Tag Archives: business & technology

Tesla sedan gets best Consumer Reports auto review of all time

Tesla sedan gets best Consumer Reports auto review of all time

Tesla Motors

Tesla’s sexy Model S.

The good news just keeps flowing — like electricity from a renewables-infused grid — for electric-auto maker Tesla Motors.

Consumer Reports just gave the Tesla Model S Sedan its highest-ever score for an automobile. The glowing review and sky-high score of 99 out of 100 came in the same week that the 10-year-old auto manufacturer enjoyed its first profitable quarter.

Some highlights from the breathless review:

This electric luxury sports car, built by a small automaker based in Palo Alto, Calif., is brimming with innovation, delivers world-class performance, and is interwoven throughout with impressive attention to detail. It’s what Marty McFly might have brought back in place of his DeLorean in  “Back to the Future.” The sum total of that effort has earned the Model S the highest score in our Ratings: 99 out of  100. That is far ahead of such direct competitors as the gas-powered Porsche Panamera (84) and the Fisker Karma plug-in hybrid (57).

The Tesla rivets your attention from the start. Simply touching the flush aluminum door handles causes them to slide outward, welcoming you inside. … And as you dip into the throttle, you experience a silent yet potent surge of power that will make many sports cars weep with envy.

Meanwhile, Nissan’s all-electric Leaf recently received a “Top Safety Pick” rating from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. From Green Car Reports:

A host of safety features, including dual-stage supplemental front air bags with seat belt sensors, side air bags, curtain side impact air bags for front and rear passengers, child safety rear door locks, Vehicle Dynamic Control (VDC) and Traction Control System (TCS) all contributed the the model’s score — and all are standard on the 2013 Leaf.

“Driver and passenger safety are top priorities for Nissan and the ‘Top Safety Pick’ designation by IIHS reflects the design and innovation that have gone into this car to make it a practical, no-compromise electric vehicle,” explained Erik Gottfried, Nissan’s director of electric vehicle sales and marketing.

It’s clear that electric-car makers aren’t just swapping out internal combustion engines for batteries — they’re putting in the extra effort to truly reimagine a new generation of American automobiles.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Living

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Credit – 

Tesla sedan gets best Consumer Reports auto review of all time

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, Nissan, ONA, oven, Pines, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Tesla sedan gets best Consumer Reports auto review of all time

WTO kills Ontario’s green jobs initiative

WTO kills Ontario’s green jobs initiative

Shutterstock

Wind turbines in Ontario, where a Canuck conspiracy to discriminate against Japanese and Europeans was foiled by the WTO.

It’s great to go green and it’s laudable to go local. But don’t you dare try to do both at once.

That’s the message the World Trade Organization sent this week went it ruled — again — that Ontario’s Green Energy Act illegally discriminated against international renewable energy companies. Similar green jobs programs in other countries might also have to be disbanded following the ruling.

The Green Energy Act aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while encouraging energy conservation and fostering a jobs-rich renewable energy sector. Under the controversial elements of the act, electricity suppliers could charge premium prices for clean energy, but only if they produced that electricity using a certain amount of locally manufactured equipment like solar panels.

The European Union and Japan protested to the international trade body, claiming that the program illegally discriminated against their manufacturers. The WTO sided with the E.U. and Japan in a November ruling. Ontario appealed against that ruling, and on Monday the WTO rejected the appeal [PDF] while making some minor tweaks to its earlier ruling. From the Toronto Star:

The province will have to bring its rules into line with WTO rules or risk a claim for trade sanctions against Canada.

Ontario energy minister Bob Chiarelli said the province will talk to the federal government before deciding what to do.

“The big question is, to what extent will it impact on job creation? We’re assessing that,” Chiarelli told reporters, saying that 31,000 jobs have been created through the Green Energy Act. Many of those were short-term construction jobs, but others are in plants that make renewable energy equipment. The Liberal government promised the green legislation would create 50,000 jobs.

The implications of the ruling could be sweeping. Governments all around the world have coupled green energy efforts with incentives to strengthen local cleantech industries, and those programs could now be vulnerable to similar challenges. Even programs that aim to strengthen local economies but have nothing to do with renewable energy could be affected. From Reuters:

Canada’s defeat may spur more WTO disputes by countries which are desperate for economic growth and suspect their firms are being illegally locked out of infrastructure projects abroad.

The United States has already charged India with illegally favouring local producers in its solar sector and China has hit the EU with a claim that Greece and Italy favoured solar power firms that bought local components.

Other potential disputes are simmering, with Brazil, Indonesia, Nigeria, Russia, Ukraine and the United States all under scrutiny in sectors such as energy, mining, carmaking and telecoms.

So much for think globally and act locally.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Source – 

WTO kills Ontario’s green jobs initiative

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, green energy, LG, ONA, Pines, PUR, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on WTO kills Ontario’s green jobs initiative

Coal companies have gotten good at wrangling their way out of federal fines

Coal companies have gotten good at wrangling their way out of federal fines

Reuters / Danny MoloshokCoal boss Robert Murray, probably contemplating how to minimize his company’s latest safety fine.

Back in high school, I had a great strategy for dealing with parking tickets I couldn’t afford to pay: I went down to city hall and challenged them — sometimes with a legitimate excuse, sometimes not (“The two-hour sign was obscured by a flowering cherry tree!”). I had figured out that bureaucrats cared less about the reliability of my sob story than they did about getting on with their day, so often they’d just roll their eyes, reduce the fine, and shoo me out the door.

Turns out the same tactic works for coal companies facing fines for safety infractions. A Cleveland Plain Dealer investigation found that when federal regulators fine mine operators for violating safety standards, those companies “are fighting significant fines as a matter of course and getting them reduced, if not dropped,” which means “clogging up the appeals process and wearing down a system that lacks resources to match the challenge.” You know, just like a privileged teenager exploiting an overburdened traffic court — except with hundreds of thousands of dollars, not to mention miners’ lives, at stake.

The Plain Dealer reports:

Reviewing [Mine Safety and Health Administration] data dating to 2007, the Plain Dealer examined the agency’s practice of levying large fines and the Ohio mines’ practice of challenging the fines. The newspaper found repeated success for mine owners. Just counting four years in which nearly every case is now resolved — 2007 through 2010 — the government wanted $1.59 million from Murray Energy for citations at its two Ohio underground mines. Murray wound up paying $1.05 million, saving more than $531,000, according to an analysis of the federal data. It did so by seeking negotiations and, if that failed, filing appeals. …

Murray is contesting nearly $1.1 million more for citations issued in 2011, 2012, and early 2013, records show.

That’s the same Murray Energy, by the way, that forced employees to take an unpaid day off to attend a Romney rally last year and pressured them to donate to pro-coal politicians; the same Murray Energy whose Crandall Canyon mine in Utah collapsed in 2007, killing nine people — six miners and three rescue workers. The Murray subsidiaries operating that mine negotiated a proposed $1.6 million fine for the accident down to $1.15 million.

The Plain Dealer writes that this pattern of challenging fines, often getting them reduced by 50 percent or more, “raises questions about how sensible and effective the mine-safety system is.” The MSHA responds that “inspections and citations, regardless of how the fines are resolved, create safer mines.” But the fact that Murray has racked up millions in fines since the Crandall Canyon collapse indicates that the company didn’t exactly get its shit together after that fatal accident.

Despite criticism from Congress for clogging the appeals system, Murray Energy CEO Robert Murray “staunchly defends his practices and views, including what he says are increasingly harsh and unnecessary environmental regulation.” The Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006 — the first major reform to mine safety regulations in 28 years — did substantially toughen penalties for safety violations. But it appears that instead of prompting mining companies to take stricter precautions, the prospect of harsher penalties only encouraged them to automatically challenge all but the most minor citations.

For mine owners, as the Plain Dealer puts it, “violations, like points on a driver’s record, are costly and have severe consequences,” providing incentive to challenge them. Just as your license can be taken away after enough traffic infractions, a mine can be shut down after enough serious safety violations.

The MSHA maintains that its safety system is working, reporting that 2012 saw the lowest ever rate of reported on-the-job injuries for coal miners, and the second-lowest number of deaths: 19.

Still sounds like 19 too many to me.

Claire Thompson is an editorial assistant at Grist.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Taken from: 

Coal companies have gotten good at wrangling their way out of federal fines

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Pines, Safer, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Coal companies have gotten good at wrangling their way out of federal fines

Should America export its fracked gas? Why greens say no.

Should America export its fracked gas? Why greens say no.

Dominion

Cove Point, built as a natural gas import terminal, destined to be a natural gas export terminal.

Frackers already contaminate America’s groundwatermake people sickproduce radioactive waste, and contribute to earthquakes. Processing and moving the natural gas that they produce leads to nasty spills and deadly explosions. And cheap natural gas makes it harder for renewable energy to compete.

But, hey, at least almost all of that cheap fuel is being used by Americans in America, right?

That may not continue to be the case. The Obama administration is poised to rule on a slew of applications to export natural gas to other countries through hulking industrial terminals dotted along U.S. coasts. Over the weekend, Obama appeared to reveal his hand on the issue, forecasting that the U.S. would likely become a net gas exporter by 2020, reports The Financial Times.

According to the newspaper, administration officials fear that a restriction on natural gas exports, as is being sought by American environmentalists and manufacturers, would send a bad signal about the country’s support for free trade.

Environmentalists fear that allowing such exports would exacerbate the fracking boom, harm the environment along the routes of new natural gas pipelines, and cause pollution and industrial accidents at natural gas export terminals. (The manufacturers aren’t worried about any of that; they just want to keep the cheap gas to themselves.)

One such export terminal is planned at Cove Point, Md., along the shores of Chesapeake Bay and close to the vast Marcellus Shale natural gas reserves. Dominion, the energy company that owns the facility, received federal permission in 2011 to export gas through the terminal to certain countries. Now it is seeking permits needed to liquefy natural gas there before loading it onto tanker ships. Like other planned natural gas export hubs, Cove Point was built to receive imported natural gas, back before America’s fracking boom took hold, and now it’s being converted into an export hub.

The Sierra Club, Earthjustice, and other environmental groups jointly filed documents [PDF] on Friday calling on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to conduct a thorough environmental review of Dominion’s proposal.

From a press release issued by the groups:

The coalition argues the development of this terminal in Lusby, MD would result in major damage to the Chesapeake Bay, coastal forests, and the local economy, which currently support more than a trillion dollars in economic activity from the seafood and tourism industries. …

Major concerns include a substantial increase in ship traffic of huge — and potentially explosive — LNG [liquefied natural gas] tankers on the Bay and to Cove Point, as well as the risks posed by dumping billions of gallons of wastewater into this large and complex estuary, made up of a network of rivers, wetlands, and forests.

Residents of nearby Myersville, Md., meanwhile, object to Dominion’s plans [PDF] to install a large natural gas compressor inside their town.

The issue of natural gas exports is scheduled to be debated today during a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing. From The Hill:

The House hearing on Tuesday will touch on 20 proposals under Energy Department (DOE) review that would green light exports to nations that lack a free-trade agreement with the United States.

Such deals face more administrative scrutiny, as federal law requires them to be in the national interest. Democrats have urged the department to exercise caution, fearing approving too many will cause domestic prices to spike.

Meanwhile, energy-hungry foreign governments — including those in Japan and India — have lobbied the White House to promptly approve applications for exports.

Some lawmakers have accused President Obama of slow-walking the decisions. They fear the United States will miss out as countries such as Australia and Canada rush into the market.

So stay tuned on this one. The damage that fracking causes in America could soon be exacerbated, for the good of the world. And for the good of the energy industry.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Credit: 

Should America export its fracked gas? Why greens say no.

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, Green Light, LG, ONA, Pines, ProPublica, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Should America export its fracked gas? Why greens say no.

Uranium mining is coming soon to the Grand Canyon area

Uranium mining is coming soon to the Grand Canyon area

Paul Fundenburg

So much for that ban on uranium mining near the Grand Canyon that Obama imposed early last year. The U.S. Forest Service just went ahead and gave a Canadian company approval to begin mining for uranium a mere six miles from the Grand Canyon National Park’s South Rim entrance, which nearly 5 million people visit every year.

Canadian company Energy Fuels Resources says its rights to mine the area, granted in 1986, should be grandfathered in, and the Forest Service concurred. In response, three environmental groups and the local Havusupai Tribe filed suit in March against the feds. They say the 1986 environmental impact review that originally gave the mine clearance needs to be updated. From The Arizona Republic:

Opponents say newer studies indicate pathways for trouble. One study, conducted in preparation for an old development plan at Tusayan, found that groundwater pumping at that Grand Canyon gateway sucked water from the vicinity of the mine. Another, by the U.S. Geological Survey, included models based on known subsurface geology funneling water toward Havasu Springs.

The Forest Service had no way of knowing these things before the 1986 approval, Northern Arizona University hydrogeologist Abe Springer said.

“Nobody ever asked the question” back then, he said.

A spokesperson for the mining company argues, naturally, that the review is still adequate, and calls the old Canyon Mine, now set to reopen in 2015, “tiny.” But Roger Clark, director of Grand Canyon Trust, one of the plaintiffs in the suit, compares the area — which will be stripped of vegetation — to the size of a Walmart parking lot, and tells The Guardian about other contamination concerns:

Clark argues that uranium’s radioactive properties only become dangerous once it is brought up out of the ground and exposed to air and water. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, such properties include radon gas, a substance that was not regulated when the government conducted its initial study of the mine in 1986. The lawsuit contends that radon and other chemicals could pollute the area.

The mine is located on a site sacred to the Havusupai and other tribes, including the Hopi, Zuni, and Navajo. The Navajo are still fighting for a comprehensive cleanup of the hundreds of abandoned uranium mines scattered across their reservation, mines blamed for decades of health problems and deaths among residents unknowingly exposed to radioactivity.

Those mines, crucial in the Cold War years to the government’s nuclear weapons program, closed as the demand for, and price of, uranium dropped steeply in the 1990s. The Canyon Mine never became fully operational before its owners decided to cut their losses. But with the value of uranium soaring, the Guardian reports that …

… companies are moving to reopen old claims. Observers say the outcome of the lawsuit is important, because it could serve as a bellwether for how future attempts to re-open old uranium mining claims in the area will go. There are over 3,000 mines in the Grand Canyon area that hold such claims.

As much as we despise bottled water, you might think about bringing some on your next trip to the Grand Canyon.

Claire Thompson is an editorial assistant at Grist.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

View this article – 

Uranium mining is coming soon to the Grand Canyon area

Posted in Anchor, ATTRA, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Pines, solar, solar power, Springer, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Uranium mining is coming soon to the Grand Canyon area

Frackers leaking less methane than previously believed, EPA says

Frackers leaking less methane than previously believed, EPA says

Ed Yourdon

Just how wack is it? The jury’s out.

Some seemingly happy news about fracking emerged this week: The EPA has lowered its estimate of how much methane escapes during the production of natural gas, down about 20 percent from previous estimates.

If the EPA is right, that’s good, because methane is a particularly potent greenhouse gas. If we’re going to frack for natural gas (which is mostly methane), we want to be burning that gas for energy rather than having a bunch of it escape into the atmosphere.

But not everyone buys the EPA’s new numbers.

From the AP:

The scope of the EPA’s revision was vast. In a mid-April report on greenhouse emissions, the agency now says that tighter pollution controls instituted by the industry resulted in an average annual decrease of 41.6 million metric tons of methane emissions from 1990 through 2010, or more than 850 million metric tons overall. …

The EPA said it made the changes based on expert reviews and new data from several sources, including a report funded by the oil and gas industry. But the estimates aren’t based on independent field tests of actual emissions, and some scientists said that’s a problem.

Robert Howarth, a Cornell University professor of ecology who led a 2011 methane leak study that is widely cited by critics of fracking, wrote in an email that “time will tell where the truth lies in all this, but I think EPA is wrong.”

Howarth said other federal climate scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have published recent studies documenting massive methane leaks from natural gas operations in Colorado and other Western states.

Howarth wrote that the EPA seems “to be ignoring the published NOAA data in their latest efforts, and the bias on industry only pushing estimates downward — never up — is quite real. EPA badly needs a counter-acting force, such as outside independent review of their process.”

The natural gas industry points out that switching to its product is better for the climate than burning coal, and it has a point — natural gas power plants emit about half as much greenhouse gases as coal plants. But methane leakage during the fracking process could undermine those GHG savings. Also, while cheap gas is cutting into coal’s market share, it’s also making it harder for renewables to compete.

The natural gas industry is, of course, feeling vindicated by EPA’s revised numbers. Steve Everley with Energy In Depth, an industry-funded group, told the AP that “the methane ‘leak’ claim just got a lot more difficult for opponents” of natural gas to make.

But this dispute is far from settled, so neither side should get too happy yet.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Follow this link:

Frackers leaking less methane than previously believed, EPA says

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Frackers leaking less methane than previously believed, EPA says

Venture capitalists are funding green food innovation

Venture capitalists are funding green food innovation

idea for life

/ Shutterstock

Big corporations are feeding Americans a diet of crap, but a swarm of start-ups is chewing away at their market dominance.

The New York Times brought us the news this week that venture capitalists — normally the lifeblood of innovation in the technology and cleantech sectors — are increasingly providing the financial fodder for food-related start-ups. The injections of cash could be helping to fertilize a green agro-culinary revolution.

From the Times article:

In some cases, the goal is to connect restaurants with food purveyors, or to create on-demand delivery services from local farms, or ready-to-cook dinner kits. In others, the goal is to invent new foods, like creating cheese, meat and egg substitutes from plants. Since this is Silicon Valley money, though, the ultimate goal is often nothing short of grand: transforming the food industry.

“Part of the reason you’re seeing all these V.C.’s get interested in this is the food industry is not only is it massive, but like the energy industry, it is terribly broken in terms of its impact on the environment, health, animals,” said Josh Tetrick, founder and chief executive of Hampton Creek Foods, a start-up making egg alternatives.

Some investors say food-related start-ups fit into their sustainability portfolios, alongside solar energy or electric cars, because they aim to reduce the toll on the environment of producing animal products. For others, they fit alongside health investments like fitness devices and heart rate monitoring apps. Still others are eager to tackle a real-world problem, instead of building virtual farming games or figuring out ways to get people to click on ads.

“There are pretty significant environmental consequences and health issues associated with sodium or high-fructose corn syrup or eating too much red meat,” said Samir Kaul, a partner at Khosla Ventures, which has invested in a half-dozen food start-ups. “I wouldn’t bet my money that Cargill or ConAgra are going to innovate here. I think it’s going to take start-ups to do that.”

The article cites research by CB Insights, a venture capital database. From CB Insights’ website:

Whether it’s finding a place to eat, sharing recommendations on your favorite dishes or ordering food online, investors have been hungry (sorry for the terrible pun) to invest in web and mobile-based food applications and platforms — aka food tech. Over the last year, almost $350 million has been invested in Food Tech and deal activity to the burgeoning sector grew over 37% vs the prior year. …

In general, international deal activity was very strong as local players and investors see opportunities in replicating some of the concepts seen, tested and validated in the US. Within the US, Silicon Valley has the largest share of deals at 17.78%, followed by NY at 16.67% and rounded out by Southern California at 7.78%.

Here’s hoping the smart money keeps flowing for smart, green foodie entrepreneurs.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Food

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Originally posted here:  

Venture capitalists are funding green food innovation

Posted in alo, Anchor, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, PUR, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Venture capitalists are funding green food innovation

Solar panels can protect you from terrorism

Solar panels can protect you from terrorism

Shutterstock

To the rescue!

Holy crime-fighting photovoltaic generation, Solar Panelman!

America’s top energy regulator says the solar panels that are proliferating on rooftops all over the country could protect against power outages triggered by terrorists.

From Bloomberg:

The U.S. power grid is vulnerable to terrorist attacks, and the growing use of rooftop solar panels will provide protection against lengthy blackouts, the chairman of the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said.

“It wouldn’t take that much to take the bulk of the power system down,” FERC Chairman Jon Wellinghoff said [Wednesday] at the Bloomberg New Energy Finance summit in New York. “If you took down the transformers and the substations so they’re out permanently, we could be out for a long, long time.”

Distributing generation units more widely on the grid, such as by deploying fuel cells and rooftop solar panels, will help consumers avoid blackouts. The trend also threatens to cut into revenue that utilities count on to maintain the transmission system, he said.

“A more distributed system is much more resilient,” he said. “Millions of distributed generators can’t be taken down at once.”

Nice to know that solar panels aren’t just saving us from deadly fossil fuel emissions. They’re also ready to step up as superheros and protect Americans from bad guys.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Continue at source:  

Solar panels can protect you from terrorism

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Solar panels can protect you from terrorism

Falling prices for renewable energy could lead to a tripling of investment

Falling prices for renewable energy could lead to a tripling of investment

John UptonSolar panels in San Francisco.

Catch ya later, failed renewable energy companies. We’re sorry to lose you, but so long as your laid-off workers find other jobs in the ballooning clean energy economy, your collapse really doesn’t matter.

That’s one takeaway message from a new analysis of the renewable energy sector by Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

The plummeting price of renewable energy has bankrupted more than two dozen wind and solar manufacturers, but the BNEF analysts say it could lead to a tripling of investment in the sector over the next 17 years. Notable victims of the falling costs of solar panels include Solyndra and Suntech. But the collapse of those companies appears to be little more than natural attrition in a fast-evolving industry with an extremely bright future.

From Bloomberg:

Annual spending on clean-energy projects that don’t add to greenhouse-gas pollution may rise to $630 billion at the end of the next decade from $190 billion last year, Bloomberg New Energy Finance said in a report today. That’s 37 percent more than estimated in November 2011 and means renewables would account for half of all generation capacity by 2030. …

While suppliers are suffering, lower equipment prices are making more projects profitable to develop and advancing the day when renewables can rival coal and oil on cost.

“The apocalyptic views about what it will cost to shift the world to renewable energy simply aren’t true,” Michael Liebreich, chief executive officer of New Energy Finance, said in an interview. “Three years ago, we thought wind and solar would be cheap as chips, and they’ve even gone below that.”

Despite noise made on the right, the failures of high-profile renewable energy companies don’t mean that the sector is failing. Quite the opposite.

Read another post about the Bloomberg New Energy Finance report: The smart money is on renewable energy

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Visit site: 

Falling prices for renewable energy could lead to a tripling of investment

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Falling prices for renewable energy could lead to a tripling of investment

One ag-gag bill is dead in California, another is approved in Tennessee

One ag-gag bill is dead in California, another is approved in Tennessee

Shutterstock

This little piggy might be better off in the Golden State.

A California state lawmaker withdrew a bill Wednesday that would have prevented animal activists from documenting systematic cruelty inflicted upon farm animals.

Unlike in other states, where similar ag-gag bills have been approved or are winding their way through legislatures with little public fanfare, the bill sponsored by Rep. Jim Patterson (R) triggered an outcry of opposition in California.

Patterson’s legislation had been pushed by the California Cattlemen’s Association, a lobbying group that represents ranchers and beef producers. The bill was was disingenuously framed as an effort to clamp down on animal cruelty — kind of a war-is-peace deal, except on animal farms.

The latest version of the legislation, before it was yanked, would have required anybody who filmed or photographed abuse of livestock to turn over the evidence to law enforcement authorities within five days. That was framed as an effort to immediately rectify abuses. Because Patterson and the California Cattlemen’s Association love animals so, so much. In reality, it would have made it almost impossible for animal activists to legally document long-running, systematic patterns of animal abuse; instead they would have been forced to blow their cover every time they filmed a single transgression or else risk being prosecuted and fined.

From an opinion column by Carla Hall in the L.A. Times, after the legislation was withdrawn:

About the only good thing you could say about this ag-gag measure is that it wasn’t as bad as other bills introduced in legislatures across the country. Some outlawed videotaping altogether at animal facilities.

The bill was also opposed by the California Newspaper Publishers Assn., which contended that it would have violated the rights of journalists who obtained tapes and recordings made at animal facilities.

Patterson told me when I talked to him last month about his bill that he does care deeply about rooting out animal abuse at slaughterhouses, and that the California Cattlemen’s Assn. does as well. Now that this ill-advised bill is out of the way, Patterson might consider creating other measures that would focus on protecting animals from cruel treatment instead of laws that hamstring people gathering evidence of the cruel treatment.

But there was grimmer news today out of Tennessee, where the Memphis Flyer is reporting that a similar bill was approved by the state House by a single vote. It had already been approved by the Senate. The ag-gag bill will now go to the desk of Gov. Bill Haslam (R), who is expected to sign it. From Food Safety News:

The one-page Tennessee bill only addresses the reporting requirement. It does not address two other elements often found in “ag-gag” bills — prohibitions on taking photographs or video without the permission of the owner, and penalties for obtaining employment without disclosing motives to investigate for animal abuse.

For a good summary of the various ag-gag bills that have been approved or proposed in states across the U.S., check out this recent piece in Modern Farmer.

John Upton is a science aficionado and green news junkie who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Food

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Visit link: 

One ag-gag bill is dead in California, another is approved in Tennessee

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on One ag-gag bill is dead in California, another is approved in Tennessee