Tag Archives: grist

Scientists say we’re “super” good at killing stuff

Scientists say we’re “super” good at killing stuff

By on 21 Aug 2015commentsShare

Humans don’t really need another reason to feel like the greatest species on Earth, so far removed from nature that we can basically do whatever we want with it, but here’s one: Scientists in British Columbia have officially dubbed us “super predators.”

Before you pat yourself on the back, being a super predator isn’t as cool as it sounds. It’s kind of like being “master of Jager bombs” in college — a compliment to some, but really just another way of saying “most likely to be an obnoxious jerk at parties.” By “super predators,” Chris Darimont, a conservation scientist at the University of Victoria, and his colleagues mean that not only do we humans kill more animals than other predators, but we also kill more adult animals — a problem for species that want to, you know, survive.

Of course, that humans are savage beasts who like to hunt species to the point of extinction is no surprise, but this is the first time that scientists have looked at how the age of our prey differs from that of other predators. The team published their findings today in the journal Science. Here’s what they found:

Our global survey […] revealed that humans kill adult prey, the reproductive capital of populations, at much higher median rates than other predators (up to 14 times higher), with particularly intense exploitation of terrestrial carnivores and fishes. Given this competitive dominance, impacts on predators, and other unique predatory behavior, we suggest that humans function as an unsustainable “super predator,” which—unless additionally constrained by managers—will continue to alter ecological and evolutionary processes globally.

What Darimont and his colleagues are trying to say is that adults, especially in fish populations, tend to produce more progeny than younger individuals, and by targeting the big fish, we’re essentially hurting the fertility of the overall population. It would be more sustainable, they argue, to instead target younger individuals, many of whom likely wouldn’t survive until adulthood anyway.

Other predators go after those younger individuals because babies are weak, and even the fiercest lions and tigers and bears (oh my!) don’t have the same kind of advanced “killing technology” that we use. Hell, if we didn’t have all the fancy guns and fishing equipment that we do, we’d probably be going for more weaklings, too.

Ultimately, the researchers suggest that we try to emulate the behavior of other predators in order to maintain the same kind of sustainable balance that exists in the wild. Which is almost as funny as asking the master of Jager bombs to opt for a vodka cran. Don’t these scientists realize that we’re the college bros of the animal kingdom? JAGER BOMBS, JAGER BOMBS, JAGER BOMBS!

Share

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

A Grist Special Series

Oceans 15


This surfer is committed to saving sharks — even though he lost his leg to one of themMike Coots lost his leg in a shark attack. Then he joined the group Shark Attack Survivors for Shark Conservation, and started fighting to save SHARKS from US.


This scuba diver wants everyone — black, white, or brown — to feel at home in the oceanKramer Wimberley knows what it’s like to feel unwelcome in the water. As a dive instructor and ocean-lover, he tries to make sure no one else does.


This chef built her reputation on seafood. How’s she feeling about the ocean now?Seattle chef Renee Erickson weighs in on the world’s changing waters, and how they might change her menu.


How do you study an underwater volcano? Build an underwater laboratoryJohn Delaney is taking the internet underwater, and bringing the deep ocean to the public.


Oceans 15We’re tired of talking about oceans like they’re just a big, wet thing somewhere out there. Let’s make it personal.

Get Grist in your inbox

Advertisement

Continued – 

Scientists say we’re “super” good at killing stuff

Posted in Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Scientists say we’re “super” good at killing stuff

Why Won’t Hillary Clinton Take a Stand on Keystone?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The story was originally published by Grist and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Rumor has it that President Obama will officially reject the Keystone XL pipeline in the coming weeks. But whatever he decides, you can be sure the issue won’t go away. All of the presidential candidates will keep on talking about it. Well, all of them except the one who’s been avoiding the topic like Ebola. Here’s where the other candidates stand:

Republicans

Most Republican politicians, just like most Americans, had never heard of the Keystone XL pipeline until climate activists started fighting it in 2011. But once that happened, the GOP rushed en masse to defend it, and they’ve been ranting and raving about its critical importance ever since, making delusional claims about its potential to create jobs and supercharge the US economy. Every single “major” GOP candidate for president—all 17 of them—supports the proposed pipeline, and many have pledged to approve it on their first day in the White House.

Donald Trump: Not only has he backed the pipeline for years, but he owns at least $250,000 worth of stock in TransCanada, the company that’s trying to build it.

Jeb Bush:

Continue Reading »

See original article here – 

Why Won’t Hillary Clinton Take a Stand on Keystone?

Posted in Anchor, Anker, Everyone, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Safer, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Won’t Hillary Clinton Take a Stand on Keystone?

Kids sue Obama over climate change

Kids sue Obama over climate change

By on 14 Aug 2015commentsShare

A new lawsuit filed against President Obama and a handful of federal departments and agencies condemns the government for supporting the fossil fuel industry in the face of a changing climate. The plaintiffs? A group of 21 children aged 8–19, mostly from Oregon. The complaint, originally drafted in green Crayola, holds the president culpable for the effects of historical and future carbon emissions and demands immediate climate action on constitutional grounds. The filing itself is a hefty document, but the argument looks something like this:

1. The government has known about the climatic effects of carbon emissions for decades. There’s scientific consensus on climate change and ocean acidification, and the story is pretty awful.

2. In spite of the danger, the government encouraged and subsidized the fossil fuel industry. The continued authorization of new fossil fuel projects (like the proposed Jordan Cove natural gas export terminal in Oregon) will further harm the children in question.

3. Climate change disproportionately affects youth because they’ll live more of their lives in a turbulent world.

4. Mitigating the effects of climate change and shifting to clean energy is possible, and the government has admitted it is the trustee of the nation’s “air (atmosphere), seas, shores of the sea, water, and wildlife.”

As such, the kids — a coalition of youth activists — allege that the government has violated the due process and equal protection principles of the Fifth Amendment, violated their rights that fall outside of the Constitution but are still protected by the Ninth Amendment, and violated the public trust doctrine of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. Which boils down to the broader allegation that support of the fossil fuel industry infringes upon youths’ fundamental rights to life, liberty, and property.

As Responding to Climate Change reports, the complaint also outlines the kids’ relationship with a changing climate:

11-year-old Hazel spends a lot of time at the coast, bodysurfing and rock-pooling, as well as relying on it as a food source. By the time she is an adult, she fears that both of these benefits will be lost.

Perhaps most shocking is the testimony of 8-year-old Levi Draheim, who lives on a barrier island [in Florida] which separates the Indian River Lagoon from the Atlantic Ocean. Faced with rising sea levels, Levi has been forced to accept the potential loss of his home.

The lawsuit comes in the wake of a similar legal case in Washington which earlier this year set a new, science-based emissions trajectory for the state.

Some claims are more extreme than others. (Compare “Levi can no longer swim in the Indian River Lagoon because of increasing flesh-eating bacteria and dead fish” to “Kelsey enjoys snowshoeing, cross-country skiing, and snow camping.”)

The lawsuit is likely a long shot, but in aggregate, the stories embedded in the complaint help paint a picture of the effects of climate change in human terms. In a world that has repeatedly demonstrated that it couldn’t care less about the polar bears, that’s a good thing.

Source:
8-year-old takes US government to court over climate change

, RTCC.

Share

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

A Grist Special Series

Oceans 15


How catching big waves helped turn this pro surfer into a conservationistRamon Navarro first came to the sea with his fisherman rather, found his own place on it as a surfer, and now fights to protect the coastline he loves.


What seafood is OK to eat, anyway? Ask an expertWhen it comes to sustainable seafood, you could say director of Seafood Watch Jennifer Dianto Kemmerly is the ultimate arbiter of taste.

Get Grist in your inbox

Advertisement

View original article: 

Kids sue Obama over climate change

Posted in Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, Radius, The Atlantic, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Kids sue Obama over climate change

Australia files joke of a climate pledge to the U.N.

Australia files joke of a climate pledge to the U.N.

By on 11 Aug 2015commentsShare

To raucous applause of denialists everywhere, Australia submitted its climate pledge to the U.N. on Tuesday. The plan — immediately and nearly universally hailed as weak by climate hawks, climatologists, and most other reasonable people — is one of twenty-six voluntary greenhouse gas emission reduction pledges, covering more than fifty countries, filed in the run-up to the climate negotiations in Paris this December. While currently non-binding, these Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) are considered indicative of countries’ levels of ambition in responding to the global climate change dilemma.

Australia committed to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by 26–28 percent of 2005 levels by 2030. Compare this target to the European Union’s: 40 percent of 1990 levels — when global emissions were much lower — by 2030. While Australia’s pledge may look similar to that of the United States, which committed to a cut of 26–28 percent of 2005 levels by 2025, analysts at Australia’s Climate Institute project that the U.S.’s pledge will amount to a 41 percent reduction on 2005 levels by 2030. Canberra’s five years of wiggle room make for a significant break for fossil fuel companies.

Weak target aside, “even worse is the lack of policy instruments outlined to get us there,” argued Yannick Spencer, an Australian Master of Public Policy candidate at Oxford’s Blavatnik School of Government, in an email to Grist. “In fact the policy instruments in place will get us nowhere near there, while being highly economically inefficient.”

The Australian INDC leans heavily on the government’s US$1.86 billion Emissions Reduction Fund, the country’s main climate strategy, even though analysts expect it to be “fully eroded” (read: out of money) by next year. The fund operates via a reverse auction, in which companies offer to undertake emissions-cutting projects and bid for taxpayer dollars to fund those projects. Not only is the fund running out of money, but its impact is dubious. The policy suite will allow Australia’s top 20 polluters to actually “increase their carbon emissions without penalties,” reported the Australian Financial Review.

Despite the backlash, the Australian government stuck to its coal-fired guns. “Australia is making a strong and credible contribution to the international effort to tackle climate change,” said Prime Minister Tony Abbott in a statement. “We are committed to tackling climate change without a carbon tax or an emissions trading scheme that will hike up power bills for families, pensioners and businesses.”

Ignoring the fact that the INDC is neither strong nor credible, the position is at least a step up for Abbott, who previously called climate change “absolute crap.” (The PM also notably said, “I won’t be rushing out to get my daughters vaccinated,” but we’ve only got time to cover one type of denialism today.)

Coal made up more than 60 percent of Australia’s energy mix in 2014. Peabody Energy, the world’s biggest private-sector coal company, quoted Abbott in a recent submission to the White House Council on Environmental Quality protesting the inclusion of greenhouse gases in National Environmental Policy Act analyses:

As Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott recently explained, … “Coal is good for humanity. Coal is good for prosperity. Coal is an essential part of our economic future here in Australia.”

The same can’t be said for the rest of the South Pacific. “If the rest of the world followed Australia’s lead, the Great Barrier Reef would disappear,” said Tony de Brum, foreign minister for the Marshall Islands, in a statement addressing Australia’s INDC. “So would my country, and the other vulnerable atoll nations on Australia’s doorstep.”

Source:
Australia Sets Emissions Goal, but Climate Scientists Say It Falls Short

, The New York Times.

Anger as Australia unveils ‘weak’ climate pledge

, RTCC.

Share

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

A Grist Special Series

Oceans 15

Get Grist in your inbox

Advertisement

Jump to original: 

Australia files joke of a climate pledge to the U.N.

Posted in Anchor, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, global climate change, LAI, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Australia files joke of a climate pledge to the U.N.

This video about the aging pipeline below the Great Lakes should be this summer’s top horror flick

This video about the aging pipeline below the Great Lakes should be this summer’s top horror flick

By on 11 Aug 2015commentsShare

You know that feeling you get when you’re watching a scary movie, and something bad is about to happen? The music gets weird, the action starts to slow down, someone says something meaningful like “I’ll always be there for you.” That’s the feeling you might get watching this video from Motherboard about an aging oil pipeline lying at the bottom of the Great Lakes.

Here’s the gist: A company called Enbridge (appropriately evil-sounding) owns a 62-year-old pipeline running between Lake Huron and Lake Michigan along the Straits of Mackinac. The pipeline was originally built to last 50 years and is in questionable shape, but don’t worry — Enbridge says they have everything under control. Sure, the company had 800 spills between 1999 and 2010, according to Motherboard, and yes, one of those spills was the worst inland spill in U.S. history, causing more than 800,000 gallons of oil to spew into the Kalamazoo River in 2010. But no matter — there’s a very nice Enbridge employee in the video who says that the company doesn’t want to have any more spills.

Now, there’s no one I trust more than a giant oil pipeline operator, but this 17-minute video still feels like a teaser for an impending catastrophe. David Schwab, a scientist at the University of Michigan who spoke with Motherboard, says that when currents are at their peak, the amount of water flowing through the strait is 10 times the amount flowing over Niagara Falls. If a rupture occurs, he says, oil will quickly spread into both lakes. And even if Enbridge takes action immediately, Motherboard reports, the best-case scenario would end in a 1.5 million gallon spill.

So let’s consider ourselves warned. Now if there is a spill, we’ll all be that stupid character who went down to the basement to check up on a mysterious noise, when she knew full well that there was a killer on the loose.

Source:
A Massive Oil Pipeline Under the Great Lakes Is Way Past Its Expiration Date

, Motherboard.

Share

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

A Grist Special Series

Oceans 15

Get Grist in your inbox

Advertisement

Originally from – 

This video about the aging pipeline below the Great Lakes should be this summer’s top horror flick

Posted in alo, Anchor, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This video about the aging pipeline below the Great Lakes should be this summer’s top horror flick

How the universe began and how humanity will drown: A scientist’s to-do list

How the universe began and how humanity will drown: A scientist’s to-do list

By on 11 Aug 2015commentsShare

No pressure, scientists, but you just got your marching orders for the next 10 years, and, well, you’ve got your work cut out for you:

  1. Understand the origins of the universe (cosmic inflation, the quantum nature of gravity, the nature of everything, etc.)
  2. Figure out how life evolved in the Antarctic over the last 30 million years (seriously, who wants to live there?)
  3. Get a handle on what’s happening with those melting ice sheets that we keep hearing so much about (i.e. just tell us how this is all gonna end, so we can start writing apology letters to the future)

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine just released this little ditty of a to-do list for scientists working on NSF-funded Antarctic and Southern Ocean research. Two of the three initiatives are directly related to climate change and how we and other living things are going to have to adapt to it. It’s certainly reassuring that the powers that be consider these issues as important as answering the age-old questions of where everything came from and what it all means, but at the same time, it pretty much just confirms that we’re totally screwed, right?

Here’s an overview of the priorities from a press release about the report:

The report proposes a major new effort called the Changing Antarctic Ice Sheets Initiative to investigate how much and how fast melting ice sheets will contribute to sea-level rise.  The initiative’s components include a multidisciplinary campaign to study the complex interactions among ice, ocean, atmosphere, and climate in key zones of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, and a new generation of ice core and marine sediment core studies to better understand past episodes of rapid ice sheet collapse. …

A second strategic research priority is to understand from a genetic standpoint how life adapts to the extreme Antarctic environment.  For more than 30 million years, isolated Antarctic ecosystems have evolved to adapt to freezing conditions and dramatic environmental changes, and now must adapt to contemporary pressures such as climate change, ocean acidification, invasive species, and commercial fishing.  Sequencing the genomes and transcriptomes of critical populations, ranging from microbes to marine mammals, would reveal the magnitude of their genetic diversity and capacity to adapt to change.

In addition to being a vast natural laboratory, Antarctica has a dry, stable atmosphere that offers an ideal setting for astrophysical observations.  The report recommends a next-generation experimental program to observe cosmic microwave background radiation, the “fossil light” from the early universe.  This would include an installation of a new set of telescopes at the South Pole, as part of a larger global array, which will allow highly sensitive measurements that could detect signatures of gravitational waves.  Such observations might provide evidence that could confirm the theory of cosmic inflation and the quantum nature of gravity, as well as address other enduring questions about the nature of the universe.

Got that, scientists? We’re looking for how the universe started, how life evolved in some of the most extreme environments on Earth, and how the oceans are ultimately going to engulf us all in a merciless end. Talk to you in 10 years.

Source:
Melting Ice Sheets, Genomic Studies, and Deep-Space Observations Are Top Priorities for Next Decade of Antarctic and Southern Ocean Research

, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

Share

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

A Grist Special Series

Oceans 15

Get Grist in your inbox

Advertisement

Visit site – 

How the universe began and how humanity will drown: A scientist’s to-do list

Posted in alo, Anchor, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How the universe began and how humanity will drown: A scientist’s to-do list

Warren Buffett has been quietly funding birth control access

Warren Buffett has been quietly funding birth control access

By on 31 Jul 2015commentsShare

It’s been a bad couple of weeks for reproductive rights. Planned Parenthood is under vicious attack: In addition to its site being hacked — hampering access to crucial reproductive healthcare services for women around the country — the absurdly named Center for Medical Progress has released, as of today, four separate videos attempting to villainize the organization. The cherry on top of this nightmare sundae is that on Monday, the Senate will vote on a bill that would strip Planned Parenthood of its funding.

Planned Parenthood is not, contrary to deluded conservative belief, the abortion factory that it’s painted as. It actually gives women all over the country access to birth control that, you know, prevents them from having to get abortions. And, as it turns out, much of the credit for the access that we do have is due to none other than Warren “Richer Than Your Entire City” Buffett.

Bloomberg Business reports:

In the past decade, the Buffett Foundation has become, by far, the most influential supporter of research on IUDs and expanding access to the contraceptive. “This is common-sense, positive work to help families meet their dreams and their needs in planning their pregnancies,” says Brandy Mitchell, a nurse practitioner who coordinates family planning at Denver Health, a state-run provider. “Why we have to rely on a donor to make this happen is beyond belief.”

Quietly, steadily, the Buffett family is funding the biggest shift in birth control in a generation. “For Warren, it’s economic. He thinks that unless women can control their fertility—and that it’s basically their right to control their fertility—that you are sort of wasting more than half of the brainpower in the United States,” DeSarno said about Buffett’s funding of reproductive health in the 2008 interview. “Well, not just the United States. Worldwide.”

Buffett’s great mountains of money have funded not only crucial medical research of IUDs, but also the landmark CHOICE project that started in St. Louis, Mo., in 2007 and the wildly successful Colorado initiative that provided free IUDs to adolescent girls, reducing teen pregnancy by 40 percent in four years as well as — surprise, surprise! — the teen abortion rate by 42 percent in the same time period. (Colorado Republicans, by the way, voted to defund that program in spite of its success.)

See, everyone? Money doesn’t always have to be evil! Incredibly rich people can do incredible things!

But then, of course, we can always count on the GOP to step in and fuck it all up.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work. A Grist Special Series

Meat: What’s smart, what’s right, what’s next

Get Grist in your inbox

Source:  

Warren Buffett has been quietly funding birth control access

Posted in Anchor, Cyber, Everyone, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Landmark, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Warren Buffett has been quietly funding birth control access

Washington Is Finally Getting What It Deserves as It Sinks Into The Sea

Mother Nature has a great sense of humor. Orhan Cam/Shutterstock New research indicates that Washington, D.C., is rapidly sinking into the ocean, news that might not make the rest of the country all that sad. The research, from the University of Vermont, the U.S. Geological Survey and several other institutions, projects the land beneath the Washington area will drop 6 or more inches in the next 100 years. That’s in addition to rising sea levels due to climate change, which is melting ice sheets and causing thermal expansion of the oceans. Climate change has already caused 8 inches of sea level rise since 1880, and is expected to raise average global sea levels another 1 to 4 feet by the end of this century. Relative sea level rise in the Chesapeake Bay region is happening faster than any other part of the Atlantic coast, according to tidal records, and twice as fast as global averages. Read the rest at The Huffington Post. View this article:   Washington Is Finally Getting What It Deserves as It Sinks Into The Sea ; ; ;

Follow this link – 

Washington Is Finally Getting What It Deserves as It Sinks Into The Sea

Posted in eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, ONA, OXO, solar, solar power, The Atlantic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Washington Is Finally Getting What It Deserves as It Sinks Into The Sea

Stop blaming yourself for the woolly mammoth extinction

SPOILER ALERT

Stop blaming yourself for the woolly mammoth extinction

By on 27 Jul 2015commentsShare

Phew! It looks like we might finally be off the hook for killing all the woolly mammoths. New research suggests that it was climate change, not overhunting and human-caused habitat fragmentation, that drove all of Mr. Snuffleupagus’ ancestors to extinction. This must feel almost as good as that time you thought you’d killed your neighbor’s dog by letting it eat a bunch of chocolate and then found out that it actually just had cancer! Welcome back to Spoiler Alerts, where climate change is always the culprit.

Scientists have been trying to figure this out for decades — not only what killed the woolly mammoth, but what killed all kinds of large land animals during what’s known as the Late Pleistocene (miss you, giant ground sloth!). But only recently, with advances in DNA analysis, radiocarbon dating, and historical climate data, have they really been able to zero in on what actually went down.

And that’s exactly what a group of researchers from Australia and the U.S. did using 56,000 years worth of climate and DNA data. They reported their findings — that periods of warming coincided with die-offs — last week in the journal Science. Here’s more from a press release out of the University of Adelaide:

The researchers came to their conclusions after detecting a pattern, 10 years ago, in ancient DNA studies suggesting the rapid disappearance of large species. At first the researchers thought these were related to intense cold snaps.

However, as more fossil-DNA became available from museum specimen collections and through improvements in carbon dating and temperature records that showed better resolution through time, they were surprised to find the opposite. It became increasingly clear that rapid warming, not sudden cold snaps, was the cause of the extinctions during the last glacial maximum.

The researchers also noted that humans, while not the primary cause of the extinctions, certainly didn’t help matters (just like you feeding your neighbor’s sick dog chocolate didn’t help, you monster!). As Chris Turney from the University of New South Wales put it in the press release:

“The abrupt warming of the climate caused massive changes to the environment that set the extinction events in motion, but the rise of humans applied the coup de grâce to a population that was already under stress.”

If these researchers are right, then Harvard geneticist George Church’s attempt to bring back the woolly mammoth in the form of a mammoth-elephant hybrid looks less like a pioneering act of genetic engineering and more like a cruel joke: “Welcome back, guys! There are now 7 billion of us, and we’re driving the Earth toward rapid and catastrophic climate change.”

Source:
Mammoths killed by abrupt climate change

, University of Adelaide.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work. A Grist Special Series

Meat: What’s smart, what’s right, what’s next

Get Grist in your inbox

See original article here: 

Stop blaming yourself for the woolly mammoth extinction

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Stop blaming yourself for the woolly mammoth extinction

Obama’s power plant rules could cut your electricity bill

Obama’s power plant rules could cut your electricity bill

By on 24 Jul 2015commentsShare

What will happen to your electric bill after the Obama administration starts limiting CO2 emissions from power plants? It could come down quite a bit, a new report finds — if your state leaders are smart.

Republican lawmakers have claimed that residential electricity bills will rise by up to $200 annually under Obama’s Clean Power Plan, based on a study put out in May 2014 by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. While the study has been widely discredited, opponents of Obama’s plan continue to cite it.

Now, a report by consulting firm Synapse Energy Economics suggests that state compliance with the plan — paired with investment in renewables and energy efficiency initiatives — could actually lead to big reductions in what Americans pay for power. The key? Early action.

Two of the report’s authors lay out the logic in EcoWatch:

By investing in high levels of clean energy and energy efficiency, every state can see significant savings with a total of $40 billion saved nationwide in 2030 … However, consumers will typically see the largest savings in states that build renewable resources early. Under the Clean Power Plan, these first movers will profit by becoming net exporters of electricity to states that are slower to respond. States that keep operating coal plants well into the future will tend to become importers after those plants retire, and energy consumers in those states will miss out on substantial benefits of clean energy and energy efficiency.

According to the report, if two-thirds of consumers participate in energy efficiency programs, electricity bills could be $35 cheaper per month than a “business-as-usual” scenario would predict for 2030. In fact, bills would be cheaper than they were in 2012, write the authors. The firm projects that the $35 savings would leave household electric bills at an average of $91 per month in 2030. (The EPA also expects household electric bills to drop under the plan, but the agency estimates they would be $8 lower per month.)

Keep in mind, though, that Synapse’s $35 figure is averaged across the U.S. as a whole. Since electricity prices already vary widely around the country, and the Clean Power Plan will be implemented differently by different states, the projected savings are subject to some massive variance. North Dakota residents, for example, could save $94 per month if their leaders are aggressive with renewable energy and efficiency.

But so far six governors have said they won’t draw up strategies for implementing the Clean Power Plan — so don’t expect early action from their states. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) wrote an op-ed in March calling for states to defy the Obama administration over the power plant rules.

While the Synapse report wasn’t funded by a group with an obvious financial interest in the outcome (like, say, the corporate-backed Chamber of Commerce), it was supported by a group with a viewpoint: the Energy Foundation, “a partnership of major foundations with a mission to promote the transition to a sustainable energy future.” Which is something we can get behind.

Source:
A Clean Energy Future: Why It Pays to Get There First

, EcoWatch.

Climate rule to bring lower energy bills, report says

, The Hill.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work. A Grist Special Series

Meat: What’s smart, what’s right, what’s next

Get Grist in your inbox

View original:  

Obama’s power plant rules could cut your electricity bill

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, sustainable energy, Uncategorized, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obama’s power plant rules could cut your electricity bill