It’s the Infrastructure, Stupid

California Elects Jerry Brown -- How Might He Impact California's Energy Policy?

This is just a recap of what we will be looking at in the year to come with a new Governor and also a quick look at what happens next... 

NEW GOVERNOR

On November 2, 2010, Californian’s elected Jerry Brown as the next Governor.  So, how will the election impact the energy sector?

Appointments and Energy Advisors

As soon as this coming week, we can expect Brown to announce a team that will lead his transition into office.  This team will help organize and recruit those that will lead the various agencies and departments – but principally – the initial transition team typically ends up as part of the Governor’s Cabinet or Governor’s Office initial key advisor staff.

Specific to Energy, candidate Brown said he would appoint an energy advisor – he called that a “renewable energy jobs czar” -- Whomever he selects, they will be a driver for energy policy in California.

Candidate Brown on Energy

Candidate Brown campaigned on the following plan for energy:

• Building 12,000 megawatts of Localized Electricity Generation
• Building 8,000 Megawatts of Large Scale Renewables and Necessary Transmission Lines
• Dealing with Peak Energy Needs and Develop energy Storage
• A Timeline to Make New Homes and Commercial Buildings Zero Net Energy
• Making Existing Buildings More Efficient
• Adopting Stronger Appliance Efficiency Standards
• Developing More Cogeneration Projects to increase combined heat and power production by 6,500 megawatts
• Add 500,000 new renewable energy jobs

Agencies

Governor Brown will be appointing to the energy and environmental agencies:

CPUC – Brown will have at least 3 appointments to replace Commissioners Bohn, Gruenich and Ryan

CEC – Brown will have at least 3 appointments to replace Commissioners Byron, Eggert, and Wisenmiller

Other Agencies – Brown will also have appointments to agency secretary roles at Cal EPA and Resources, Chair at CARB (the entire CARB Board serves at the Governor’s pleasure), CAISO (Chair Willrich’s term is up, Board member Tom Habashi, was not confirmed. Kristine Hafner also did not win support of the current administration, and Board member Laura Doll told media she would not seek reappointment -- so 4 appointments for Brown here).

NEW LEGISLATURE/CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS

While the California Legislature remains unchanged as far as balance goes (Democrats still in control of the Senate and Assembly), there are rumors that we will see a new president of the Senate.  We may also see a shuffling of committee chairs. 

Already (on 11/4), the Republicans have announced that the new minority leader will be Connie Conway (Assemblywoman from Visalia).  On Friday (11/5), the Democrats re-elected Perez as Speaker.

While it should not impact the policy of energy too much, it is interesting to note that all Constitutional officers are Democrats [NOTE: AS OF THIS DATE, THE AG RACE HAS NOT YET BEEN CALLED].

All of these changes could bring changes in the views on energy policy. 

Energy Legislative Committee Chairs Re-Elected Easily

Senator Alex Padilla (D-Pacoima), current chair of the Senate Energy Utilities & Commerce Committee, won 69 percent of the vote; Assemblymember Steven Bradford (D-Los Angeles), current chair of the Assembly Energy Committee, won 82 percent of the vote.

PROPOSITIONS

With regard to the propositions, the failure of Prop 23 means that AB 32 can move forward.  The passage of Prop 26 could mean that the legislature will have to approve by 2/3 vote how and if fees will be imposed to implement AB 32.  So this makes for an interesting situation. 

Legislation and RPS vs. RES

Depending on whom Brown selects as his energy advisor or advisors, these have the potential to greatly impact what we see in the form of the next RPS bill (Rumor: We will see a new RPS bill in January, this bill has the potential to look very similar to SB 722 – and Senator Simitian is expected to again carry the RPS bill – 3^rd time the charm?).  Labor played a key role in the discussions in the last 2 versions of this effort, so considering that labor and the unions influenced by labor gave Brown $25 million (IEs that paid for the Whitman attack ads), I assume they will again play a major role and this time with a much more sympathetic ear from the Administration.

CONCLUSION

The most important message to take from this is the following: If you are working on projects in California, you really need to pay close and active attention to how the energy and renewable process develops under the new Governor and offer your opinions on a regular basis.

Sunrise Powerlink Gets Boost from CPUC President -- Approval is Next

SDG&E got a boost on its efforts to build the Sunrise Powerlink, a $1.9 billion power line proposed to connect San Diego and Imperial counties.

Michael Peevey, president of the California Public Utilities Commission, offered a third alternative for his four fellow commissioners to consider when they discuss the proposal on December 18, 2008.

President Peevey's proposal would allow SDG&E to build the Powerlink without any condition that the line be required to deliver green energy to San Diego.

The proposal points to a southern route that avoids Anza-Borrego Desert State Parkand communities such as Julian and Santa Ysabel.  Does he have the votes to get this done?  Sources say yes. 

I have said before, infrastructure is in short supply -- and our continued grwoth -- like it or not -- demands that we build the necessary infrastructure that we will need to keep the lights on.  And for those who say we don't need it -- not only do we need transmission, we need to add more generation inside of California too.  Failure to do these necessary upgrades and construction will cause us to fail on the effort (and now law and executive order) to get to a greener future.

Obama-Nation: Historic Win -- Now What on Energy?

Historic.  That's the word that most of the pundits used to describe it.  While I have my reservations about some of the issues and how the President Elect may deal with them, I agree that we have an exciting situation in the United States.  Biut closer to my heart is energy.  And what can we expect from the president elect and the vice president elect?

Lets review what they said during the campaign and you decide.  As for me -- I see HUGE hurdles, given the economy.  Many challanges remain in California and as to how we meld with the campaign promises and the realities that come -- well, lets wait and see...

What Does Barack Obama Say About Energy?

www.barackobama.com

ü      Reduce the Burden of Rising Gas Prices on Working Families

ü      Reduce Carbon Emissions 80 Percent by 2050

ü      Invest in a Clean Energy Future

ü      Support Next Generation Biofuels

ü      Set A

merica on Path to Oil Independence

ü      Improve Energy Efficiency 50 Percent by 2030

ü      Restore U.S. Leadership on Climate Change

Senator Joe Biden

The energy challenge take sacrifice and is a moral crusade. (Dec 2007)

FactCheck: Oil did not jump $18/bbl due to Iran Resolution. (Dec 2007)

Supports cap-and-trade for greenhouse gases. (Nov 2007)

Provide for emergency fuel assistance immediately. (Oct 2007)

Make every automobile sold be a flex-fuel automobile. (Apr 2007)

Voted YES on tax incentives for energy production and conservation. (Jun 2008)

Voted YES on addressing CO2 emissions without considering India & China. (May 2008)

Voted YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jun 2007)

Voted YES on factoring global warming into federal project planning. (May 2007)

Voted YES on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's ANWR. (Nov 2005)

Voted YES on $3.1B for emergency oil assistance for hurricane-hit areas. (Oct 2005)

Voted YES on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%). (Jun 2005)

Voted YES on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. (Mar 2005)

Voted YES on Bush Administration Energy Policy. (Jul 2003)

Voted YES on targeting 100,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010. (Jun 2003)

Voted YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill. (Mar 2003)

Voted NO on drilling ANWR on national security grounds. (Apr 2002)

Voted NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months. (Mar 2002)

Voted NO on preserving budget for ANWR oil drilling. (Apr 2000)

Voted NO on ending discussion of CAFE fuel efficiency standards. (Sep 1999)

Voted NO on defunding renewable and solar energy. (Jun 1999)

Voted NO on approving a nuclear waste repository. (Apr 1997)

Voted NO on do not require ethanol in gasoline. (Aug 1994)

Keep efficient air conditioner rule to conserve energy. (Mar 2004)

Establish greenhouse gas tradeable allowances. (Feb 2005)

Sponsored bill raising CAFE by a 4% per year until 2018. (Jul 2006)

Rated 83% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence. (Dec 2006)

Designate sensitive ANWR area as protected wilderness. (Nov 2007)

CPUC's Trick or Treat on Sunrise

On all Hollows Eve, the CPUC offered a treat to SDG&E:  competing proposed decisions on thier proposed Sunrise Powerlink.  The trick:  the two proposed decisions either partly or fully oppose the project.

The first of the proposed decisions, authored by an administrative law judge, denies the application for the 150-mile Sunrise Powerlink altogether, saying the project could significantly raise electric rates and do extensive environmental damage if built, and “is not needed to meet California's current renewable (energy) requirements.”

The second proposed decision, written by Commissioner Grueneich, approves the project but denies SDG&E its preferred northern route.  Grueneich argues that Powerlink is needed to meet state goals in reducing greenhouse gases, but the utility should use a southern route through

San Diego

County

that avoids

Anza-Borrego

Desert

State Park

and all tribal lands.

The full commission is not expected to vote on the two proposed decisions until December 4 at the earliest.  The commission will hear comments from interested parties and oral arguments at a public hearing in

San Francisco

on November 7.

McCain vs. Obama on Energy – Who Wins this Battle?

So, we have heard a lot from both of the presidential campaigns on energy this week, but have either of the candidates delivered knockout punches on the issue?  In my opinion, neither candidate has done that – but for now I would score the fight in favor of McCain, only because he is not loading up his plan with more spending.  Take a look for yourself, and make your decision.

 

What Does John McCain Say About Energy?

www.johnmccain.com

ü      Expanding Domestic Oil And Natural Gas Exploration And Production

ü      Taking Action Now To Break Our Dependency On Foreign Oil By Reforming Our Transportation Sector

ü      Investing In Clean, Alternative Sources Of Energy

ü      Protecting Our Environment And Addressing Climate Change: A Sound Energy Strategy Must Include A Solid Environmental Foundation

ü      Promoting Energy Efficiency

ü      Addressing Speculative Pricing Of Oil

ü      Does Not Support A Windfall Profits Tax

 

What Does Barack Obama Say About Energy?

www.barackobama.com

ü      Reduce the Burden of Rising Gas Prices on Working Families

ü      Reduce Carbon Emissions 80 Percent by 2050

ü      Invest in a Clean Energy Future

ü      Support Next Generation Biofuels

ü      Set America on Path to Oil Independence

ü      Improve Energy Efficiency 50 Percent by 2030

ü      Restore U.S. Leadership on Climate Change

CAISO CEO Says Grid Needs 6 New Major Transmission Lines in Addition to Sunrise Powerlink and Tehachepi Transmission Line

Yakout Mansour, CAISO CEO, delivered keynote addresses this past week at the California Manufacturers and Technology Association’s Annual Energy Conference and at the California Council for the Environmental and Economic Balance conference.  In his nearly identical remarks at both conferences (Wednesday and Thursday, respectively), Mr. Mansour made some interesting pronouncements.  Following are the highlights:

 

·       California’s Transmission and Generation Siting process must be streamlined as it poses incredible challenges (particularly to goals for renewable portfolio standard— RPS, generation integration and greenhouse gas reduction – as well as providing necessary generation for California’s continued energy consumption growth)

·       Current

California

nameplate capacity is critical in meeting the 20% RPS under current law, achieving 33% RPS will be even more difficult

·         Current CAISO interconnection cue is 110K MWs – of this 70K MWs are renewable-this is generation proposals that are under consideration and must be studied by the CAISO to determine how and where they would connect to the grid

·         CAISO expects that 85% of this generation will not be built

·        CAISO study concludes that in addition to the Tehachepi and

Sunrise

transmission lines, 6 additional major transmission lines will be needed to help CA meet RPS, GHG and growth requirements.

Great News! The Fires in the Last few Weeks Have Slowed Global Warming

Is it possible that the smoke that we choked on for the past few weeks and the homes and lives lost were for a greater cause?  The fires actually will slow global warming?

 

According to scientists, the Arctic may cool for weeks or months at a time as smoke from northern wildfires drifts into the region, according to researchers at the

University

of

Colorado

and the

U.S.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The cooling effect was observed above the snow-free tundra and to a greater extent over the darker, ice-free ocean, according to the study which appears in the Journal of Geophysical Research.

 

The study claims that smoke in the atmosphere temporarily reduces the amount of solar radiation reaching the surface.  Robert Stone, an atmospheric scientist at the

University

of

Colorado

and lead author of the study, also said in a statement that the “transitory effect could partly offset some of the warming caused by the buildup of greenhouse gases and other pollutants.”

Warming temperatures are extending wildfire seasons, raising the threat to communities and to forest ecosystems, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said in a report last year.  Wildfires are likely to occur more often as warming increases the risk of drought and reduces the amount of winter snow that accumulates at higher elevations.

California

current wildfires forced 10,000 people to abandon their homes in the foothills of the

Sierra Nevada

earlier this month, the largest fire evacuation in the state this year. Wildfires are likely to increase in

California

, the West, Southwest and the Southeast, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said in a report last week.

 

More Proof?

 

Researchers analyzed the short-term impact of wildfires that swept through

Alaska

and western

Canada

in 2004.  That summer, fires burned a record 10,000 square miles of

Alaska

's interior and another 12,000 square miles in western

Canada

.

 

Researchers as far away as Greenland and the Svalbard archipelago north of Norway also observed that smoke was blocking more solar radiation during the 2004 summer, suggesting that the effect North American wildfires was far-reaching.  Smoke from the same fires was observed as far south as the

Gulf of Mexico

.

So, should we encourage wildfires from time to time?  Are the preservationists right to not allow better harvesting of forests?  Have we heard anything about this from Al Gore?  Too many questions…