Maine PUC inquires into storm costs and grid resilience

Citing "increasing storm frequency and severity, and escalating storm restoration costs", Maine utility regulators have opened an inquiry to obtain information about the problem and how it could be addressed.

On July 25, 2024, the Maine Public Utilities Commission (PUC) issued a Notice of Inquiry in docket 2024-00191. According to that notice:

Maine is experiencing increasing storm frequency and severity, and escalating storm restoration costs. While utilities are developing their grid plans and doing the vulnerability assessments and preparing resiliency/mitigation plans, the Commission opens this inquiry to look for some shorter-term efforts to reduce the impact of storm damage to the system and study ways in which Maine’s electric utilities may more proactively address escalating storm costs.

The PUC's notice includes a list of questions and prompts for comment by September 4, 2024. Some questions ask how other states are addressing storm- and resilience-related costs. Others seek information on how Maine utilities might behave differently -- for example, leveraging data systems to prioritize resilience upgrades, shifting away from wood poles, or changing tree trimming protocols and other vegetation management programs. The questions also ask about what "resilience" means and how it can be quantified.

Under PUC practice, an inquiry is a relatively informal proceeding initiated by the PUC to gather information. After the PUC collects information through an inquiry, it can use what it learned to inform a subsequent adjudicatory proceeding (like an investigation) or a rulemaking. 

Outside this inquiry, a recently enacted law requires each of Maine's investor-owned transmission and distribution utilities to develop "a 10-year integrated grid plan designed to improve system reliability and resiliency and enable the cost-effective achievement of the State’s greenhouse gas reduction obligations and climate policies." The utilities must file their proposed grid plans by January 12, 2026.

A separate statute requires each utility to file a 10-year climate change protection plan that includes specific actions for addressing the expected effects of climate change on the utility's assets needed to transmit and distribute electricity to its customers. The first climate change protection plans were due on December 31, 2023, and must be updated every three years.

U.S., China ratify Paris climate agreement

The U.S. has formally ratified the global climate change agreement reached in Paris last year, as has China.  This moves the Paris climate agreement closer to legal effectiveness -- but more nations must accept the pact before it can enter into force.

At issue is the Paris Agreement, an agreement brokered at the 21st Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).  In December 2015, over 190 countries meeting under UNFCCC adopted the Paris Agreement agreement to limit global warming.  The Paris Agreement describes climate change as an "urgent threat" and a "common concern of humankind."  The agreement's aim is to strengthen global response to this threat, through a variety of means.  These include the creation of individual national commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increased adaptation to climate change, and assistance for developing nations.

But the Paris Agreement has not yet taken its full legal force, because it contains a provision limiting its effectiveness until enough nations agree to comply.  As is common for multilateral international agreements, the Paris Agreement calls for parties to express their consent to be bound by the agreement, by depositing instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession with the depositary established by the convention.  In this way, the agreement draws a distinction between Parties -- those signing the Agreement -- and those nations which have deposited their ratification instruments. 

Under its Article 21, the Paris Agreement "shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date on which at least 55 Parties to the Convention accounting in total for at least an estimated 55 percent of the total global greenhouse gas emissions have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession."  Practically speaking, this means that as new countries submit their ratifications, the convention's secretariat must calculate the total greenhouse gas emissions of Parties that have ratified the Paris Agreement, as a percentage of global greenhouse gas emissions.  Once the 55 percent threshold is hit, the Paris Agreement will become legally effective and operational.  The UNFCCC has said that while it cannot predict when this will occur, "it is conceivable that the Agreement may enter into force before 2020."

On April 22, 2016, the Paris Agreement was opened for signature.  At the opening ceremony, 15 states deposited instruments of ratification.  By September 1, reportedly 24 states accounting for just over 1% of global greenhouse gas emissions had ratified the agreement.

The Paris Agreement's path to effectiveness advanced on September 3, when President Obama announced that the U.S. and China had formally joined the Paris agreement in a ceremony in China.  In recent years, these nations have been among the world's top emitters of carbon dioxide.  As described by the White House, "Both leaders expressed satisfaction with jointly joining the Paris climate agreement and pledged to work together and with other parties to bring the Paris agreement into force as early as possible."  The Obama administration also noted other recent U.S. climate actions taken jointly with China, including support for a proposed amendment to the Montreal Protocol to phase down the consumption and production of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) globally, and efforts to address international aviation emissions.

Following the U.S.-China announcement, the convention secretariat announced that as of September 7, 27 states had deposited instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval accounting in total for 39.08% of the total global greenhouse gas emissions.

Climate and energy in 2016 State of the Union

President Obama delivered his final State of the Union address on January 12, 2016.  The White House has posted his remarks as prepared for delivery to Congress.  Climate change, and related energy and environmental issues, formed a prominent theme in this year's speech.

The White House.

Climate change first surfaced in the 2016 State of the Union as part of one of four "big questions" President Obama posed for the nation.

Second, how do we make technology work for us, and not against us -- especially when it comes to solving urgent challenges like climate change?

After announcing a "moonshot" medical research effort to cure cancer to be led by Vice President Joe Biden, President Obama said, "We need the same level of commitment when it comes to developing clean energy sources."

He then spent several minutes addressing climate change directly.  First, he noted effective consensus that climate change is a topic worth tackling:

Look, if anybody still wants to dispute the science around climate change, have at it. You will be pretty lonely, because you’ll be debating our military, most of America’s business leaders, the majority of the American people, almost the entire scientific community, and 200 nations around the world who agree it’s a problem and intend to solve it.

He then touted the economic and environmental effects of investment in renewable and distributed generation and energy storage:

But even if -- even if the planet wasn’t at stake, even if 2014 wasn’t the warmest year on record -- until 2015 turned out to be even hotter -- why would we want to pass up the chance for American businesses to produce and sell the energy of the future?

Listen, seven years ago, we made the single biggest investment in clean energy in our history. Here are the results. In fields from Iowa to Texas, wind power is now cheaper than dirtier, conventional power. On rooftops from Arizona to New York, solar is saving Americans tens of millions of dollars a year on their energy bills, and employs more Americans than coal -- in jobs that pay better than average. We’re taking steps to give homeowners the freedom to generate and store their own energy -- something, by the way, that environmentalists and Tea Partiers have teamed up to support. And meanwhile, we’ve cut our imports of foreign oil by nearly 60 percent, and cut carbon pollution more than any other country on Earth.

Gas under two bucks a gallon ain’t bad, either.

President Obama then called for changes to transition to clean energy sources:

Now we’ve got to accelerate the transition away from old, dirtier energy sources. Rather than subsidize the past, we should invest in the future -- especially in communities that rely on fossil fuels. We do them no favor when we don't show them where the trends are going. That’s why I’m going to push to change the way we manage our oil and coal resources, so that they better reflect the costs they impose on taxpayers and our planet. And that way, we put money back into those communities, and put tens of thousands of Americans to work building a 21st century transportation system.

Now, none of this is going to happen overnight. And, yes, there are plenty of entrenched interests who want to protect the status quo. But the jobs we’ll create, the money we’ll save, the planet we’ll preserve -- that is the kind of future our kids and our grandkids deserve. And it's within our grasp.

Climate change is just one of many issues where our security is linked to the rest of the world.

His final reference to climate change came while discussing international engagement, and "seeing our foreign assistance as a part of our national security":

When we lead nearly 200 nations to the most ambitious agreement in history to fight climate change, yes, that helps vulnerable countries, but it also protects our kids.

Climate, energy, and environmental issues thus featured prominently in the 2016 State of the Union speech.  Over the coming year, these themes -- domestic and international action on climate change, investment in renewable energy and distributed generation, transition away from oil and coal -- will likely continue to play out at the federal level.

Previewing climate and energy in 2016 State of the Union

President Obama is scheduled to deliver his final State of the Union address tonight. As in previous years, he is likely to address climate change, energy and environmental issues.  What will the 2016 State of the Union have to say about these topics?

We know from previous years' State of the Union speeches (2013, 2014, 2015) that energy, the environment, and climate change have played an increasing role in the Obama administration's priorities. While the administration released a "preview" video on Youtube for the 2016 address,  the brief clip doesn't include any substantive remarks about climate, energy, or the environment.

However, the Obama administration has been active on climate, energy and environmental issues, with key developments in the past year such as the adoption of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan regulations limiting power plant emissions of carbon dioxide and the denial of the Keystone XL pipeline's Presidential Permit application.  Indeed, President Obama has said that "no challenge poses a greater threat to our children, our planet, and future generations than climate change — and that no other country on Earth is better equipped to lead the world towards a solution."

Climate change, energy, and the environment are likely to be mentioned along with other administration priorities such as international relations, national security, gun violence, and the economy.  Indeed, the White House's State of the Union website features sections titled Economic Progress, Acting on Climate, Engagement in the World, Health Care Reform, and Social Progress and Equality.

Under the "Acting on Climate" heading, the administration website for this year's address notes the December 2015 Paris agreement on climate change, reduced domestic emissions, the largest investment in renewable energy in U.S. history, and associated job creation.  The website also provides a "Record on Climate Change", listing details of the administration's actions to address climate change.

President Obama's final State of the Union address to Congress will be streamed live at https://www.whitehouse.gov/sotu on January 12, 2016 at 9PM ET.

Guide to the Paris climate agreement decision

Representatives from 195 countries signed a climate agreement on Saturday at the COP21 United Nations climate summit in Paris.  The resulting Paris climate agreement calls upon both developed and developing nations to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, and establishes a framework for reviewing progress every five years.  This post examines the formal decision to adopt the Paris Agreement taken by the 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Under the procedural rules governing the Conference of the Parties, the parties adopted "decision 1/CP.21", the draft of which was proposed by the President of the Conference of the Parties.  Decision 1/CP.21 formally adopts the Paris Agreement -- contained in an annex to the decision -- and creates processes supporting its implementation.

Decision 1/CP.21 emerges from the parliamentary procedures used by the U.N. and the Conference of the Parties.  Written in formal language, the draft decision includes a preamble and six active sections:

• The preamble recites the agreed-upon facts motivating the Paris agreement, such as, "climate change represents an urgent and potentially irreversible threat to human societies and the planet and thus requires the widest possible cooperation by all countries."
• Section I, "Adoption," formally adopts the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change as contained in the annex, and establish the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Paris Agreement to facilitate its implementation.
• Section II, "Intended Nationally Determined Contributions," invites participating countries to submit "intended nationally determined contributions" towards achieving the objective of the Convention "as soon as possible and well in advance of the twenty-second session of the Conference of the Parties (November 2016)."
• Section III, "Decisions to Give Effect to the Agreement," includes sections covering mitigation, adaptation, loss and damage, finance, technology development and transfer, capacity-building, transparency of action and support, global stocktake, facilitating implementation and compliance.
• Section IV, "Enhanced Action prior to 2020," calls for "the highest possible mitigation efforts in the pre-2020 period," such as "the provision of urgent and adequate finance, technology and capacity-building support by developed country Parties in order to enhance the level of ambition of pre-2020 action by Parties," with a goal of jointly providing USD 100 billion annually by 2020 for mitigation and adaptation.
• Section V, "Non-Party Stakeholders," welcomes interest, participation, and parallel efforts by non-Party Stakeholders, such as "civil society, the private sector, financial institutions, cities and other subnational authorities."
• Section VI, "Administrative and Budgetary Matters," notes potential limits on available financial resources, and urges that parties voluntarily make additional resources available.

Through this COP21 decision, the Conference of Parties adopted the Paris Agreement itself.   In a companion post, I provide a walkthrough of the terms of the Paris Agreement itself.

US auctions NJ offshore wind sites

The U.S. Department of the Interior has auctioned the rights to lease nearly 344,000 acres offshore New Jersey for potential offshore wind energy development. 

Under federal law, the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is responsible for leasing marine sites on the Outer Continental Shelf for energy development.  In addition to BOEM's oil and gas site leasing programs, the agency also operates renewable energy programs focused primarily on offshore wind and hydrokinetic resources (waves and currents).  Prior to yesterday's lease sale, BOEM had awarded nine commercial offshore wind leases offshore Massachusetts, Maryland, Rhode Island, and Virginia.

In September, BOEM announced that it would auction off the rights to two designated Wind Energy Areas offshore New Jersey.  That auction was held yesterday.  According to BOEM, the provisional winner of lease area OCS-A 0498 (160,480 acres) was RES America Developments Inc., with a bid of $880,715.  US Wind Inc. provisionally won site OCS-A 0499 (183,353 acres), with a bid of $1,006,240. Fishermen’s Energy LLC also reportedly participated in the lease sale but did not win either parcel.

Generally centered offshore of Atlantic City, the New Jersey Wind Energy Area starts about 7 nautical miles offshore and runs about 21 nautical miles seaward.  The U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory reports that full development of the area could support about 3,400 megawatts of wind generation.

Since the Obama administration's early "Smart from the Start" program, BOEM has engaged in efforts to spur offshore wind development.  President Obama's June 2013 Climate Change Action Plan features offshore wind as a tool to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from domestic industry.

This emphasis on the linkage between offshore wind and action on climate change is increasingly clear in the administration's messaging.  Early press releases on BOEM's offshore wind programs emphasized "the Obama Administration's all-of-the-above energy strategy to continue to expand domestic energy production."  By July 31, 2013, in announcing the first ever competitive lease sale for renewable energy in federal waters, BOEM described "President Obama's comprehensive plan to move our economy toward domestic clean energy sources and cut carbon pollution."  Just two months later in September 2013, after the release of the Climate Action Plan, BOEM began using the phrase "President Obama's Climate Action Plan to create American jobs, develop domestic clean energy sources and cut carbon pollution."  BOEM continues to use this phrase in touting its offshore wind program's consistency with the Climate Action Plan, as recently as yesterday's press release about the New Jersey lease sale.

Perhaps more tellingly, the Department of Interior press release announcing yesterday's New Jersey sale references "COP21", the upcoming 2015 Paris Climate Conference, in its brief summary.  This reference to the Paris climate convention is not otherwise explained in the text of the press release.  Nevertheless its inclusion here highlights the interplay between domestic and international energy policy, as well as the potential role U.S. offshore wind might play in addressing climate change.

EPA proposes methane rules for oil and gas

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed a suite of new and modified rules affecting the oil and natural gas industry.  Collectively, the proposed rules released on August 18 are designed to reduce methane emissions from oil and natural-gas drilling activities.

As the world tackles climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, methane plays a dual role.  As the key constituent of natural gas, methane offers society an abundant and efficient fuel that can displace reliance on costlier and more carbon-polluting fuels like coal and oil.  At the same time, methane in the atmosphere can act as a greenhouse gas itself, with a global warming potential more than 25 times greater than that of carbon dioxide.  According to EPA, methane is the second most prevalent greenhouse gas emitted in the United States from human activities, and nearly 30 percent of those emissions come from oil production and the production, transmission and distribution of natural gas.  At the same time, U.S. production of oil and natural gas has increased, giving the sector important economic and domestic security impacts.

To address this dynamic, yesterday EPA proposed a series of rules affecting the oil and natural gas sector.  EPA has described the new rules as a "key component" of the Obama administration's Climate Action Plan.  They follow a January announcement of a new goal to cut methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by 40 to 45 percent of 2012 levels by 2025.  Under the administration's view, a key tool supporting that goal is the implementation of standards for methane and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from new and modified oil and gas production sources, and natural gas processing and transmission sources.

The rules EPA proposed yesterday include such standards, along with supporting materials.  EPA has described its collective proposal as "a suite of commonsense requirements that together will help combat climate change, reduce air pollution that harms public health, and provide greater certainty about Clean Air Act permitting requirements for the oil and natural gas industry."

EPA's proposed package of rules includes:

• Updates to New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) (PDF, 591 pages) setting methane and VOC requirements for additional new and modified sources in the oil and gas industry. 
• Draft Control Techniques Guidelines (PDF, 310 pages) for reducing VOC emissions from existing oil and gas sources in certain ozone nonattainment areas and states in the Ozone Transport Region.
• A Source Determination Rule (PDF, 54 pages) to clarify EPA’s air permitting rules as they apply to the oil and natural gas industry.

According to EPA, the proposed rule will reduce methane emissions by between 340,000 and 400,000 short tons in 2025,  on top of reductions of 170,000 to 180,000 tons of other VOCs and 1,900 to 2,500 tons of hazardous air pollutants.  But industry trade group American Petroleum Institute has called additional regulation "unnecessary for reducing emissions."  Debate over EPA's proposal is likely to be vigorous, before EPA as it considers its proposed rulemaking, as well as before Congress and possibly even federal courts, before the dust settles.

EPA will take public comment on the proposals for 60 days after they are published in the Federal Register.  According to the January announcement, the administration expects the final rule will follow in 2016.  This action on oil and natural gas production follows closely on the heels of EPA's adoption of the Clean Power Plan rules, regulating carbon emissions associated with the electric power industry.

Energy and State of the Union 2015

President Obama delivered his 2015 State of the Union address on January 20, 2015.  In his remarks as prepared for delivery, he addressed energy-related themes including the growth of U.S. energy resource production and climate change.

As in his 2013 and 2014 addresses, increased domestic production of energy resources featured prominently in the 2015 State of the Union speech, for its economic, political, and national security benefits:

At this moment – with a growing economy, shrinking deficits, bustling industry, and booming energy production – we have risen from recession freer to write our own future than any other nation on Earth.  It’s now up to us to choose who we want to be over the next fifteen years, and for decades to come...

We believed we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil and protect our planet.  And today, America is number one in oil and gas.  America is number one in wind power.  Every three weeks, we bring online as much solar power as we did in all of 2008.  And thanks to lower gas prices and higher fuel standards, the typical family this year should save $750 at the pump.

During the past several years, U.S. production of oil and natural gas has increased significantly.  According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, total U.S. crude oil production averaged an estimated 9.2 million barrels per day (bbl/d) in December 2014, and forecasts for oil productino continue to grow.  EIA predicts that projected crude oil production will reach 9.5 million bbl/d in 2016, constituting the second-highest annual average level of production in U.S. history (after 9.6 million bbl/d in 1970.)

EIA also predicts continued growth in the use of renewable energy resources to produce electricity and heat. In 2014, 6.4% of electric generation came from hydropower and 6.7% from nonhydropower renewables. EIA projects continued growth of nonhydropower renewables, reaching an electricity generation share of 7.9% by 2016.  Wind is the largest source of nonhydropower renewable generation, and it is projected to contribute 5.3% of total electricity generation in 2016.

President Obama also addressed climate change in this year's State of the Union address, and his administration's efforts to combat and mitigate its effects:

2014 was the planet’s warmest year on record.  Now, one year doesn’t make a trend, but this does – 14 of the 15 warmest years on record have all fallen in the first 15 years of this century. 

I’ve heard some folks try to dodge the evidence by saying they’re not scientists; that we don’t have enough information to act.  Well, I’m not a scientist, either.  But you know what – I know a lot of really good scientists at NASA, and NOAA, and at our major universities.  The best scientists in the world are all telling us that our activities are changing the climate, and if we do not act forcefully, we’ll continue to see rising oceans, longer, hotter heat waves, dangerous droughts and floods, and massive disruptions that can trigger greater migration, conflict, and hunger around the globe.  The Pentagon says that climate change poses immediate risks to our national security.  We should act like it.

That’s why, over the past six years, we’ve done more than ever before to combat climate change, from the way we produce energy, to the way we use it.  That’s why we’ve set aside more public lands and waters than any administration in history.  And that’s why I will not let this Congress endanger the health of our children by turning back the clock on our efforts.  I am determined to make sure American leadership drives international action.  In Beijing, we made an historic announcement – the United States will double the pace at which we cut carbon pollution, and China committed, for the first time, to limiting their emissions.  And because the world’s two largest economies came together, other nations are now stepping up, and offering hope that, this year, the world will finally reach an agreement to protect the one planet we’ve got.

His 2015 remarks on climate change reflect a belief or fear that Congress will not act on the issue, or will act to frustrate the Obama administration's efforts on climate change.  In 2013, President Obama asked Congress to develop a market-based solution to climate change, but said he would take executive action if Congress failed to act.  In 2014, he noted Congress's apparent unwillingness to act, and highlighted his administration's proposed new standards on power plant emissions of carbon.  This year's remarks continue the trend of featuring executive-branch solutions, and downplaying the likelihood of near-term legislative support.

Will U.S. production of energy continue to grow?  What economic, political, and national security impacts will flow from the shifts in and growth of the U.S. energy sector?  Will the U.S. continue to act -- or take more serious action -- on climate change?  The remainder of 2015 -- and of President Obama's term in office, which runs into January 2017 -- will show how these themes evolve.

Sea level rise and coastal LNG terminals

Should federal agencies consider climate change and sea-level rise as they review the environmental impacts of liquefied natural gas terminals?

Yes, according to letters recently filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law.  Last week the Columbia Law School center submitted comments on two cases involving applications to develop liquefied natural gas export facilities in Maine and Louisiana.

Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and its implementing regulations, in approving an activity, the Commission must consider reasonably foreseeable indirect and cumulative environmental impacts of that activity.  Each case targeted by the Sabin Center involves a proposal to develop facilities for the liquefaction and export of natural gas from coastal or riverine sites: 

• Downeast Liquefaction, LLC has proposed the Downeast LNG Import-Export Project, to be located in Robbinston, Maine.  The bi-directional terminal on the banks of the Passamaquoddy Bay would be capable of processing an average of approximately 300 MMcf per day of pipeline-quality natural gas (including fuel and inerts) in the liquefaction mode and 100 MMcf per day in the vaporization mode.

• Louisiana LNG Energy, LLC has proposed the Mississippi River LNG Project, to be located in Plaquemines Parish south of the Port of New Orleans.  The project would have an initial capacity of 2 million metric tonnes per annum (MTPA), with a targeted start-up in late 2017.

Procedurally, each of these cases is at the stage where the Commission solicits comment on the scope of issues it should include in its environmental review.  In similar letters filed in each docket (Downeast and Louisiana), the Sabin Center took no position on the export of liquefied natural gas or on whether the project should be approved. Instead, the center noticed that while the Commission's Notice of Intent to prepare an environmental impact statement included many important issues to consider, the notice did not identify the potential impact of climate change on the LNG project.

Specifically, the Sabin Center's letters note that sea level rise, and an associated increase in flooding and storm surges, may pose a significant risk due to the project sites' coastal location.  The letters argue that NEPA requires the Commission to assess the projected range of sea level rise and storm surge throughout the life of the projects and identify ways to prepare for climate change-related risks.  They also called for requiring the projects' design to incorporate an additional margin of safety, known as “freeboard,” to account for unanticipated risk factors that can contribute to flood heights, such as waves and the effect of development on ground water absorption.

Whether the Commission will agree with the Sabin Center remains to be seen.  As federal agencies issue permits for energy projects, they face increasing pressure from the public -- and presumably from the administration -- to consider the projects' broader implications for and from climate change.

Obama administration releases National Climate Assessment

The Obama administration has released its third National Climate Assessment, a document designed as a public presentation of the administration's comprehensive scientific assessment of how climate change is impacting the U.S. people and economy.

A view from the Lincoln Memorial to U.S. Capitol, in Washington, D.C.

The National Climate Assessment summarizes the impacts of climate change on the United States, now and in the future.  Produced as a collaboration between over 300 experts guided by the 60-member National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee, the report was extensively reviewed by the public and experts, including federal agencies and a panel of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Climate Assessment has a broad scope, in terms of both types of impacts and regions covered.  Thematically, it analyzes impacts on seven sectors – human health, water, energy, transportation, agriculture, forests, and ecosystems – and on the bigger-picture interactions between these sectors.  Geographically, the report also assesses key impacts on all U.S. regions: Northeast, Southeast and Caribbean, Midwest, Great Plains, Southwest, Northwest, Alaska, Hawai'i and Pacific Islands, as well as a more general look at coasts and oceans.

The report states that that increased scientific scrutiny has led to "increased certainty that we are now seeing impacts associated with human-induced climate change":

While scientists continue to refine projections of the future, observations unequivocally show that climate is changing and that the warming of the past 50 years is primarily due to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from burning coal, oil, and gas, with additional contributions from forest clearing and some agricultural practices.

Outcomes predicted under possible future scenarios include continued increases in average air and water temperatures, changes in rainfall and precipitation patterns, air quality decreases, sea level rise, and ocean acidification.  These changes can disrupt systems for food production, harm human health, or damage property and risk safety through flooding.

The National Climate Assessment also summarizes options for responding to climate change.  These include mitigation: reducing the amount and speed of future climate change by reducing emissions of heat-trapping gases or removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.  Efforts to limit emissions or promote carbon sequestration are considered mitigation efforts.  Other possible responses focus on adaptation: preparing for and adjusting to new conditions -- for example, building levees and seawalls, or promoting farmers' growth of crops more suitable to the changing conditions.

In all, the report provides insight into the Administration’s approach to addressing climate change, and can help people and businesses both minimize risks and identify new opportunities.

The full National Climate Assessment can be explored on the government's climate change website globalchange.gov, or can be downloaded.  The entire report, downloaded in print quality resolution, clocks in at over 170 megabytes.

What the 2013 State of the Union said about energy

Tonight President Obama delivered the 2013 State of the Union address.  Energy figured heavily in his remarks, with emphasis on energy efficiency, natural gas production, and renewable energy.  His newly proposed policies, some of which require congressional approval, aim to boost the economy while protecting the environment.  Here's a look at what he said, relying on the text released online by the New York Times as text as prepared for delivery, as provided by the White House.

The State of the Union is a key opportunity for a president to speak his mind to the public and to Congress.  Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution directs the president to "from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient."  Presidents since Woodrow Wilson have delivered oral addresses to Congress.

President Obama's 2013 State of the Union address presented a number of energy issues and policies.  He criticized federal budget sequestration orders as disrupting priority programs including the energy sector:

In 2011, Congress passed a law saying that if both parties couldn’t agree on a plan to reach our deficit goal, about a trillion dollars’ worth of budget cuts would automatically go into effect this year. These sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts would jeopardize our military readiness. They’d devastate priorities like education, energy, and medical research. They would certainly slow our recovery, and cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs. That’s why Democrats, Republicans, business leaders, and economists have already said that these cuts, known here in Washington as “the sequester,” are a really bad idea.

Energy security and sovereignty also figured prominently.  He cited advances in transportation fuel economy, renewable energy, natural gas, and reductions in carbon emissions:

After years of talking about it, we are finally poised to control our own energy future. We produce more oil at home than we have in 15 years. We have doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas, and the amount of renewable energy we generate from sources like wind and solar – with tens of thousands of good, American jobs to show for it. We produce more natural gas than ever before – and nearly everyone’s energy bill is lower because of it. And over the last four years, our emissions of the dangerous carbon pollution that threatens our planet have actually fallen.

Climate change also returned as a key area of focus, as it had in President Obama's second inaugural speech last month:

But for the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change. Yes, it’s true that no single event makes a trend. But the fact is, the 12 hottest years on record have all come in the last 15. Heat waves, droughts, wildfires, and floods – all are now more frequent and intense. We can choose to believe that Superstorm Sandy, and the most severe drought in decades, and the worst wildfires some states have ever seen were all just a freak coincidence. Or we can choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science – and act before it’s too late.

To address climate change, President Obama asked Congress to develop a market-based solution, but vowed to take executive action if necessary:

The good news is, we can make meaningful progress on this issue while driving strong economic growth. I urge this Congress to pursue a bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change, like the one John McCain and Joe Lieberman worked on together a few years ago. But if Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will. I will direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy.

Clean energy continues to draw attention, while the development of economically-recoverable natural gas supplies is the latest energy revolution:

Four years ago, other countries dominated the clean energy market and the jobs that came with it. We’ve begun to change that. Last year, wind energy added nearly half of all new power capacity in America. So let’s generate even more. Solar energy gets cheaper by the year – so let’s drive costs down even further. As long as countries like China keep going all-in on clean energy, so must we.

In the meantime, the natural gas boom has led to cleaner power and greater energy independence. That’s why my Administration will keep cutting red tape and speeding up new oil and gas permits. But I also want to work with this Congress to encourage the research and technology that helps natural gas burn even cleaner and protects our air and water.

President Obama also promoted energy efficiency, from getting the transportation sector off oil to improving residential, business and industrial energy efficiency.  He proposed to create a trust funded by oil and gas leases and royalties to help fund some of these shifts:

Indeed, much of our new-found energy is drawn from lands and waters that we, the public, own together. So tonight, I propose we use some of our oil and gas revenues to fund an Energy Security Trust that will drive new research and technology to shift our cars and trucks off oil for good. If a non-partisan coalition of CEOs and retired generals and admirals can get behind this idea, then so can we. Let’s take their advice and free our families and businesses from the painful spikes in gas prices we’ve put up with for far too long. I’m also issuing a new goal for America: let’s cut in half the energy wasted by our homes and businesses over the next twenty years. The states with the best ideas to create jobs and lower energy bills by constructing more efficient buildings will receive federal support to help make it happen.

Infrastructure investment was another point, including the electric power grid and pipeline networks:

America’s energy sector is just one part of an aging infrastructure badly in need of repair. Ask any CEO where they’d rather locate and hire: a country with deteriorating roads and bridges, or one with high-speed rail and internet; high-tech schools and self-healing power grids. The CEO of Siemens America – a company that brought hundreds of new jobs to North Carolina – has said that if we upgrade our infrastructure, they’ll bring even more jobs. And I know that you want these job-creating projects in your districts. I’ve seen you all at the ribbon-cuttings.

Tonight, I propose a “Fix-It-First” program to put people to work as soon as possible on our most urgent repairs, like the nearly 70,000 structurally deficient bridges across the country. And to make sure taxpayers don’t shoulder the whole burden, I’m also proposing a Partnership to Rebuild America that attracts private capital to upgrade what our businesses need most: modern ports to move our goods; modern pipelines to withstand a storm; modern schools worthy of our children. Let’s prove that there is no better place to do business than the United States of America. And let’s start right away.

The 2013 State of the Union address suggests continued growth in U.S. sectors such as energy efficiency, alternative transportation fuels, renewable energy, and infrastructure development and maintenance.  Carbon emissions may also be examined, with a national market-based carbon cap and trade program possible such as now exists in California and the northeastern Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative member states.  How Congress and the public react to these remarks remains to be seen, as does how and to what extent President Obama's proposed policy shifts are implemented.

Energy, environment, and the 2013 inauguration

This week U.S. President Barack Obama took the oath of office for his second term. The 57th presidential inauguration was celebrated in Washington, D.C. on January 21, 2013.  In his inaugural address, President Obama delivered calls for action on issues ranging from the federal budget to social policy.  His speech also offered a platform on environmental and energy issues.  What did the 2013 inaugural address say about environmental and energy policies?

The United States Capitol after the inauguration ceremonies on Martin Luther King Day, January 21, 2013.

Climate change featured prominently in President Obama's second inaugural address.  Drawing on the official transcript of the address provided by the White House:

We, the people, still believe that our obligations as Americans are not just to ourselves, but to all posterity. We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations. (Applause.) Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires and crippling drought and more powerful storms.  

Exactly how he plans to address climate change remains to be seen.  Likely measures include further Environmental Protection Agency regulations covering emissions from coal plants, greater military use of renewable and alternative fuels and energy sources, and an emphasis on energy efficiency.

President Obama also advocated for greater use of sustainable energy resources:

The path towards sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult.  But America cannot resist this transition, we must lead it. We cannot cede to other nations the technology that will power new jobs and new industries, we must claim its promise. That’s how we will maintain our economic vitality and our national treasure -- our forests and waterways, our crop lands and snow-capped peaks. That is how we will preserve our planet, commanded to our care by God. That’s what will lend meaning to the creed our fathers once declared.

Because this paragraph immediately followed his remarks about the climate and natural disasters, the speech suggested greater reliance on renewable or sustainable energy as another response to climate change.  President Obama emphasized both the environmental and economic value of these alternative energy resources.

Left unsaid were the details on the path towards sustainable energy.  Will President Obama suggest a national program requiring the use of renewable electricity?  Congress enacted a renewable biofuels standard as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and most states have enacted laws requiring utilities to source electricity from renewable sources.  To date, no proposed federal electric renewable portfolio standard has found traction in Congress.  What about federal tax credits and incentives for renewable energy, such as the renewable electricity production tax credit and investment tax credit?  Last year President Obama called for making the production tax credit permanent and refundable, meaning taxpayers would not need to have any income tax liability to benefit from the credit.

Based on President Obama's 2013 inaugural address, he will push for solutions with enthusiasm and vigor.  The ultimate proposals, and the paths towards their execution, may affect their chances of success.  Exactly what measures surface -- and which can either pass through Congress or, in the case of agency action, survive legal challenge -- will be revealed over the next four years. 

Long Island utility exec resigns, hurricane response blamed

The Long Island Power Authority announced this week that its Chief Operating Officer, Mike Hervey, has resigned from LIPA effective at the end of 2012.

LIPA is a political subdivision of the State of New York.  LIPA was formed in 1985 as a non-profit municipal electric utility to take over the assets of former investor-owned utility Long Island Lighting Company.  Today, LIPA owns the electric grid in most of Long Island.  LIPA does not own electric generation assets on the island but serves 1.1 million customers with electricity generated off-island.  Its electric distribution network was hard hit by Hurricane Sandy, with over 1.1 million customers losing power.  As of earlier this week, 10,000 customers just east of New York City were still without power, while 35,000 more farther onto Long Island suffered significant flood damage and will need repairs before electric service can be restored.  County executives and other leaders are calling for federal involvement, and have criticized LIPA for its management of the restoration process.

In a statement released November 13, LIPA Chairman Howard E. Steinberg stated that he had accepted Hervey's resignation, with regret, on behalf of the Board of Trustees.  The announcement noted that Hervey had worked for LIPA for 12 years, including serving as CEP for two years.

Also on Tuesday, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo formed a commission to investigate utility companies' storm preparedness and management.  Governor Cuomo used his powers under the Moreland Act to form the commission, whose mandate also includes an examination of the regulatory and legal structures for oversight of utility operations.  Citing storms including Hurricane Irene, Tropical Storm Lee, and Hurricane Sandy in the past two years, Governor Cuomo also addressed the adaptation process of adjusting "to the reality of more frequent major weather incidents".

One utility executive has already resigned, and the commission's investigation will soon be under way.  What other changes lie ahead for utility companies in New York and elsewhere as a result of utility responses to hostile weather?

Preparing for an ice-free Arctic?

As the Arctic climate changes, the possibility of an ice-free Arctic Ocean is looming.  In recent history, almost all of the Arctic Ocean is covered by sea ice in winter, and perennial ice persists throughout the year over much of the basin.  Arctic sea ice is now reducing in both volume and coverage.  Some predictions, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), suggest that based on observed 2007/2008 summer sea ice extents, the Arctic could be nearly sea ice free in summertime within 30 years.

Rainbow over Canada's icy St. Lawrence River near Petite-Riviere-Saint-Francois, Quebec.

Setting aside the root causes of these changes, Arctic nations are preparing for a less icy future.  Many stakeholders, like US Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, believe that reduced ice cover over the Arctic could lead to future subsea resource discoveries.  Indeed, the Arctic sea floor is already known to be home to abundant energy resources including petroleum, natural gas, as well as metal and mineral deposits.  In addition, the ocean and sea bed are home to significant marine life.

Beyond opening up potential for underwater resource extraction, a reduction in ice cover could also open up commercial navigation across the fabled Northwest Passage or other routes.  This could reduce the cost of shipping goods across the globe, but could significantly increase marine traffic in the Arctic Ocean.

Arctic nations are gearing up for this possible future.  For example, Canada has ordered new icebreakers and offshore patrol boats, and the head of the Royal Canadian Navy has recommended increasing military staffing in the region.

What will the future hold for the Arctic?  Will perennial ice cover be significantly reduced within decades?  If so, what will it mean for the environments, economies, and national security interests of countries in the Arctic region?

August 13, 2010 - Martha's Vineyard solar power; China

First, a solar power meter installed at the docks in Vineyard Haven on the island of Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts. Martha's Vineyard is home to a variety of innovative energy solutions designed to stabilize and lower rates, strengthen reliability and security, and reduce air emissions.



China's energy footprint continues to make news.  In July, a report by the International Energy Agency (IEA) said that in 2009, China was the world's largest energy consumer.  According to the IEA, in 2009, China consumed 2.25 billion tons of oil equivalent in 2009.  (Compare the U.S. at 2.17 billion tons -- close, but a lower number.)  China subsequently ordered over 2,000 industrial facilities to close over their energy consumption.  Now, China is refuting the IEA study's results.  Chinese statistical agencies now point to a 2009 energy consumption in China of 2.15 billion tons, arguably due to differences in how consumption is estimated.  Whatever China's total energy footprint is, China's large population means that China's energy intensity -- measured in energy consumed per capita -- is roughly 20% of that of the U.S.

The World Meteorological Organization is publicly linking flooding in places like China, Pakistan, and the U.S. with renewed predictions of disaster due to climate change.

Russia is reporting that Iran will soon load fuel into its nuclear reactor.

July 7, 2010 - it's hot

Quick update today. It is hot in New England, and I have a few news stories that are thematically linked to the heat.

First, NOAA reports that warmer nearshore waters are drawing sharks closer to land in New England -- including the great white shark.

Second, speaking of hot: what if the world got hot enough to melt the polar ice caps? Check out this interesting Salon.com interview with Peter D. Ward, author of [i]The Flooded Earth: Our Future in a World Without Ice Caps[/i].

Following on yesterday's note of Earth First protests in Maine: three protesters of TransCanada's Kibby Mountain wind project expansion were arrested yesterday, one of whom attached herself to a truck hauling a windmill blade.

In rail news: Maine won $35 million in federal stimulus money for rehabilitation and expansion of Amtrak's Downeaster passenger train service to Brunswick, meaning there will soon be passenger rail from Brunswick to all points south and west.

4/14/10

Preti Flaherty hosted a very successful Climate Matters breakfast event this morning. Our guest, Efficiency Maine Trust executive director Michael Stoddard, spoke to about 60 guests about energy policy and Maine's efforts to implement an unprecedented amount of energy efficiency measures. Michael presented on the Efficiency Maine Trust's triennial plan, federal stimulus money, the state's conservation programs funded by the systems benefit charge and other mechanisms. The bottom line is that Maine has over $100 million in money to spend on energy efficiency and greenhouse gas reduction projects over the next few years. What are you doing to get your business a piece of the money?

2/1/10

From the turning death into science department: Herbie, the ancient elm tree that stood for over 200 years in Yarmouth, Maine, is being studied by dendrochronologists and dendroclimatologists. Herbie was the tallest elm in New England at 110' in height. Through the care of Yarmouth's 101 year-old tree warden, Frank Knight, Herbie survived 14 bouts of Dutch elm disease, and finally succumbed this year. Now that Herbie lives no more, my friend Pete Lammert of the Maine Forest Service and others are taking slices from the trunk for study of growth rates, which could shed light on Yarmouth's historic climate. Discoveries are already coming in: it now appears that Herbie grew in the shade -- likely in the wild -- for 10 to 20 years before being transplanted to its ultimate location. If this is confirmed, it will mean Herbie lived for 235 to 240 years, having sprouted before the Revolution.

1/11/10

Looks like despite a lack of governmental support, businesses in China are solar thermal technology -- using mirrors to concentrate light, make steam, and turn turbines to generate electricity. As usual, the story emphasizes not only the value of siting generation in China, but also the value of producing solar thermal components for sales abroad -- the classic energy/manufacturing complex that is touted for deepwater offshore wind in Maine. Commercially, up to 2,000 MW of capacity may be developed by a partnership between Californian developer eSolar and Chinese manufacturer Penglai Electric. However, the Chinese government is officially skeptical about the merits of solar thermal, on the theory that China lacks sites where there is abundant water, sun, and cheap land.

Climate change? Global warming? A number of places around the world continue to face record low temperatures, which have remained in place for weeks. NYT reports that this is the largest and most persistent Arctic high pressure system to take hold since the 1950. This Arctic high deflects the jet stream south of our latitude, bathing us in cold Canadian air.

In Maine news, we have the $9 million in RGGI grants for industrial energy efficiency projects announced last week, a $12.4 million grant for the UMaine composites lab for deepwater offshore wind research, and rebates of $1500 to $3000 to homeowners for qualifying energy audits and weatherization projects.

Thomas Casten on CHP

I recently read an interesting article which aims to identify obstacles to broader use of combined heat and power (CHP) in the Nov.-Dec. issue of Cogeneration and On-Site Power Production. The article by Thomas Casten notes that despite the potential to cut US emissions by 20% and save consumers $80 to $100 billion per year, US markets remain dominated by the central generation plant model - a model whose overall generation efficiency is about 33%.

Casten points to ratemaking policy for the electric industry as a cause of this resistance: the regulator-approved electricity rate structure drives utilities to want to maximize their sales, which leads to utility opposition to broader implementation of local generation.

Casten gives an overview of recent history. In 1978, PURPA allowed efficient cogenerators to sell to their local distribution utilities at avoided cost. PURPA may have broken the monopoly on generation, but it preserved utilities' monopoly on distribution. In response, utilities set high rates for back-up service to make self-generation less attractive; because cogenerators had no alternative options for back-up distribution service, utilities could force customers to pay this higher price. Likewise, utilities began making the interconnection process more onerous by requiring extensive studies, and by requiring interconnections to be at transmission-level voltages.

We have seen utilities interpose these obstacles. For example, one local distribution company attempted to shift its rate structure to recover more from customers based on their peak demand using a "demand ratchet". Although this reduced the volumetric energy component of the utility's rates, the effect on a customer who had recently installed self-reliant cogeneration was to require that customer to pay nearly the same amount for backup service as it had been paying for full-requirements service. Only through a rate case before the Public Utilities Commission did we push the utility back.

The 1992 Energy Policy Act is Casten's next milepost. EPAct 1992 broadened the right to sell power at wholesale, while eliminating the cogeneration requirement. In the ensuing decade, over 120,000 MW of merchant gas-fired generation was built, and coal and nuclear plants increased their run-time. Meanwhile, many states forced utilities to divest their generation.

Other highlights include:

• US T&D line losses average 9%, and can reach 25% at peak. By contrast, local generation losses might be 2%.
  
• T&D development is expensive, and has a high capital cost. Local generation requires little to no T&D build-out.
• Nearly half of the average 10 cents per kWh customers pay in the US goes to pay for line losses, return on T&D capital, and operations. Local generation incurs none of these costs.

Casten concludes that the US should establish enhanced incentives for clean generation including CHP. Specifically, Casten proposes a federal requirement that utilities develop a clean standard offer which includes distribution costs. Casten estimates that this would result in a 15% decrease in rates paid by consumers.

Casten also dips into climate change issues. He proposes an "output-based pollution allowance system", under which a decreasing number of allowances are allocated to generators to be credited against MWh generation and Btu conversion.

Personally, I see CHP as a significant opportunity for the future. I'd even consider installing CHP units in new residential construction. Particularly once the installed price goes down, we can achieve both environmental and financial goals through efficient cogeneration.