wind energy – R&R – Reachout and Rebuild

Fish Doing Well

David Posnett — Mon, 25 Apr 2022 21:43:01 +0000

In the East Hampton Star 4/21/22

East Hampton
April 18, 2022

Dear David,

Much of the resistance to the South Fork Wind farm, currently being constructed 35 miles east of Montauk’s Lighthouse, has centered on the question of whether it might impact our local fishing industry. There have been numerous studies of marine species in Europe’s North Sea, probing whether their wind farms, in operation for more than 20 years, may have caused harm. They have not. Some species (like mussels) thrived, especially around the base of the wind turbines!

North America’s first offshore wind farm began operation in October 2016: The Block Island Wind Farm. Just last month (March 2022) a study was published in the ICES Journal of Marine Science examining whether the abundance of fish was affected by either construction (2014-2015) of the Block Island turbines, or operation (2016-2019) of the Block Island turbines. The study is available online as a pdf. It is a highly technical study that begs for a lay language summary.

The abundance of bottom species was assessed in the area of the Block Island Wind Farm and compared to two reference areas: to the south and to the east of Block Island. This was done both prior to, during, and after construction of the Block Island turbines, by monthly trawling. 663,970 fish, representing 61 species, were collected over 7 years. What stands out is the following.

No species were adversely affected by the construction or operation of the Block Island turbines. Black sea bass increased nearly 10-fold in the Block Island turbines area, but not in the reference areas, during operation 2016-2019.

During construction, there were surges in the frequency of spiny dogfish. One catch was too large to be brought on board! These are predators and their frequency is linked to that of their prey (Atlantic cod, herring, squid, butterfish, and mackerel). Maybe they were attracted to the wind farm because their prey was more abundant?

It is important to remember that an increase in a species may mean many different things. There could be increased food for the species. Or there may be a decrease in predators, etc.

The paper contains a ton of data not covered in this brief synopsis. The general gist, however, is that fish are doing well around the Block Island turbines.

I note that this study was authored by marine scientists of INSPIRE Environmental in Newport R.I. This is a company that performs studies commissioned and paid for by private enterprises, like Orsted, with a vested interest in wind farms. One author is an employee of Orsted. The study also relied on commercial fishing partners although these are not listed as authors.

This is a very valuable type of study. I hope it will be repeated as further wind farms are constructed all along Atlantic shores. I also hope that other entities (not only the companies building the wind farms) become involved in funding such studies.

DAVID POSNETT, M.D.

Life on Earth Can Recover … Humans Cannot.

David Posnett — Sun, 27 Jun 2021 18:26:00 +0000

From Joanne Young Doesschate (Port Jefferson)

I’ve gotten lots of great news links sent to me about so many different subjects, but then the leaked IPCC report put all but the environment and climate change on the back burner.

When the ground temperature in the Arctic Circle on the summer solstice last week was 118 degrees, the report says

“Life on Earth can recover from a drastic climate shift by evolving into new species and creating new ecosystems … humans cannot.”

“Tipping points are triggered when temperatures reach a certain level, whereby one impact rapidly leads to a series of cascading events with vast repercussions. For instance, as rising temperatures lead to the melting of Arctic permafrost, the unfreezing soil releases methane, a powerful greenhouse gas that in turn causes more heating.”

We’re reaching those tipping points faster than imagined, and the fear is that we may have already started a cascade we cannot stop. We are about to enter a mini-heat wave on Long Island (high 80’s). Nothing compared to the other side of the US:

“[T]his heat will be historic, dangerous, prolonged and unprecedented. ” “We can’t stress enough how impactful this heat will be to nearly every person and community in the Pacific and Inland Northwest region.” – Spokane Weather Service –

All Politics Is Local. All climate change is local too and we won’t meet the Paris Climate Accords (which are already too little too late), without local politics helping national politics helping global politics.

This is the 50th anniversary of Joni Mitchell’s Blue album. But her Big Yellow Taxi best describes what we have done:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFB-d-8_bvY

They paved Paradise and put up a parking lot

With a pink hotel, a boutique and swinging hot spot

Don’t it always seem to go

That you don’t know what you’ve got til it’s gone

They paved Paradise and put up a parking lot.

Took all the trees and put them in tree museum

And they charged the people a dollar and half to see them

Don’t it always seem to go

That you don’t know what you’ve got til it’s gone…

The final conclusion of the IPCC report:

Climate change will fundamentally reshape life on Earth in the coming decades, even if humans can tame planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions.
Species extinction, more widespread disease, unliveable heat, ecosystem collapse, cities menaced by rising seas — these and other devastating climate impacts are accelerating and bound to become painfully obvious before a child born today turns 3

While it has been dire reading, this, by Prof Waleed Abdalati of the U of Colorado, Boulder, may say it best:

“The science does clearly point to a challenging future, one in which climate change places significant stresses on every aspect of our lives. Science, by its nature, avoids hyperbole and those who have spoken out most aggressively about the climate crisis have been derogatorily labeled as alarmists. But sometimes, when the outcomes and risks are so severe, alarm is warranted.

Alarm, however, should not necessarily equate to hopelessness. On the contrary, alarm can and should be a motivator for action, action that brings out — and takes advantage of — the best in our scientific, technological, policy, industrial and humanitarian capabilities to rise to the climate challenge and successfully overcome it.

The content of the upcoming IPCC Assessment Report will, like those before it, present us with an opportunity to take an honest and sober look at the future we may be in for and help us determine the trajectory of humanity in the face of that future. Just as science shines a light on the challenges, science can light the path to success.”

Will the world be willing to meet the challenge? Today’s article in the NY Times, “What If American Democracy Fails the Climate Crisis?”, has lots of intriguing ideas but doesn’t make it sound promising. Take this comment about the the original infrastructure jobs bill, not all of which dealt with climate:

In particular, the scale is simply too small; $900 billion on climate is not enough to catalyze the pace of decarbonization we will need in order to cut emissions by 50 percent by 2030, while providing millions of good jobs. That’s more like $10 trillion over 10 years.

The new bipartisan bill is only $1.2 trillion and most not for climate change. One project, linked below, hoping to get some of that federal funding, is for protecting the Houston coastline from rising sea levels. It has a projected cost of $26 million. That is only one city. Which cities do we save, which ones move inland, which ones die? That is a global question, not just an American one.

And it’s not just cities. What parts of Long Island do we save? Can we save?

Lots of reading, lots of thinking. Will you meet the challenge? Please try to read it during this moderate heat spell by challenging yourself and doing it without turning on the AC!

Take care, JoAnne

Right whale #3720

David Posnett — Wed, 26 May 2021 14:39:18 +0000

On March 18^th Chris Paparo, the manager of Stony Brook University’s Marine Sciences Center reported a sighting of a mother right whale with her calf just 300 yards off an East Hampton ocean beach! #3720, as she is called, had travelled from waters near Wassaw Island, Georgia, where she and her calf were last seen on Jan. 19^th 2021, their final destination perhaps Cape Cod bay, or as far north as the gulf of St. Lawrence.

We all know that the right whale is a critically endangered species with less than 400 individuals still alive and perhaps less than 100 reproducing females. Spotting calves with their mothers represents a glimmer of hope.

With plans to build an offshore South Fork Wind Farm 35 miles east of Montauk point and run a submarine cable coming ashore on a Wainscott beach, I could not help wonder how the developer (Ørsted) plans to safeguard these magnificent marine mammals.

Here is my lay person report.

Ørsted takes this very seriously. I spoke with Sophie Hartfield Lewis, Ørsted Head of U.S. Permitting. Safeguarding whales are clearly deer to her heart. Together with Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution they are tackling issues like the correct distance between a source of submarine noise, such as pile driving, and a whale straying into the area. At what distance is there assured harm to the whale’s hearing (permanent or temporary)? At what distance do all drilling operations need to be halted? Currently that stands at 1 km depending on what marine species is involved and the type of noise emitted, including the noise frequency. F.ex. frequencies above 200 mHz are deemed safe because whales don’t hear them or because they don’t have adverse reactions to them.
I also learned about techniques used to dampen noise. (a) There is something called a ‘Big bubble curtain’ (BBC): it consists of a flexible tube fitted with special nozzle openings and installed on the seabed around the pile. Compressed air is forced through the nozzles producing a curtain of rising, expanding bubbles. These bubbles effectively attenuate noise by scattering sound on the air bubbles, absorbing sound, or reflecting sound off the air bubbles! (b) There is the Hydro-Sound Damper (HSD): it consists of a fisher net with different sized elements, laid out at various distances from each other, and encapsulating the pile. HSD elements can be foam plastic or gas-filled balloons. Noise is reduced as it crosses the HSD due to reflection and absorption. (c) There is the AdBm, Helmholz resonator: it consists of large arrays of Helmholtz resonators, or air filled containers with an opening on one side that can be set to vibrate at specific frequencies to absorb noise, deployed as a “fence” around pile driving activities. Sophie told me that if operations were to start tomorrow, they would use BBC.
I spoke with Catherine Bowes of the National Wildlife Foundation. Key recommendations include: seasonal & temporal restrictions on pile driving; real-time monitoring of science-based exclusion zones; underwater noise limits; vessel speed restrictions; and commitments to pre, during & post-construction monitoring to ensure we learn as we go, in launching this new clean energy industry. This last point is essential for informing impact mitigation strategies along the coast.

Sophie Hartfield Lewis directed me to an online pdf. Pages 100-166 directly concern mitigation strategies for the SFWF. It is titled “Protected Species Mitigation and Monitoring Plan South Fork Wind, LLC.“ I warn the reader: it gets pretty involved.

The world has seen an increasing and alarming number of extinctions in recent years. And that’s only the ones we know about. Ultimately, protecting threatened species protects us, the human species, because loss of biodiversity has health impacts among many other ill effects. Just google ’loss of biodiversity.’ Simultaneously, we are existentially threatened by climate change. Thus, we have no choice. We need to save species like the right whale and we need offshore wind energy.

Win With Wind invites you to attend a virtual seminar on

Offshore Wind Farms & Protection of Endangered Species

Q&A with 2 renowned experts:

Catherine Bowes, Program Director, National Wildlife Federation

Sophie Hartfield Lewis, Head of Environment & Marine Affairs, Ørsted

Wednesday Jun 9, 2021, 4.00 – 5:30 PM

Will LIPA terminate PSEG?

David Posnett — Tue, 20 Apr 2021 14:28:30 +0000

As reported in Newsday, on April 15 Assemblyman Steve Englebright and thirteen other members of the NYS Assembly and Senate sent a letter to Governor Cuomo urging that LIPA terminate its contract with PSEG LI and become a true public power company. You may be well aware of, and participating in, this issue as it has been the topic of much discussion in the public forum and in the media, including many articles and editorials in Newsday. If you are familiar with and support this position, and would like to follow up on last week’s letter sent by Assemblyman Englebright and other NYS representatives, attached is a simple letter that you may use. Feel free to amend it to reflect your personal thoughts. The LIPA Board meeting to discuss this topic is on April 28, 2021. Sending this letter is completely voluntary based on your knowledge and support of the position taken.

Contact the Governor:
Mail: The Honorable Andrew M. Cuomo Governor of New York State NYS State Capitol Building Albany, NY 12224
Electronic Address for Governor Cuomo: http://www.governor.ny.gov/contact Telephone: (518) 474-8390

You can cut and paste the letter printed below or click this link to open a PDF version of the letter for you to print and mail or insert into your email to Governor Cuomo.

April 18, 2021
The Honorable Andrew M. Cuomo Governor of New York State
Executive Chamber
The Capitol
Albany, NY 12224

Dear Governor Cuomo,
I am writing to you in support of the letter you received dated April 15, 2021 from selected members of the New York State Assembly and Senate urging the termination of the contract between LIPA and PSEG LI and the creation of a true public power company. I agree that public utilities are more affordable and reliable for their customers and I agree that “it is the time to allow LIPA to meet the goals that it was created to achieve.” I want to make my voice heard as a part of the growing chorus of Long Islanders who support public power. Thank you for your time and attention to this important issue for Long Island. Sincerely,

Complete Lee Zeldin Environmental Voting Record

David Posnett — Wed, 08 Jul 2020 20:00:03 +0000

Lee Zeldin’s League of Conservation Voters (LCV) score for 2019 was 28%. This seems like an improvement from his scores from prior years, which hovered around 10%, but to put things in perspective: The average Member of Congress score in 2019 was 56%, twice Zeldin’s, and true friends of the environment routinely score in the 90’s or even 100%.

Zeldin’s lifetime score, covering all 3 of his terms in Congress, remains a dismal 13%.

Since our last update, in August 2019, Zeldin voted 5 times to preserve or expand the rights of fossil fuel interests to explore and drill: Off the Gulf Coast of Florida, in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, near Chaco Canyon National Park, near the Grand Canyon, and in 200,000 acres of Colorado Wilderness. He also voted to permit seismic air gun blasting (for oil and gas exploration) that harms marine mammals.

Also since our last update, Zeldin voted against closing a loophole in the Clean Water Act that allows companies to discharge unlimited amounts of toxic PFAS (also known as “forever chemicals”) into our nation’s waterways, and Zeldin voted in favor of the Trump North American trade deal that completely failed to address climate change.

On the other hand, since our last update and sometimes in seemingly contradictory fashion, Zeldin voted to ban oil and gas drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts, to impose a moratorium on seismic blasting off the Atlantic Coast, to ban all trade in shark fins and to increase some regulation of PFAS in drinking water and consumer products.

Full details can be found in the linked Complete Lee Zeldin Environmental Voting Record Spreadsheet. https://www.facebook.com/notes/lets-visit-lee-zeldin/complete-lee-zeldin-environmental-voting-record/1703500749943694/

By Marc Rauch and Suzi Kondic, see post on Facebook

And here is the prior post from 2017:

Complete Lee Zeldin Environmental Voting Record

Climate and Real Estate

David Posnett — Fri, 03 Jan 2020 03:58:28 +0000

GUESTWORDS in the East Hampton Star

By David Posnett

January 1, 2020

There is already evidence of a real estate slump in the United States. A housing recession is predicted for 2020. The average price of luxury home sales is falling, as is the number of sales. Long Island specifically is suffering as sales decrease and homes lose value. This is rather astonishing given that the rest of the economy is still on steroids.

What are the reasons? The following have all been suggested.

First, baby boomers from New York are downsizing and moving to lower-tax states. Second, millennials seem to have a distaste for buying second homes and would rather rent. Third, bonuses on Wall Street fell 17 percent in 2018 compared with 2017.

Fourth, the tax changes brought on by Donald Trump: a cap of $10,000 on the amount of state and local taxes (SALT), including property taxes, that can be deducted from federal income tax. For an expensive home with property taxes of $50,000 per year, this means that $40,000 can no longer be deducted.

Fifth, as mentioned by some real estate professionals: chronic flooding, which threatens the values of houses here. According to Aidan Gardiner writing for The Real Deal, a website focusing on New York real estate news: “Chronic flooding threatens to sink the value of Hamptons homes. Hamptons homes are very likely to lose value given that they’ll face chronic flooding as climate changes and sea levels rise over the coming years, according to Bloomberg. Behind only central California, the area has the second-highest level of its property tax revenue at risk among U.S. municipalities with a high likelihood of chronic flooding in the next 12 years. Climate change is expected to bring constant floods that would tank property values, erode infrastructure, and sink tax revenue, all of which will make it harder to fund projects to battle the rising seas.”

You can check for yourself on ss2.climatecentral.org, where you can find a “risk zone map for surging seas.” See the figure appended below. You can input anything from “unchecked pollution” to “extreme carbon cuts,” depending on how you predict future policies will rein in carbon emissions.

I assumed unchecked carbon emissions along the lines of our present-day emissions, and I asked for maps of a 10-foot water level rise. The program produces maps with dark blue shaded areas that will be underwater. Here are some of the highlights for the not so distant future (2050 to 2100).

Montauk will become an island, the Napeague stretch will be underwater, and much of downtown Montauk will be too, including Route 27. Flooding of Route 27 across Napeague will start with just a three-foot rise in sea water levels, shutting down access to Montauk.

Homes all around Accabonac Harbor will be flooded. Gerard Drive and Louse Point will be submerged. Maidstone Park, Sammy’s Beach, and Cedar Point will be gone. Barcelona Point and the Sag Harbor Golf Course will become an island.

Beach homes in Amagansett, homes along Two Mile Hollow Beach, homes around Hook Pond, Georgica Pond, and Wainscott Pond will all be underwater. Indeed, a few homes on Beach Lane in Wainscott will be submerged. That is where the cable from the South Fork Wind Farm is proposed to come ashore and where some of its opponents own property.

Much of Sag Harbor Village will be underwater, and North Haven will be a real island.

Up and down Long Island, the homes close to the South Shore will be underwater, and Fire Island will no longer exist.

The North Shore, too, will be flooded, and Greenport will be on an island.

Kennedy International Airport will be underwater.

It is not just someone else’s problem. Loss of value of high-end homes means loss of significant local business and loss of jobs, and it spills over, resulting in loss of the value of your own property regardless of whether it is in particular danger of flooding.

Showtime’s “The Affair” recently wrapped up its final season, and part of it was set in mid-21st-century Montauk, with warming temperatures and rising seas. The show forecasts what life will look like in 34 short years, including mass transit that routinely short-circuits because of flooding, coastal communities plunged into near-total darkness, and shoreline towns without basic municipal services.

We had better support clean energy (including offshore wind) and work to decrease our carbon footprint. It is urgent.

https://ss2.climatecentral.org/#12/41.0339/-72.0864?show=satellite&projections=0-K14_RCP85-SLR&level=10&unit=feet&pois=hide

How Solar-friendly is your town on Long Island?

David Posnett — Mon, 30 Dec 2019 01:42:09 +0000

Great resource: Long Island Solar Report Card 2019. An in-depth evaluation of 19 municipalities and solar policies on Long Island. Municipal regulations to promote vs. discourage solar panels! Interesting. I did not know how different the rules are from one town to another.

East Hampton ranks #2! Yay!

Oil Giant Takes Climate Change Seriously

David Posnett — Fri, 08 Mar 2019 22:24:19 +0000

This is hilarious:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=34&v=D1BOWxFMT5Q

And this is serious:

BY STEVEN MUFSON, The Washington Post, March 5th

The chief economist of one of the world’s biggest oil companies is urging other companies to take climate change seriously — and sooner rather than later.

If not, it might be bad for business.

That’s the warning from BP’s Spencer Dale, who made the rounds in Washington last week explaining the business case for finding a solution for the warming planet.

“All the climate arguments are real, urgent and important,” Dale said in an interview with The Washington Post.

Despite working for one of the world’s biggest producers of fossil fuels, Dale said the longer the world waits to address rising emissions, the more “draconian” the changes in the global economy will have to be.

“How do I run a business, how do I make a business plan if I know that the path I’m on is unstable?” Dale asked.

For a multinational energy firm operating in dozens of countries, that could mean having to scrap assets, Dale said.

The provocative economist spent more than a decade working for the Bank of England before joining the oil giant. At the end of February, Dale led the publication of BP’s annual energy outlook, which is widely anticipated among energy industry followers.

At the center of the report’s most likely scenario for the future is the tension between the pressing need to slash carbon emissions and the growing demand for energy as the global population grows and seeks better livelihoods.

The best way to deal with that, Dale said, is to boost the energy efficiency of buildings and other systems.

Still, in all of BP’s scenarios, oil would still be widely used in 2040. The amount could vary from 80 million barrels a day to 130 million barrels a day — a huge gap. Yet even the low-end scenario would require trillions of dollars of investment just in petroleum over the next 20 years.

Indeed, history shows how hard it has been for societies to move from one form of power production to another, Dale said. Previous energy transitions have taken about four or five decades, he said.

It took almost 45 years, for example, for oil to go from 1 percent of world energy in the late 1800s to 10 percent. It took natural gas more than half a century to catch on.

Renewables will penetrate the global energy system faster than any fuel in history, Dale said, going from 1 percent to 10 percent in just 15 years.

But BP’s analysis suggests that is not fast enough to stem the growth of climate-warming emissions. Even though new renewable energy will satisfy about half of the new energy demand, carbon dioxide emissions are likely to increase by about 10 percent instead of falling sharply as needed to stem climate change.

Overall, global energy demand probably will grow by around a third by 2040, slower than the previous 20 years but still enough to make it difficult to lower greenhouse gas emissions as needed.

Around 80 percent of that increase in demand will come from the developing world, yet a substantial proportion — two-thirds — of the world’s population will still consume low amounts of energy 21 years from now.

BP has said it wants the federal government to take action, having endorsed a $40-a-ton nationwide tax. But that doesn’t mean the company always supports carbon taxes in practice. BP spent more than any other company last year to defeat a carbon-fee ballot initiative in the state of Washington that the company said was “poorly designed.” The proposal ultimately fell short with voters in November.

Happy Valentine’s Day, Dear Earth, #LoveOurPlanetNotPollution

David Posnett — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 19:04:37 +0000

Some of us have been meeting at the Southampton library to discuss ways we can scale up existing efforts that draw down carbon from the atmosphere, based on the top 100 solutions outlined in the New York Times bestseller Drawdown: the most comprehensive plan ever proposed to reverse global warming.

The book’s 100 best practices and technologies measure and model ways we are already substituting fossil fuels with renewable clean energy, being more efficient, conserving, and even sequestering CO2 emissions. It is a matter of scale. The science reveals if we scale up our best practices, big-time, we can roll back greenhouse gas emissions — reverse the buildup of CO2 — reverse global warming by 2050.

There is much laughter at the meetings, and sometimes I tear up. So, we can actually cut the gloom and doom, and see our reality as an invitation to build, innovate and effect change? A pathway for creativity, an opportunity for an economy humming with innovation, for a renewable energy future with cleaner air, better health, more involved communities?

I share this 3 minute video, a positive hi-tech and low-tech overview.

Reading Drawdown I was surprised to learn that top solutions (#3 and #4) have to do with food —what we eat, what we throw away, where we buy our food. Individually, in our families, and as a community, we can make choices that have huge impacts in reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG).

Food waste alone is big (#3), generating 4.4 gigatons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year (8% of GHG emissions). Food waste from farm to fork generates emissions at every stage. We Americans throw out 1/3 of our food. If 50% of food waste is reduced by 2050, 26.2 gigaton emissions could be avoided, also avoiding deforestation needed for additional farmland. How? Willful food waste dominates at the consumer level. So then, eat what you buy, make delicious “leftover” soups, buy “ugly” produce, enjoy kitchen creativity — all big CO2 reducers and money savers. I can do that.

On a community level, buying locally and encouraging markets and restaurants to reallocate unpurchased food for reuse by farmers, entrepreneurs, food banks, even business or community composting efforts will reduce GHG. Can’t we do that?

Composting, by the way, is the CO2-smart way to handle any food waste. From backyard bins to commercial operations, composting creates an incredibly valuable fertilizer. Allowing your organic waste to end up in a landfill, absent oxygen, produces the potent GHG methane (34x more powerful than CO2). Note: Copenhagen has not sent any organic waste to landfills in 25 years, reaping savings, fertilizer production and carbon mitigation. Can’t we do that too?

Perhaps the healthiest lifestyle change you can make is not-doing something — what I call the Fish+Farmstand Diet, or Once A Week Red Meat. Surprise: beef cattle are 1/5 of global emissions. Eating the Mediterranean diet, more fish, fruit, veggies, grains, will keep you from heart disease, stroke, diabetes and you will feel great. Source your red meat from silvopasture farms, which reduce methane emissions 10x more than treeless farms (storing carbon in the trees and soil and 0 fertilizer use). From enriching a pasture with trees for shade to grazing in relatively dense wooded areas, Cornell Extensions across the state are helping expand silvopasturing to economically benefit farmers — a win, win, win. Why not silvopasture here?

Finally, the big accelerator for drawing down carbon from the atmosphere, the top #1 solution, is a national effort. Rather than have government subsidize oil companies as we do now, a 2019 bi-partisan bill would provide an economic incentive to substitute fossil fuels with clean renewable energy. Wouldn’t that jump-start be terrific?

Updating here from a previous blog, the bill’s full name is H.R.763 – To create a Carbon Dividend Trust Fund for the American people in order to encourage market-driven innovation of clean energy technologies and market efficiencies which will reduce harmful pollution and leave a healthier, more stable and more prosperous nation for future generations. It is sponsored by Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL), and co-sponsored by Rep. Francis Rooney (R-FL) and 11 Democrats, including most recently Yvette Clarke of New York.

Carbon emissions would reduce 90% by 2050 exceeding the Paris Climate goals and the Clean Power plan. American households would receive monthly dividend checks increasing from $600, $1,400, and $2,600 for each household in the first, fourth, and ninth years of policy implementation. Yes, gas would go up 19 cents a gallon, and a Yale study found that seniors, lower and mid-income and small towns benefit the most financially. The bill is transparent, market-based, does not enlarge government, leaves energy decisions to individual choices, provides thousands of clean energy jobs, cleans the air, and gives us a dividend check, each month, for 30 years. A healthier you chooses how you spend it.

Interestingly, the Green New Deal does not include carbon pricing. As Josh Siegel of the Washington Examiner, noted in “Republican lawmakers face pressure to propose ‘Green New Deal’ alternative” this leaves an opening for Republicans like Mr. Rooney and other Floridians who have taken the lead in co-sponsoring carbon tax legislation.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/energy/republican-lawmakers-face-pressure-to-propose-green-new-deal-alternative

More movement is taking place in Washington, as Madame Speaker Pelosi has reconstituted the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, which she had created as speaker in 2007-2011.

H.R. 763 is a well-researched bi-partisan jump-start to reverse global warming and importantly gets our economy humming with innovation. The timing is good now to make it happen and Senators/Congressman needs to hear from you. Call. Write a post card. Write a letter to the editor.

More information on our local Drawdown East End effort to be posted soon!

Mary Foster Morgan

Co-Leader

Citizens Climate Lobby NYS – LI East

Trump Mouths off About “Windmills”

David Posnett — Sat, 15 Sep 2018 17:29:50 +0000

Submitted by Judith Hope:

In an Aug. 30 rally in Evansville, Indiana, President Donald Trump made three unsubstantiated claims about wind turbines, which he calls “windmills”:

Trump suggested that a single turbine can be responsible for “thousands” of bird deaths. Birds are killed by turbines, but the real death toll from a single turbine is orders of magnitude lower than this. A 2013 study estimated an average of just over five bird deaths per turbine per year.
He repeatedly referred to “problems” when the wind doesn’t blow. It’s true that lack of wind prevents turbines from generating energy, but these pauses do not create problems that power grid operators can’t handle.
Trump also stated that living near turbines is noisy, enough to make someone “go crazy after a couple of years.” Studies indicate that people living near turbines are rarely exposed to average sound levels beyond 45 decibels, which is akin to the hum of a refrigerator. There is no direct evidence that the sound is detrimental to physical or mental health, although it may be annoying to some people.

Here is the full source: https://www.factcheck.org/2018/09/trump-again-overblows-risks-of-wind-power/

Editorial remark (D. Posnett):

I can remember visiting the wind turbines off of Block Island in a chartered party boat in October 2017. I remember,

they are huge when you are right next to them
they are completely silent – I just heard the waves, the wind and the people talking on the boat
there were private fishing boats at the base of some turbines, because that is where the fish were