Bill Weld's Brain Fart!

When Bill Weld was elected, one might make a pretty convincing argument that 'what sane person would vote for John Silber?'

As a consequence of the Piss Poor Choice of a Democratic Candidate, Bill Weld was elected....not known for hard work...pretty lazy in fact....

yet Bill Weld's Grand and Glorious PRIVATIZATION PLAN created an eyesore that remains in Lakeville to this day....







or:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_2tFKaNn4g



The damage accomplished by Willard is WELL KNOWN to those who were paying attention...don't look for records...they were destroyed when Willard left office to run for President!  Easy to lie about your accomplishments when there's no record!  


Can't wait to see what the next Republican Do Da destroys!

Remember the Obstructionists

Clean Energy reduces costs, improves the environment and much else.

Former Massachusetts Governor Willard Mitt Romney withdrew from RGGI [Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative].

Gubernatorial Candidate Charlie Baker [Closet Tea Bagger] OPPOSED Cape Wind and lost his last run for Governor. Now the Flip-Flopper supports Cape Wind? Don't bet on it!

Massachusetts is leading and so should the U.S.
 
Choose your candidates wisely when you vote so we stop electing the Party of the Dinosaurs.


State way ahead on clean energy

By Patrick Cassidy

pcassidy@capecodonline.com

June 03, 2014

The announcement Monday that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency would require states to cut carbon emissions from existing power plants by 30 percent from 2005 levels by 2030 was cheered by Bay State environmentalists and Gov. Deval Patrick's administration.

But the impact on Massachusetts, which has been a leader in renewable energy and energy efficiency, will likely be driven by what other states must do if the regulations are carried out.

"What the EPA rule does is give states like ours even more of a big tail wind," Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner David Cash said.

Massachusetts, which is part of a regional emissions cap-and-trade program and has passed a series of laws to address climate change and decrease the use of fossil fuels, is already 40 percent below its 1990 greenhouse gas emissions in the power sector, Cash said.

And by 2020 the state expects to be at 50 percent of 1990 levels, he said, adding that the state already has almost reached an interim goal in the new rule.

A national program to reduce emissions will likely drive more states into cap-and-trade markets like the one Massachusetts participates in, helping to reduce costs for everybody, Cash said. In addition, more competition for clean energy and the technologies that drive it will further support innovations Massachusetts companies are pursuing, he said.

"The governor has worked really hard to grow the clean-energy economy all across the board," Cash said.

Cash echoed EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy's dismissal earlier in the day of the argument that reducing carbon emissions would hurt the economy.

"Our gross state product has increased by 70 percent," Cash said about the rise in the state's economic output since 1990.

Modeling for the regional cap-and-trade program initially predicted a 1 to 2 percent increase in electricity prices, but prices have actually dropped by 8 percent, Cash said.

And while declines in electricity prices in the U.S. have been tied to natural gas prices, the Patrick administration has been bullish on alternatives to fossil fuel, including wind energy and a push to increase the capacity to deliver hydroelectric power to the state.

Among the greatest successes Patrick cites is a rapid increase in solar energy across Massachusetts from almost zero in 2002 to 518 megawatts currently. The administration has set a goal of 1,600 megawatts of solar energy installed in the state by 2020.

On Cape Cod, solar projects have sprouted on rooftops and capped landfills, including through a cooperative of towns, counties and other agencies.

"We do also foresee this policy change for America helping to level the playing field," Cape and Vineyard Electric Cooperative special projects coordinator Liz Argo said about the EPA rule.

The cooperative was formed in 2007 to pursue renewable energy projects in communities on the Cape and Martha's Vineyard. It currently has about 29 megawatts of solar energy online or in development.

The EPA's announcement will also push Midwestern states to reduce emissions that end up on the Cape and Islands, Argo said. In addition, the new requirements legitimize decisions by the Cape Light Compact to provide financial support for the cooperative, Argo said.

The compact, which buys power in bulk for electric customers on the Cape and Vineyard, provides energy efficiency programs for local businesses and residents, and advocates for ratepayers, will have supplied $3.7 million to the cooperative by the end of fiscal 2015.

Critics have argued for more transparency in how the two agencies interact and have questioned the compact's financial largesse. Supporters, meanwhile, say the activities of the two agencies are complementary.

The cooperative structure, which provides benefits on a regional basis, could act as a model for other parts of the country seeking to meet the EPA goals, Argo said.

It's unclear how the new rule will affect power plants in the state, although the owner of a coal-fired power plant in Holyoke announced Monday that it would close.

A spokesman for NRG Energy declined to comment specifically on the future of the oil-fired plant it owns on the Cape Cod Canal, which has struggled to compete with other generators in recent years.

In an email, NRG spokesman David Gaier wrote that the company supports the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions but worries that the EPA's rule would adversely affect electricity reliability and consumers in certain states.

"We are carefully reviewing the proposed rule and we look forward to working with the EPA and state regulators to create reasonable, practicable guidelines for achieving substantial emission reductions," he wrote.

Cash said he expects the rule to survive legal attacks by its critics. The EPA's ability to regulate carbon emissions was settled as a matter of law in a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision in favor of Massachusetts and other states that had sued to force the agency to take action.

"Massachusetts v. EPA obviously is the cornerstone legal decision in this area," said Matthew Pawa, an environmental lawyer with a family home in Brewster who has litigated several major clean-air cases.

The court's decision found not only that the EPA can regulate carbon emissions but that it has the obligation to do so, Pawa said, adding that the agency's ability to regulate carbon was reaffirmed by the high court in a case he worked on that was decided in 2011.

And while Pawa praised the Obama administration's decision to move forward in regulating emissions from existing plants, he said it should have been done sooner.

"The industry is going to fight this tooth and nail," he said, adding that if the new rules had been proposed earlier the country would have been much further along in carrying out the changes and in dealing with the legal fallout.

 

 

http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20140603/NEWS/406030336/-1/NEWSLETTER100

 

 

A Moral Obligation

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative  [RGGI] is referenced blow.   

It's significant to remember the former Massachusetts Governor Willard Mitt Romney withdrew from RGGI, one of the few acts beyond Romney's Slash & Burn....when he was even in Massachusetts. 

Charlie Baker, currently running as a Massachusetts Gubernatorial Candidate OPPOSED CAPE WIND the last time 'round. 

Now it seems Flip Flopper Charlie stuck his finger in the wind, saw the overwhelming voter support....now Charlie's for Cape Wind! 

The rest of the world is leading in Alternative Energy solutions, reducing Dirty Energy consumption, creating Clean Energy Jobs and the U.S. is lagging behind because of the lock-step Party of the Dinosaurs. 

Before you believe the Koch-funded attack ads and the Koch-funded Propaganda, please do your research and vote for the candidate who will protect the future and protect American Clean Energy jobs. 

A Moral Obligation

May 30, 2014 | By CAP Action War Room

Obama Administration Set To Announce New Climate Protection Rule

On Monday, the Obama Administration will announce another step to reduce carbon pollution and address our climate crisis. New EPA standards will cut carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants – the single largest source of the country’s climate emissions. The rule, which stems from a 2007 Supreme Court decision saying that the EPA has the authority to limit climate pollution under the Clean Air Act, will protect public health from more air pollution, allergies, and tropical diseases. As the New York Times put it, this is “the strongest action ever taken by an American president to tackle climate change.” Needless to say, big polluters aren’t happy, and have already launched an aggressive misinformation campaign to block any action. It’s important for the public to have all the facts in this debate. Here are some of the most important:

The new standards are a breakthrough in protecting public health and slowing the effects of climate change. While many conservative politicians continue to deny that global warming is real and due to human activity, scientists are as certain that humans are causing climate change as they are that cigarettes are deadly. Communities across the US are already experiencing the effects of rising temperatures: massive droughts are driving up food prices and strengthening wildfires in the west; more intense hurricanes are pummeling the southeast; stronger rains are costing billions of dollars in damage in the northeast. Power generation is responsible for 40% of US carbon pollution. By significantly reducing pollution from coal-fired power plants, the EPA rule will help slow rising temperatures and the public health and economic havoc already evident.

States can employ a tested model that can spark home-grown clean energy solutions. The EPA rule will provide states with the flexibility to tailor carbon reduction strategies to what works best for them. This includes enabling states to create carbon pollution markets. It will also spur renewable and efficiency technological innovation and create 21st century jobs: the approach gives energy companies an incentive to invest in new clean energy technologies in order to reduce their long-term reliance on dirtier fossil fuels. Carbon pollution standards like this are already successful: the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a collaboration of nine northeastern states, started in 2003. Between 2005 and 2012, power plant pollution in these states dropped 40 percent, and at the same time the states raised $1.6 billion in new revenue.

The companies spreading misinformation are desperate, dirty, and in denial. Industry opponents of the new rule are already trotting out scare tactics before the Administration has even released the rule. The reality is that they simply don’t want to reduce their pollution because it affects their profits. The average coal-fired power plant in the United States is 38 years old, but some are nearly sixty years old. Coal plants are the number one contributor to carbon pollution. Some of these companies are responsible for horrible coal ash spills and other contamination of drinking water in North Carolina, West Virginia, and elsewhere. There have even been reports of coal companies deliberately hiding health threats like black lung from watchdogs and workers. Coal executives know that any serious attempt we make to protect the health of our kids and slow climate change has to include them.

Setting carbon pollution standards for coal power plants won’t destroy our economy. The primary aim of these opponents is to make this into a false choice – either cut pollution or create jobs. The reality is just the opposite: reducing carbon pollution will help modernize our economy, lead to new clean energy jobs, and save families money on their utility bills via more energy efficiency. We’ve heard the utility and coal companies’ argument before – in 1970 when we passed the Clean Air Act, and in 1990 when George H. W. Bush acted to stop acid rain caused by coal plants. These opponents were wrong then, and they are wrong now.

BOTTOM LINE: We have a moral obligation to our children to protect their health now, and leave them an inhabitable planet that is not permanently damaged. The Obama Administration’s forthcoming proposed rule to apply carbon pollution limits to our nation’s dirtiest coal-fired power plants is an important step in the fight against climate change and underscores the Administration’s commitment to addressing the problem. And despite what climate deniers and big polluters may say, these carbon standards will spur innovation and create 21st century clean energy jobs.

Like CAP Action on Facebook and follow us on Twitter!

Renewable Energy: Siemens Inks $2.1 Billion Deal for 600-MW Dutch Offshore Wind Project

The U.S. can't get the first offshore wind project out of the courts because of the Dirty Energy Koch Brothers while the rest of the world leads......

Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Charlie Baker [closet Tea Bagger] opposed Cape Wind....now he's FOR Cape Wind? It all depends on which way the wind is blowing!

Former Massachusetts Governor Willard 'Mitt' Romney pulled the Commonwealth out of RGGI.

Don't forget who stands for the future.

Siemens Inks $2.1 Billion Deal for 600-MW Dutch Offshore Wind Project by Alex Webb, Bloomberg | May 15, 2014 | 1 Comment
	Siemens AG won a 1.5 billion-euro ($2.1 billion) contract for a Dutch offshore wind park that will also give Europe’s largest engineering company its biggest-ever energy service contract. Full Article

80 Percent of Brits Support Renewable Energy by Zoë Casey | May 14, 2014 | Post Your Comment
	If you are a follower of the press and politics in the U.K. you might be forgiven for thinking that the country is against wind energy — but a new survey proves exactly the opposite. The survey — carried out by the U.K. government... Full Article