Tag Archives: pur

Las Vegas casinos want to go renewable, and that means a fight with the state’s utility

Las Vegas casinos want to go renewable, and that means a fight with the state’s utility

By on 8 Mar 2016commentsShare

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

The glittering Las Vegas strip is not an obvious model for energy conservation.

Yet hidden above the glowing Eiffel Tower, neon resort awnings, and a black pyramid that shines a beam of light into space is one of the largest rooftop solar arrays in the country.

Twenty acres of sun-catching glass sit atop the Mandalay Bay convention center, and when new installations are complete, it will become the biggest rooftop solar array in the U.S.

Advertisement – Article continues below

In recent months, three of Nevada’s largest casino companies  — MGM Resorts, Wynn, and Las Vegas Sands — have announced plans to buy and produce more renewable energy for their hotels, a move driven both by increasing demand for responsible energy use from the companies that rent their conference halls, and a surplus of cheap power from solar farms in Nevada and California.

“It’s no accident that we put the array on top of a conference center. This is good business for us,” said Cindy Ortega, chief sustainability officer at MGM Resorts. “We are looking at leaving the power system, and one of the reasons for that is we can procure more renewable energy on the open market.”

But there is a big shadow lurking over a rapid greening of the Las Vegas strip. Regulators will not let casinos simply walk away from the state’s monopoly utility provider, NV Energy.

Together, the casinos’ 15 properties account for 7 percent of NV Energy’s electricity sales, and if that income were lost, the utility says, its remaining customers would have to endure significant rate hikes. As a result, the public utility commission (PUC) of Nevada is demanding resorts pay tens of millions of dollars to leave NV Energy’s services, a December 2015 decision which one casino has appealed.

Las Vegas’s power drama captures an ongoing dilemma in the new energy economy. While corporations have been encouraged to go green, their efforts pass the burden of subsidizing old utility regimes on to retail consumers, which regulators cannot allow.

“They need to maintain the grid. You cannot let these utilities go bankrupt or else every business in the city dies,” said Bill Ellard, an energy economist for the American Solar Energy Society. “What will happen if they don’t maintain the grid properly and the transformers blow?”

In December, Nevada’s three-member PUC effectively destroyed a thriving rooftop solar industry by approving NV Energy’s request to drastically lower the rate at which solar users are compensated for excess energy they provide to the grid.

“This is what I call a death spiral for utilities,” said Ellard. “They make it hard to go solar because once you defect from them, that affects revenue. Then they increase rates on everybody else, forcing them to defect.”

MGM Resorts has already hurt utility profits though an ambitious energy conservation effort. In addition to building a solar array strong enough to power 1,000 homes for one year, the corporation is replacing 1.3 million lightbulbs in its properties with LEDs.

But to power multi-thousand-room resorts which house nightclubs, pools, theaters, and slot machine-packed casinos would require more solar panels than the companies have rooftop space. They are consequently joining a trend in big energy consumers requesting to buy electricity outside the utility system.

“They are all very concerned with their bottom lines,” said Rebecca Wagner, a former member of Nevada’s PUC. “The energy market in the west is great right now, so they are seeking to curb costs by getting in that market.”

Cheap natural gas is probably driving the initiative more than anything else, Wagner says. But according to Ellard, the antipathy casinos have for NV Energy’s monopoly also previews the next phase in an energy economy where renewables are competitive with fossil fuel prices.

“It’s complex because it’s not just electricity,” he said. “It’s natural gas, wind, coal, smart grid, big data, oil — it’s all connected. We’re at this next change point where wind and solar [battery] storage and smart software are going to start to replace all those energy sources.”

If the resorts do decide to separate from NV Energy, it will still cost them a combined $126.5 million, a price set by the PUC which they say is necessary to prevent broad consumer rate hikes and to compensate the utility provider for losses incurred on power plants and other assets purchased with casino demand in mind.

The resorts have complained that this “exit fee” is too high — and perhaps even illegal. “The PUC has simply made up rules as it goes along so as to discourage any applicants from exiting [NV Energy’s] service,” Wynn lawyers stated in a January judicial appeal. (MGM and the Las Vegas Sands are considering their options.)

Wynn’s president, Matthew Maddox, also noted in PUC testimony that NV Energy is owned by Warren Buffett’s company, Berkshire Hathaway (based in Omaha, Neb.), and is therefore, in his estimation, more concerned with maximizing profits than with maintaining Nevada’s grid. Maddox pointed out that their money doesn’t even stay in Nevada, saying: “It goes to Omaha.”

Data storage company Switch faced a similar situation last year when it announced plans to use 100 percent renewable energy to power its giant computer servers. NV Energy was not able to meet those energy demands, and the PUC said the company would have to pay $27 million to break up with the utility provider since its large data centers amounted to nearly 3 percent of NV Energy’s electricity sales. As a compromise, Switch is paying the utility company to build a new solar array in North Las Vegas to meet their sustainability goals.

The city of Las Vegas, too, is planning to use 100 percent renewable energy to power its municipal buildings, fire stations, city parks, and streetlights by 2017. That would make Las Vegas the largest U.S. city to achieve such a goal. But to get PUC approval, it also had to promise to buy most of the power from an NV Energy solar plant in nearby Boulder City. Nevadans are thus subsidizing NV Energy’s green investments while it lobbies against private rooftop solar installations by their customers.

MGM Resorts’s sustainability chief, Ortega, would not comment on her company’s wrangling with NV Energy and the PUC. But she did endorse the broad push toward sustainability as a way to combat notions that Sin City lacks a conscience. “The more we can dispel the myths around Las Vegas the better destination it is,” Ortega said.

“We have the ability to educate a wide variety of stakeholders on how we can exponentially reduce environmental impacts,” she added. “Las Vegas is the perfect place to do that because we have 40 million people come here every single year, and so what better place to start telling that story.”

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Climate on the Mind

A Grist Special Series

Get Grist in your inbox

Originally posted here:  

Las Vegas casinos want to go renewable, and that means a fight with the state’s utility

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, PUR, Radius, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Las Vegas casinos want to go renewable, and that means a fight with the state’s utility

Here’s Yet Another Penny-Ante Shill From Donald Trump

Mother Jones

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

The list of Donald Trump’s penny-ante shills seems endless. Trump steaks, Trump mortgages, Trump university, Trump vodka, Trump travel, etc. All of them were going to be the biggest thing ever, and all of them were basically either failures or scams. But it turns out there’s another Trump failure that no one seems to have heard about until now. Here’s Ian Tuttle with the details:

In November 2009, Trump, boasting a Midas-gold tie, took the stage in front of several thousand fans at Miami’s Hyatt Regency to debut his latest venture: The Trump Network™, a multi-level marketing operation focused on nutritional supplements.

A pyramid scheme based on nutritional supplements? That has Donald Trump written all over it! Please continue:

In early 2009, Trump purchased Ideal Health, Inc., founded in 1997 outside Boston by Lou DeCaprio and brothers Todd and Scott Stanwood, who became Trump Network executives….The centerpiece of the program was the PrivaTest….Customers would purchase the PrivaTest kit, collect a urine sample, and ship the sample to a lab, which would analyze it and develop a “Custom Essentials” kit of nutritional supplements “calibrated . . . to reflect your unique nutrient needs.”

….The PrivaTest and a month’s supply of Custom Essentials cost $139.95, an additional month’s supply cost $69.95, and to keep one’s “unsurpassed individual nutritional support” up to date, the Trump Network recommended repeating the PrivaTest every nine months — at a price of $99.95, plus shipping and handling.

….Network marketing has had its successes: Avon and Mary Kay, for example….Trump and his devotees maintain that, because there was an actual product involved, the Trump Network was no scam, and in early 2011, Trump told New York Magazine that he expected the Trump Network to become larger than Amway, then an $8.4 billion operation. Unsurprisingly, that never happened. “The Trump Network had gotten in trouble financially,” Bonnie Futrell, a former Network marketer, told Stat News. “They weren’t being able to pay the lab. They weren’t paying vendors. They weren’t paying us.” In early 2012, just over two years after it started, the Trump Network was sold to network-marketing company Bioceutica.

I assume no one is surprised to hear this, so there’s not much point in dreaming up snarky comments about it. It’s pure Trump.

But here’s what I don’t get: how is it that we’re hearing about this for the first time? It only happened seven years ago. It was announced with all the usual Trump fanfare. But it seems to have escaped everyone’s notice. How many more of these things are out there just waiting to be discovered?

Visit source – 

Here’s Yet Another Penny-Ante Shill From Donald Trump

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s Yet Another Penny-Ante Shill From Donald Trump

What Are the Best Apps for Ordering Groceries Online?

If you like to cook but don’t have time to shop for food, there are plenty of mobile apps that can make it easy for you to do your shopping online.

Why bother?You’ll save time driving to the store and strolling the aisles. You may get better organized about what you cook, since you can look at recipes while you shop to figure out exactly what ingredients you need. Maybe you’ll reduce waste, too, since you won’t be tempted by impulse products while you’re standing in the check-out line.

Plus, I found when I was shopping online for groceries that often, the food I got delivered was of better quality than what I found in the store.

A big disadvantage of online grocery shopping is that food comes in a lot more bags and containersthan I would use if I shopped myself. For example, I rarely put loose apples or oranges in a plastic produce bag, but if I order them online, they come in a bag that’s not very easy to re-use. Because groceries are packaged and then boxed up so an order is easy to deliver, it’s hard to avoid all that packaging waste.

WHAT APPS TO USE?

Grocery Store – Many grocery stores have their own apps so you can shop online but keep it local. For example, the Giant chain in the Washington, D.C. area calls its online service Peapod. You get a $20 discount on your first order if it’s over $100, and the first two months delivery charges are free. They offer “natural and organic” options as well as conventional ones. A mobile app means you can order from your phone if you’re in a meeting or on the go and realize you need food but don’t have time to shop.

Boxed – Boxed is a service that lets you order packaged groceries and household products in bulk. Delivery is free on all orders over $50 and there’s no membership fee. Boxed doesn’t deliver meat, fish or fresh produce. But for cereal, cookies, toothpaste, baby food, pet supplies, coffee and tea, you order online and receive your order in 1-3 days.

Instacart – This app allows you to shop from several stores in your zip code (if they’re working with Instacart). For example, where I live outside Washington DC, I could use Instacart to shop online at Whole Foods, Costco, Harris Teeter, Safeway and Petco. The first delivery is free; thereafter, delivery fees depend on when you want your groceries delivered. Within 2 hours, the cost would be $9.99; otherwise, it looked like it would cost about $5.99 for deliveries. When I clicked on Whole Foods, a number of discounts showed up, which was appealing. Otherwise, prices online seem to be about the same as in the store.

WeGoShop – Want a sort of personal shopper to take your order, do the shopping and deliver everything to your home? Take a look at WeGoShop. It differs from other services in that the shopper goes to the stores of your choice rather than a limited selection. For example, you might want items from a liquor store, grocery store, food coop, deli and specialty store. Your WeGoShop assistant could make all those stops for you without a problem. You pay for your groceries and a service fee upon delivery by cash, check, debit, credit card or by using a WeGoShop gift certificate. You need to call to place your order.

What online grocery apps do you use? Please share.

Related
Best Grocery Shopping Apps to Help Manage Your Next Party

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Link:  

What Are the Best Apps for Ordering Groceries Online?

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What Are the Best Apps for Ordering Groceries Online?

Now That We Know These Disturbing Numbers, Can We Trust Air Marshals?

Mother Jones

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

This story was originally published in ProPublica.

Seven and a half years ago, as a new reporter at ProPublica, I filed a Freedom of Information Act request for all reports of misconduct by federal air marshals.

It had been several years since the U.S. government rapidly expanded its force of undercover agents trained to intervene in hijackings after 9/11. And a source within the agency told me that a number of air marshals had recently been arrested or gotten in trouble for hiring prostitutes on missions overseas.

I knew the FOIA request would take a while—perhaps a few months—but I figured I’d have the records in times for my first ProPublica project.

Instead, I heard nothing but crickets from the Transportation Security Administration.

Finally, last Wednesday, an email popped into my inbox with the data I had been fighting for since my fourth day at ProPublica.

The saga to get the air marshal data reveals a lot about the problems with FOIA, which is supposed to guarantee the public’s access to government records, as well as what happens when an agency decides to drag out the process.

Even though the Federal Air Marshal Service insists it has taken steps to build an agency steeped in professionalism with no tolerance for misconduct, it continues to face the same issues it was battling when I filed my FOIA request in 2008.

While waiting for the data, I found dozens of air marshals who had been arrested for crimes ranging from aiding a human trafficking ring to attempted murder. One air marshal used his badge to smuggle drugs past airport security while another used his to lure a young boy to his hotel room, where he sexually abused him.

Air marshals had hired prostitutes in Barcelona and gotten into a fight with security guards after patronizing a brothel in Frankfurt.

Another marshal’s in-air behavior concerned flight attendants so much that they reported it to the agency, saying “I can’t believe he is able to carry a gun!” (That officer was later convicted of bank fraud for trying to cash a $10.9 million check that he said was a settlement after he was a scratched by a friend’s cat.)

As time passed, the problems continued.

Last year, several other news outlets published troubling reports about air marshals that sound remarkably similar. A few selections: Air marshals accused of hiring prostitutes in Europe and recording the sex on their phones. Air marshals describe a “party-hearty” atmosphere. Air marshal kicked off plane after throwing a fit when he was offered only one dinner choice instead of three.

Oddly, when the TSA finally responded to my seven-year-old request, it included its own analysis of the data along with an unsolicited statement.

“The vast majority of FAMs federal air marshals are dedicated law enforcement professionals who conduct themselves in an exemplary manner,” it said. “TSA and FAMS continually strive to maintain a culture of accountability within its workforce.”

The statement also said the agency saw a “significant reduction” in misconduct cases in 2015 as a result of its initiatives. But notably, the agency only provided data through February 2012, even though in my last email exchange with the office last month I requested the entire database.

This has become standard practice for many agencies. By delaying FOIA requests for years, the TSA gets to claim the data it releases is old news. (The agency made the same claim back in 2008, which—because of the data we received recently—we now know wasn’t true.)

So what did the data tell us about misconduct by air marshals?

For starters, air marshals were arrested 148 times from November 2002 through February 2012. There were another 58 instances of “criminal conduct.”

In addition, air marshals engaged in more than 5,000 less serious incidents of misconduct, ranging from 1,200 cases of lost equipment to missing 950 flights they were supposed to protect.

Is that a lot or a little? It’s hard to say because the number of air marshals is classified and the estimates of the size of the force don’t include turnover.

The TSA says the misconduct represents just a “handful of employees.” But concerned air marshals I spoke with said they should all show sound judgment, given that air marshals are allowed to carry guns on planes and must make split-second life-and-death decisions.

Some other highlights found in our analysis of the data:

250 air marshals have been terminated for misconduct; another 400 resigned or retired while facing investigation.
Air marshals have been suspended more than 900 times, resulting in more than 4,600 days lost to misconduct.
The Washington field office had the most incidents with 530 cases, followed by New York with 471, Chicago and Dallas with 373 each and Los Angeles with 363. There were 85 cases at air marshal headquarters, highlighting that in some cases, misconduct has extended to the top brass.

After our story ran in late 2008, Robert Bray, the director of the air marshal service at the time, vowed to create a “culture of accountability” within the agency and raised the penalty for drunk driving arrests to a 30-day suspension.

We now know the number of misconduct cases remained fairly steady, about 600 a year, in the years before and after our investigation.

It’s unclear if the agency got tougher or weaker. Before the story ran, only 4 percent of air marshals who had been arrested received a suspension of 14 days or longer. After the story ran, that number jumped to 20 percent. But at the same time, a much higher percentage of arrested air marshals got off with minor discipline such as a letter of reprimand, a warning or no action at all.

After the story, I continued to talk to air marshals and pursue the FOIA request. Inspired by the Obama administration’s memo on transparency, and armed with new information that there was a specific misconduct database, I filed a second FOIA request in 2010.

This was perhaps a mistake. Rather than respond to my first request, the TSA merged it with my new request.

In 2012, the agency responded. But the TSA only released two columns —one showing allegations against air marshals, the other listing disciplinary actions taken in response. Notably, there were no dates, which would have allowed us to check if the agency’s “culture of accountability” was working.

I immediately appealed. In addition, I filed another FOIA request for the entire database—”all columns and rows.”

Two more years passed. Meanwhile, air marshal director Bray himself became embroiled in a misconduct investigation. A supervisor was accused of obtaining free and discounted guns from the air marshals’ weapons supplier and providing them to top officials, including Bray, for their personal use. In 2014, Bray retired.

Around that time, I partially won my appeal. But the data was still incomplete.

After nearly six years, I had pretty much given up.

Until late December. That’s when an email arrived from TSA telling me my request from 2012 had been sitting in a backlog and wanting to know if I was still interested.

Indeed I was. (The TSA had asked me this question a few times during my pursuit of these records.)

A month later, I had the information I had been seeking. It only took seven years, seven months and 29 days.

Link:

Now That We Know These Disturbing Numbers, Can We Trust Air Marshals?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, ProPublica, PUR, Radius, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Now That We Know These Disturbing Numbers, Can We Trust Air Marshals?

The Nation’s Election Watchdog Just Hit a New Level of Dysfunction

Mother Jones

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

In 2011, former Bain Capital executive Edward Conrad decided to give $1 million to the super-PAC supporting the presidential bid of his pal Mitt Romney. But he didn’t contribute the cash directly. Instead, he put the money in a generically named shell company he had recently created, which then cut a check to the super-PAC, Restore Our Future. Election law prohibits donors from taking steps to hide their identities, and campaign finance activists pressed the Federal Election Commission to investigate. Five years later, the FEC—which since at least 2010 has been existing in a fugue state of partisan paralysis—has finally rendered a decision on whether it will probe the matter, which is something of a post-Citizens United test case. Nah, we’ll pass on this one, the FEC decided on Monday.

In a letter sent to the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan campaign finance watchdog that complained about the donation in 2011, the FEC reported that its six commissioners deadlocked 3-to-3 on whether to open an investigation into the donation. Keep in mind that they didn’t split on whether there had been a violation of law, or if Conrad should be punished—just whether they should open an inquiry. The FEC also informed the Campaign Legal Center that the commission had deadlocked on a similar case from 2011, involving donations made via two other shell corporations to Romney’s super-PAC.

The FEC has been mired in a messy standoff for years now. With three Republican commissioners and three Democratic commissioners, it deadlocks on nearly every question put to it, even the minor ones. But this case was essentially a big softball. Conrad eventually publicly acknowledged he was behind the shell corporation. Donations from anonymous corporations to super-PACs are becoming increasingly common, but it is rare that the original source of the money reveals himself.

The FEC’s inability to open an investigation ends this case, but it doesn’t create a legal precedent. The commission could theoretically pursue future cases over the use of limited liability companies to fund campaigns. But don’t hold your breath, says Paul S. Ryan, the deputy executive director for the Campaign Legal Center.

“We have seen a pretty dramatic increase in the use of the LLCs to contribute to super-PACs, and I don’t think that’s going to change anytime soon,” he says, noting that the Campaign Legal Center has filed three similar complaints in the last two weeks alone. “But I think the dismissal of these complaints from 2011 will be viewed as a greenlight to continue laundering money into super-PACs.”

For the gridlocked commission, Ryan fears that this is far from rock bottom. “I’ve thought on several occasions that we’ve reached bottom, and they continue to surprise me with greater and greater dysfunction every year. This is a new low, that’s for sure. This does seem to be a million-dollar violation with an admission, and the FEC won’t even do anything about that. If they won’t do this, what hope is there for them to do any investigations in the context of less clear-cut violations?”

Ryan says the Campaign Legal Center will decide in the coming weeks whether to sue the FEC over its failure to act in this case.

Charlie Spies, an attorney for Restore Our Future, the Romney super-PAC that took the donation, told Mother Jones that the organization had followed the law.

More here – 

The Nation’s Election Watchdog Just Hit a New Level of Dysfunction

Posted in alo, Anchor, Casio, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Nation’s Election Watchdog Just Hit a New Level of Dysfunction

Are Big Power Companies Pulling a Fast One on Florida Voters?

Mother Jones

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

The Florida Supreme Court is set to weigh in on a controversial ballot measure that environmentalists warn could erect a new obstacle for the state’s struggling renewable energy industry.

On Monday, the court is expected to begin hearing oral arguments over Amendment 1, a proposed ballot imitative that purports to strengthen the legal rights of homeowners who have rooftop solar panels. But critics in the solar industry and environmental groups claim that if the measure passes in November, it would actually deal a major blow to rooftop solar by undermining one of the key state policies supporting it.

Amendment 1 was created by an organization with a grassroots-sounding name: Consumers for Smart Solar. In reality, though, the organization is financed by the state’s major electric utility companies as well as by conservative groups with ties to the Koch brothers. The measure qualified for the ballot in late January, after nabbing nearly 700,000 signatures from Floridians. A competing measure—pushed by Floridians for Solar Choice, a group backed by the solar industry—did not get enough signatures to make the ballot.

In Florida, the Supreme Court is commonly asked by the attorney general to review ballot initiatives to ensure that what voters will read on the ballot accurately characterizes the legal effects of the measure. And in this case, it does not, according to a legal brief filed by the environmental group Earthjustice:

If passed by the voters, the utility-sponsored amendment would be a constitutional endorsement of the idea that rooftop solar users should pay higher utility bills than other customers. Solar users could end up paying twice as much as other customers pay to buy power from the utilities. This utility-sponsored amendment pretends to be pro-solar but is actually a disguised attempt to derail rooftop solar in Florida.

“This is really shrewd, cynical deception,” said David Guest, the Earthjustice attorney who will argue the group’s position to the court on Monday.

A spokesperson for the utility-backed Consumers for Smart Solar countered in an email that “our amendment is not misleading” and that its opponents “are manufacturing false arguments and using scare tactics.”

The court battle over the ballot measure is just the latest episode in a long and brutal fight in Florida pitting solar companies and their environmentalist allies against power companies that fear losing their customers to rooftop solar power. Despite being one of the country’s sunniest (and largest) states, Florida ranks just 15th for solar installations. As Tim Dickinson recently explained in a great feature for Rolling Stone:

Key policies that have spurred a rooftop solar revolution elsewhere in America are absent or actually illegal in Florida. Unlike the majority of states, even Texas, Florida has no mandate to generate any portion of its electricity from renewable power. Worse, the state’s restrictive monopoly utility law forbids anyone but the power companies from buying and selling electricity. Landlords cannot sell power from solar panels to tenants. Popular solar leasing programs like those offered by SolarCity and Sunrun are outlawed. Rooftop solar is limited to those who can afford the upfront expense; as a result, fewer than 9,000 Florida homes have panels installed.

The controversial ballot measure would amend the Florida constitution to guarantee that “electricity consumers have the right to own or lease solar equipment installed on their property to generate electricity for their own use.” Sounds great, right?

Actually, it’s a bit more complicated than that. For one thing, Floridians already have that right, even though it’s not explicitly mentioned in the state’s constitution.

“There already is a right to own or lease solar,” explained Hannah Wiseman, a professor of energy law at Florida State University. In this area, she said, Amendment 1 “is entrenching existing laws.”

What the amendment won’t do, however, is legalize the type of solar lease offered by SolarCity, which is currently banned in Florida. “Third-party ownership” is a business model in which a contractor such as SolarCity installs solar panels on your roof free of charge, retains ownership of those panels, and then sells you the electricity they produce at less than the cost of buying electricity from the grid. That model has been extremely successful for SolarCity in California and other leading solar states, since it’s simple and allows homeowners to avoid the big up-front costs of installing and maintaining their own panels. In Florida, only electric utilities have the right to sell electricity to homeowners; you can buy or lease your own solar panels, but you can’t arrange to buy power from a third-party solar contractor. The failed ballot measure backed by Floridians for Solar Choice would have changed that, but Amendment 1 will not.

But according to Guest, there’s an even more insidious provision in Amendment 1’s fine print. The amendment says that state and local governments have the authority “to ensure that consumers who do not choose to install solar are not required to subsidize the costs of backup power and electric grid access to those who do.”

The issue here is net metering, a policy that exists in almost every state (including Florida) that requires electric utilities to purchase excess electricity from solar homes. In effect, the extra power your panels produce in the afternoon offsets the cost of power you take from the grid at night. The policy is widely loathed by power companies, because they not only lose a paying customer to solar, but have to pay that customer and take the customer’s extra power off their hands. Electric utilities across the country have waged a variety of wars against net metering over the last several years; one of their biggest wins was in Nevada last month.

Often the fight comes down to a complicated, sometimes esoteric, debate about whether or not net metering forces utilities to raise their rates for non-solar homes to cover the cost of solar homes. (In addition to having to buy the excess power, utilities say that solar homes still make use of transmission lines and other grid infrastructure without paying their fair share for it.)

That brings us back to the amendment: If passed, Wiseman said, it would allow utilities to argue that net metering is a “subsidy” for solar and that lawmakers have the authority to prohibit it.

“It could open the door for utilities charging solar users high fixed fees, and potentially getting rid of net metering,” Wiseman said.

Guest was more blunt: “They’re trying to kill net metering, is really what it is.”

All of this seems to be pretty confusing for Floridians, who appear to hold conflicting views on the controversy. According to the solar industry-backed Floridians for Solar Choice, 82 percent of the state’s voters said they would support changing the law to permit third-party ownership of solar. But a recent poll from the utility-backed Consumers for Smart Solar found that 73 percent of voters support their ballot measure.

One of the amendment’s opponents is Debbie Dooley, a Georgia-based Tea Party activist who has rallied conservative opposition to this measure and other potentially anti-solar policies around the country. Consumers for Smart Solar is engaged in “a campaign of lies and deception,” she said. The group “claims to support free market principle, but they are taking an anti-free market position by siding with monopolies to stop competition from solar.”

Now it’s up to the court to determine if Amendment 1’s wording is, in fact, deceptive. If they decide it is, they could throw the measure out. The case is much more ambiguous than the ballot measure language the court normally reviews, Wiseman said. But she added that it’s rare for the court to remove initiatives from the ballot.

This article – 

Are Big Power Companies Pulling a Fast One on Florida Voters?

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, green energy, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Smart Solar, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Are Big Power Companies Pulling a Fast One on Florida Voters?

Ever Wondered What Happens to All Those Old iPhones?

What happens when electronics come to the end of their useful life? For the vast majority of these devices, they either collect dust somewhere in our homes or offices or get sent to the landfill.According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, only12.5 percentofelectronic waste,or e-waste, is recycled in the U.S.

Bloombergrecently dug intoApples e-wasteproblemnamely the fate of the more than 570 million smartphonesthat have been sold since the first generation iPhone debuted in Jan. 9, 2007and found that the tech giant has collected more than 40,000 tons of e-waste in 2014, recovering enough steel to lay 100 miles of railway track.

Apple has sold 570 million iPhones in the past 9 years. What happens to these phones when they reach the end of the road? Photo credit:Flickr

Its clear that our increasingly digital world has left ashocking impact on our planet. These gadgetsrequire amassive amount of energyto manufacture and its potentially hazardouscomponents can havea toxic and evendeadlyimprint on planetary inhabitants.

With agrowing number of smartphones, computers andtablets piling up in our drawers or the landfill, United Nations officialsestimatedthat the volume of e-waste generated worldwide is expected to climb by 33 percent by 2017 to 65 million tons.

Apple will have to face thismounting e-wastecatastrophe as each

new product

comes along. However, asLisa Jackson, Apples vice president of environment, policy and social initiatives told Bloomberg,Apple has led theindustry in recycling efforts:

In the electronics recycling business, the benchmark is to try to collect and recycle 70 percent, by weight, of the devices produced seven years earlier. Jackson says Apple exceeds that, typically reaching 85 percent, including recycling some non-Apple products that customers bring in.

That means it will have to get hold of and destroy the equivalent of more than 9 million of 2009s iPhone 3GS models this year around the world. With iPhone sales climbing to 155 million units last fiscal year, grinding up Apple products is a growth business.

Apple has afree reuse and recycling programthat allows users to turn in their old iPhones, iPads or computers (Mac or PC) for Apple gift cards if the device qualifies for reuse. If it doesnt qualify for reuse, Apple will recycle it at no cost to the consumer.

Apple works with the Hong Kong-based electronics recycler Li Tong Group that follows a strict and secretivemulti-stepprocess that consists of breaking down every single element of an old phone and capturing 100 percent of thechemicals and gasses thats released during the process, Bloomberg reported.

Jackson saidthat the never-endingbuildup of new tech gear is a global issue.

Theres an e-waste problem in the world, JacksontoldBloomberg. If we really want to leave the world better than we found it, we have to invest in ways to go further than what happens now.

Jackson, who once headedthe U.S. Environmental Protection Agecny, has achieveda number of green initiatives since she was tapped to take charge ofApples environmental affairs in 2013. Frombanning a number oftoxicchemicalsfrom their products tooverseeingthe companys $1.5 billion green bond,the largest such bond from a U.S. business.

Apple has banned these chemicals in their products out of concern for the environment. Photo credit: Apple

The Cupertino, California-based company is currently running its entire nation-wide operation on 100 percent renewable energy and has committed to running its overseas supply chain on renewables as well.

I think people expect it of us. I think our customers hold us to a high standard, Jackson told Bloomberg.

Apple CEO Tim Cook is a big believer in big businessestaking charge on environmental sustainability.

The environment must also be on the business agenda, hesaidin a speech at Bocconi University in Italy in November.

As business leaders, we have a responsibility to address this, and urgently, he continued. We have obligations to our companies and our shareholders becauseclimate changeimpacts supply chains, energy crises and overall economic stability.

Written by Lorraine Chow. Reposted with permission from EcoWatch.

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

See the original article here:

Ever Wondered What Happens to All Those Old iPhones?

Posted in alo, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ever Wondered What Happens to All Those Old iPhones?

These Racist Collectibles Will Make Your Skin Crawl

Mother Jones

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

DAVID PILGRIM bought his first piece of racist memorabilia in the early 1970s, when he was a youngster in Mobile, Alabama. It was a set of salt and pepper shakers meant to caricature African Americans. “I purchased it and broke it” on purpose, recalls Pilgrim, who is black. Yet over the next few decades, he amassed a sizable collection of what he calls “contemptible collectibles”—once-common household objects and products that mock and stereotype black people.

David Pilgrim Ferris State University

PM Press

In 1996, Pilgrim transformed his 3,200-item collection into the Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia at Michigan’s Ferris State University, where he teaches sociology. He presents a selection of these appalling objects and images in his new book, Understanding Jim Crow: Using Racist Memorabilia to Teach Tolerance and Promote Social Justice. As the title implies, the book isn’t merely an exercise in shock value. It lays out the philosophy behind Pilgrim’s work as a scholar and an activist: that only by acknowledging these artifacts and their persistence in American culture can we honestly confront our not-so-distant past.

Mother Jones: What made you decide to turn your collection into a museum?

David Pilgrim: When I got to Michigan, someone mentioned that they knew this elderly black woman who was an antiques dealer. After many months, she agreed to let me see her personal collection. It was just objects floor to ceiling in a barnlike structure. I was overwhelmed by the sheer volume. It shook me! I thought I’d seen everything. What she had was a testimony to—this is going to sound weird—not just the creativity of racism, but the diversity in it. I remember that day thinking that I wanted to do what she’d done, but in a different way.

MJ: How popular were these collectibles?

DP: They were everyday objects in a lot of people’s homes, including African Americans’. The antiques collector had postcards, posters. She had records, 78s. She had ashtrays. She had a racist bell. I think she had the game called Chopped Up Niggers—it’s a puzzle. She told me that she hadn’t paid very much for many of those pieces because at the time people were throwing stuff away. Some people were ashamed.

“Nigger Milk,” a 1916 magazine advertisement that Pilgrim bought in 1988 Courtesy of David Pilgrim/PM Press

MJ: Why own them in the first place?

DP: These toys, games, sheet music about “coons” and “darkies”—all these millions, and I mean literally millions, of objects—were integral to maintaining Jim Crow. Jim Crow could not work without violence, real violence, but also the threat of violence and the depiction of violence. There are a number of games in the museum where you throw things at black people: “hit the nigger” or “hit the Negro” games. If you had such a game, you were actually creating safe spaces to do that.

An early 1900s game that depicted an African American as a target Courtesy of David Pilgrim/PM Press

MJ: Do you also keep track of racist images and memorabilia online?

DP: Absolutely. With the power of the internet and social media, one person can do the damage that in the old days it took many to do. When you have a race-based incident—and I make it my business to look—within one week there are material objects that reflect that incident in a racist way: lunch boxes, posters, puzzles, T-shirts, pillows. President Obama has been an industry for racist objects. He has been portrayed as a witch doctor, a Rastus character from Cream of Wheat, as a Sambo, as an Uncle Tom—and also as gay, as transgender, as communist, as socialist, as a terrorist, as a Muslim. Many of the images that appear online are old. The images from the old “coon” songs from the late 1800s and early 1900s show up in memes, and people don’t realize they’re older images.

A 1940s creamer or pitcher from Pilgrim’s collection Courtesy of David Pilgrim/PM Press

1950s fishing lure Courtesy of David Pilgrim/PM Press

MJ: What sort of people collect this stuff?

DP: There are some who want to educate. I’ve met collectors who collect to destroy the pieces. But by far the biggest segment are speculators who know that a McCoy cookie jar was $3 and you can get several hundred dollars for it now.

MJ: Do you see a role for your collection in today’s movement for racial equality?

DP: One of the questions I get often is why we’re still having these conversations. And my answer is: The objects are still being made, they’re still being sold and distributed. There’s not an image in the museum that’s not being reproduced in some way. Secondly, the reason we still have these discussions is because race still matters. But Americans don’t often talk about it in places where their ideas are challenged. We want our museum to be safe but uncomfortable.

MJ: I found myself hiding your book from my kids. At what age do you think it’s okay to expose children to this stuff?

DP: I believe that young people—8, 9, 10—should have discussions appropriate to their age about race. But no one under 12 can come into the museum by themselves, and we discourage parents from bringing them. Right in the center of the room is a lynching tree. Even though it’s contextualized, it can be a house of horrors.

A ceramic figure from the 1950s Courtesy of David Pilgrim/PM Press

Pilgrim writes that historian Henry Louis Gates Jr. found this the most disturbing image in the Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia. It is from an unknown book. Courtesy of David Pilgrim/PM Press

Early 1900s postcard Courtesy of David Pilgrim/PM Press

“Be-Bop the Jivin Jigger” toy Courtesy of David Pilgrim/PM Press

1950s bar set Courtesy of David Pilgrim/PM Press

Link: 

These Racist Collectibles Will Make Your Skin Crawl

Posted in Anchor, Broadway, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Oster, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on These Racist Collectibles Will Make Your Skin Crawl

16 Surprising Uses for Green Tea

Green tea has been around for thousands of years. Its no wonder the stuff sure is tasty, and is shown to have a number of great health benefits. But there are plenty of other reasons to keep green tea around. From cleaning carpets to giving your feet a much needing pampering, read on for some surprising ways to use green tea.

Quick Tip: Store your used green tea bags in the fridge so they dont spoil.

Beauty and Health

1. Reduce Eye Puffiness. The tannins and caffeine in green tea helps reduce both puffiness and dark circles under the eyes. Brew two bags of green tea. Take the bags out of the water and, with your fingers, squeeze out as much liquid as you can and let them cool to room temperature. Put one tea bag over each eye and wait 10 minutes before removing.

2. DIY Facial Toner. Green tea is found in a number of commercial skincare products but you can make some at home, too! Its also ridiculously easy: just brew some green tea, let it come to room temperature and transfer it to a clean spray bottle. Store in the fridge. Twice a day, spritz some on your face before using moisturizer. Its that simple!

3. Soothe Sunburns. Green tea contains properties that help with inflammation a major thing you want to combat if youre dealing with a sunburn. Soak a clean piece of cloth in cooled green tea and apply it to the affected area.

4. Pamper Your Feet. Green tea works well on puffy eyes because it reduces swelling and the same is true for your feet. After a long day, who doesnt want to relax with a nice, aromatic foot soak. Click here for a recipe.

Odor Fighting

5. Reduce Fridge Odor. Nobody wants a stinky fridge. Combat that by placing a dry, unused green tea bag in the refrigerator to absorb moisture.

6. Reduce Trash Odor. A couple unused green tea bags will also help stop foul odors that come from the trash. Keep a few unused bags at the bottom of your garbage can.

7. Clean Greasy Dishes. A used green tea bag is a great DIY sponge for cleaning greasy and grimy dishes.

8. Keep Litter Boxes Fresh. Adding some dry green tea leaves to kitty litter will help keep odors at bay and, whats more, your cat wont mind one bit!

9. Stash In Your Underwear Drawer. Green tea infuses a nice, subtle scent to your unmentionables. Keep an unused green tea bag in your lingerie drawer.

Cleaning

10. Clean Yoga Mats. One great way to clean yoga mats is to wash them in water with diluted green tea. Itll help keep them smelling fresh.

11. Clean Carpets. No, really! Sprinkling some used (but dry) green tea leaves 10 minutes before you vacuum the carpet will help you pick up more grime AND lightly deodorize both the carpets and the vacuum cleaner.

12. Clean Glass and Mirrors. Instead of tossing your green tea bag after you use it, brew it again, and use that weakened tea to clean windows and mirrors. Transfer room temperature tea to a spray bottle and wipe with a clean, dry cloth.

13. Clean Toilets. Deodorize your toilet by tossing a few used green tea bags in and letting them sit for an hour or two. Remove the bags, scrub and flush. Easy!

More Uses

14. Toss in the Compost. Green tea bags can absolutely be composted as long as the cloth is biodegradable, which many brands are.

15. Perfect Plant Watering. The big benefit of using green tea in the garden is that it absorbs water. Placing a used and dried tea bag at the bottom of the soil will absorb excess moisture and, over time, help redistribute that moisture more efficiently.

16. Naturally Dye Paper, Easter Eggs and More. Green tea is a great way to dye things, well, green! Click here for detailed instructions.

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Taken from:

16 Surprising Uses for Green Tea

Posted in alo, Aroma, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 16 Surprising Uses for Green Tea

Mass extinction threatens the world’s pollinators — and its crops

Mass extinction threatens the world’s pollinators — and its crops

By on 26 Feb 2016commentsShare

Bees, butterflies, bats, and birds have three things in common: They all have names that start with ‘b’, they are all pollinators, and they are all in serious danger.

United Nations-sponsored study released Friday reports that the world’s pollinators — and the crops that depend on them — are experiencing a trend of deep decline toward mass extinctions, with 2 out of 5 invertebrate species on their way to being completely wiped out. A meeting of representatives from 124 nations approved the research after it was presented by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services this week in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

The findings, drawn from over 3,000 scientific papers on pollinators, are dire: 40 percent of invertebrate pollinator species (bees, butterflies) and 16 percent of vertebrate pollinators (bats and birds) are threatened with extinction. The causes are multiple and varied: pesticide use, habitat loss associated with development, pathogens, and global warming are all major factors preventing pollinators from thriving.

Advertisement

A planet full of bee carcasses isn’t the only reason to worry about this news. The lives of birds and bees and bats are inextricably interwoven with the crops they pollinate — and with the food security of the people who depend on them. About 75 percent of the world’s staple crops, including coffee, cotton, almonds, and cacao, depend on pollination in some way.

“Pollinators are important contributors to world food production and nutritional security,” the co-chair of the UN assessment, Vera Lucia Imperatriz-Fonseca, said. “Their health is directly linked to our own well-being.”

The work done by these tiny insects, birds, and mammals can add up to a lot of money, too. According to the findings, the annual value of global crops directly affected by pollinators is estimated at as much as $577 billion — a figure higher than the GDP of the United Arab Emirates.

The report comes laden with the requisite catastrophe warnings, but there may be a way to reverse some of the damage. Practices like conducting sustainable agriculture in diverse habitats, utilizing indigenous knowledge, reducing or replacing pesticide use, and improving disease control can help attract pollinators and allow them to flourish.

“[W]e have more than enough evidence to act,” Imperatriz-Fonseca said. Given that we all like to eat food, maybe the stakes are high enough that we actually will.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Climate on the Mind

A Grist Special Series

Get Grist in your inbox

Continue reading here: 

Mass extinction threatens the world’s pollinators — and its crops

Posted in Anchor, ATTRA, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, oven, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Mass extinction threatens the world’s pollinators — and its crops