Sustainability

Download

sustainability@sfgreens.org

August 2007

3 participants
12 discussions

[Sustain] PG&E Using Large Hydro Scam For Meeting Renewable Standard
by Eric Brooks 01 Aug '07

01 Aug '07

PG&E is trying to scam its way to meet its renewable requirements by counting upgrades done on large hydro. http://www.sfbg.com/printable_entry.php?entry_id=4178 <http://www.sfbg.com/printable_entry.php?entry_id=4178> Dam scam /Are efficiency upgrades renewable energy?/ By Amanda Witherell A bill to have efficiency upgrades at large hydroelectric dams be considered renewable energy is floating through the State Legislature, with very few members swimming upstream against it. The legislation by Assemblymember Sam Blakeslee (R--San Luis Obispo) is supported by Pacific Gas and Electric Co., which indicated it could count an additional 460 gigawatt-hours toward its renewable portfolio standard if the rule were changed. The utility company delivered a total of 84,310 GWh of energy last year, and by 2010 it will be required to provide 20 percent of that from renewable sources. Small hydroelectric facilities of 30 megawatts or less are considered renewable. The bill received unanimous assembly approval, but opponents say efficiency upgrades at dams are or should be occurring anyway and don't deserve the coveted "renewable" title. "California's RPS program was established to promote generation of new renewable energy sources. The RPS program was not designed to simply reward actions that would have occurred without the program," the Planning and Conservation League wrote to the Senate Natural Resources Committee. The Sierra Club also opposes the bill, as does Sen. Carole Migden, whose press secretary, Tracey Fairchild, said, "It doesn't ultimately create one megawatt of true renewable energy." *(Witherell)* Tuesday July 31, 2007 -- "The past is the Textbook of Tyrants; the Future the Bible of the Free" - Herman Melville

1 0

Re: [Sustain] Fwd: Blue Angels
by Don Eichelberger 01 Aug '07

01 Aug '07

I went to http://www.quakeradio.com/cc-common/bformmail.cgi and told them: Fleet Week and the Blue Angels are a giant ad for militarism. Many of us in San Francisco, of all places, hold hope that people can, eventually, learn to deal with their differences in a more enlightened way than warfare. Humans should seek the capacity to move past "survival of the fittest", "might makes right", and other "stinkin' thinkin'. But, first, we need to stop glorifying war, especially to our young. Daly's legislation is well-meaning, but, if anything, it does not go far enough. Blue Angels are all the things Daly says they are, and more. When some of us see them, together with the whole Fleet Week pageantry, we are reminded of the newsreel scenes from earlier days of swastika-laden tanks or nuclear missiles with hammer and sickles streaming along before the review stand, and can only hang our head at what we have become. Don Eichelberger At 01:58 PM 7/31/2007, Richard A. Knee wrote: >A friend sent me the following: > >------- Forwarded message ------- >To: rak0408(a)earthlink.net >Subject: Blue Angels >Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:31:31 -0700 > >Rick-Yesterday on KQKE's "Progressive News Hour," just before 6 p.m., I >heard a part of a vicious attack on Chris Daly for proposing to stop the >Blue Angels' buzzing of SF. Not entirely sure who the speaker was, as I >tuned in partway through, but I'm guessing it was John Scott, who hosts >the show. He basically accused Daly of being unpatriotic, of attacking >our troops and our military, and of implying that the city doesn't need >or want the protection of the U.S. military. Also said Daly's assertions >that he was concerned about noise and safety were pretexts to cover his >anti-military position. The speaker, whoever he was, said he was antiwar >but that Daly and his proposal were over the edge or off the charts. >Sounds like they might need a little educating.

1 0