Tag Archives: Planning

Planning Commission yesterday: did you know? @ GLPC 2013-01-28

Did you see an agenda or an announcement that the Greater Lowndes Planning Commission (GLPC) was meeting yesterday? Agenda @ GLPC 2013-01-28 Nor did LAKE. Matt Martin, Valdosta City Planner, usually sends an agenda to Gretchen, but there were no Valdosta items on this agenda, so he apparently didn’t even get one. And the county still doesn’t publish GLPC agendas, so if there was an item on there that affected you, how could you know? Does that seem right to you?

On the agenda were three Lowndes County rezoning items, all involving C-H (Highway Commercial), and one Lake Park rezoning case, going to R-P (Residential/Professional). Here’s a summary of the cases. You know, if I can do this in a couple of minutes by typing it in from a photograph that Gretchen took, Lowndes County could do it in a second by pressing Export to PDF. Now that there’s a new Chairman, maybe he’ll say they should do that.

Lowndes County,
Final action
Tuesday 12 Feb 2013 		4. REZ-2012-20 Corbett
US 41 South and Newsome Road, Valdosta
Request to rezone ~5 acres from E-A (Estate Agriculture) to C-H (Highway Commercial)
5. REZ-2013-01 Barrentine
102 Davis Road East, Valdosta
Request to rezone 1.2 acres from C-H (Highway Commercial) to R-1 (Low Density Residential)
6. REZ-2013-02 Interstate Land Management
Briarwood Road along I-75, Valdosta
Request to rezone 4.87 acres from R-1 (Low Density Residential) to C-H (Highway Commercial)
Lake Park,
Final Action
Tuesday 5 Feb 2013 		LP-12-2012-01 Karen K. Nolan and Blanche C. Bush
105 Broadway Street, Lake Park
Request to rezone 0.46 acres from R-15 (Single Family Residential) to R-P (Residential/Professional)

-jsq

Georgia Power to announce 20-year plan Thursday

What will Georgia Power announce for a 20 year energy plan Thursday? Will they (1) just double down on their rate-hike boondoggles for nuclear and gas, or (2) they could flip like Austin Energy in 2003 and Cobb EMC in 2012 and suddenly go solar? The wording here looks like it’s going to be the former. That they even feel compelled to announce some sort of formal plan instead of just shovelling disinformation out another 50 years indicates they’re feeling the pressure to change direction to real sustainable energy: wind and solar power.

Matt Shedd wrote for WUGATV today, Georgia Power To Release Energy Plan,

Georgia Power is set to release a 20-year energy plan on Thursday which will outline a way for the company and the state to be less reliant on coal power. The AJC reports that just 5 years ago, the company’s reliance on coal was at 70 percent.

That number has now dropped to 47 percent. These changes are coming in the wake of Georgia Power’s parent, the Southern Co., being pushed by environmental rules to rely less on coal. Georgia Power won approval to buy electricity produced by natural gas from its sister company Southern Power, which may be part of the company’s future plans.

Thomas A. Fanning, CEO of Georgia Power’s parent The Southern Company (SO), has been touting 70% to 35% reduction in coal since at least May 2012 at the SO shareholder meeting. Fanning continues to emphasize nuclear, gas, and “clean coal” instead of real sustainable energy, namely wind and solar power. He also continues to assert electricity demand will increase, while ignoring conservation and efficiency, which for Georgia could remove all need for new energy, enabling solar and wind to shut down more coal and gas plants, as well as nukes.

So, get out the popcorn and take your bets. Will it be (1) or will it be (2)? I’m betting this time it will be (1), but sooner or later it will be (2), and even Georgia Power, and yes, even Southern Company, will stop digging in their heels and get on the solar train to profits, jobs, energy independence, and oh, by the way, clean air and plenty of clean water.

-jsq

Dear Mr. Pritchard: How are we paying on something that was 100% paid off? —John S. Quarterman

I sent this today. -jsq

 
From: John S. Quarterman <questions@quarterman.com>
Cc: bslaughter@lowndescounty.com, jevans@lowndescounty.com, rraines@lowndescounty.com, cpowell@lowndescounty.com, dmarshall@lowndescounty.com, jpage@lowndescounty.com, questions@quarterman.com
Subject: How are we paying on something that was 100% paid off?

Dear Mr. Pritchard,

You may recall that at the Lowndes County Commission meeting of the 8th of January 2013, I asked the following:

“When this building complex was opened in 2010, the county put out a double-sheet flyer saying it was completely paid off out of SPLOST money, with zero dollars owed. I’m wondering how it is that then, either in November or December, the Commission just before your one here, refinanced bonds that included I think it was six or seven million dollars for this very building complex? I’m very confused by that. I wonder if someone could clarify how we’re paying on something that was completely 100% paid off with zero owed.”

I asked Commissioner Crawford Powell this question at the going-away reception for former Chairman Ashley Paulk on 14 December 2012, and he referred me to you for an answer. It has been more than two weeks since I asked in a Commission Regular Session and I have received no answer. So I ask again.

Specifically:

Continue reading →

Get a job —Lowndes County to waste site workers

Continuing to ignore its responsibilities to protect public health, safety, and well-being, the Lowndes County government proceeded with its plan to trash rural residents’ waste collection sites, and told part time workers there to get a job.

Jason Schaefer wrote for the VDT today, Trash centers dumped: Final week to make trips to county recycling centers,

The Lowndes County Board of Commissioners near the end of 2012 voted to approve a contract with Advanced Disposal to serve as the sole waste company to conduct curbside trash pick-up in unincorporated Lowndes County. Some citizens remain critical of the change in service, which will cost $12.80 per month, and many are trying to get their last loads to the collection/recycling centers before they close….

Full-time employees at the recycling stations, which are already employees of Public Works, said County Clerk Paige Dukes, will be moved to different positions within the department. Part-time employees will need to find new jobs.

Why might citizens be critical? Continue reading →

GA SB 51, The Georgia Cogeneration and Distributed Generation Act

Georgia Senator Buddy Carter has introduced a Senate bill for the current session of the legislature, SB 51, “The Georgia Cogeneration and Distributed Generation Act of 2001”. It attempts to fix Georgia’s special solar financing problem, the antique 1973 Territorial Electric Service Act.

Why 2001? Apparently Buddy Carter has been introducing it every year since then. Last year Georgia Power’s disinformation campaign nuked it when it was SB 401. Has the legislature gotten tired of Georgia Power and its parent the Southern Company being way late and overbudget on those new nukes? Does the legislature want Georgia citizens to get the savings and job benefits of the fastest growing energy source in the country? Will GaSU help with SB 51, or only with GaSU’s attempt to become a solar monopoly utility? You can contact your legislators and tell them what you think. Every one of them who voted for Georgia Power’s stealth-tax rate hike for that nuke boondoggle should vote for SB 51 to start getting Georgia on a clean path to jobs and energy independence.

This bill is not perfect: it counts “generator fueled by biomass” as Continue reading →

Solar energy growth like compound interest

Some nuclear backers only want to look at the next table in that FERC report, Office of Energy Projects Energy Infrastructure Update For December 2012, which shows solar energy as 0.34% of total U.S. energy production, and then they stop thinking. But what about that 30% increase in solar power deployed between 2011 and 2012? Think of it like compound interest.

Total Installed Operating Generating Capacity
Installed Capacity (GW) % of Total Capacity % Growth 2011-2012
Coal 337.71 29.17% 1.3%
Natural Gas 491.82 42.48% 1.8%
Nuclear 107.01 9.24% 0.1%
Oil 41.32 3.57% 0.1%
Water 98.12 8.47% 0.1%
Wind 57.53 4.97% 22.8%
Biomass 15.00 1.30% 3.7%
Geothermal Steam 3.70 0.32% 4.2%
Solar 3.90 0.34% 60.9%
Waste Heat 0.69 0.06% 0.4%
Other 1.04 0.09% 0.0%
Total 1,157.86 100.00% 23.3%

Source: Data derived from Ventyx Global LLC, Velocity Suite.
Growth rates computed by jsq for LAKE www.l-a-k-e.org 24 January 2013.

Let’s look what happens if we assume 30% growth in solar power deployed per year:

Solar power growth rates like compound interest

At 30% annual growth, we’re up to solar as 50% of all generation within Continue reading →

New U.S. energy in 2012 —FERC

What new energy sources are being deployed the fastest in the U.S.? According to FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, it’s not what you may think. The big winners are coal, wind, and solar.

According to the report Office of Energy Projects Energy Infrastructure Update For December 2012, Coal, while accounting for only 17% of new capacity in 2012, unfortunately increased by 133% over new capacity installed in 2011. Natural gas did account for the second most new installed capacity in 2012, 33%, but the amount in megawatts installed actually decreased by 20% from 2011.

The most new capacity installed in 2012? Wind, at 40%, with a 56% increase over new installations in 2011. That’s right, wind beat natural gas 40% to 33% in total new capacity in 2012, and whomped gas in increase in new capacity in 2011, by 56% to -20%.

While solar only accounted for 5.59% of new capacity in 2012, that was an increase of 30% over new capacity in 2011, which is way more than gas and after only coal and wind.

New Generation In-Service (New Build and Expansion)
December 2012 January – December 2012 Cumulative January – December 2011 Cumulative Percent of Total New 2012 Percent Increase 2011- 2012
Primary Fuel Type No. of Units Installed Capacity (MW) No. of Units Installed Capacity (MW) No. of Units Installed Capacity (MW)
Coal 4 1,434 8 4,510 15 1,932 17.1% 133%
Natural Gas 6 2,306 94 8,746 108 11,020 33.1% -20.6%
Nuclear 0 0 1 125 0 0 0.474% -%
Oil 0 0 19 49 66 136 0.186% -64%
Water 2 4 13 99 41 94 0.375% 5.32%
Wind 45 3,095 164 10,689 146 6,844 40.5% 56.2%
Biomass 5 91 100 543 131 446 2.06% 21.7%
Geo- thermal Steam 2 9 13 149 9 56 0.565% 166%
Solar 16 77 240 1,476 354 1,131 5.59% 30.5%
Waste Heat 0 0 1 3 2 136 0.0114% -97.8%
Other 2 0 5 0 11 0 0% -%
Total 82 7,016 658 26,387 883 21,795 100% 21.1%

Source: Data derived from Ventyx Global LLC, Velocity Suite.
Last two columns added by jsq for LAKE www.l-a-k-e.org 24 January 2013.

Biomass unfortunately accounted for Continue reading →

Hatch 1 nuclear reactor down to 40% power Sunday: why?

Why is Plant Hatch Unit 1 running at well below capacity? Saturday 19 Jan 2013 that nuclear plant was at 100%, according to the NRC, yet Sunday it was down to 45%, then 40% Monday and 64% today. What's going on at Hatch 1? And what happened to nuclear supposedly being 24/7?

There's no event report about this from the NRC; the last item the NRC has on Hatch 1 seems to be from 2003. Southern Company provides no information on this event. Another source (Platts, 4 January 2013) says Hatch 2 (and Vogtle 2) are to refuel in the first half of this year, among Fifty-six US nuclear units to shut for refueling in 2013. But Hatch 1 is not on that list, and a similar Hatch 1 brownout happened 5 and 6 January:

Continue reading →

Rural AIDS: poverty the cause, solar power part of the solution

Director Lisa Biagiotti spent two years travelling around the South interviewing people about AIDS to make a film, deepsouth. She found rural AIDS is a bigger and faster-growing problem than AIDS in center cities, yet most health and prevention funding goes to urban areas. The root cause seemed clear to her: poverty. Here’s some deeper dirt (literally) on rural poverty in the U.S., and one thing we know can help with that: distributed solar power, for jobs, for reduced electrical bills, and for energy independence. What politician wouldn’t want jobs for their constituents?

The director said the screening at VSU at the end of November drew more people than the day before in Little Rock. There were clearly more than 150 in the audience in Valdosta. It’s a topic very relevant to here, as Dean Poling wrote in the VDT 26 November 2012,

Organizers note that Georgia is ranked sixth highest nationally for its cumulative number of AIDS cases reported through December 2009. More than 40,000 known HIV/AIDS cases were reported in Georgia as of 2010.

The South Health District’s 10 counties, which include Lowndes and surrounding counties, report 950 confirmed cases of HIV/AIDS, while many more are likely infected and risk becoming sick because they are not being treated. More specifically, there are about 460 reported cases in Lowndes County.

In reporting these numbers, HIV is the virus (HIV disease) and AIDS is the medical diagnosis made by a doctor of the symptoms, according to South Health District.

It’s a great movie and I highly recommend it. Director Biagiotti spent a substantial amount of her own money and two years to make this film, yet there are aspects she could only note in passing, such as incarceration. She can’t be expected to have researched every aspect; maybe somebody else can step up and help follow more threads.

The movie starts with some maps about poverty and AIDS in the South. It did not, however, look outside the South for poverty. Here are better poverty maps, from the CDC:

Continue reading →

Shutdown at San Onofre: permanent this time?

California only has a couple of nuclear reactor locations (unlike the 32 reactors within 500 miles of here), and one is in even worse shape than the other: San Onofre, almost as bad as Crystal River. I’m sure Southern Company would never cut corners or have design or construction problems at Plant Vogtle, right?

Harvey Wasserman wrote for AlterNet 7 January 2013, Showdown at San Onofre: Why the Nuclear Industry May Be Dealt a Big Blow,

Perched on an ocean cliff between Los Angeles and San Diego, the reactors’ owners cut unconscionable corners in replacing their multi-million-dollar steam generators. According to Russell Hoffman, one of California’s leading experts on San Onofre, inferior metals and major design failures turned what was meant to be an upgrade into an utter fiasco.

Installed by Mitsubishi, the generators simply did not work. When they were shut nearly a year ago, tubes were leaking, banging together and overall rendering further operations impossible.

Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric have unofficially thrown in the towel on Unit 3. But they’re lobbying hard to get at least Unit 2 back up and running. Their technical problems are so serious that they’ve asked the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to let them run Unit 2 at 70% capacity. In essence, they want to “see what happens” without daring to take the reactor to full power.

The NRC has expressed serious doubts. On December 26 it demanded answers to more than 30 questions about the plant’s technical realities. There have been assertions that unless San Onofre can be shown as operable at full power, its license should be negated.

It’s good the NRC got around to doing something, after Continue reading →