Environmental groups want to reduce shipping emissions at ports in Virginia and nationwide, urging President Joe Biden to sign an executive order decarbonizing maritime shipping and offer recommendations on best practices.
International shipping accounts for 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions but the International Maritime Organization wants international shipping to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.
Antonio Santos, federal climate policy director for the nonprofit Pacific Environment, recommended having ships at anchor only use shore power.
"That they effectively not use their auxiliary engines, those diesel engines. That they're plugged in, either to shore power," Santos explained. "Shore power is the connections where ships can use onshore electrical power instead of their auxiliary engines."
Other recommendations include establishing a goal-based fuel standard for ships using U.S. ports, and supporting shipbuilders and maritime stakeholders to build low- and zero-emission ships. Santos pointed out it could all be in place by 2040. The Biden administration has already begun work to decarbonize shipping no later than 2050 through the Ocean Climate Action Plan.
Technologies to decarbonize ships are already in the works, albeit at a much smaller scale. Famous boats such as the Maid of the Mist in Niagara Falls went electric in 2020 with little issue. Santos acknowledged full finds electrification will not the best way forward for cargo ships, noting other clean fuels will be sought out.
"Bigger ships, of course, because of the weight of the batteries, not a likely big player in the long-term solutions," Santos observed. "Which is why they're looking at some of these other fuel options like ammonia or hydrogen, whether that's burned in an internal combustion engine or used in a fuel cell."
Decarbonizing shipping can improve health outcomes in port communities. A National Institutes of Health report showed the highest air pollution concentrations were along major shipping routes. Other studies found 400,000 premature deaths per year worldwide are attributed to air pollution from shipping.
Disclosure: Pacific Environment contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, and Oceans. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Two new solar farms will soon be under construction in the Lexington and Lebanon areas to bring affordable and clean energy to eastern Kentuckians, according to East Kentucky Power Cooperative, the utility spearheading the projects.
Local community members, including an ecumenical monastic community of women in Floyd County, said the move is a step in the right direction.
Nick Comer, external affairs manager for the cooperative, said plans include a 96 megawatt solar farm on 635 acres in Marion County and a 40 megawatt solar farm on 387 acres in Fayette County.
"These will certainly be among the largest solar farms in Kentucky that I'm aware of," Comer noted. "They will provide enough electricity for about 15,500 homes. This is a big move forward for renewable energy in Kentucky."
The cooperative is owned by more than a dozen distribution cooperatives and provides power to around 1 million people.
Kathy Curtis, prioress of The Dwelling Place Monastery in Mount Tabor, said the move reflects a changing reality in a region long dependent on coal industry jobs. She added the emerging tourism industry in eastern Kentucky depends on having clean lakes, mountains and other natural resources.
"We need to be bold and step into the future," Curtis urged. "Expecting that it will be good, not being afraid, just expecting that this is a good choice for Kentucky across the board."
Comer pointed out construction for the Lexington solar farm is expected to start in 2025 and the Marion County farm in 2026.
"These two projects are expected to be online in mid 2027, right now they're going through a regulatory process with the Kentucky Public Service Commission," Comer explained.
Kentucky continues to expand solar energy. Earlier this year the state was awarded more than $62 million in grants to help increase access to affordable residential solar.
get more stories like this via email
Minnesota is sorting out details ahead of trying to meet its 100% carbon-free electricity goal by 2040.
Some environmental advocates feel energy sources being floated to regulators would defeat the purpose of the new law. The state's Public Utilities Commission is accepting public comment until July 10 on which technologies should make the list of energy options defined under the law. Utilities, advocacy organizations and others are lining up with their input.
Hudson Kingston, legal director for the group Clean Up the River Environment, worried certain recommendations he feels are dubious will make the final cut.
"Comments suggesting that burning wood, burning biomass, burning trash are all -- in some people's way of thinking -- carbon free, even though when you burn things like trash or wood, you are emitting quite a lot of carbon," Kingston pointed out.
The Minnesota Forest Resources Partnership contended burning limbs from harvested trees, or wood left over from fires or disease restoration projects, is a viable substitute for fossil-fuel production. The group said there would also be reductions in harmful sulfur and mercury going into the air. Initial public comments will be accepted by June 28. The deadline for reply comments is July 10.
Kingston noted bringing the definition into focus has a lot to do with what is considered a renewable energy source versus green technology emitting no carbon at all.
"It was a political decision a while ago that burning certain things could be considered a renewable," Kingston explained. "But under the carbon-free standard, there is no such list from the Legislature that gives burning things an out."
Even with regulators seeking clarity through public comment, Kingston feels the new law is clear in only leaning on proven carbon-free sources. In adopting the landmark policy last year, Minnesota leaders allowed for other exceptions, namely "offramps" for utilities struggling to meet the standard if clean-energy technologies are too costly or hinder grid reliability.
get more stories like this via email
Signature gatherers in Washington state hope to get an initiative on the November ballot to roll back the state's attempt to phase out natural gas in buildings and environmental groups worry about the effect the initiative would have.
The measure would ensure gas companies and utilities can still offer natural gas and bans cities from prohibiting or discouraging natural gas in buildings. The initiative is sponsored by the Building Industry Association of Washington.
Dylan Plummer, senior field organizing strategist for the Sierra Club, said the measure would be bad for the state and its climate goals.
"What they're hoping to do is turn back the clock multiple years on the progress that Washington state has made on climate action," Plummer asserted. "Specifically electrification efforts, whether it's local building codes like what Seattle has passed or the state building code and other local efforts."
Supporters said people should have the ability to choose natural gas. To qualify for the ballot, signature gatherers need to get nearly 325,000 signatures by July 5.
Plummer argued keeping natural gas around will exacerbate the climate crisis and noted the building sector is a significant contributor of greenhouse gases in the country.
"Specifically, the use of fossil fuels like 'natural' or methane gas for heating and water-heating," Plummer noted. "It's one of the single largest sources of emissions in Washington state."
Plummer added if the initiative passes, it could have negative effects on the state's move toward clean energy.
"We're removing key subsidies and incentives that are going to drive the transition to allow for greater access to these really important technologies that will reduce energy burden, that will protect health and safety indoors and out, and that will protect our climate," Plummer outlined.
Disclosure: The Sierra Club contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, Environment, and Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email