Earth Share of Washington

Big Wins for a Healthy Washington - A legislative wrap up

- By Tom Geiger from Earth Share organization Washington Environmental Council

For the third year in a row, leading conservation groups working at the state level have successfully advocated for new and improved laws to better protect people, land, air and water in Washington.

A new law to promote green building, as well as a law to clean our air by limiting auto emissions, will help people and nature breathe a little easier. Progress was also made on helping promote the health of Hood Canal and Puget Sound, and eliminate some very toxic chemicals from our household products.

The conservation community’s development of four common-sense Priorities for a Healthy Washington for the 2005 session was crucial to this success. (To learn more, go to www.environmentalpriorities.org) Instead of going to the Capitol with a laundry list, the short list made a splash from the get-go. The Seattle P-I’s editorial on December 27th called our proposals “a smart approach that should help lawmakers of both parties focus on a few areas where action can make a difference.”

Now we are celebrating some great success. After lots of hard work by the conservation community, all our partners and key legislative supporters, the Seattle Times opined: “Give the environmental community credit as well. For the third session, asking for less has meant more success.”

We are making progress and are being successful in getting real improvements to the laws that will help millions of people live healthier lives.

Here is a summary of what happened to each of the four 2005 Priorities for a Healthy Washington.

High Performance Green Buildings

On April 8th, Governor Gregoire signed this bill into law. The new law requires state buildings, schools, and universities to be built and certified as high performance, green buildings. This will result in buildings that save energy and water, are cheaper to operate, and improve student learning and employee performance.

Cleaner Air - Cleaner Cars

The Governor signed Cleaner Air - Cleaner Cars into law on May 6th. We’ll all breathe easier with cleaner cars - that’s a win worth smiling about! Cleaner Air - Cleaner Cars will reduce cancer-causing emissions and global warming pollution from new cars, increase consumer choice, and save consumers a bundle at the gas pump.

Sound Solutions - Saving Hood Canal and Puget Sound

While major bills did not pass, the conservation community secured over $6 million dollars for local clean water projects, including funds to clean up Hood Canal, and a grant and loan program to help homeowners fix failing septic systems. A bill to prioritize tax incentives for habitat buffers did pass. And a key bill that would reduce water pollution from septic systems passed the House but came two votes shy of going to the full Senate for a vote.

Phasing out Toxics

The Priority to phase out a particularly toxic set of flame-retarding chemicals failed to pass the legislature. However, the legislature did provide funding to the Department of Ecology to develop a plan for banning the most widely used form of toxic these chemicals. The department will report back to the legislature with recommendations in December.

Other Good News

Some other good bills that passed include: Oil Spill Prevention; improvements to the state’s approach to transportation funding; a new program for the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program; and programs to increase solar power, renewable energy and energy efficiency.

Priorities for a Healthy Washington is a combined effort of Earth Share organizations American Rivers, Audubon Washington, Center for Environmental Law and Policy, Climate Solutions, Futurewise, NW Energy Coalition, People for Puget Sound, Sierra Club, Transportation Choices Coalition, Washington Citizens for Resource Conservation, Washington Environmental Council, and Washington Toxics Coalition and includes other non-Earth Share members League of Women Voters of Washington, Northwest Ecosystem Alliance, Washington Conservation Voters, and WashPIRG.

Posted in the June 2005 Earth Page

Mountain Forecast: Sunny with a chance of rate increases

-By Louise Alexander

Guest author Louise Alexander contributes through Earth Share’s Journalism Internship Program. In addition to writing for Earth Share, she is a Project Manager for EarthCorps, leading volunteer restoration crews on projects around Puget Sound.

February has always been the hardest month, even for an East Coast native. The festivity of seasons has passed with little to look forward to, the days are shorter, and spring is a distant horizon; untouchable. But in the Puget Sound, winter in Seattle is the price one must pay for beautiful summers and rings of snowcapped mountains. The days darken in the early afternoon and the cold, constant rain and cloud cover is a daily reminder of what season it is. But February of 2005 was the antithesis of the infamous winters of Seattle. Almost every day was characterized by clear, sunny skies with perfect views of the bare mountains of the Olympics and Cascades. Yet enjoying respite in rain was bittersweet for many people, because we rely on the rain and cold days of winter.

The state of Washington suffered a decline in tourism as the ski mountains and resorts were unable to open for much of the season due to a lack of snow. Beyond this immediate economic hurt, there is also the issue of a lack of water in the spring and summer that comes from snowmelt. This will have direct repercussions on irrigation for agriculture as well as presenting an inhospitable environment for strong salmon and fish runs, as rivers dry up to shadows of what they should be. However, there is another strain on the economy. Hydropower is a major source of energy for the Northwest.

Ed Mosey from the Bonneville Power Administration admits with no hesitation that the water situation in Washington may lead to increased electricity rates this summer. “We measure the amount of water that is available by picking a place, in this case the Dalles Dam, and we measure during the high flow months of January to July. The measurement is 1 foot of water over an acre. In early March our measurements read at 70 million acre feet which is about 66% of our average flow and every time we measure the number goes down. 2001 was the worst year for water. We were in a drought and the amount of water we measured at a reading was 58 million acre feet.”

Thanks to sustained spring rains, the situation isn’t as dire as it looked in March. Bonneville Power hopes that there’s enough water to produce the necessary power to meet the needs of Washington, but may be forced to seek a rate increase due to reduced market sales. Mosey explains that, “normally there are sufficient amounts of reserve water that [Bonneville Power] can sell hydropower to other, drier states like California, and the money lost from those sales will have to be made up in increased rates”.

Lack of available water is a statewide problem, with several people paying close attention to how agencies like Bonneville Power will respond. Marc Krasnowsky, the Communications Director of the NW Energy Coalition states, “We’ll soon find out if the region learned from the 2000-01 energy crisis and drought, when tens of thousands of baby salmon and steelhead died when hydro-system operators pushed for more electricity production at their expense.” And here lies perhaps one of the region’s greatest dilemmas. In a low-water year, how do we choose between power production and protecting wildlife and the environment? Krasnowsky believes that, “this choice almost always spells disaster for migrating salmon and steelhead.”

Yet both groups can agree that hydropower, Washington’s biggest supplier of energy, cannot be counted on to meet the growing demands of the region or state. Krasnowsky remarks, “Hydropower is a great renewable resource, but it is not without its challenges. We must recognize that it is limited and even without the projected warm-weather reductions, can’t meet growing needs”. But the question is how these challenges will be met. According to Mosey, “the past four or five years have all been very dry. But we have only been recording the amount of water we receive since the 1920s, so we don’t know if this is part of a larger cycle or something more random. But this year is an example of how we can’t rely on hydropower for energy, but have to develop new sustainable energy and technology. We are hoping to announce new technology using computer-driven technology. I can’t discuss the details now, but it is very exciting and wind definitely plays a part in it.”

As a community, the Puget Sound cannot rely on groups to advocate for sustainability, or for power companies to hand us an easy solution that requires no effort on our part. Individuals must choose sustainability and conservation. The ability to turn a tap and have water flow is a privilege that we cannot afford to abuse. Because by the time we have to choose between salmon spawning and irrigation, we have already lost the time when we can afford to be ignorant of our situation. And eventually, there will be an entire month of days when there is not a drop of water, and we will sorely miss the reliable rain of February.

Posted in the June 2005 Earth Page

Plan maps out clean energy path for Washington and the region

- submitted by Lisa Noble-Rennick from ESW organization NW Energy Coalition

The Northwest Power and Conservation Council, made up of two governor-appointed representatives each from Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana, develops a power plan for the four-state region every five years. The plans recommend ways to guarantee adequate and reliable electricity for Northwest consumers at the least economic and environmental cost.

The Council released its draft Fifth Power and Conservation Plan last fall, took extensive public comment in October and November, and finalized the plan on Dec. 16. Long-time advocates for clean and affordable energy in the Northwest saw their efforts rewarded with Council recommendations to meet roughly half the region’s expected 20-year growth in electricity demand with energy efficiency (because it’s cheaper than anything else, including existing hydropower) and to build virtually no new power resources other than wind facilities in the short term.

Throughout the comment period, NW Energy Coalition and its allies pushed for a strong regionwide commitment to energy efficiency and renewable energy. The final plan reflects that hard work:

Energy efficiency — The final plan calls for 140 average megawatts of new efficiency per year between now and 2009 and for total development of more than 2,500 average megawatts of efficiency over the 20-year period. A city the size of Seattle uses about 1,080 average megawatts of energy per year, so this is a huge amount of energy efficiency. The bulk of the savings will be found in efficient lighting, motors and heating/cooling systems.

Renewable energy — The Council’s final plan calls for building considerably more new wind in the next five years than suggested in the draft. The amount of wind now recommended for the entire 20-year period could easily power two Seattle-sized cities!

Coal —The Council originally said the region should prepare to build a new 400-megawatt coal plant sometime after 2009. New coal remains a possibility in the final plan, though construction has been pushed farther into the future and is dependent on increased power needs and the future cost of coal – including the cost of carbon regulation.

Fish — The Council is responsible for overseeing a fish and wildlife program that balances the Northwest’s environmental and energy needs. But its draft power plan disregarded salmon issues. The final plan recognizes the link between power production and salmon survival and suggests development of a method for calculating the risk to fish presented by inadequate power supply.

Overall, the Fifth Northwest Power and Conservation Plan puts the region on-course for a clean and affordable energy future. The next step is ensuring implementation of the plan’s clean-energy recommendations. The Council is committed to meeting these goals and will be holding meetings over the next year on all of the action items.

Posted in the February 2005 Earth Page

Cleaner Cars, Cleaner Air

- by Sarah Jaynes from ESW organization Climate Solutions

Like most of us, my daily life hauling around two small children often requires that I drive a car. However, I share the concern of many Washingtonians about the toll that car emissions are taking on our health and our environment. Cars and trucks are the number one source of Washington’s air pollution, causing asthma, cancer, and global warming.

Hybrids and diesel cars are one answer. Another is to pass cleaner auto emissions (clean car) standards, one of the environmental community’s Priorities for a Healthy Washington. Clean cars are regular cars that reduce dangerous air pollution, burn less gas and save people money. With these standards, all new cars sold in Washington after 2008 will emit less pollution, while saving on fuel.

Passing clean car standards this year will:

• Reduce cancer-causing automobile emissions such as benzene and formaldehyde.
• Save $2.3 billion for Washington state consumers by 2020 .
• Start reducing our dependence on foreign oil.
• Enable Washington to reduce global warming pollution from new cars by roughly 30% by 2016.

Eight other states have already adopted these standards, and we know from their experience that clean cars make sense.

Best of all, we don’t need to worry about being able to afford a clean car. These new clean cars actually put money back in our pockets. Cars that meet global warming emission standards have reduced operating costs and fuel consumption. For example, if you finance your car over 5 years, you would save $18 in fuel costs per month, while spending only $7 more per month on your car payment. That’s $11 in your pocket every month, while cleaning up our air.

I want to be able to make the choice to drive a cleaner car. Californians currently enjoy the choice of 25 cleaner vehicle models that are not available in Washington. You probably know people who have had to wait 6-12 months to purchase popular hybrids. That’s because they are first delivered to California and other states with clean car standards. But this isn’t just about hybrids. Virtually every car model you want to buy (even the biggest SUVs) can meet the new standards cost-effectively with technology that is already available. To read more about consumer choice and savings, visit www.cleancarswashington.org.

As I’m writing this article, balmy, rainy January weather has caused widespread flooding and ski area closures. We have no time to lose. Unchecked climate disruption is a major threat to Washington’s economy and environment. Washington and Oregon’s Cascade snowpack - which drives our power, water, agriculture, and habitat systems - is projected to decline by 59% by the 2050s without swift action. Children in Seattle and Spokane have asthma rates nearly twice the national average.

I hope you’ll join Climate Solutions in getting involved in this effort. Now is our chance to make a big difference in the quality of our air. To get involved, please send an email to sarah@climatesolutions.org, or visit the campaign website www.cleancarswashington.org.

Posted in the February 2005 Earth Page

Priorities for a Healthy Washington

- submitted by Tom Geiger from ESW organization Washington Environmental Council

My son Isaiah was born about the same time as the Legislative Partnership between Washington Environmental Council and Washington Conservation Voters was established - the Fall of 2002. This partnership, working with the broader conservation and public interest groups, has worked to develop a list of winning priorities for the 2005 Legislative Session beginning January 10th.

Isaiah's future, and the legacy for all kids in the next generation will be improved because we are pushing priorities that will change people's lives for the better. At the same time, we all recognize that this work goes hand-in-hand with the creation of good jobs and a strong economy.

Recent legislative sessions have produced positive gains for old-growth forests, restoring streams and shorelines, attacking pollution, and reducing greenhouse gases. These ongoing achievements reflect the conservation ethic embraced by a majority of Washington voters. And they suggest our state's elected officials are paying more attention to their constituents.

Action on this year's Priorities for a Healthy Washington (listed below) will enhance our health and help preserve the treasures of the wonderful state we all call home.

Clean Air Through Clean Cars
Smart new technology allows cars to pollute less and save fuel. Eight states have Clean Car standards that provide a wider choice of cleaner cars, trucks, and SUVs than we have. Why shouldn't Washingtonians have those same choices? Clean Car legislation will ensure that new cars sold in Washington after 2008 use proven technology that reduces cancer-causing air toxics and global warming pollution.

Better Building for Sustainability and Efficiency
Facilities constructed with state money should be safe, healthy, and support our environment. That means using non-toxic and sustainable materials and design concepts. These buildings will save taxpayer money because the buildings are cheaper to operate; help conserve water and keep our air clean; and provide healthy environments that help students learn better and government workers be more efficient.

Sound Solutions: Saving Hood Canal and Puget Sound
Puget Sound is in trouble; much of it fails to meet basic clean water standards. The "dead zone" in Hood Canal represents a much larger problem. Unchecked development is polluting our marine waters and forcing many shellfish beds to close. Restoring and protecting our vital marine waters and ecosystems will provide safe recreational opportunities, promote clean water-dependent business in such areas as shellfish, fishing, and tourism, and enhance our quality of life.

Banning Toxic Flame Retardants
Scientists are finding chemical cousins of PCBs, the toxic flame retardants PBDEs, everywhere they look. PBDEs are in orca whales, ospreys, and even the breast milk of Puget Sound moms. Developing babies are most at risk, being exposed to PBDEs when they leach out of products and contaminate our home, food chain, and bodies. The legislature can protect our children's health and prevent the next PCB tragedy by banning all forms of PBDEs by 2006.

Washington State's environmental community is building bipartisan support for these essential priorities. The public overwhelmingly supports a new generation of protections for our health and this place we call home, and our elected leaders are starting to respond. Working together, we can create a model for the nation and true legacy for generations to come.

To learn more about how to become more involved supporting the 2005 legislative priorities, please see the upcoming events section below, which includes the 2005 Legislative Workshop on January 8 and Citizen's Lobby Day on February 17.

Posted in the January 2005 Earth Page

Climate Change (Part 2 of 2)

Policy, Action, and Opportunities

University of Washington environmental studies majors Ara Clark and Emily Raforth spent their summer taking part in an Environmental Journalism internship for Earth Share of Washington. Their interest in climate change and environmental ethics stems from their coursework through the Program on the Environment at the UW. This is the second installment of their 2-part series exploring the physical and social implications of climate change in the Pacific Northwest.

After spending part 1 of our series confronting the harsh scientific reality of climate change, in part 2, we wanted to highlight opportunities for businesses, government, and individuals. Our vision for this article is to make climate policy and solutions accessible. We wanted to know what our government is doing to protect our environment and us. What do people need to know about climate change politics? What are some positive solutions to the global warming crisis and what is being done in the Pacific Northwest? What can the average citizen do to make a difference?

For policy information, we approached two Washington congressmen who are actively involved in climate change issues, Jay Inslee (House of Reps - Dist. 1) and Jim McDermott (House of Reps - Dist. 7). Surprisingly, both congressmen lamented that the public is "light years" ahead of policy with respect to climate change.

There appears to be a vicious cycle between public indifference and political inaction. The public trusts that if an issue were serious enough, the government would be doing something about it. Without public pressure and support, the government is reluctant to forge ahead and we are left with a stagnant environmental policy. However, there has been a positive shift within the political arena towards embracing the science and recognizing the opportunity for economic growth and energy independence.

In October of 2003, Senators John McCain (R-Ariz) and Joe Lieberman (D-CT) introduced the bi-partisan Climate Stewardship Act came up for a vote in the U.S. Senate. Although it did not pass, 43 senators supported the McCain-Lieberman bill, demonstrating much greater support than just a few years before.

Congressman Inslee is leading the New Apollo Energy Project, "designed to bring the same type of optimistic and visionary leadership to [the climate change] effort that Kennedy brought to the space race." The New Apollo Project hopes to revolutionize our national energy policy. We spoke to the Congressman over the phone and he explained that, "the three goals [of the Apollo project] are 1) to break our addiction to Middle Eastern oil, 2) to stop, or at least slow down, global climate change, and 3) to grow new high-tech jobs in America rather than in Japan, Denmark, and Germany."

For a non-partisan political opinion, we turned to the advocacy group Climate Solutions, a non-profit organization dedicated to researching and promoting "practical and profitable solutions to the global warming crisis." We spoke with their policy director, K.C. Golden, whose optimistic attitude can be summarized with the mantra, "the climate change issue is big, but not overwhelming. People caused it, people can fix it."

Being a supporter of the Climate Stewardship Act, Golden believes that "a sound energy and climate policy" are essential steps towards a positive solution. Golden's idea of a sound energy policy is based on converting from our fossil fuel-based market, to a clean energy economy with responsible limits on global warming pollution. Golden's advice to policy makers is to "recognize the truth of the science in policy."

Can we really break our fossil fuel addiction, and is it even worth it? Inslee, Golden, and McDermott stressed the potential economic benefits of energy independence and the necessary switch to alternative energy sources. Golden surprised us by saying, "wind is now the fastest growing alternative energy source worldwide. It is cost-competitive with the cheapest fossil fuels." All three spoke of the potential for employment opportunities associated with the growth of alternative energy industries. According to Jay Inslee's official web site, "a 'New Apollo [Energy] Project' would stimulate $1.4 trillion in new gross domestic product (GDP), and add $953 billion in personal income and $323 billion in retail sales. The Northwest is very well positioned to benefit economically from such an initiative."

"Already, energy efficiency and utility incentives have saved the people of the Pacific Northwest $500 million," said Golden. And there is the potential to double this amount.

Despite relatively little action on behalf of the federal government, some states and industries are taking their own initiative to combat the effects of climate change. While we were doing research, news headlines everywhere announced that California approved revolutionary new vehicle emissions standards targeted specifically at reducing global warming. Automakers are already gearing up to repeal the decision that will cut approximately 30% of California's CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions. If all goes as planned, the new standards will go into effect in 2009. California has the nation's largest auto market, accounting for 20% of national sales, making this one of the most important anti-global warming actions on the state level. This forces automakers to comply and will allow smaller states, such as Washington, to mandate similar standards.

Refusing to be passive bystanders, Pacific Northwest ski resorts are banding together to fight climate change that could be the ruin of their industry. The Keep Winter Cool Program is a coalition between the National Resources Defense Council and the National Ski Areas Association designed "to raise visibility and public understanding of global warming and spotlight opportunities that exist right now to start fixing the problem." Skiers, for example, may have the option to purchase Green Tags along with their lift tickets for a few extra dollars. Green Tags are a mechanism by which the purchaser can offset their personal carbon dioxide emissions by investing in alternative energy sources.

So what can the average citizen do? There are so many opportunities to make a difference in the fight against climate change. "For your next car, buy a hybrid. My whole family drives hybrid cars," declared McDermott during our interview. For Golden, "the first step is wasting less." So we compiled our own Top 10 Simple Solutions that individuals can do to help combat climate change.

Top 10 Simple Solutions

1. Support local "green power" through your local utility
2. Modify your transportation - buy a hybrid, carpool/vanpool, walk, bike, use public transportation
3. Support climate policy - be an informed voter, write your elected officials
4. Make your home energy efficient - install triple pane windows, low flow water devices, proper insulation, and long-life light bulbs
5. Spread the word! Educate yourself, your kids, and everyone else
6. Waste less - reduce/reuse/recycle
7. Get Involved - volunteer, find out what people in your community are doing
8. Save water!
9. Support local economies - such as farmers markets
10. Buy Green Tags to offset your personal carbon emissions from driving, flying, etc.

The Pacific Northwest has the potential to be a leader in climate change policy and related industries. We must first dispel the myth that being environmentally responsible is expensive and prohibitive. Rather, it can bring hope and vitality to local communities while addressing a global issue at the same time. Having an emotional and intimate connection to the problem encourages people to make themselves part of the solution.

For more information about how to be part of the solution, please visit the website of Earth Share of Washington organization Climate Solutions - www.climatesolutions.org.

Posted in the December 2004 Earth Page

Burnin' the bean

My story about converting to biodiesel
- by Dave Manelski, Earth Page Editor and Earth Share of Washington Program Coordinator

No, this bean burning is not some sort of new recreational drug. In fact, the bean in question is none other than the soybean, and biodiesel is a clean-burning renewable fuel derived from the North American soybean (Glycine max). In keeping with the theme of the December Earth Page on climate change, I would like to share my story of purchasing a new car, one of the ten simple steps mentioned above.

BACKGROUND

Through my work at Earth Share of Washington, I've become acutely aware of the impending climate crisis, and the dangers associated with runaway greenhouse gas emissions.

Instead of falling prey to this impending sense of doom, my wife and I decided to take a proactive step to be a part of the solution. Since automobiles are the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, we wanted to make a conscientious decision about our new car purchase.

Before exploring the options, let me first explain what features we valued in a new car. We wanted a car that fit our lifestyle, that wasn't overly difficult to maintain and refuel anywhere in the country. It had to be big enough to accommodate our two dogs, and sturdy enough to make the occasional ski and camping trip. Finally, it had to limit our greenhouse gas emissions, and reduce our reliance on foreign oil.

Fortunately, there are many "green" options available in the vehicle marketplace today. The perfect storm is brewing to propel alternative fuels and high fuel efficiency vehicles into the mainstream:

1. Oil prices recently surged to record highs due to high demand, political strife, and predictions by renowned economists and scientists that oil production is peaking or will peak in the near future. One thing is certain however; oil is a finite resource.
2. The depressed rural economy has forced farmers to search for new markets for their products.
3. To meet consumer demand for cleaner, more fuel-efficient vehicles, automakers have developed many profitable new technologies, including alternative fuel vehicles and hybrids.
4. New laws are being proposed and enacted to provide incentives for alternative fuels and fuel efficiency.

The are 5 major green car technologies available today - compressed natural gas (CNG), biodiesel, ethanol, fuel cells, and hybrids. All 5 options are designed to either decrease pollution, increase fuel efficiency, or curb carbon dioxide emissions - the primary greenhouse gas. Of them all, CNG is the cleanest burning. It is a popular fuel for fleet vehicles, including Pierce Transit buses, and some Washington taxicabs. However, storing compressed gas has obvious safety concerns, and there are only a few cars on the market that are designed to accept this fuel. Because of the limited availability of vehicles and fuel stations, we quickly ruled out a CNG vehicle. Ethanol is a renewable fuel derived from corn. Although it is clean burning, its production is fairly energy intensive, vehicles need modifications to run ethanol, and it has a limited distribution network. And while fuel cells might be the most promising long-term solution, there are currently no cars available for sale. Why, you ask? Because most fuel cells require hydrogen as fuel, which is not found in its pure form on our planet. Currently, it requires more than twice the energy to produce hydrogen than the fuel cell produces.

DECISIONS DECISIONS...

After ruling out CNG, ethanol, and fuel cells, we were left with two options - biodiesel and hybrids - both excellent green vehicle options, and both readily available. First, a bit about these two:

• Hybrid - Hybrid vehicles run on a gasoline engine and an electric motor. They use batteries to store energy from the engine and recapture the energy of motion when braking, called regenerative braking. These batteries then drive electric motors, which assist the gasoline engine, and allow it to operate more efficiently. Because the energy needed to run a vehicle is recaptured and stored, these vehicles use much less gasoline than their non-hybrid counterparts. There are quite a few hybrid vehicles on the market right now, including popular cars like the Toyota Prius, Honda Civic, Ford Escape SUV, and many others coming soon.
• Biodiesel - While there aren't any biodiesel vehicles per se, biodiesel runs without modifications in any new diesel vehicle, and can be blended with diesel fuel in any mixture. Diesel cars are inherently more efficient that gasoline cars because the fuel holds about 20-30% more energy, resulting in higher miles per gallon. While diesel has a dirty reputation for being smoky, smelly, and loud, biodiesel burns much cleaner, and releases nearly 80% less carbon dioxide. Most North American biodiesel is produced from soybeans and these plants soak up carbon dioxide throughout their lifespan. There is a growing network of fuel distributors around the country, and many diesel vehicles on the market.

We could not have gone wrong with either option. Both offer significant gains in fuel efficiency, multiple vehicle options, ease of maintenance & refueling, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. What ultimately drove our decision was reducing our reliance on foreign oil. Because biodiesel is produced in the U.S., we would be supporting U.S. farmers instead of shipping our money overseas, and supporting an oil infrastructure that threatens the environment in many different ways - from oil spills to arctic drilling.

In October of this year, my wife and I purchased a 2005 Volkswagen Passat Wagon TDI (diesel). We buy B100 (100%) biodiesel from a station in Seattle's Ballard neighborhood - Dr. Dan's FuelWerks (www.fuelwerks.com). Although biodiesel costs more than conventional diesel and gasoline, it's worth every penny to feel confident that we are part of the solution to mitigate the effects of climate change. As an aside, the first biodiesel tax incentive was signed into federal law in October, promising to grow this blossoming industry, and reduce prices at the pump.

GREEN CARS FOR EVERYONE

The most important lesson that I learned in my research is that there are dozens of green vehicle options for every lifestyle. In the 1970's, fuel efficiency was associated with small cars and dirty diesels. Today, green vehicles are available in all shapes and sizes, from SUVs, to pickup trucks, to station wagons, like our Passat. Alternative fuels that were once hard to find, and on the fringe of eco-lifestyle, are now widely available. In fact, the largest consumer of biodiesel in Washington is King County Metro, who recently adopted the use of a biodiesel blend in all their buses.

Burnin' the bean is hardly a new drug, but it sure is addictive!

RESOURCES

Green Car Congress
www.greencarcongress.com

BiodieselNow
www.biodieselnow.org

National Biodiesel Board
www.biodiesel.org

Puget Sound Clean Cities Coalition
www.pugetsoundcleancities.org

Posted in the December 2004 Earth Page

Climate Change (Part 1 of 2)

Learning the Science

University of Washington environmental studies majors Ara Clark and Emily Raforth are spending their summer taking part in an Environmental Journalism internship for Earth Share of Washington. Their interest in climate change and environmental ethics stems from their coursework through the Program on the Environment at the UW. This is the first installment of their 2-part series exploring the physical and social implications of climate change in the Pacific Northwest.

Dismissing the debate

Pens, notebooks, and $30 tape recorder in-hand, we set out on our first interviews to better understand the science of climate change. For answers, we turned to Dr. Richard Gammon, climate science professor at the University of the Washington. As former students of professor Gammon's spring quarter climate policy class, we were familiar with his passion for climate change and mind-blowing propensity for spitting out rapid-fire, detail-laden responses.

We were looking for scientific proof and personal reflections from Dr. Gammon. What are some specific impacts of climate change here in the Northwest? With so much evidence that humans are causing climate change and so many positive clean energy solutions available, why do the media still focus on the 'science debate' that scientists say is already settled? And how do we communicate the science to the public?

Q: What statistics about climate change do find most compelling?

RG: He rephrased our question for us, "you mean what can you tell people to convince them?" Pausing for a moment he stated matter-of-factly, "atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration is at a level the Earth hasn't seen for half a million years, not to mention rapid retreat and melting of arctic ice and glaciers world wide." Dr. Gammon then cited several local effects, "we are in the middle of a six year drought, the Northwest is seeing increased forest fires, and by the middle of this century, we will have lost half of the annual snow-pack in the Cascades. Northwest average temperatures have risen 1.5 F in the last century and are expected to rise another .5 F by 2020."

According to Gammon, "the role of human activity as a primary driver [of climate change] is now accepted by most climate scientists. You both know people who don't accept the climate science; they think we are still arguing about it. It's like they are addicted smokers convinced there is no connection between smoking and lung cancer. We need to convince those skeptics to move beyond that denial because this problem is not going to go away."

For obvious reasons, the most notable skeptics are the oil and coal industries. Outspoken skeptical scientists exist, but it is important to note that they are the minority when compared to the 2,000+ scientists from more than 100 countries that comprise the United Nations Environmental Programme's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In our research visiting the websites of several prominent skeptics organizations, the same half dozen scientists were named as contributors.

Overwhelmed by these statistics we asked each other, how does this affect our lives? Snow pack loss alone impacts our winter recreation, the water we drink, and iconic northwest wildlife and their habitat. Implications of our changing climate will seriously impact local industries such as agriculture, fisheries, and forestry. It affects everyone.

Our next interview was with KC Golden of Climate Solutions, one of the nations leading grassroots climate advocacy groups. Golden has been involved with climate policy in the Pacific Northwest for the past 10 years. He served as special assistant to the Mayor of Seattle for clean energy and climate protection initiatives. He also served as the Assistant Director of Washington's Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development, where he directed the Energy Division and the state's energy policy office.

Q: What specific people and industries are most affected by climate change in the Pacific Northwest?

KC: The loss of Cascade snow pack is the single most devastating impact. Water from Cascade snow is the backbone of our power supply. It makes agriculture and salmon possible.

In a nutshell, if we don't get enough snow in the winter, we won't have enough water to carry us through the dry parts in the year. Our climate will be wetter in all the wrong places at all the wrong times, causing winter and spring flooding which affect salmon spawning grounds. Snow pack and quality of life go hand in hand in the Northwest. Decreasing annual snow pack will severely impact all ski resorts below 5,000 feet in elevation. We were reminded of a statement from our interview with Dr. Gammon that, "plans to ski at Snoqualmie Pass in 2050 will be non-existent."

Golden also mentioned the threats to our great forests. With warmer winters come extensive pest damage, as British Columbia is already experiencing with the Mountain Pine Beetle. These infestations leave forests vulnerable to increased forest fire frequency and intensity.

Forests and snow are the essence of our livelihood in the Pacific Northwest, with their loss we will lose our regional uniqueness.

Telling the Story

The idea of simply reporting on climate science was frustrating, inaccessible, and difficult for us to grasp. Considering the impending doom descending upon us and the seemingly impossible task of communicating the impacts of climate change, we asked our interviewees to step into the shoes of a journalist. How do we share this information, why should people care, and what are some solutions? Gammon was outspoken about what he sees as a false debate over climate change presented by the media, "we don't stage media debates over whether or not the Earth is round." Amazingly he advocated using a personal approach when communicating the science of climate change. "Most people aren't excited or moved by graphs, unlike myself. You can more effectively reach out by telling the story of climate change in a personal way."

KC Golden advised us to find the right balance in our climate change storytelling. From his perspective, climate stories should be true to the science and sobering, yet upbeat. "It's hard to absorb a story that is all doomsday. It's not that people don't believe the science - they just numb out because it can be too overwhelming."

We emerged from the interviews considering climate change from a much broader perspective. Dr. Gammon talked about the importance of considering the social, economic, political, and ethical aspects of this broad issue. He opened our eyes to the need for a humanistic and holistic approach to climate science. His advice is to, "be involved in understanding the science and be politically active." He wasn't necessarily talking about sign waving and protest-marching; he was implying that a firm grasp of the science empowers people to be environmentally aware and involved citizens.

With forest fires on the evening news and record-breaking temperatures across the state, climate change was on our minds this summer. After speaking with one of the most prominent Northwest climate scientists and one of the most outspoken climate advocates, it is not only the science that is compelling, but the personal stories of the families and businesses being affected by climate change today. The story of climate change is important to tell because we are all living the reality of climate change; it affects our forests, our economy, and our quality of life here in the Pacific Northwest.

Refusing to be helpless bystanders, we wanted to address the tremendous opportunities for people and businesses in the Pacific Northwest to make a difference. Through economic development of alternative energy, a sound climate policy, and responsible individual actions, we can change the course of our climate future.

Stay tuned for our next installment in the December Earth Page. Instead of letting the gloom and doom drown us, we sought out proactive solutions: Policy, Action and Opportunities in Part 2 of Climate Change.

Posted in the November 2004 Earth Page

Solutions are all about Connections

- submitted by Joelle Robinson from ESW organization Climate Solutions

Over 60 of the region's most active climate leaders have formed the Northwest Climate Connections project. Connections is a network of opportunity whose members are aware and engaged in the rapidly expanding movement for climate protection; part of the solution in their homes, workplaces, and communities, and a growing voice for responsible climate policy.

Of all the places on Earth, the Pacific Northwest poised to best demonstrate potential solutions, and how they help build stronger economies and healthier communities. This region has a tradition of renewable energy and efficiency investment, which includes an infrastructure of businesses, institutions, and public agencies that form the nucleus for a clean energy economy. The central feature of this new prosperity is the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy sources and efficient systems.

Much of this work is already under way. Thanks to the efforts of Northwest Energy Coalition and Northwest Energy Efficiency Council, over 2600 average megawatts of electricity has been saved in the last two decades, enough to power all of Idaho on a continuous basis. With strong leadership from the Renewable Northwest Project and the Bonneville Environmental Foundation, renewable energy production and use is expanding rapidly. The Climate Trust and Seattle City light are pioneering market-based approaches to greenhouse gas reduction. Transportation Choices Coalition, Oregon Environmental Council and Tri-Met are developing innovative ways to reduce car trips and Mt Hood Meadows is "Keeping Winter Cool" with renewable energy. And the list goes on and on.

These organizations, not content to rest on their laurels, formed Northwest Climate Connections. This is a project of Climate Solutions, a state leader is practical and profitable solutions to global warming. The Connections project aims connect those solutions and their sponsors into a winning constituency for the policy and economic changes needed in order to stabilize the climate. Climate change may well be this generation's defining challenge. It's clearly more than any one organization can handle. That's why it's so important that those who are committed to solutions connect.

To learn more about Climate Solutions and the Northwest Climate Connections Project, please visit their website: www.climatesolutions.org.

Posted in the September 2004 Earth Page

Tacoma Power Offers Customers "Green Power" Option

Tacoma Power's EverGreen Options program offers customers the opportunity to support electricity generated by sustainable, renewable power sources that have minimal impact on the earth's natural resources. About 85% of EverGreen Options' power is generated by wind, low-impact hydropower, and a small amount of solar electricity. By making a modest additional payment through their electricity bills, customers will be contributing toward improving the environment.

Tacoma Power's green power - Environmentally Preferred Power (EPP) - is a portfolio of renewable power assembled by the Bonneville Environmental Foundation, and sold through the Bonneville Power Administration to utilities in the Pacific Northwest. EPP is endorsed by environmental groups including Earth Share of Washington members Northwest Energy Coalition and Natural Resources Defense Council.

Green power options are not strictly limited to Tacoma - power companies around Washington offer programs which allow their customers to support the development of renewable energy such as wind and solar. For more information about green power programs in Washington State, including EverGreen Options in Tacoma, please visit the Environmental Protection Agency's "How to Buy Green Power" webpage: www.epa.gov/greenpower/buyguide/wa.htm.

Posted in the May 2004 Earth Page

Environmental Gains Achieved in 2004 Legislative Session

- submitted by Tom Geiger from ESW member Washington Environmental Council

Olympia, WA -- The 2004 Legislative Session was marked by environmental gains and no losses, making a successful year in the state capitol for Washington's environmental community. Progress was made in the areas of toxics reduction, old growth protection, water clean up and stream flow restoration.

"This is the second consecutive year in which bi-partisan support was essential to passing environmental priorities," said Clifford Traisman, state lobbyist for Washington Environmental Council/Washington Conservation Voters. "Lawmakers from both parties increasingly understand that clean air, land and water are important to all Washington citizens."

At the outset of the 2004 Session, the environmental community elevated four Priorities [featured in the February 2004 Earth Page]. Results included the following:

• Toxics: Funding for the state's Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics (PBTs) program was restored, ensuring that the most harmful chemicals in our society, such as mercury, dioxin and PBDE (the fire retardant polybrominated diphenyl ethers), will ultimately be reduced in our environment.
• Forests: An important study to look at certifying state forests--which would have delayed the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) from increasing logging state forests until the study was completed--was not included in the final capital budget, but a provision was included that requires the DNR to inventory and map old growth in state forests and notify the public before it is logged.
• Water: A bill to restore and protect stream flows (SHB 2396) did not make it through the legislative process, but neither did other water legislation, which would have eliminated the state's law aimed at preventing the hoarding and speculation of the public's water. However, $1 million was included in the supplemental budget to improve stream flows and water management.
• Energy: Although legislation to promote energy efficiency and renewable energy development did not pass the full legislature, the bill did pass two House committees. Fortunately, the legislature did pass a bill requiring new power plants to mitigate 20 percent of their emissions of carbon dioxide, the principle pollutant responsible for global warming (SHB 3141).

Other important environmental bills included oil spill prevention (SSB 6641), electronic recycling (ESHB 2488), and significantly, improved safeguards for stormwater management (ESSB 6415). Governor Locke is expected to sign all of the bills and support the proposed funding.

"This is the first time in memory that the legislature provided all wins and no losses for the environment," said Joan Crooks, WEC Executive Director. "The environmental community intends to continue this record of success in the 2005 Session with a new governor and new legislature."

Posted in the April 2004 Earth Page

The Smell of CO(-2) in the Morning

- submitted by Allison Riese from ESW member EarthCorps, originally published in the Seattle P-I

Carbon dioxide is one of the by-products of coffee roasting.

For environmentally conscious David Schomer, who has run Espresso Vivace on Capitol Hill for 15 years, it's a vexing matter. So to mitigate some of the effects of his coffee roasting, Schomer is donating 2,000 trees - Western red cedar, Western hemlock and Sitka spruce - for planting this week in Interlaken Park.

There are 3,700 acres of publicly owned forests in Seattle, said Pieter Bohen, lands stewardship director for Seattle-based Cascade Land Conservancy, which is working with the Mayor's Office on a project to restore the city's urban forests. Of those, about 85 percent are in rapid decline and 60 percent are covered with tree-killing ivy.

Trees absorb carbon dioxide during photosynthesis and emit oxygen, improving air quality. One acre of mature trees sequesters 16 tons of carbon a year, Bohen said. The 3-year-old trees planted this week will cover about 10 acres of the Capitol Hill park.

It is uncertain how long it will take those trees to absorb the amount of carbon dioxide that is emitted from Espresso Vivace's roaster. But the business is taking a positive step, Bohen said.

"I'm really impressed with David. I think his heart is really in the right place," he said. "If, for instance, all the small coffee businesses in the city alone decided to sequester their carbon, we could probably restore the entire urban forest just on that. That's a remarkable thought."

Schomer, who is donating $10,000 for the trees, and his staff will plant trees along with volunteers from Cascade Land Conservancy and EarthCorps starting Wednesday. He acknowledged being "a little bit hyperaware" of air pollution; he commutes from Fremont to Capitol Hill by bicycle. Interlaken Park is on his route.

"It's going to be really sweet to go by the trees," he said. "It's just going to be great."

Those wishing to patronize Schomer's establishment will find Espresso Vivace at 901 E. Denny Way (at Broadway) in Seattle.

Posted in the April 2004 Earth Page

Renewing Washington's Energy Future

Wind Production Numbers Show Standards are Economic Stimulus

OLYMPIA - The Washington legislature is poised to adopt a policy proven to increase development of renewable energy and energy efficiency, allowing the state to join the ranks of others using the combined purchasing power of their utilities to benefit local and statewide economies.

Last year's wind-farm construction boom demonstrates a strong link between industry growth and states with Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS). During 2003, 65 percent of U.S. wind development occurred in states with either an RPS or a renewable energy fund, such as the Energy Trust of Oregon. Wind farms installed throughout the country last year will generate more than $5 million in annual payments to landowners. All four states with the most wind development in 2003 have RPS policies in place.

According to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), the 1,700 megawatts of wind power developed in the U.S. during 2003 was a near record, surpassed only slightly in 2001. Minnesota's wind development in the last year was nearly 15 times Washington State's modest incremental wind power construction. Nearly all of the 15.6 megawatts of wind developed last year in Washington resulted from expansion of Energy Northwest's Nine Canyon wind farm in Benton County. That's very little new growth, especially in a state blessed with tremendous wind resources - enough to supply close to two-thirds of the state's electricity needs, according to the recent Renewable Energy Atlas of the West (www.energyatlas.org).

Washington legislators are considering numerous bills encouraging increased renewable energy and energy efficiency including elements of RPS policies established in other states, most relying on incentives and flexible compliance to gain utility support. The Union of Concerned Scientists estimates that, if enacted in Washington, such policies would attract the growing wind industry to the state and stimulate more than $28 million annually in land lease payments, property tax revenues, wages, and economic activity for every 100 megawatts of wind power generation developed over the next 20 years. The bills also would unleash inland communities to harvest clean energy from the 4.3 million tons of biomass produced each year in Eastern Washington. According to a recent Washington State University study, this biomass surplus could produce 3.1 million megawatt-hours of electricity, 40 percent of Eastern Washington's residential load (www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/0307021.html).

"Washington's legislature has an important opportunity to build the rural economy and stabilize electric rates through SHB 2333," said Randy Smith of NW Sustainable Energy for Economic Development (SEED). Smith noted the American Farm Bureau Federation's recent endorsement of renewable electric standards - a sign that the national farm community values the development of renewable energy sources to stimulate rural economies.

To learn more about renewable energy in Washington, contact Earth Share of Washington members Climate Solutions and Northwest Energy Coalition.

Posted in the March 2004 Earth Page

2004 Environmental Legislative Priorities - Forests, Streams, Energy and Toxins

Groups stress need to protect current safeguards

OLYMPIA, Wash. - At the start of the 2004 Washington legislature, 14 conservation organizations representing tens of thousands of residents joined together to encourage elected representatives to pass important new measures and to continue safeguards of our health and the environment.

The groups have given highest priority to four issues involving forests, streams, power and toxic pollution, and made "No rollbacks" a special priority for this legislative session.

The four main priorities are:

• Certified stewardship for state-owned forests, including the preservation our remaining old growth.
• Safeguarding water levels in Washington streams for vital fish habitat, water quality, irrigation, power and recreation.
• Fostering more reliable and sustainable energy by encouraging electric utilities to include energy-efficiency savings and reasonable amounts of renewables such as wind, biomass and solar in their mix of power sources.
• Funding to eliminate and clean-up persistent toxic chemicals such as mercury, dioxin and PCBs.

In addition, the state's environmental community will encourage legislators to keep Washington "a national leader on environmental health and stewardship," said Bruce Gryniewski, executive director of Washington Conservation Voters.

Groups backing the priorities are Earth Share of Washington members 1000 Friends of Washington, American Rivers, Audubon WA, Center for Environmental Law and Policy, NW Energy Coalition, People for Puget Sound, Sierra Club, Transportation Choices Coalition, Washington Environmental Council, Washington Toxics Coalition and other Washington environmental groups -- NW Ecosystem Alliance, League of Women Voters, Washington Conservation Voters, and WashPIRG.

Posted in the February 2004 Earth Page

Carbon Dioxide Mitigation in Washington

- submitted by Lisa Noble for ESW member Northwest Energy Coalition

Residents of the Pacific Northwest have long benefited from abundant and relatively cheap hydropower. Currently hydropower provides about 70 percent of Washington's electricity, but cannot be counted upon to satisfy additional future demand. Unfortunately, our remaining energy needs are being met primarily with coal and natural gas, fouling the air we breathe and causing more damage from global warming.

Climate change already is reducing the amount of water available for power generation and other Northwest needs, such as irrigation, recreation and wildlife. Proposed new power plants threaten to emit millions of tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), the primary global warming pollutant, to Northwestern skies.

In 1997, Oregon became the first state to regulate CO2 emissions from new natural gas power plants. Now, after several years of effort by clean-energy advocates, Washington is poised to establish its own standard.

Sadly, the draft rule developed by Washington State's Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) is no better than Oregon's long-outdated standard. Though Governor Gary Locke called for offsetting 20 percent of new CO2 emissions, EFSEC has set the price of mitigating carbon so artificially low that in reality, less than 10 percent of emissions will be offset. "Mitigation" can mean removing an equal amount of CO2 from the atmosphere -- through a tree-growing project, for example. It also can mean funding a renewable-energy project that generates power without producing CO2. Either way, that mitigation costs about $2.75 per ton. EFSEC's draft rule, by comparison, would charge polluters just 87 cents per ton.

When many other states are considering real and significant emission reductions, the EFSEC proposal falls short of curbing carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.

EFSEC is accepting comments from the public through the end of November. To learn more about CO2 mitigation or to get involved in public commentary visit: www.nwenergy.org.

Posted in the November 2003 Earth Page

The Harsh Reality of Global Climate Change

In July of 2003, over 700 U.S. climate scientists submitted a letter to the U.S. Senate on global climate change. The letter highlights the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions clearly stating that the longer we wait, the faster we will have to reduce emissions in order to mitigate the effects of climate change.

The letter was delivered in time for the Senate to debate amendments to "The Energy Policy Act of 2003" (S-14), expected to address the issue of climate change/global warming. A copy of the letter follows.

THE STATE OF CLIMATE SCIENCE: JULY 2003 -- A LETTER FROM U.S. SCIENTISTS:

July 29, 2003
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senators First and Daschle:

Two years have elapsed since the publication of the most recent reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the National Research Council (NRC) on the state of the science of climate change and its impacts on the United States and the rest of the world. As scientists engaged in research on these subjects, we are writing to confirm that the main findings of these documents continue to represent the consensus opinion of the scientific community. Indeed, these findings have been reinforced rather than weakened by research reported since the documents were released.

In brief, the findings are that:

1) Anthropogenic climate change, driven by emissions of greenhouse gases, is already underway and likely responsible for most of the observed warming over the last 50 years, the largest warming that has occurred in the Northern Hemisphere during at least the past 1000 years;

2) Over the course of this century the Earth is expected to warm an additional 2.5 to 10.5 degrees farenheit, depending on future emissions levels and on the climate sensitivity; a sustained global rate of change exceeding any in the last 10,000 years;

3) Temperature increases in most areas of the United States are expected to be considerably higher than these global means because of our nation's northerly location and large average distance from the oceans;

4) Even under mid-range emissions assumptions, the projected warming could cause substantial impacts in different regions of the U.S., including an increased likelihood of heavy and extreme precipitation events, exacerbated drought, and sea level rise;

5) Almost all plausible emissions scenarios result in projected temperatures that continue to increase well beyond the end of this century; and,

6) Due to the long lifetimes of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the longer emissions increase, the faster they will ultimately have to be decreased in order to avoid dangerous interference with the climate system.

Evidence that climate change is already underway includes the instrumental record, which shows a surface temperature rise of approximately 1 degree (F) over the 20th century; the accelerated sea level rise during that century relative to the last few thousand years, global retreat of mountain glaciers; reduction in snow cover extent; earlier thawing of lake and river ice; the increase in upper air water vapor over most regions in the past several decades; and the 0.09 degrees (F) warming of the world's deep oceans since the 1950's.

Evidence that the warmth of the Northern Hemisphere during the second half of the last century was unprecedented in the last 1000 years comes from three major reconstructions of past surface temperatures, which used indicators such as tree rings, corals, ice cores, and lake sediments for years prior to 1860, and instrumental records for the interval between 1865 and the present.

On the subject of human causation of this warmth, the NRC report stated that, "The IPCC's conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue." Indeed, computer simulations do not reproduce the late 20th century warmth if they include only natural climate forcings such as emissions from volcanoes and solar activity. The warmth is only captured when the simulations include forcings from human-emitted greenhouse gases present in the atmosphere.

In summary, the main conclusions of the IPCC and NRC reports remain robust consensus positions supported by the vast majority of researchers in the fields of climate change and its impacts. The body of research carried out since the reports were issued tends to strengthen their conclusions.

Sincerely,
[names of 725 scientists, from 45 states]

To learn more about climate change, visit the following Earth Share of Washington member websites:

Climate Solutions
http://www.climatesolutions.org

Environmental and Energy Study Institute
http://www.eesi.org

Northwest Energy Coalition
http://www.nwenergy.org

Posted in the September 2003 Earth Page

How will you light your home?

- by Lisa Noble from ESW member NW Energy Coalition

When you flip the light switch at your home or work place, do you wonder where the power comes from? The energy sources used to create our electricity make a real difference to our lives, our future and our planet. Poor choices over the past several years have resulted in soaring bills for utility customers.

Planning for the future. Puget Sound Energy's proposal for meeting its customers' future energy needs is presented in what's called a least-cost plan. In 2002, about 31 percent of the electricity Puget Sound Energy (PSE) sent its retail customers was generated from coal, 20 percent came from plants fueled by natural gas, and 46 percent came from hydroelectric power. Very little came from non-hydro renewable sources, like wind, or from conservation.

Time to diversify. Hydropower is unpredictable, due to variable water levels, and constantly pits power generation against the survival of salmon and other endangered wildlife. Natural gas prices are highly unstable. Coal is an ecological disaster from cradle to grave: It must be dug up, transported to a power plant, burned (releasing a wide range of toxins), and then disposed of as dangerous ash.

The good news. PSE's least-cost plan calls for increasing the ratio of non-hydro renewable energy - currently less than 1 percent of its supply mix -- to 5 to 10 percent by 2013. This is certainly a step in the right direction. Protecting customers over the long term requires a diversified pool of energy resources to draw from, including the kinds of energy efficiency measures that helped keep the lights on in Washington during the 2001 energy crisis. PSE will decide its future level of energy efficiency in August.

See Upcoming Events (below) for further details on a PSE hearing scheduled for Monday, July 21.

For more information, please visit www.nwenergy.org or email lisa@nwenergy.org

Posted in the July 2003 Earth Page

Stopping Global Warming through Environmentally-Minded Economic Development

- by Patrick Mazza from Earth Share of Washington member Climate Solutions

Greenhouse gases are a good thing in proper measure. Existing as trace elements in the atmosphere, they create a heat-trapping blanket that makes life on Earth possible. But too much of a good thing turns into its opposite. Humans are now thickening the blanket, primarily through greenhouse emissions released in the burning of coal, oil and gas. The result is a warming climate. 2002 was the second warmest year on record, and 2003 is on its tail.

The good news is that we can reduce greenhouse emissions. The critical need is new energy sources. Some people object to moving in this direction, claiming it will damage the economy. Earth Share of Washington member Climate Solutions takes the opposite approach: Development of clean energy technologies represents a staggeringly large economic opportunity. Those who step out in the lead will prosper mightily in coming decades. Climate Solutions is building alliances to make the Northwest a clean energy leader. The effort has two thrusts.

One goes under the banner of "Clean Energy=Economic Opportunity." The goal is to build a Silicon Valley-like clean energy cluster in the Northwest capable of exporting technologies throughout the world. The region already has an impressive line-up of companies in the field. In 2001, Climate Solutions assembled a consortium of Northwest utilities and economic development agencies to commission a global market analysis, Poised for Profit, which concluded the region could have 32,000 people working in clean energy technologies by 2020 with proper policy support. The report is available at www.climatesolutions.com. A report on one of the most promising areas of energy technology, the use of information technology to improve energy efficiency and integrate new clean energy resources, The Smart Energy Network: Electricity's Third Great Revolution, will be available in early June. To learn more contact joelle@climatesolutions.org.

The second major thrust is harvesting clean energy. Climate Solutions is building the Harvesting Clean Energy Network of Northwest farm groups, rural development organizations, public utilities and clean energy advocates to realize the rural Northwest's potential to generate clean energy including windpower, biofuels and bio-gas. This is a win-win for both the environment and for jobs and new revenues in areas that greatly need them. The Network gained a victory in the past legislature with passage of four bills aimed at building biofuels markets and production in Washington State. Overwhelming support from both sides of the aisle confirms that environmentally-oriented economic development is an all around winner. Sign up for the Harvesting Clean Energy E-Bulletin to stay abreast, peter@climatesolutions.org.

The Northwest has a huge stake in climate protection. Our forests, salmon, rivers and mountain snowpack depend on a stable climate. Fortunately, we can act and make a globally significant contribution by creating a new, climate-friendly energy industry, and in the process build a new tech sector that could eventually rival software and aerospace in size. Climate Solutions is fully engaged in bringing about this win-win for global climate and the regional economy.

Posted in the June 2003 Earth Page

Clean Energy Options Break Through Cost Barriers

- submitted by Lisa Noble of ESW member group Northwest Energy Coalition

A study released last month by the Tellus Institute shows the Northwest can meet all of its growing need for electricity by increasing energy efficiency and investing in new sources of renewable power generation. Thanks to recent innovations, clean energy technologies are primed to compete with gas-fired power plants, the economic benchmark for new power generation. The results of the Tellus study cast doubt on the need for additional fossil fuel generation in the Northwest.

The study shows we can meet all of the Northwest's new power demand with cost competitive clean energy and even retire some existing power plants. The region will need about 5,300 average megawatts (aMW) of additional generation by 2020, enough juice to power nearly five cities the size of Seattle. The Tellus report shows we can slash that demand by 3,100 aMW through cost-effective conservation and generate 9,000 aMW with new wind, biomass and geothermal resources at prices comparable to what we would pay for new gas-fired generation.

Investing in energy efficiency and diversifying the Northwest energy mix with alternative sources offers clear environmental advantages, but will also act to stabilize energy prices and make the power supply more secure. Much like a diverse financial portfolio guards against the ups and downs of Wall Street, energy diversity mutes swings in the price and supply of any single resource.

Tellus identifies 14,431 aMW of potential energy available through conservation and renewable resources. Pulling out the most cost-effective conservation measures and competitively priced renewables yields just over 12,000 aMW, most of which costs 4.1 cents per kilowatt-hour or less. The cost of new gas-fired generation ranges between 3.5 cents and 4.0 cents per kilowatt-hour.

This report indicates that not only is shift to renewable energy the right thing to do, but that it is also an economically viable alternative. The Northwest is poised to lead the way in obtaining energy from the fast-growing supply of renewable power.

Read the full report of this study or learn more about Northwest Energy Coalition at http://www.nwenergy.org/

Posted in the December 2002 Earth Page