Ameren Illinois – A Utilitiy That Just Keeps Takin And A Takin

Posted on September 9, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

After Tim Landis, Adriana Colindres is my favorite write for the SJ-R. But here is her story from another paper. I personally find these stories revolting because we in Riverton were without power for 4 hours. There wasn’t a cloud in the sky. No car crashes. No catastrophic incident like a shut down plant or a coal strike. When our local grocer (who has huge coolers thus a huge stake in the issue) asked what had happen he was told that there was squirrel damage at the local substation. These guys can’t beat squirrels but they want our money.

http://www.galesburg.com/news/x837456249/Ameren-seeks-fee-to-make-up-for-uncollectible-bills

Ameren seeks fee to make up for uncollectible bills

By ADRIANA COLINDRES

GateHouse News Service

Posted Sep 09, 2009 @ 06:37 AM

SPRINGFIELD —

AmerenCIPS, AmerenCILCO and AmerenIP are asking the state’s utility regulator for permission to impose a fee on customers that would cover unpaid bills left behind by other customers.

The three companies, jointly called the Ameren Illinois Utilities, filed paperwork last week with the Illinois Commerce Commission. It’s not clear yet when the ICC will decide on the matter, or how much the fee might be.

The fee, which would appear on monthly bills, would make up for what are known as “uncollectibles” — the unpaid bills that remain after a customer’s utilities are shut off due to non-payment…..

…….

Ameren also has other business still pending before the Illinois Commerce Commission: a proposed $226 million delivery rate hike for electricity and natural gas customers. The ICC is expected to decide on that next spring.

On Tuesday, the ICC announced three public hearings in connection with the rate case.

The hearings are scheduled for Sept. 29 in hearing room A of the ICC offices, 527 E. Capitol Ave., Springfield; Oct. 5 in the Kenneth Hall Regional Office Building, 1100 Eastport Plaza, Collinsville; and Oct. 27 in the Pekin City Council Chambers, 111 S. Capitol St., Pekin.

The Ameren Illinois Utilities provide electricity to about 1.2 million customers throughout the southern two-thirds of the state. They serve more than 800,000 natural gas customers in the same areas.

:’}

http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2009/08/03/daily50.html

Ameren seeks $185 million in stimulus

St. Louis Business Journal – by Kelsey Volkmann

Ameren’s Missouri and Illinois utilities applied this week for $185 million in stimulus money for infrastructure upgrades, smart grid projects and electric vehicles.

AmerenUE applied for $140 million in stimulus funding, and Ameren Illinois Utilities applied for $45 million.

AmerenUE’s application includes the following funding requests for a 50 percent federal match:

• $125 million in projects for modernizing the company’s Missouri delivery system.

• $15 million for an operating system that would synthesize and provide data to help better manage AmerenUE’s response to service disruptions.

• Matching funds to purchase two plug-in electric trouble trucks.

Of the total $787 billion federal stimulus package, about $43 billion is targeted for energy projects and energy efficiency. About $4.5 billion of that is targeted to support research and development of the nation’s smart grid, which delivers electricity from suppliers to consumers using digital technology.

Ameren Illinois Utilities seeks $45 million in stimulus to fund smart grid projects to improve electric service reliability. Its smart grid project will cost $83 million, of which $75 million is eligible for a 50 percent federal match of $37.5 million, the utility said.

Ameren Illinois Utilities also said it is requesting $7.5 million for a $15 million advanced distribution management system, a foundation for the smart grid project that will provide a common interface to monitor, control and manage the electrical distribution system and electrical devices.

Ameren Illinois Utilities said it plans to ask the Illinois Commerce Commission to allow the utility to add a charge to customer bills to recover AIU’s portion of the project costs.

St. Louis-based Ameren Corp. (NYSE: AEE) serves 2.4 million electric customers and 1 million natural gas customers in a 64,000-square-mile area of Missouri and Illinois

http://www.themaneater.com/stories/2009/8/25/ameren-seeks-gas-price-hike-cities-around-columbia/

Ameren seeks electricity price hike in cities around Columbia

Communities around Columbia might see an increase next year.

By Wes Duplantier

Published Aug. 25, 2009

Correction appended

AmerenUE, the state’s largest utility company, has asked regulators for permission to raise its electric rates by as much as 18 percent, but the increase will not affect Columbia.

Ameren spokesman Mike Cleary said the increase would not directly affect MU students because the company does not provide electrical services to Columbia, only natural gas. Rates might go up in surrounding communities such as Ashland, Rocheport, Boonville and Moberly.

The company estimated the $402 million proposal would amount to an increase of about 50 cents per day for the average family. Its request comes as it is also asking for $185 million from the federal stimulus package to modernize its delivery systems. This is the company’s third request for a rate increase since 2007.

Cleary said the increase, if approved, would mostly be used to pay for reliability improvements such as reinforcing pipelines and electrical poles, and to make up for increasing delivery costs of fuel.

“We’ve just got to put everything into perspective,” Cleary said. “The reason for this increase is reliability. That’s our No. 1 priority because it’s the thing our customers have been asking us to improve the most.”

Cleary said raising rates in a down economy might affect consumers. He said Ameren has a number of programs for customers to get assistance paying bills so they will not lose service. Those programs include the ability to make minimum payments and budget billing to help eliminate sudden seasonal spikes in a family’s utility bills.

“The message we’re trying to get across is: If you’re having trouble paying the bills, call us early and don’t wait until you get a cut-off notice,” he said.

Ruth Ehresman, director of Health and Budgetary Policy for the Missouri Budget Project, said even with such programs, low-income families hit hardest by the economic crisis would face even more difficulties.

“We do know that many low-income families struggle to pay their utility bills already and a rate increase will always be problematic,” Ehresman said. “We’re always concerned when low-income families’ ability to provide basic resources is made more difficult.”

I wish there something more to add, but considering their level of service and customer satisfaction ratings…what more is there to say?

The EnCana Bomber – Why doesn’t this get more American Press?

Posted on September 8, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

We get 14% of our oil and natural gas from Canada so where is the American Press on this one?

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/EnCana+bomber+probe+chills+community/1969701/story.html

EnCana bomber probe chills B.C. community

Neighbours paranoid over unsolved attacks

By Hanneke Brooymans, Edmonton Journal, September 7, 2009

I t is early evening in Tomslake and the rural roads are eerily quiet.

This corner of northeastern British Columbia is no longer the place to go for an idle drive, even on one of summer’s last beautiful days.

As the tension ratchets up around the now 11-month search for the EnCana bomber, chances are a watchful, nervous neighbour will call the RCMP.

“You don’t just hop in your truck and drive around anymore,” says one local farmer. He hasn’t driven certain roads for months now, because he doesn’t want people second-guessing why he is there. Nevertheless, he feels strongly enough about the burgeoning gas development to take a reporter and photographer on a short tour to point out the many drilling rigs, flares and compressor stations in his area.

The farmer is too nervous to have his name published, for fear of becoming the target of RCMP interrogations, harassment and phone tapping. This is what happens to anyone who openly criticizes the oilpatch in the area, he says, a view echoed by others.

The wish to avoid police attention has made residents reluctant to talk, even to each other, about the bomber or development issues for fear their views might be misconstrued.

At the Dawson Creek RCMP detachment, Staff Sgt. Stephen Grant is conscious of those concerns, but he won’t comment further on the chilling effect the incidents and the resulting investigation are having on the community. The RCMP, along with the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team, have thrown considerable resources at the hunt for the perpetrator–or perpetrators –of the six explosions on EnCana pipelines.

Grant says they’ve had more than 250 staff working on the case over the last 11 months — as many as 40 or 50 at certain points in time. About 1,000 interviews have been conducted, he adds.

Last week, the Dawson Creek detachment set up a new rural unit in Tomslake, 28 kilometres to the south. Part of the mandate of the four officers in the new unit is to ease the security fears of people in the area.

But residents say they won’t relax until the bomber is caught. Not even the bomber’s most recent letter –promising a three-month vacation from attacks to give EnCana time to announce a withdrawal from the area –has provided any relief.

:”}

Been going on for awhile too:

http://www.sqwalk.com/bc2009/001491.html

Pipeline bombers probably local: expert

By Jamie Hall
The Edmonton Journal
January 6, 2009

Attacks audacious, U of A researcher saysWhatever the bombers lack in technical ability, they make up for in will and audacity, a University of Alberta researcher said after the latest pipeline bombings at EnCana natural gas facilities in northern B.C.

“We’re clearly dealing with someone who’s an amateur, but it does show that although they lack technical ability, their will is certainly not lacking,” said eco-terrorism expert Paul Joosse.

“They’re continuing to carry out these attacks, even though we’re throwing everything we have at them from a law enforcement perspective.”

Evidence of the fourth explosion in three months was discovered Sunday by EnCana workers near the community of Tomslake, about 20 kilometres southeast of Dawson Creek.

The crew noticed damage to a small building housing a natural gas meter at a well site, which was promptly shut down as a precaution. A company spokesman said there was no damage to the wellhead or the pipeline, nor was there a gas leak at the facility.

The RCMP in Dawson Creek are investigating the bombings, with help from the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team, the explosives disposal unit and the forensic identification unit.

Joosse is convinced the attacks are being carried out by someone who lives in the area, but said it’s difficult to say whether it’s a single individual or a “small tightly knit group.”

“Even if it is an individual,” said Joosse, “there are other people who know about this person and are complicit in helping, if only through their silence.”

Residents blocked oil and gas vehicles on a road running through the community of Kelly Lake last summer, an event Joosse said was a precursor to the explosions.

Joosse said the blockade was an illustration of “widespread community support for civil disobedience, and a widespread sentiment of frustration” by locals angry over what they see as the destruction of their land.

:+}

Apparently not everyone is real happy about the enormous damage being done to the environment AND the quality of life there. Can’t let the American Press know about that. Or do they care.

Is the EnCana Bomber a Terrorist or a Hero?

Posted by jl on 7/27/09 • Categorized as Canada, arguments, collaboration, juri, polis

Since last October, a man has been blowing up EnCana pipelines in B.C. (Everyone seems to assume the bombings are the work of a man acting on his own.) So far, no one has been injured by these attacks.

There have been six incidents in the past 10 months, and the police appear to have approximately zero leads.

From a July 16 story in the National Post: “Despite a $500,000 reward, more than 250 investigators and 450 local people interviewed, there has been no public break in the investigation.”

Earlier this month the bomber sent a letter to the Dawson Creek News in which he gives EnCana “three months to convince the residents here and the general public” that they will “cease all [their] activities and remove all [their] installations”. (He calls this a “summer vacation”.)

The writer indicates that failure to comply with this demand will result in attacks more destructive that the “six minor and fully controlled explosions” that have occurred to date. (The RCMP for their part describe the explosions as “extremely violent in nature and … very dangerous to the local community.”)

Although the letter is certainly the work of a radical, its tone and content do not appear delusional.

“You are on the wrong side of the argument,” the bomber writes. “Use your excessive earnings to install green energy alternatives… That can be negotiated here but there will be no negotiation with you on fossil fuel activities.”

Radical and threatening? Yes. Deranged and out of control? Not really.

In any case, the RCMP have now decided to call the bomber a “domestic terrorist”.

This may be an attempt to provoke the man in the hope that he screws up in response. (“B.C. Bomber Makes TV Appearance to Deny Link to Al Qaeda.”) Or it could be a public-relations effort by the RCMP in which the EnCana bomber is very subtly inserted into people’s mental category of the universally-detested villain.

If theory #2 is correct, however, it’s not clear who’s winning the PR battle.

Indeed, a sampling of recent newspaper stories and readers’ comments on the topic shows that the EnCana bomber enjoys a significant level of popular support.

“mikebreta” commenting on the Globe & Mail web site:

I like what the bomber is doing. I wish there were more people like him. Standing up for what he believe in. Way to go bomber.

“Joe Canadian” writing on the National Post web site:

The RCMP, and many news outlets are painting Encana as good guys. I suppose they are given that the person(s) who are blowing up their pipelines are committing illegal acts. Still, I have to side with residents who don’t want this sour gas pipeline running nearby their town, and especially near their children’s school. Even if they catch the person doing this, no jury in this country is going to send the perpetrator to jail for doing a public service.

:”}

I know how I would vote.

Happy Birthday To Oil, Happy Birthday To Oil, Happy Birthday To OOOOOOil

Posted on August 31, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

Happy birthday to you…You belooooong in a zoo. Actually you made Zoos absolutely necessary as ARKS for the species that our use of oil has driven either to extinction or near extinction.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/08/oilat150/

Wired Science News for Your Neurons

Happy 150th, Oil! So Long, and Thanks for Modern Civilization

By Alexis Madrigal
August 27, 2009 |
2:39 pm |
Categories: Energy

One hundred and fifty years ago on Aug. 27, Colonel Edwin L. Drake sunk the very first commercial well that produced flowing petroleum.

The discovery that large amounts of oil could be found underground marked the beginning of a time during which this convenient fossil fuel became America’s dominant energy source.

But what began 150 years ago won’t last another 150 years — or even another 50. The era of cheap oil is ending, and with another energy transition upon us, we’ve got to scavenge all the lessons we can from its remarkable history.

“I would see this as less of an anniversary to note for celebration and more of an anniversary to note how far we’ve come and the serious moment that we’re at right now,” said Brian Black, an energy historian at Pennsylvania State University and and author of the book Petrolia. “Energy transitions happen and I argue that we’re in one right now and that we need to aggressively look to the future to what’s going to happen after petroleum.”

When Drake and others sunk their wells, there were no cars, no plastics, no chemical industry. Water power was the dominant industrial energy source. Steam engines burning coal were on the rise, but the nation’s energy system — unlike Great Britain’s — still used fossil fuels sparingly. The original role for oil was as an illuminant, not a motor fuel, which would come decades later.

Before the 1860s, petroleum was a well-known curiosity. People collected it with blankets or skimmed it off naturally occurring oil seeps. Occasionally they drank some of it as a medicine or rubbed it on aching joints.

Some people had the bright idea of distilling it to make fuel for lamps, but it was easier to get lamp fuel from pig fat or whale oil or converted coal. Without a steady supply, there was no point in developing a whole system and infrastructure dedicated to petroleum.

Nonetheless, some Yankee capitalists from Connecticut were convinced that oil could be found in the ground and exploited. They recruited “Colonel” Edwin Drake, who was not a Colonel at all, mostly because he was charming and unemployed. He, in turn, found someone skilled in the art of drilling, or what passed for it in those days.

Drake and his sidekick “Uncle Billy” Smith started looking underground for oil in the spring of ‘59. They used a heavy metal tip attached to a rope, sending it plummeting down the borehole like a ram to break up the rock. It was slow going.

On Aug. 27, 1859, at 69 feet of depth, Drake and Smith hit oil. It was a big deal, but the Civil War stalled the immediate development of the rock oil industry.

“When the discovery happened, the few people who were there and not involved in the war, went around and bought all the property they could and had outside investors come in,” Black said. “But the real heyday of the development happened from 1864-1870. It’s that 11-year period when the little river valley was the world’s leading supplier of oil.”

The “little river valley” in western Pennsylvania earned the nickname Petrolia. Centered in the Oil Creek valley about one hundred miles north of Pittsburgh, the wells of Pithole, Titusville and Oil City pumped 56 million barrels of oil out of the ground from 1859 to 1873.

:}
Though there is some question about whether it was the first well in the world or even in the US:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=whither-the-oil-age-150-years-of-bl-2009-08-27

And let's get the record straight. The Drake well was not

the first oil well in the U.S. Historical geologic research data

my father paid for circa 1979 pegged a well outside Oneida Tenn.

as the first producing oil well in the U.S. It preceeded the

Drake Well by a couple of decades or more (I believe the well

was struck around 1819 but I am going from memory as I read the survey

a long time ago). Unfortunately it was deep in mountainous terrain

making it nearly impossible to commercialize. Plus there wasn't

much of a use for oil yet. The well was accidental - they were actually

after water. The survey mentioned the Drake well as being considered

the first viable commerical well. But the Drake well definitely was

not the first oil well in the U.S. Dad commissioned the survey because

of a good oil producing lease on the mountain that over looks

Huntsville Tenn. In fact, the land was leased from Bobby York - one of

the grandsons of Alvin York. Yes, that Alvin York, a.k.a. "Seargent York"

 of WWI fame.

Even then there were people who thought that the mass consumption of oil would cause big problems:

http://www.enotes.com/earth-science/arrhenius-svante-august

Arrhenius, Svante August (1859-1927)

Swedish chemist

Svante August Arrhenius was awarded the 1903 Nobel Prize in chemistry for his research on the theory of electrolytic dissociation, a theory that had won the lowest possible passing grade for his Ph.D. two decades earlier. Arrhenius’s work with chemistry was often closely tied to the science of physics, so much so that the Nobel committee was not sure in which of the two fields to make the 1903 award. In fact, Arrhenius is regarded as one of the founders of physical chemistry—the field of science in which physical laws are used to explain chemical phenomena. In the last decades of his life Arrhenius became interested in theories of the origin of life on Earth, arguing that life had arrived on our planet by means of spores blown through space from other inhabited worlds. He was also one of the first scientists to study the heat-trapping ability of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in a phenomenon now known as the greenhouse effect.

Arrhenius was born on February 19, 1859, in Vik (also known as Wik or Wijk), in the district of Kalmar, Sweden. His mother was the former Carolina Thunberg, and his father was Svante Gustaf Arrhenius, a land surveyor and overseer at the castle of Vik on Lake Mälaren, near Uppsala. Young Svante gave evidence of his intellectual brilliance at an early age. He taught himself to read by the age of three and learned to do arithmetic by watching his father keep books for the estate of which he was in charge. Arrhenius began school at the age of eight, when he entered the fifth-grade class at the Cathedral School in Uppsala. After graduating in 1876, Arrhenius enrolled at the University of Uppsala.

Yahoo Attacks The Illinois State Fair – Well not really but my Yahoo account was attacked

Posted on August 27, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

The reason this Post is so late in the day is because I opened my web browser today and it showed that I had 35 messages waiting for me. Someone had unleashed a worm on my address book and it was busy sending all my friends spam. Some of it dangerous spam. I was mortified. I spent over 2 hours checking to make sure it was originating on my computer. People sent some of it back to me so I could see what the heck was spewing out of my account. Then in consultation with my computer expert Afredo I determined that just changing my email password could halt the attack…So I did and it ended. I had to blow off lunch with David Lasley, Dave Fuchs and the Sangamon County Democrats just to get to here…Damnit.

There were some things that I saw at the Illinois State Fair that I did not really care for. One of those things was the prominence of Biofuel in both of Governor Pat Quinn’s tents. We all know that biofuel, especially ones made from foods, distract people from getting rid of the internal combustion engine. It also drives up food prices so this:

and this:

were NOT appreciated.

Though the latest craze in biofuels is watermellons that are farm waste:

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/08/26/watermelon-fuel.html

Watermelon Juice: The New Fuel?

Michael Reilly, Discovery News

Fill ‘er Up | Discovery News Video

Aug. 26, 2009 — A staple of backyard barbecues and summer time snacks, watermelon is also a promising new source of renewable energy.

According to a new study, leftover watermelons from farms’ harvests could be converted into up to 9.4 million liters (2.5 million gallons) of clean, renewable ethanol fuel every year destined for your car, truck, or airplane’s gas tank.

Agriculturally, watermelon is a peculiar fruit — each year farmers across the country leave between 20 and 40 percent of their crop to rot on the ground. These are the ugly ducklings of the lot; though perfectly fine on the inside, the misshapen or blemished melons simply won’t sell at the grocery store.

“If a crow lands on a melon, takes two pecks at the rind, and then flies away, it’s no good,” Wayne Fish of the United States Department of Agriculture in Lane, Oklahoma said. “I had farmers telling me, ‘I’m leaving one-fifth of my melons on the land. Is there anything I can do with them?'”

Across the United States, he estimated that 360,000 tons of watermelons spoil in fields every year.

Some local growers wondered whether the waste melons could be turned into ethanol, the clean-burning fuel derived from plant sugars. In a series of new experiments published yesterday in the journal Biotechnology for Biofuels, Fish and a team of researchers showed that they can.

What’s more, watermelon juice may turn out to be the perfect way to optimize industrial-scale production of ethanol from corn, molasses and sugar cane.

Then there was this. What the hell. This causes Earth Quakes in Texas yet it makes it to the State Fair?

Fracking is Coming to Decatur. People better get ready for it:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,526233,00.html

Drilling Eyed as Possible Culprit Behind Texas Earthquakes

Sunday, June 14, 2009

CLEBURNE, Texas — The earth moved here on June 2. It was the first recorded earthquake in this Texas town’s 140-year history — but not the last.

There have been four small earthquakes since, none with a magnitude greater than 2.8. The most recent ones came Tuesday night, just as the City Council was meeting in an emergency session to discuss what to do about the ground moving.

The council’s solution was to hire a geology consultant to try to answer the question on everyone’s mind: Is natural gas drilling — which began in earnest here in 2001 and has brought great prosperity to Cleburne and other towns across North Texas — causing the quakes?

“I think John Q. Public thinks there is a correlation with drilling,” Mayor Ted Reynolds said. “We haven’t had a quake in recorded history, and all the sudden you drill and there are earthquakes.”

At issue is a drilling practice called “fracking,” in which water is injected into the ground at high pressure to fracture the layers of shale and release natural gas trapped in the rock.

There is no consensus among scientists about whether the practice is contributing to the quakes. But such seismic activity was once rare in Texas and seems to be increasing lately, lending support to the theory that drilling is having a destabilizing effect.

On May 16, three small quakes shook Bedford, a suburb of Dallas and Fort Worth. Two small earthquakes hit nearby Grand Prairie and Irving on Oct. 31, and again on Nov. 1.

Lighting Things On Fire Fascinates Humans – Burning things is stupid

Posted on August 21, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

(it’s jam band friday and i saw eva hunter last night so – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2i8vaWoIVN4 – )

Everyone who is human has started a fire. It is primal, but now it is deadly. The “off gases” of combustion are changing the planet Earth’s composition to the point that much of the animal world will not be able to live in it.

http://redyak.com/video/BurningThings/BurningThings.htm

(speaking of hot – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOx6QGJaNFA&feature=related -)

While we are hooked on burning things the rest of the world moves on:

http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2248232/china-poised-seize-clean-tech

China poised to seize clean tech crown

Report from The Climate Group argues China is set to dominate the global market for low-carbon technologies

James Murray, BusinessGreen, 21 Aug 2009

China’s position as one of the world’s pre-eminent clean tech hubs was underlined yesterday, with the release of a major new report from The Climate Group arguing that the country has already secured a lead over many of its global rivals in the race to develop and implement low-carbon technologies.

The report, which updates a similar study from last year, concluded that despite the onset of the global recession, Chinese clean tech firms are continuing to record impressive growth, aided in no small part by the government’s decision to focus much of its $585bn (£354bn) stimulus package on low-carbon projects.

The study found that while the Chinese government is resisting international calls to set carbon emission targets, it is delivering good progress against domestic targets to improve energy efficiency, having cut the energy intensity of the economy 60 per cent since 1980.

(did i mention seriously talented – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6PJUoNp0tY&feature=related -)

Yet still we must send smoke into the very air we breath and without which we can not survive.

http://www.dgate.org/~brg/death/index2.html

We like to burn things!

So one fine Saturday, recently, (to be exact it was the third of February, 1996), we were kinda bored, and we were messing around with some hard drives, trying to get them to work. One of ’em was completely dead — no spin-up, no blinking light, no nothing. The computer said it was a Micropolis but couldn’t tell us more than that. So we figured, the thing’s toast, right? And we figured, we’re on the third floor, right? Cool. Open da window. (Remember, it was -6 degrees F out that night!) ;-> Well, enough of my ranting, why dontcha look at the pictures! (If you are using a text-only browser, you might as well quit now. We took 87 pictures for this thing, and they *ARE* the good part, OK???)

(did I say beautiful – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ7KDVtxcXA&feature=related -)

We throw so much up in the air, SOX, NOX, Natural gases like methane, butane, and propane, and dangerous particulates like mercury. Yet everyone wants to worry about carbon. I guess that is as good a place as any to start:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita

List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

CO₂ emission per capita per year per country

This article relies largely or entirely upon a single source. Please help improve this article by introducing appropriate citations of additional sources. (September 2008)

This is a list of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita from 1990 through 2006. All data were calculated by the US Department of Energy’s Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC), mostly based on data collected from country agencies by the United Nations Statistics Division.

Countries are ranked by their metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions per capita in 2006.

(great band too – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBnfxOovUVA&feature=related )
They even have a FaceBook page dedicated to it. You too can make your own Flamethrower!

Burning Things

Homemade Flamethrower

haha i encourage you all to try this… pam + water gun = pure entertainment!

Length:0:09

Burning Things

Burnt things

11 new photos

April 29 at 5:46pm · View Feedback (4)Hide Feedback (4) · Share

RECENT ACTIVITY

Burning Things discussed I am a pyromaniac. I burn these things: on the Burning Things discussion board.

Burning Things edited their Founded and Company Overview.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4InbNOJqqy8&feature=related

I like her very much.

Why Buying Locally Could Save The Planet – Stupid uses of transportation

Posted on August 4, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

Why buying your food locally is so important in so many ways. One of corporate capitalism’s goals is for people to lose their common sense. Some forms of food have been moved all over the planet for 20,000 years. Certain forms of food lend themselves to this process nicely. The commodity grains for example have been move by draft animals, boats and now trucks since their mass cultivation began. Even this can be moderated a bit. But to be shipping all manner of food all manner of places in all types of weather is just dumb.

I boil this down to a single sentence. Do I need to eat apples in Illinois in the winter? If I do should it come from Ecuador? (this is true) I have an apple tree in the back yard. Shouldn’t I just freeze some? But then irrational uses of our transportation system is a hallmark of the modern world. But there is more to consider. Local foods encourage carbon sequestration in the plants themselves, their reintroduction into the soil by composting, and the enhancement of your personal health. These are a few things to consider when you buy only food grown within a hundred miles of your house.

Then there is the ethics of factory farming of any living thing. Anyway planting a garden and harvesting local free stuff only makes sense.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/26/business/worldbusiness/26food.html

The Food Chain

Environmental Cost of Shipping Groceries Around the World

Massimo Sciacca for The New York Times

Kiwis grown in Italy are examined — and damaged fruit is discarded— before being shipped.

By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL

Published: April 26, 2008

Correction Appended

Cod caught off Norway is shipped to China to be turned into filets, then shipped back to Norway for sale. Argentine lemons fill supermarket shelves on the Citrus Coast of Spain, as local lemons rot on the ground. Half of Europe’s peas are grown and packaged in Kenya.

In the United States, FreshDirect proclaims kiwi season has expanded to “All year!” now that Italy has become the world’s leading supplier of New Zealand’s national fruit, taking over in the Southern Hemisphere’s winter.

Food has moved around the world since Europeans brought tea from China, but never at the speed or in the amounts it has over the last few years. Consumers in not only the richest nations but, increasingly, the developing world expect food whenever they crave it, with no concession to season or geography.

Increasingly efficient global transport networks make it practical to bring food before it spoils from distant places where labor costs are lower. And the penetration of mega-markets in nations from China to Mexico with supply and distribution chains that gird the globe — like Wal-Mart, Carrefour and Tesco — has accelerated the trend.

But the movable feast comes at a cost: pollution — especially carbon dioxide, the main global warming gas — from transporting the food.

Under longstanding trade agreements, fuel for international freight carried by sea and air is not taxed. Now, many economists, environmental advocates and politicians say it is time to make shippers and shoppers pay for the pollution, through taxes or other measures.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/28/AR2008112801611.html

Want to Shrink Your Carbon Footprint? Think Food.

Transportation choices such as car vs. subway have a big effect on carbon footprint, but experts say food choices have nearly as much impact.

Transportation choices such as car vs. subway have a big effect on carbon footprint, but experts say food choices have nearly as much impact. (By Ramin Talaie — Bloomberg News)

By Katherine Salant

Saturday, November 29, 2008; Page F04

In moving for a year to New York City from Ann Arbor, Mich., a small Midwestern college town, the biggest change for me has not been the shift from a house to a high-rise and a living space that is only one-third as big.

It is the absence of a car.

The difference was apparent the first day. As in previous moves, settling in included many trips to the hardware store for this and that. But this time it was not a simple matter of getting directions and driving there. It was confronting a subway system with 26 different lines. And, after reaching Home Depot and making my purchases, I had to figure out how to get them home. (I learned that most stores in Manhattan offer delivery services for a fee.)

Even the most mundane details of daily life, including meal planning, have changed. In Michigan I had the luxury of “last-minute cuisine,” routinely making a dinner plan at 6 p.m., heading for the grocery store that is a three-minute drive from my house, grabbing a few things and returning home, all inside of 20 minutes. Here the grocery store is a 15-minute walk from our apartment building. The return trip is longer because I am lugging my purchases in a wire shopping cart. With each grocery outing taking at least 40 minutes, I plan ahead and shop for groceries only once or twice a week.

Traveling by subway has not proven to be a timesaver, but the time is allocated differently. On a 60-minute car trip you can while away the time by listening to the radio or music. On a subway you can read. The rush hour is still stressful, but the defensive maneuvers are different. Sandwiched into a subway car, you have to be watchful of backpack-wearing riders who never seem to realize how often their backpacks whack other passengers.

If you want to calculate how much you save by buying locally:

http://www.foodcarbon.co.uk/

Home The food we consume contributes to climate change. The production, packaging and transportation of food all consumes energy and results in carbon emissions which threaten to raise average global surface temperatures.

However, not all foods are equal…

The Food Carbon Footprint Calculator (FCFC) provides the opportunity to calculate the resultant carbon dioxide from the food you eat, called your “Food Carbon Footprint”.

This website also offers personalised and practical ways to reduce the carbon footprint of your diet, reducing your impact on climate change.

Illinois Moves Ahead With Plans To Poison The Earth – Let’s inject toxins into our watershed

Posted on July 21, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

That sounds like a plan doesn’t it?

http://www.sj-r.com/news/x1264048039/House-revives-Taylorville-Energy-Center

House revives Taylorville Energy Center

OKs beginning of design work on clean-coal power plant

By DOUG FINKE (doug.finke@sj-r.com)

STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER

Posted Jul 16, 2008 @ 11:19 PM

Last update Jul 16, 2008 @ 11:44 PM

A $2.5 billion clean-coal power plant proposed for Taylorville got a new lease on life Wednesday when the Illinois House overwhelmingly approved a bill developers said is crucial to the project.By an 86-5 vote, the House passed Senate Bill 1987, which will allow design work to begin on the Taylorville Energy Center. It is similar to a bill that failed by 10 votes in the House in the closing hours of the spring session.Rep. Gary Hannig, D-Litchfield, said the latest version contains “some safeguards” to mollify utility giant Commonwealth Edison, which opposed the earlier bill. That includes more oversight of the project by the Illinois Commerce Commission.“They were concerned that some of the cost might be excessive,” Hannig said. “Now the Illinois Commerce Commission will have an opportunity to say yes or no to that. We have to prove to the power companies that we can produce this in Taylorville in a clean and economically feasible way.”The Taylorville Energy Center would use coal-gasification technology and Illinois coal to produce 525 megawatts of electricity while controlling carbon dioxide emissions

Or in their own words:

http://www.tenaska.com/newsItem.aspx?id=62

News

Tenaska’s Taylorville Energy Center Selected By U.S. DOE For Loan Guarantee Program; Illinois Electric Ratepayers Could Save Up To $60 Million Per Year With $2.5 Billion Guarantee – 07/13/09

TAYLORVILLE, Illinois – July 13, 2009 – Tenaska, managing partner for the $3.5 billion Taylorville Energy Center (TEC), announced today that, following a competitive six-month application process, it has been selected by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to proceed into the term sheet negotiation phase under the DOE Loan Guarantee Program. The amount of the guarantee will be up to $2.579 billion, depending on the final project costs and capital structure.

Upon completion of due diligence and negotiations, the Taylorville project expects to receive a federal government guarantee of its debt, which will greatly reduce financing costs. Because TEC financing costs are included in electric rates under the recently enacted Illinois Clean Coal Portfolio Standard Law, the DOE loan guarantee results in savings of between $40 and $60 million per year to Illinois consumers.

“This is a very important step toward securing a clean coal facility in Taylorville. The federal loan guarantee would significantly reduce the cost of financing the construction of the facility,” said Attorney General Lisa Madigan. “That’s important because cost will be a critical factor when the General Assembly reviews this project next year.”

The DOE Loan Guarantee Program, instituted in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, is designed to spur technological innovation in fossil fuel energy development. It essentially gave the U.S. government the ability to back loans for advanced clean energy projects, thereby lowering financing costs.

If you want to read a load of crap:

http://www.cleancoalillinois.com/tec.html

Taylorville Energy Center
Taylorville Energy Center (TEC) is a proposed 500- to 525-megawatt clean coal power plant using an advanced technology called Hybrid Integrated Gasification Combined-Cycle (Hybrid IGCC) to make it the cleanest coal-fired power plant in the world.

Located a mile northeast of Taylorville in central Illinois, the plant will convert Illinois coal into clean substitute natural gas (also known as methane) to generate enough electricity to power more than 500,000 area homes.

The benefits of TEC include:

• Millions saved annually on power costs
• Economic development for a job-starved region
• Creation of a new market for Illinois coal
• Protection of the environment and public
health through clean-coal technology

Plant rendering (high-res image)

Taylorville Energy Center is being developed by Christian County Generation, LLC, a joint venture between affiliates of Tenaska, an Omaha, Nebraska-based power development company, and MDL Holding Co. of Louisville, Kentucky. Tenaska is managing developer of the Taylorville project. Since its inception 21 years ago, Tenaska has built more than 9,000 megawatts of power generation. Forbes magazine ranks Tenaska as the 24th largest private U.S. corporation, based on 2007 gross revenues.

And if you want to listen to a load of crap:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGxZXBASYdc

For 3 years they have planned, and talked, and schemed….

Our Atmospere Is A Hell Bound Train – Illinois moves south and eventually ends up with Louisiana’s weather

Posted on July 8, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

I have suddenly become interested in the descent into hell as a metaphor for the descent of humankind from peak activity to tribalism. I am not a big fan of the descent theory either. It seems like commercial activity and traveling are universal and have gone on since the beginning of time. It is true that certain forms of economic organization have come and gone. But it seems to me that it universally accepted education that comes and goes. Mainly that is because the things we know are true are constantly evolving. Like he said in Men in Black:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJvl5fnB-bU&feature=PlayList&p=41D6FF8997B79F88&index=3

Anyway, the difference between “hell in a hand basket” and “hell bound train” is that the basket metaphor seems almost leisurely and the train seems to move a lot faster. As far as origins:

http://everything2.com/title/The%2520Hell-Bound%2520Train

One long poem or:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlqqeobOJvg

One long song:

http://tomtrumpinski.com/Tom_Trumpinski/Books_&_Stories.html

One long book.

Nonetheless you have to admit that it can’t predate the invention of the actual train itself. Why worry about such things? Because the idea that Illinois shall soon have sub Trobical weather is just simply revolting. But according to this it is happening faster than even the “extremists” thought:

http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2166

30 Jun 2009: Analysis

Report Gives Sobering View
Of Warming’s Impact on U.S.

A new U.S. government report paints a disturbing picture of the current and future effects of climate change and offers a glimpse of what the nation’s climate will be like by century’s end

by michael d. lemonick

For anyone wondering whether climate change has already hit the United States, a recent U.S. government report says it has — and in a big way.

Witness these trends: In the northeastern U.S., winter temperatures have increased by 4 degrees F since 1970; in the Pacific Northwest, the depth of the Cascade Mountain snowpack on April 1 has declined by 25 percent over the last half century, while spring runoff from the Cascades now occurs nearly a month earlier than 50 years ago; and in Alaska, winter temperatures have increased a stunning 6.3 degrees F in the last 50 years.

Those are just some of the sobering signs of rapid warming spelled out this month in a new report by a U.S. government body that almost no one has heard of: the United States Global Change Research Program (USGCR), which by law is required to report to Congress every ten years on the causes, effects, and possible responses to climate change in the U.S.

If the changes that the U.S. already has experienced make you uneasy, then perhaps you shouldn’t read the the downloadable document itself: It makes quite clear that if the U.S. and the world do little or nothing to slow greenhouse gas emissions, then the climate in the U.S. will be far hotter — and decidedly unpleasant — by the end of this century.

For those inclined to dismiss the USGCR’s report, it should be noted that the group’s scientific pedigree is impeccable. The study is a joint effort of the departments of Energy, Commerce, Defense, State, Interior, Transportation, Health and Human Services, and Agriculture — plus the Environmental Protection Agency, NASA, the Smithsonian Institution, the National Science Foundation, and the Agency for International Development.

The report, which includes new material not contained in the 2007 report

Click to Enlarge

U.S. Global Change Research Program

The Warming of Illinois

of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, brings climate change down to the level where people live. For each region of the U.S., the report describes some of the changes that have already been observed, then looks at what’s likely to happen under both a low-emissions scenario (in which emissions of greenhouse gases are cut substantially) and a high-emissions scenario (where the world pretty much stays on the course it’s now following).

Either way, the authors say, significant changes are coming. Substantial emissions cuts are under active debate, but they remain hypothetical so far; the highlights cited here will therefore focus on the business-as-usual scenario — not in order to be alarmist, but to stay in the realm of the concrete.

I included all that I did just so I could include the cool map of Illinois. Read the rest it is really frightening.

George Will And Robert Murray Defend The Carbon Economy With Lies

Posted on June 25, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

The State Journal Register is just the same old Republican Rag that wants to shine Big Coals boots to stay in business. They ran 3 Right Wing Pundits today and 2 of them Commented on the Green Economy. One who says it won’t work and the other who says that Cap and Trade will destroy the US Economy. The first one, George Will:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/03/24/LI2005032402294.html

Who admits in the very article that the report he cites is the product of, a right wing radical libertarian economist, was published by a right wing think tank that opposes any change in energy policy besides “Drill here, Drill now” and that has neither been replicated nor peer reviewed. BUT none the less it is TRUE to point out that Spain has an unemployment rate of 18% (which is disputed by many) and that every green electricity production job costs 700,000 to 1.5 million $$$ counting subsidies and green corruption.

The unemployment figures are probably 3 to 4 % lower then he reports and at 12-14 % where the United States will end up by September or October BECAUSE we are in the greatest economic downturn since the GREAT Depression (though no one can tell me what was so great about it) that was caused by rightwing attacks on our financial sector, our housing sector and on labor (car manufacturers). These are his wealthy buddies yah know. He then tosses off another “source”, a report by rightwing Missourian, Kitt Bond who may or may not know anything about economics which comes to a similar conclusion, “Oil good when cheap – Wind and Solar bad” and concludes that a failed policy in EDUCATION will have the same results in ENERGY policy. Did George have a cup of coffee today? It is always tough when your biases show like your butt crack.

http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x998784623/George-Will-Reality-of-green-spending-not-promising

George Will: Reality of green spending not promising

THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER

Posted Jun 25, 2009 @ 12:02 AM

WASHINGTON — The Spanish professor is puzzled. Why, Gabriel Calzada wonders, is the U.S. president recommending that America emulate the Spanish model for creating “green jobs” in “alternative energy” even though Spain’s unemployment rate is 18.1 percent — more than double the European Union average — partly because of spending on such jobs?Calzada, 36, an economics professor at Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, has produced a report which, if true, is inconvenient for the Obama administration’s green agenda, and for some budget assumptions that are dependent upon it.Calzada says Spain’s torrential spending — no other nation has so aggressively supported production of electricity from renewable sources — on wind farms and other forms of alternative energy has indeed created jobs. But Calzada’s report concludes that they often are temporary and have received $752,000 to $800,000 each in subsidies — wind industry jobs cost even more, $1.4 million each. And each new job entails the loss of 2.2 other jobs that are either lost or not created in other industries because of the political allocation — sub-optimum in terms of economic efficiency — of capital. (European media regularly report “eco-corruption” leaving a “footprint of sleaze” — gaming the subsidy systems, profiteering from land sales for wind farms, etc.) Calzada says the creation of jobs in alternative energy has subtracted about 110,000 jobs from elsewhere in Spain’s economy.:}

Normally I would not even dein this kind of obvious “paid to play” kind of Drivel, because if I wrote a blog for everytime George Will was wrong or lying I would never get anything done, but when the SJ-R follows that with an attack on Cap and Trade (the industries OWN proposed solution) written by known liar and coal mine owner Robert Murray that is just way over the line. Please note their web site:

http://www.murrayenergy.net/

These people are proud that they are longwall miners and mountain TOP destroyers and even ash producers. To wit:

Murray is the largest privately owned coal company in America
Producing approximately 30 million annual tons of bituminous coal that provides affordable energy to households and businesses across the country. We have eight (8) underground and surface mining operations, plus 40 subsidiary and support companies. Transporting coal via truck, rail and waterways, we operate the second largest fleet of longwall mining units in the country. With a support team of 3,000 hard-working, dedicated, and talented employees in six (6) states, Murray Energy Corporation provides efficient, safe, and affordable high-quality coal to the country’s leading electric producers, domestically and abroad.

Energy, Efficiency, Effective leadership . . .
Celebrating 20 years of building America’s energy future, and utilizing the industry’s most modern mining technologies today to enhance safety, improve productivity and reduce costs. We credit our employees and talents of the team assembled to provide this reliable, low-cost energy source. Murray is transforming America’s most abundant natural energy resource into electricity, powering America’s future. Murray Energy’s team, from the CEO to the coal miner, along with their effective managers use state-of-art technology and engineering principles, all to the production of energy..

Commitment . . .
Is the driving force behind Murray Energy producing and delivering to get the most reliable and affordable energy supplied to our customers. From our leadership and management, to our workforce, commitment is the center of our focus to produce every ton of coal safely, efficiently, and to provide the most affordable energy for the benefit of all Americans and the Country

And he says:

http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x998784635/Robert-Murray-Waxman-Markey-bill-will-destroy-U-S-coal-industry

Robert Murray: Waxman-Markey bill will destroy U.S. coal industry

THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER

Posted Jun 25, 2009 @ 12:04 AM

Perhaps the most destructive legislation in our country’s history will be voted on, maybe as soon as next week, in the U.S. House of Representatives — the Waxman-Markey climate and energy bill. It is a misguided attempt to address climate change.It will have adverse and lingering consequences for every American.It will raise the cost of electricity in our homes, the fuel for our cars, and the energy that produces our manufacturing jobs, with little or no environmental benefit.Further, independent experts estimate that it will cost Americans more than $2 trillion in just over eight years. All Americans in the Midwest, South and Rocky Mountain regions will be drastically affected because the climate change legislation will destroy the nation’s coal industry and the low-cost electricity it has provided to these regions for generations. Wealth will be transferred away from almost every state to the West Coast and New England.The most abundant and by far least expensive energy source in our country for generating electricity is coal. America’s coal reserves rival the energy potential of Saudi Arabian oil.

Nowhere does he cite actual sources or anything else. No one at the SJ-R calls him on it or points out that “Cap and Trade” was very effective at getting rid of sulfur dioxide. If coal were not such a nasty energy source we would not be getting rid of it. WHAT doesn’t he understand about “Leave it in the ground”?

The Day After Memorial Day – In all fairness to the Energy Conglomerates

Posted on May 26, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

The US Military is the largest single user of carbon based energy in the World. When you toss in the other worlds militaries, if we just cut the militaries of the world to patrolling borders global warming would backup by decades. Not only that but the Energy Companies are pushed around by the military big time. No military and the pirates take tankers…No Iraq war no Iraqui oil…No defense against China they suck all the world’s resources up like a vacuum cleaner…Do I feel sorry for the Energy Companies or the Military? No they deserve each other I just don’t think we deserve them. GO AWAY.

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/29925

I am not going to reprint the total article here…this guy did a lot of work on graphs and charts and things but it is interesting and he is not the only person to report on this. It is important to note that the Energy Bulletin has been adopted by the Post Carbon Institute (http://www.postcarbon.org/). Wonder when that happened?

Published May 20 2007 by Energy Bulletin
Archived May 21 2007

US military energy consumption- facts and figures

by Sohbet Karbuz

As the saying goes, facts are many but the truth is one. The truth is that the U.S. military is the single largest consumer of energy in the world. But as a wise man once said, don’t confuse facts with reality. The reality is that even U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) does not know precisely where and how much energy it consumes. This is my Fact Zero.

Below I give some facts and figures on U.S. military oil consumption based mostly on official statistics.[1] If you want to reproduce them make sure you read every footnote even if you need to put on your glasses. Also read the footnotes in this article.

FACT 1: The DoD’s total primary energy consumption in Fiscal Year 2006 was 1100 trillion Btu. It corresponds to only 1% of total energy consumption in USA. For those of you who think that this is not much then read the next sentence.

Nigeria, with a population of more than 140 million, consumes as much energy as the U.S. military.

The DoD per capita[2] energy consumption (524 trillion Btu) is 10 times more than per capita energy consumption in China, or 30 times more than that of Africa.

Total final energy consumption (called site delivered energy by DoD) of the DoD was 844 trillion Btu in FY2006FACT 2: Defense Energy Support Center (DESC) sold $13 billion of energy to DoD services in FY2006. More than half of it was to Air Force.

FACT 3: Oil accounts for more than three-fourths of DoD’s total site delivered energy consumption. Oil is followed by electricity (slightly more than 10%) and natural gas (nearly 10%). In terms of fuel types, jet fuel (JP-8)[3] accounts for more than 50% of total DoD energy consumption, and nearly 60% of its mobility[4] fuel.

FACT 4: Nearly three quarters of DoD site delivered energy is consumed by vehicles (or for mobility if you like). Only one quarter is consumed in buildings and facilities.[5]FACT 5: DoD consumed 97 million gasoline gallon equivalent in its non-tactical vehicles and for that it spent 238 million dollars.

FACT 6: In 2006, its oil consumption was down to 117 million barrels (or 320 thousand barrels per day),[10] despite increasing activity in Iraq and Afghanistan.

FACT 7: In 2006, for example, DESC reports in its Factbook that it sold 131 million barrels of oil (or 358 kbd) to DoD but DoD Federal Energy Management Report states that DoD consumed 117 million barrels (or 320 kbd).[12]

FACT 8: According to 2007 CIA World Fact Book there are only 35 countries in the world consuming more oil than DoD.

FACT 9: There exist no official estimates. Let me know if you see or hear one. According to my most pessimist estimates it is about 150 thousand barrels per day FACT 10: Whatever the true figure oil consumed by the U.S. military does not show up in world oil demand. See for more explanation under item #425 in October 2004 issue of ASPO Newsletter.

For more of this incredibly insightful and well written article please go to the above website and see it..Even the Military is aware that it is seen as a BIG FAT energy PIG, but it is also aware that NO OIL = NO WAR

http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/addressing-the-militarys-energy-efficiency/

Addressing the Military’s Energy Inefficiency

By John Lorinc

Report

The folks who gave the world the Hummer, the poster child of fuel inefficiency, want to spawn a new generation of eco-friendly military equipment with cross-over potential in the “civilian sector,” say a group of retired American military officers who released a sharply worded report on Monday calling on the Department of Defense to reduce its “carbon bootprint.”

“The American military gave you the Humvee, and now we’re taking it back,” said retired Adm. John Nathman, the former vice chief of naval operations and an adviser to President Obama, in a conference call on Monday. “You’re going to see some fairly dramatic movement by the Department of Defense in terms of public visibility.”

The report, “Powering America’s Defense,” was published by CNA Analysis and Solutions, a research group based in Alexandria, Va., that issued a previous study on defense and energy security in 2007.

In the new study’s preface, 12 retired military officers lay out the case for weaning the military — and the country — off oil:

Many of our overseas deployments were de?ned, in part, by the strategic decision to ensure the free ?ow of oil, to the U.S. and to our allies. Many of the troops we commanded were aided by air cover from high-thrust delivery systems that only an energy-intense society can provide. Many of these same troops were often burdened and imperiled by battle?eld systems that were energy-inef?cient. Some of the attacks on our troops and on American civilians have been supported by funds from the sale of oil. Our nation’s energy choices have saved lives; they have also cost lives.

As we consider America’s current energy posture, we do so from a singular perspective: We gauge our energy choices solely by their impact on America’s national security. Our dependence on foreign oil reduces our international leverage, places our troops in dangerous global regions, funds nations and individuals who wish us harm, and weakens our economy; our dependency and inef?cient use of oil also puts our troops at risk.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee ranking minority member ~~chairman~~ Richard Lugar, an Indiana Republican, told The Associated Press that he strongly agreed “with the stark conclusions” of the report, whose authors point out that fluctuating oil prices, dependence on foreign resources and an ailing electricity grid imperil national security both at home and abroad.

“Climate change is a threat multiplier,” said Vice Adm. Dennis V. McGinn, a retired officer and former commander of the Third Fleet.

Defense officials have previously described the American military as likely the world’s largest consumer of petroleum products, with an annual outlay in excess of $13 billion.

Each $1 per barrel increase in oil prices translates into $130 million of extra cost.

Calls for the military to address its environmental performance are not new. But in the past year or so, energy efficiency seems have become more of a priority, from a new solar wall installation at Fort Drum to the purchase of a large electric vehicle fleet for military bases.

After all is said and done, are we safer with all this energy consumption? I think not:

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/05/19-9

Published on Tuesday, May 19, 2009 by Agence France Presse

US Energy Use a National Security Threat: Study

WASHINGTON – US dependence on fossil fuels and a vulnerable electric grid pose a perilous threat to the country’s national security, retired military officers warned Monday in a report.

The threat requires urgent action and the Defense Department should lead the way in transforming America’s energy use by aggressively pursuing efficiency measures and renewable sources, said the report by CNA, a nonprofit research group.

“Our dependence on foreign oil reduces our international leverage, places our troops in dangerous global regions, funds nations and individuals who wish us harm, and weakens our economy,” it said.

“The market for fossil fuels will be shaped by finite supplies and increasing demand. Continuing our heavy reliance on these fuels is a security risk,” said the report titled “Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security.”

The authors, top ranked retired officers from the US Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps, also point to the strained domestic electricity network as a possible hazard for US military bases.

“Our domestic electrical system is also a current and significant risk to our national security: many of our large military installations rely on power from a fragile electrical grid that is vulnerable to malicious attacks or interruptions caused by natural disasters,” it said.