Welcome to ArticleXI.com!
We are a group of environmental advocates united in providing a one-stop source for Virginia's environmental news. We each focus on different issues, but share the vision of a Commonwealth that preserves and protects its natural resources. Please join us!
One way or the other, it looks like decoupling, which I have advocated for many moons, is finally going to happen.
The single most important policy change needed to promote broad-based, California-style energy efficiency is to "decouple" utility profits from sales -- to allow utilities to profit from energy efficiency...
I have been assuming that Democrats would wait until the mother of all energy bills later this year to make their big push toward decoupling. But it turns out that Dems have decided to make it one of the conditions for the multi-billion-dollar energy efficiency block grants in the stimulus...
That is an outstanding idea.
"Outstanding" indeed; all hail Henry Waxman! :)
In all seriousness, Rep.Waxman's amendment does look highly promising and, based on what I've seen so far, I strongly support its passage ASAP. Frankly, we should have had "decoupling" in this country a long, long time ago. (See here for an excellent explanation of what decoupling's all about {UPDATE: see here for additional discussion of this topic following discussions the blogger held with lobbyists from the Association of Electric Cooperatives}; in short, the idea is that "if we could separate this connection between energy use and company profit, environmentalists and utilities could work together to make energy-efficient changes")
Meanwhile, here in Virginia, Del. Margi Vanderhye has a bill she tells me "will direct the SCC to provide reverse rate structures - the first step to decoupling." Amazingly, it sounds like even Dominion Power sees the writing on the wall and might get behind Margi's bill. Color me a bit suspicious of Dominion's motivations here. Specifically, I'd like to know if they're being sincere about this or if they're actually trying to get a watered-down version of decoupling as a way to head off real decoupling. Also, I'm a bit puzzled as to why we need a two-step process (first reverse rate structures, then decoupling) and can't just proceed straight to decoupling. Perhaps this is the way to get decoupling right, as opposed to the potential pitfalls of perverse incentives (e.g., see the discussion here about potential for "remov[ing] all incentive to be efficient on the consumer's end" by moving towards a fixed rate structure).
Anyway, I'll certainly be interested to see how Del. Vanderhye's bill (and Del. Kilgore's as well) plays out, particularly in light of what's happening at the national level. Thoughts?
Today's New York Times has an article about Wal-Mart succumbing to public pressure and moving in the "green" direction. It's a story worth reading, because if the public can pressure mega-corporation Wal-Mart into changing its (terrible, horrible, awful) ways, the public can do it with other companies (uh, hello Dominion?) as well.
...Wal-Mart was the target of a well-orchestrated assault focusing on its labor practices and environmental record. It was also straining to keep its legendary growth on track. [CEO] Mr. [H.Lee] Scott, hungry for ways to protect and transform his company, began to see environmental sustainability as a way to achieve two goals: improve Wal-Mart's bottom line and its reputation.
So he presented his colleagues with a radical option - the "choice" that gave the meeting its name - encouraging them to adopt a sustainability program to remake the entire company, from the materials used to build stores to the light bulbs stocked on its shelves. Although participants were conflicted, a vote on the initiative was unanimous: Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer and biggest buyer of manufactured goods, would go green.
By virtue of its herculean size, Wal-Mart eventually dragged much of corporate America along with it, leading mighty suppliers like General Electric and Procter & Gamble to transform their own business practices.
Of course, Wal-Mart still has a long ways to go in terms of achieving true environmental sustainability, or even CEO Scott's goals: "running [Wal-Mart's] operations solely on renewable energy, creating zero waste and selling products that sustain the earth's resources and environment." No, Wal-Mart's not quite there yet. Still, it's made a start, and that's saying a great deal for a corporate actor that used to be considered almost the epitome of "bad" from an environmental perspective.
Can the same thing happen with other companies, even Big Bad Dominion Power? Of course it can - and it has. For instance, citizen activism in Texas ultimately helped lead to a February 2007 agreement with one of the state's largest power companies (Luminant, formerly TXU), in which Luminant "agreed to cancel 8 of its planned 11 new Texas coal-fired power plants as well as several new coal-fired plants in Pennsylvania and Virginia, back federal legislation to create a cap-and-trade system regulating CO2 emissions, and double spending on energy efficiency." Not too shabby!
Here in Virginia, we haven't succeeded yet, but that doesn't mean we won't or that we should cease our efforts. To the contrary, we need to ratchet up the pressure against Dominion Power - and the politicians who love it - and see how much we can achieve. Who knows? Perhaps, just like Wal-Mart, Dominion will someday soon "beg[in]to see environmental sustainability as a way to achieve two goals: improve [its] bottom line and its reputation." It's our job to help them see the (compact fluorescent or LED) light! :)
As many of you know, Dominion Power is not exactly my favorite company. I think it's fair to say that it's not Miles' favorite company either, or Eileen's, or most other Virginia environmentalists'. Why is that, you ask? So many reasons, so little time. :)
In all seriousness, Dominion Power is a big-time corporate bad actor (with big-time money to burn) influencing government policy to its own benefit, but NOT to everyone else's (certainly not to the environment's benefit, that's for sure). From writing and ramming through its own reregulation bill; to resisting mandatory renewable portfolio standards (26 states now have these, while 6 others - including Virginia - have "voluntary" RPS's); to pushing dirty, mountaintop-removing, coal-fired power; to constantly pushing the lying lie that energy efficiency and clean renewables are not sufficient to meet Virginia's energy needs; to richly earning the mock slogan, "Dominion: Global Warming Starts Here," Dominion Power is pretty much the worst of the worst.
You'd never know any of this, of course, if you only read the corporate, print media (where Dominion places expensive, full-page advertisements). You'd never know any of this if you only watched Dominion's propagandistic, faux-warm-and-fuzzy TV ads. And you'd certainly never know any of this if you only looked at the pro-Dominion voting patterns of many Virginia politicians.
How does Dominion spread its (false) narrative and distract peoples' attentions from the true (but not so flattering) story? The answer is very simple: MONEY, and lots of it. In fact, according to VPAP, since 2005, Dominion has given nearly $2.5 million to Virginia state politicians, Democratic and Republican alike.
Why does Dominion spend all this money? Obviously, it's not out of any altruism on the company's part. I mean, let's get real here; if Dominion's exec's really had wanted to be altruistic, they could have given that $2.5 million to help poor families weatherize their homes or to help working people reduce their energy expenditures (e.g., by subsidizing the purchase of energy efficient appliances). They could have spent some of that money promoting green building standards. They could have pumped that money into health care for poor communities in coal-mining regions of the Commonwealth. Etc., etc.
But, of course, Dominion CEO Thomas Farrell and Company haven't done any of that. Instead, they've used their money to buy what really matters to them: political clout in Richmond's halls of power, used to "persuade" lawmakers to do Dominion's bidding, time and time again.
Well, here we are in the year 2009, with the ice caps melting, with 90% of scientists agreeing that temperatures are rising (and 97% of climatologists agreeing that mankind is playing a role in causing that to take place), and with a major breath of fresh air having come to Washington.
Today, it's time for change - voters just finished sending a huge message that this is exactly what they want - in a big way. That's why I'm challenging all Virginia 2009 candidates to "just say no" to Dominion's dirty money. Refuse it. Reject it. Return it. Just don't take any money from Dominion Power.
As we head into the 2009 Virginia General Assembly session, a new report dominates the stage and unites much of the environmental community's current work in Richmond.
Commissioned by the Wise Energy for Virginia Coalition, the report produced by Abt Associates, an independent, global research firm whose clients include the U.S. EPA, the Department of Energy and other major U.S. corporations, compares the same investment in energy efficiency instead of Dominion's Wise County coal plant in meeting the same electricity demand.
It's a slam dunk for energy efficiency!
"[T]he Energy Efficiency Alternative would be both less costly than the [Wise County] Plant for ratepayers, and substantially more beneficial to the Virginia economy in terms of Gross State Product (GSP) and job effects," the report concludes. (Read full report here.)
"According to the study, energy efficiency instead of the Wise County plant would boost the state economy by at least $228 million to $323 million each year between 2012 and 2025. It would also lead to at least 2,600 more permanent jobs than would exist if the investment were made in the Wise County coal plant.
The report finds even greater benefits if the federal government implements 'cap-and-trade' regulations on carbon dioxide, the main contributor to global warming, which will increase the cost of electricity from coal, according to the report. The Abt researchers estimate that, if such regulations are enacted, efficiency will boost the State Gross Product by up to between $483 million and $675 million annually between 2012 and 2025, as compared to the coal plant. It would result in a net gain of between 4,000 to 6,000 permanent jobs during the same period".
User comments or postings reflect the opinions of the responsible contributor only, and do not reflect the viewpoint of the Sierra Club and/or the League of Conservation Voters. The Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters do not endorse or guarantee the accuracy of any posting. The Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters accepts no obligation to review every posting, but reserves the right (but not the obligation) to delete postings that may be considered offensive, illegal or inappropriate.
ArticleXI.com is paid for and authorized by
Virginia League of Conservation Voters PAC, 530 East Main Street, Ste. 410, Richmond, Virginia 23219, (804) 225-1902 and
Sierra Club VA PAC, 422 E. Franklin Street, Suite 302, Richmond, VA 23219, (804) 225-9113.
One way or the other, it looks like 
Today's New York Times has 
As many of you know, Dominion Power is not exactly my favorite company. I think it's fair to say that it's not Miles' favorite company either, or Eileen's, or most other Virginia environmentalists'. Why is that, you ask? So many reasons, so little time. :)
As we head into the 2009 Virginia General Assembly session, a new report dominates the stage and unites much of the environmental community's current work in Richmond.
