Tag Archives: wind energy

Well done, ‘Smitty’ Smith

smitty_smith_cr_jpg_800x1000_q100

The headline was an attention-getter for me.

“‘Smitty,’ a Texas Lobbyist for the Small Fry, Retiring After 31 Years.” That’s how it appeared in the Texas Tribune.

Why did it grab my attention? Well, for starters, I’ve long admired Tom “Smitty” Smith’s courage in lobbying for causes that aren’t particularly popular in Texas.

He’s lobbied on behalf of environmental groups. consumers, the “little guy,” if you want to call it that.

Smith led Public Citizen of Texas for 31 years, which is nearly about as long as I’ve lived and worked in Texas. I arrived here in1984 and became acquainted almost immediately with Smith once I started standing my post on the editorial page of the Beaumont Enterprise, way down yonder in the Golden Triangle.

We hit it off right away.

To be candid, I have lost contact with Smith over the years. I don’t recall meeting with him with nearly the frequency in Amarillo that I did in Beaumont. Plus, I’ve been away from daily journalism for four years, severing that professional connection.

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/09/21/analysis-smitty-texas-lobbyist-small-fry-hangs-it-/

Ross Ramsey’s piece in the Tribune, though, encapsulates Smith to a “t.” He is an everyman. As Ramsey notes: “He’s from that part of the Austin lobby that doesn’t wear fancy suits, doesn’t drive the latest luxury cars and doesn’t spend its time fawning over and feeding elected officials. Smitty has a beard, an omnipresent straw hat and, often, a colorful sheaf of flyers making his points on whatever cause he’s pushing at the time.”

I particularly liked Smith’s commitment to environmental issues, which in Texas can be seen as a tough sell. Texas isn’t known as a haven for tree-huggers. We remain pretty much a throw-away society. We still love our big cars and trucks. Oil refineries and petrochemical plants still pour toxins into the air.

Smith, though, has been a champion for alternative forms of energy. He likes wind and solar power. Although the sun isn’t yet a major energy producer in Texas, wind certainly has assumed its place. Texas is now the leading state in the production of wind energy. “Smitty” Smith had a big hand in that development.

Smith seemed a bit out of place in a state that, according to Ramsey, is anathema to the values that Smith promotes: Ramsey writes: “Smitty has been a leading voice for government intervention and regulation of big industries and interests in the capital of a state with conservative, business-friendly politicians from both parties who pride themselves on light regulation, low taxes and a Wild West approach to money in politics.”

I regret not keeping up with “Smitty” Smith better in recent years. I wish him well in his retirement. He has fought a good fight on behalf of everyday Texans.

Well done, Smitty.

Wind power is in the wind

wind farm

ADRIAN, Texas — You have to squint your eyes a bit to take in the view in this picture.

It’s along Interstate 40 in the Texas Panhandle. I shot the picture this afternoon with my fancy-shmancy phone camera as I was returning home from a lunch meeting with a colleague in Tucumcari, N.M.

It’s a wind farm. Lots and lots and lots of wind turbines are blowing in the breeze, generating electricity — I reckon — to be shipped to points hither and yon. Given that I don’t get out as much as I used to, I was struck by the sight of hundreds of those turbines along nearly the entire length of I-40 through Oldham County after driving back onto the Caprock.

I want to call attention to this form of energy because of the presidential campaign that’s now in full swing in both major political parties.

Republicans and Democrats are seeking to nominate candidates for the White House, one of whom will succeed President Obama on Jan. 20, 2017.

That silence you’ve heard along the campaign trail has dealt with wind energy. You remember wind energy, don’t you?

Politicians are supposed to talk about it as a way to wean this nation from its dependence on fossil fuels. We’ve made some progress in one critical area: The United States is about to become the world’s leading fossil fuel energy producer, which means we’ve all but ended our dependence on foreign oil.

Of late, the only mention I’ve heard of energy production has been on the Democratic side of the campaign trail, with Bernie Sanders accusing Hillary Rodham Clinton of being in the hip pocket of fossil fuel producers; Clinton has fired back, saying Sanders also is beholden to campaign contributors who are associated with fossil fuel producers. The world has a glut of oil, demand is down, therefore so is the price of fossil fuel-related products — such as gasoline!

Oh sure, the candidates traipsed through Iowa corn fields in the first contest of the season and talked here and there about ethanol, the “bio-fuel” produced by corn. One of the big surprises of the campaign, of course, was Texas U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz’s victory in Iowa — even though he stuck his neck out and criticized ethanol subsidies as a form of government giveaway the nation couldn’t afford.

The Republican/Democratic Road Show trekked eventually to Texas. Did you hear much around the Panhandle about how any of the candidates would seek to shore up wind power?

If you did, then were dialed in far more acutely than I was. I don’t recall hearing a peep out of that still-large herd of candidates in the time leading up to the March 1 Texas primaries.

I’m proud of my state for becoming a leader in wind energy. Think of it: Texas and California have something in common after all, as they are the two leading wind-producing states in the country. Who knew?

Heaven knows we have enough of it here. It’s renewable and clean — even when it kicks up tons of dirt from the cultivated fields that are spread out for miles upon miles along our vast horizon.

Here’s my plea to the candidates … if they or their staffers see this blog post: How about talking more about wind and other renewables? It’s no longer cool to just “drill baby, drill.” We’ve got a lot of wind out there that’s not coming from the mouths of political blowhards.

How about ensuring we find ways to put it to use?

 

Why not debate … in Amarillo?

APTOPIX_Presidential_Debate-0bf0c-7089

I’ve noted before in previous election cycles that the major political parties need to think beyond the norm when planning for debates between their presidential nominees.

The norm in the past has been to select cities with large media markets. Sometimes the parties put these debates in cities and states where the race is competitive.

Here’s a revolutionary thought: Why not stage one of these events right here, in little ol’ Amarillo, Texas?

Hey, I know it’s a long shot. A pipe dream. I know it won’t happen. Then again, in this strange, goofy, unpredictable, topsy-turvy primary campaign — which on the Republican side is being driven by Donald J. Trump — well, anything seems possible.

Look at it this way, Amarillo is a significant city in a significant state. One of Amarillo’s state lawmakers, Republican Four Price, said the other day that Texas’s economy all by itself is the 12th largest in the world. That by itself makes us a player.

What might be the theme of a debate held in Amarillo? Energy policy ought to be front and center. I doubt, of course, that debate planners would build a two-hour televised event around energy policy by itself.

But it does tie into the nation’s economy. How about foreign policy, given that we’re weaning ourselves of foreign oil? We’re becoming something of a trend-setter in the development of wind energy, one of those alternatives that gets some of the credit for the plunging oil prices around the world.

We’ve got venues for such an event. The Civic Center is one. The performing arts center across the street is another. Why not look at the West Texas A&M University event center in Canyon?

Is such a thing possible?

Consider this: No one ever thought that Donald Trump would be setting the pace in the race for the Republican Party presidential nomination.

I’m just saying that this election is wild and crazy enough for Amarillo to get a serious look if the political parties here want to put together a formal request.

 

 

Gasoline projected to drop … then it spikes up!

No sooner than I finished reading reports about projected steep declines in the price of gasoline in the United States …

Then the price of unleaded regular gas spikes up 15 cents overnight in little ol’ Amarillo, right here in the heart of the Oil and Natural Gas Patch.

What gives with that?

One of the reports I read said the price decline can be attributed to a number of factors:

* Automakers are making more fuel-efficient cars. My wife and I are driving one now, a Toyota Prius. We’re doing our part.

* There’s a glut of higher-quality gasoline that needs to be used up. Once that supply is gone, then refiners are going to start turning out lower-grade gasoline, which will sell for less than the better quality go-juice.

* Alternative energy sources are becoming more of the norm across the country. The wind and the sun are heating and cooling more homes, although Texas — one of the sunnier places in the country — needs to get more involved in the solar energy game.

I always have trouble trying to figure out the gasoline pricing structure in Amarillo and the Panhandle. A friend who owns a chain of convenience store/gas stations has tried to explain it to me. It has something to do with the price he pays wholesalers for the gasoline he sells at his stations.

I’ll admit, though, to being annoyed when I read about consumer price projections — only to watch the price of the commodity at issue going in the other direction.

I guess I just need to settle down.

 

 

Texas city becomes environmental pioneer

Who would have thought that a Texas city would blaze an impressive environmental trail?

Georgetown has announced plans to become the first city in Texas to use renewable energy sources for all its power needs.

Is this the start of something environmentally revolutionary?

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/03/18/georgetown-goes-all-renewable-energy/

Georgetown is in Central Texas. It owns the utility company. Thus, it is able to convert to wind and solar energy exclusively, no longer over time relying on fossil fuels.

Are you paying attention to this, Amarillo, which has abundant sun and even more abundant wind.

OK, the cities are different. Amarillo does not own the utility company that provides electricity to the city’s 200,000 residents. Xcel Energy controls the source of fuel it receives to power its energy plants.

It’s a hopeful sign nevertheless to see a Texas city — which happens to be near the capital city, Austin — engaging in this kind of ecological pioneering.

According to the Texas Tribune: “Because of its size and intense radiation, Texas leads the nation in solar energy potential, but the solar industry has long struggled to get a foothold in the state, as policymakers have provided fewer incentives than other states, and solar energy currently makes up a tiny percentage of the state’s energy portfolio.

“That’s beginning to change.

“Improving technology has driven down the price of solar power, making it more competitive with other resources­ — even without extra incentives, developers say. That trend has sparked what some industry experts describe as a small “land rush” in West Texas, and it’s increasingly convincing utilities that solar power is workable.”

Texas already has joined California among the nation’s leading producers of wind energy. That’s a hopeful sign as well of a commitment to renewables in a state that has relied for more than a century on fossil fuel — oil and natural gas — to fill its energy needs.

Here’s hoping this decision by a single Texas city is a harbinger of a cleaner energy future.

 

News flash: Earth sets temp record once again

This just in: Planet Earth just set yet another record for temperatures around the globe during a calendar year.

2014 was 0.07 degrees hotter than the previous record year, says the National Climatic Data Center.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/16/world/earth-hottest-year/index.html?

Will that put the kibosh on the climate-change deniers? Do not even bet on that. Not for a minute.

They’ll suggest that the scientists at the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration are much of politically driven zealots whose aim is to destroy the fossil fuel industry.

They likely might contend that the White House cooked up the numbers just to advance their agenda aimed at developing those nasty clean-energy alternatives. You know, those wind farms and solar panels that are harvesting the wind and the sun and producing actual energy to heat and cool our homes.

Weather forecasters began keeping worldwide temperatures in 1880. The year just past set a record. Who or what is responsible? Scientists say it’s humans. Other scientists it’s all part of Earth’s ecological cycle which repeats itself about, oh, every other millennia.

Let’s be mindful, though, of an important factor.

No matter the cause, billions of human beings are going to be affected by the changes occurring in our climate. Storms are getting more severe. Ice caps are receding. Rainy regions are getting less rain. Sea levels are rising.

And the world’s 7 billion souls — and counting — are standing right in the path of Mother Nature’s infinite power.

I don’t know about you, but I worry for Planet Earth.

 

Perry builds wind energy in Texas

Let it never be said that I am such a blind partisan that I fail to recognize the good things that politicians of the “other party” have accomplished.

Republican Texas Gov. Rick Perry is about to leave office and the Texas Tribune is doing a great job of looking back at the governor’s huge legacy.

All those wind turbines one sees turning along the High Plains or along the South Plains and the Rolling Plains down yonder? They’re a big part of the Perry legacy, to which I will provide high praise.

http://apps.texastribune.org/perry-legacy/energy/

The Tribune notes that most of the turbines didn’t exist when Perry took his initial oath of office in December 2000. They do now, in a big way.

As the Tribune notes: “In 2000, wind farms composed just 116 megawatts of capacity on the state’s main electric grid. That number has since soared to more than 11,000 megawatts, while wind fuels about 10 percent of all generation. (On average, one megawatt-hour of wind energy can power 260 typical Texas homes for an hour.)

“’His legacy on the fossil side of things is very sound, but on the wind side, he’s done tremendous things to move the state forward,’ said Jeff Clark, executive director of the Austin-based Wind Coalition, an advocacy group. ‘Under Rick Perry, wind in Texas has moved from alternative energy to being a mainstream component of our power supply.’”

Think of how vast this supply of energy is in Texas, particularly along the Caprock, where the wind blows incessantly — and where it will blow for as long as Planet Earth exists. I reckon that’ll be a good while, agreed?

Texas has become the nation’s No. 1 wind-energy-producing state, supplanting California at the top of the heap.

Perry’s predecessor as governor, George W. Bush, signed a bill in 1999 that deregulated the electric sector, opening the door for the development of wind energy. Perry would later sign legislation mandating an increase in wind energy production. The state has delivered in a big way.

Here’s the Tribune: “’That we were able to build thousands of miles of high-capacity transmission from West Texas to the Panhandle without landowners marching on the Capitol with pitchforks, it’s pretty remarkable,’ said Railroad Commissioner Barry Smitherman, whom Perry appointed to the Public Utility Commission in 2004 and reappointed in 2007. ‘And the governor had our back on that.’”

Rick Perry isn’t known as an environmentalist, but the wind energy that has developed on his watch has gone a long way toward conserving fossil fuels. It’s also producing arguably the cleanest energy possible.

Well done, governor.

 

'P' offers a pleasant surprise

Politicians occasionally surprise me — pleasantly so.

Sometimes I draw conclusions about politicians, only to have them suggest I might have been a bit too quick on the trigger.

George P. Bush has been, well, one of those pleasant surprises as he runs for Texas land commissioner.

It turns out that the tea party wing of the Republican Party with which he has aligned himself might be gnashing its teeth over P’s environmental policies. As land commissioner, environmental protection goes with the territory.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/08/31/george-p-bush-interview/

P, the grandson of President George H.W. Bush, nephew of George W. Bush, son of Jeb Bush and a darling of the more conservative wing of the Republican Party, turns out to be keenly aware of some issues that interest those of us who tilt the other direction.

The young man acknowledges the Earth’s climate is change, that it’s getting warmer; he likes the idea of developing alternative energy sources, such as wind and solar power; he stops short of calling for abolishing the Environmental Protection Agency; he’s concerned about protecting coastal wetlands; he wants the state to use less coal and use more natural gas to fire electrical power plants.

This guy just might be OK if he gets elected. In a state that leans so far toward the GOP, that event is a near-certainty.

The land commissioner has other responsibilities as well, such as administering the state’s veteran home loan program. On that score, I give the incumbent Commissioner Jerry Patterson and his immediate predecessor David Dewhurst loads of credit. P likely will need to study up on the impact the program has on prospective homebuyers.

I’ve long thought of the land commissioner, though, as one of the state’s chief environment stewards. The office’s very name suggests that protecting “the land” is its top priority.

On that score, George P. Bush is sounding more reasonable than his tea party affiliation would suggest.

I presume he’ll know that many Texans — including yours truly — will be watching him to ensure he stays true to his stated beliefs about our environment.

We’ve only got one planet, P. We need to take care of it.

 

 

Debate is off, now it's on

Someone pick me up off the floor. I’m getting dizzy trying to keep up with the on-again, off-again, on-again Texas gubernatorial debate status.

Republican candidate Greg Abbott backed out of a planned debate with Democratic candidate Wendy Davis. That announcement came Friday.

Now comes word that the candidates will debate Sept. 19, in McAllen.

Hey, what gives?

I’m glad they’ll debate. Frankly, I’d like to see more of them prior to the election this November.

The Texas Tribune posted an interesting item profiling the debates the candidates for Texas governor have had dating back to 1982.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/08/29/governor-debate-timeline/

Abbott and Davis need to face off.

Abbott had backed out of a Dallas debate because his new debate planner, Bob Black, didn’t like the roundtable format agreed to earlier by Abbott and Davis campaign advisers. I considered that to be kind of chicken bleep of Black to pull the plug on something his guy had agreed to already.

The Davis camp accused Abbott of being scared. No surprise there.

Now the two are going to meet under the auspices of another TV network.

They’ll travel to South Texas.

How about coming way up yonder? To Amarillo? How about talking to us about your plans to implement further statewide water management plans. Water’s a big deal around here. How about talking about how you intend advance efforts to develop more affordable wind-powered electricity. You two know this already, but we’ve got lots of wind blowing.

I’m glad to hear that Abbott and Davis will face off at least once. More would be better.

 

Here comes the sun … power

President Obama has decided to crack down on carbon dioxide emissions produced by power-generating plants.

He has implemented federal environmental rules requiring a 30 percent reduction in emissions by 2030. Is the president the enemy of the coal industry, which produces a lot of energy to fuel these plants? Not according to Bloomberg View, which reports that the solar industry is the biggest threat to the fossil fuel industry.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-06-04/obama-isn-t-killing-power-plants-the-sun-is

I’ve read the article attached here and it brings to mind something I’ve wondered for almost the entire time I’ve lived in West Texas: Why isn’t solar energy more prevalent here?

I think I know one reason: natural gas. We have lots of natural gas here and it remains a large employer and is quite important to the electricity-generation grid. There’s little incentive, therefore, to move away from natural gas.

West Texas is producing a lot more wind energy now than when we moved here in early 1995. Indeed, Texas and California are the two top alternative-energy producing states in the country — a fact that I’m sure drives the governors of both states, Democrat Jerry Brown of California and Republican Rick Perry of Texas stark-raving mad.

West Texas also has a large amount of sunshine. The Panhandle has more than 300 days of sunshine annually. We can erect a lot of solar panels on new home construction here and have them heat and cool houses while using less fossil fuel that has limits on its supply.

As Carl Pope, a Sierra Club activist, writes for Bloomberg View: “Solar panels — whether utility scale or residential rooftop — generate maximum power on exactly those hot afternoons when demand peaks. What’s more, they do so at no marginal cost; the sun is free. This reduces reliance on peakers, causing prices to fall across the board, including for customers without solar power.”

It’s an interesting concept that ought to find its way to West Texas … eventually.