STEPS TO ENERGY EFFICIENCY

5 STEPS TO ENERGY EFFICIENCY

San Francisco Chronicle

Sunday, May 18, 2008

This simple list recognizes the elements needed to harness the innovative power of the superpower economy.

carbon numbers

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/18/IN3R10MMI2.DTL

This article appeared on page G - 2 of the San Francisco Chronicle

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/18/IN3R10MMI2.DTL&type=printable

By Daniel M. Kammen

San Francisco Chronicle

Sunday, May 18, 2008

Retooling America for a low-carbon and environmentally responsible future has been long in coming and will take decades to achieve, but clean energy industries have already become a major economic force in Europe and are poised to do the same here.

The explosion of financial and political interest in energy is overdue. As a start, Congress and the next president will have to address that the federal government has underinvested in energy research for decades. As a nation, we invest less in energy R&D and deployment than do a few large biotechnology firms. This is unacceptable.

Clean, low-carbon energy systems - energy efficiency, renewable energy, nuclear energy and fossil fuel systems with carbon capture and storage - today provide about 12 percent of global electricity. In 2007, an estimated $71 billion was invested in new renewable energy capacity worldwide. Clean energy is now the third-largest slice of all venture capital investment, with almost 40 percent of this "cleantech" funding flowing though California.

Politically, global warming and clean energy legislation is big business, with about 200 members of the House and Senate now signatories on bills in this area. Presidential candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton and John McCain are all running on platforms of energy autonomy. Each has significant plans to address global warming.

Over the next five decades, progress to meaningfully address the risk of significant climate change will require an estimated 80 percent - or greater - reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions. The United States and China together account for almost half of all greenhouse gas emissions, so the work needs to begin here.

At the same time, no nation is better positioned to adopt a low-carbon energy diet than we are. The United States not only has tremendous clean energy resources, but it has major companies looking to take advantage of a change in federal policy to compete in the global clean energy economy. The United States must mobilize the world's largest R&D if we are to address climate change.

The central challenge of the 21st century will be to replace the vast fossil-fuel infrastructure with a new economy based on low-carbon technologies. The issue on the table is the need to finance clean energy research programs and to build markets where low-carbon technologies are rewarded. In other words, we must begin to price pollution.

Courageous experiments can form the basis of needed federal legislation and leadership. The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32) here in California is an example. The Midwest is developing what promises to be an aggressive policy in a region with exceptional wind and biofuel resources.

The Democratic presidential candidates have each committed to a national energy portfolio of at least 25 percent of electricity from clean energy sources by 2025, and all three candidates are in favor of cap-and-trade systems to build greenhouse gas markets. It is vital, but politically challenging, to make sure that all emissions credits are auctioned, not given away to large polluters. We are now in a moment - perhaps a first - where a growing view exists that energy and climate could be front-burner issues for candidates and voters. The time is right to focus on the energy system we want, not on the one we had, and sadly, still have.

Daniel M. Kammen is a professor in the Energy and Resources Group and in the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley. E-mail comments to insight@sfchronicle.com.

This article appeared on page G - 2 of the San Francisco Chronicle

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/18/IN3R10MGSK.DTL

Uranium claims sprout near Grand Canyon

Increasing interest in nuclear power fuels rush to cash in

By Judy Pasternak, Los Angeles Times

San Francisco Chronicle

Sunday, May 18, 2008

On public lands within 5 miles of Grand Canyon National Park, there are more than 1,100 uranium claims, compared with just 10 in January 2003, according to data from the Department of the Interior.

In recent months, the uranium rush has spawned a clash as epic as the canyon's 18-mile chasm, with both sides claiming to be working for the good of the planet.

Environmental organizations have appealed to federal courts and Congress to halt any drilling, arguing that mining so close to such a rare piece of the nation's patrimony could prove ruinous for the canyon's visitors and wildlife.

Mining companies say the raw material they seek is important to the environment, too: The uranium would feed nuclear reactors that could - unlike coal and natural gas - produce electricity without contributing to global warming.

And uranium is in short supply. In recent years, mines closed in Canada and West Africa, yet the United States as well as France and other European countries have announced intentions to expand nuclear power. Predictably, the price of uranium has soared - to $65 a pound recently, from $9.70 a pound in 2002.

In the five western states where uranium is mined, 4,333 new claims were filed in 2004, according to the Interior Department; last year the number had swelled to 43,153.

The push to extract more uranium has caused controversy not just involving federal land but private and state land as well. In Virginia, a company's plan to operate in a never-mined deposit spurred a hearing in the Legislature. In New Mexico, a Navajo activist group is challenging in federal court a license issued just over the reservation's eastern border.

Uranium claims are also encroaching on stretches of Western parkland such as Arches National Park, Capitol Reef National Park and Canyonlands National Park, all in Utah, as well as a proposed wilderness area in Colorado called the Dolores River Canyon.

But by far the most claims staked near any national park are in the vicinity of the Grand Canyon, which draws 5 million people a year. The park is second in popularity only to the Great Smoky Mountains of North Carolina and Tennessee.

"If you can't stop mining at the Grand Canyon, where can you stop it?" asked Richard Wiles, executive director of the Environmental Working Group.

The energy-versus-environment debate is apparent within the Interior Department, which granted the mining claims through its Bureau of Land Management. Among the mining critics is Steve Martin, superintendent of the Grand Canyon park and an Interior Department employee himself. "There should be some places that you just do not mine," Martin said.

Uranium is "a special concern," he added, because it is a toxic heavy metal and a source of radiation. He worries about uranium escaping into the local water and about its effect on fish in the Colorado River at the bottom of the gorge, and on the bald eagles, California condors and bighorn sheep that depend on the canyon's seeps and springs. More than a third of the canyon's species would be affected if water quality suffered, he said.

Martin is not the only one uneasy about potential water contamination. Add to the list the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which sells wholesale water throughout Southern California from its Colorado River Aqueduct. "In addition to the public health impacts, exploration and mining of radioactive material near a drinking water source may impact the public's confidence in the safety and reliability of the water supply," the district's general manager, Jeffrey Kightlinger, wrote to Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne.

No one is mining near the Grand Canyon yet, but wooden claim stakes can be spotted throughout the brush-covered plains north and south of the park.

Vane Minerals, a British company, applied last year to start exploratory drilling on seven sites in the Kaibab National Forest, near the canyon's popular South Rim.

Under current mining law the Forest Service had no choice but to allow the drilling, Regional Forester Corbin Newman testified in March to Congress. The mission of a national forest is different from that of a national park, he pointed out. Indeed, signs at the Kaibab Forest's border proclaim that visitors are entering the "Land of Many Uses."

In response to the approval, the Grand Canyon Trust, the Center for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Club sued in federal court, alleging that the Forest Service didn't thoroughly investigate the environmental effects of drilling and prospective mining. In April, a judge issued a temporary restraining order until the case could be heard, probably in the summer.

Drilling had begun near Deer Tank Wash just off a rutted dirt road about 5 miles from the canyon park's east entrance. Now the only signs of that activity are a 6-inch pipe sticking up from the ground near a large pinon tree, and hay scattered around in the mud.

The wash is prone to flooding, said Taylor McKinnon, a public lands advocate for the Center for Biological Diversity. "Would the water from a flash flood go through the bore hole to the aquifer? We don't know because there wasn't an analysis," he said.

Meanwhile, five additional proposals for exploratory drilling have been submitted to the Kaibab National Forest, according to Newman. And three old uranium mines near the canyon park are on standby, ready to resume operations.

Many of the companies are based abroad, said McKinnon, so their directors don't understand the special place that the Grand Canyon holds in this country's lore: "What if an American company went to drill at Stonehenge?"

But the region is special in another way, said Kris Hefton, chief executive of Vane's American uranium operation. The uranium is found in "breccia pipes," contained geological formations that hold higher-grade deposits than elsewhere in the United States, he said.

Breccia pipe mines can be compact, less than 20 acres in size, and uranium producers say they are among the easiest to restore after mining is done. And because the ore holds so much uranium, it's cheaper to mine. "They're not as susceptible if the price drops," Hefton said, adding that mining can be profitable in the region even if uranium fetches only $20 a pound.

"You won't have to depend on foreign uranium," he said. Although higher-grade deposits are found in Canada, and more mines are opening in the next five years, "You never know what the Canadians will do. It just makes sense to protect our industry from a national security standpoint."

Nevertheless, Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., has introduced a bill that would withdraw 1 million acres of federal land around the Grand Canyon park from future mining and mineral leases. The bill would not affect the claims already staked if they are found to contain uranium deposits.

And so uranium mining could end up being part of the view at Gunsight Point, a promontory north of the park at the end of a rutted dirt road on public land. There, two striking gorges merge into one, with a dry wash at the bottom of Snake Gulch coming in from the east and Kanab Creek flowing in from the west.

Overlooking the creek are 14 uranium claims, according to an analysis of Interior Department data by the Environmental Working Group. The claims are held by companies such as Energy Metals and Uranium One Ventures, and by an official with Quaterra Resources Inc., which boasts to investors that it is "one of the largest claim holders in the Arizona Strip District."

On a hazy morning, the canyon is still visible downstream. And Martin, charged with its protection, is apprehensive. His experience with uranium mines is confined to one that operated right at the canyon's edge, grandfathered in because it opened before Congress created the national park in 1919. The U.S. bought the site in 1962, and mining stopped in 1969.

Now the remains of the aerial tram that carried the ore up the canyon's steep slopes can be seen at the South Rim. Special strips have been placed atop the structure to keep California condors from resting there, to protect them from lightning strikes. And a chain-link fence keeps hikers away from mine wastes.

Elevated radiation has been detected in Horn Creek below, and signs have been posted warning visitors not to drink the water. A National Park Service sign at the abandoned facility explains that uranium deposits also lie just outside the park.

"What does the future hold?" the note asks, and concludes: "Mines and other industry near parks often bring unforeseen impacts on park resources."

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/18/MNJL10JSET.DTL

This article appeared on page A - 4 of the San Francisco Chronicle

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/18/MNJL10JSET.DTL&type=printable

More towns jump on 'green' bandwagon

Environmental issues top priority in many suburbs

By Geoff Mulvihill, Associated Press

San Francisco Chronicle

Sunday, May 18, 2008

Cherry Hill, once a desolate farmland and now a bustling Philadelphia suburb of 70,000, is one of the latest examples nationwide of a movement of local governments committing to make environmental issues a priority.

The township is switching to lower-energy traffic lights, offering residents incentives to recycle and even looking into putting solar panels on a municipal building.

"For far too long we have waited for other government agencies to act on these issues," Mayor Bernie Platt told the township council before it adopted a plan in March to reduce carbon emissions and waste. "This elected body will act to provide leadership, guidance and immediate action."

Many local governments across New Jersey and the nation are also taking formal steps to "go green."

Some examples: Westwood, N.J., is converting its fleet of police cars to gas-saving hybrids. Austin, Texas, is planning to power all city-owned buildings with renewable energy by 2020 and require new single-family homes to do the same within a decade. Warwick, R.I., is using more efficient LED lights in all its traffic signals.

Former Vice President Al Gore deserves part of the credit for raising awareness of the idea - backed by many scientists - that people's activities are responsible for global warming, according to Annie Strickler, spokeswoman for the Oakland-based U.S. offices of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives. The organization's U.S. membership, consisting of local governments trying to be more sensitive to the environment, has nearly doubled in the past year.

Cynthia McCollum, president of the National League of Cities and a member of the City Council in Madison, Ala., says the jurisdiction of cities gives them good reason to be thinking green.

"We control the building codes," she said. And in most places, local government controls the roads and planning regulations, she noted.

McCollum's group is lobbying Congress to allocate $2 billion a year to help local governments with environmental initiatives.

"I think it's a good thing in that towns are at least talking about going green," said Peter Kasabach, executive director of New Jersey Future, which promotes sustainable land-use planning. "The concept of going green has gone mainstream."

Cherry Hill isn't exactly a granola-crunching town that you might expect to strive for greenness.

Before it was Cherry Hill, it was Delaware Township, a mass of mostly farmland and a few suburban neighborhoods just east of Camden and Philadelphia.

Starting in the late 1950s, development took off with waves of ranches, split-levels and, later, Colonials, condos and McMansions until by 1985, practically every lot in the 24-square-mile town was developed. Population swelled to about 70,000, making it one of New Jersey's largest suburbs.

The town's claim to fame was having the first large, enclosed shopping center on the East Coast. The Cherry Hill Mall opened in 1961 and the same year, the township changed its name, picking a moniker that matched the mall, which remains a shopping hub.

Platt, a funeral director long involved in local politics, looked at recycling as a way to save money. The cost of taking trash to a landfill was rising relentlessly.

Township officials calculated that by using RecycleBank, a program that gives residents gift certificates in exchange for recycling, it could save $2 million in landfill fees over the next five years.

Lori Braunstein, chairwoman of the advocacy group Sustainable Cherry Hill, said Platt turned out to be an easy sell on the goal of reducing and even mitigating carbon emissions, which scientists say lead to global warming.

The 10-point plan the township developed calls for modest measures like annual tree planting, and ambitious ones such as exploring offering builders incentives to do earth-friendly construction.

There are some environmental concerns in Cherry Hill that might be harder to fix because of the spread-out nature of a suburb built for people expected to commute by car.

"One of the challenges still faced is being able to define green broadly enough," said Kasabach. "How people use their land, and get around your town."

His ideal would be relatively dense, walkable villages surrounded by farms and green space and amenable to mass transit. That does not describe present-day Cherry Hill, or many of the suburbs that sprung up across New Jersey at the same time.

"Previous planners in Cherry Hill have to take almost all the blame," Platt said. "We inherited this sprawling suburban community."

Platt said he's seeing progress on the land-use front. There's a building boom going on at the former site of the Garden State Park horse track. While part of the development consists of big-box stores in a sea of parking lots, Platt likes to point out that it's bringing homes and offices within walking distance of a train station.

"It's sort of ironic to green one of the biggest examples of suburban sprawl in the country," said Jeff Tittel, executive director of the Sierra Club in New Jersey. "If you can do it in Cherry Hill, you can do it everywhere."

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/18/MNGI10LI13.DTL

This article appeared on page A - 6 of the San Francisco Chronicle

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/18/MNGI10LI13.DTL&type=printable