Category Archives: Environment

Professor unrepentant in latest fracking payola case

Apparently the natural gas industry pays professors to greenwash their polluting product, like back in the hey-day of radio record companies used to pay disk jockies to play their records. Remember: natural gas from fracking is the main thing Southern Company and Georgia Power are switching to from coal (not that they’re even abandoning coal, just rebranding it as “21st century coal”). That and their nuke boondoggle at Plant Vogtle. All approved by the Georgia Public Service Commission, all of whose members apparently accept massive direct or indirect contributions from the utilities they regulate. Two GA PSC Commissioners slots are up for election right now.

The professor most recently found to be in the pay of a fracking company when he reported on fracking is unrepentant. Terrence Henry wrote for State Impact Texas yesterday, Texas Professor On the Defensive Over Fracking Money

So the questions remaining are: Why didn’t Groat disclose this in the study? And did he fail to tell anyone at the University about it?

The professor would not agree to an interview, but in an email to StateImpact Texas he says the Public Accountability Initiative report is “a mixture of truths, half truths, and unfounded conclusions based [on] incorrect interpretations of information. I don’t want to discuss it.”

The University of Texas requires that financial conflicts of interest be disclosed by employees when it has “potential for directly and significantly affecting the design, conduct, or reporting of … research or is in an entity whose financial interest appears to be affected by that research.”

Dean Sharon Mosher of the Jackson School of Geosciences says that Groat submitted the financial conflict of interest form to her office in previous years, but that he had not done so this year. “I was not aware that he was still a member of the board,” Mosher tells StateImpact Texas. “Had I known he was still a member of the board and being paid, I would have insisted that he disclosed it.”

What report? Follow the links in here. Terrence Henry wrote for State Impact Texas 23 July, Fracking Company Paid Texas Professor Behind Water Contamination Study,

Earlier this year, a study led by Dr. Charles “Chip” Groat for the Energy Institute at the University of Texas at Austin made headlines for saying there was no link between fracking and groundwater contamination. (When we reported on the study in February, we noted that the study also found some serious issues around the safety and regulation of fracking that weren’t getting much press coverage.)

But according to a new report out today by the Public Accountablitiy Initiative (PAI), a nonprofit watchdog group, the conclusions in Groat’s report aren’t as clear cut as initially reported. And Groat himself did not disclose significant financial ties to the fracking industry.

Groat, a former Director of the U.S. Geological Survey and professor at the Jackson School of Geosciences at the University of Texas at Austin, also sits on the board of Plains Exploration and Production Company, a Houston-based company that conducts drilling and fracking in Texas and other parts of the country. According to the new report (and a review of the company’s financial reports by Bloomberg) Groat received more than $400,000 from the drilling company last year alone, more than double his salary at the University. And one of the shales examined in Groat’s fracking study is currently being drilled by the company, the report says.

Since 2007, Groat has received over $1.5 million in cash and stock awards from the company, and he currently holds over $1.6 million in company stock, according to the PAI report. (Update: we clarified with PAI, and that $1.6 million in stock comes from the stock awards over the years. PAI says Groat’s total compensation from the company is close to $2 million.)

And it gets worse from there: rough drafts published, unsubstantiated peer review claims, etc.

This isn’t an isolated case:

This isn’t the first time that academic studies of drilling have been called into question because of industry ties. In an earlier report on a State University of New York at Buffalo study on fracking’s environmental risks, Public Accountability Initiative found that it “suffered a number of critical shortcomings” and the “report’s authors had strong industry ties.”

And in today’s investigation from Bloomberg, they found other instances of industry influence and financial ties at Pennsylvania State University and University of Wyoming.

Do we want to trade air pollution by coal for groundwater pollution by fracking? When we have a better future already at hand through conservation and efficiency along with solar and wind power?

-jsq

It is time to finally put the pieces of a larger energy puzzle together —Michael Noll

Seen today on the WACE facebook page: an online comment the VDT declined to let appear. It was on Natural gas use expanding; station planned for Valdosta by Kay Harris, VDT, 22 July 2012. -jsq

There are some major problems with this article, but let’s first begin with the points one can agree with:

Mr. Putnam is correct when he says that natural gas is a much cleaner source of energy than coal and oil. It is also true that natural gas is a “bridge fuel” which can buy us time to develop new technologies. However, here are the points that are missing (or were glanced over) simply because we are, again, looking for a quick fix to our dependence on foreign oil, while doing little to address issues that really matter:

  1. Neither Mr. Putnam nor the VDT seem to fully understand or recognize the environmental damage fracking does. This new technology is not only responsible for our nation’s current natural gas surplus, but also comes at an enormous price to both people and the environment.
  2. Time and again we are talking about the need to become independent of foreign oil, yet little attention is paid to the need to conserve. Instead we continue to ‘live it up” and consume more energy per capita than any other western nation. If you are addicted to a “drug” (as in an overly consumptive lifestyle) hopping from marijuana to heroin won’t help your general problem.

It is time to finally put the pieces of a larger energy puzzle together because at the end of the day natural gas, too, is a finite source. But how will we ever get there when a) entities like Southern Company (i.e. Georgia Power) refuse to embrace truly clean sources of energy production like solar and wind, when b) people like Mr. Putnam and papers like the VDT only present a one-sided view of an important and complex issue, and when c) we, the consumers, refuse to accept our responsibilities in this whole mess as if we had a God given right to be wasteful?

-Michael Noll

IKEA building almost as much solar as Southern Company

IKEA has already deployed more solar power than Southern Company, and plans almost as much as SO’s total planned solar generation. Remind me, which one is the energy company? Maybe we need to elect people who will remind Southern Company and Georgia Power.

Remember Southern Company bragged earlier this month about its first big solar project coming online, 1 megawatt in Upson? IKEA plans to install that much solar in Atlanta this year on top of its furniture store:

Atlanta, Georgia: With a store size of 366,000 square feet, ft2 (~34,000 square metres, m2) on 15 acres (~6 hectares), the solar program will use 129,800 ft2 (~12,060 m2) at 1,038 kilowatts (kW) with 4,326 solar panels generating 1,421,300kWh/year. This is equivalent to reducing 1,080 tons of carbon-dioxide (CO2), 192 cars’ emissions or powering 122 homes.

IKEA plans more than that in Savannah, 1.5 megawatts:

Savannah, Georgia Distribution Centre: With a size of 750,000 ft2 (~69,700 m2) on 115 acres (~46.5 hectares), the solar program will use 187,500 ft2 (~17,400 m2) at 1,500kW with 6,250 solar panels generating 2,029,500kWh/year. This is equivalent to reducing 1,542 tons of CO2, 274 cars’ emissions or powering 175 homes.

Sure, but Southern Company already did it first, right? Nope, IKEA already powered up a megawatt in Houston, and already had some in Frisco and Round Rock, Texas, making IKEA already the largest solar owner in Texas.

As Kirsty Hessman put it in Earth Techling 8 December 2011,

They don’t call it the Sunbelt for nothing, and Ikea plans to take full advantage of the salubrious solar situation down South.

That was when IKEA was planning the Houston, Frisco, and Round Rock, Texas solar installations. Half a year later, they’re up and running. When will your new nukes be finished (if ever), Southern Company?

But back to solar. According to IKEA PR 9 July 2012, IKEA plans 38 MW of solar:

Continue reading →

Sustainable public housing for Valdosta?

A group of Valdosta City Council members recently visited Sustainable Fellwood in Savannah, and may be considering it as a model for affordable fair housing in Valdosta. There’s also a model much closer than Savannah.

Here’s how one blog described Sustainable Fellwood, 17 November 2009:

Fellwood is a project which aims to demonstrate that highly efficient and healthy buildings can be built affordably. The project will include a four acre park and a community garden. Preserving the local oak tree canopy will be another important step. The development team is taking steps to reduce stormwater run off and utilize native landscaping. Energy Star appliances, reflective roofs, and high efficiency windows are all included in the plans. The project will be registered with the EarthCraft Coastal Communities certification, and it is a pilot LEED — ND neighborhood. It is developed using the principles of smart growth for walkable and diverse communities.

Jan Skutch wrote for SavannahNow 16 May 2012, Sustainable Fellwood celebrates final two phases,

Continue reading →

Will electricity demand increase?

Back in April Southern Company CEO Thomas A. Fanning gave yet another version of his stump speech that we saw at the shareholders’ meeting in May and that he’s video blogging on YouTube now. In April he emphasized a huge assumption with no evidence; an assumption that may just not be true.

National Energy Policy – Part 5 of 7 (30 April 2012)

This much we know: demand for electricity will increase. The Energy Information Administration projects an 18% increase in electricity demand nationally and in the southeast, we’re as expecting as much as a 25% increase over the next 20 years. So we know the need is real, immediate, and critical.

Really? Here’s recent electricity use and nearterm forcast by the U.S. Energy Information Administration:

Sure looks to me like there was a big dip in 2009, and projected use in 2013 is no higher than in 2007. What was that about “immediate”?

Now you may say, of course, that’s a recession. But what about this?

Continue reading →

Why Energy Matters to You —Thomas A. Fanning

Since our coverage of the Southern Company (SO) shareholders meeting in May, SO CEO Thomas A. Fanning has started his own YouTube video series, “Why Energy Matters to You”, in which he tries to head off a real energy policy by advocating SO’s nuclear and coal strategy instead.

SO PR 28 June 2012, Southern Company Chairman Launches CEO Social Media Video Series,

Southern Company SO today unveiled the first in a series of CEO Web videos examining issues critical to the electric utility industry. The video series, “Why Energy Matters to You,” is available on YouTube and features Southern Company Chairman, President and CEO Thomas A. Fanning. Fanning announced the Web series during an appearance at the 2012 Aspen Ideas Festival in Aspen, Colo.

Here are his two episodes so far. His theme:

“I believe that every American deserves a supply of clean, safe, reliable, and affordable energy.”

Who could argue with that? It’s just SO’s ideas of how to do it that provoke some argument.

Here’s Part 1 of 2:

Why Energy Matters to You —Thomas A. Fanning Part 1 of 2

His question:

“How can better energy create more economic freedom for the American people?”

His answer is in Part 2 of 2:

Continue reading →

CNN report on cancer in Shell Bluff, GA: near nuclear Plant Vogtle

CNN reported in 2010 on Shell Bluff, Georgia, near Southern Company’s nuclear reactors at Plant Vogtle. Why is there so much cancer in such a small population? Why are not just the older folks, but younger folks, dying? Who is looking into all this before Southern Company builds two new reactors? Um, not clear. Does that seem right to you?

Here’s the video:

-jsq

Sidewalk snaps up behind coal in Georgia: Snapping Shoals EMC drops Power4Georgians

Only a few months ago, Cobb EMC pulled out of Power4Georgians and their coal plant plans; now Snapping Shoals EMC does the same. The sidewalk is indeed snapping up behind coal in Georgia. As once again customers of an EMC decide to run for its board. Southern Company and Georgia Power, are you listening? Not just about coal; also about those new nukes.

The insurgent candidates have a facebook page, Smart Energy for Snapping Shoals.

PR yesterday from Georgians for Smart Energy, Snapping Shoals EMC Backs Away From Risky Coal Plant Venture

Continue reading →

Insurer won’t cover fracking losses

Does your insurance policy explicitly list fracking damages among the things it covers? If not, you’re probably not covered, and especially if your insurer is Nationwide. And if your drinking water catches on fire, that’s probably not even considered damage to your property. Remember, natural gas through fracking (plus nuclear) is what Southern Company and Georgia Power (and therefore all the smaller electric utilities in Georgia) are moving to instead of coal.

The River Reporter reported Wednesday, Nationwide insurance: no fracking way

National Casualty (Insurance) Company, part of the Nationwide group of insurance companies, has announced that hydraulic fracturing operations are prohibited in relation to properties it insures.

The company has determined that the exposures presented by hydraulic fracturing are too great to ignore. Risks involved with hydraulic fracturing are now prohibited for General Liability, Commercial Auto, Motor Truck Cargo, Auto Physical Damage and Public Auto (insurance) coverage. The company said it would not bind risks with this exposure, and any policies currently written with the exposure would be non-renewed (following state requirements).

Among the prohibited risks involved in fracking operations listed by the company are contractors involved in fracking operations, landowners whose land has been leased to lessees with fracking operations, frack sand and frack liquid haulers and site prep (dump trucks, bulldozers) or leasing of tanks.

On Thursday they posted (part of) Nationwide’s response:

Continue reading →

Duke and Progress to buy Santee-Cooper’s Summer nuke?

I erred in saying Duke owns nuclear Summer Station in North Carolina: it’s actually owned by SCANA and Santee Cooper. But I wasn’t as wrong as I thought. It looks like somebody’s been pressuring Duke and Progress, the two utilities currently maybe merging, to buy Summer.

John D. Runkle, attorney for NC WARN, hand-delivered a letter to Robert Gruber Executive Director Public Staff of the NC Utilities Commission on 18 June 2012, Re: INVESTIGATION — Duke-Progress Merger

In preparing comments on the Duke-Progress merger on behalf of the NC Waste Awareness and Reduction Network (NC WARN), we came across several reports that South Carolina officials, including the South Carolina Public Service Commission, were pressuring the utilities to purchase the State-owned Santee Cooper’s shares of the V.C. Summer Nuclear Generating Station.

Santee Cooper owns one-third of the present reactor and 45% of the proposed units 2 and 3. Based on the recent cost estimate of $9.8 billion, buying Santee Cooper’s share would add about $4.5 billion to the cost of the merger. But those are low-ball estimates; other nuclear units in the Southeast are projected to cost roughly twice as much. Realistically, purchasing Santee Cooper’s share would likely add much more to the cost of the merger.

We were unable to find any filings in either the South Carolina or North Carolina dockets regarding the V.C. Summer Station. If a purchase of nuclear units in South Carolina has been made a condition to the merger, it should be part of the public record, and not as some backroom negotiation.

I’d like to see that.

Even more I’d like to see this:

Continue reading →