The Australian
Analysis - Ewin Hannan
August 05, 2006
Ian Campbell's stunning cave-in has undermined his credibility and cast a long shadow over the Howard Government's environmental approval process. Despite ferocious spin, Campbell had little option but to cut a deal. If the court case had run its course, he was a strong chance to lose. Bemused taxpayers would have footed a significant legal bill.
But even in defeat, Campbell was selective with the facts. He claimed he stopped the wind farm because his Biosis report found it would have a "significant" impact on the orange-bellied parrot. The report actually found the mortality rate would be "very small".
Like a drowning man, Campbell seized on a 2003 Victorian departmental submission to a planning panel which said the wind farm would increase the "level of threat" to the parrot. While it did not use the site, the submission says it was highly likely to fly across it, often at rotor height.
What Campbell doesn't say is the panel considered the submission, with many others, and found there was no threat. Its June 2004 report says "there is no significant likelihood of harm" to the bird.
Even the department submission did not recommend stopping the wind farm. Campbell did.
Lawyers for Wind Power, which wanted to build the farm, believed they would have won the legal action because Campbell failed to show them the Biosis report before blocking the project. It appeared to them to be a straightforward denial of natural justice.
Yesterday, Campbell argued he did not disclose the report because Wind Power had forced his hand by taking separate legal action this year to push him to make a decision. But this doesn't ring true.
Campbell took 18 months to make a decision after putting it on hold after the 2004 federal election. He could have given the company time to respond to the Biosis report.
The reality is Campbell kept shopping around until he got the advice he wanted.
In December 2004, consultants engaged by his department to examine all parrot material, including the state planning panel, found the threat to the parrot was "negligible". His department was told no more studies were necessary.
But Campbell kept digging. After conducting the Biosis study, he received advice from his own department recommending he approve the wind farm. Instead of cutting his losses, Campbell persisted and has now been forced into an embarrassing backdown. It has been a sorry farce.
Saturday, 5 August 2006
Campbell reconsiders wind farm ban
Friday August 4, 12:39 PM
The Federal Environment Minister, Ian Campbell, has agreed to set aside his decision to scrap a wind farm planned for South Gippsland in Victoria. In April, Senator Campbell overturned Victorian Government approval for a 52 wind turbine farm at Bald Hills.
Senator Campbell said he scrapped the project to protect the orange-bellied parrot.
But the Victorian Government attacked the decision because a consultant's report estimated that at worst, only one parrot would be put at risk about every 600 years. "We believe that he hadn't shown due regard for process and we have been vindicated," Victorian Planning Minister Rob Hulls said.
Proponents of wind power have agreed to drop a legal challenge against the decision because Senator Campbell has agreed to consider new information on the proposal. "I think it's a good outcome for taxpayers and a good outcome for the environment," he said. Mr Hulls says Senator Campbell's move to reconsider the decision proves it was politically motivated.
"This Minister has used his position and the federal legislation as nothing more than his political plaything," he said. The Federal Government will also pay the company's legal costs.
The Federal Environment Minister, Ian Campbell, has agreed to set aside his decision to scrap a wind farm planned for South Gippsland in Victoria. In April, Senator Campbell overturned Victorian Government approval for a 52 wind turbine farm at Bald Hills.Senator Campbell said he scrapped the project to protect the orange-bellied parrot.
But the Victorian Government attacked the decision because a consultant's report estimated that at worst, only one parrot would be put at risk about every 600 years. "We believe that he hadn't shown due regard for process and we have been vindicated," Victorian Planning Minister Rob Hulls said.
Proponents of wind power have agreed to drop a legal challenge against the decision because Senator Campbell has agreed to consider new information on the proposal. "I think it's a good outcome for taxpayers and a good outcome for the environment," he said. Mr Hulls says Senator Campbell's move to reconsider the decision proves it was politically motivated.
"This Minister has used his position and the federal legislation as nothing more than his political plaything," he said. The Federal Government will also pay the company's legal costs.
China to make industry pay for pollution
The Australian
Rowan Callick, China correspondent
August 04, 2006
CHINA will order industry to pay for the right to discharge noxious sulphur dioxide in a market-driven attempt to tackle its chronic air pollution problem. Under a plan to reduce sulphur dioxide emissions by 10 per cent, China, which leads the world in air pollution as well as driving economic growth, will also introduce emission trading deals.
The World Bank says 16 of the world's most polluted cities are in China, and that 400,000 people a year die from related illnesses.
Department of Pollution Control director-general Li Xinmin said yesterday that sulphur dioxide emissions rose 27 per cent in the five years to the end of last year, during which the country's coal consumption - the main culprit - grew by more than 800million tonnes.
He said restricting the sulphur dioxide rise to 27 per cent was an achievement, given soaring coal-fired power generation.
"That means it's still under effective control," he said. "Without restrictive measures it would have been much worse.
"Coal accounts for 70 per cent of China's energy consumption. This fact is hard to change in the short term." Half of the coal is used to generate power.
But overall, he said, during 2000-05, 22 per cent more cities brought their air quality up to a required national standard, while the number with unacceptable air quality fell by 24 per cent.
Last year, 357 out of 696 cities being monitored were found to have acid rain.
Mr Li said that during the new five-year plan that had just started, the Government was seeking an ambitious 10 per cent fall in sulphur dioxide emissions.
He said the State Environmental Protection Administration would tackle this task through pilot projects on selling emission rights and establishing emission trading, through technological change - including installing desulfurisation units in coal power plants - and through publishing more often and more publicly the names of enterprises that meet pollution targets and those that do not.
The Government would also introduce tougher vehicle emission standards and phase out the vehicles that failed to meet them.
In Beijing alone, he said, the city authorities were planning to take 300,000 unacceptable cars off the roads by the end of next year - in time to help ensure the tough target of a clean, green Olympic Games in August 2008.
Mr Li said this push to remove polluting vehicles, plus measures to improve fuel quality, was the 12th stage of Beijing's Olympics-driven environmental program. The other 11 stages, he said, had each cost up to $16 billion.
He said that by 2008 all heavy industry, led by Capital Steel Company, would be moved out of Beijing, and that the boilers in the heart of the city would be converted from coal to liquefied petroleum gas. Beijing Chemical Works has been closed down.
In surrounding provinces, 185 businesses that failed to comply with environmental standards were shut down last year, he said.
Partly as a result, Beijing had met its target of 63per cent of the days in 2005 meeting national air quality standards.
Mr Li said that "after years of stable and rapid growth", the Government was now shifting to a more balanced strategy "to optimise growth by environmental measures. Faced by such rapid growth, we are strengthening our supervision".
He said a claim published yesterday that almost 25 per cent of Los Angeles's air pollution came from China was "not trustworthy because such findings don't have a solid scientific basis".
Rowan Callick, China correspondent
August 04, 2006
CHINA will order industry to pay for the right to discharge noxious sulphur dioxide in a market-driven attempt to tackle its chronic air pollution problem. Under a plan to reduce sulphur dioxide emissions by 10 per cent, China, which leads the world in air pollution as well as driving economic growth, will also introduce emission trading deals.
The World Bank says 16 of the world's most polluted cities are in China, and that 400,000 people a year die from related illnesses.
Department of Pollution Control director-general Li Xinmin said yesterday that sulphur dioxide emissions rose 27 per cent in the five years to the end of last year, during which the country's coal consumption - the main culprit - grew by more than 800million tonnes.
He said restricting the sulphur dioxide rise to 27 per cent was an achievement, given soaring coal-fired power generation.
"That means it's still under effective control," he said. "Without restrictive measures it would have been much worse.
"Coal accounts for 70 per cent of China's energy consumption. This fact is hard to change in the short term." Half of the coal is used to generate power.
But overall, he said, during 2000-05, 22 per cent more cities brought their air quality up to a required national standard, while the number with unacceptable air quality fell by 24 per cent.
Last year, 357 out of 696 cities being monitored were found to have acid rain.
Mr Li said that during the new five-year plan that had just started, the Government was seeking an ambitious 10 per cent fall in sulphur dioxide emissions.
He said the State Environmental Protection Administration would tackle this task through pilot projects on selling emission rights and establishing emission trading, through technological change - including installing desulfurisation units in coal power plants - and through publishing more often and more publicly the names of enterprises that meet pollution targets and those that do not.
The Government would also introduce tougher vehicle emission standards and phase out the vehicles that failed to meet them.
In Beijing alone, he said, the city authorities were planning to take 300,000 unacceptable cars off the roads by the end of next year - in time to help ensure the tough target of a clean, green Olympic Games in August 2008.
Mr Li said this push to remove polluting vehicles, plus measures to improve fuel quality, was the 12th stage of Beijing's Olympics-driven environmental program. The other 11 stages, he said, had each cost up to $16 billion.
He said that by 2008 all heavy industry, led by Capital Steel Company, would be moved out of Beijing, and that the boilers in the heart of the city would be converted from coal to liquefied petroleum gas. Beijing Chemical Works has been closed down.
In surrounding provinces, 185 businesses that failed to comply with environmental standards were shut down last year, he said.
Partly as a result, Beijing had met its target of 63per cent of the days in 2005 meeting national air quality standards.
Mr Li said that "after years of stable and rapid growth", the Government was now shifting to a more balanced strategy "to optimise growth by environmental measures. Faced by such rapid growth, we are strengthening our supervision".
He said a claim published yesterday that almost 25 per cent of Los Angeles's air pollution came from China was "not trustworthy because such findings don't have a solid scientific basis".
Cedar Rapids Secretary Pushes Renewable Energy
August 2, 2006
Frank Miller spends a lot of money each month on energy. "We travel from Iowa City everyday to sell sweet corn, so we have to watch our costs there," says Johnson County Farmer Frank Miller. He says the combination of cooling his home, fueling his truck and harvesting his crops makes for a very tight budget.
Miller says the price of energy isn't the only thing destroying his profit margin. "Our corn prices are just terrible, we're actually producing right at cost, so we're not making anything," says Miller. He says he's looking to ethanol to take his farm to the next level. "We're hoping to get these plants going in Cedar Rapids, to use some our corn and beans for biodiesel," said Miller.
Miller's customer Curtis Edgar says he's just learned to deal with the high prices. He says he won't stop cooling his house or stop driving to save money. Edgar says,"If we're going to cutback, we'll cut back somewhere else."
Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman says Iowans are on the right track with ethanol and using wind power. "I can tell you that this is a major crisis in a lot of American families. I know that the president knows that," said Secretary Bodman. Secretary Bodman says the government is working on getting more energy supplies to bring down prices. They are also investing in wind, solar and ethanol energies. Bodman says change will take time, but eventually prices should go down.
Edgar says,"Sometimes it might get tight at the end of the month, but it always works out." That's news Iowans like Frank Miller and Curtis Edgar are glad to hear. "The American public just can keep doing this forever," says Miller.
Frank Miller spends a lot of money each month on energy. "We travel from Iowa City everyday to sell sweet corn, so we have to watch our costs there," says Johnson County Farmer Frank Miller. He says the combination of cooling his home, fueling his truck and harvesting his crops makes for a very tight budget.
Miller says the price of energy isn't the only thing destroying his profit margin. "Our corn prices are just terrible, we're actually producing right at cost, so we're not making anything," says Miller. He says he's looking to ethanol to take his farm to the next level. "We're hoping to get these plants going in Cedar Rapids, to use some our corn and beans for biodiesel," said Miller.
Miller's customer Curtis Edgar says he's just learned to deal with the high prices. He says he won't stop cooling his house or stop driving to save money. Edgar says,"If we're going to cutback, we'll cut back somewhere else."
Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman says Iowans are on the right track with ethanol and using wind power. "I can tell you that this is a major crisis in a lot of American families. I know that the president knows that," said Secretary Bodman. Secretary Bodman says the government is working on getting more energy supplies to bring down prices. They are also investing in wind, solar and ethanol energies. Bodman says change will take time, but eventually prices should go down.
Edgar says,"Sometimes it might get tight at the end of the month, but it always works out." That's news Iowans like Frank Miller and Curtis Edgar are glad to hear. "The American public just can keep doing this forever," says Miller.
Avista exec has a hand in federal decisions about alternative fuel vehicles
Mail Tribune
Thu, Aug 3, 2006
Newly appointed to an energy board advising the U.S. secretary of energy and Congress, Medford Avista executive Steve Vincent has joined efforts in recommending the fast-tracking of alternative fuel vehicles, creating a system of renewable energy credits that can be traded and making energy conservation a "moral imperative."
Just back from a week of talks with the State Energy Advisory Board in Washington, D.C., Vincent, Avista's regional business manager, said his panel in August will finalize five major recommendations — including making power plants part of Homeland Security, which is now only happening "to the smallest degree."
Continuing a major focus on "moving away from petroleum," said Vincent, the board also will ask the Department of Energy to better publicize new technology coming out of its labs, especially about alternative-fuel vehicles, so it can be commercialized more quickly in the private sector.
Although the panel is only advisory and has no legal power, Vincent said its DOE contact, Andrew Karsner, the new assistant secretary for energy efficiency and renewable energy, has shown "a lot of receptivity" and wants the department to seriously engage in alternative-vehicle fuels.
The board wants DOE to actively promote early use of such new transportation fuels as natural gas, ethanol and biodiesel by "pulling together the best practices in communities and use that to deploy it state to state," said Vincent. "This will help us move away from petroleum, clean the air and allow us to get away from energy security issues and why we have conflict in the Mideast."
The panel, composed mainly of state secretaries of energy and utility heads, wants DOE to set up a system of tradable credits based on energy efficiency and renewable energy, such as biomass, solar and wind power — something "now just in its infancy in the U.S.," Vincent said.
He called credits "the least-cost plan" for mainstreaming alternative energy use — "and the least-cost plan is what utilities are into."
So-called renewable portfolio standards allowing for such credits have been passed by almost half the states, including California and Montana. Gov. Kulongoski will ask the Oregon Legislature to adopt them next session, said Vincent.
The panel is asking DOE to embrace a vigorous program of education to "transform energy efficiency in the market into a moral imperative," said Vincent, rather than "just another brand of light bulb, which is how the public now thinks of it."
Asked if the panel's recommendations will have clout in the White House and Congress, Vincent said,"That's a good question. You wonder if an advisory board is there for show or if they will take your recommendations seriously. I do believe there's a lot of receptivity. The president did devote half his State of the Union speech to energy-related issues."
The panel will ask DOE to "consider energy security to be part of Homeland Security" and try to insert itself into Homeland Security's efforts so that power generation facilities are protected.
"Right now it's about protecting ports and helicopters and such from terrorism," Vincent said. "Energy has to be on that list."
Vincent was recently appointed to a two-year term on the board by Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman. Its Web site, www.steab.org, says its mission is to develop recommendations for DOE and Congress on policies for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, helping bring consistency among federal, state and local efforts.
Vincent serves as president of the Oregon Economic Development Association, is a member of the Oregon Department of Treasury's Growth Account Board and the Governor's Unemployment Insurance Diversion Task Force, and serves in several roles with Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development Inc.
John Darling is a freelance writer living in Ashland. E-mail him at jdarling@jeffnet.org.
Thu, Aug 3, 2006
Newly appointed to an energy board advising the U.S. secretary of energy and Congress, Medford Avista executive Steve Vincent has joined efforts in recommending the fast-tracking of alternative fuel vehicles, creating a system of renewable energy credits that can be traded and making energy conservation a "moral imperative."
Just back from a week of talks with the State Energy Advisory Board in Washington, D.C., Vincent, Avista's regional business manager, said his panel in August will finalize five major recommendations — including making power plants part of Homeland Security, which is now only happening "to the smallest degree."
Continuing a major focus on "moving away from petroleum," said Vincent, the board also will ask the Department of Energy to better publicize new technology coming out of its labs, especially about alternative-fuel vehicles, so it can be commercialized more quickly in the private sector.
Although the panel is only advisory and has no legal power, Vincent said its DOE contact, Andrew Karsner, the new assistant secretary for energy efficiency and renewable energy, has shown "a lot of receptivity" and wants the department to seriously engage in alternative-vehicle fuels.
The board wants DOE to actively promote early use of such new transportation fuels as natural gas, ethanol and biodiesel by "pulling together the best practices in communities and use that to deploy it state to state," said Vincent. "This will help us move away from petroleum, clean the air and allow us to get away from energy security issues and why we have conflict in the Mideast."
The panel, composed mainly of state secretaries of energy and utility heads, wants DOE to set up a system of tradable credits based on energy efficiency and renewable energy, such as biomass, solar and wind power — something "now just in its infancy in the U.S.," Vincent said.
He called credits "the least-cost plan" for mainstreaming alternative energy use — "and the least-cost plan is what utilities are into."
So-called renewable portfolio standards allowing for such credits have been passed by almost half the states, including California and Montana. Gov. Kulongoski will ask the Oregon Legislature to adopt them next session, said Vincent.
The panel is asking DOE to embrace a vigorous program of education to "transform energy efficiency in the market into a moral imperative," said Vincent, rather than "just another brand of light bulb, which is how the public now thinks of it."
Asked if the panel's recommendations will have clout in the White House and Congress, Vincent said,"That's a good question. You wonder if an advisory board is there for show or if they will take your recommendations seriously. I do believe there's a lot of receptivity. The president did devote half his State of the Union speech to energy-related issues."
The panel will ask DOE to "consider energy security to be part of Homeland Security" and try to insert itself into Homeland Security's efforts so that power generation facilities are protected.
"Right now it's about protecting ports and helicopters and such from terrorism," Vincent said. "Energy has to be on that list."
Vincent was recently appointed to a two-year term on the board by Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman. Its Web site, www.steab.org, says its mission is to develop recommendations for DOE and Congress on policies for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, helping bring consistency among federal, state and local efforts.
Vincent serves as president of the Oregon Economic Development Association, is a member of the Oregon Department of Treasury's Growth Account Board and the Governor's Unemployment Insurance Diversion Task Force, and serves in several roles with Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development Inc.
John Darling is a freelance writer living in Ashland. E-mail him at jdarling@jeffnet.org.
Blair defies Bush on cells and gases
The Times
August 02, 2006
LOS ANGELES: Tony Blair broke ranks with George W.Bush on Monday to announce agreements with the state of California to cut greenhouse gases and promote stem cell research, in defiance of White House policy. The British Prime Minister met California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to lay the groundwork for a new transAtlantic carbon trading system designed to encourage companies to reduce emissions.
Frustration with the US President's refusal to cut carbon emissions has driven Britain to risk the wrath of the White House and do business with the states on climate change. The deal with California, to be signed after a summit in Los Angeles, came after Mr Blair publicly defied the White House and called for extra investment in stem cell research.
Downing Street hopes the two new agreements will end criticism that Mr Blair is slavishly loyal to Mr Bush. The Prime Minister's spokesman even abandoned the usual loyal language used about the White House when discussing the two agreements.
Asked if Britain risked antagonising Mr Bush, he said: "It is important we can work with people who are like-minded and have the same perspective on things." Privately, Mr Blair is furious Mr Bush has refused to act on climate change.
The White House not only withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol but also has since tried to cast doubt on the science of global warming, saying it has not been proved that climate change is a man-made phenomenon. It is refusing to limit emissions.
Stem cell research is another major policy difference in the "special relationship" between the two nations. Mr Bush has used his veto to block federal funding for stem cell research on embryos. But at a meeting with the biotechnology industry in San Francisco, Mr Blair said the research was vital to advance medical science.
During the meeting with some of the biggest players in the industry, Mr Blair lauded Britain's liberal regulations, which permit almost everything except embryo cloning. He said Britain was a haven for scientists frustrated with the restrictions in the US, and urged them to work in Britain.
August 02, 2006
LOS ANGELES: Tony Blair broke ranks with George W.Bush on Monday to announce agreements with the state of California to cut greenhouse gases and promote stem cell research, in defiance of White House policy. The British Prime Minister met California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to lay the groundwork for a new transAtlantic carbon trading system designed to encourage companies to reduce emissions.Frustration with the US President's refusal to cut carbon emissions has driven Britain to risk the wrath of the White House and do business with the states on climate change. The deal with California, to be signed after a summit in Los Angeles, came after Mr Blair publicly defied the White House and called for extra investment in stem cell research.
Downing Street hopes the two new agreements will end criticism that Mr Blair is slavishly loyal to Mr Bush. The Prime Minister's spokesman even abandoned the usual loyal language used about the White House when discussing the two agreements.
Asked if Britain risked antagonising Mr Bush, he said: "It is important we can work with people who are like-minded and have the same perspective on things." Privately, Mr Blair is furious Mr Bush has refused to act on climate change.
The White House not only withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol but also has since tried to cast doubt on the science of global warming, saying it has not been proved that climate change is a man-made phenomenon. It is refusing to limit emissions.
Stem cell research is another major policy difference in the "special relationship" between the two nations. Mr Bush has used his veto to block federal funding for stem cell research on embryos. But at a meeting with the biotechnology industry in San Francisco, Mr Blair said the research was vital to advance medical science.
During the meeting with some of the biggest players in the industry, Mr Blair lauded Britain's liberal regulations, which permit almost everything except embryo cloning. He said Britain was a haven for scientists frustrated with the restrictions in the US, and urged them to work in Britain.
Wednesday, 2 August 2006
Senator Campbell Caught Out Again On Parrots
Rob Hulls - Attorney General Minister for Industrial Relations Minister for Planning
Media Statement - 29 July 2006
The Federal Environment Minister, Senator Ian Campbell, has again exposed his appalling ignorance about his own portfolio with his latest claims about the Bald Hills wind farm and the risk to endangered orange-bellied parrots.
The Minister for Planning, Rob Hulls, and the Deputy Premier and Environment Minister, John Thwaites, said Senator Campbell's claims about supposed secret departmental advice to the Bracks Government were nonsensical.
"This would be laughable if it was not so serious," said the Planning Minister, Mr Hulls. "Senator Campbell is referring to a departmental submission to a public and independent panel process investigating the project's environmental impacts.
"The department presented a power point on its submission at the public hearings, and distributed its submission to everyone present. Its findings and recommendations were quoted in the final panel report, a copy of which was sent to the Federal Government and is also on the internet.
"So Senator Campbell is being either dumb or deceitful. He was certainly too lazy, apparently, to read the panel report as part of his own assessment of this project.
"If he thinks this submission is a secret, then he must also think Peter Costello doesn't want the Prime Minister's job. "Senator Campbell's credibility is in tatters and John Howard should get rid of him before he causes any more damage to Australia's environment."
The Deputy Premier and Environment Minister, John Thwaites, said the DSE submission referred to an increased risk but did not quantify it, and recommended compensatory habitat management. "Senator Campbell's own independent consultants, Biosis, then went on to quantify the risk, and their modelling found it to be potentially one dead parrot every 1000 years.
"Unlike Senator Campbell, we heeded the advice from the independent panel, which assessed this and other expert submissions and recommended that the wind farm be approved. "Senator Campbell received the same advice from his department, and ignored it."
Media Statement - 29 July 2006
The Federal Environment Minister, Senator Ian Campbell, has again exposed his appalling ignorance about his own portfolio with his latest claims about the Bald Hills wind farm and the risk to endangered orange-bellied parrots.
The Minister for Planning, Rob Hulls, and the Deputy Premier and Environment Minister, John Thwaites, said Senator Campbell's claims about supposed secret departmental advice to the Bracks Government were nonsensical.
"This would be laughable if it was not so serious," said the Planning Minister, Mr Hulls. "Senator Campbell is referring to a departmental submission to a public and independent panel process investigating the project's environmental impacts.
"The department presented a power point on its submission at the public hearings, and distributed its submission to everyone present. Its findings and recommendations were quoted in the final panel report, a copy of which was sent to the Federal Government and is also on the internet.
"So Senator Campbell is being either dumb or deceitful. He was certainly too lazy, apparently, to read the panel report as part of his own assessment of this project.
"If he thinks this submission is a secret, then he must also think Peter Costello doesn't want the Prime Minister's job. "Senator Campbell's credibility is in tatters and John Howard should get rid of him before he causes any more damage to Australia's environment."
The Deputy Premier and Environment Minister, John Thwaites, said the DSE submission referred to an increased risk but did not quantify it, and recommended compensatory habitat management. "Senator Campbell's own independent consultants, Biosis, then went on to quantify the risk, and their modelling found it to be potentially one dead parrot every 1000 years.
"Unlike Senator Campbell, we heeded the advice from the independent panel, which assessed this and other expert submissions and recommended that the wind farm be approved. "Senator Campbell received the same advice from his department, and ignored it."
Why nuclear power won't stop climate change
Perth Indymedia
Wed, Aug 2, 2006
By Professor Ian Lowe AO, ACF President.
The debate about nuclear energy is welcome recognition of the urgent need to respond to climate change. But the nuclear option is not a wise response. It is too costly, too dangerous, too slow and makes too little impact on greenhouse pollution. That is why most of the developed world is rejecting the nuclear option in favour of renewable energy and improved efficiency.
There is no serious doubt that climate change is real, it is happening now and its effects are accelerating. It is already causing serious economic impacts such as reduced agricultural production, increased costs of severe events like fires and storms, and the need to consider radical water supply measures such as desalination plants. So we should set a serious target for reducing our rate of releasing carbon dioxide, like the UK goal of 60% by 2050.
The economics of nuclear power just don't stack up. The real cost of nuclear electricity is certainly more than for wind power, energy from bio-wastes and some forms of solar energy. Geothermal energy from hot dry rocks also promises to be less costly than nuclear. That is without including the huge costs of decommissioning power reactors and storing the radioactive waste.
So there is no economic case for nuclear power and investors are turning their backs on nuclear energy. The number of reactors in western Europe and the USA peaked 15 years ago and has been declining since. By contrast, the amount of wind power and solar energy is increasing at rates of 20 to 30 per cent per annum.
Nuclear power is too dangerous. There is not just the risk of accidents like Chernobyl, but the increased risk of nuclear weapons or nuclear terrorism. It remains the case, as the Ranger Inquiry found nearly thirty years ago, that increased export of Australian uranium would contribute to proliferation of nuclear weapons. This is a major security issue in our region as well as globally.
Nuclear power also inevitably produces radioactive waste that will have to be stored safely for hundreds of thousands of years. After nearly fifty years of the nuclear power experiment, nobody has yet demonstrated a solution to this problem. In the absence of a viable solution, expanding the rate of waste production is just irresponsible.
Nuclear power is too slow to make a difference. Even if all government approvals were granted, it would still take about ten more years and several billion dollars to construct a power station and deliver the first unit of electricity. Wind turbines can be up and delivering power in six months. More efficient appliances can be reducing pollution tomorrow.
Nuclear power won't stop climate change. There would be a massive increase in greenhouse pollution from mining, processing and reactor construction before any electricity is generated. The known resources of high-grade uranium ores only amount to a few decades use at the present rate, so an expansion of nuclear power would see those resources rapidly depleted. The poorer grades of ore that would be used subsequently require much more conventional fuel energy.
To avoid dangerous further changes to our climate, we need to act now. We should make a commitment to the sensible alternatives that produce sustainable cost-effective reductions in greenhouse pollution: wind power, solar water heating, energy efficiency, gas and energy from organic matter.
http://www.acfonline.org.au/articles/news.asp?news_id=545
Wed, Aug 2, 2006
By Professor Ian Lowe AO, ACF President.
The debate about nuclear energy is welcome recognition of the urgent need to respond to climate change. But the nuclear option is not a wise response. It is too costly, too dangerous, too slow and makes too little impact on greenhouse pollution. That is why most of the developed world is rejecting the nuclear option in favour of renewable energy and improved efficiency.
There is no serious doubt that climate change is real, it is happening now and its effects are accelerating. It is already causing serious economic impacts such as reduced agricultural production, increased costs of severe events like fires and storms, and the need to consider radical water supply measures such as desalination plants. So we should set a serious target for reducing our rate of releasing carbon dioxide, like the UK goal of 60% by 2050.
The economics of nuclear power just don't stack up. The real cost of nuclear electricity is certainly more than for wind power, energy from bio-wastes and some forms of solar energy. Geothermal energy from hot dry rocks also promises to be less costly than nuclear. That is without including the huge costs of decommissioning power reactors and storing the radioactive waste.
So there is no economic case for nuclear power and investors are turning their backs on nuclear energy. The number of reactors in western Europe and the USA peaked 15 years ago and has been declining since. By contrast, the amount of wind power and solar energy is increasing at rates of 20 to 30 per cent per annum.
Nuclear power is too dangerous. There is not just the risk of accidents like Chernobyl, but the increased risk of nuclear weapons or nuclear terrorism. It remains the case, as the Ranger Inquiry found nearly thirty years ago, that increased export of Australian uranium would contribute to proliferation of nuclear weapons. This is a major security issue in our region as well as globally.
Nuclear power also inevitably produces radioactive waste that will have to be stored safely for hundreds of thousands of years. After nearly fifty years of the nuclear power experiment, nobody has yet demonstrated a solution to this problem. In the absence of a viable solution, expanding the rate of waste production is just irresponsible.
Nuclear power is too slow to make a difference. Even if all government approvals were granted, it would still take about ten more years and several billion dollars to construct a power station and deliver the first unit of electricity. Wind turbines can be up and delivering power in six months. More efficient appliances can be reducing pollution tomorrow.
Nuclear power won't stop climate change. There would be a massive increase in greenhouse pollution from mining, processing and reactor construction before any electricity is generated. The known resources of high-grade uranium ores only amount to a few decades use at the present rate, so an expansion of nuclear power would see those resources rapidly depleted. The poorer grades of ore that would be used subsequently require much more conventional fuel energy.
To avoid dangerous further changes to our climate, we need to act now. We should make a commitment to the sensible alternatives that produce sustainable cost-effective reductions in greenhouse pollution: wind power, solar water heating, energy efficiency, gas and energy from organic matter.
http://www.acfonline.org.au/articles/news.asp?news_id=545
US wind farm buy
Australian financial review
Tue, Aug 1, 2006
Babcock & Brown wind partners has bought interests in two farms in Texas and California for about $US 72million ($94 million) under a deal agreed before its IPO.
Tue, Aug 1, 2006
Babcock & Brown wind partners has bought interests in two farms in Texas and California for about $US 72million ($94 million) under a deal agreed before its IPO.
James Chessell writes....
Sydney Morning Herald
Tue, Aug 1, 2006
... And then there's Donald Robert "Don't Argue" Argus, who'll be blowing out 68 candles today. The Don needs no introduction. He's done a pretty good job at the helm of the BHP and Brambles boards and keeps bovines at the family farm in southern Victoria.
(Indeed, he was among those who opposed the proposed South Gippsland wind farm of orange-bellied parrot fame).
But while Melbourne claims Argus as one of their own, he remains a proud Bundaberg boy at heart. This means following Queensland's various rugby teams with far too much interest.
The big Seven-oh now beckons. It will be interesting to see how long Argus remains chairman of BHP and Brambles.....
Tue, Aug 1, 2006
... And then there's Donald Robert "Don't Argue" Argus, who'll be blowing out 68 candles today. The Don needs no introduction. He's done a pretty good job at the helm of the BHP and Brambles boards and keeps bovines at the family farm in southern Victoria.
(Indeed, he was among those who opposed the proposed South Gippsland wind farm of orange-bellied parrot fame).
But while Melbourne claims Argus as one of their own, he remains a proud Bundaberg boy at heart. This means following Queensland's various rugby teams with far too much interest.
The big Seven-oh now beckons. It will be interesting to see how long Argus remains chairman of BHP and Brambles.....
Alternative power training centre opens
Maitland Mercury
Monday, 31 July 2006
An emerging skills shortage has sparked a new direction in training at a Telarah company, focused on wind, solar and water powered technologies. The Hunter Valley Training Company (HVTC) officially opened its electrotechnology training centre on Friday.
Based at the company's Hunter-V-Tec site, the new centre includes an electrical workshop, two classrooms and associated facilities and is designed specifically for training students in renewable energy.
A working renewable energy display was also set up, including solar panels, a wind turbine and a hydroelectricity area, which are used to power a water fountain, a stop-go sign, a battery and also return some electricity to Energy Australia's grid. The training company received $436,684 from the Federal Government in 2004, with the company contributing a matching amount to build the $873,368 facility.
HVTC general manager Peter Shinnick said the new training area had allowed them to increase the number of apprentices studying for their electrotechnology trade from 90 students to more than 200 each year.
The training will later be expanded to target qualified electricians entering the renewable energy industry. Mr Shinnick said the Federal Government's growing interest in renewable energies had opened up a new opportunity for the company and new career paths for the apprentices.
"Two years ago we identified a shortage of skills for new entrants into the workforce and existing workers in renewable energy," Mr Shinnick said. "There were no private registered training organisations and only some TAFE campuses delivering this training.
"We saw an opportunity to get into the training side and approached the Federal Government for some funding to help set it up. "We've also been able to offer this through school-based traineeships, we have 20 doing it at the moment and they think it's fantastic."
Monday, 31 July 2006
An emerging skills shortage has sparked a new direction in training at a Telarah company, focused on wind, solar and water powered technologies. The Hunter Valley Training Company (HVTC) officially opened its electrotechnology training centre on Friday.
Based at the company's Hunter-V-Tec site, the new centre includes an electrical workshop, two classrooms and associated facilities and is designed specifically for training students in renewable energy.
A working renewable energy display was also set up, including solar panels, a wind turbine and a hydroelectricity area, which are used to power a water fountain, a stop-go sign, a battery and also return some electricity to Energy Australia's grid. The training company received $436,684 from the Federal Government in 2004, with the company contributing a matching amount to build the $873,368 facility.
HVTC general manager Peter Shinnick said the new training area had allowed them to increase the number of apprentices studying for their electrotechnology trade from 90 students to more than 200 each year.
The training will later be expanded to target qualified electricians entering the renewable energy industry. Mr Shinnick said the Federal Government's growing interest in renewable energies had opened up a new opportunity for the company and new career paths for the apprentices.
"Two years ago we identified a shortage of skills for new entrants into the workforce and existing workers in renewable energy," Mr Shinnick said. "There were no private registered training organisations and only some TAFE campuses delivering this training.
"We saw an opportunity to get into the training side and approached the Federal Government for some funding to help set it up. "We've also been able to offer this through school-based traineeships, we have 20 doing it at the moment and they think it's fantastic."
Cost of electricity in Michigan concerns businesses
AP Michigan News
July 29, 2006
Michigan's utility costs are higher than surrounding states and slightly above the national average for industrial customers, a factor that could cause some businesses to rethink whether they want to stay in Michigan. While natural gas rates in Michigan are relatively low, electricity rates are a concern for some industrial and commercial businesses, according to an April poll of 558 businesses conducted by Lansing-based EPIC-MRA.
Twenty-eight percent said utility costs were their most difficult costs to pay, ahead of taxes, worker's compensation and other items. Only insurance, pushed up by rapidly rising health care premiums, ranked higher than electricity and gas among businesses polled. "That's really a concern for industrial customers in Michigan when they look at whether they want to expand or stay in Michigan," says former Michigan Public Service Commission member Robert Nelson, who now deals with energy and telecommunications issues at the Lansing law office of Fraser Trebilcock Davis & Dunlap. "It probably has something to do with why some of these industrial users are leaving the state."
According to the federal Energy Information Administration, the average cost of electricity in April for industrial customers among five Upper Midwestern states -- Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and Wisconsin -- was 5.18 cents per kilowatt hour. Illinois and Indiana's costs were less than 5 cents per kwh, while Michigan topped the list at 5.90 cents. That compared to a national average of 5.76 cents. Gov. Jennifer Granholm knows the electric rates in surrounding states are lower for industrial customers. But she says some states' rates have been held down artificially by price freezes that are set to expire. Illinois customers, for instance, could see their prices rise 35 percent when a freeze expires at the end of the year, and she says Ohio customers could see an increase when a rate increase that has been deferred for three years is given the go-ahead.
The Democratic governor also notes that, among 10 major industrial states, Michigan in 2005 had the second-lowest natural gas rates, in part because the state has a lot of storage capacity, and the fourth-lowest electric rates when it came to industrial customers, according to the EIA. "Thirty-five percent of all manufacturing is done in states with higher gas and electric rates," she says. She adds that the Michigan Public Service Commission has trimmed the size of the rate increases requested by the state's major utilities in recent years. Consumers Energy Co. spokesman Dan Bishop says the utility's rates are below the national average, even though power generation is more expensive in Michigan because the state has to import the coal, oil and natural gas it uses to power its plants, unlike some states that have those resources on hand.
Still, Republican gubernatorial candidate Dick DeVos says Michigan needs to lower energy costs in Michigan to make it more attractive to businesses. "What we see is that we do have high costs," he says. "Electricity is simply too expensive for Michigan job providers." DeVos pledges to encourage the building of more transmission lines so more power can be brought into the state and carried within it; to pursue wind and solar power; and to invest in alternative fuels such as ethanol, biodiesel and biomass, a promise Granholm also has made.
Major customers usually get a break on rates, something that has helped General Motors Corp. with its new assembly plant in Delta Township near Lansing. Lansing Board of Water & Light spokesman Mark Nixon says the automaker pays an average of 4.93 cents per kwh, one reason it was economical to build the plant in the municipal utility's service area. A freeze on Michigan electric rates expired at the end of 2003 for industrial customers, at the end of 2004 for commercial customers and at the end of 2005 for residential customers; all saw increases when the freezes were lifted. But Granholm says no big rate increase is on the horizon in Michigan, and that the state's rates are competitive.
The EIA as of April ranked Michigan 26th highest nationally in electric rates for all classes of customers: residential, commercial and industrial. Michigan's average electric rate of 8.02 cents per kwh is lower than the national average of 8.39 cents, in part because both its residential and commercial rates are lower than the national average. Michigan also faces the need for a new power plant sometime in the next decade, and the cost of building a new plant could push up rates. In April, Granholm issued an executive directive requiring Public Service Commission Chairman Peter Lark to develop a comprehensive energy plan for the state by year's end.
Senate Technology and Energy Chairman Bruce Patterson, R-Canton, also is looking into a long-term state energy policy. Besides the possibility of a new power plant, the MPSC report also is expected to encourage the use of new technologies to improve energy efficiency, cleanliness and distribution. It also will explore ways to help the alternative energy industry grow in Michigan and require that a certain percentage of the state's energy supply come from renewable resources.
Michigan now gets about 55 percent of its power from coal-burning plants, with the rest coming mostly from nuclear power plants and gas- and oil-fired power plants. A small amount comes from hydroelectric plants and from renewable energy sources such as wind power and biomass, and a pumped-storage plant on Lake Michigan kicks in when demand is especially heavy. Some experts say a new plant likely would be powered with coal because it's the cheapest source of fuel. But new technology could create less polluting emissions than current coal-burning plants, and conservation and renewable energy could decrease the size of the plant needed to supply customers' needs, they add. Consumers Energy in Jackson and DTE Energy Co. in Detroit may express interest in building a new plant, though DTE spokesman Scott Simons says anyone who wants to build a plant will want guarantees that customers will pick up the tab to reassure investors.
Given the many new players in the utility field, some are urging that the state open the bidding process to everyone. Terry Harvill, vice president of Baltimore-based Constellation Energy, soon to be the nation's largest electricity generator, says "there are a lot of companies out there that would like to come in" and present their case that they could build a plant cheaper and faster than the existing utility companies. Harvill, a former DTE regulatory affairs director and Illinois utility regulator, says the company sells power to Michigan industrial and commercial customers from its Southfield office through programs that let business customers shop around for the cheapest supplier. "In today's market," he says,"there aren't really Detroit Edison and Consumers Energy areas anymore."
July 29, 2006
Michigan's utility costs are higher than surrounding states and slightly above the national average for industrial customers, a factor that could cause some businesses to rethink whether they want to stay in Michigan. While natural gas rates in Michigan are relatively low, electricity rates are a concern for some industrial and commercial businesses, according to an April poll of 558 businesses conducted by Lansing-based EPIC-MRA.
Twenty-eight percent said utility costs were their most difficult costs to pay, ahead of taxes, worker's compensation and other items. Only insurance, pushed up by rapidly rising health care premiums, ranked higher than electricity and gas among businesses polled. "That's really a concern for industrial customers in Michigan when they look at whether they want to expand or stay in Michigan," says former Michigan Public Service Commission member Robert Nelson, who now deals with energy and telecommunications issues at the Lansing law office of Fraser Trebilcock Davis & Dunlap. "It probably has something to do with why some of these industrial users are leaving the state."
According to the federal Energy Information Administration, the average cost of electricity in April for industrial customers among five Upper Midwestern states -- Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and Wisconsin -- was 5.18 cents per kilowatt hour. Illinois and Indiana's costs were less than 5 cents per kwh, while Michigan topped the list at 5.90 cents. That compared to a national average of 5.76 cents. Gov. Jennifer Granholm knows the electric rates in surrounding states are lower for industrial customers. But she says some states' rates have been held down artificially by price freezes that are set to expire. Illinois customers, for instance, could see their prices rise 35 percent when a freeze expires at the end of the year, and she says Ohio customers could see an increase when a rate increase that has been deferred for three years is given the go-ahead.
The Democratic governor also notes that, among 10 major industrial states, Michigan in 2005 had the second-lowest natural gas rates, in part because the state has a lot of storage capacity, and the fourth-lowest electric rates when it came to industrial customers, according to the EIA. "Thirty-five percent of all manufacturing is done in states with higher gas and electric rates," she says. She adds that the Michigan Public Service Commission has trimmed the size of the rate increases requested by the state's major utilities in recent years. Consumers Energy Co. spokesman Dan Bishop says the utility's rates are below the national average, even though power generation is more expensive in Michigan because the state has to import the coal, oil and natural gas it uses to power its plants, unlike some states that have those resources on hand.
Still, Republican gubernatorial candidate Dick DeVos says Michigan needs to lower energy costs in Michigan to make it more attractive to businesses. "What we see is that we do have high costs," he says. "Electricity is simply too expensive for Michigan job providers." DeVos pledges to encourage the building of more transmission lines so more power can be brought into the state and carried within it; to pursue wind and solar power; and to invest in alternative fuels such as ethanol, biodiesel and biomass, a promise Granholm also has made.
Major customers usually get a break on rates, something that has helped General Motors Corp. with its new assembly plant in Delta Township near Lansing. Lansing Board of Water & Light spokesman Mark Nixon says the automaker pays an average of 4.93 cents per kwh, one reason it was economical to build the plant in the municipal utility's service area. A freeze on Michigan electric rates expired at the end of 2003 for industrial customers, at the end of 2004 for commercial customers and at the end of 2005 for residential customers; all saw increases when the freezes were lifted. But Granholm says no big rate increase is on the horizon in Michigan, and that the state's rates are competitive.
The EIA as of April ranked Michigan 26th highest nationally in electric rates for all classes of customers: residential, commercial and industrial. Michigan's average electric rate of 8.02 cents per kwh is lower than the national average of 8.39 cents, in part because both its residential and commercial rates are lower than the national average. Michigan also faces the need for a new power plant sometime in the next decade, and the cost of building a new plant could push up rates. In April, Granholm issued an executive directive requiring Public Service Commission Chairman Peter Lark to develop a comprehensive energy plan for the state by year's end.
Senate Technology and Energy Chairman Bruce Patterson, R-Canton, also is looking into a long-term state energy policy. Besides the possibility of a new power plant, the MPSC report also is expected to encourage the use of new technologies to improve energy efficiency, cleanliness and distribution. It also will explore ways to help the alternative energy industry grow in Michigan and require that a certain percentage of the state's energy supply come from renewable resources.
Michigan now gets about 55 percent of its power from coal-burning plants, with the rest coming mostly from nuclear power plants and gas- and oil-fired power plants. A small amount comes from hydroelectric plants and from renewable energy sources such as wind power and biomass, and a pumped-storage plant on Lake Michigan kicks in when demand is especially heavy. Some experts say a new plant likely would be powered with coal because it's the cheapest source of fuel. But new technology could create less polluting emissions than current coal-burning plants, and conservation and renewable energy could decrease the size of the plant needed to supply customers' needs, they add. Consumers Energy in Jackson and DTE Energy Co. in Detroit may express interest in building a new plant, though DTE spokesman Scott Simons says anyone who wants to build a plant will want guarantees that customers will pick up the tab to reassure investors.
Given the many new players in the utility field, some are urging that the state open the bidding process to everyone. Terry Harvill, vice president of Baltimore-based Constellation Energy, soon to be the nation's largest electricity generator, says "there are a lot of companies out there that would like to come in" and present their case that they could build a plant cheaper and faster than the existing utility companies. Harvill, a former DTE regulatory affairs director and Illinois utility regulator, says the company sells power to Michigan industrial and commercial customers from its Southfield office through programs that let business customers shop around for the cheapest supplier. "In today's market," he says,"there aren't really Detroit Edison and Consumers Energy areas anymore."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)