by jboullion | Jan 20, 2010 | Uncategorized
From an article by Dee Hall in the La Crosse Tribune:
MADISON — The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources is dragging its heels in addressing charges that four University of Wisconsin System coal-fired plants are violating the federal Clean Air Act, an environmental group says.
The Sierra Club alleged in comments last summer that the heating plants at the La Crosse, Eau Claire, Stevens Point and Stout campuses have undergone millions of dollars worth of upgrades that should trigger additional pollution controls.
A consultant’s report commissioned by the state Department of Admini-stration disagreed, concluding that the $16.8 million in changes at the four facilities don’t qualify as “major modifications.“
Officials at the DNR, which issues operating permits for the four plants, say they’re still evaluating the comments.
Jeff Johnson, environmental engineering supervisor for the air-management program at the DNR’s regional office in Eau Claire, said the permit reviews are “complicated” and it will take time to evaluate the written comments filed by the Sierra Club and others expected from the U.S. Environ-mental Protection Agency.
“I do not have all the information on how the comments from Sierra Club and EPA will be handled, but do know we have a small task force working on resolving these issues,” Johnson said.
Charges that state-owned power plants are violating the federal clean-air law come at an awkward time for Gov. Jim Doyle, who late last year unveiled his Clean Energy Jobs Act. It calls for 25 percent of the state’s energy to come from wind, solar, biomass or other renewable sources by 2025. At the end of 2008, the state was at nearly 5 percent.
Wisconsin currently relies heavily on coal, which is a major source of greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change.
‘We can only move so fast’
While the overwhelming majority of that coal is burned by private utilities, the state owns 15 coal-fired plants that serve UW campuses, state treatment facilities and prisons and state-owned buildings in Madison including the Capitol. The plants provide steam to heat the buildings, and some generate electricity and chilled water for cooling.
“Clearly one of the first and best steps he (Doyle) could take is to clean up the state of Wisconsin facilities,” said Jennifer Feyerherm, director of the Sierra Club’s Wisconsin Clean Energy Campaign. “It seems like the first logical step for someone who wants to take the lead on global warming.”
by jboullion | Dec 24, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an article by Lisa Kaiser in the Shepard Express (Milwaukee):
Supporters of a proposed clean energy bill promise that not only will the new green energy standards help the environment, but that they will also help the state’s bottom line.
If passed by the state Legislature, the proposed Clean Energy Jobs Act would increase the amount of electricity to be generated by renewable energy, change building codes, implement new energy standards for appliances and cars sold in the state, revise the state’s requirements for new nuclear power plants, and require the state Department of Transportation (DOT) to consider greenhouse gas emissions when planning a new transportation project.
The bill, built on recommendations from the Governor’s Task Force on Global Warming, would require 25% of the state’s energy to be produced from renewable sources by 2025 and encourage businesses and residents to conserve energy and increase energy efficiency measures.
Taken together, the bill’s provisions would cut the state’s greenhouse gas emissions 22% by 2022 and 75% by 2050.
The bill will be introduced in the state Legislature after the winter break, and supporters would like to deliver it to the governor’s desk by April 22, 2010, the 40th anniversary of Earth Day.
by jboullion | Dec 21, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an Associated Press article by Ryan J. Foley in the Green Bay Press Gazette:
MADISON — Gov. Jim Doyle has backed off a campaign promise that the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay and three other UW campuses will be energy independent by 2012 after determining it was not practical as proposed.
Weeks before he was re-elected in 2006, Doyle said campuses would “go off the grid” by becoming the first state agencies to purchase or produce as much energy from renewable sources as they consume. He said they would achieve that by replacing fossil fuels with cleaner energy sources like solar, wind and biomass.
The goal has since been changed to require the campuses to sharply reduce their carbon dioxide emissions, instead of ending them altogether or going off the grid entirely, by 2012. The change came into public view this month during a Board of Regents meeting.
Some university officials say the original plan never made much sense because “going off the grid” would have required them to start producing their own electricity instead of buying it from utilities, which was not feasible or cost-effective.
At the same time, they credit the challenge with spurring them to conserve energy, study alternative fuels, and purchase more renewable sources from the utilities that provide their electricity.
Doyle told reporters Wednesday his original vision may have been unrealistic because of the challenges associated with producing energy on campuses, but the program would still motivate students and university employees to reduce pollution.
by jboullion | Dec 17, 2009 | Uncategorized
An Associated Press article published in the Minneapolis Star Tribune:
MADISON, Wis. – Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle says he is focusing on developing jobs in clean energy fields at the U.N. climate summit in Copenhagen.
Doyle told reporters in a conference call Wednesday he has been meeting with other leaders and company executives to discuss “building a good strong new economy in green energy and energy conservation.”
Doyle said Wisconsin has a tremendous opportunity to create a significant part of its economy around jobs in water, wind energy, and sustainable forestry.
He said the state must not resist transitioning away from the dirty fuel sources like coal that have historically powered the state. Doing so, he said, would put the state at an economic disadvantage.
by jboullion | Nov 30, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an article by Joe Knight in the Eau Claire Leader-Telegram:
“This is the age of oil, but the age of oil is about to end,” said Lori Snyder of UW-Eau Claire’s geology department.
In 1950, the U.S. did not import any oil. Today, we still like our cars, and we have to import 60 percent of the oil we use to support our driving habit, she said.
Vehicles may have gotten a smaller and more fuel efficient since the 1950s, but our appetite for energy – the majority of it coming from fossil fuels – is huge. Today the average American uses three times the amount of energy we used in 1950, Snyder said.
Snyder and J. Brian Mahoney, also of the geology department, discussed the future of fossil fuels and energy Tuesday night for an “Ask A Scientist” program at UW-Eau Claire.
An audience of mixed ages attended, and many asked questions of the scientists, but the answers they received painted a less-than-reassuring picture of our energy future.
Fossil fuel basically is solar energy trapped by plants and bugs – sometimes millions of years ago – that never completely decomposed. We have extracted the fuels and used it to power our cars, heat our homes and generate our electricity, but supplies are becoming scarce, the geologists said.
Oil supplies in the U.S. peaked in the 1970s, Mahoney said. World supplies of oil that is readily accessible are peaking now, he said.
There are some alternative sources of oil, such as sand tars in Alberta, Canada, which are being mined, but they require a substantial amount of energy to extract and are costly to the environment, Mahoney said.
We still have an abundance of coal in the U.S. – enough to meet our electrical needs for 200 to 250 years, Snyder said. Unfortunately, coal is the dirtiest fossil fuel for emissions. We’re already altering the composition of the atmosphere, and continuing at the current rate or increasing emissions brings about more questions about climate change and what life on Earth might be like in 100 years, Mahoney said.
“It’s taking us to a place we don’t really understand,” he said.
