|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
Last week, the Texas Senate voted to create a $500 million fund to support solar power. This is great news, but already Big Oil and King Coal are gunning to kill renewable energy legislation. Don’t let them! Click below to e-mail your state legislators and urge them to pass several priority solar power bills. http://www.environmenttexas.org/action/solar-power/email?id4=ES Texas has what it takes to be a world solar leader. The state Legislature is currently considering incentives to install solar panels on half a million rooftops in the next 10 years. This would create an economic revolution, attracting billions in investment and creating tens of thousands of jobs. Unfortunately, lobbyists for the oil and coal industries are aggressively lobbying against solar power legislation. If we don’t act, these projects will go to other states. Please click below to send an e-mail telling your state legislators to pass these solar power bills. http://www.environmenttexas.org/action/solar-power/email?id4=ES Last week, the Texas Senate approved SB 545 (Fraser) to create a statewide solar rebate program that would create $500 million of incentives over the next five years. This is a great start, but in order to reduce pollution enough to avoid dangerous global warming, we need to do even more to promote solar. The Texas House will soon take SB 545 to a vote and may include additional incentives. A Senate committee also approved SB 541 (Watson) last week, which sets a goal of generating 3,000 megawatts of our electricity from emerging renewable technologies such as solar. The full Senate will consider the bill later this week. Tell them to vote for more solar power for Texas: http://www.environmenttexas.org/action/solar-power/email?id4=ES Sincerely, Luke Metzger Environment Texas Director LukeM@environmenttexas.org http://www.environmenttexas.org
Texas extended its already formidable national lead in wind power by clearing the way Thursday for a major expansion of the state’s electrical power transmission network, valued at nearly $5 billion, a move that will triple its current wind power capacity.
The preliminary approval from the Public Utility Commission of Teaxs (PUCT) effectively green-lights tens of billions of dollars more in wind development investment and will supply the state with more than 18,00 megawatts of additional wind power.
The decision consolidates Texas as “the epicenter of land-based wind energy development in North America,if not the world,” said Commision Chairman Barry Smitherman in a statement. (MORE…)
Wonder why we don’t have a national energy policy or a serious push toward alternatives?
Follow the money that oil and gas companies send to Congress.
By Jim JubakThink it’s a matter of chance that we don’t have a meaningful national energy policy? Wondering why oil and gas companies don’t pay higher royalties to the Treasury now that oil is over $55 a barrel? Amazed that Washington loves to talk about energy research with promise 15 years down the road, but won’t put significant money into alternative technologies that could reduce energy consumption now?
For answers to all those questions and more, just follow the money. Nothing about U.S. energy policy should be a surprise if you know where the money’s been going and which legislators have taken the biggest payouts from the energy industry. So don’t miss your only chance in the next two years — the Nov. 7 election — to tell Congress what you think of its sellout to the energy companies.
It has become increasingly expensive to run for national office, and any politician who wants to win has to raise big bucks these days. In the 2006 election cycle, according to the Federal Election Commission, as of Oct. 20, challengers and incumbents running for the House of Representatives had raised $713 million for their campaigns. Those for Senate had raised $452 million. And these figures don’t include any of the money raised by “independent” organizations, so-called 527 groups such as Emily’s List on the left ($9.6 million raised) or Club for Growth on the right ($6.2 million raised).
Lawyers top contributor list
Corporations and affiliated individuals have coughed up a big chunk of that money. By industry, the top honor on the giving roll goes to lawyers and law firms, with $89 million contributed, according to Federal Election Commission data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, which describes itself as nonpartisan and nonprofit. As the Republicans have said in campaign after campaign, the bulk of that — 69% to 30% — has gone to Democrats. But the Republicans don’t need to worry; there’s plenty of money coming into their till from other industries. Second place goes to the retirement industry with $86 million (54% goes to Republicans). Third place? The real estate industry with $53 million (57% goes to Republicans.)The oil and gas industry comes in at No. 15 with $14 million in contributions.
The top five contributors were Koch Industries, ExxonMobil (XOM, news, msgs), Valero Energy (VLO, news, msgs), Chevron (CVX, news, msgs) and Occidental Petroleum (OXY, news, msgs), according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
That $14 million puts the oil and gas industry in the company of such heavyweights as electric utilities (at $12 million) and the pharmaceutical industry (at $14 million).
Most energy money goes to GOP
The oil and gas industry’s giving is highly, highly focused. Oil and gas executives seem to feel that with the Republicans in solid control of Congress, there’s no need to give to anybody but Republicans, since they’re the folks that can get things done. There’s none of the fence straddling of the securities industry, which has divided its $46 million in contributions almost evenly between Republicans (47%) and Democrats (51%). A whopping 83% of oil and gas money has gone to Republicans in this election cycle. To find similar imbalance, you have to look at such Democratic bulwarks as the public-sector unions, 84% Democratic in their giving, and the building trades unions, at 83% Democratic.So who did this concentrated dose of cash go to? Here are the top 10 — all Republicans — as complied by the Center for Responsive Politics:
| Rank | Candidate | Office | Amount given by oil and gas industry |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hutchison, Kay Bailey, R-Texas | Senate | $258,361 |
| 2 | Burns, Conrad, R-Mont. | Senate | $188,775 |
| 3 | Santorum, Rick, R-Pa. | Senate | $188,120 |
| 4 | Bode, Denise, R-Okla. | House | $153,650 |
| 5 | Allen, George, R-Va. | Senate | $148,600 |
| 6 | Talent, James M., R-Mo. | Senate | $147,470 |
| 7 | Cornyn, John, R-Texas | Senate | $142,750 |
| 8 | Barton, Joe, R-Texas | House | $138,450 |
| 9 | Hastert, Dennis, R-Ill. | House | $122,200 |
| 10 | Pombo, Richard, R-Calif. | House | $121,340 |
Data from the FEC as of Sept. 11, 2006. Compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
You’ve got to hand it to the oil and gas industry. They know how to support their favorite sons and daughters, of course: Texans Kay Bailey Hutchinson and John Cornyn, after all, are both senators from a big oil state.
But the industry keeps its eye on the prize. If you want to keep oil and gas royalties low; if you’d like to drill in environmentally sensitive areas; if you want to keep the government from admitting that global warming might exist; if you want to make sure that money flows to research in alternative energy technologies for the future but not to commercialize alternative technologies today, then you give to the key people who can get those jobs done.
So you contribute to the campaign of California Republican Rep. Richard Pombo, chairman of the House Resources Committee in charge of deciding how the oil and gas (and other industries) can use government land and how much they’ll pay for that use. Pombo has been a point man in the House in efforts to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling.
(The committee’s jurisdiction also extends to gambling on Indian lands. Pombo and his personal political action committee, known as Rich PAC, reportedly are being investigated in the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal. Indian tribes paid Abramoff and his lobbying firm big fees in exchange for promises he would get favorable rulings from lawmakers and members of the executive branch on their casino plans.)
Pombo is also involved in my favorite bit of election-year irony. He has been criticized for lobbying then-Interior Secretary Gale Norton to suspend regulations opposed by the wind-power industry because his parents collect sizable royalties from windmills on their ranch. Pombo, his critics have noted, has a personal interest in the ranch. So who should Pombo face in the 2006 election? Democrat Jerry McNerney, a wind-power engineer and CEO of a start-up wind-turbine manufacturer.
The oil and gas industry also gives heavily to Texas Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee; to Sens. James Talent of Missouri, Conrad Burns of Montana and George Allen of Virginia, all of whom sit on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee; to Illinois’ Dennis Hastert, speaker of the House, who plays a huge role in deciding what legislation moves to the floor for a vote and what doesn’t; and to Pennsylvania’s Rick Santorum, head of the Senate Republican Conference and announced candidate for Republican whip in 2006 if he wins re-election.
Control of Congress up in air
Among the top 10 recipients of oil and gas money, Pombo, Talent, Burns and Santorum face stiff races for re-election this year. That, plus the possibility of a shift in control of one or both houses of Congress from Republican to Democratic, creates some interesting angles for investors interested in playing potential changes in U.S. energy policy as the biases of Republican incumbents yield to the biases of Democratic replacements.Sometimes it’s hard to tell exactly what the effect might be. So for example, a shift in control of the House of Representatives would be likely to unseat Barton as chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. (Barton is a lock in his re-election. The incumbent has raised $2.7 million to Democratic challenger David Harris’ $22,000. Harris had $932 in his campaign treasury as of Oct. 20.)
Barton has been one of the fiercest congressional critics of global-warming theories. At a recent congressional hearing, he said, “As long as I am chairman, (regulating the gases that produce global warming) is off the table indefinitely. I don’t want there to be any uncertainty about that.” But Barton’s likely replacement would be John Dingell, D-Mich., a fierce advocate for the U.S. automobile industry.
In other cases, the effect of the change is easier to extrapolate. Pombo’s likely replacement as chairman of the House Resources Committee would be Nick Rahall, D-W.Va. Can you say “coal,” boys and girls?
Money and politics go hand in hand
No matter how the elections turn out this year, of course, the connection between money and politicians will survive. Incumbents of both parties know that taking the money out of politics — I mean, really taking it out — would destroy one of most effective tools they have for assuring their own re-election. Taking the money out of campaigns is less likely than the Easter Bunny passing out eggs in January.So vote your convictions. Throw this year’s bums out. They certainly deserve it. Then watch to see which newly elected politicians start quickly to work to become next year’s bums.
And always remember the great American humorist Finley Peter Dunne’s advice: “Trust everybody, but cut the cards.”
Dear Friend,
Recently, President Bush delivered what was billed as a major
speech on global warming.
What a disaster! Rather than staking out a set of ambitious
goals for America to strive for, the President argued that the
United States should do nothing about global warming until 2025.
That’s completely irresponsible — and President Bush needs to
hear it.
Senator Barbara Boxer is going to deliver a petition to the
White House, demanding that President Bush stand up and join the
fight to stop global warming. I hope you’ll join me and add your
name to the petition by clicking on the link below:
http://ga6.org/campaign/bush
and feel free to use strong language ![]()
-Tim Padden
House of Solar
Texas net metering call with Rob Styler and Erika Morgan
(LINK)
This call was held in response to new interpretation of the net metering laws in Texas. The Public Utilities Commission has decided to apply a meaning to the description of net metering that is not held by 30+ other states. Basically they now leave the decisions around Net Metering up to the Utilities .This is why is is so important for the citizens of this state and this country to be on alert and involved. I do hold the belief that this is OUR state and laws should be passed for the benefit of the majority and not a small powerful minority. This will never happen while the decision are left to a few and people just sit on their hands and hope.
Tim Padden
RSD -Texas
Take Action
Imagine hundreds of thousands of calls flooding Congressional phone lines.That is what LCV and our coalition partners plan to generate today—Earth Day—to demand action on global warming.
As the global warming crisis continues to worsen, Congress still has not passed any comprehensive legislation to solve it. That is why the League of Conservation Voters has partnered with the Earth Day Network on the Call for Climate campaign to generate an unprecedented number of calls to Congress this Earth Day to issue a wake-up call that they can’t ignore.
Will you take a few minutes to add your voice to this extraordinary effort?
Here is the information you need to take action:
| WHO: | Senator Cornyn at (202) 224-2934 Senator Hutchison at (202) 224-5922 Representative McCaul at (202) 225-2401 |
| WHEN: | TODAY, Tuesday, April 22 |
| WHAT TO SAY: | Tell the legislative staffer who answers that:
|
The way to protect your world is my creating change from the bottom u. Feel free to pass this along to your friends . Today we can make a statement.
Tim Padden
RSD Citizenre
If you’ve been wondering what happened to the bill introduced last week by U.S. Sens. Cantwell and Ensign that would, among other measures, extend solar investment tax credits for residential and commercial use, here’s some up-to-the-minute news. By a vote of 88-8, the Cantwell-Ensign language was successfully added as an amendment to the Senate’s comprehensive housing bill (HR 3221). This bill passed the Senate on Thursday with an estimated $6.6 billion in tax credits allocated to renewables, and including a lifting of the $2000 cap on residential solar installation credits. (You’ll find details of how your senator voted below). This is a landmark development on Capitol Hill, since attempts to get the Senate this far have failed three times in the last year. Of course, on those occasions the initial impetus came from the House, and the stumbling block for the Senate was always the source of funding for the tax credits–reducing some of the government subsidies enjoyed by the oil and gas industry. In this case it’s a Senate-originated bill, with no identified source of funding, and that means that the problem this time around may be with the House. Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), head of the Finance Committee’s Energy Sub-committee, has said that the House is unlikely to agree to the provisions without spending offsets. Sponsors of the energy amendment and Senate leadership have started to work with Representatives and the White House to find a way out of the looming impasse. And Maria Cantwell has not dismissed the idea of paying for the incentives in a tax extenders bill. “I’m happy to look at any vehicle that’s going to move quickly,” said the Washington Senator. “I think we have a few more weeks before these (renewable energy) projects get cancelled.” Cantwell and her co-sponsor, John Ensign (R-NV), have argued that since the incentives would stimulate the economy, Congress should approve them without offsets. But this argument is unlikely to sway the House, so senior Finance Democrats and the Bush Administration continue to try to find an agreeable set of offsets that would allow the renewable energy credits to be included on a larger tax extenders bill. We don’t yet know when, or in what form, the bill will be brought before the House, or what kind of fight it will face there or at the White House. But with Senate passage at least, a step that has been impossible for a year has finally been taken. Many of you phoned or e-mailed your senators to urge them to vote for clean energy, and 88 of them did! To all of you, thanks for making your voices heard. And now it might be a good time to thank (or spank) those senators who voted. The eight holdout senators who voted against the Cantwell-Ensign amendment were: Alexander (R-TN), Bunning (R-KY), Byrd (D-WV), Carper (D-DE), Dodd (D-CT), Kyl (R-AZ), Sessions (R-AL) and Voinovich (R-OH) And the four who did not cast votes at all? They were the three presidential candidates (who may well have been otherwise occupied), and Elizabeth Dole (R-NC). Why not TAKE ACTION NOW and send thanks ‘n’ spanks to your senator(s)? All you have to do is enter your ZIP code below and GO! |
||||
|
||||

Round Rock-based Dell announced Wednesday it will use green energy to power its entire Austin headquarters.
The computer company said it gets 40 percent of its power from Waste Management’s Austin Community Landfill gas-to-energy plant. The rest comes from wind farms.
The company declined to say how much it will pay for the renewable power.
The contract is for 80 million kilowatt hours a year. Typically renewable power credits cost around half a cent per kilowatt hour, meaning Dell could pay about $400,000 extra to run on renewable power rather than fossil fuel or nuclear power.
More than 10,000 employees work at the 2.1 million square-foot Dell headquarters.
“It’s time for our industry to take a lead role in creating a clean energy future,” said Paul Bell, president of Dell Americas in a media release.
A facility in Twin Falls, Idaho is also completely green-powered.
Dell also said it will increase green power from eight to 17 percent at the Austin Parmer Campus. Previously, 8 percent of the campus’ power came from renewable sources.
The company said it is the latest step in meeting a 2008 carbon neutral commitment made last year.
Dell expects the renewable power to become cheaper than fossil fuel electricity during the next three years, saving the company almost $2 million per year and cutting carbon dioxide emissions by almost 12,000 tons.
—-
The Dallas Morning News contributed to this report
AUSTIN — Proposed regulations relating to the installation of renewable-energy-producing devices at homes and businesses could stymie the development of solar power in Texas, a coalition of conservation groups are warning.
The regulations — some of which are up for consideration by the Texas Public Utility Commission today, and some later in the year — would establish broad guidelines for how the state’s deregulated electric market treats consumers and businesses that invest in solar panels, small windmills or related devices.
A coalition of conservation groups complained Tuesday that the rules would require the acquisition of expensive redundant meters for those who invest in solar panels and hope to be compensated for the excess electricity that would potentially flow back into the state’s power grid.
Preliminary rules also leave open the possibility that those who generate power through solar panels or small windmills would not be compensated properly — or at all — according to the conservation groups.
“These rules protect the utility companies by shifting all the cost of solar power to the customers while giving consumers none of the benefits,†said Cyrus Reed, conservation director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club.
The three-member PUC is set to consider some of the regulations today. The second set of regulations, which would govern a broad set of related issues, remains in preliminary form and won’t go before the PUC for weeks.
All the proposed regulations relate to House Bill 3693, an energy efficiency bill authored by state Rep. Joe Strauss, R-San Antonio, during the 2007 legislative session. Reed said the preliminary rules set forth by the PUC staff do not conform to the spirit of the law. Strauss was unavailable for comment Tuesday.
But Steve Davis, president of the Alliance for Retail Markets, said the electric company umbrella group supports the staff’s proposed regulations as they relate to the installation of meters for so-called distributive renewable generation, such as rooftop solar panels.
Under HB 3693, “an electric utility shall make available . . . separate meters that measure the load and generator output, or a single meter capable of measuring inflow and outflow.†The law also states that “the distributed renewable generation owner must pay the differential cost of the metering, unless the meters are provided at no additional cost.â€
Davis said it’s important to have a method that measures the influx of power into a home or business and another that measures power that potentially flows from solar panels, windmills, or other renewable-energy sources.
Davis noted that the value of the energy flowing in to a home or business and the value of the energy flowing out can be different — depending on factors such as the time of day when the power is produced. That’s why it’s not enough to have a meter that moves both backward and forward, he said.
“The value of the energy that comes in and the value of the energy that comes out are not always one in the same,†he said. “We have to be sure that we’re getting compensated [properly] for our energy that is consumed on the premises.â€
He said his organization had not yet formulated positions on others aspects of the pending rules.
Chris Schein, a spokesman for Oncor, which operates the North Texas transmission system, said the company will roll out advanced meters over the next several years that can measure the net power to and from homes and businesses. He said that a separate regulation calls for customers to pay for the meters through a surcharge on bills.
House Bill 3693 calls for regulators to have the rules in place by Jan. 1, according to a PUC spokesman.
R.A. Dyer reports from the Star-Telegram’s Austin bureau. 512-476-4294


Recent Comments