By Caitlin Rydinsky
Illinois is the first state in the nation to ban potentially hazardous plastic beads from common hygiene products.
Gov. Pat Quinn signed Senate Bill 2727 into law over the weekend. The law would phase out the small plastic beads that are used in some exfoliating body scrubs and whitening toothpastes. Manufacturers will have to stop including the beads in products by 2017, and stores can no longer sell products with them after 2018. The use of the beads in prescription medicines, such as toothpastes or acne washes, will be eliminated in 2019. Consumers can identify products containing the plastic pieces by checking for polyethylene or polypropylene in the ingredients list.
The plastic pieces are designed to roll down the drain easily after use. However, the beads, which are about the size of a grain of salt, are too small to be caught by water filtration systems. So, they end up in bodies of water. “Banning microbeads will help ensure clean waters across Illinois and set an example for our nation to follow,” Governor Quinn said in a prepared statement. “Lake Michigan and the many rivers and lakes across our state are among our most important natural resources. We must do everything necessary to safeguard them.”
The issue was brought to the attention of lawmakers after a study of the Great Lakes performed by environmental groups found the plastic beads polluting the water. The study found twice the beads in Lake Erie samples than in some parts of the ocean.
Fish are eating the beads, which are brightly colored and small enough to be mistaken as microbes. The other remaining plastic pieces end up floating on top of the water or sinking to the floor after they absorb pollutants within the water. Once the plastic pieces are in the water, it is too difficult to eliminate them all because of their small size.
Big names in the personal hygiene industry, such as Johnson & Johnson and Unilevar, have already acknowledged the dangers of the beads and support replacing them with more natural items, such as ground nut shells, salt, rice, sugar, or silica. Backers of the ban say it is needed to ensure that the companies follow through and to cover any producers that have not signed on to phasing out the beads.
“Lake Michigan is a critically important natural resource for our state, and its health affects recreation, tourism and the flourishing of aquatic plant and animal species,” Sen. Heather Steans, who sponsored the bill, said in a written statement. “I’m proud that Illinois is an environmental leader, taking the first step away from plastic microbeads toward natural exfoliates, and I’m optimistic that we’ve started a nationwide movement to protect not just the Great Lakes, but other bodies of water with high concentrations of microbeads.”
New York and California have similar legislation waiting to be signed into law and other states surrounding the Great Lakes, such as Wisconsin, Ohio, Minnesota and Michigan have introduced bills that would eliminate the products from their states.
Showing posts with label Environment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Environment. Show all posts
Monday, June 09, 2014
Monday, April 14, 2014
Proposed ban on plastic microbeads could be model for other states
By Caitlin Rydinksy,
A bill approved last week by the Illinois Senate that would eliminate plastic microbeads found in hygiene products could become a national model for states looking to phase out the material.
Microbeads are small plastic particles, made of polyethylene or polypropylene, found in items such as body and facial scrubs and some toothpastes. After use, they are washed down the drain and released into waterways. The beads are so small that they make it through the filtration process at water treatment plants. They cause harm when fish and other aquatic life confuse them with food because of the resemblance in color and size to the microbes that they eat. Because they are made of plastic, which is not biodegradable, the particles do not dissolve once they are released into the environment. They float through the water or sink to the bottom once they have absorbed surrounding pollutants.
Researchers have found them in waterways, oceans and, overwhelmingly, the Great Lakes. The 5 Gyres Institute, a group that studies the global effect of plastic pollutants, found beads within the lakes. Early testing, which looked at Lake Superior, Lake Huron and Lake Erie, shows Lake Erie had more than two times the amount sampled within some areas of the ocean. The results of the study have spurred manufacturers to act. “Most of the major manufacturers that were presented with the research of the high abundance of these particles in the Great Lakes surface water responded by voluntarily phasing out plastic particles in their products and looking for alternative formulations,” said Olga Lyandres, research manager of the Alliance for the Great Lakes, a Chicago-based environmental organization. The alliance worked with The 5 Gyres Institute on the lakes study.
“Plastic microbeads are used in personal care cleansing products because of their exfoliating properties and excellent safety profile,” said the Personal Care Products Council in a prepared statement. “However, our industry shares a common interest with other stakeholders in protecting the environment, and we take questions regarding the presence of plastic microbeads in our waterways very seriously. While we believe plastic microbeads in personal care cleansing products represent a very small contributor to the overall plastic found in the aquatic environment, our industry is demonstrating leadership on this issue by publicly announcing plans to phase out the use of these ingredients.”
The study found remnants of other plastics including pieces of plastic bags. But the amount of microbeads and the fact that they are easily identifiable allowed researchers to point to a specific cause of pollution and request that companies transition to more environmentally friendly substitutes. Although many high profile companies, such as Johnson & Johnson and Unilever, have already started phasing out production of the beads, The Alliance for the Great Lakes is lobbying for Senate Bill 2727 to hold the companies to that promise.
States surrounding the Great Lakes and some coastal states, such as New York and California, have also considered bans. Those who negotiated SB 2727 say it could serve as an example for those states because it gives the industry years to find a substitute for the beads and allows retailers to continue selling their current inventory. Scrubbing products that do not contain microbeads have various other abrasive materials, such as silica, ground nutshells, rice, sugar or salt. SB 2727 calls for a ban on products containing the beads to begin in 2017 and a ban on the sale of such products by 2018. Mark Denzler with the Illinois Manufacturers Association said a phase out takes time. “You have to change the line production and get additional products for what you’re going to use,” he says. “So, really the debates are set on timelines when manufacturers have to stop producing it, and retailers have to stop selling it. That negotiation was sort of easy to accomplish.”
Chicago Democratic Sen. Heather Steans, who sponsored the bill, said that cooperation from the manufacturers has helped the measure gain broad support. The measure passed with no opposition in the Senate. “We phased it in to make it so the companies have time to handle it appropriately, but they really worked with us and we got to an agreement. So I think we probably pass it [in the House] as it got out, unanimously, here,” she said.
Results from the testing of Lake Michigan and Lake Ontario waters will be released later this month, but those close to the research predict the findings will be similar to the other lakes. While the industry, environmentalists and lawmakers are working together to phase out the beads, those already in the waters cannot be removed because of their small size. “Well, once they are in the water, they are there to stay,” said Lyandres. “They are very difficult to capture once they are released.”
A bill approved last week by the Illinois Senate that would eliminate plastic microbeads found in hygiene products could become a national model for states looking to phase out the material.
Microbeads are small plastic particles, made of polyethylene or polypropylene, found in items such as body and facial scrubs and some toothpastes. After use, they are washed down the drain and released into waterways. The beads are so small that they make it through the filtration process at water treatment plants. They cause harm when fish and other aquatic life confuse them with food because of the resemblance in color and size to the microbes that they eat. Because they are made of plastic, which is not biodegradable, the particles do not dissolve once they are released into the environment. They float through the water or sink to the bottom once they have absorbed surrounding pollutants.
Researchers have found them in waterways, oceans and, overwhelmingly, the Great Lakes. The 5 Gyres Institute, a group that studies the global effect of plastic pollutants, found beads within the lakes. Early testing, which looked at Lake Superior, Lake Huron and Lake Erie, shows Lake Erie had more than two times the amount sampled within some areas of the ocean. The results of the study have spurred manufacturers to act. “Most of the major manufacturers that were presented with the research of the high abundance of these particles in the Great Lakes surface water responded by voluntarily phasing out plastic particles in their products and looking for alternative formulations,” said Olga Lyandres, research manager of the Alliance for the Great Lakes, a Chicago-based environmental organization. The alliance worked with The 5 Gyres Institute on the lakes study.
“Plastic microbeads are used in personal care cleansing products because of their exfoliating properties and excellent safety profile,” said the Personal Care Products Council in a prepared statement. “However, our industry shares a common interest with other stakeholders in protecting the environment, and we take questions regarding the presence of plastic microbeads in our waterways very seriously. While we believe plastic microbeads in personal care cleansing products represent a very small contributor to the overall plastic found in the aquatic environment, our industry is demonstrating leadership on this issue by publicly announcing plans to phase out the use of these ingredients.”
The study found remnants of other plastics including pieces of plastic bags. But the amount of microbeads and the fact that they are easily identifiable allowed researchers to point to a specific cause of pollution and request that companies transition to more environmentally friendly substitutes. Although many high profile companies, such as Johnson & Johnson and Unilever, have already started phasing out production of the beads, The Alliance for the Great Lakes is lobbying for Senate Bill 2727 to hold the companies to that promise.
States surrounding the Great Lakes and some coastal states, such as New York and California, have also considered bans. Those who negotiated SB 2727 say it could serve as an example for those states because it gives the industry years to find a substitute for the beads and allows retailers to continue selling their current inventory. Scrubbing products that do not contain microbeads have various other abrasive materials, such as silica, ground nutshells, rice, sugar or salt. SB 2727 calls for a ban on products containing the beads to begin in 2017 and a ban on the sale of such products by 2018. Mark Denzler with the Illinois Manufacturers Association said a phase out takes time. “You have to change the line production and get additional products for what you’re going to use,” he says. “So, really the debates are set on timelines when manufacturers have to stop producing it, and retailers have to stop selling it. That negotiation was sort of easy to accomplish.”
Chicago Democratic Sen. Heather Steans, who sponsored the bill, said that cooperation from the manufacturers has helped the measure gain broad support. The measure passed with no opposition in the Senate. “We phased it in to make it so the companies have time to handle it appropriately, but they really worked with us and we got to an agreement. So I think we probably pass it [in the House] as it got out, unanimously, here,” she said.
Results from the testing of Lake Michigan and Lake Ontario waters will be released later this month, but those close to the research predict the findings will be similar to the other lakes. While the industry, environmentalists and lawmakers are working together to phase out the beads, those already in the waters cannot be removed because of their small size. “Well, once they are in the water, they are there to stay,” said Lyandres. “They are very difficult to capture once they are released.”
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Fracking bill has a clear path to becoming law
By Jamey Dunn
The Illinois House today overwhelmingly approved regulations for horizontal fracturing, which supporters say will be the strictest in the nation.
Hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, is a process used to extract oil and natural gas by pumping water, chemicals and sand into the ground. The water fractures a source rock, allowing gas or oil to escape and be collected. Sand is used to hold the cracks in the rock open. Chemicals are added to the water for a variety of reasons, such as disinfection, lubrication and making the water thicker to keep the sand from sinking. “There are strong requirements and standards regarding water usage, regarding water disposal, regarding water containment,” said Marion Democratic Rep. John Bradley, who sponsors the bill. Senate Bill 1715 would create standards for drilling wells and requires water testing before and after fracking begins. If fracking chemicals are found in water, it would assumed that it was the well operator's fault, and the operator would be required to prove otherwise.
It also sets fees for permits at $13,500 per well. The measure would set the tax on oil or gas extracted from fracking wells at 3 percent for the first two years of the life of a well and then on a sliding scale based on production. Supporters say that fracking will be a boon for the state and struggling economies in southern Illinois. “When the coal mines closed, we lost tens of thousands of jobs downstate,” Bradley said.
The bill has a broad coalition of supporters, including business leaders and environmental groups. The environmental advocates who backed the bill said they would prefer a ban on fracking, but they said it is already happening in the state, and current law would not specifically regulate it. The Department of Natural Resources has reported that according to their permits, fracking is already taking place in Illinois. “While it will not make fracking safe, this is a critical step to make sure that Illinois has some protections to prevent environmental degradation,” said Democratic Rep. Sam Yingling of Round Lake Beach.
Some southern Illinois groups and environmental activist have been leading a loud push back against the bill. They were not involved in the negotiations, and members of those groups have been staging sit-ins this week outside Gov. Pat Quinn’s office, hoping to get a meeting with the governor, who supports the bill, and change his mind. Quinn’s staff met with some of those in opposition, but they did not have a sit down with the governor. Chicago Democratic Rep. Deborah Mell, who cast one of the nine votes against the bill, said she would like to see fracking put on hold for a few years so the results of some high-profile pending studies could come in before the state makes a decision on the issue. “I just hope that we’re not making a big mistake here. I just wish that we could kind of stop the clock a little bit.”
Champaign Democratic Sen. Michael Frerichs, who sponsors SB 1715, said he expects it to pass in the Senate tomorrow. The Senate approved a fracking regulatory bill last year with no votes in opposition. Quinn plans to sign the bill. “Today’s passage of hydraulic fracturing legislation in the House brings good news for jobs, economic development and environmental protection in Illinois. This legislation will unlock the potential for thousands of jobs in southern Illinois, while ensuring that our state has the nation‘s strongest environmental protections in place for this industry,” Quinn said in a written statement. “Over the past year, we have brought together lawmakers, industry and labor leaders and environmental groups in a collaborative, bipartisan effort to develop the best possible legislation. This approach has not only worked but been praised as a national model for transparency, public participation, environmental safety and economic development.”
The Illinois House today overwhelmingly approved regulations for horizontal fracturing, which supporters say will be the strictest in the nation.
Hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, is a process used to extract oil and natural gas by pumping water, chemicals and sand into the ground. The water fractures a source rock, allowing gas or oil to escape and be collected. Sand is used to hold the cracks in the rock open. Chemicals are added to the water for a variety of reasons, such as disinfection, lubrication and making the water thicker to keep the sand from sinking. “There are strong requirements and standards regarding water usage, regarding water disposal, regarding water containment,” said Marion Democratic Rep. John Bradley, who sponsors the bill. Senate Bill 1715 would create standards for drilling wells and requires water testing before and after fracking begins. If fracking chemicals are found in water, it would assumed that it was the well operator's fault, and the operator would be required to prove otherwise.
It also sets fees for permits at $13,500 per well. The measure would set the tax on oil or gas extracted from fracking wells at 3 percent for the first two years of the life of a well and then on a sliding scale based on production. Supporters say that fracking will be a boon for the state and struggling economies in southern Illinois. “When the coal mines closed, we lost tens of thousands of jobs downstate,” Bradley said.
The bill has a broad coalition of supporters, including business leaders and environmental groups. The environmental advocates who backed the bill said they would prefer a ban on fracking, but they said it is already happening in the state, and current law would not specifically regulate it. The Department of Natural Resources has reported that according to their permits, fracking is already taking place in Illinois. “While it will not make fracking safe, this is a critical step to make sure that Illinois has some protections to prevent environmental degradation,” said Democratic Rep. Sam Yingling of Round Lake Beach.
Some southern Illinois groups and environmental activist have been leading a loud push back against the bill. They were not involved in the negotiations, and members of those groups have been staging sit-ins this week outside Gov. Pat Quinn’s office, hoping to get a meeting with the governor, who supports the bill, and change his mind. Quinn’s staff met with some of those in opposition, but they did not have a sit down with the governor. Chicago Democratic Rep. Deborah Mell, who cast one of the nine votes against the bill, said she would like to see fracking put on hold for a few years so the results of some high-profile pending studies could come in before the state makes a decision on the issue. “I just hope that we’re not making a big mistake here. I just wish that we could kind of stop the clock a little bit.”
Champaign Democratic Sen. Michael Frerichs, who sponsors SB 1715, said he expects it to pass in the Senate tomorrow. The Senate approved a fracking regulatory bill last year with no votes in opposition. Quinn plans to sign the bill. “Today’s passage of hydraulic fracturing legislation in the House brings good news for jobs, economic development and environmental protection in Illinois. This legislation will unlock the potential for thousands of jobs in southern Illinois, while ensuring that our state has the nation‘s strongest environmental protections in place for this industry,” Quinn said in a written statement. “Over the past year, we have brought together lawmakers, industry and labor leaders and environmental groups in a collaborative, bipartisan effort to develop the best possible legislation. This approach has not only worked but been praised as a national model for transparency, public participation, environmental safety and economic development.”
Thursday, March 14, 2013
Deal reached on fracking fees
By Jamey Dunn
A day after House Speaker Michael Madigan said he supports a ban on hydraulic fracturing in Illinois, supporters of a bill to regulate it say they have reached a deal with the industry.
Rep. John Bradley, a Marion Democrat, said he expects a House committee to approve House Bill 2615 on Friday. (UPDATED: The Friday hearing on the bill was cancelled, and Bradley was excused from legislative session. The bill remains in committee.) “We’ve got a historic compromise here on the issue of horizontal high volume hydraulic fracturing, and we intend to move forward with that.”
Madigan told reporters yesterday that he supports a moratorium on the practice, commonly referred to as fracking. It is achieved by pumping water mixed with sand and chemicals through a well into rock that holds a carbon fuel, such as oil or natural gas. The sand holds the cracks open so the gas and/or oil can be extracted. Horizontal drilling allows gas and oil companies to drill down into the Earth and then permeate rock along a horizontal line, which is sometimes miles long. Industry experts say that it is likely both oil and gas will be extruded from fracking wells in southern Illinois, where drilling companies have spent about $150 million to lease mineral rights. “Until you really get down there and drill, you don’t know what’s going to come up,” said Mark Denzler, representing the Growing Resources and Opportunity for the Workforce in Illinois coalition, a business group supporting fracking in the state.
Madigan referred to the fallout that fracking has caused in other states, particularly Pennsylvania, where methane leaked into drinking water wells. “Read about what happened in Pennsylvania,” he said. Methane is not toxic but is dangerous at certain levels because it is flammable.
Negotiations over fracking regulations in Illinois have been going on for years. A regulatory framework in the Senate passed last year with no opposition. However, the plan fell apart in the closing days of the legislative session because a deal could not be reached over the fees and taxes that well operators would pay and last minute consideration of proposals to temporarily ban the process while a task force conducted research.
After Madigan’s talk to the press yesterday, industry representative met with Bradley and came to a deal on the taxes and fees. Denzler, who is also vice president and chief operating officer of the Illinois Manufacturers’ Association, said the state stands to gain an estimated $200,000 in revenue per well. He denies that industry concerns over Madigan’s statement pushed the negotiations. “I don’t think so. We’ve been negotiating on this for three years and focused on the revenue for about three weeks. So we were actually very close. We were close to an agreement before the comments yesterday, and we were hoping to get an agreement reached so the bill could move this week,” Denzler said. “I think we would have gotten the agreement yesterday regardless of comments that might have been made.” Operators would pay $13,500 in fees for each well. $11,000 would go to the Department of Natural Resources, which would oversee licensing, and $2,500 would to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.
Supporters say they do not expect the speaker’s stance to stop the bill from being approved in the House. “We feel really good about the package, and we’re moving it forward,” Bradley said.
“We feel pretty good about it,” Denzler said. “We think it’s a strong regulatory framework. It’s endorsed by the business community, the Farm Bureau, the major environmental interests in the state of Illinois. So we think it’s a good comprise. We have nearly 60 legislators who have signed on as [co-sponsors], so we feel pretty good about its chances.”
Environmental groups were encouraged by Madigan’s words. “We absolutely support the speaker’s call for a moratorium. ... That remains our first choice. That remains the safest thing for the state of Illinois to do, but if that doesn’t pass, we have to do whatever we can to protect ourselves,” said Jack Darin, director of the Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club. Darin and representatives of other environmental organizations have been criticized by some southern Illinois community groups for coming to the table over regulation instead of taking a hard line stance on a moratorium.
Darin said he takes Madigan’s statement at face value and does not see it as a strategic effort to push an agreement from the industry on takes and fees. “I do think that the speaker has been focused on this issue for over a year, and I do think the speaker understands the problems that have been created in other states. And we see that he’s been trying to get the strongest possible protections that we can. We worked with the speaker for the better part of 2012 to try to pass the moratorium. And if he supports the moratorium now, then we stand with him in trying to get that to happen.”
But Bradley said he does not expect that the bills calling for a two-year ban on fracking and a task force to study the issue will progress. They are currently assigned to the House Revenue and Finance Committee, where he serves as chairman. “If bill sponsors want to come to committees and call their bills [for hearings], they’re welcome to do that. It’s a democratic process. But I’m not expecting that to go anywhere.” Bradley was coy about his thoughts on the speaker’s intent or the possible effect the highly publicized statement had on negotiations yesterday. “Well, I’m just happy that we got something done and that we were able to resolve all the unfinished issues.”
A day after House Speaker Michael Madigan said he supports a ban on hydraulic fracturing in Illinois, supporters of a bill to regulate it say they have reached a deal with the industry.
Rep. John Bradley, a Marion Democrat, said he expects a House committee to approve House Bill 2615 on Friday. (UPDATED: The Friday hearing on the bill was cancelled, and Bradley was excused from legislative session. The bill remains in committee.) “We’ve got a historic compromise here on the issue of horizontal high volume hydraulic fracturing, and we intend to move forward with that.”
Madigan told reporters yesterday that he supports a moratorium on the practice, commonly referred to as fracking. It is achieved by pumping water mixed with sand and chemicals through a well into rock that holds a carbon fuel, such as oil or natural gas. The sand holds the cracks open so the gas and/or oil can be extracted. Horizontal drilling allows gas and oil companies to drill down into the Earth and then permeate rock along a horizontal line, which is sometimes miles long. Industry experts say that it is likely both oil and gas will be extruded from fracking wells in southern Illinois, where drilling companies have spent about $150 million to lease mineral rights. “Until you really get down there and drill, you don’t know what’s going to come up,” said Mark Denzler, representing the Growing Resources and Opportunity for the Workforce in Illinois coalition, a business group supporting fracking in the state.
 |
| Each blue dot represents an oil and gas test drill. Data, which was obtained from the Prairie Research Center at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, was current as of Dec. 2012. Graphic by Andrew Thomason |
After Madigan’s talk to the press yesterday, industry representative met with Bradley and came to a deal on the taxes and fees. Denzler, who is also vice president and chief operating officer of the Illinois Manufacturers’ Association, said the state stands to gain an estimated $200,000 in revenue per well. He denies that industry concerns over Madigan’s statement pushed the negotiations. “I don’t think so. We’ve been negotiating on this for three years and focused on the revenue for about three weeks. So we were actually very close. We were close to an agreement before the comments yesterday, and we were hoping to get an agreement reached so the bill could move this week,” Denzler said. “I think we would have gotten the agreement yesterday regardless of comments that might have been made.” Operators would pay $13,500 in fees for each well. $11,000 would go to the Department of Natural Resources, which would oversee licensing, and $2,500 would to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.
Supporters say they do not expect the speaker’s stance to stop the bill from being approved in the House. “We feel really good about the package, and we’re moving it forward,” Bradley said.
“We feel pretty good about it,” Denzler said. “We think it’s a strong regulatory framework. It’s endorsed by the business community, the Farm Bureau, the major environmental interests in the state of Illinois. So we think it’s a good comprise. We have nearly 60 legislators who have signed on as [co-sponsors], so we feel pretty good about its chances.”
Environmental groups were encouraged by Madigan’s words. “We absolutely support the speaker’s call for a moratorium. ... That remains our first choice. That remains the safest thing for the state of Illinois to do, but if that doesn’t pass, we have to do whatever we can to protect ourselves,” said Jack Darin, director of the Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club. Darin and representatives of other environmental organizations have been criticized by some southern Illinois community groups for coming to the table over regulation instead of taking a hard line stance on a moratorium.
Darin said he takes Madigan’s statement at face value and does not see it as a strategic effort to push an agreement from the industry on takes and fees. “I do think that the speaker has been focused on this issue for over a year, and I do think the speaker understands the problems that have been created in other states. And we see that he’s been trying to get the strongest possible protections that we can. We worked with the speaker for the better part of 2012 to try to pass the moratorium. And if he supports the moratorium now, then we stand with him in trying to get that to happen.”
But Bradley said he does not expect that the bills calling for a two-year ban on fracking and a task force to study the issue will progress. They are currently assigned to the House Revenue and Finance Committee, where he serves as chairman. “If bill sponsors want to come to committees and call their bills [for hearings], they’re welcome to do that. It’s a democratic process. But I’m not expecting that to go anywhere.” Bradley was coy about his thoughts on the speaker’s intent or the possible effect the highly publicized statement had on negotiations yesterday. “Well, I’m just happy that we got something done and that we were able to resolve all the unfinished issues.”
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Fracking opponents call for ban
By Jamey Dunn
A coalition of Illinois groups opposed to horizontal hydraulic fracturing is pushing for a ban on the practice in the state.
Hydraulic fracturing, which is commonly referred to as fracking, is achieved by pumping water mixed with sand and chemicals through a well into rock that holds a carbon fuel, such as oil or natural gas. The water creates pressure, which fractures the rock or opens up pre-existing cracks. The sand holds the cracks open so the gas and/or oil can be extracted. It has been done since the 1930s. But recently, fracking has been coupled with horizontal drilling, which allows gas and oil companies to drill down into the Earth and then permeate rock along a horizontal line, which is sometimes miles long. The marrying of the two technologies has allowed for projects that are much larger in scale. (For more on fracking, see Illinois Issues May 2012.)
Lawmakers, regulators and many environmentalists agree that it is coming to Illinois. Oil and gas companies and have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars leasing mineral rights in southern Illinois. House Bill 2615 seeks to regulate the practice and has a broad group of supporters.
“There’s kind of a gold rush mentality surrounding all of this isn’t there? But what happened after the gold rush? Ghost towns,” said Rich Whitney, who is on the legal committee for Southern Illinoisans Against Fracturing Our Environment (SAFE). A group of anti-fracking activists that rallied at the Capitol today say they reject the prevailing belief that fracking in Illinois is inevitable, and they are calling for a two-year moratorium on the practice. “Fracking is not inevitable, and it is offensive to suggest that is inevitable without hearing from the people first and hearing what their concerns are. They’re very legitimate concerns,” said Whitney. Senate Bill 1418 and HB 3086 both call for a two-year ban on fracking and the creation of a task force to study the issue.
Whitley, who ran as the Green Party candidate for governor in 2006 and 2010, took Gov. Pat Quinn to task for highlighting fracking in his budget address. "Hydraulic fracturing, commonly called fracking, is coming to Illinois, with the strongest environmental regulations in the nation,” Quinn said. “This legislation has the potential to create thousands of jobs in downstate Illinois. It will also ensure that our natural resources are protected for future generations.” Quinn encouraged lawmakers to approve HB 2615 this year.
“Gov. Quinn is wrong when he said. ...that this bill will be the strictest regulations in the country. No. New York has a moratorium. That’s the strictest regulation in the country. And what’s good enough for New York, we think is good enough for Illinois. We think that they had the wisdom. We need the wisdom,” Whitley said. Fracking opponents said that the process for appealing drilling permits in HB2615 would be overly burdensome on residents. They argue the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, which has seen deep cuts in recent years, is not prepared to properly regulate fracking. “Nobody listened to the people of southern Illinois” before HB2615 was introduced said Annette McMichael, a SAFE spokesperson. “I assure you southern Illinois was not represented in the closed door sessions [to negotiate the bill]. We are going to continue to educate our legislators that southern Illinois is not a playground for the oil and gas industry.”
Several environmental groups support HB 2615. However, the say they would also be open to a moratorium. Jack Darin, director of the Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club, said most groups just want to make sure that if fracking comes to Illinois, there is a regulatory plan in place. “In the environmental community, we have a lot of concerns about what fracking is going to bring to Illinois, and when we look at some of the controversies that have happened in other parts of the country, there’s a real need for us to prepare for that,” Darin said.
However, Environment Illinois, which describes itself as a citizen-based environmental advocacy organization, has joined the call for a moratorium. Bruce Ratain, state policy associate for Environment Illinois, called fracking a “rolling environmental disaster” across the country. Ratain pointed to incidents that occurred in the last two months. A fracking well operator in Ohio was accused of illegally dumping thousands of gallons of chemical-laced wastewater and contaminating the Mahoning River. A broken well-head near the northern Colorado town of Windsor spilled an estimated 84,000 gallons of contaminated water. In a rural northeastern area of West Virginia, a worker was killed by an explosion on a drilling site.
Lawmakers in support of HB 2615 say that potential environmental dangers are part of the reason they believe the bill is needed. “It does concern me — there’s no doubt about it — but now with these rules and regulations in this legislation,I think it’s going to help things. ... Some rules and regulations are better than none,” said Rep. Brandon Phelps, a Harrisburg Democrat. He said he does not think groups like the Sierra Club would support the bill if they thought it would be bad for his region of the state. “I just can’t for the life of me not vote for this knowing that there are companies that want to come to Illinois and spend millions of dollars, and in my area especially, where unemployment is high because we’ve had some layoffs in coal mines and things shut down, like the prisons. This is going to be a huge economic boon in my area.”
A coalition of Illinois groups opposed to horizontal hydraulic fracturing is pushing for a ban on the practice in the state.
Hydraulic fracturing, which is commonly referred to as fracking, is achieved by pumping water mixed with sand and chemicals through a well into rock that holds a carbon fuel, such as oil or natural gas. The water creates pressure, which fractures the rock or opens up pre-existing cracks. The sand holds the cracks open so the gas and/or oil can be extracted. It has been done since the 1930s. But recently, fracking has been coupled with horizontal drilling, which allows gas and oil companies to drill down into the Earth and then permeate rock along a horizontal line, which is sometimes miles long. The marrying of the two technologies has allowed for projects that are much larger in scale. (For more on fracking, see Illinois Issues May 2012.)
Lawmakers, regulators and many environmentalists agree that it is coming to Illinois. Oil and gas companies and have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars leasing mineral rights in southern Illinois. House Bill 2615 seeks to regulate the practice and has a broad group of supporters.
“There’s kind of a gold rush mentality surrounding all of this isn’t there? But what happened after the gold rush? Ghost towns,” said Rich Whitney, who is on the legal committee for Southern Illinoisans Against Fracturing Our Environment (SAFE). A group of anti-fracking activists that rallied at the Capitol today say they reject the prevailing belief that fracking in Illinois is inevitable, and they are calling for a two-year moratorium on the practice. “Fracking is not inevitable, and it is offensive to suggest that is inevitable without hearing from the people first and hearing what their concerns are. They’re very legitimate concerns,” said Whitney. Senate Bill 1418 and HB 3086 both call for a two-year ban on fracking and the creation of a task force to study the issue.
Whitley, who ran as the Green Party candidate for governor in 2006 and 2010, took Gov. Pat Quinn to task for highlighting fracking in his budget address. "Hydraulic fracturing, commonly called fracking, is coming to Illinois, with the strongest environmental regulations in the nation,” Quinn said. “This legislation has the potential to create thousands of jobs in downstate Illinois. It will also ensure that our natural resources are protected for future generations.” Quinn encouraged lawmakers to approve HB 2615 this year.
“Gov. Quinn is wrong when he said. ...that this bill will be the strictest regulations in the country. No. New York has a moratorium. That’s the strictest regulation in the country. And what’s good enough for New York, we think is good enough for Illinois. We think that they had the wisdom. We need the wisdom,” Whitley said. Fracking opponents said that the process for appealing drilling permits in HB2615 would be overly burdensome on residents. They argue the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, which has seen deep cuts in recent years, is not prepared to properly regulate fracking. “Nobody listened to the people of southern Illinois” before HB2615 was introduced said Annette McMichael, a SAFE spokesperson. “I assure you southern Illinois was not represented in the closed door sessions [to negotiate the bill]. We are going to continue to educate our legislators that southern Illinois is not a playground for the oil and gas industry.”
Several environmental groups support HB 2615. However, the say they would also be open to a moratorium. Jack Darin, director of the Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club, said most groups just want to make sure that if fracking comes to Illinois, there is a regulatory plan in place. “In the environmental community, we have a lot of concerns about what fracking is going to bring to Illinois, and when we look at some of the controversies that have happened in other parts of the country, there’s a real need for us to prepare for that,” Darin said.
However, Environment Illinois, which describes itself as a citizen-based environmental advocacy organization, has joined the call for a moratorium. Bruce Ratain, state policy associate for Environment Illinois, called fracking a “rolling environmental disaster” across the country. Ratain pointed to incidents that occurred in the last two months. A fracking well operator in Ohio was accused of illegally dumping thousands of gallons of chemical-laced wastewater and contaminating the Mahoning River. A broken well-head near the northern Colorado town of Windsor spilled an estimated 84,000 gallons of contaminated water. In a rural northeastern area of West Virginia, a worker was killed by an explosion on a drilling site.
Lawmakers in support of HB 2615 say that potential environmental dangers are part of the reason they believe the bill is needed. “It does concern me — there’s no doubt about it — but now with these rules and regulations in this legislation,I think it’s going to help things. ... Some rules and regulations are better than none,” said Rep. Brandon Phelps, a Harrisburg Democrat. He said he does not think groups like the Sierra Club would support the bill if they thought it would be bad for his region of the state. “I just can’t for the life of me not vote for this knowing that there are companies that want to come to Illinois and spend millions of dollars, and in my area especially, where unemployment is high because we’ve had some layoffs in coal mines and things shut down, like the prisons. This is going to be a huge economic boon in my area.”
Thursday, February 21, 2013
Plan to regulate fracking has broad support in the House
By Jamey Dunn
After a bipartisan bill to regulate hydraulic fracturing
stalled last year, supporters think they have a better chance at success with a
new plan.
Hydraulic fracturing, which is commonly referred to as
fracking, is achieved by pumping water mixed with sand and chemicals through a
well into rock that holds a carbon fuel, such as oil or natural gas. The water
creates pressure, which fractures the rock or opens up pre-existing cracks. The
sand holds the cracks open so the gas and/or oil can be extracted. It has been
done since the 1930s. But recently, fracking has been coupled with horizontal
drilling, which allows gas and oil companies to drill down into the earth and
then permeate rock along a horizontal line, which is sometimes miles long. The
marrying of the two technologies has allowed for projects that are much larger
in scale.
The combined practice is not specifically regulated in
Illinois, but many lawmakers, environmentalists and regulators agree it is
coming to the state. Two Illinois rock formations, the New Albany Shale in the
southeast and the Maquoketa Group Shale in the north, could potentially hold
carbon fuels. Energy companies across the nation have spent hundreds of
thousands of dollars to lease mineral rights for land above these formations,
mainly in southern Illinois. “We don’t have regulations in the state of Illinois,
we don’t have laws that will deal with horizontal fracking,” said Chicago
Democratic Rep. Barbara Flynn Curry. She said that fracking could start in the
state at any time without a bureaucratic system to regulate it or bar certain
practices.
House Bill 2615 has a
broad coalition of supporters, including Republicans, Democrats, environmental
groups, unions and representatives of the coal and natural gas industry. The
bill would create a permitting and regulatory system for horizontal fracking.
It would not apply to vertical fracking wells. The measure would:
- Set standards for the cement casings that are put into wells to prevent leakage of fracking fluid.
- Require water testing before and after hydraulic fracturing wells are constructed.
- Require disclosure of chemicals used in the process.
- Set standards for the disposal of water used for fracking.
- Prohibit hydraulic fracturing near certain sensitive sites and water sources, including schools, churches and health care facilities.
If water pollution
were detected near a fracking wells, it would be the owners’ responsibility to
prove that it was not caused be the well. “We have crafted a piece of
legislation, which first and foremost protects our water supply and the
communities and families of southern Illinois but allows an industry to develop
in a responsible manner for the creation of thousands of jobs and the potential
for tens of millions of dollars of revenue for the state of Illinois,” said
Marion Democratic Rep. John Bradley, who sponsors the bill.
Willow Hill Republican Rep. David Reis, who also sponsors
the measure, said that fracking revenues could help bolster the state’s
struggling budget. “This is historic from an economic standpoint. We know we
have to put the safeguards in place, and we’ve done that with this [bill]. But
the revenue that this is going to generate for the entire state of Illinois
through income taxes and severance taxes — that we’re still going to negotiate
— reoccurring sales taxes is going to be maybe one of the things we need to get
out of our financial challenges that we face in this state.”
Environmental groups that worked on the bill say they do not
support the practice, which has vocal detractors in other states that already
have horizontal fracking operations, coming to the Illinois. “In the
environmental community, we have a lot of concerns about what fracking is going
to bring to Illinois, and when we look at some of the controversies that have
happened in other parts of the country, there’s a real need for us to prepare
for that,” said Jack Darin, director of the Illinois chapter of the Sierra
Club. But they say fracking in Illinois may be inevitable, and they want to
make sure that there are regulations in place when that day comes. “We
understand that the industry is coming to Illinois ... and I think we all
understand that our current set of rules and regulations and laws are not up to
the task of looking at the potential impacts from this industry.”
But those who support a moratorium on fracking disagree. “Fracking
is not inevitable,” said Liz Patula, coordinator of Southern Illinoisans
Against Fracturing Our Environment (SAFE). Senate Bill 1418 calls for a ban on
horizontal fracking and the creation of a task force to study the issue. Patula
called the move a “common sense” approach. “The idea of just writing a
regulatory bill out of fear, that doesn’t make any sense.”
Patula said SAFE has several concerns with the bill. “The
idea that the bill is written on so-called best practices in other states —
well, that hasn’t exactly worked in other states.” She said that any fracking
regulation should allow for local controls, including local bans on fracking.
SAFE plans to do a comprehensive analysis of the legislation in the coming
weeks. Patula said there is also worry that the state lacks the funds and
manpower to enforce the proposed regulations. The Department of Natural
Resources would be responsible for much of the permitting process. The
legislature recently passed a funding package for DNR, which included an
increase to license plate fees, because the agency lacked the funds to keep up
with maintenance of the state’s parks.
“Whatever is written, how could it
possibly be enforced?” Patula asked. SB 2615 does not address the fees that
would be paid by licensees. Bradley said the need for additional funding and
manpower to regulate the new industry would be a consideration when negotiating
such costs. “We’re going to have to figure out in the process of coming up with
permits and applications. We’re going to have to make sure that they have
sufficient funding in order to process the increased amount of work.”
Bradley said he
thinks horizontal fracking could start in Illinois by the end of the year. “The
pressure is on for the state of Illinois." He said he hopes to move
through the process soon and not wait until the end of the spring legislative
session to get it passed.
Gov. Pat Quinn supports SB 2615. “Today’s proposal is
good news for southern Illinois and our entire state’s economy. This
legislation has the potential to bring thousands of jobs to southern Illinois,
while also ensuring that Illinois has the nation’s strongest environmental
protections,” Quinn said in a prepared statement. “I am committed to creating
jobs and economic growth in every part of Illinois and always making sure our
water and natural resources are protected for future generations.”
Friday, September 07, 2012
Canada and U.S. renew pact to protect Great Lakes
 |
| Asian carp found near Lake Michigan in 2010 |
The United States and Canada have signed a renewed agreement to protect the Great Lakes. The new version of the pact, which was updated today for the first time in 25 years, focuses on prevention and addresses new subjects, such as invasive species.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the goal of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement is “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the waters.” The agreement was first signed in 1972 and updated in 1987. “Joint stewardship of the Great Lakes — a treasured natural resource, a critical source of drinking water, essential to transportation, and the foundation for billions of dollars in trade, agriculture, recreation and other sectors — is a cornerstone of the Canada-United States relationship,” Canada’s Minister of the Environment Peter Kent said in a prepared statement. “The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement supports our shared responsibility to restore and protect this critical resource and builds on 40 years of binational success.”
The agreement focuses on areas that were not subjects of the previous pact, including invasive species, habitat protection and climate change. The deal sets timelines for several goals, including plans to reduce phosphorus, a chemical that is often associated with runoff from agriculture and lawn maintenance, in Lake Erie to combat algae growth. Under the plan, projections will be created to assess the potential effects of climate change on the Great Lakes. The agreement also calls for the development of a plan to quickly identify and respond to the threat of invasive species.
Fears over a mass invasion of Asian carp into the Great Lakes have sparked debate and litigation among Illinois and its neighboring states. Former Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox unsuccessfully appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2010 to close Chicago’s navigational locks in an effort to stop the spread of the species. Those in favor of closing the locks say that the fish could do irreparable damage to lake ecosystems as well as the fishing and tourism industries. Opponents said that closing the locks would put an unnecessary burden on shipping and could cause flooding and sanitation concerns.
A recent search for Asian carp DNA conducted by the state of Wisconsin in Lake Michigan turned up no evidence of the fish. A search of Lake Erie by the Ohio and Michigan natural resources departments and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service did not turn up any Asian carp either, but carp DNA has been found in the lake before.
“I’m pleased that after 25 years, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement is being updated to better reflect our scientific understanding and focus resources on the most pressing threats to this natural treasure,” Michigan Democratic U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, who co-chairs the Senate Great Lakes Task Force along with Illinois Republican U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk, said in a prepared statement. “With its emphasis on prevention of environmental damage, the agreement reflects a more cost-effective use of resources, as preventing damage is generally less costly than cleaning up ruined ecosystems. I am also pleased the agreement focuses on invasive species which are a continuing threat.”
Kirk echoed Levin’s support of updating the agreement to include new concerns while continuing to focus on threats the lakes have faced for years, such as chemical pollution. “I am fully committed to preventing toxic chemicals from poisoning our food supply and invasive species from damaging our ecosystem.”
Monday, August 27, 2012
Quinn vetoes plastic bag recycling plan, leaving door open for local bans and taxes
By Jamey Dunn
Gov. Pat Quinn shot down a bill that would have created a statewide recycling pilot program for plastic bags, but supporters of the measure are skeptical about the issue being addressed on the local level.
Under Senate Bill 3442, plastic bag manufacturers would have been required to register with the state and pay fees that would have gone toward a statewide recycling program. Retailers would have been barred from buying bags from producers not registered with the state, and manufacturers would have had to offer recycling collection for plastic bags and plastic films in 90 percent of the state’s counties by 2014. The program would have sunset after four years.
“This is an industry-driven private approach to a public policy problem that could be solved without taxpayer financing,” says Crystal Lake Republican Rep. Michael Tryon, a sponsor of the bill. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates Americans use 380 billion plastic bags and wraps a year. Illinois generates 494,280 tons of plastic film annually. But the measure also would have closed off options to local municipalities, such as charging fees for bags or banning their use altogether. Champaign is one city that was recently considering levying a per-bag fee to try to get consumers to cut down on using the bags.
Quinn said in his veto message that he agrees with the intent of the bill, but that it went too far in limiting what local governments could do to address the problem. “This bill is more restrictive on municipalities than any other plastic bag regulation in the country, which creates a roadblock for locals to choose the policies that fit the needs of the area. Communities throughout the country experienced great success with different types of policies, as can be seen in the numerous municipalities in California that enacted an outright ban on plastic bags.”
Sen. Terry Link, a sponsor of the bill, said the plan was modeled after a pilot program in Lake County. He said the legislation was the result of five years of negotiations with manufacturers, retailers and other interested groups. “I’m kind of perturbed today — in plain words. I put a lot of work into this, and a lot of people put a lot of work into this.” Link, a Waukegan Democrat, said he is uncertain about whether he will push for an override of Quinn’s veto. The measure passed with bipartisan support in both legislative chambers and had more than enough supporters to override Quinn’s veto. However, three House members who voted in favor of the bill — including the recently ousted former Rep. Derrick Smith — have since left the body. Link said he will gauge the changes of a successful override when lawmakers return for their veto session, which is scheduled for November after the general election.
Critics of Link’s plan say it would have done little to keep bags off streets and out of landfills and waterways. They cite the low level of current recycling rates, even though several large retail chains already offer on site recycling collection. In Illinois, an estimated 1.5 percent of plastic bags are returned for recycling, .7 percent of commercial and industrial plastic films are returned for recycling and only .3 percent of other plastic films, such as those used in consumer packaging, are returned for recycling. “I share concerns that this program would not increase the rate of recycling beyond the natural growth. Local authorities and the environmental community strongly oppose this program because the metrics are simply not aggressive enough and home rule preemption prevents more stringent local regulation,” Quinn wrote.
While Link frames the measure as a compromise worked out to bring the industry on board, environmental groups say it is a preemptive strike by businesses and manufacturers to keep cities from banning bags or enacting fees. “Business groups want to prevent Illinois cities from doing the bag-use reduction programs that are happening in other states,” said Jennifer Walling, executive director of the Illinois Environmental Council. “That's the real goal of this legislation.” An analysis of the bill that a coalition of environmental groups sent to Quinn claims that many of the goals in the measure, such as the reach of recycling programs into 90 percent of counties, have "likely" already been met through voluntary recycling programs at large retail chains.
Link said that local governments have had years to address the issue, and little has been done. “Where were all these cities who are, in the 12th hour, complaining about it? They had years to make ordinances and put them into effect.”
For more on what other state's and municipalities are doing to address plastic waste pollution, see Illinois Issues July/August 2010.
Gov. Pat Quinn shot down a bill that would have created a statewide recycling pilot program for plastic bags, but supporters of the measure are skeptical about the issue being addressed on the local level.
Under Senate Bill 3442, plastic bag manufacturers would have been required to register with the state and pay fees that would have gone toward a statewide recycling program. Retailers would have been barred from buying bags from producers not registered with the state, and manufacturers would have had to offer recycling collection for plastic bags and plastic films in 90 percent of the state’s counties by 2014. The program would have sunset after four years.
“This is an industry-driven private approach to a public policy problem that could be solved without taxpayer financing,” says Crystal Lake Republican Rep. Michael Tryon, a sponsor of the bill. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates Americans use 380 billion plastic bags and wraps a year. Illinois generates 494,280 tons of plastic film annually. But the measure also would have closed off options to local municipalities, such as charging fees for bags or banning their use altogether. Champaign is one city that was recently considering levying a per-bag fee to try to get consumers to cut down on using the bags.
Quinn said in his veto message that he agrees with the intent of the bill, but that it went too far in limiting what local governments could do to address the problem. “This bill is more restrictive on municipalities than any other plastic bag regulation in the country, which creates a roadblock for locals to choose the policies that fit the needs of the area. Communities throughout the country experienced great success with different types of policies, as can be seen in the numerous municipalities in California that enacted an outright ban on plastic bags.”
Sen. Terry Link, a sponsor of the bill, said the plan was modeled after a pilot program in Lake County. He said the legislation was the result of five years of negotiations with manufacturers, retailers and other interested groups. “I’m kind of perturbed today — in plain words. I put a lot of work into this, and a lot of people put a lot of work into this.” Link, a Waukegan Democrat, said he is uncertain about whether he will push for an override of Quinn’s veto. The measure passed with bipartisan support in both legislative chambers and had more than enough supporters to override Quinn’s veto. However, three House members who voted in favor of the bill — including the recently ousted former Rep. Derrick Smith — have since left the body. Link said he will gauge the changes of a successful override when lawmakers return for their veto session, which is scheduled for November after the general election.
Critics of Link’s plan say it would have done little to keep bags off streets and out of landfills and waterways. They cite the low level of current recycling rates, even though several large retail chains already offer on site recycling collection. In Illinois, an estimated 1.5 percent of plastic bags are returned for recycling, .7 percent of commercial and industrial plastic films are returned for recycling and only .3 percent of other plastic films, such as those used in consumer packaging, are returned for recycling. “I share concerns that this program would not increase the rate of recycling beyond the natural growth. Local authorities and the environmental community strongly oppose this program because the metrics are simply not aggressive enough and home rule preemption prevents more stringent local regulation,” Quinn wrote.
While Link frames the measure as a compromise worked out to bring the industry on board, environmental groups say it is a preemptive strike by businesses and manufacturers to keep cities from banning bags or enacting fees. “Business groups want to prevent Illinois cities from doing the bag-use reduction programs that are happening in other states,” said Jennifer Walling, executive director of the Illinois Environmental Council. “That's the real goal of this legislation.” An analysis of the bill that a coalition of environmental groups sent to Quinn claims that many of the goals in the measure, such as the reach of recycling programs into 90 percent of counties, have "likely" already been met through voluntary recycling programs at large retail chains.
Link said that local governments have had years to address the issue, and little has been done. “Where were all these cities who are, in the 12th hour, complaining about it? They had years to make ordinances and put them into effect.”
For more on what other state's and municipalities are doing to address plastic waste pollution, see Illinois Issues July/August 2010.
Monday, July 23, 2012
Quinn signs ban on Cook County landfills
By Jamey Dunn
A battle over the expansion of a landfill on Chicago’s southeast side may be put to rest after Gov. Pat Quinn signed a bill banning new landfills in Cook County.
In 1984, the city of Chicago enacted a moratorium on creating new landfills or expanding existing ones. However, Land and Lakes Co. planned to annex a piece of the city into nearby Dolton, which does not have such a ban. The company planned to start dumping on the land to keep its site, called River Bend, from shutting down. River Bend is expected to reach capacity by 2014.
But opponents of the expansion pushed for a countywide ban, which with the governor’s signature, is now in effect. “This is a community victory. This is an environmental and health victory. This is showing that democracy can work for everyday people,” Quinn said at a Chicago bill signing.
Neighborhoods on the southeast side have dealt with high levels of pollution for decades. The area was home to several steel mills and industrial operations, and according to a 2001 city land use plan, about 835 acres of the southeast side are covered in landfills. Advocates point to the area as an example that minorities and those in low-income areas often bear a disproportionately high amount of the nation’s pollution. “This is victory. We can breathe. We can look at today and say that we can do environmental restoration in our community. No more landfills in Cook County. That’s a great thing,” said Cheryl Johnson, executive director of People for Community Recovery. “We have to begin to learn how to clean up what we messed up. And it’s going to take a process. But today we are establishing that baseline for equal environmental protection.” Johnson’s mother, Hazel Johnson, founded People for Community Recovery and is known as the mother of the environmental justice movement.
Chicago Democratic Sen. Donne Trotter noted the improvements that have been made in the area since local residents began organizing to clean up their community. “It is not going to go back to the way it was — not to when we were growing up 40 [or] 50 years ago, when seeing smoke and smelling garbage meant you were home. Those days are gone. We have fought for a new life ... a quality of life that [means] our children will be able to enjoy this land [and] be able to enjoy all the great things that this land has to offer.”
However, Land and Lakes argues that the expansion could occur without harming the environmental progress that has been made in the area. The company says that under the ban, other environmental upgrades that would come along with the expansion would be lost. “Land and Lakes operates a landfill in Dolton, which is adjacent to our other landfill, which reached capacity and closed in 1995. Our vision is to connect the two facilities, bring the dormant facility up to current, stricter environmental standards, create open lands with habitat restoration, all while generating low-cost renewable energy and properly managing the waste disposal needs of the area. This is about as green a project as they come,” Mary Margaret Cowhey, chief executive officer of Land and Lakes, told a Senate committee in May.
She added: “To place a blanket elimination on EPA permits in Cook County kills deserving projects. This bill is overkill based on fear.
Land and Lakes did not respond to requests for a statement on the signing of the bill, but a statement released when the legislation passed said: “The bill guarantees that a closed landfill in Chicago will remain a brownfield for generations to come. The bill means there is no opportunity for Land and Lakes to add environmental upgrades and develop green amenities consistent with what south-side residents want over the long term.” The company argues that the ban would also hurt local economic development by eliminating local jobs and potential tax revenues.
Oak Park Democratic Sen. Don Harmon, a sponsor of House Bill 3881, said that business growth should not be the only priority for lawmakers. “Down in the pressure cooker of Springfield, it was very easy to fall into the trap of talking about business. Is this bill going to help someone’s business? Is this bill going to hurt someone’s business? And business is important, but it’s not the only thing we need to be thinking about. It’s quality of life and our neighborhoods,” he said. “Cook County is simply too dense to sustain any new landfill development, and the residual consequences of all the landfills we have are going to cause us problems for a long time.”
Quinn took the opportunity to tout the Millennium Reserve project, which has the goal of restoring 140,000 acres of land in the area and increasing recreation in the Lake Calumet region. The state has invested almost $18 million in the project so far. “This will basically be the largest conservation area in an urban environment in the whole United States, and we have work to do, obviously. This area for many, many years was dumped upon,” he said.
Marc Miller, director of the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, said the project focuses on the area south of the Chicago River and extends beyond the Calumet River, with the Calumet area as its core. “For the first time in 100 years, we have a record of a bald eagle nest here in the Calumet [area],” Miller said. “And that shows you what is possible when you let nature heal itself once you get the pollutants and the bad things out of it.”
For more on the environmental history of the southeast side and the battle over land fill expansion, see the current Illinois Issues.
A battle over the expansion of a landfill on Chicago’s southeast side may be put to rest after Gov. Pat Quinn signed a bill banning new landfills in Cook County.
In 1984, the city of Chicago enacted a moratorium on creating new landfills or expanding existing ones. However, Land and Lakes Co. planned to annex a piece of the city into nearby Dolton, which does not have such a ban. The company planned to start dumping on the land to keep its site, called River Bend, from shutting down. River Bend is expected to reach capacity by 2014.
But opponents of the expansion pushed for a countywide ban, which with the governor’s signature, is now in effect. “This is a community victory. This is an environmental and health victory. This is showing that democracy can work for everyday people,” Quinn said at a Chicago bill signing.
Neighborhoods on the southeast side have dealt with high levels of pollution for decades. The area was home to several steel mills and industrial operations, and according to a 2001 city land use plan, about 835 acres of the southeast side are covered in landfills. Advocates point to the area as an example that minorities and those in low-income areas often bear a disproportionately high amount of the nation’s pollution. “This is victory. We can breathe. We can look at today and say that we can do environmental restoration in our community. No more landfills in Cook County. That’s a great thing,” said Cheryl Johnson, executive director of People for Community Recovery. “We have to begin to learn how to clean up what we messed up. And it’s going to take a process. But today we are establishing that baseline for equal environmental protection.” Johnson’s mother, Hazel Johnson, founded People for Community Recovery and is known as the mother of the environmental justice movement.
Chicago Democratic Sen. Donne Trotter noted the improvements that have been made in the area since local residents began organizing to clean up their community. “It is not going to go back to the way it was — not to when we were growing up 40 [or] 50 years ago, when seeing smoke and smelling garbage meant you were home. Those days are gone. We have fought for a new life ... a quality of life that [means] our children will be able to enjoy this land [and] be able to enjoy all the great things that this land has to offer.”
However, Land and Lakes argues that the expansion could occur without harming the environmental progress that has been made in the area. The company says that under the ban, other environmental upgrades that would come along with the expansion would be lost. “Land and Lakes operates a landfill in Dolton, which is adjacent to our other landfill, which reached capacity and closed in 1995. Our vision is to connect the two facilities, bring the dormant facility up to current, stricter environmental standards, create open lands with habitat restoration, all while generating low-cost renewable energy and properly managing the waste disposal needs of the area. This is about as green a project as they come,” Mary Margaret Cowhey, chief executive officer of Land and Lakes, told a Senate committee in May.
She added: “To place a blanket elimination on EPA permits in Cook County kills deserving projects. This bill is overkill based on fear.
Land and Lakes did not respond to requests for a statement on the signing of the bill, but a statement released when the legislation passed said: “The bill guarantees that a closed landfill in Chicago will remain a brownfield for generations to come. The bill means there is no opportunity for Land and Lakes to add environmental upgrades and develop green amenities consistent with what south-side residents want over the long term.” The company argues that the ban would also hurt local economic development by eliminating local jobs and potential tax revenues.
Oak Park Democratic Sen. Don Harmon, a sponsor of House Bill 3881, said that business growth should not be the only priority for lawmakers. “Down in the pressure cooker of Springfield, it was very easy to fall into the trap of talking about business. Is this bill going to help someone’s business? Is this bill going to hurt someone’s business? And business is important, but it’s not the only thing we need to be thinking about. It’s quality of life and our neighborhoods,” he said. “Cook County is simply too dense to sustain any new landfill development, and the residual consequences of all the landfills we have are going to cause us problems for a long time.”
Quinn took the opportunity to tout the Millennium Reserve project, which has the goal of restoring 140,000 acres of land in the area and increasing recreation in the Lake Calumet region. The state has invested almost $18 million in the project so far. “This will basically be the largest conservation area in an urban environment in the whole United States, and we have work to do, obviously. This area for many, many years was dumped upon,” he said.
Marc Miller, director of the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, said the project focuses on the area south of the Chicago River and extends beyond the Calumet River, with the Calumet area as its core. “For the first time in 100 years, we have a record of a bald eagle nest here in the Calumet [area],” Miller said. “And that shows you what is possible when you let nature heal itself once you get the pollutants and the bad things out of it.”
For more on the environmental history of the southeast side and the battle over land fill expansion, see the current Illinois Issues.
Monday, September 19, 2011
Economic downturn may help keep space open at landfills
By Jamey Dunn
Illinois landfills have an average of 23 years of capacity left if they continue to accept trash at current rates, which the state’s economic slump may be helping to keep down.
In 2010, 43 Illinois landfills took in about 14 million tons of waste, about 11 percent of which came from other states. According to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s landfill capacity report, 22 Illinois landfills accepted a total of more than 1.5 million tons of trash from other states including California, Iowa, Indiana, Kentucky and Wisconsin. The overall capacity of the state’s landfills, which is currently more than 303 million tons, decreased by 18.2 million tons or 5.4 percent in 2010. The measurements are based on waste before it is compacted for storage.
Landfills in northwestern Illinois and the Chicago metropolitan area have the least amount of projected capacity. If landfills in that region continue accepting trash at their current rates, they will run out of room in 14 years. Of the seven regions the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency designates for solid waste management, five saw a shrinking capacity for trash in 2010 when compared with 2009 capacity levels.
Both the IEPA and those in the solid waste disposal industry say the state is in no immediate danger of running out of room for its trash. However, one industry expert said the recent dip in waste production could be an indicator of the state’s economic woes. “I think for the time being, we’re fine. The economy has not been booming, so we haven’t seen a big increase in waste production,” said David Hartke, president of the Illinois Counties Solid Waste Management Association. Hartke noted that the amount of waste going into landfills has dropped every year since 2006, and he said it is directly related to residents’ levels of consumption. Landfills saw a small increase —.5 percent — of the amount of trash they took in 2010.
Hartke, senior waste analyst for the Will County Land Use Department, said waste haulers in some northern areas of the state, where construction was booming in recent years, are now reporting up to 15 percent less trash as the building of homes and businesses has died off. “It is just interesting to see the amount of waste received as compared to our latest slump in the economy,” he said.
Overview of the state’s landfill capacity by region:
Maggie Carson, a spokesperson for the IEPA, said that the trend in Illinois is toward larger landfills that have the potential to grow. “The bigger picture is that the larger [landfills], and typically those managed by the large waste management companies, continued to get bigger,” Carson said. “They saw they way things were going was that smaller landfills were unable to meet the environmental requirements. They have space to continue to develop for the foreseeable future.”
Hartke said of smaller landfills: “They can’t afford to continue their operations. They can’t afford the meet regulatory requirements.” He said some requirements are confusing and difficult to implement. He pointed to a new law that will bar many electronics, such as computers and televisions, from being placed in landfills as of 2012. “It’s definitely going to be difficult for waste haulers and landfills to pull those items out, compared to tires, which are banned. It’s a lot more obvious to see a tire or landscaping waste, [which is also banned.]” Hartke said an exemption for businesses makes the law even more difficult to enforce in practice. “When you see a [computer] out there, how do you know if it was in a business or a house?” he asked. Hartke said several waste management operations are working on drafting a standard that all facilities in the state can live by.
Illinois landfills have an average of 23 years of capacity left if they continue to accept trash at current rates, which the state’s economic slump may be helping to keep down.
In 2010, 43 Illinois landfills took in about 14 million tons of waste, about 11 percent of which came from other states. According to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency’s landfill capacity report, 22 Illinois landfills accepted a total of more than 1.5 million tons of trash from other states including California, Iowa, Indiana, Kentucky and Wisconsin. The overall capacity of the state’s landfills, which is currently more than 303 million tons, decreased by 18.2 million tons or 5.4 percent in 2010. The measurements are based on waste before it is compacted for storage.
Landfills in northwestern Illinois and the Chicago metropolitan area have the least amount of projected capacity. If landfills in that region continue accepting trash at their current rates, they will run out of room in 14 years. Of the seven regions the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency designates for solid waste management, five saw a shrinking capacity for trash in 2010 when compared with 2009 capacity levels.
Both the IEPA and those in the solid waste disposal industry say the state is in no immediate danger of running out of room for its trash. However, one industry expert said the recent dip in waste production could be an indicator of the state’s economic woes. “I think for the time being, we’re fine. The economy has not been booming, so we haven’t seen a big increase in waste production,” said David Hartke, president of the Illinois Counties Solid Waste Management Association. Hartke noted that the amount of waste going into landfills has dropped every year since 2006, and he said it is directly related to residents’ levels of consumption. Landfills saw a small increase —.5 percent — of the amount of trash they took in 2010.
Hartke, senior waste analyst for the Will County Land Use Department, said waste haulers in some northern areas of the state, where construction was booming in recent years, are now reporting up to 15 percent less trash as the building of homes and businesses has died off. “It is just interesting to see the amount of waste received as compared to our latest slump in the economy,” he said.
Overview of the state’s landfill capacity by region:
- Region One is the Northwestern Region, which includes the counties of Boone, Bureau, Carroll, DeKalb, JoDaviess, LaSalle, Lee, Ogle, Putnam, Stephenson, Whiteside and Winnebago. Landfills in the region would be able to take in trash for another 14 years at current rates.
- Region Two is the Chicago Metropolitan Region, which includes the counties of Cook, DuPage, Grundy, Kane, Kankakee, Kendall, Lake, McHenry and Will. Landfills in the region would be able to take in trash for another 14 years at current rates.
- Region Three is the Peoria/Quad Cities Region, which includes the counties of Fulton, Hancock, Henderson, Henry, Knox, Marshall, McDonough, Mercer, Peoria, Rock Island, Stark, Tazewell, Warren and Woodford counties. Landfills in the region would be able to take in trash for another 56 years at current rates.
- Region Four is the East Central Illinois Region, which includes the counties of Champaign, Clark, Coles, Crawford, Cumberland, DeWitt, Douglas, Edgar, Effingham, Ford, Iroquois, Jasper, Livingston, Macon, McLean, Moultrie, Piatt, Shelby and Vermilion. Landfills in the region would be able to take in trash for another 26 years at current rates.
- Region Five is the West Central Illinois Region, which includes the counties of Adams, Brown, Calhoun, Cass, Christian, Greene, Jersey, Logan, Macoupin, Mason, Menard, Montgomery, Morgan, Pike, Sangamon, Schuyler and Scott. Landfills in the region would be able to take in trash for another 26 years at current rates.
- Region Six is the St. Louis Metropolitan East Region, which includes the counties of Bond, Clinton, Fayette, Madison, Marion, Monroe, Randolph, St. Clair, and Washington. Landfills in the region would be able to take in trash for another 18 years at current rates.
- Region Seven is the Southern Illinois Region, which includes the counties of Alexander, Clay, Edwards, Franklin, Gallatin, Hamilton, Hardin, Jackson, Jefferson, Johnson, Lawrence, Massac, Perry, Pope, Pulaski, Richland, Saline, Union, Wabash, Wayne, White and Williamson. Landfills in the region will be able to take in trash for another 47 years at current rates.
Maggie Carson, a spokesperson for the IEPA, said that the trend in Illinois is toward larger landfills that have the potential to grow. “The bigger picture is that the larger [landfills], and typically those managed by the large waste management companies, continued to get bigger,” Carson said. “They saw they way things were going was that smaller landfills were unable to meet the environmental requirements. They have space to continue to develop for the foreseeable future.”
Hartke said of smaller landfills: “They can’t afford to continue their operations. They can’t afford the meet regulatory requirements.” He said some requirements are confusing and difficult to implement. He pointed to a new law that will bar many electronics, such as computers and televisions, from being placed in landfills as of 2012. “It’s definitely going to be difficult for waste haulers and landfills to pull those items out, compared to tires, which are banned. It’s a lot more obvious to see a tire or landscaping waste, [which is also banned.]” Hartke said an exemption for businesses makes the law even more difficult to enforce in practice. “When you see a [computer] out there, how do you know if it was in a business or a house?” he asked. Hartke said several waste management operations are working on drafting a standard that all facilities in the state can live by.
Monday, September 12, 2011
Quinn vetoes smart grid bill
By Jamey Dunn
Gov. Pat Quinn today followed though on his vow to veto a bill that he says asks too much of energy consumers in the name of progress.
Quinn shot down Senate Bill 1652, legislation that would allow the state’s two largest utility companies, Commonwealth Edison and Ameren, to increase customers’ rates by up to 2.5 percent annually as part of a plan to upgrade the state’s electric grid. The companies would be required to invest $3.2 billion in the grid over 10 years by making basic upgrades, as well as adding so-called smart technologies that would allow consumers to track their energy usage and possibly save money. The measure would also require ComEd to create 2,000 new jobs through the plan and Ameren to create 450 jobs.
Quinn, Attorney General Lisa Madigan, consumer advocates AARP and others have vocally opposed the legislation since its inception. “This bill would have been devastating for Illinois consumers,” Madigan said at a Chicago news conference today. “It’s hardly something that we should have shoved down our throats and taken out of our wallets here in the state of Illinois.”
They say the bill would allow companies to defer all the risk of new investments to consumers by ensuring that utilities see all-but-guaranteed profit increases. Madigan said the bill would “gut” the state regulatory system that requires utilities to make their cases for rate increases to the Illinois Commerce Commission. Doug Scott, director if the ICC, said the legislation allows utilities to charge customers for much more than grid upgrades, including lawyers' fees and charitable contributions. “This isn’t just about smart grid, and it isn’t just about infrastructure,” Scott said.
Sen. Mike Jacobs, a sponsor of the bill, said Madigan and others are grandstanding and blocking a bill that would bring economic growth and new jobs to the state, as well as improved service for utility customers. “When you move away from the politics, where everybody wants to make their two cents on their press releases, and look at the bill, it’s an upgrade,” said Jacobs, an East Moline Democrat.
Supporters and opponents of the legislation both point to summer storms that led to mass blackouts in the northern Chicago suburbs as a way to make their case.
“In particular, this bill grants unprecedented advantages to Illinois utilities that have a less than stellar record for providing reliable service. Recent storms in the Chicago area exposed significant service shortcomings, and more than 1.5 million people suffered through lengthy and widespread outages. Local businesses and consumers who depend on regular, predictable electricity suffered enormously. These interruptions impose a profound hardship on the state’s economy and are simply unacceptable,” Quinn wrote in the message that accompanied his veto. “More troubling is that while customers suffer service interruptions and higher rates, these same utilities have been in Springfield advocating for a bill that erodes meaningful consumer protections. These utilities have been trying to dramatically change the rules to guarantee annual rate increases, while eliminating accountability for, literally, leaving people in the dark.’
But Jacobs said that smart-grid technologies could have prevented some of the blackouts and helped to turn the lights back on more quickly for those who lost power.“You can’t buy champagne on a beer budget. … The fact is that Illinois is a leader in energy, and it’s time for the governor to lead,” Jacobs said. He said it is “disingenuous” of Quinn to support energy conservation and earth-friendly policy but oppose SB 1652, which could allow for more power generated by renewable sources.
Some environmental advocates did jump on in support of the plan after a rewrite emerged at the end of the spring legislative session. Jack Darin, director of the Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club, said the bill that legislators passed would allow more companies, such as big box stores, to generate their own power through wind, solar and other means. “We could see every large rooftop in the state potentially being a clean renewable energy power plant, whether it’s a big box store, parking garage or office space,” Darin said. He said his organization backs the bill strictly on its environmental merits, but he said lawmakers should also recognize the concerns of consumer advocates.
Quinn is pushing his own piece of legislation that he says would help to improve the grid while protecting consumers. However, Jacobs and the House sponsor, Orland Park Democrat Rep. Kevin McCarthy, said they are confident that they will be able to find the votes needed to override Quinn’s veto.
Quinn said that business owners came to plead with him to veto the bill and that the majority of Illinoisans do not support the plan. “We’ll, I think, show them… that the people of Illinois are mightier than Commonwealth Edison.”
Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang said ComEd needs to step up its customer service efforts if the company wants lawmakers who did not support the bill last time to change their votes. He said his constituents who lost power over the summer were less upset about the lapse in service and more worked up about the way the company treated them when they called to report that their power was out. “The people that called my office irate did not call here just because they had a power outage,” Lang said.
For more on what defines smart grid technology and its potential public policy implications for the state, see Illinois Issues July/August 2011.
Gov. Pat Quinn today followed though on his vow to veto a bill that he says asks too much of energy consumers in the name of progress.
Quinn shot down Senate Bill 1652, legislation that would allow the state’s two largest utility companies, Commonwealth Edison and Ameren, to increase customers’ rates by up to 2.5 percent annually as part of a plan to upgrade the state’s electric grid. The companies would be required to invest $3.2 billion in the grid over 10 years by making basic upgrades, as well as adding so-called smart technologies that would allow consumers to track their energy usage and possibly save money. The measure would also require ComEd to create 2,000 new jobs through the plan and Ameren to create 450 jobs.
Quinn, Attorney General Lisa Madigan, consumer advocates AARP and others have vocally opposed the legislation since its inception. “This bill would have been devastating for Illinois consumers,” Madigan said at a Chicago news conference today. “It’s hardly something that we should have shoved down our throats and taken out of our wallets here in the state of Illinois.”
They say the bill would allow companies to defer all the risk of new investments to consumers by ensuring that utilities see all-but-guaranteed profit increases. Madigan said the bill would “gut” the state regulatory system that requires utilities to make their cases for rate increases to the Illinois Commerce Commission. Doug Scott, director if the ICC, said the legislation allows utilities to charge customers for much more than grid upgrades, including lawyers' fees and charitable contributions. “This isn’t just about smart grid, and it isn’t just about infrastructure,” Scott said.
Sen. Mike Jacobs, a sponsor of the bill, said Madigan and others are grandstanding and blocking a bill that would bring economic growth and new jobs to the state, as well as improved service for utility customers. “When you move away from the politics, where everybody wants to make their two cents on their press releases, and look at the bill, it’s an upgrade,” said Jacobs, an East Moline Democrat.
Supporters and opponents of the legislation both point to summer storms that led to mass blackouts in the northern Chicago suburbs as a way to make their case.
“In particular, this bill grants unprecedented advantages to Illinois utilities that have a less than stellar record for providing reliable service. Recent storms in the Chicago area exposed significant service shortcomings, and more than 1.5 million people suffered through lengthy and widespread outages. Local businesses and consumers who depend on regular, predictable electricity suffered enormously. These interruptions impose a profound hardship on the state’s economy and are simply unacceptable,” Quinn wrote in the message that accompanied his veto. “More troubling is that while customers suffer service interruptions and higher rates, these same utilities have been in Springfield advocating for a bill that erodes meaningful consumer protections. These utilities have been trying to dramatically change the rules to guarantee annual rate increases, while eliminating accountability for, literally, leaving people in the dark.’
But Jacobs said that smart-grid technologies could have prevented some of the blackouts and helped to turn the lights back on more quickly for those who lost power.“You can’t buy champagne on a beer budget. … The fact is that Illinois is a leader in energy, and it’s time for the governor to lead,” Jacobs said. He said it is “disingenuous” of Quinn to support energy conservation and earth-friendly policy but oppose SB 1652, which could allow for more power generated by renewable sources.
Some environmental advocates did jump on in support of the plan after a rewrite emerged at the end of the spring legislative session. Jack Darin, director of the Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club, said the bill that legislators passed would allow more companies, such as big box stores, to generate their own power through wind, solar and other means. “We could see every large rooftop in the state potentially being a clean renewable energy power plant, whether it’s a big box store, parking garage or office space,” Darin said. He said his organization backs the bill strictly on its environmental merits, but he said lawmakers should also recognize the concerns of consumer advocates.
Quinn is pushing his own piece of legislation that he says would help to improve the grid while protecting consumers. However, Jacobs and the House sponsor, Orland Park Democrat Rep. Kevin McCarthy, said they are confident that they will be able to find the votes needed to override Quinn’s veto.
Quinn said that business owners came to plead with him to veto the bill and that the majority of Illinoisans do not support the plan. “We’ll, I think, show them… that the people of Illinois are mightier than Commonwealth Edison.”
Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang said ComEd needs to step up its customer service efforts if the company wants lawmakers who did not support the bill last time to change their votes. He said his constituents who lost power over the summer were less upset about the lapse in service and more worked up about the way the company treated them when they called to report that their power was out. “The people that called my office irate did not call here just because they had a power outage,” Lang said.
For more on what defines smart grid technology and its potential public policy implications for the state, see Illinois Issues July/August 2011.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Wind power brings jobs to Chicago
By Jamey Dunn
A new report by the Environmental Law and Policy center found that wind power means job growth for Illinois, predominantly in the Chicago area.
The Environmental Law and Policy Center found that more than 100 businesses in Illinois are involved in the supply chain of the wind industry. About 60 of them are in or near Chicago. The city is home to 13 corporate headquarters of American and international wind energy companies.
“A major wind power project creates a lot of jobs. Everything from electric workers to construction workers to people who lay the concrete pads,” said Howard Learner, executive director of the ELPC. Learner said there is also potential for growth for financial and accounting firms, as well as Illinois’ stagnant manufacturing sector.
Learner added, “What we are seeing are old-line manufacturing firms retooling to make wind power components that are part of the clean energy economy future.”
Jerry Roper, president and chief executive officer of the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce, said federal stimulus funds helped to jump-start the wind sector in Illinois.
Ashley Craig, and environmental business expert for the ELPC, said public money helps, but it doesn’t beat out a friendly policy climate for stimulation growth. “More than the federal subsidy money, I think the thing that has positively impacted the business the most is the policy decisions, and that’s consistent, really, with any business innovation that our country has experienced — everything from the Internet from the car industry to air travel. You don’t launch a large industry like this without federal and state support, and that doesn’t have to come in the form of money. Policy is just as important.”
Learner said the Illinois Renewable Electricity Standard, which requires utilities to purchase 25 percent of their power from renewable sources by 2025, has been key to the growth of wind power in the state. Of the 25 percent, 75 percent of the energy must come from wind power. The report also attributes growth to sales tax breaks on materials used to build wind energy projects, tax-free bonds to help spread out initial investment costs, and a consistent system for wind farm property tax assessments across the state
Sen. Mike Jacobs, chair of the Senate energy committee, said alternative energy sources, such as wind and solar, may not yet be consistent enough to rely upon, and lawmakers should be judicious when considering tax breaks or subsidies. He is concerned about asking consumers, especially in a down economy, to pay more for power. Jacobs, an East Moline Democrat, said it is a constant balancing act to keep old power sources thriving while still encouraging development of renewable energy.
“Everybody is really interested in jobs. … I just don’t think weakening incumbent utilities who provide us cheaper power is a good trade-off for us,” Jacobs said.
Roper said it will take more than government support to make the state a leader in wind power. He said the business sector also needs to focus on the potential of wind energy in Illinois. “Illinois can own a big part of what they’re calling … green jobs in America. [Wind energy] is probably the best definition of green jobs, as far as I’m concerned, and it’s something that needs to be touted out there in the marketplace.”
A new report by the Environmental Law and Policy center found that wind power means job growth for Illinois, predominantly in the Chicago area.
The Environmental Law and Policy Center found that more than 100 businesses in Illinois are involved in the supply chain of the wind industry. About 60 of them are in or near Chicago. The city is home to 13 corporate headquarters of American and international wind energy companies.
“A major wind power project creates a lot of jobs. Everything from electric workers to construction workers to people who lay the concrete pads,” said Howard Learner, executive director of the ELPC. Learner said there is also potential for growth for financial and accounting firms, as well as Illinois’ stagnant manufacturing sector.
Learner added, “What we are seeing are old-line manufacturing firms retooling to make wind power components that are part of the clean energy economy future.”
Jerry Roper, president and chief executive officer of the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce, said federal stimulus funds helped to jump-start the wind sector in Illinois.
Ashley Craig, and environmental business expert for the ELPC, said public money helps, but it doesn’t beat out a friendly policy climate for stimulation growth. “More than the federal subsidy money, I think the thing that has positively impacted the business the most is the policy decisions, and that’s consistent, really, with any business innovation that our country has experienced — everything from the Internet from the car industry to air travel. You don’t launch a large industry like this without federal and state support, and that doesn’t have to come in the form of money. Policy is just as important.”
Learner said the Illinois Renewable Electricity Standard, which requires utilities to purchase 25 percent of their power from renewable sources by 2025, has been key to the growth of wind power in the state. Of the 25 percent, 75 percent of the energy must come from wind power. The report also attributes growth to sales tax breaks on materials used to build wind energy projects, tax-free bonds to help spread out initial investment costs, and a consistent system for wind farm property tax assessments across the state
Sen. Mike Jacobs, chair of the Senate energy committee, said alternative energy sources, such as wind and solar, may not yet be consistent enough to rely upon, and lawmakers should be judicious when considering tax breaks or subsidies. He is concerned about asking consumers, especially in a down economy, to pay more for power. Jacobs, an East Moline Democrat, said it is a constant balancing act to keep old power sources thriving while still encouraging development of renewable energy.
“Everybody is really interested in jobs. … I just don’t think weakening incumbent utilities who provide us cheaper power is a good trade-off for us,” Jacobs said.
Roper said it will take more than government support to make the state a leader in wind power. He said the business sector also needs to focus on the potential of wind energy in Illinois. “Illinois can own a big part of what they’re calling … green jobs in America. [Wind energy] is probably the best definition of green jobs, as far as I’m concerned, and it’s something that needs to be touted out there in the marketplace.”
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Illinois lags on solar jobs
By Jamey Dunn
A new study found Illinois is not keeping up with some neighboring states on job creation in the solar power industry.
The study to take stock of jobs created by the expansion of solar power across the country was conducted by the Solar Foundation, a non-profit group that funds solar research; Green LMI , which specializes in predicting the future of labor markets; and Cornell University .
According to the report, as of August 2010, more than 93,000 people nationwide work in solar power, and half of companies in that field expect to hire new employees in the next year. Those jobs include manufacturing, installation and sales. There are solar companies in every state, but the industry is mainly concentrated in the western and northeastern parts of the country. California leads the nation with 30 percent of all solar related businesses and more than 36,000 solar jobs.
Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Indiana and Ohio all made it into the report’s top 20 states for solar job creation, but Illinois did not.
According to the research, Illinois has about 530 solar-related jobs with a projected growth to nearly 700 jobs by 2011. That compares with Indiana — ranked 10th in the country for solar employment and growth — with more than 1,600 jobs and projected growth to more than 1,800 by 2011.
Environment Illinois says the General Assembly can take steps to help Illinois catch up with its neighbors in the solar sector. Miranda Carter, a field associate with Environment Illinois, said a few key changes could help the state keep pace.
One plan is to allow larger solar operations to sell extra power that they create back to utilities. Now, smaller operations, such as private residences and small business, can generate power with solar panels or a wind turbine and sell back what they don’t use under a policy called net metering. Carter said larger operations, including warehouses and big-box stores, such as Walmart, need to be included in the policy.
Carter said 16 other states allow those larger energy producers to sell their surplus power. “Illinois will lose business to those states unless we change the law. Illinois is home to many flat-roofed industrial and commercial space that is ideal for solar installation, but these companies will not proceed unless they get the full worth of the energy they produce.”
She said reworking the Property Assessed Clean Energy Program (PACE) would also help to expand solar power in Illinois. Such programs allow homeowners nationwide to get municipal bonds to make their homes more energy efficient or install alternative energy improvements, such as solar panels. They pay off the loan with their future energy savings. “The price or upfront cost is what is so difficult for people,” Carter said.
However, Sen. Mike Jacobs, chair of the Senate Energy Committee, said solar power needs to be more reliable before the state starts setting such policies or subsidizing it. “I am still waiting for that big new idea that’s really going to get this off the ground."
Jacobs, a Democrat from East Moline, added, “Really I just think that we need to make sure that we take care of our current employers before we go chasing new ones.”
Jacobs said he is concerned about the expense, which could be associated with expanding net metering and PACE in Illinois. “Both of those put their hands in the pocket of consumers,” said Jacobs. “We may be behind a little on solar, but I don’t view that as a bad thing. Frankly it is very expensive to the customer. And somebody’s got to pay for this.”
Check back tomorrow for a report on Illinois job creation and development in the wind power sector.
A new study found Illinois is not keeping up with some neighboring states on job creation in the solar power industry.
The study to take stock of jobs created by the expansion of solar power across the country was conducted by the Solar Foundation, a non-profit group that funds solar research; Green LMI , which specializes in predicting the future of labor markets; and Cornell University .
According to the report, as of August 2010, more than 93,000 people nationwide work in solar power, and half of companies in that field expect to hire new employees in the next year. Those jobs include manufacturing, installation and sales. There are solar companies in every state, but the industry is mainly concentrated in the western and northeastern parts of the country. California leads the nation with 30 percent of all solar related businesses and more than 36,000 solar jobs.
Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Indiana and Ohio all made it into the report’s top 20 states for solar job creation, but Illinois did not.
According to the research, Illinois has about 530 solar-related jobs with a projected growth to nearly 700 jobs by 2011. That compares with Indiana — ranked 10th in the country for solar employment and growth — with more than 1,600 jobs and projected growth to more than 1,800 by 2011.
Environment Illinois says the General Assembly can take steps to help Illinois catch up with its neighbors in the solar sector. Miranda Carter, a field associate with Environment Illinois, said a few key changes could help the state keep pace.
One plan is to allow larger solar operations to sell extra power that they create back to utilities. Now, smaller operations, such as private residences and small business, can generate power with solar panels or a wind turbine and sell back what they don’t use under a policy called net metering. Carter said larger operations, including warehouses and big-box stores, such as Walmart, need to be included in the policy.
Carter said 16 other states allow those larger energy producers to sell their surplus power. “Illinois will lose business to those states unless we change the law. Illinois is home to many flat-roofed industrial and commercial space that is ideal for solar installation, but these companies will not proceed unless they get the full worth of the energy they produce.”
She said reworking the Property Assessed Clean Energy Program (PACE) would also help to expand solar power in Illinois. Such programs allow homeowners nationwide to get municipal bonds to make their homes more energy efficient or install alternative energy improvements, such as solar panels. They pay off the loan with their future energy savings. “The price or upfront cost is what is so difficult for people,” Carter said.
However, Sen. Mike Jacobs, chair of the Senate Energy Committee, said solar power needs to be more reliable before the state starts setting such policies or subsidizing it. “I am still waiting for that big new idea that’s really going to get this off the ground."
Jacobs, a Democrat from East Moline, added, “Really I just think that we need to make sure that we take care of our current employers before we go chasing new ones.”
Jacobs said he is concerned about the expense, which could be associated with expanding net metering and PACE in Illinois. “Both of those put their hands in the pocket of consumers,” said Jacobs. “We may be behind a little on solar, but I don’t view that as a bad thing. Frankly it is very expensive to the customer. And somebody’s got to pay for this.”
Check back tomorrow for a report on Illinois job creation and development in the wind power sector.
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
July/August issue: The environment
Illinois Issues magazine's annual environment issue came out today.
In it, you'll find "Wind power," a story about Illinois being at a turning point in its energy-producing future. It's written by Michael Hawthorne, the Chicago Tribune reporter who broke the Crestwood water contamination story.
I picked up on the Crestwood case, which spawned multiple lawsuits, including one by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan. I wrote about it in my July/August column, which explores current state law regarding how information about the public water supply trickles down — or not — to local residents.
Also check out a rather inspiring story about the "River man," a personal profile of Chad Pregracke, founder of Living Lands & Waters and dedicated leader of hundreds of volunteers who cruise the state's waterways and pick up unbelievable amounts of trash.
Energy policy gurus can catch up on the state's new process of procuring power on behalf of Illinois utilities by reading "Switched on." It discusses the Illinois Power Agency's role in an uncertain electricity market.
In addition to our regular columns, brief articles and legislative checklists, the print-only edition also includes a feature about the environmentally friendly but challenging technologies meant to fight pollution in urban areas. Our print readers also will learn more about Marc Miller, new Natural Resources director who is trying to revive that agency's morale while fighting an uncertain economic future.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Quinn lights the way
By Jamey Dunn
Gov. Pat Quinn commemorated Earth Day by signing an executive order to make state agencies more “green,” while several measures addressing environmental issues are under consideration in the legislature.
Quinn signed the executive order after announcing that several light bulbs in the Executive Mansion will be replaced with more efficient LED bulbs, and rain barrels will be placed around the building to catch water for gardening. The LED bulbs, which were donated by a company called The LED Way based in Skokie, are expected to save more than $4,500 a year.
The executive order sets goals for agencies to cut waste and energy consumption:
And after 2025, 60 percent of the new vehicles purchased by the state would have to be hybrid gas and electric vehicles, and 15 percent would have to solely run on electricity.
Quinn said that the order is geared at “making sure that our state government and our universities and our community colleges and our local governments really are focused on sustainability and a green way of thinking and a green way of acting.”
According to Sarah Wochos, a policy advocate for the Environmental Law and Policy Center in Chicago, the order puts Illinois on par with environmental goals set in many Midwestern states.
Meanwhile, several measures in the House and Senate address environmental concerns:
A bill that advanced to the Senate sponsored by Rep. Karen May, a Highland Park Democrat, would require state-owned buildings to be cleaned with only environmentally friendly products.
Another measure that passed the House would potentially make environmentally friendly products or services more competitive in the bidding process for state contracts. Agencies could consider a “green” product or service that costs up to 10 percent more than a regular product or service under this proposal by Rep. Michael Tryon, a Republican from Crystal Lake.
Perhaps the most controversial bill would create a so-called cap-and-trade program for Illinois. Companies that vent large amounts of carbon emissions would have to buy carbon credits from the state to offset their pollution. A certain amount of credits would be auctioned off to create revenue for the state.
A cap-and-trade program for carbon is being considered in the U.S. House, as well (summary here).
In Illinois, Sen. Heather Steans, a Chicago Democrat, is sponsoring the Senate version of a state cap-and-trade program. She said that she doesn’t think it’s time for the state to pass its own program. However, she said she hopes the bill will help to pressure Congress to take action on a nationwide program.
House sponsor Rep. Elaine Nekritz, a Democrat from Northbrook, agrees. But she said that if legislators approach a statewide cap-and-trade policy as a potential revenue source, it might be realistic to consider it during the current budget crisis.
Wochos said that a state as large as Illinois has a responsibility to address its impact on the environment, and it is time for lawmakers to start making some tough choices. “I can understand legislators and politicians being risk-averse, but we are at a critical crossroads,” she said. “Now is time to get real.”
Much of the legislation under consideration does not have any real teeth. Most bills include suggestions and not mandates, and Nekritz said it can be difficult, especially in a financial crisis, to get additional funding to make projects green. She is pragmatic about the possible timing for passing any strict environmental legislation. She said that the state can expect to see some major changes, such as a policy that regulates carbon emissions, “when we have the votes.”
Gov. Pat Quinn commemorated Earth Day by signing an executive order to make state agencies more “green,” while several measures addressing environmental issues are under consideration in the legislature.
Quinn signed the executive order after announcing that several light bulbs in the Executive Mansion will be replaced with more efficient LED bulbs, and rain barrels will be placed around the building to catch water for gardening. The LED bulbs, which were donated by a company called The LED Way based in Skokie, are expected to save more than $4,500 a year.
The executive order sets goals for agencies to cut waste and energy consumption:
- Cut solid waste production 40 percent by 2015.
- Reduce paper consumption 20 percent by 2012.
- Decrease electricity and natural gas usage 25 percent by 2025.
- Lessen petroleum consumption 20 percent by 2012.
And after 2025, 60 percent of the new vehicles purchased by the state would have to be hybrid gas and electric vehicles, and 15 percent would have to solely run on electricity.
Quinn said that the order is geared at “making sure that our state government and our universities and our community colleges and our local governments really are focused on sustainability and a green way of thinking and a green way of acting.”
According to Sarah Wochos, a policy advocate for the Environmental Law and Policy Center in Chicago, the order puts Illinois on par with environmental goals set in many Midwestern states.
Meanwhile, several measures in the House and Senate address environmental concerns:
A bill that advanced to the Senate sponsored by Rep. Karen May, a Highland Park Democrat, would require state-owned buildings to be cleaned with only environmentally friendly products.
Another measure that passed the House would potentially make environmentally friendly products or services more competitive in the bidding process for state contracts. Agencies could consider a “green” product or service that costs up to 10 percent more than a regular product or service under this proposal by Rep. Michael Tryon, a Republican from Crystal Lake.
Perhaps the most controversial bill would create a so-called cap-and-trade program for Illinois. Companies that vent large amounts of carbon emissions would have to buy carbon credits from the state to offset their pollution. A certain amount of credits would be auctioned off to create revenue for the state.
A cap-and-trade program for carbon is being considered in the U.S. House, as well (summary here).
In Illinois, Sen. Heather Steans, a Chicago Democrat, is sponsoring the Senate version of a state cap-and-trade program. She said that she doesn’t think it’s time for the state to pass its own program. However, she said she hopes the bill will help to pressure Congress to take action on a nationwide program.
House sponsor Rep. Elaine Nekritz, a Democrat from Northbrook, agrees. But she said that if legislators approach a statewide cap-and-trade policy as a potential revenue source, it might be realistic to consider it during the current budget crisis.
Wochos said that a state as large as Illinois has a responsibility to address its impact on the environment, and it is time for lawmakers to start making some tough choices. “I can understand legislators and politicians being risk-averse, but we are at a critical crossroads,” she said. “Now is time to get real.”
Much of the legislation under consideration does not have any real teeth. Most bills include suggestions and not mandates, and Nekritz said it can be difficult, especially in a financial crisis, to get additional funding to make projects green. She is pragmatic about the possible timing for passing any strict environmental legislation. She said that the state can expect to see some major changes, such as a policy that regulates carbon emissions, “when we have the votes.”
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Tenaska in Taylorville update
Taylorville is one step closer to building a $2.5 billion “clean coal” power plant using Illinois coal and advanced technologies to reduce pollution. The Illinois House twice rejected the plan before approving legislation Wednesday that would allow a so-called feasibility study to estimate the cost of the project and detail the engineering of the cleaner power production. You can read about the holdup of the project and the purpose of the legislation in my June column in Illinois Issues magazine.
Now the legislation goes to the Senate. If approved, then the Nebraska-based Tenaska Inc. would conduct a study to detail how it would generate cleaner electricity, the cost of the project and the amount of money it would expect to collect in the long run. The legislation also would set parameters for Illinois’ long-term energy portfolio. Read my column for more on that.
Rep. Gary Hannig, a Litchfield Democrat whose district includes the proposed Taylorville Energy Center, described the purpose of the study. “They’re not just guesstimating what it would cost to build a plant. They’d be pretty close, to the point where they could say, ‘This is what a kilowatt of electricity will cost us.’ Then they’ll come back to us and say, ‘We’ll build it this way, it’ll be clean, and this is what it’ll cost.’ And then we say yes or no.”
The Illinois legislature would be able to review the study and vote on whether the project should proceed. Right now, no Illinois power plants qualify as a “clean coal” facility, Hannig said. Taylorville could be the first if this goes through.
Some Republicans still opposed the measure because they said it had potential to spend a lot of taxpayer dollars on unproven technology. No tax dollars would pay for the construction of the plant, but all electricity users — including customers of Commonwealth Edison in northern Illinois and Ameren Illinois customers in the rest of the state — eventually would help pay for the power supplied by the Tenaska plant once it went online.
The other holdup, until Wednesday, was that ComEd formerly opposed the legislation. The utility said in a statement that it now is on board because the legislation would beef up the oversight by the Illinois Commerce Commission and would require the commission and the Illinois Power Agency to hire an independent consultant to review Tenaska’s cost and engineering study, which would help legislators decide whether to let the project go forward.
Now the legislation goes to the Senate. If approved, then the Nebraska-based Tenaska Inc. would conduct a study to detail how it would generate cleaner electricity, the cost of the project and the amount of money it would expect to collect in the long run. The legislation also would set parameters for Illinois’ long-term energy portfolio. Read my column for more on that.
Rep. Gary Hannig, a Litchfield Democrat whose district includes the proposed Taylorville Energy Center, described the purpose of the study. “They’re not just guesstimating what it would cost to build a plant. They’d be pretty close, to the point where they could say, ‘This is what a kilowatt of electricity will cost us.’ Then they’ll come back to us and say, ‘We’ll build it this way, it’ll be clean, and this is what it’ll cost.’ And then we say yes or no.”
The Illinois legislature would be able to review the study and vote on whether the project should proceed. Right now, no Illinois power plants qualify as a “clean coal” facility, Hannig said. Taylorville could be the first if this goes through.
Some Republicans still opposed the measure because they said it had potential to spend a lot of taxpayer dollars on unproven technology. No tax dollars would pay for the construction of the plant, but all electricity users — including customers of Commonwealth Edison in northern Illinois and Ameren Illinois customers in the rest of the state — eventually would help pay for the power supplied by the Tenaska plant once it went online.
The other holdup, until Wednesday, was that ComEd formerly opposed the legislation. The utility said in a statement that it now is on board because the legislation would beef up the oversight by the Illinois Commerce Commission and would require the commission and the Illinois Power Agency to hire an independent consultant to review Tenaska’s cost and engineering study, which would help legislators decide whether to let the project go forward.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Feds recast FutureGen's future
FutureGen isn’t dead, yet. But it’s dead as we know it. The 13 energy companies that formed the FutureGen Alliance and selected Mattoon as the host of the groundbreaking project also isn’t dead, yet. In fact, Mattoon and the Alliance could land another version of the multibillion-dollar project with state-of-the art technology for cleaner energy production if they go through another long, detailed, competitive bidding process. And the Alliance would have to come up with a way to fund it other than borrowing, as it proposed in the original FutureGen deal with the federal government.
The U.S. Department of Energy announced in a conference call Wednesday that a new approach to FutureGen would be an “all around better deal for America” for less money and less risk. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said the department would start from scratch, seeking new bids for new projects that would a) allow for commercial operation of clean coal plants, b) use multiple locations and c) sequester “double the amount” of carbon dioxide emissions than proposed in 2003. (That’s when President George W. Bush unveiled the original FutureGen plan.) The restructured FutureGen also would aim to generate enough electricity to power 400,000 homes, more than the FutureGen projection, and faster.
New plants would be operational by 2015. Interested applicants have until March 3 to submit proposals.
The halt on federal funding for the original FutureGen site started to trickle down when the FutureGen Alliance announced Mattoon as the selected site in December. In fact, the Energy Department urged the Alliance not to continue with the announcement because of funding and feasibility concerns and didn’t attend the unveiling in Washington, D.C.
The concerns, according to DOE’s Deputy Secretary Clay Sell, focus on the cost estimates nearly doubling to $1.8 billion and drastic changes in clean-coal technology in the past five years. He said more than 33 companies are seeking permits to build plants that use similar technology that could do what made FutureGen so promising: generate electricity and hydrogen from coal and then sequester the carbon dioxide emissions underground rather than releasing them as air pollutants. The costs and the market changes underpinned the decision to take a different approach, Sell said.
It really didn’t help that the FutureGen Alliance proposed that its share of the costs would be financed by mortgage loans. “Quite simply, the financing approach advanced by the FutureGen Alliance would place interests of U.S. taxpayers at risk to that of private mortgage holders,” Sell said. “This would represent a substantial departure from DOE practice for projects which the government bears a majority of costs. And we think it would significantly and unduly increase taxpayer risk.” Ultimately, the feds and the Alliance couldn’t agree on a way to restructure FutureGen.
But what if costs escalate just as they did for the original project? “I can’t guarantee anything five years in the future, and neither can anyone in the Congress,” Sell said. Responding to the Illinois delegation’s harsh words that the feds put the kibosh on Mattoon’s version of the FutureGen, Sell added that the administration has much more confidence that the new approach wouldn’t suffer the same fate.
He also quashed skepticism that the administration pulled the plug on the Mattoon site as retribution for the project not landing in the president’s home state of Texas, as well as the notion that the DOE conveniently set a timeline that coincides with the end of Bush’s term. “Had I wanted to just wash my hands of this, I would have let it go. And the folks of Mattoon, Ill., could have continued to celebrate this for a year or maybe two years. And then when the thing went south, I could have blamed it on the next administration for failing to bring this great idea to fruition. But we recognized that we had a problem. We recognized that we needed to restructure it.”
So now the feds have to deal with the persistent Illinois Congressional delegation, as well as the state legislature and the governor, who all vow to fight for Mattoon and FutureGen.
The U.S. Department of Energy announced in a conference call Wednesday that a new approach to FutureGen would be an “all around better deal for America” for less money and less risk. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said the department would start from scratch, seeking new bids for new projects that would a) allow for commercial operation of clean coal plants, b) use multiple locations and c) sequester “double the amount” of carbon dioxide emissions than proposed in 2003. (That’s when President George W. Bush unveiled the original FutureGen plan.) The restructured FutureGen also would aim to generate enough electricity to power 400,000 homes, more than the FutureGen projection, and faster.
New plants would be operational by 2015. Interested applicants have until March 3 to submit proposals.
The halt on federal funding for the original FutureGen site started to trickle down when the FutureGen Alliance announced Mattoon as the selected site in December. In fact, the Energy Department urged the Alliance not to continue with the announcement because of funding and feasibility concerns and didn’t attend the unveiling in Washington, D.C.
The concerns, according to DOE’s Deputy Secretary Clay Sell, focus on the cost estimates nearly doubling to $1.8 billion and drastic changes in clean-coal technology in the past five years. He said more than 33 companies are seeking permits to build plants that use similar technology that could do what made FutureGen so promising: generate electricity and hydrogen from coal and then sequester the carbon dioxide emissions underground rather than releasing them as air pollutants. The costs and the market changes underpinned the decision to take a different approach, Sell said.
It really didn’t help that the FutureGen Alliance proposed that its share of the costs would be financed by mortgage loans. “Quite simply, the financing approach advanced by the FutureGen Alliance would place interests of U.S. taxpayers at risk to that of private mortgage holders,” Sell said. “This would represent a substantial departure from DOE practice for projects which the government bears a majority of costs. And we think it would significantly and unduly increase taxpayer risk.” Ultimately, the feds and the Alliance couldn’t agree on a way to restructure FutureGen.
But what if costs escalate just as they did for the original project? “I can’t guarantee anything five years in the future, and neither can anyone in the Congress,” Sell said. Responding to the Illinois delegation’s harsh words that the feds put the kibosh on Mattoon’s version of the FutureGen, Sell added that the administration has much more confidence that the new approach wouldn’t suffer the same fate.
He also quashed skepticism that the administration pulled the plug on the Mattoon site as retribution for the project not landing in the president’s home state of Texas, as well as the notion that the DOE conveniently set a timeline that coincides with the end of Bush’s term. “Had I wanted to just wash my hands of this, I would have let it go. And the folks of Mattoon, Ill., could have continued to celebrate this for a year or maybe two years. And then when the thing went south, I could have blamed it on the next administration for failing to bring this great idea to fruition. But we recognized that we had a problem. We recognized that we needed to restructure it.”
So now the feds have to deal with the persistent Illinois Congressional delegation, as well as the state legislature and the governor, who all vow to fight for Mattoon and FutureGen.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Energy bust
It very well could be too good to be true for Mattoon and the state, which lost federal support of the groundbreaking FutureGen coal power plant one month after winning the project. I thought something was peculiar when I listened to President George W. Bush’s last State of the Union speech Monday night. He mentioned the need “to build a future of energy security” and pioneering “a new generation of clean energy technology,” but he didn’t name FutureGen, an international project touted to do just that.
Mattoon was selected by the energy industry group, FutureGen Alliance, to host the $1.75 billion project capable of generating energy with much less pollution. It was to be an economic boon and an environmental breakthrough. The blow to Mattoon and the entire state came Tuesday after news of a meeting between the U.S. delegation of Sen. Dick Durbin and Rep. Tim Johnson and U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, according to published reports.
Durbin said in a statement that the feds’ move was unmatched in “cruel deception.”
Mattoon was selected by the energy industry group, FutureGen Alliance, to host the $1.75 billion project capable of generating energy with much less pollution. It was to be an economic boon and an environmental breakthrough. The blow to Mattoon and the entire state came Tuesday after news of a meeting between the U.S. delegation of Sen. Dick Durbin and Rep. Tim Johnson and U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, according to published reports.
Durbin said in a statement that the feds’ move was unmatched in “cruel deception.”
“After our meeting today it is clear that Secretary of Energy Sam Bodman has misled the people of Illinois, creating false hope in a FutureGen project which he has no intention of funding or supporting.”
Gov. Rod Blagojevich said in a statement that the state will not give up the fight to make FutureGen a reality in Illinois.
Even if Illinois were to fight and win a scaled-down version of FutureGen or another kind of clean coal technology project, it likely would cost a lot more than the original estimate. FutureGen Alliance’s Michael Mudd gave an online interview about the unknown reason the U.S. Department of Energy had yet to issue a decision by mid-January. But he also said the more delay, the higher the cost — as much as $10 million a month — because of inflation.
Editor’s note: The upcoming February issue of Illinois Issues has an article about FutureGen that was printed before it could be updated with today’s news. Watch the blog and our March issue for more updates.
Utility debate returns
Get ready for another round of energy debates involving natural gas and electricity rates for Commonwealth Edison and Ameren Illinois customers. A group of consumer advocates gathered Tuesday to say consumers have a voice and should get involved in the rate-setting debates before the Illinois Commerce Commission.
Ameren proposes collecting about $245 million from customers of all three subsidiaries to deliver natural gas and electricity. The utility also proposes something called “decoupling,” which would allow it to add a surcharge on natural gas delivery rates to make up for a decline in the average amount of therms used by customers. For instance, Beth Bosch of the Illinois Commerce Commission gave this example: If Illinois has a warm winter and Ameren Illinois customers use less heat, then the utility would lose money. There is a cost to deliver the natural gas no matter how much or little customers use, says Leigh Morris, Ameren Illinois spokesman. He adds the amount of the surcharge would be minimal. The proposal also could benefit customers in the opposite scenario: If Illinois had a colder than normal winter and the utility made more money, then customers could get a credit on their bills.
The Illinois attorney general opposes that billing scheme. Janice Dale, chief of the public utilities bureau in the AG’s office, says it’s “a plan to have customers pay for natural gas service that they won’t use.”
Dale joined AARP at a Statehouse news conference Tuesday. Along with the Citizens Utility Board, they want to organize opposition to proposed rate increases and ask customers to attend public hearings before the Illinois Commerce Commission accepts some, all or none of the rate increases. Any rate changes wouldn’t be effective until at least this fall, according to Bosch.
Morris says Ameren Illinois asks customers to participate with an open mind about the company’s proposal, considering those rates apply only to the cost of delivering the power, amounting to about 25 percent of customers’ bills. Last year’s political turmoil contributed to the company’s poor credit rating, which makes it more expensive to borrow money when other costs — equipment, operations, fuel — are increasing. The company also plans to spend $900 million on infrastructure through 2010. “A rate increase is essential to our ability to meet our mission,” he says.
Public hearings are scheduled for 7 p.m. throughout Ameren’s service area:
- February 4 at the Decatur Public Library
- February 6 at Marion’s Williamson County Pavilion
- February 13 at the Belleville City Council chambers
- February 19 at Peoria City Hall
- February 26 at the Quincy City Council chambers
- February 28 at the Champaign City Council chambers.
Gov. Rod Blagojevich said in a statement that the state will not give up the fight to make FutureGen a reality in Illinois.
Even if Illinois were to fight and win a scaled-down version of FutureGen or another kind of clean coal technology project, it likely would cost a lot more than the original estimate. FutureGen Alliance’s Michael Mudd gave an online interview about the unknown reason the U.S. Department of Energy had yet to issue a decision by mid-January. But he also said the more delay, the higher the cost — as much as $10 million a month — because of inflation.
Editor’s note: The upcoming February issue of Illinois Issues has an article about FutureGen that was printed before it could be updated with today’s news. Watch the blog and our March issue for more updates.
Utility debate returns
Get ready for another round of energy debates involving natural gas and electricity rates for Commonwealth Edison and Ameren Illinois customers. A group of consumer advocates gathered Tuesday to say consumers have a voice and should get involved in the rate-setting debates before the Illinois Commerce Commission.
Ameren proposes collecting about $245 million from customers of all three subsidiaries to deliver natural gas and electricity. The utility also proposes something called “decoupling,” which would allow it to add a surcharge on natural gas delivery rates to make up for a decline in the average amount of therms used by customers. For instance, Beth Bosch of the Illinois Commerce Commission gave this example: If Illinois has a warm winter and Ameren Illinois customers use less heat, then the utility would lose money. There is a cost to deliver the natural gas no matter how much or little customers use, says Leigh Morris, Ameren Illinois spokesman. He adds the amount of the surcharge would be minimal. The proposal also could benefit customers in the opposite scenario: If Illinois had a colder than normal winter and the utility made more money, then customers could get a credit on their bills.
The Illinois attorney general opposes that billing scheme. Janice Dale, chief of the public utilities bureau in the AG’s office, says it’s “a plan to have customers pay for natural gas service that they won’t use.”
Dale joined AARP at a Statehouse news conference Tuesday. Along with the Citizens Utility Board, they want to organize opposition to proposed rate increases and ask customers to attend public hearings before the Illinois Commerce Commission accepts some, all or none of the rate increases. Any rate changes wouldn’t be effective until at least this fall, according to Bosch.
Morris says Ameren Illinois asks customers to participate with an open mind about the company’s proposal, considering those rates apply only to the cost of delivering the power, amounting to about 25 percent of customers’ bills. Last year’s political turmoil contributed to the company’s poor credit rating, which makes it more expensive to borrow money when other costs — equipment, operations, fuel — are increasing. The company also plans to spend $900 million on infrastructure through 2010. “A rate increase is essential to our ability to meet our mission,” he says.
Public hearings are scheduled for 7 p.m. throughout Ameren’s service area:
- February 4 at the Decatur Public Library
- February 6 at Marion’s Williamson County Pavilion
- February 13 at the Belleville City Council chambers
- February 19 at Peoria City Hall
- February 26 at the Quincy City Council chambers
- February 28 at the Champaign City Council chambers.
Friday, February 02, 2007
Blagoterminator
Yes, it’s easy to get sidetracked by the name game of Team Blagojevich-Schwarzenegger that met in California yesterday. But they made environmental announcements that show promise, according to the Environment Illinois advocacy group.
Rebecca Stanfield, Environment Illinois state director, says it’s significant that Illinois partnered with the “Golden State” because California has already enacted some of the policies recommended in the Illinois group’s report to reduce global warming emissions.
For instance, she says California was the first state to set carbon dioxide emission standards for cars made in 2009 and beyond. That law was approved in 2002 under the former governor. Last summer, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger also approved a cap on greenhouse gas emissions (coupled with reporting requirements) so statewide levels would return to 1990 levels by 2020.
Stanfield says there’s no doubt the auto industry would fight tooth an nail against a CO2 standard for cars (they’ve already taken their case to Supreme Court), but she hopes that consumer demand for clean cars could heighten the chances that CO2 standards could be adopted in Illinois.
Gov. Rod Blagojevich released another statement today touting his anti-pollution programs, including the creation of the Illinois Climate Change Advisory Group that has to make recommendations to the governor by July 30 this year. Last summer, Blagojevich also unveiled an energy plan to invest in renewable fuels (corn and soybeans) and wind power. And he caps his accomplishments with this week’s announcement of BP PLC funding of the Energy Biosciences Institute that promises up to $100 million for the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s research on converting plants to fuel.
This all comes on the heels of an international panel’s declaration that human behavior, particularly burning of fossil fuels, “very likely” causes global warming. Fossil fuels emit CO2, the most important greenhouse gas, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change created by the United Nations.
BP invests in UI, biofuel development - News
Rebecca Stanfield, Environment Illinois state director, says it’s significant that Illinois partnered with the “Golden State” because California has already enacted some of the policies recommended in the Illinois group’s report to reduce global warming emissions.
For instance, she says California was the first state to set carbon dioxide emission standards for cars made in 2009 and beyond. That law was approved in 2002 under the former governor. Last summer, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger also approved a cap on greenhouse gas emissions (coupled with reporting requirements) so statewide levels would return to 1990 levels by 2020.
Stanfield says there’s no doubt the auto industry would fight tooth an nail against a CO2 standard for cars (they’ve already taken their case to Supreme Court), but she hopes that consumer demand for clean cars could heighten the chances that CO2 standards could be adopted in Illinois.
Gov. Rod Blagojevich released another statement today touting his anti-pollution programs, including the creation of the Illinois Climate Change Advisory Group that has to make recommendations to the governor by July 30 this year. Last summer, Blagojevich also unveiled an energy plan to invest in renewable fuels (corn and soybeans) and wind power. And he caps his accomplishments with this week’s announcement of BP PLC funding of the Energy Biosciences Institute that promises up to $100 million for the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s research on converting plants to fuel.
This all comes on the heels of an international panel’s declaration that human behavior, particularly burning of fossil fuels, “very likely” causes global warming. Fossil fuels emit CO2, the most important greenhouse gas, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change created by the United Nations.
BP invests in UI, biofuel development - News
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
