Showing posts with label Energy and Environment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Energy and Environment. Show all posts

Saturday, April 4, 2009

Cap-And-Trade?

A recent article in the Argus Leader discusses the effects of the cap-and-trade carbon emissions program that the new administration wants to implement. According to the article, South Dakotans in residential areas can expect to see their electricity bills increase by a minimum of 41 percent under this plan.

The goal of cap-and-trade is to limit carbon emissions by taxing industries that produce more than a set quota of emissions and rewarding those who produce below that threshold.

We all want a cleaner environment that relies more heavily on renewable sources of energy that are produced here at home, rather than purchased from enemies abroad.

Rather than tax the problem (coal, natural gas, etc.), which happens to be the most affordable option for consumers today, why not focus more on developing alternative energy technologies to the point where they become economically competitive? Wind, hydroelectric, clean coal, cellulosic ethanol, nuclear, or even garbage can all be practical forms of energy if done correctly.

Otherwise, are you prepared to pay almost 50 percent more to heat your home, in addition to higher fuel and business costs?

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Big Stone II Update...

Unfortunately, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has thrown up some possible roadblocks to the much-anticipated Big Stone II project. Since the Supreme Court’s ruling last year that carbon emissions can be regulated by the EPA, the EPA under the new administration is considering limiting carbon emission by coal plants such as Big Stone II through tax penalties, which may lead to much higher electricity costs for customers, according to the Argus Leader. Read more here…

The enactment of such a policy has a few negative impacts and shortsightedness. First, according to the Argus article, the Big Stone II plant would be 20 percent more efficient than coal plants of similar size, which reduces our impact on the environment by utilizing cheap, low-sulfur Wyoming coal in a much more efficient manner. Second, holding up such projects decreases our chances of cost-effectively installing a framework of electricity transmission lines…a crucial part of any wind development within South Dakota. And finally, all the customers utilizing the electricity provided will pay a much higher cost for their needed energy, as the power companies will be required to pass on the cost of an even more efficient plant or costs of carbon-taxes on to their customers. Let’s look for some middle ground here where we can be environmentally friendly and also keep energy costs low.

Thursday, January 22, 2009

Cooperation for Sustainable Energy…

The Big Stone II power plant project has been in talks with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, as roughly half of the energy produced from the coal plant will be sold to Minnesota and new transmission lines will need to be built. Details here…

The PUC placed some stipulations on approval of the project, citing caps on greenhouse gas emissions and constructions costs, specifically.

Moving away from fossil fuels is a piecemeal process that will not happen in an affordable fashion overnight. A promising and untapped source of energy here in South Dakota is of course wind energy, and one of the biggest costs and roadblocks to wind energy is the cost of transmission lines. Big Stone II provides another vein in our regional network of transmission lines, and for wind energy to take off projects like Big Stone II may prove invaluable to future green energy projects.

Creating regional agreements between the windy states in our area and the states who require our excess supply of energy, we can utilize the resources we have now, both natural and monetary, to provide a necessary framework for green energy in the near future.

Saturday, January 10, 2009

Wasted Material...

An article by the Rapid City Journal states that last-minute changes to a federal energy bill would disqualify cellulosic ethanol created using waste plant matter collected from national forests toward filling ethanol mandates. Read more here…

In a time of volatile fuel prices and dependency on foreign fuels, it seems crazy to not utilize and encourage use of the resources we have, particularly in the promising area of cellulosic ethanol, which is packed with much more energy than corn-based ethanol. If we can turn waste material into fuel to power our state, we should not be throwing up senseless roadblocks in the way of that goal.

We need to incentivize new and better ways of producing energy, not generate loopholes that create barriers to progress in nonsensical ways. Black Hills National Forest and other national parks have the opportunity to contribute toward weaning the country off of fossil fuels, but not if we do not maintain an environment that encourages alternative fuel production.

Friday, October 31, 2008

Cellulosic Biofuel and Wildlife Study to Begin in South Dakota

The South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks issued a news release yesterday outlining future plans to study, monitor, and possibly implement biofuel production in wildlife conservation areas. I have posted on this subject before, but it is inspiring to see some action taking place. According to the release:

With the nation intent on discovering alternative sources of energy, research about to begin in South Dakota will provide the best management practices to maximize the production of cellulosic biofuel while taking into consideration the needs of wildlife resources.

Read the rest of the release on the GFP website.

Currently, cellulosic ethanol looks to be a promising source of renewable energy. If South Dakota can work to develop a model where wildlife and biofuel feedstocks can both be generated in the same area, we will solve multiple issues with one solution, while simultaneously bettering our future.

As an agricultural state, South Dakota is poised to become a leader in renewable energy. By segueing into cellulosic ethanol, we will be able to produce, according to a recent study, 540% more energy than what was used for production, as well as incorporate more regions of our state in the feedstock production process.

This is an excellent example of collaboration...