Does a coal-to-gas switch = bad to worse?

On August 3, 2015, President Obama announced the final rule for the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Clean Power Plan, which aims to cut carbon pollution from power plants by 32 percent by 2030.

The good news in Pennsylvania is that we're already roughly halfway to meeting that goal. A Statewide Implementation Plan will be crafted over the next year that will allow us to meet the full goal utilizing "building blocks," which include adding more renewable energy to Pennsylvania's electric generation mix and accelerating energy efficiency, increasing efficiency at coal-fired power plants, and making a switch in electric generation from coal to natural gas.

Okay, not so fast on that last one as a switch from coal to natural gas warrants a close look. Carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants is indeed a huge problem as C02 is a greenhouse gas that will warm our planet, and remain in the atmosphere, for a very long time. Centuries. Natural gas, on the other hand, is a cleaner burning fuel whose current low prices makes it an (apparent) logical choice for a coal-to-gas switch.

However, natural gas operations bring the very real issue of methane emissions as a by-product of drilling operations. Methane or CH4, the primary component of natural gas, is a far more potent greenhouse gas than coal, up to 84 times more so in the first 20 years after its release into the atmosphere. While it remains in the atmosphere for a shorter time than carbon, its planetary warming wreaks a tremendous amount of havoc in the meantime.

Photo credit: WCN 24/7 via Flickr Creative Commons

If we are to truly combat climate change, we must address both carbon and methane emissions. Simply trading one for the other accomplishes little.

Where we need to focus our energy in the battle against climate change is on renewable energy and energy efficiency. These cleaner measures will create good-paying jobs and save consumers money on their electric bills. Pennsylvania currently boasts 57,000 jobs in the clean energy sector and is poised for many more. Studies show that aggressive energy efficiency measures could drive down electricity bills by nearly 10 percent by 2030.

As the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) readies its response to the Clean Power Plan, it must also roll out strong standards that address methane emissions from both new and existing sources of natural gas operations. We cannot trade one problem for another since that will only make a bad situation worse.

Elaine Labalme is strategic campaigns director for PennFuture and is based in Pittsburgh. She tweets @NewGirlInTown.

Today’s the day. Give a salute to clean energy!

As we celebrate our nation's 239^th birthday with pool parties and picnics this weekend, let's not forget that it takes energy to cool our houses and grill our holiday food.

Show your civic pride this Fourth of July and declare your energy independence by donating to PennFuture so we can continue to push for more renewable, homegrown energy and a brighter future for our state!

Pennsylvania has long been an energy innovator. It's essential that we continue to lead as we build a clean energy economy to restore our environment and provide a sustainable future for our kids. PennFuture's job is to work with policymakers across the state and the nation to shape public policy and make Pennsylvania a leader in renewable energy and energy efficiency. Our educational campaigns convinced large institutions, businesses, and individual consumers to go green and be sustainable.

Will you help us continue to fight for more renewable energy?

Three generous donors have agreed to match a total of $5,000 in gifts for our campaign to push for more renewable energy. Your gift will be matched dollar for dollar and your support will really make a difference.

Renewable energy is projected to make up 10 percent of U.S. energy consumption in the next year, but in Pennsylvania, renewable energy makes up only 4 percent of our total energy consumed. Meanwhile, our neighbors in New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and Delaware continue to deploy more renewable energy — and have more renewable energy jobs than Pennsylvania.

We know we can do better. PennFuture will continue to work tirelessly for more clean energy in Pennsylvania. Like the Founding Fathers, we're not just sitting around. We're pushing forward to make our state a leader in clean energy to create jobs, improve air quality, and reduce our dependence on foreign energy supplies.

America has been the land of innovation for almost two and a half centuries. We plan to continue that tradition by making bold strides in clean energy production right here in Pennsylvania.

Declare your independence! Salute clean energy and support PennFuture with your tax-deductible donation today!

Mary Kane is development associate for PennFuture and is based in Harrisburg.

Earth Day + Clean Energy = One Great Event

Last week, PennFuture and Environmental Entrepreneurs (E2) co-sponsored a roundtable for business leaders in northwest Philadelphia to hear from speakers on federal, state, and local policies related to clean energy and climate and why business leaders should get involved. The takeaway? A clean energy future is good for the economy and the environment.

Attendees heard from a slate of speakers, each bringing a different perspective to the table. Alice Tong and Bob Keefe of E2 welcomed the attendees and gave an overview of the work their organization is doing in Pennsylvania, highlighting a clean energy jobs report they jointly released with the Keystone Energy Efficiency Alliance (KEEA.) The report identifies highlights from the clean energy industry and opportunities for growth. (There are currently 57,000 clean energy jobs in Pennsylvania and additional jobs can be created if the state takes action to improve Pennsylvania’s national energy efficiency ranking from the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE).)

Speaker Rich Freeh from Philadelphia’s Office of Sustainability addressed our clean energy economy from the local perspective. Currently, over 60 percent of the city’s greenhouse gas emissions come from building energy usage. The city of Philadelphia’s energy benchmarking program is raising awareness about building energy usage by having buildings of 50,000 or more square feet disclose their energy use in a standardized database, the EPA’s ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager. This database allows building managers to look at their energy use relative to comparable buildings to help identify areas for energy use reduction and, as a result, generate cost savings and fewer greenhouse gas emissions.

Alex Dews of the Delaware Valley Green Building Council discussed energy efficiency – aka energy we don’t need to produce – as the cheapest, cleanest energy resource available and a viable option for creating jobs. He highlighted that we should not only be looking at ways to make new buildings as efficient as possible, but also be thinking about ways that we can make energy efficiency improvements to buildings that have been built in the recent past and will be around for decades to come.  

PennFuture’s policy director, Matt Stepp, gave a comprehensive overview of the Clean Power Plan and its potential positive effects on Pennsylvania. Stepp noted that with the planned retiring of coal-fired power plants across the state, Pennsylvania is on track to reach half of its carbon reduction goals as specified in the Plan absent further action. He emphasized the opportunity for the growth of the renewable energy sector, a sector that will hopefully receive additional support from Pennsylvania’s state government in the coming years. (Gov. Tom Wolf’s proposed budget includes $225 million to be invested in renewables, conservation, and clean technology investments. It’s a relative drop in the bucket compared the $3.25 billion in state subsidies to the fossil fuels industry, but I digress.)

Business leaders attending the event signed postcards addressed to Senators Casey and Toomey supporting the Clean Power Plan as a means to reduce our carbon emissions and an opportunity to invest in a sustainable, clean energy economy. It’s critically important that we make our voices heard in support of good economic and environmental policy! 

Katie Bartolotta is southeastern Pennsylvania outreach coordinator for PennFuture and is based in Philadelphia. She tweets @KatieBartolotta.

Video: Energy switching in six minutes: Part 2

Last week, we quizzed you about your energy supplier. Did you pass? If not, here's your chance.

Energy Switching Series,created by Nicole Catino for PennFuture

This week's energy switching video outlines how to swap your default supplier for a renewable energy supplier in three easy steps.

Pennsylvania's electricity supply is dominated by coal - a heavily polluting fossil fuel. Over the years, PennFuture has worked hard to control unhealthy pollution from coal emissions while also building a market for solar and wind electricity in the state. One victory on the latter front is the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard (AEPS), which requires the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission to generate a small percentage of electricity from wind and solar alongside other alternative sources. The AEPS, among other factors, has helped build a renewable energy market in our state, including 25 utility scale wind energy projects and over 8,000 large and small solar energy projects.

With renewable energy available, how can you make sure that you are powering your lights, computer and refrigerator without contributing to smog and climate change? Buy clean energy for your home or business. Watch the video to learn how.

Valessa Souter-Kline is western Pennsylvania outreach coordinator for PennFuture and is based in Pittsburgh. She tweets @ValessaSK.

Video: Energy switching in six minutes: Part 1

Pop quiz! Ready?

Who is your electricity supplier?

      A) My local utility

      B) A renewable energy supplier in Pennsylvania 

If you answered B, give yourself a pat on the back. Simply by paying your bill every month, you are helping ensure that Pennsylvanians have clean, healthy air to breathe. Our lungs thank you. 

If you answered A, maybe now is the time to consider making the switch. 

Energy Switching Series,created by Nicole Catino for PennFuture

Much of Pennsylvania's electricity comes from coal-fired power plants, which spew pollution into our air. Unhealthy levels of air pollution in Pennsylvania contribute to asthma, COPD, lung disease and even cancer. 

While individuals and organizations (including PennFuture) work to ensure that our air is protected, you too can take a step to increase clean energy generation. You can choose to buy your electricity from renewable wind and solar sources, right here in Pennsylvania. Want to know more? This three-minute video outlines why energy switching matters.

Valessa Souter-Kline is western Pennsylvania outreach coordinator for PennFuture and is based in Pittsburgh. She tweets @ValessaSK.

CMU paper: Renewable subsidies should vary across the nation

I was driving on the Pennsylvania Turnpike near the town of Somerset recently when I was perplexed by a billboard that declared ominously, "Your tax dollars subsidize wind power."

Researchers from Carnegie Mellon University will publish a paper this week in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Science that argues for focusing renewable energy subsidies in those areas of the nation that will yield the greatest health and climate benefits - such as Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

Those that argue against government subsidies for wind such as former US Rep. Phil Gramm, tend to use per watt figures to make their case that wind is not a good investment, instead of overall federal and state spending that shows government subsidies have historically favored black and not green energy sources.  The per watt figures that detractors use tend to ignore life cycle costs associated with subsidizing fossil fuels. For example, Gramm's figures do not account for the total cost to society of choosing coal over wind, such as the billions that will be needed to treat abandoned post-mining acid discharges, the lost recreational revenue because 5,000 miles of streams have been polluted by mining throughout the mid-Atlantic region, and the numerous health care costs of dirtying the air that our children breathe. The detractors also fail to account for the major economic benefits that would result from drastically reducing CO2 emissions by eliminating fossil fuel subsidies worldwide.

The researchers at Carnegie Mellon point out that wind and solar provide identifiable health benefits that should be considered and maximized by targeting government subsidies for renewables in areas of the country where clean energy would yield the greatest benefit to society.

This blog previously argued for a "health revenue" policy in Pennsylvania that recognizes the disparate effects of carbon-based fuels and renewables. That would allow a more descriptive billboard to read, "Your tax dollars subsidize less asthma attacks for your children and less heart attacks for your grandparents."

Build the Bridge between Natural Gas and Renewables

Jared L. Cohon, president of Carnegie Mellon University, wrote a thoughtful op-ed on his big-picture perspective of shale gas development in Pennsylvania. Among other things, Cohon explains why he joined the Board of Directors of the Center for Sustainable Shale Gas Development.

Towards the end of his piece, Dr. Cohon addresses the argument that we should not be fracking for natural gas because it will delay the development of renewable energy. His response is straightforward - the country will be dependent on fossil fuels for a long time, so we should minimize the environmental and social impacts of burning dirtier fuel in the interim while we "aggressively develop" non-carbon alternatives.

Ahhhh! And therein lies the rub - those that doubt that shale gas will be a bridge to a clean energy future fear that this cheap and plentiful fuel will take the pressure off of a nation only capable of making significant policy shifts in the face of imminent crisis. Eliminate the crisis and you eliminate the impetus for investment in renewables.

Dr. Cohon describes this argument as "strange" - but it is not clear what he considers odd - the basic concern about cheap gas delaying the development of renewables, or the conclusion that because of this concern we should ban fracking.

As to the first, the underlying concern is legitimate. To achieve the goal of "aggressively promoting" renewables, the nation will need a significant shift in energy policy - and that will not be easy. Moving from coal, oil and gas to renewables will affect many vested and well-funded interests. The champions of solar, wind and geothermal cannot compete with multi-nationals that have poured millions into campaign coffers over the years, and now can do so anonymously.  Additionally, this Congress has demonstrated a unique ability to disagree on just about anything - not to mention a bold policy shift that would financially disadvantage deep-rooted and well-funded interests on Capitol Hill.

The "ban fracking" portion of the argument could be viewed as cutting off our nose to spite our face - depending on methane leakage rates - but it could also be mooted by policies that directly link carbon fuels to renewables. This could be done on a national scale through a carbon tax, or through individual state policies that would generate "health revenue" from the development of coal, oil and gas in order to promote energy sources that do not inflict increased heart and asthma attacks on Pennsylvanians, and put mercury in our food chain.

Pennsylvania's energy policy fosters cynicism amongst the "ban fracking" advocates because it does not do what Dr. Cohon promotes - it does not build a bridge between natural gas and the aggressive promotion of renewable energy. Pennsylvania's Act 13 directs state revenue from natural gas development to road repair and other "local impacts." It does not promote strategic statewide policies such as renewable energy and early childhood education. That is but one of the failures of a state policy that does not impose a reasonable tax on the development of Pennsylvania's shale gas.