limitations. But it is at the very least a symbolic act of progress, and a market signal to clean tech companies that their business will be welcome in California. And to go from campaigning to uphold AB 32 during last year's elections (against the proponents of Prop 23) to suing to have it delayed makes no sense to me.

Energetics Cliff Notes - Tuesday Edition

A note to my readers: some of you may have noticed my recent contributions to WattHead - Energy News and Commentary and the Americans for Energy Leadership Blog. For those interested, be sure to follow my future posts on these excellent new sites, and check out what other authors have to say. Now on to the news...

• Elizabeth McGowan thinks that GOP victories in November could actually benefit climate/energy policy, if a newly balanced Washington power structure moves past cap-and-trade.
• Despite global temperatures and increasing extreme weather, 2010 is a banner year for climate skepticism.
• The Solar on the White House campaign was officially defeated this week, with Secret Service concerns about rooftop installations trumping climate symbolism.
• PG&E's market capitalization fell by $1.2 billion following the San Bruno natural gas explosion.
• A new study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) says offshore wind resources have the potential to quadruple US energy needs.
• Dan Froomkin presents a case of industry capture of federal inspectors by the oil industry.
• Dan Kammen, director of the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory at UC Berkeley, is joining the World Bank as its Chief Technical Specialist for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency.
• The AGs from Nebraska, Alabama, Texas and North Dakota are preparing lawsuits challenging California's AB 32 on the premise that it violates the Interstate Commerce stipulations of the U.S. Constitution.
• Today is the 40th anniversary of the Clean Air Act and the 50th anniversary of OPEC.
• This is one of the more ridiculous things I've seen lately.

Energetics Cliff Notes - Friday Edition

The week that was: (/climategate) and, yes, more oil.

• Dave Roberts was on Rachel Maddow last night talking about the oil spill and the climate/energy bill.
• Prop 23, a.k.a. the Dirty Energy Proposition, isn't doing so hot in the opinion polls.
• As you've no doubt heard if you're reading my blog, the Solar Impulse, a plane powered entirely by retrofitted solar panels, finished its 26-hour flight yesterday...meaning it flew through the night.
• Alexis Madrigal of The Atlantic asks: can the US innovate without manufacturing? Quick answer: NO. (Seriously though, read the whole piece.)
• Not that it really matters anymore (except maybe for the researchers themselves), but a British panel has cleared the East Anglia climatologists at the center of "climategate" of any wrongdoing.
• Michael Levi figures that a utility-only cap, while not raising nearly as much revenue as an economy-wide cap, would still reduce the deficit due to a correlatively diminished effect on business.
• Keep an eye on this: the EPA's new "transport rule" may place bureaucratic restrictions on cap-and-trade schemes for more than just CO2.
• Robert Cialdini, psychologist and author of the influential Influence, weighs in on energy conservation.

Energetics Cliff Notes - Tuesday Edition

• Calitics gives us an update on Valero's mission to kill AB 32.
• Politifact fact-checks Bill Maher's and George Will's energy claims.
• The Oil Drum on decentralization, localization and scale-free self sufficiency of our energy infrastructure.
• ABC Australia lists 10 inventions for a climate-changed future.
• Robert Reich compares BP, Massey Energy and Goldman Sachs in 'The Rebirth of Regulation.'
• NRDC's Dan Lashoff joins the chorus of enviros condemning BP and advocating for emissions reductions.
• TIME reports of Obama's visit to the Gulf Coast.
• Here's the Energy Collective on the leaked tapes from Copenhagen.
• A few Senators are proposing increasing the liability of oil companies in cleaning up after themselves.
• Google is investing $38.8 million in North Dakota wind energy projects, totaling 170 MW of installed capacity.

Energetics Cliff Notes - Tuesday Edition

• T. Boone Pickens and Ted Turner in a video at Fox Business, discussing renewable energy and energy security.
• Here's a Forbes piece on "Nine more myths about electric cars" -- Robert Bryce should take a look.
• Australia has shelved its cap-and-trade program. PM Kevin Rudd blames "political opposition," and the plan will be put on hold unto Kyoto expires in 2012.
• Sir Richard Branson, of Virgin fortune, predicts $200/bbl oil prices in the near future.
• Valero Oil is raking in cash and using it to finance its war against AB 32.
• Spill, baby, spill -- The Economist reports on the recent rig explosion off the coast of Louisiana.
• Solar Feeds provides 10 reasons why Israel is becoming a global clean tech powerhouse.
• Mark Muro at Brookings offers his thoughts on how the COMPETES Act should be implemented.
• Philip Radford of Greenpeace trashes the state-preemption provisions in KGL.
• The World People's Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth a) needs a new name and b) has called for an international climate court.

Energetics Cliff Notes - Tuesday Edition

• Governor Schwarzenegger defends AB 32, calling the Texas oil companies bank-rolling its repeal effort "greedy."
• NPR comments on Obama's shifting priorities, as the administration moves forward with financial reform and energy policy.
• Pioneer environmentalist Stewart Brand supports nuclear power and geoengineering.
• A Newsweek segment on how very little oil there is off the Atlantic coast.
• Despite sizable donations from PG&E, the LA County Democratic voted unanimously against Prop 16.
• Another influential voice supporting nuclear power - George Will shows there is cross-party appeal to comprehensive energy legislation.
• Now that baseball season is in full swing, the folks at Climate Central talk about how climate change is to weather what steroids are to baseball (go Giants).
• Simon Donner at the Energy Collective discusses why US environmentalists should support offshore drilling.
• Mayor Gavin Newsom touted GreenFinanceSF this week, a city program aimed at residential energy efficiency.
• Edward Burtynsky photographs the culture of oil.

Energetics Cliff Notes - Friday Edition

The week that was: oil spills, mine explosions, Paul Krugman and Larry Summers.

• India's finance minister recently proposed a coal tax to fund clean tech innovation.
• Daily Kos blogger Meteor Blades discusses the link between wind energy and industrial policy.
• The California Public Utilities Commission goes after PG&E for its opposition to community choice aggregation and public utilities.
• Chinese HSR technology and expertise are being imported for California transit projects.
• Al Gore comes out against Obama on energy policy for the first time, criticizing his plans for offshore.
• The Atlantic summarizes Paul Krugman's recent lengthy article on climate economics.
• Despite months of Republican opposition, AB 32 remains very popular (more on that from the East Bay Express).
• The Economist takes on geoengineering policy following the Asilomar Conference.
• The Breakthrough Blog touches on a recent study on imperfect information and individual conservation efforts.
• A recent poll shows overwhelming support for mass transit.

Valero Boycott

CREDO Action, in collaboration with the Courage Campaign, have organized a boycott against Valero Energy, the Texas-based oil company that is currently financing efforts to repeal AB 32. The boycott calls for a cease in patronage to these locations:

• Valero
• Beacon
• Diamond Shamrock
• Shamrock
• Corner Store
• Ultramar
• Tesoro
• Mirastar
• USA Petroleum

I don't know how effective this boycott will be, but I sent an email to Valero in support of AB 32.

Energetics Cliff Notes: Tuesday Edition

• Roger Pielke Jr. offers a counterpoint argument to Robert Stavins on the death of cap™.
• Kamala Harris, current San Francisco Attorney General and candidate for California AG, has added defending AB 32 to her campaign pledges.
• State Senator Alex Padilla's SB 71 passed last week, which provides sales tax exclusions for green technology projects.
• The lobby for renewable energy is growing in Washington.
• Check out an early review of Ian McEwan's new novel Solar, which is about a climate scientist.
• Earth Energy Resources is in the process of raising capital to develop the first major US oil sands extraction site.
• Ezra Klein uses the efforts to regulate CO₂ by the EPA as a further indication of the Senate outsourcing domestic policy.
• Nordhaus and Shellenberger discuss the dangers of linking energy policy to climate science.

Cap™

There have been many public eulogies for cap-and-trade (or cap™, my preferred moniker) lately, not least from optimist sources like the New York Times and people who really ought to know better like Sen. Lindsay Graham.

But here is what Robert Stavins has to say:

Although cap-and-trade has fallen dramatically in political favor in Washington as the US answer to climate change, this approach to reducing carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions is by no means "dead."

The frequent pronouncements by the punditry and the politicians over the past year that health care reform was "dead" should indicate the potential credibility of similar claims for cap™. Without explicitly advocating for any of the cap™ programs currently on the block, I believe I can firmly agree with Mr. Stavins—cap-and-trade is not dead. It is curious, therefore, that Sen. Graham pronounced it so when his own bill contains a distinct, if marginal, cap™ program.

Indeed, other carbon trading programs are budding and flourishing elsewhere. In California, the emissions reduction law AB 32 contains a cap™ and is set to be phased in over the next several years. Efforts to repeal this landmark legislation are not seeing a great deal of success.

California is also, as of 2007, a member of the 11-member Western Climate Initiative, a regional carbon cap scheme that will regulate 90% of emissions by 2015.

Finally, the northeastern Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative cover 10 states and proposes using a cap™ program to reduce utility emissions 10% by 2018.

So advocates of cap™ should have plenty to be happy about, in theory. But their battle is not yet won—not by a long shot. Sen. Bernie Sanders today wrote a letter to Senators Kerry, Graham and Lieberman, demanding that their bill not preempt these state and regional efforts to reduce emissions, a fate that could very well result from the passage of the KGL bill. Such a move would replace economy-wide cap™ programs with a scaled-down, sector-specific version. Setting aside the inherent weakness of the landmark regional efforts (carbon offsets, low carbon prices), cap™ advocates had better cross their fingers and hope that the WCI and RGGI are around long enough to do any good whatsoever.

Update: I can certainly imagine Sen. Graham's claim that cap-and-trade is "dead" could be a purely political move (i.e., call the cap™ program in KGL something else and hope no one notices). This could actually be a fairly effective strategy.

Energetics Cliff Notes

• DOE Under Secretary Kristina Johnson goes before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development to lobby for RE-ENERYSE, Obama's budget proposal to increase funding for K-12 energy education.
• Over at Grist, David Roberts interviews Van Jones on green jobs and his highly publicized resignation last summer. (Part 2 here).
• Surprise, surprise: Carly FAILorina wants to scrap AB 32 altogether.
• A survey shows residents in North Carolina have no problem with wind farms off their coastal beaches.
• From the Asilomar conference on climate geoengineering earlier today: "We do not yet have sufficient knowledge of the risks associated with using climate intervention methods."
• Kate Shepherd gives us an update on the inside-baseball of KGL.
• For anyone who thinks that biodiversity protection is another crunchy-hippy-commie whine fest, check out this piece on coral reef extinction.

AB 32 to create jobs, energy savings

From No On Valero [Facebook], the good folks at the California Air Resource Board (ARB) have just posted a report on the jobs, energy savings and economic growth created by AB 32, California's carbon pricing plan. From the report summary:

• Fuel expenditures drop by 4.9 percent in 2020, with a total cost savings of $3.8 billion in reduced consumption of gasoline and diesel, as a result of increased investment in energy efficiency and cleaner fuels.

• Two million jobs will be created by 2020, the result of a sustained growth in labor demand of .9 percent each year, which is consistent with the business-as-usual case.

• The economy, including personal income, will continue to grow at a rate of 2.4 percent per year.

• Offsets in a cap-and-trade program help to reduce costs.

• Divergence from the AB 32 Scoping Plan (i.e. limiting requirements for oil companies or utilities), increases costs and shifts them to Californians and small businesses.

Makes you wonder why Meg Whitman, Republican frontrunner for governor and apparent tax-evader extraordinaire, opposes this visionary environmental legislation and is running on a platform of repeal.