First Name
Last Name
Email**
Zip

**Required

Which free subscriptions would you like?

Weekday*
Weekend Comprehensive**
Weekend Short Edition***

Check the editions you wish to receive
(The days EE News goes out sometimes vary.)
*(Tu, Th) Breaking climate stories
**(Sunday) Week in review and new stories
***(Sunday) Top stories of the week

hide details

Obama's Nuclear Loan Guarantee Plan Draws Broad Opposition. By Wendy Koch, USA Today, February 1, 2010. "A campaign is already underway to oppose the tripling of loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants, included in President Obama's 2011 budget unveiled on Monday. A bevy of environmental, taxpayer and scientific groups -- plus a scholar at the conservative Heritage Foundation -- are criticizing Obama's proposal to increase loan guarantees for new nuclear plants from $18.5 billion to $54.5 billion. The guarantees could bolster GOP support for his bill to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which passed the House of Representatives but is pending in the Senate. In a letter to Obama, four groups - the National Taxpayers Union, Taxpayers for Common Sense, the George Marshall Institute and the Non-Proliferation Education Center -- oppose an expansion of loan guarantees for new nuclear plants: 'With hundreds of billions in bailouts already on the shoulders of U.S. taxpayers, the country cannot afford to move forward with a program that could easily become the black hole for hundreds of billions more.'" 

Chu Announces Commission on Nuclear Waste. Press Release, U.S. DOE, January 29, 2010. "As part of the Obama Administration's commitment to restarting America's nuclear industry, U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu on January 29 announced the formation of a Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future to provide recommendations for developing a safe, long-term solution to managing the Nation's used nuclear fuel and nuclear waste. The Commission is being co-chaired by former Congressman Lee Hamilton and former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft. In light of the Administration's decision not to proceed with the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, President Obama has directed Secretary Chu to establish the Commission to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. The Commission will provide advice and make recommendations on issues including alternatives for the storage, processing, and disposal of civilian and defense spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste."  

White House Budget Would Kill Tax Breaks for Oil, Gas and Coal Industries. By Ben Geman, The Hill, February 1, 2010. "The White House calls for the end of nearly $40 billion in tax beaks for oil, gas and coal companies in its budget proposal released on Monday. The tax effort is sure to prompt outcry from industry groups, which have long argued that ending the subsidies will stymie investments in domestic energy production. The fiscal year 2011 budget plan calls for repealing $38.8 billion worth of tax breaks for oil, natural gas and coal companies over a decade, according to the White House. President Barack Obama's first budget plan a year ago called for cutting $31.5 billion in oil and gas industry incentives, including a repeal of the industry's ability to claim a lucrative domestic manufacturing tax break. Congress did not act on the proposals, which are opposed by a mix of Republicans and Democrats representing oil and gas-producing states. The call for ending the tax breaks comes after the White House signaled concessions to the oil and nuclear lobbies -- and their Capitol Hill allies -- in an effort to advance a bipartisan climate and energy bill." 

In State of the Union Speech Obama Focuses on Nukes, Offshore Drilling and Biofuels. Commentary by David Roberts, Grist, January 28, 2009. "On the subjects of climate and energy, he began well, introducing the eminently sensible notion that the U.S. needs to get cracking on creating clean energy jobs lest we have our lunch eaten by China, Germany, and India. 'I do not accept second place for the United States of America,' he thundered. Well good then! What does that mean? This was the opportunity. There are thousands of stories he could have told: about the burgeoning interest in energy efficiency and building retrofits,  the cheapest and most labor-intensive way to reduce emissions;  the astoundingly fast spread of distributed energy, driven by innovative financing models; the rapid growth and falling costs of wind and solar thermal power; the spread of bright green, low-carbon, walkable cities, where people benefit by living more sustainable lives. There are so many fascinating, inspiring, untold stories around energy right now. This was a real chance to open the public's eyes to the amazing revolution happening around them -- a revolution that can benefit them, employ them, and inspire them. Instead 'what it means' was, in order: nukes, offshore oil and gas drilling, biofuels, 'clean coal,' and ... well, that's it. That's right, in listing what 'clean energy' means the president did not mention renewable energy. That's just stunning. It's 2010 and renewable energy isn't even an afterthought?

"There were a few bright moments. First, the focus on clean energy jobs and 21st century competition is good, even if filled it out with 19th century energy sources that don't actually create many jobs. It's good that Obama is opening up an ideological space for non-greens to get excited about clean energy: 'the nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy. And America must be that nation.' Perfect line... The speech really caught fire toward the end, when he left behind substance and started talking process. I loved that he called out Republicans: 'Neither party should delay or obstruct every single bill just because they can.' I loved that he called out Democrats: 'we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve problems, not run for the hills.' I love the rhetoric of leadership, of seizing history, of tackling big problems and accomplishing big things... But, he's got to put some cards on the table, get in the mix, risk losing a little bit of his cool and composure. Otherwise he runs the danger of having his legacy be little more than vast and unrealized hopes." Video, 70 min.  

Obama Sets Aside Curbing Greenhouse Gases in Talk with House Republicans. By Ben Geman, The Hill, January 29, 2010. "President Barack Obama avoided talking about mandatory greenhouse gas curbs that are deeply unpopular within the GOP caucus Friday at the House Republican retreat. Instead, Obama emphasized his support for 'clean coal' and nuclear power, issues more popular with the GOP, in talking about climate change legislation. Obama, echoing his State of the Union speech, is emphasizing common ground with Republicans as he seeks a bipartisan climate and energy deal that's an iffy election-year proposition. But in doing so, Obama and his advisers appear to be underplaying their support for cap-and-trade proposals that require reduction of emissions linked to global warming." Video, 86 min. Transcript. 

SEC Votes for More Disclosure About Climate Risks. By Siobhan Hughes, DowJones, January 27,2010. "A divided U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday voted to encourage companies to disclose the effects of climate change on their business, bringing a partisan debate over global warming into a new arena. Democrats and Republicans split over approving the guidance in a 3-2 vote. Democrats portrayed the action as clarifying existing disclosure requirements... 'We are not opining on whether the world's climate is changing, at what pace it might be changing or due to what causes,' SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro said. But she said that the guidance 'will help to ensure that our disclosure rules are consistently applied, regardless of the political sensitivity of the issue at hand, so that investors get reliable information'... 'I can only conclude that the purpose of the release is to place the imprimatur of the commission on the agenda of the social environmental policy lobby, an agenda that falls outside of our expertise and beyond our fundamental mission of investor protection,' said Kathy Casey, a Republican commissioner."

President Obama Sets Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Target for Federal Operations. Press Release, White House, January 29, 2010. "President Barack Obama today announced on Friday that the Federal Government will reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution by 28% by 2020.  Reducing and reporting GHG pollution, as called for in Executive Order 13514 on Federal Sustainability, will ensure that the Federal Government leads by example in building the clean energy economy. Actions taken under this Executive Order will spur clean energy investments that create new private-sector jobs, drive long-term savings, build local market capacity, and foster innovation and entrepreneurship in clean energy industries. As the single largest energy consumer in the U.S. economy, the Federal Government spent more than $24.5 billion on electricity and fuel in 2008 alone. Achieving the Federal GHG pollution reduction target will reduce Federal energy use by the equivalent of 646 trillion BTUs, equal to 205 million barrels of oil, and taking 17 million cars off the road for one year. This is also equivalent to a cumulative total of $8 to $11 billion in avoided energy costs through 2020... As a next step, the Office of Management and Budget will validate and score each agency's sustainability plan, assuring a long-term return on investment to the American taxpayer. To ensure accountability, annual progress will be measured and reported online to the public." 

U.S. Submits Pledge to Reduce Emissions by 17% by 2020. By Juliet Eilperin, WashPost, January 29, 2010. "The United States pledged Thursday to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 17% by 2020 from 2005 levels under an international climate agreement, though it made its commitment contingent on passing legislation at home. The Obama administration submitted its much-anticipated reduction target to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat under the Copenhagen Accord, a non-binding deal brokered by the United States last month at the U.N.-sponsored climate talks. Under the deal President Obama helped secure in Copenhagen, major emitters of greenhouse gases are expected to 'inscribe' their reduction targets by Jan. 31."

hide details

Big Nations File Emission Cuts Targets. By Fiona Harvey, FT, January 31, 2010. "Most of the world's big economies on Sunday filed their targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions with the UN, meeting the deadline set in Copenhagen... Many countries submitted their official targets in the form of a range. Australia, for instance, will cut its emissions by between 5% and 25% by 2020, depending on what other countries agree. In contrast, the Maldives, the island state in the Indian ocean threatened by rising sea levels, has pledged to go carbon neutral by 2020, cutting its net carbon dioxide emissions by 100%. This means diplomats will spend much of the next year trying to persuade countries to move to the upper end of their range" 

Countries Rated for Environmental Performance in New Report. Press Release, Yale, January 28, 2010. "Iceland leads the world in addressing pollution control and natural resource management challenges, according to the 2010 Environmental Performance Index (EPI) produced by a team of environmental experts at Yale University and Columbia University. This is the third edition of the EPI, which has been revisited biannually since 2006. Released on January 28 at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2010, the EPI ranks 163 countries on their performance across 25 metrics aggregated into ten categories including: environmental health, air quality, water resource management, biodiversity and habitat, forestry, fisheries, agriculture, and climate change.  

"Iceland's top-notch performance derives from its high scores on environmental public health, controlling greenhouse gas emissions, and reforestation. Other top performers include Switzerland, Costa Rica, Sweden, and Norway -- all of which have made substantial investments in environmental infrastructure, pollution control, and policies designed to move toward long-term sustainability. Occupying the bottom five positions are Togo, Angola, Mauritania, the Central African Republic, and Sierra Leone -- impoverished countries that lack basic environmental amenities and policy capacity. The United States places 61st in the 2010 EPI, with strong results on some issues, such as provision of safe drinking water and forest sustainability, and weak performance on other issues including greenhouse gas emissions and several aspects of local air pollution. This ranking puts the United States significantly behind other industrialized nations like the United Kingdom (14th), Germany (17th), and Japan (20th)...The United States' ranking does not reflect the recent policy activities of the Obama Administration, as the 2010 EPI builds on data from before 2009." 

World Economic Forum Ends With Little Consensus, But Pledges for Humanitarian Aid. By Tim Weber, BBC, January 31, 2010. "The World Economic Forum in Davos, the annual meeting of some of the world's most powerful business leaders and politicians ended with few new plans or real achievements. There was agreement though that job creation and free trade had to be key ingredients of any economic recovery. Larry Summers, economics adviser to US President Barack Obama, probably coined the most memorable phrase of this year's Davos when he said the world was experiencing a 'statistical economic recovery, but a human recession'... Arguably the most tangible result of Davos was probably a series of commitments to humanitarian causes. Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates and his wife Melinda made the most spectacular announcement, pledging $10 Billion over the next 10 years to help research, develop and deliver vaccines for the world's poorest countries. Many business leaders also made detailed promises on how they or their companies would help Haiti to cope in the aftermath of the earthquake. This was not a normal year for Davos - it had few outcomes, but an intensity of discussion and debate that is unusual even for this high-powered event." 

Pachauri Says He Will Not Step Down from IPCC. BBC, January 25, 2010. "The chairman of the UN's climate science body said he would not resign in the wake of a row about a mistake on glaciers that appeared in a key report. Rajendra Pachauri told BBC News: 'I am not going to stand down, I am going to stand up.' The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) admitted that it had made a mistake in asserting that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035. Critics say the mistake has damaged the scientific credibility of the IPCC. IPCC vice-chairman Jean-Pascal van Ypersele has admitted that the inclusion of the 2035 date in a key report was a mistake. The date appeared in the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (4AR), which read: 'Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world... the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high.' A number of scientists had recently disputed the date, after a row erupted in India late last year in the run-up to the Copenhagen climate summit... Dr Pachauri said the inclusion of the 2035 date in the 4AR, which was published in 2007, was 'a case of human error,' adding that it was unfortunate that it had happened. 'However, let me emphasize that this does not in any way detract from the fact that the glaciers are melting, and this is a problem that we need to be deeply concerned about.'"

hide details

Climate Bill Drives Energy Companies to Spend More. By Jim Snyder, The Hill, January 31, 2010. "Energy companies significantly increased their lobbying expenditures last year as Congress considered controversial climate change legislation that promised to rearrange the nation's energy mix. The Edison Electric Institute, which represents for-profit electric utilities, spent around $10.5 million in 2009 to lobby Congress. That was more than a 40% increase from the $7.5 million the group spent in 2008... The American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry's main lobby, increased its advocacy budget to $7.3 million over the $4.8 million it had spent in 2008... Meanwhile, America's Natural Gas Alliance, which represents 28 natural gas exploration and production companies, paid K Street $1.6 million in 2009. The alliance spent that much in just the last half of the year in hopes of reshaping the House-passed climate bill that natural gas companies contend is too generous to the coal industry. It wasn't just fossil fuel groups spending more to influence lawmakers... The American Wind Energy Association, which lobbied aggressively in support of an economic stimulus package that included $80 billion in clean energy funding, spent more than $3.3 million to lobby Congress and the administration. In 2008, the group spent just under $1.7 million on lobbying. The Solar Energy Industries Association also spent more, although the increase was less dramatic. The trade group spent $1.6 million on lobbying, compared with the $1.4 million it spent in 2008." 

Kerry: 'It's Open How You Price Carbon;' Graham: 'Carbon Tax Has No Support'. Reuters, January 28, 2010. "U.S. climate envoy Todd Stern gave notice to the United Nations that the country will aim for a 17 percent emissions cut in carbon dioxide and other gases blamed for global warming by 2020, from 2005 levels. The move... was conditional on other countries also submitting their pollution-cutting targets to the accord, Stern said. The condition was likely aimed at fence-sitters in Congress who do not want to see the United States commit to steps on fighting global warming unless other major polluters like China and India go along. John Kerry, the Democratic U.S. senator working on a compromise climate bill, insisted that Congress would put a price on carbon, forcing companies to pay for their global warming pollution... But he followed the lead of President Barack Obama, who called for a comprehensive climate plan during Wednesday's State of the Union speech without mentioning one of its most controversial and complicated elements, cap-and-trade, which would allow companies to trade rights to pollute. 'It's open to how you price carbon,' Kerry told Reuters. 'People need to relax and look at all the ways you might price carbon. We're not pinned down to one approach.' Kerry, who is working on the bill with Republican Senator Lindsey Graham and independent Senator Joe Lieberman, strongly rejected the idea that progress had bogged down... Graham said cap-and-dividend, which would mandate carbon emission reductions while limiting the trading of pollution permits, is under review along with other options. Under that system, polluters would be required to buy carbon credits in auctions and consumers would receive most proceeds. A carbon tax has no support in Congress, Graham said." 

Conning the Climate: Inside the Carbon-Trading Shell Game. By Mark Shapiro, Harpers, February issue. "Carbon trading is now the fastest-growing commodities market on earth. Since 2005, when major greenhouse-gas polluters among the Kyoto signatories were issued caps on their emissions and permitted to buy credits to meet those caps, there have been more than $300 billion worth of carbon transactions. Major financial institutions such as Goldman Sachs, Barclays, and Citibank now host carbon-trading desks in London; traders who once speculated on oil and gas are betting on the most insidious side effects of our fossil fuel-based economy. Over the next decade, if President Obama and other advocates can institute a cap-and-trade system in the United States, the demand for carbon credits could explode into a $2 to $3 trillion market, according to the market-analysis firm Point Carbon... 

"Carbon exists as a commodity only through the decisions of politicians and bureaucrats, who determine both the demand, by setting emissions limits, and the supply, by establishing criteria for offsets. It was the United States that sculpted the cap-and-trade system during the Kyoto negotiations, before pulling out of the accord and leaving the rest of the world to implement the scheme. Since then, most of the world's major political, financial, and environmental interests have aligned themselves with the idea, because of its potential to generate profits out of adversity and to avoid the difficult economic decisions posed by climate change. Now the Obama Administration and the Democratic Congress -- along with most American companies, which see cap-and-trade as the friendliest regulation they could hope for -- want to rejoin the world and multiply the market. That market is, in essence, an elaborate shell game, a disappearing act that nicely serves the immediate interests of the world's governments but fails to meet the challenges of our looming environmental crisis."

hide details

Ballot Initiative Would Curb California Efforts. By Margot Roosevelt, LATimes, January 25, 2010. "So what happens if California delays the implementation of its landmark global warming law, AB 32? The state's nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office has done the math on Measure 94, a proposed ballot measure, and assessed the fallout. Its verdict?  The measure would cripple but not completely dismantle the state's efforts to slash its greenhouse gas emissions; it could lead to bigger short-term profits for some businesses, but dampen investments in clean technology and green jobs. The legislative analyst report, the first step in qualifying an initiative for the ballot, was sent to the California attorney general Tuesday. He has 15 days to give the initiative a title and a summary. Once that happens, proponents can begin gathering the 433,971 valid signatures required to place Measure 94 on the November ballot. An attorney general's spokeswoman said that is likely to happen on Feb 5.  Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown, an advocate for climate curbs, is unlikely to retain proponents' current title: 'California Jobs Initiative.' 

"Assembly Bill 32, adopted in 2006, would require the state to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions -- which mostly come from burning fossil fuels in power plants, factories and cars -- to 1990 levels by 2020. That would be an effective cut of about 15% below today's levels. The California Air Resources Board is expected to adopt a cap-and-trade program by the end of the year, which would limit the amount each industry can emit, but allow companies to buy and sell emissions credits to lower their costs. Measure 94 would delay implementing the law until California's unemployment drops to 5.5% for four consecutive quarters (two other versions in the pipeline would delay the law until joblessness sinks even lower). The state's current unemployment rate is 12.4%. The measure is proposed by Assemblyman Dan Logue (R-Marysville), Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Granite Bay) and Ted Costa, of the People's Advocate Initiative Committee (the anti-tax, Prop. 13 folks), and California tea-party activists." 

Massachusetts Announces Aggressive Energey Efficiency Measures. By Jay Lindsay, AP, January 30, 2010. "The state of Massachusetts on Friday announced ambitious energy efficiency plans for utilities that aim to triple the electricity conservation of previous plans and save utility customers $6 billion by 2012. The plans will make Massachusetts the country's top-ranked state in energy efficiency savings per capita, according to the state Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. State energy officials also say the plans will enable Massachusetts to supply 30% of its electricity through improved efficiency by 2020 -- a huge leap from 8% today." 

State Regulators Strongly Distrust Federal Transmission Siting. By Katherine Ling, Greenwire, January 25, 2010. "State regulators and environmental groups fear federal authority to site transmission lines would create a process that would emphasize infrastructure over costs and environmental benefits, according to a survey unveiled today by the University of Texas Center for Energy Economics and the Terra Group, a stakeholder relations consultant. The nine-month survey [PDF, 20 pp] of 11 state regulatory commissions and major national environmental organizations found that while both groups admit that the U.S. transmission system should be improved both for reliability and environmental purposes, they believe placing that power in the hands of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will lead to overly expensive lines that are not all necessarily needed. Many of the state regulators surveyed said they do not believe FERC could adequately balance local costs and needs versus the needs of a few states, the report says." 

Oregon Voters Approve New Taxes. By Harry Esteve, Oregonian, January 26, 2010. "Oregon voters bucked decades of anti-tax and anti-Salem sentiment Tuesday, raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy to prevent further erosion of public schools and other state services. The tax measures passed easily, with late returns showing a 54% to 46% ratio. Measure 66 raises taxes on households with taxable income above $250,000, and Measure 67 sets higher minimum taxes on corporations and increases the tax rate on upper-level profits. The results triggered waves of relief from educators and legislative leaders, who were facing an estimated $727 million shortfall in the current two-year budget if the measures failed."

hide details

Wind Power Grew 39% in 2009. By Jad Mouawad, NYTimes, January 26, 2010. "Despite a crippling recession and tight credit markets, the American wind power industry grew at a blistering pace in 2009, adding 39% more capacity. The country is close to the point where 2% of its electricity will come from wind turbines... The American Wind Energy Association, in its annual report to be released on Tuesday, said the amount of capacity added last year, 9,900 megawatts, was the largest on record, and was 18 percent above the capacity added in 2008, also a banner year. The group said the growth of wind power was helped by the federal stimulus package that passed a year ago, which extended a tax credit and provided other investment incentives for the industry. But the group warned that the growth could slow. Much of the wind development in 2009 was caused by momentum from 2008, as huge turbines ordered then were delivered to wind farms. In 2009, the recession idled many manufacturers and new orders weakened, which could portend an installation slowdown this year." 

Oil Demand Has Already Peaked in Developed World: International Energy Agency. By Alex Lawler, Reuters, January 28, 2010. "Oil use in rich industrialized countries will never return to 2006 and 2007 levels because of more fuel efficiency and the use of alternatives, the chief economist of the International Energy Agency said on Thursday. The bold prediction, while made previously by some analysts, is significant because the IEA advises 28 countries on energy policy and its oil demand forecasts are closely watched by traders and policymakers. 'When we look at the OECD countries -- the U.S., Europe and Japan -- I think the level of demand that we have seen in 2006 and 2007, we will never see again,' Fatih Birol told Reuters... Birol said the economic crisis had played a role in curbing OECD demand but the main reasons were more efficient cars and the increasing use of electricity and gas instead of oil in areas outside transport." 

Radioactive Water Leaks in Vermont and Elsewhere Raise Growing Concern. By David Gram, AP, February 1, 2010. "Radioactive tritium, a carcinogen discovered in potentially dangerous levels in groundwater at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, has now tainted at least 27 of the nation's 104 nuclear reactors -- raising concerns about how it is escaping from the aging nuclear plants. The leaks -- many from deteriorating underground pipes -- come as the nuclear industry is seeking and obtaining federal license renewals, casting itself as a clean-green alternative to power plants that burn fossil fuels. Tritium, found in nature in tiny amounts and a product of nuclear fission, has been linked to cancer if ingested, inhaled or absorbed through the skin in large amounts. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said Monday that new tests at a monitoring well on Vermont Yankee's site in Vernon registered 70,500 picocuries per liter, more than three times the federal safety standard of 20,000 picocuries per liter... Officials of the New Orleans-based Entergy Corp., which owns the plant in Vernon in Vermont's southeast corner, have admitted misleading state regulators and lawmakers by saying the plant did not have the kind of underground pipes that could leak tritium into groundwater... Vermont, with a strong anti-nuclear movement, is the only state in the country where the Legislature decides whether to relicense a nuclear plant. Vermont Yankee's current 40-year license is up in 2012, and Entergy is asking for 20 more years." 

A Nuclear Critic Draws a Lesson from France's Success. By Matthew L. Wald, NYTimes, January 19, 2010. "A new statistical analysis of an almost-secret topic -- what it costs to build nuclear reactors in France -- may have some lessons for a 'nuclear renaissance' in the United States. France, nuclear advocates often point out, gets about 80% of its electricity from nuclear power, or roughly quadruple the proportion that this country does... France, of course, built its reactors as matter of national policy, without regard to competition in the electric field; in the United States, most were built by private companies that worried about cost. And it is hard to say how successful the French were. The French national utility, Électricité de France, has never been open about what the plants cost to build. But a researcher at the International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis in Vienna analyzed a 2000 report that included the French utility's year-by-year expenses and correlated this to construction schedules. He concluded [PDF, 36 pp] that construction cost at the end of the period was about 3.5 times higher than at the beginning,  

"That caught the attention of Charles Komanoff, an energy analyst based in New York who began analyzing American power plant costs in the 1970s and is the author of a 1981 book [PDF, 335] comparing nuclear and coal plants of that era. Mr. Komanoff re-analyzed the data [PDF, 11pp], concentrating not only on the beginning and the end, but also the middle. He found that while costs rose over the period -- he put it at 60% -- they also fell for certain classes of reactors. One lesson, he said, was that 'building more plants in a short period of time creates a potential to reduce or at least control costs.' His findings echo what American utilities say, that building a 'first-of-a-kind' plant is expensive and later units are cheaper. But for Mr. Komanoff to reach a similar conclusion is significant, because he was a sharp critic of the industry in the construction boom of the 1980s and is no fan of nuclear power now... Putting a tax on carbon emissions, which might also spur nuclear construction, would be a smarter overall strategy than specifying nuclear plants, he said."

hide details

USDA Weighs Genetic Engineering Commercial Forests. By Paul Voosen, Greenwire, January 29, 2010. "While the practice of splicing foreign DNA into food crops has become common in corn and soy, few companies or researchers have dared to apply genetic engineering to plants that provide an essential strut of the U.S. economy, trees. But that will soon change. Two industry giants, International Paper Co. and MeadWestvaco Corp., are planning to transform plantation forests of the southeastern United States by replacing native pine with genetically engineered eucalyptus, a rapidly growing Australian tree that in its conventional strains now dominates the tropical timber industry. The companies' push into genetically modified trees, led by their joint biotech venture, ArborGen, looks to overcome several hurdles for the first time. Most prominently, they are banking on a controversial gene splice that restricts trees' ability to reproduce, meant to allay fears of bioengineered eucalyptus turning invasive and overtaking native forests... Yet many questions remain about the effectiveness of the fertility system used by ArborGen, which, according to leading scientists, has never been rigorously studied in multiyear trials to prove that it can effectively control plants' spread. More research must be conducted before such systems are relied upon to restrict pollen and seed spread, they say... Given the uncertainty involved, however, the Nature Conservancy has recommended to USDA that ArborGen be allowed fewer acres and trees to flower, and none in Florida."

Study Finds Extra CO2 Enabling Trees to Grow Faster. By Leslie Kaufman, NYTimes, February 2, 2010. "Forests in the eastern United States appear to be growing faster in response to rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, a new study has found. The study centered on trees in mixed hardwood stands on the western edge of the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland that are representative of much of the those on the Eastern Seaboard. All are growing two to four times as fast as normal, according to a study published in Tuesday's issue of The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. After controlling for other variables, scientists concluded that the change resulted largely from the increase in carbon dioxide... Geoffrey G. Parker, a co-author of the paper and an ecologist with the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center in Edgewater, Md., said his research indicated that the local forests were adapting to the rise in carbon dioxide by absorbing more. 'My guess is that they are already sopping up some of the extra carbon,' he said. But Dr. Parker said it was unclear whether the trend could be sustained. 'We don't think this can persist for too long because other limiting factors will come into play, like water availability and soil nutrients,' he said."

Global Warming Opens up Arctic for Undersea Cable. By Dan Joling, AP, January 21, 2010. "Global warming has melted so much Arctic ice that a telecommunication group is moving forward with a project that was unthinkable just a few years ago: laying underwater fiber optic cable between Tokyo and London by way of the Northwest Passage. The proposed system would nearly cut in half the time it takes to send messages from the United Kingdom to Asia, said Walt Ebell, CEO of Kodiak-Kenai Cable Co. The route is the shortest underwater path between Tokyo and London."

hide details

Sierra Club Names New Executive Director. Press Release, Sierra Club, January 28, 2010. "Michael Brune, a respected leader whose strategic vision and hard-charging charm have driven a number of important environmental victories, has been named executive director of the Sierra Club, the nation's oldest, largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization. Brune, 38, takes leadership as the club, founded in 1892 by iconic conservationist John Muir, plunges headlong into the most important environmental battle of the 21st century, notching up dramatic successes against greenhouse gas-polluters and helping create the clean energy future that is the best defense against potentially catastrophic climate disruption. Brune's alignment with this ambitious mission is reflected in his critically acclaimed book, Coming Clean -- Breaking America's Addiction to Oil and Coal. Published by Sierra Club Books in 2008, the volume details a plan for a new green economy that will create well-paying jobs, promote environmental justice and bolster national security. 

Brune... comes to the Sierra Club from the Rainforest Action Network, where in his seven years as executive director he earned a reputation for using bold but respectful confrontation to encourage corporate responsibility. At age 26, he led a historic consumer-education campaign that ultimately persuaded Home Depot to stop selling wood from endangered forests. Time magazine called that victory 'the top environmental story of 1999.' Under Brune's leadership, Rainforest Action Network went on to win more than a dozen other key commitments from America's largest corporations, including Citi, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Kinko's, Boise, and Lowe's... As the Sierra Club's 6th executive director, Brune assumes a position formerly held by such legendary environmentalists as David Brower and Michael McCloskey. He succeeds Carl Pope, who, since taking leadership of the Club in 1992, has steadily increased its political clout and intellectual heft while building an influential base of more than 1.4 million members and supporters in all 50 states. Pope will maintain his 37-year tenure with the Club in the role of executive chairman." 

5 Cent Bag Tax Having Great Results in Washington DC. By Matt Yglesias, ThinkProgress, January 25, 2010. "There's a supermarket on my block and I'm a terrible planner, so I go to the supermarket a lot. Consequently, I've had plenty of opportunity to gather anecdata on the impact of DC's new initiative to impose a five cent tax on plastic grocery bags. My key observations are that I hear a ton of whining about how terrible this new tax is, and also a lot of people engaging in tax-avoiding behavior -- canvass bags, cramming stuff into backpacks, carrying items by hand. In other words, it looks to be a stunning success! The five cent fee is actually very small but people really hate paying it. Apparently it's led to something like a 50% reduction in bag usage."

West Virginian Tree Sitters Halt Mountaintop Blasting for 9 Days. Press Release, Climate Ground Zero, January 29, 2010. "After blocking Massey Energy's operations on the Bee Tree Permit for nine days, Amber Nitchman, 19, and Eric Blevins, 28 descended from their respective trees. They had occupied the two oak trees... to protest mountaintop removal and the blasting of Coal River Mountain. Upon descent, they were immediately arrested by West Virginia State Troopers. The sitters' decision to leave the trees was made in light of the recent drop in temperature... The tree sit represents Climate Ground Zero's most sustained intervention in mountaintop removal mining operations since its campaign of nonviolent direct action began last February. Volunteers know that the fight is far from over and expect work to commence on the Bee Tree site immediately. However, they see this tree sit as a victory. 'It halted blasting for nine days. I think they've wildly succeeded with their goals,' said Climate Ground Zero volunteer Mike Bowersox. In a final communication from her perch, Nitchman captured the group's resolve. 'Its not over until the blasting is stopped,' she said."

Daniel Lippman: Citizen Journalist. By Chris Wallace, FoxNews, February 1, 2010, audio and transcript (which could use Daniel's corrections!) "Daniel Lippman a nineteen year old sophomore at George Washington University. Practices what he called citizen journalism. Which means he's a self appointed editor of some of the nation's top reporters... Lippman writes reporters telling them there's a factual error in their story. Or a misspelling. Or suggesting a lead they may want to check out is it... Most of them love his interest and respect his comments." Editor's note: CCC certainly appreciates Daniel's daily input to EE News. 

Ross Gelbspan: 'In Conclusion'. HeatisOnline.org, January, 2010, video, 15 min. A journalist's assessment of the economic, social and political implications of the climate crisis. Ross Gelbspan is the author of two seminal books on the climate crisis: The Heat is On and Boiling Point. He is also a member of the CCC steering committee. We highly recommend watching this video.