Existing Pinnacle Wind Farm in Mineral County, West Virginia

From an Article by Michelle Lewis, Electrek Communications, January 26, 2021

West Virginia is getting a 115 MW wind farm, which will increase the state’s wind power by 15%. Here’s why that’s a really big deal – and why West Virginia’s governor, Jim Justice, is so excited.

West Virginia wind power — First, let’s check out West Virginia’s new wind farm. Construction is underway on the $200 million Black Rock Wind project. It consists of 23 turbines that produce 5 megawatts each on the Grant-Mineral county line, in the northeastern region of the state. Green energy developer Clearway Energy is building Black Rock Wind, which will provide power to Toyota and American Electric Power.

Clearway, which already operates the Pinnacle Wind Farm (pictured above) in Mineral County, intends to have Black Rock Wind operating before the end of this year.

WVMetroNews reports that Clearway Energy CEO Craig Cornelius says that $52 million of the $200 million will be spent on payroll and services during the construction process.

Construction will create 200 union jobs, and permanent positions will be advertised later this year. Clearway is planning a pilot project training program for workers who have coal mining or other energy experience.

West Virginia’s coal dependency is changing

West Virginia is coal country. According to the US Energy Information Administration, as of 2018, it was the second-largest coal producer in the US after Wyoming and ranked fifth among the states in total US energy production – that’s 5%.

Coal-fired electric power plants accounted for 91% of West Virginia’s electricity net generation in 2019. Renewable energy resources — primarily hydroelectric power and wind energy — contributed a meager 6%, in contrast.

West Virginia depends on the fossil fuel for jobs and revenue – but coal is a lost cause. Maybe that’s why Governor Jim Justice (R-WV) sounds so excited – maybe even a little relieved? – when he announced Black Rock Wind yesterday. Here’s an excerpt of what he said:

Gosh, this is so necessary that we have within our state, and this is really good stuff. Today we’re announcing a great move by Blackrock, a great move in the State of West Virginia, and so many, many, many good things that are about to happen here.

We absolutely do not run off and leave our [fossil fuel] jobs, but at the same time, we absolutely want to embrace all the other ways we can move forward with manufacturing and great jobs.

The United Nations Framework Convention (UNFCCC) was established at the first Rio Earth Summit in 1992. The 26th Conference of the Parties (COP-26) is set for Glasgow in November 2021

From an Article by Mary Anne Hitt, Sierra Magazine, January – February, 2021

Finally, we engaged millions of people in the work for climate justice. Let’s be clear: None of this was easy. As we sit here in 2030, the clean and just energy future that we’ve built together has been the result of millions of people stepping up in their own states and communities.

I know all this seemed impossible back in 2020, when it felt as if everything was falling apart and our climate might be doomed. But everything we did mattered. All of it.

We now know that we’re going to keep global temperature rise below the dangerous tipping points that climate scientists warned us about a decade ago.

We can look our kids in the eye and tell them that we didn’t let them down. Now we can watch their dreams unfold.

As all our great spiritual traditions have taught us, new beginnings are often born during our most difficult days. We created something beautiful out of those hard days in 2020.

Of course we have more work to do. But we’re doing that work from a foundation we built together. I can’t wait to see what we’ll do next.

££ This concludes this Article series here on FrackCheckWV.net.

This Article appeared in the January/February edition of SIERRA with the headline “A Love Letter From the Clean Energy Future.”

#####. #####. #####. #####. #####.

See also: Paris Climate Agreement Q&A | Center for Climate and Energy Solutions …. What happens next?

The negotiations on the Paris rulebook at COP 24 proved in some ways more challenging than those leading to the Paris Agreement as parties faced a mix of technical and political challenges and, in some respects, higher stakes in seeking to elaborate the agreement’s broad provisions through detailed guidance. Delegates adopted rules and procedures on mitigation, transparency, adaptation, finance, periodic stocktakes, and other Paris provisions. But they were unable to agree on rules for Article 6, which provides for voluntary cooperation among parties in implementing their NDCs, including through the use of market-based approaches.

Instead, parties deferred those decisions to COP 25.

In September 2019, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres convened a climate summit in New York to rally countries to higher ambition in 2020. The world’s largest emitters failed to present substantive plans for greater emissions reductions but 65 countries expressed their intention to enhance their NDCs by the end of 2020. With the launch of a “Climate Ambition Alliance,” 66 countries announced their intention to develop plans to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.

A marathon COP 25 was held in Madrid, Spain, from December 2 to December 15, 2019, with Chile retaining the presidency. Governments reaffirmed a prior call for parties to reflect “their highest possible ambition” when presenting a new round of NDCs in 2020, but they failed again to adopt rules for international carbon trading under Article 6, the last major piece of the “rulebook” for implementing the Paris Agreement. Additionally, vulnerable developing countries expressed growing exasperation at the scarce resources available to them to cope with worsening climate impacts.

Due to the impacts of the global novel coronavirus pandemic in 2020, the UNFCCC postponed most of its major climate meetings until 2021, including COP 26. The COVID-19 pandemic has also affected countries’ efforts to put forward the new or enhanced NDCs due in 2020.

On December 12, 2020, the fifth anniversary of the adoption of the Paris Agreement, the UN, France, and the UK, co-hosted a virtual global climate summit, the Climate Ambition Summit.

The UK currently plans to host COP 26 from November 1-12, 2021, in Glasgow, Scotland.

... take me home down country roads ...

Article from Staff Reports, Charleston Gazette Mail, September 22, 2020

A Citizens Guide to Climate Change, a 16-page report on the impending climate crisis and summaries of potential solutions proposed to counter it, has been released by the newly formed West Virginia Climate Alliance.

“This guide is the beginning of a dialog with West Virginians,” said Charleston’s Perry Bryant, a member of the Alliance. “Regardless of who wins the election this November, climate change legislation is likely to be considered in 2021. West Virginians need to understand the range of options for addressing climate change and how these options will affect our state and its people.”

Strategies under consideration for mitigating the effects of climate change are covered in the guide, including carbon fees and taxes, cap-and-trade pricing for carbon, fuel economy standards and tax incentives for low-carbon technologies. Key components of the Green New Deal are also discussed.

According to the guide’s introduction, information used in its compilation is “scientifically valid,” and relies heavily on research from government agencies. The guide was produced for “people who are concerned about climate change and want more information.”

“We’re noticing more West Virginians seeking to have a better understanding of climate change,” said Angie Rosser, director of the West Virginia Rivers Coalition, one of the groups that make up the West Virginia Climate Alliance. “It’s a complex issue with many implications for our state, and this guide is a starting point for people to become more informed.”

In West Virginia, climate change may have played a role in deadly flooding in June 2016, caused by a downpour severe enough to be expected only once in 1,000 years, according to the guide, citing a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration report. Some of the hottest temperatures on record for September and October were recorded last year during those months, according to the guide.

While West Virginia is located in the heart of coal country, “we believe people can help fight climate change and at the same time, treat coal miners with dignity and respect,” Bryant said.

The West Virginia Climate Alliance includes the American Friends Service Committee, Center for Energy and Sustainable Development, Citizens Climate Lobby West Virginia, League of Women Voters of West Virginia, Christians for the Mountains, Moms Clean Air Force-West Virginia, Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, Sierra Club of West Virginia, West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy, West Virginia Citizen Action Education Fund, West Virginia Interfaith Power and Light and the West Virginia Rivers Coalition.

To view A Citizen’s Guide to Climate Change, go to wvrivers.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/wvclimate.pdf

For a printed copy of the guide, or to comment on its content, contact Bryant at perrybryantwv@outlook.com

SOURCE: https://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/energy_and_environment/climate-change-guide-released-by-coalition-of-wv-environment-social-justice-groups/article_e72d325d-d2d3-5661-8df0-043afd0a8756.html

############################

See also: What is the West Virginia Center on Climate Change? — The West Virginia Center on Climate Change (“the Center” or “WV3C”) is a nonprofit organization headquartered in Morgantown and Thomas, WV. The Center is an initiative of the Friends of Blackwater (“FOB”), a regional conservation group.

Carbon dioxide & methane pollution has become the climate change problem

From an Article by David Wooley, Utility Dive, June 22, 2020

The following is a contributed article by David Wooley, professor at the UC Berkeley Goldman School of Public Policy and Executive Director of the Center for Environmental Public Policy.

What is the future of gas in the U.S. electric power sector? Is it essential, long-term, for a reliable and economical electric supply? A new study from UC Berkeley provides the latest answer, demonstrating it is technically and economically feasible to reach 90% clean electricity by 2035 without building any new gas plants and reducing generation from existing plants by 70%, all without any increase in wholesale power costs compared to today.

Let’s clear away the myths about gas, renewables and the grid.

1. First, there is a widely circulated assumption that gas is cleaner than coal. It’s true that gas power plants produce less acid gas (SO2, NOX) and metals emissions than coal, but greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from gas are not significantly lower than coal. Methane emissions occur along the gas supply chain, from getting gas out of the ground and to market. Methane has 84 times the global warming impact of CO2 from burning coal and gas, a fact often overlooked in gas industry promotions. The fact is that gas used to make electricity is not “clean” and remains a serious problem for the climate.

2. Second, there is the question of reliability and whether we can trust a renewables-heavy grid when the sun isn’t shining. The truth is, the U.S. power grid has always been reliable using a diverse set of generation types. Today low-cost wind and solar, paired with battery storage technologies and existing hydro, nuclear and gas generation allows the U.S. to dramatically increase renewable generation, and cut fossil fuel use, without sacrificing dependability or raising costs.

3. Third, there is an old argument that gas is cheaper than renewables. Well, not anymore. In recent years, utility-scale wind and solar plants routinely out-bid gas and coal in wholesale electric markets. This is in part due to federal tax credits, but gas production also enjoys a wide range of federal subsidies, and wind and solar plant costs in many cases are already lower than gas generation even without considering the tax credits.

And finally, people often ask if renewables are only cost effective in very sunny and windy regions of Southwest and Plains states. The answer is no. Low costs are now driving a geographic expansion of renewables, making wind and solar cost-effective in all regions of the country.

The latter points are driven home by the study released last week by the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley. The 2035 Report finds that plummeting costs of zero-carbon technologies allows the U.S. electricity system to deeply decarbonize, and lower customer electricity costs compared to today. This is the first report to show that technologies widely available today can preserve a dependable grid, and achieve large employment, health and climate benefits by 2035.

The report finds that it is technically and economically feasible to do so without new fossil gas power plants. This stands in contrast to the oil and gas industry’s efforts to rapidly expand gas generation in the U.S. and globally. According to RMI, utilities and other investors have announced plans for over $70 billion in new gas-fired power plant construction through 2025 and another $30 billion for new interstate gas pipelines.

Maintaining a dependable grid with sustainable generation

The study shows that the existing fleet of domestic gas plants, operating infrequently in combination with hydro, nuclear and battery storage, is enough to support a dependable grid during times when wind, solar and battery generation is low. The 70% decrease in gas generation that would come with the transition to 90% clean electricity would drop gas’s share of U.S. electric generation from 37% to 10%.

Gas would remain a part of the electric sector, but at a much smaller level than today. This is a good thing, since methane and CO2 emission from gas production and use must decline steeply to have any chance of avoiding the worst impacts of climate change. A 90% clean electric generation sector reduces annual carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 1.6 billion tons of CO2. The GHG benefits do not stop there, since deep carbon reductions in the electric sector are a key step to decarbonize transportation and buildings.

The economic benefits of this shift are attractive. A turn away from new gas and existing coal generation in favor of renewables and storage would produce a net increase of 530,000 energy sector jobs and boost the economy with $1.7 trillion of private investment for renewables and storage. The job benefits would be widespread since utility-scale solar generation and wind are economic winners in every region and low-cost wind power’s range is expanding fast.

The job benefits make this a powerful COVID-19 recovery strategy. Most of the economic benefits can be achieved quickly, without increased government spending.

Can the U.S. really build enough renewables and storage to displace gas? Yes. This is shown by the number of utility-scale renewables projects currently in development — wholesale market interconnection queues include 544 GW of wind, solar and storage plants — and historic growth rates for other forms of power generation, such as gas.

To reach 90% clean electricity by 2035, 1,100 GW of new wind and solar need to be built, averaging about 70 GW per year. We’ve built on this scale before — the U.S. added 65 GW of natural gas generation in 2002. Moreover, the wind, solar and storage industries believe they can do it.

What’s the catch? It won’t happen without changes in federal and state energy policy. Old habits, that no longer serve current needs, die hard. America’s current electricity policy framework and market systems cannot deliver on this economic opportunity. Every day brings news of coal plant retirements, and investment in renewable energy, but policy changes can accelerate this and help support recovery from the current economic crisis.

While many states and cities are leading the country by passing policies to decarbonize by 2050, in the electric power sector we can — and must — go much faster. This study shows that targeting 2035 for deep decarbonization is possible, would increase employment and inject investment into the economy, improve public health, and go a long way toward aligning U.S. policy with climate realities.

Planning for much more solar & wind power

From a Report by Ivy Main, Power for the People VA, April 3, 2020

Virginia joins RGGI, less CO2 emissions

Virginia’s Department of Environmental Quality has already written the regulations that call for Virginia power plants to reduce emissions by 30 percent by 2030. The mechanism for achieving this involves Virginia trading with the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a regional carbon cap and trade market.

The regulations have been on hold as the result of a budget amendment passed last year, when Republicans still ruled the General Assembly. After July 1, DEQ will be able to implement the regulations, with the commonwealth participating in carbon allowance auctions as early as the last quarter of this year or the first quarter of 2021.

In addition to joining RGGI, the Clean Energy and Community Flood Preparedness Act also allows the commonwealth to earn money from the allowance auctions. The Department of Housing and Community Development will spend 50 percent of auction proceeds on “low-income efficiency programs, including programs for eligible housing developments.”

The Department of Conservation and Recreation will get 45 percent of the auction proceeds to fund flood preparedness and climate change planning and mitigation through the Virginia Community Flood Preparedness Fund. The last 5 percent of proceeds will cover administrative costs, including those for administering the auctions.

Energy efficiency savings become mandatory, not just decorations

Two years ago, the Grid Transformation and Security Act required Dominion and Appalachian Power to propose more than a billion dollars in energy efficiency spending over 10 years, but the law didn’t say the programs had to actually be effective in lowering electricity demand.

This year that changed. For the first time, Virginia will have an energy efficiency resource standard (EERS) requiring Dominion to achieve a total of 5 percent electricity savings by 2025 (using 2019 as the baseline); APCo must achieve a total of 2 percent savings. The SCC is charged with setting new targets after 2025. At least 15 percent of the costs must go to programs benefiting low-income, elderly or disabled individuals, or veterans.

The EERS comes on top of the low-income energy efficiency spending funded by RGGI auctions.

Dominion and Appalachian Power ramp up renewables and energy storage

The Clean Economy Act requires Dominion to build 16,100 megawatts of onshore wind and solar energy, and APCo to build 600 megawatts. The law also contains one of the strongest energy storage mandates in the country: 2,700 MW for Dominion, 400 MW for Appalachian Power.

Beginning in 2020, Dominion and Appalachian must submit annual plans to the SCC for new wind, solar and storage resources. We’ll have a first look at Dominion’s plans just a month from now: the SCC has told the company to take account of the Clean Economy Act and other new laws when it files its 2020 Integrated Resource Plan on May 1.

The legislation provides a strangely long lead time before the utilities must request approval of specific projects: by the end of 2023 for APCo (the first 200 MW) or 2024 for Dominion (the first 3,000 MW). But the build-out then becomes rapid, and the utilities must issue requests for proposals on at least an annual basis.

In addition to the solar and land-based wind, Dominion now has the green light for up to 3,000 MW of offshore wind from the project it is developing off Virginia Beach, and which it plans to bring online beginning in 2024. All told, the Clean Economy Act proclaims up to 5,200 MW of offshore wind by 2034 to be in the public interest.

###########################

See also: Virginia lawmakers agreed to join a regional carbon market. Here’s what happens next. – Virginia Mercury, Sarah Vogelsong, April 14, 2020

“By joining RGGI, Virginia will take part in a proven, market-based program for reducing carbon pollution in a manner that protects consumers,” Northam said in a statement Sunday. “I am proposing important refinements and I look forward to signing it into law soon.”

Clearing these political hurdles, though, is only the beginning of the administration’s work. Virginia will become a full participant in RGGI starting Jan. 1. Here’s what will happen between now and then.

The VA Legislature provides leadership keeping Gov. Northam busy signing bills

From an Update by Ivy Main, Power for the People, VA, April 3, 2020

With Democrats in charge, Virginia passed a suite of bills that establish a sturdy framework for a transition to renewable energy in the electric sector.

At the center of this transformation are the Clean Economy Act, HB1526/SB851, and the Clean Energy and Community Flood Preparedness Act, HB981/SB1027. Other new laws direct further planning, make it easier for customers to install solar, improve the process for siting wind and solar farms, and expand financing options for energy efficiency and renewable energy.

Gov. Ralph Northam has now signed these bills. The legislation takes effect on July 1. One of the strongest arguments in support of our energy transition is that it will save money for consumers.

So what happens after July 1? How does this all work? Let’s look at the way these major pieces of legislation will change the energy landscape in Virginia.

Dominion’s plans for new gas plants come to a screeching halt

Before the 2020 legislative session, Dominion’s Integrated Resource Plan included plans for as many as 14 new gas combustion turbines to be built in pairs beginning in 2022. In December, the company announced plans to build four gas peaking units totaling nearly 1,000 MW, to come online in 2023 and 2024.

But that was then, and this is now. The Clean Economy Act prohibits the SCC from issuing a certificate of convenience and necessity for any carbon-emitting generating plant until at least January 1, 2022, when the secretaries of natural resources and commerce and trade submit a report to the General Assembly “on how to achieve 100 percent carbon-free electric energy generation by 2045 at least cost to ratepayers.”

Even with no further moratorium, Dominion will find it hard to sell the SCC on the need for new gas plants on top of all the renewable energy and energy storage mandated in the Clean Economy Act. Solar and battery storage together do the same job that a gas peaker would have done — but they are required, and the gas peaker is not. Meanwhile, the energy efficiency provisions of the act mean demand should start going down, not up.

Dominion has already signaled that it recognizes the days of new gas plants are largely over. On March 24, Dominion filed a request with the SCC to be excused from considering new fossil fuel and nuclear resources in its upcoming Integrated Resource Plan filing, arguing that “significant build-out of natural gas generation facilities is not currently viable” in light of the new legislation.

Fossil fuel and biomass plants start closing

By 2024, the Clean Economy Act requires the closure of all Dominion or APCo-owned oil-fueled generating plants in Virginia over 500 MW and all coal units other than Dominion’s Virginia City Hybrid plant in Wise County and the Clover Station that Dominion co-owns with Old Dominion Electric Cooperative.

This mandate is less draconian than it sounds; it forces the closure of just two coal units, both at Dominion’s Chesterfield plant. Other Dominion coal plants in Virginia have already been retired or switched to using gas or biomass, and one additional coal plant in West Virginia lies beyond the reach of the legislation. Oil-fired peaking units at Yorktown and Possum Point were already slated for retirement in 2021 and 2022. APCo owns no coal or biomass plants in Virginia.

Although the exceptions might appear to swallow the rule, the truth is that coal plants are too expensive to survive much longer anyway. One indication of this is a March 24 report Dominion filed with the SCC showing its fuel generation sources for 2019: coal has now fallen to below 8 percent of generation.

By 2028, Dominion’s biomass plants must shut down, another victory for consumers. All other carbon-emitting generating units in Virginia owned by Dominion and APCo must close by 2045, including the Virginia City plant and all the gas plants.

As of 2050, no carbon allowances can be awarded to any generating units that emit carbon dioxide, including those owned by the coops and merchant generators, with an exception for units under 25 MW as well as units bigger than 25 MW (if they are owned by politically well-connected multinational paper companies with highly-paid lobbyists).

MORE ON THESE UPDATES IN VIRGINIA FOR TOMORROW . . .

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

See also: VIRGINIA becomes first state in the South to commit to carbon-free – The Washington Post, Gregory Schneider, April 13, 2020

RICHMOND — Over the weekend, Gov. Northam authorized the omnibus Virginia Clean Economy Act, which mandates that the state’s biggest utility, Dominion Energy, switch to renewable energy by 2045. Appalachian Power, which serves far southwest Virginia, must go carbon-free by 2050. Almost all the state’s coal plants will have to shut down by the end of 2024 under the new law. Virginia is the first state in the old Confederacy to embrace such clean-energy targets.

Solar panel installation underway at Washington and Lee University in Lexington, VA

From an Article by Sarah Vogelsong, Virginia Mercury, February 9, 2020

The Virginia Clean Economy Act, the Democrats’ energy omnibus bill designed to achieve Gov. Ralph Northam’s goals of reducing Virginia’s carbon emissions to zero by 2050, sparked sharp questions from senators Sunday over how the costs of shifting away from carbon should be calculated.

“You can’t do this stuff for free,” said a visibly irritated Senate Majority Leader Dick Saslaw, chair of the powerful Commerce and Labor Committee, at an unusual Sunday meeting designed to clear the Senate’s legislative decks before the crossover deadline Tuesday. “Everybody says that we’ve got a climate problem, and you know, you can’t fix the climate problem for free. You all need to understand that.”

Saslaw’s comments were addressed to Kimberly Pate, director of the Division of Utility Accounting and Finance for the State Corporation Commission, the body that regulates all electric utilities in Virginia. But while they reflected an ongoing tension between the legislature and the SCC over who should take the reins in energy decision-making, they also touched on a question increasingly troubling governments forced to grapple with the consequences of climate change: What are the costs of doing nothing?

The SCC estimates that the Clean Economy Act, which is being backed by a coalition that includes the renewable energy industry, environmental groups and Virginia’s two electric monopolies, will cause the average electric ratepayer’s bill to increase by at least $23.30 per month by 2027-2030. Annually, customers would see a roughly $280 jump in their bills.

According to the SCC, the majority of that increase will come from the buildout of 5,200 megawatts of offshore wind and 16,100 megawatts of solar, both of which the legislation would declare to be in the public interest.

Some legislators seemed skeptical of those numbers: Sen. John Bell, D-Loudoun, in particular questioned Pate about the SCC’s decision to not include estimated fuel savings in its calculations of the offshore wind component of the cost. “The problem is the fuel savings may or may not occur. And so we have not quantified that,” said Pate.

In an email to the Virginia Mercury, SCC Division of Information Resources Director Ken Schrad pointed to the uncertainty surrounding the offshore wind units’ capacity factor, a measurement that compares how much energy a unit actually produces to how much it’s capable of using.

“All of the risk is on the ratepayer. If the project does not generate electricity at its expected capacity factor, the utility company will have to purchase power from the wholesale market or construct backup generation (i.e. — gas-fired generation),” Schrad wrote. “Purchased power and fuel costs are recovered through the fuel factor. So, while (Dominion Energy) claims the possibility of fuel savings, staff cannot quantify what those savings might be because of the unknown capacity factor of offshore wind.”

Fuel savings aren’t the only variable that Clean Economy Act backers claim were incorrectly omitted from the cost analysis.

The Executive Director of the Virginia Advanced Energy Economy is Harry Godfrey, one of the key players involved in drafting the legislation,. He told the Mercury that the commission had also failed to take into account ratepayer savings from such provisions as binding energy efficiency targets and investments, cost caps and a rate relief program for low-income customers. “I don’t know that they have considered any of this,” he said.

Disagreements between the SCC and other officials on energy costs are not uncommon. Last spring, the commission and the Department of Environmental Quality quarreled over the cost to Virginia of joining the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a cap-and-trade agreement between 10 states that aims to reduce carbon emissions. The SCC estimated the average customer would see their bill rise by $7 over 25 years; DEQ said joining the market would decrease monthly bills by about 54 cents.

The SCC’s current estimate of the costs of RGGI membership, according to the analysis presented by Pate Sunday, is a $2 to $2.50 increase in the average customer’s monthly bill. RGGI is the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.*

At Sunday’s meeting, however, lawmakers’ criticism went beyond whether fuel savings should or should not be included in the financial impact estimate, with Sen. Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax, questioning whether the very foundation of the SCC’s analysis was sound.

“You all do this analysis every time, and all you focus on is the cost you can identify on a bill,” he said. “If you all quantified what the cost of however many more Virginians are going to have asthma or cancer, or what happens when Norfolk goes underwater, or all the other costs that we continue not to count of puffing carbon in the atmosphere — do you all ever look at that when you make these decisions?”

“That is not the charge of the commission,” Pate responded. “We are an economic regulator. We look at the applications before us … and we analyze the costs there and what the impact is on customer bills. That is what the commission does.”

If the Clean Economy Act is passed, that may change: among the many provisions of the 75-page bill is one that would require the SCC to consider the “social cost” of carbon in evaluating new generation facilities. That, said Godfrey, could begin “to rebalance the equation and analysis” of what energy proposals cost.

The Clean Economy Act passed Senate Commerce and Labor on a 12-3 party-line vote. A House version of the legislation advanced to the floor last week.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
* — Power plant emissions down 47% under the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative » Yale Climate Connections, Jan Spiegel, Yale Climate Connections, January 16, 2020

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative is not a cap-and-trade program.

This first-in-the-nation regional effort to lower carbon emissions from power plants is actually a cap-and-invest program. Power plants buy emission allowances through quarterly auctions for the right to pollute above a set cap. The states get the money, most of which they’re supposed to invest in consumer benefits such as energy efficiency programs that help lower energy use further.

From 2009, when RGGI – pronounced Reggie – officially kicked in, through 2017, that system sent $2.4 billion back to the nine current member states, according to the most recent report from RGGI.

Note the heavy concentration of coal plants in the Ohio River valley

From an Article by Dan Gearino, Inside Climate News, March 25, 2019

Nearly three-fourths of the country’s coal-fired power plants already cost more to operate than if wind and solar capacity were built in the same areas to replace them, a new analysis says.

Coal-fired power plants in the Southeast and Ohio Valley stand out. In all, 74% of coal plants cost more to run than building new wind or solar, analysts found.

Not a single coal-fired power plant along the Ohio River will be able to compete on price with new wind and solar power by 2025, according to a new report by energy analysts.

The same is true for every coal plant in a swath of the South that includes the Carolinas, Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi. They’re part of the 86 percent of coal plants nationwide that are projected to be on the losing end of this cost comparison, the analysis found.

The findings are part of a report issued Monday by Energy Innovation and Vibrant Clean Energy that shows where the shifting economics of electricity generation may force utilities and regulators to ask difficult questions about what to do with assets that are losing their value.

The report takes a point that has been well-established by other studies—that coal power, in addition to contributing to air pollution and climate change, is often a money-loser—and shows how it applies at the state level and plant level when compared with local wind and solar power capacity.

“My big takeaway is the breadth and universality of this trend across the continental U.S. and the speed with which things are changing,” said Mike O’Boyle, a co-author of the report and director of energy policy for Energy Innovation, a research firm focused on clean energy.

The report is not saying that all of those coal plants could or should be immediately replaced by renewable sources. That kind of transition requires careful planning to make sure that the electricity system has the resources it needs. It also doesn’t consider the role of competition from natural gas.

The key point is a simpler one: Building new wind and solar power capacity locally, defined as within 35 miles for the report, is often less expensive than people in those markets realize, and this is indicative of a price trend that is making coal less competitive.

This shift shows how market forces are helping the country move away from fossil fuels. At the same time, coal interests have been trying to obscure or cast doubt on this trend, while seeking more government subsidies to slow their industry’s decline.

Coal Concerns in the Solar-Rich Southeast

Nearly three-fourths of the country’s coal-fired power plants already cost more to operate than if wind and solar power were built in the same areas to replace them, the report says.

By 2025, with the costs of building wind and solar power expected to continue to decline, the analysts project that 86 percent of coal-fired power plants will be more expensive than local renewable energy. Notably, the 2025 wind and solar estimates assume that expiring federal tax credits will not be extended, so any price advantage is without federal credits.

In parts of the country where power plants compete on open markets, such as most of Texas, companies may be more quick to shut down money-losing plants because plant owners are the ones bearing the losses. It’s different in places where plants are fully regulated, as plant owners can pass extra costs on to consumers.

The Southeast, which is almost entirely regulated markets, has some of the costliest coal plants and is rich with solar resources. “Consumer advocates and regulators there should be asking harder questions about integrating renewables,” said Eric Gimon, an energy analyst and co-author of the report.

In North Carolina, for example, a state second only to Indiana in total coal plant capacity, every one of those coal-fired power plants is “substantially at risk,” meaning the existing plants have operational costs that are at least 25 percent more than what it would cost to build wind or solar capacity, the report says.

The state’s largest utility, Duke Energy, has invested in solar. The report shows that there is room for more of this development, and that the state remains heavily dependent on coal power that is not cost-competitive.

Political Opposition in the Ohio Valley

In the Ohio Valley, some of the sunniest parts of Ohio are near the river in the southern and southwest parts of the state, areas that now have almost no solar power development. American Electric Power, a Columbus-based utility, has proposed solar arrays there, but the plans are running into fierce opposition before state regulators and it is far from clear that the projects will get approved.

The Ohio Valley is a hub for coal-fired power, with plants that were built because of proximity to coal mines and the ability to deliver coal on river barges. And yet, the report shows that most of those plants cost more to operate than building new wind and solar capacity.

One of the exceptions is the Gavin Power Plant, the largest in Ohio and one of the largest in the country at 2,600 megawatts, which is operating at a large enough scale to remain competitive. But by 2025, even Gavin won’t be able to keep up with the declining costs of wind and solar, according to the report. This doesn’t mean the plant will be unprofitable, but it signals a shift in the market that will put increasing pressure on the plant.

Some Utilities Are Factoring in Climate Impact

Colorado and the St. Louis metro area are two of the few places were coal plants would retain a cost advantage over new renewable energy in 2025, according to the analysis. The authors say that is because of a lack of available land to build cost-effective wind or solar within 35 miles and because the plants are close to coal mines, which reduces fuel costs.

But a purely cost-based analysis leaves out other reasons to shut down coal plants and build wind and solar, as shown by the largest utility in Colorado, Xcel Energy, which is doing just that.

The company’s executives said they were responding to reports about the acceleration of climate change. They have found that they can build new wind and solar capacity for little or no extra cost, which is a less precise comparison than in the new report.

And, they are preparing for the possibility that Colorado will pass a law requiring utilities to shift to 100 percent renewable energy, which is a priority of new Democratic Gov. Jared Polis.

Distance can also make a difference in cost calculations. If new resources are built far from the ones they are replacing, grid operators and utilities need to make sure they have enough power line capacity to transport the electricity. Also, there are local economic considerations. Utilities sometimes put new projects in the same metro areas as ones that are closing to help the local community. This has been part of Excel’s planning process in Pueblo, Colorado, where it is closing a coal plant and developing new solar.

Natural Gas Competition Also Plays a Role

The report’s findings about the declining viability of coal plants are in line with previous studies, including one from March 2018 from BloombergNEF with the headline “Half of U.S. Coal Fleet on Shaky Economic Footing.”

But there is a key difference. The BloombergNEF report looked at the finances of coal plants in the context of competition from all fuels, including natural gas.

William Nelson, a co-author of the BloombergNEF report, says he is leery of comparing the costs of building new wind and solar to the costs of operating existing coal plants because a coal plant is capable of running around the clock, which makes it a different type of resource than wind and solar unless there is large-scale battery storage.

And, he thinks that natural gas prices are an essential part of the conversation in places such as the Ohio Valley, where gas is plentiful and inexpensive.

Gimon of Energy Innovation says he agrees that the role of natural gas in the market is an important element, but he says the report intentionally narrowed the focus to look at the deteriorating finances of coal and the improving competitiveness of wind and solar, rather than at the electricity market as a whole.

Daniel Cohan, a Rice University engineering professor who is not involved in the new report, says “gas is more of a gamble” for power plant owners than wind or solar because of uncertainty about future gas prices.

He thinks there is more certainty that wind and solar will continue to get less expensive and that their prices can serve as a useful comparison for coal.

The decreasing costs of wind and solar will lead to a growing gap compared to the costs of operating coal plants, one that coal plant owners and regulators would be wise to prepare for, Gimon said. “You really can’t hang tight,” he said. “It’s just going to get worse.”

New Windmills Rated at 7.5 Megawatts

Cities and States Lead on Climate Change

Op-Ed Article by Jeff Biggers, New York Times, November 30, 2016

PHOTO: A wind turbine in Adair, Iowa. Credit Charlie Neibergall/Associated Press

IOWA CITY — THE wind turbines that rise out of the cornfields here reminded me on a recent drive of one postelection truth, even in the red state of Iowa.

As President-elect Donald J. Trump considers whether to break the United States commitment to the Paris climate accord, the rise of clean energy across the heartland is already too well entrenched to be reversed.

By 2020, thanks to MidAmerican Energy’s planned $3.6 billion addition to its enormous wind turbine operations, 85 percent of its Iowa customers will be electrified by clean energy. Meanwhile, Moxie Solar, named the fastest-growing local business by The Corridor Business Journal of Iowa, is installing solar panels on my house, and is part of a solar industry that now employs 200,000 nationwide.

Doomsday scenarios about the climate have abounded in the aftermath of the November election. But responsibility for effectively reining in carbon emissions also rests with business, and with the nation’s cities and states. Those are the battlegrounds. Worldwide, cities produce as much as 70 percent of greenhouse gas emissions.

Many of the planet’s cities lie along the coasts and are threatened by slowly rising seas. Seventy percent of those cities are already dealing with extreme weather like drought and flooding. Add in aging infrastructure and waves of migrants and it is obvious that city planners, mayors and governors have had to re-envision how their cities generate energy and provide food and transportation.

“The concept of a regenerative city could indeed become a new vision for cities,” the Germany-based World Future Council reported recently. “It stands for cities that not only minimize negative impact but can actually have a positive, beneficial role to play within the natural ecosystem from which they depend. Cities have to constantly regenerate the resources they absorb.”

This idea won broad support at a recent gathering of city leaders from around the world in Quito, Ecuador, hosted by the United Nations. The Habitat III conference approved a “new urban agenda” that urges cities to adapt to climate change but minimize their harm to the environment and move to sustainable economies.

In a changing climate, these approaches make sense. As Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York, told the Chinese General Chamber of Commerce recently, “Cities, businesses and citizens will continue reducing emissions, because they have concluded — just as China has — that doing so is in their own self-interest.”

With or without significant federal support, reducing greenhouse gas emissions will require major private investment, as it has here in Iowa, and ambitious private-public initiatives from mayors and governors. We need to activate a new era of “regenerative” cities and states.

California’s recent move to reduce its carbon emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 is a hopeful shift that other cities and states should emulate. This would involve setting high benchmarks for developing green enterprise zones, renewable energy, cultivating food locally, restoring biodiversity, planting more trees and emphasizing walkability, low-carbon transportation and zero waste.

Following this regenerative approach, the Australian city of Adelaide reduced its carbon emissions by 20 percent from 2007 to 2013, even as the population grew by 27 percent and the economy increased by 28 percent. The city experienced a boom in green jobs, the development of walkable neighborhoods powered by solar energy, the conversion of urban waste to compost and a revamped local food industry. The city also planted three million trees to absorb carbon dioxide.

Over 10,000 climate initiatives are underway in cities worldwide, according to the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, which represents 80 major cities. In nearby Des Moines, for instance, Mayor Frank Cownie recently committed the city to reducing its energy consumption 50 percent by 2030 and becoming “carbon neutral” by 2050.

Initiatives like those have become a “fill the potholes” reality for many mayors, regardless of political games in Washington. In San Diego, the Republican mayor, Kevin Faulconer, helped to push through a climate action plan that commits the city to 100 percent renewable energy by 2035. Other cities are following his lead.

“Dull, inert cities, it is true, do contain the seeds of their own destruction and little else,” the urban visionary Jane Jacobs wrote. “But lively, diverse, intense cities contain the seeds of their own regeneration, with energy enough to carry over for problems and needs outside themselves.”

In an age of climate change, and a possible shift in the federal government’s priority on climate action, never have those words been truer.

>>> Jeff Biggers works include Reckoning at Eagle Creek, recipient of the Delta Award for Literature and the David Brower Award for Environmental Reporting and The United States of Appalachia, praised by the Citizen Times as a “masterpiece of popular history.”  Biggers serves as the Writer-in-Residence at the University of Iowa’s Office of Sustainability, where he founded the Climate Narrative Project and cofounded the Ecopolis Forum. He is editor of a forthcoming book, Ecopolis: Envisioning a Regenerative City in the Heartland, for the University of Iowa Press.

>  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >

WV League of Women Votes Program on Climate Change

See this Lecture & Slide Show by Jim Kotcon, WV Sierra Club, entitled:

“Green Jobs & Renewable Energy”

Charleston, WV 5/20-21

WV Chapter of the Sierra Club and WV Interfaith Power & Light join forces for gathering the week of Earth Day (April 22, 2015)

From an Article by Michael Barrick, Appalachian Preservation Project, April 1, 2015

Charleston, WV – The West Virginia chapters of The Sierra club, one of the nation’s most renowned environmental preservation groups, and Interfaith Power & Light (IPL), a new entity in the Mountain State, have partnered to support a conference being held in Charleston on April 20th and 21st at the St. John’s XXIII Pastoral Center. The unprecedented interfaith and interdisciplinary gathering, “Preserving Sacred Appalachia: Gathering, Speaking and Acting in Unity,” is being held to educate Appalachian people and others about the many threats to the well-being of the people, ecology and wildlife of West Virginia and Appalachia.

The gathering will features about 20 speakers, including ministers, laity, environmental activists, educators and artists. The event is being sponsored by St. Luke’s United Methodist Church of Hickory, N.C. and coordinated by the Appalachian Preservation Project of Bridgeport, W.Va.

Founded by legendary preservationist John Muir in 1892, the Sierra Club is the nation’s largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization, with more than two million members and supporters. The Sierra Club exists to protect the wild places of the earth, to practice and promote responsible environmental stewardship, and to educate the public about how to protect and restore the quality of the natural and human environment.

While the Sierra Club can trace its roots to the 19th century, Interfaith Power & Light was formed at the beginning of this century. It was established to draw together the religious community and spiritual people to provide a voice of conscience to address the dangers to people and the environment associated with climate change. The national organization began as a single state chapter; it now has not only a national outreach, but also 40 state chapters. A core group of West Virginia faith community leaders have joined to foster formation of the 41st state IPL chapter, West Virginia Interfaith Power & Light.

The West Virginia chapter of the Sierra Club is working on energy efficiency and renewable energy and also has joined with other preservation groups to counter the public health and safety problems associated with fracking and mountaintop removal. Bill Price, the organizing representative of the West Virginia chapter said, “Members of the Sierra Club in West Virginia are excited to be working on the ‘Preserving Sacred Appalachia’ conference. For too many years, the health and well-being of people in West Virginia have been damaged by the extractive industries. For many years, the Sierra Club in West Virginia has worked to reduce those impacts and move to a brighter future. Partnering with people of faith is a key component of that ongoing work. I hope to see many old and new friends at the gathering.”

The Rev. Mel Hoover, a member of the steering committee of West Virginia Interfaith Power & Light, offered, “This partnership demonstrates that we are at a crossroads in the Mountain State. We have always known that we must work together to address the many environmental issues impacting the people and ecology of West Virginia. This conference, by joining together people of faith with scientists, educators, artists and others, sends a clear message that cannot be ignored – we are united in purpose.” He continued, “Global warming is one of the biggest threats facing humanity today. The very existence of life – life that religious people are called to protect – is jeopardized by our continued dependency on fossil fuels for energy. Every major religion has a mandate to care for Creation. We were given natural resources to sustain us, but we were also given the responsibility to act as good stewards and preserve life for future generations.”

He added, “We are excited about forming the nation’s newest IPL chapter. The rapidly growing movement has more than a decade of success in shrinking carbon footprints and educating hundreds of thousands of people in the pews about the important role that we play in addressing the threats to public health and the environment.”

Hoover concluded, “As people of faith, our mission includes being advocates for vulnerable people and communities. It is poor people who are being hit first and worst by environmental degradation. We also aim to make sure that all people can participate in and benefit from the growing clean energy economy.”

The conference is open to the public, though advance registration is required. Folks can register by visiting the website of the Appalachian Preservation Project. They can also learn more about the agenda and view a brief video explaining the conference.