Obama announces initiatives to make solar more accessible for wider range of Americans

Repost from CNBC.com
[Editor:  See also good coverage in Mother Jones.  – RS]

New plan will fund solar energy for low-income Americans

By Robert Ferris, 7 Jul 2015 | 2:15 PM ET

The Obama administration is starting a new program designed to spread solar power and solar industry jobs to a wider range of Americans, including renters and low-income communities, according to a White House announcement Tuesday.

Solar energy roof panels
Solar energy roof panels. Tim Boyle | Bloomberg | Getty Images

The program includes a commitment to install 300 megawatts of new solar panels on federally subsidized housing by 2020, and to offer loans and “toolkits” that will make it easier for low-income Americans to draw their energy from solar power and improve energy efficiency in their homes.

Officials on a conference call with reporters Tuesday did not provide an estimate of the program’s cost.

To put 300 MW of solar energy in perspective, the Solar Energy Industries Association estimates that 1 MW of energy can power about 164 homes. Actual results can vary depending on how much sunshine a region receives and how much energy homes use, and other factors.

The White House said that state and local governments, NGOs and companies have promised $520 million to increase solar power use and energy efficiency programs around the country, and that housing authorities and utilities will start 260 solar power projects across 20 states.

The president wants to create 75,000 solar industry jobs by 2020 as well, and plans to use AmeriCorps funding to train workers for solar jobs, according to the White house announcement.

Solar power continues to be an attractive renewable energy sector for consumers. Prices of solar panels and other equipment remain low, and some expect that to continue.

Customers who can draw at least part of their energy from solar power can potentially save a lot of money on power bills, but first they need the roof space and the money to install solar panels.

For that reason, homeowners are among the biggest customers of solar power—they have the roof space for the panels, and, because they own their homes, the authority to install them. Renters, on the other hand, have to seek permission from landlords—who may not grant it—and apartment dwellers have the added complication of living in multiunit buildings.

Many lower-income Americans are renters who live in apartments or subsidized housing.

Some companies already offer financing for solar power systems, and some communities allow customers to draw their energy from wind or solar farms that may be located far away from end users. But electricity costs remain a burden for many low-income customers, said U.S. Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., on Tuesday’s conference call.

“We all know that underserved communities struggle to pay their bills—I lived in an underserved community so I’m very familiar,” Cummings said. “But I cannot tell you the number of calls I get in my office from constituents who have to make choices about which bills they will pay each month, and those choices could mean having their electricity cut off.”

President Obama and Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff jointly pledged last week to increase renewable energy use (excluding hydropower) to 20 percent of the total energy mix for both countries by 2030.

“Achieving that goal of renewable deployment across our electricity grid means we basically have to triple where we are, starting today,” said Brian Deese, senior advisor to Obama, on Tuesday’s press call.

Two months since Amtrak 188 derailed, what’s changed and why big problems remain: ‘It’s actually cheaper to kill people’

Repost from BillyPenn.com

NTSB_2015_Philadelphia_train_derailment_3
Philadelphia Amtrak 188 derailment. NTSB

Two months since Amtrak 188 derailed, what’s changed and why big problems remain: ‘It’s actually cheaper to kill people’

By Anna Orso, July 7, 2015, 9:00 am

In the two months since Amtrak 188 derailed in Philadelphia, killing eight people and injuring hundreds, the train giant has said that it’s making a number of changes to ensure better railroad safety. But is it really doing much beyond what it was already supposed to before the crash?

That depends on who you ask. Amtrak says it’s made a number of technological changes in wake of the crash to improve safety features. However, that admission came after the National Transportation Safety Board basically said the crash could have been prevented if Amtrak had it’s stuff together.

The major feature on railroad safety advocates’ list for decades is a way to automatically slow down trains on certain segments of track. Called Positive Train Control technology, federal regulators had mandated that all passenger train companies have it installed by the end of this year. The NTSB said this would have prevented the train, operated by engineer Brandon Bostian, from hitting 106 mph as it flew around a rated-for-50-mph curve in Philly.

Amtrak will be done installing PTC by the end of December, thus making the deadline and becoming the first “Class 1″ railroad company to do so. Spokesman Craig Schulz says the company is in the process of putting in “Advanced Civil Speed Enforcement Systems” to ensure trains are operated at safe speeds along the Northeast Corridor, spending more than $110 million since 2008 to install PTC.

The company also is quick to point out that in the immediate aftermath of the crash, it installed (read: fixed) a “code change point” in the signal system on the eastbound tracks just west of the Frankford Curve, meaning that trains traveling east from Philadelphia to New York approach the curve at 45 mph in accordance with the speed limit there. They’re not so quick to point out that this technology was previously required.

Amtrak, according to Schulz, has also committed to installing inward-facing video cameras in its fleet of ACS-64 locomotives in service on the Northeast Corridor by the end of this year and will comply with additional Federal Railroad Administration regulations released earlier this year. Cameras like this would have shown what, for instance, Bostian was doing as the train hit the curve at nearly double the recommended speed.

But the lawyers circling this case say these actions are a day late and a dollar short.

Bob Pottroff, a Kansas-based attorney who’s a railroad safety expert, is consulting with several of the personal injury lawyers who are representing victims in lawsuits against Amtrak and other parties. A number of those court actions have already been filed, including two of behalf of families whose loved ones were killed in the crash.

It’s expected the lawsuits against Amtrak will be consolidated, and the company will only be liable for a total of $200 million because of a cap put in place by Congress in 1997. This means that no matter how many people are killed or injured in a train crash, Amtrak will never be asked to pay up more than $200 million in total.

Pottroff thinks removing this cap would be the best way to get large railroad companies to stop dragging their feet on installing new and better technologies that he advocates should have been installed years ago.

“If you really want to scare the hell out of the railroad industry, the first thing to do is remove the damage cap,” he said. “They’re saying ‘we’re never going to have to pay more than $200 million,’ so any project that costs more doesn’t make sense.

“The failing state of our railroad infrastructure would probably cost closer to $200 billion to fix. It’s actually cheaper to kill people.”

And for Amtrak, someone has to be concerned about saving money. The transportation giant is staring down potentially massive cuts to its federal funding, after $270 million in cuts were approved by the House along party lines right after the crash. Democrats and safety advocates have rallied against slashing of funding.

Meanwhile, Amtrak is still focused on making train trips — especially along the Northeast Corridor which had 11.6 million riders in fiscal year 2014 — faster. Slowing down trains when they go around curves would counter those goals.

Pottroff said his fear is that Amtrak can make promises in wake of accidents, but he says the FRA hasn’t set up penalties for what could happen if the company doesn’t follow through with regulations in a timely manner. He says there aren’t any checks on the company.

“Nothing really has changed,” he said. “Until the FRA grows some teeth, they’re going to be a mouthpiece. We will go on hiding the ball on the real causes of problems until we have government oversight that is effective.”

Blocking the Bomb Trains: Nationwide Protests On Lac-Megantic Anniversary

Repost from DeSmogBlog
[Editor:  See also video coverage of the Portland vigil on WMTW8 ABC TV.  – RS]

Blocking the Bomb Trains: Nationwide Protests On Lac-Megantic Anniversary

By Justin Mikulka, July 6, 2015 – 16:35
Portland Climate Action Coalition Blocks Rail Tracks on Anniversary of Lac Mégantic Disaster

It’s corporate greed versus the common good, whether it’s rail safety or climate change.”

Those were the words of Lowen Berman, a Portland activist involved in a blockade of oil train tracks to mark the second anniversary of the Lac-Megantic oil train disaster.

Berman and 60 other activists protested in Portland today as part of a national Oil Train Week of Protests led by 350.org and ForestEthics.

A Portland, OR, memorial to the 47 people incinerated by a bomb train in Lac Megantic. photo courtesy of Climate Action Coalition

Portland’s Climate Action Coalition sponsored the blockade at Arc Logistics for a memorial service on the two-year anniversary of the oil train derailment that killed 47 people in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec.

While activists in Portland were protesting against the danger of bomb trains on the anniversary of the disaster in Lac-Megantic, activists in Lac-Megantic were also marching.

Emotions and politics are tied together in this, unfortunately,” Jonathan Santerre, an activist and founder of the Carré bleu Lac-Mégantic citizens’ group told the Montreal Gazette. “It’s shocking that after everything that happened, people’s lives still come second to money.”

Santerre has a point. As detailed on DeSmogBlog, the events in Lac-Megantic can be directly attributed to corporate cost cutting.

In Portland, the activists were blockading tracks where oil trains travel weekly through North Portland. The Climate Action Coalition is calling for an end to fossil fuel development and an immediate transition to a renewable energy.

At the same time, a new report by the Sightline Institute predicts that if all of the currently planned projects for oil-by-rail infrastructure in the Northwest are completed, they would require more than 100 loaded mile-long trains per week to traverse the Northwest’s railway system.

And residents along the tracks are becoming increasingly aware of the threats. In addition to the protests in Portland, activists were arrested in Benicia, California today protesting the oil trains.

In Albany, New York — the largest distribution hub on the East coast for oil trains, earning it the nickname Houston on the Hudson — there was another protest.

There is much to fear among residents living near the tracks within the blast zone, and you certainly don’t have to be an environmentalist to care about this public safety threat. Sadly, The Hill suggests that this whole week will be marked by protests by “greens.”

There is no doubt that there is increased awareness and efforts to try to protect the millions of people who live near the tracks carrying dangerous oil trains. However, as we wrote over a year ago here at DeSmog, the people of Lac-Megantic still want the executives at the top to be held accountable. As one local said at that time as they arrested the train engineer and other low level employees involved in the Lac-Megantic disaster, “It’s not them we want.”

With the new rail regulations doing little to protect people, and the CEOs of rail and oil companies supporting lawsuits challenging the new weak regulations, it is unlikely things will change. As the Portland activist said today, “It’s corporate greed versus the common good.”

Lac-Megantic is a stark example of how corporate greed is winning.

 

Albany NY: Rally on Lac Megantic disaster anniversary

Repost from the Albany Times Union

Rally on Lac Megantic disaster anniversary in Albany

By Eric Anderson, July 6, 2015
Oil train opponents rally in front of the Governor's Mansion in Albany Monday.
Oil train opponents rally in front of the Governor’s Mansion in Albany Monday.

Between 80 and 100 people, many affiliated with People of Albany United for Safe Energy, rallied in front of the Governor’s Mansion on Eagle Street in Albany at noon Monday, calling on Gov. Andrew Cuomo to ban oil train traffic in the state.

The rally also marked the second anniversary of the Lac Megantic oil train derailment and explosion that killed 47 people and destroyed the center of the small Quebec town.

That train’s destination was the Irving Oil Co. refinery in St. John, New Brunswick, where it was to unload its cargo of fracked crude from the Bakken oil field in North Dakota.

The Port of Albany has become a major transshipment point for Bakken crude to refineries up and down the East Coast, with at least some of that oil also destined for the Irving Oil refinery.

Several speakers at Monday’s event called for a shift to renewable energy sources from fossil fuels.

“We have to transition our economy completely off fossil fuels,” said one speaker, Neely Kelley, lead organizer of Mothers Out Front, which seeks to raise awareness about the dangers of climate change.

“Governor Cuomo, you have a moral imperative to take the climate seriously,” said Peter Iwanowicz, executive director of Environmental Advocates of New York.

PAUSE has sought to have oil trains, some of which are parked next to the backyards of residents of Ezra Prentice apartments in Albany, prohibited. State officials have said they haven’t the power to regulate railroads, that it’s a federal responsibility.

But activists have said that state officials could declare the oil trains an “imminent hazard” and ban them.

Whether Gov. Cuomo heard the protesters’ message Monday wasn’t clear. The governor was in New York City.

For safe and healthy communities…