More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Carl Pope

GET UPDATES FROM Carl Pope

No, It's Not All as Hard as It Looks

Posted: 08/11/11 12:15 PM ET

Yesterday morning's Tom Friedman column in the New York Times is a fantasy of what would happen if our leaders in Washington decided to start leading instead of squabbling. It closes with these lines: "What's sad is how much this is a fantasy and how easily -- with just a little political will -- it could be a reality."

You might think that Friedman's piece is glib -- surely if the problems were easy then even our broken political system would respond. But in fact there's evidence all over the landscape that America's current problems for the most part have really easy solutions (both technical and financial) that have been blocked solely by the determination of one wing of our politics -- Tea Party Republicanism -- to hold solutions hostage.

The coal and utility industries, for example, are desperately lobbying in Washington on the fable that if we clean up air and water pollution from power plants, as the EPA is proposing, then lights will go out, electric bills will go up, and workers will lose jobs. Well, we don't even have to rely on logic to disprove that one. We have evidence.

Take the Alexandria coal plant where, three weeks ago, the Sierra Club and Bloomberg Philanthropies announced our new "Beyond Coal" partnership to end coal and usher in a new clean energy future. Two weeks later, a report revealed that if the electric utilities in the DC area proceed to upgrade their transmission infrastructure as planned, the plant will no longer be needed and all of its pollution and high costs could be eliminated. Key to this is the increasing ability of large electric users to cut back their demand at moments of peak load when the Alexandria GenOn plant might otherwise be needed.

Then, yesterday morning, the American Clean Skies Foundation released a plan that shows how the Alexandria coal plant site could be redeveloped into a $450 million mixed-use development that would generate more jobs and income than the current coal plant does. Bruce Nilles, who leads the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign, commented that "Each retirement of an aging coal-fired power plant is already a victory for public health and the environment. The "Potomac River Green" report shows a way to repurpose these retired plants so that they benefit the local communities and taxpayers who once lived in their shadows."

And the GenOn plant is not alone. This month, for example, the electric-grid manager for the entire 13 mid-Atlantic state region, PJM, conducted its annual auction -- this one to make sure that there will be enough power to keep the lights on and the motors humming through 2015. The conventional wisdom had been that some old, outmoded coal-fired power plants would be withdrawn from service, but that costs for the remaining coal plants -- and therefore for the electricity they provide -- would increase because of the need to install modern pollution-control equipment.

But there was a surprise. Yes, about 2,000 MW of old coal plants did not even enter the auction -- they'll be retired from baseload service. And yes, utilities proposed to spend lots of money upgrading the rest of the coal fleet. But it turns out that ratepayers won't have to pay those increased prices. Energy efficiency, specifically the increasing ability of large energy users to manage their electrical demand, can replace not only the 2,000 megawatts of coal that didn't enter the auction but also another 5,000 MW that turn out to be more expensive to upgrade than to replace through efficiency.

So 7,000 MW of coal power were taken out of the PJM baseload market -- enough coal capacity to power 2.2 million homes. That's about five percent of PJM's total peak electrical need -- replaced by already deployed energy efficiency! Those coal plants would have emitted 36 million tons of carbon dioxide, 228,000 tons of sulfur dioxide, and 59,000 tons of nitrogen oxides. And making even modest improvement in their pollution-control technology would have cost about $3.5 billion -- all money that ratepayers have just saved. PJM now has the opportunity to make these savings permanent -- by requiring retirements of these plants that clearly are costing ratepayers money, not delivering value.

Really, how hard was this?

 
 
 

Follow Carl Pope on Twitter: www.twitter.com/CarlPope

 
 
  • Comments
  • 14
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NAMI
Je juge , donc je suis
08:13 PM on 08/14/2011
Food for your thoughts

Ever since Obama became President, we have been witnessing

the TYRANNY of the MINORITY
with the GOPers in SENATE with the FILIBUSTER..........which is the DICTATORSHIP of ONE senator
and then the TEAbaggers hostage taking and hard line stances our way or the Highway.
Daniel Shorr before he died used that term The TYRANNY of the MINORITY.
This should tell you how POWERFUL they are and how WEAK the DEMS who with even a SUPER Majority could not do what they wanted but had to WATER down every bill to please the GOPers or the BLUE DOGs .
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lambdin1
What's this?
09:16 AM on 08/13/2011
It would be redundant to say AGREED! Be assured though that there will be no cost to energy corporations desipte what they say. Somehow they will pass any and all costs along to the consumer or back to the government. Energy companies have never, and never will, bear any costs for any program no mater how agreeable they seem to be!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Malcolm Hensley
Last of the Reagan Republicans
12:28 PM on 08/12/2011
Just thinking most of those old coal generation plants being retired are in the Rust Belt an area that has seen a lot of manufacturing jobs disappear. So many of the former large users as you describe are got so of course they are more efficient.

This is something the Sierra Club is happy about??? Talk about putting a good spin on a bad situation!

I don't know maybe it's just me but I'd rather have 5-6% unemployment and a few old coal generating plants. That's just me!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:49 PM on 08/12/2011
I'd rather have poorer rich people and an equitable social contract from which to correct course.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Malcolm Hensley
Last of the Reagan Republicans
04:08 PM on 08/12/2011
I understand what you would rather have. Unfortunately what we are getting is a poorer middle class and poorer poor.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Malcolm Hensley
Last of the Reagan Republicans
04:06 PM on 08/12/2011
sorry typo -

"So many of the former large users as you describe are got so of course they are more efficient. "

should have been

"So many of the former large users as you describe are GONE so of course they are more efficient."
07:52 PM on 08/11/2011
There are more than enough solutions. . .what it comes down to is the ability to implement them. This, of course, is what Tom Friedman was referring to as "fantasy". I've been arguing for some time now that changing the way the real estate market functions is the easiest way to inject the financial capital needed to affect broad change. Micheal Bloomberg's recent $50 Million entry the anti-coal debate is an illustration of what can happen when big money is put towards a worthy cause.

For most of us, real estate is the single largest transaction we will ever make. Collectively, the US real estate market represents trillions of dollars of private wealth. Why not use this money to build communities that reflect our values and aspirations? Why do we let developers decide what are communities will look like and then pocket the enormous profits?

What is needed is a venue to buy homes collectively, instead of as individuals, purchasing sustainable communities, instead of homes. This perhaps sounds daunting, but the internet and social networking provide a perfect medium, it is only a matter of building support and awareness for the concept.

http://omegaproject.us
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Whiskeyman09
11:53 PM on 08/11/2011
Your post and website were jaw-dropping...and not in a good way.

Good luck with aaallll that!
03:18 PM on 08/13/2011
Really? It may seem like a daunting project, but what is lacking is the organization and support for the concept. Even in this down economy we are building about 3.5 million new homes each year, with a net worth of about $875 Billion. Building a town of 10,000 homes would represent about a 1/4 of 1% of the new homes built in the US each year.

Finding 10,000 people interested in taking part in the project is definitely a tall task, but it essentially amounts to getting people to do something they are already doing (i.e. buying homes) and asking them to work collectively rather than as individuals.

http://omegaproject.us
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ronald Malaney
02:57 PM on 08/13/2011
Bloomberg's 50 million donation, will be leveraged by lobbyist and lawyers, into 500 billion in cost to Americans, talk about bang for your buck.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dh Barr
Bringing Clues to the Clueless
04:22 PM on 08/11/2011
I don't have a problem with requiring that coal fired power plants use the most modern and efficient pollution controls - but don't think that this is will not affect consumer prices as the local level. I've got a network center in Maryland and have watched our electricity prices rise over 50% in the last few years already. We use virtualization and many other strategies to minimize our energy use (and costs), but our costs still continue to rise.