Category Archives: Pipeline

New place, new member, new officers, new name? @ VLCIA 2014-07-15

Six years in the making! Finally VLCIA meets in its new office near the hospital. Georgia Power VP Terri Lupo was just appointed to VLCIA by the Lowndes County Commission (without ever showing up and speaking). On this VLCIA agenda is the annually expected officer nominating committee report. Plus “Proposed VLCIA Name Change”. How about SolarTown?

Hm, this move uptown leaves their old building to Sabal Trail and its proposed fracked methane pipeline. Has VLCIA ever developed an opinion on that boondoggle?

Here’s the agenda. Continue reading →

56% increase shale gas 2012-2040; 100% 200% increase solar 2012-2014

Projected 56% fracked methane increase over 28 years sets a Wall Street analyst a-twitter, while solar already went up 400% in four years and will continue to do so for the next decade. Which would you rather bet on? More “natural” gas pipelines that would take twice the land to produce as much power as solar panels, or just go straight to installing the solar panels, faster, cheaper, and with local jobs and reduced electric bills?

David Alton Clark wrote for seekingalpha 20 June 2014, Kinder Morgan: Is The Party Over?

1) Shale gas provides the largest source of growth in U.S. natural gas supply.

A 56% increase is expected in total natural gas production from 2012 to 2040 resulting primarily from increased development of shale gas, tight gas, and offshore natural gas resources.

He claims U.S. demand is still leading production, but: Continue reading →

Thousands of solar jobs a thousand miles north of here: SolarCity buys Silevo

An Economic Development Council in snowy Buffalo has landed a solar manufacturer with suddenly even deeper pockets, while our Industrial Authority didn’t even meet this month. Maybe instead of supporting an unnecessary fracked methane pipeline that diverts resources we could get on with real solar industry here in sunny south Georgia?

WIVB.com wrote yesterday, Purchase of company coming to Buffalo could be boon for WNY,

Silevo, a company that had planned to set up shop at Buffalo’s Riverbend site, has been bought out by SolarCity, and the plan could mean thousands of jobs for Western New York.

Silevo is Continue reading →

Kelly Lenz resigns as Library Director

Via AP from VDT yesterday, Library director accepts new position,

The South Georgia Regional Library Board of Trustees announced the resignation Thursday of Director Kelly Lenz.

Lenz has accepted the position as the director of the Middle Georgia Regional Library System. Since 2008, she has served in various positions with the South Georgia Regional Library.

The Middle Georgia Regional Library System says it is headquartered at the Macon-Bibb County Public Libraries and serves Bibb, Crawford, Jones, Macon, Twiggs, & Wilkinson Counties.

The story says she will continue to work with SGRL until an interim director is named, and she starts her new job in Macon 4 August 2014.

The story doesn’t mention Continue reading →

Twice the acreage than solar for Sabal Trail pipeline to produce the same power @ FERC 2014-03-05

According to Sabal Trail’s own numbers, twice as much land for the entire three-pipeline Spectra -> Sabal -> FSC proposed gouge through three states as would be required to produce as much solar power.

STT’s solar acreage estimates from their Draft Resource Report 10: Alternatives (RR10) of November 2013, Continue reading →

Solar freakin’ roadways

Solar Roadways has raised $1,884,633 in six weeks from Earth Day to now on a goal of $1,000,000 in indiegogo (which was already a record for most contributors with 36,000 people at $1.5 million). Yes, to all those who have asked me, I think it could work. Add solar roadways to rooftop solar and solar farms and wind, and the EPA’s new CO2 rule (which doesn’t even do much about coal for years and does nothing about about “natural” gas) will seem like a quaint baby step in a few years after this happens: Continue reading →

Energy Policy Act of 2005 considered harmful

The same Energy Policy Act of 2005 that subsidized dirty oil and fracked methane including LNG exports also funded that oxymoron “clean” coal such as Southern Company’s Plant Ratcliffe in Mississippi, ethanol production lining the pockets of Monsanto, and the $8.3 billion loan guarantee to Georgia Power for the new nukes at Plant Vogtle.

2005 was a very long time ago in solar PV years: prices are halved, and installed solar power production is up more than ten times and growing exponentially like compound interest. We need to stop throwing money at dirty, water-sucking, centralized baseload 20th century non-solutions and get on with clean 21st century distributed solar and wind power for jobs, for energy independence, and for clean air and water, not to mention less climate change.

-jsq

The fragility of centralized energy systems

All thermal power generation requires water for cooling, with nukes so vulnerable no private insurer will cover them anyway and failing frequently in recent heat waves. “Natural” gas is no better than coal or oil for water use; maybe worse because all those pipelines vulnerable to backhoes or corrosion or attack. Even hydro is vulnerable to lack of rainfall. Carbon sequestration doesn’t get good marks, while conservation and efficiency get rave reviews from a study of insurance perspectives on power generation. What’s the one power source this article about insurance risks does not say is fragile in the face of climate change? Hint: look up.

Limiting Liability in the Greenhouse: Insurance Risk-Management Strategies in the Context of Global Climate Change, by Christina Ross, Evan Mills, and Sean B. Hecht, Stanford Environmental Law Journal and the Stanford Journal of International Law, Symposium: on Climate Change Risk, Vol. 26A/43A:251, 2007.

Supply-side energy choices that may be made to reduce the carbon-intensity of energy services have their own distinctive liability characteristics. For example, switching to lower-carbon electricity generation technology based on thermal power plant technology (e.g., by substituting natural gas for coal) results in systems that are still heavily dependent on water resources for cooling. The Electric Power Research Institute has documented considerable risks to traditionally cooled power generation systems as a result of climate change-induced droughts.242 Similarly, “zero-emissions” hydroelectric generating systems are also sensitive to rainfall patterns.

242 Denis Albrecht, Electric Power Research Institute, Presentation: Climate Impact on Water Availability for Electricity Generation (April 11, 2006) (presentation slides associated with the Electric Power Research Institute).

Centralization considered harmful

Continue reading →

ICLEI and sustainability

Have you heard there’s a U.N. agency going around getting local governments to sign “Agenda 21” into ordinances that will take away your private property through eminent domain? If not, you’ve avoided the propaganda put out by fossil fuel companies to subvert sustainability. If you have, here’s why it’s bunk.

There is an organization that promotes measures for sustainability to local governments. Sustainability as in arranging for local resources to be available for us and our children and grandchildren. Clean air, clean water, forests, education, and private property rights including not letting developers or big corporations damage your private property. Are you against any of those things?

An organization promoting sustainability with local governments is called ICLEI–Local Governments for Sustainability. ICLEI says it is:

the leading global network devoted to local governments engaged in sustainability, climate protection, and clean energy initiatives. The organization was formerly known as the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives.

ICLEI has heard about the conspiracy theories and has written up a rebuttal. Continue reading →

Stanford beats Harvard; divests from coal

In the first big win for the fossil fuel divestment campaign, Stanford just did what campaign-founder Harvard has not yet: announced it would divest from coal-mining companies.

Here’s Stanford’s PR dated today, 7 May 2014, Stanford to divest from coal companies,

Acting on a recommendation of Stanford’s Advisory Panel on Investment Responsibility and Licensing, the Board of Trustees announced that Stanford will not make direct investments in coal mining companies. The move reflects the availability of alternate energy sources with lower greenhouse gas emissions than coal.

Who is this Advisory Panel? Continue reading →