Energy

The Sierra Club and Natural Gas

02/02/2012 From Michael Brune, Executive Director

Have you ever had to turn away millions of dollars? It sounds crazy, but here's why the Sierra Club chose to do exactly that.

In 2010, soon after I became the organization's executive director, I learned that beginning in 2007 the Sierra Club had received more than $26 million from individuals or subsidiaries of Chesapeake Energy, one of the country's largest natural gas companies. At the same time I learned about the donation, we at the Club were also hearing from scientists and from local Club chapters about the risks that natural gas drilling posed to our air, water, climate, and people in their communities. We cannot accept money from an industry we need to change. Very quickly, the board of directors, with my strong encouragement, cut off these donations and rewrote our gift acceptance policy. Let me tell you how it came about.


PNM Financial Reports and Analysis

PNM Analysis (by David Van Winkle):

  • Residential rates have increased by 41% from 2008, with 1% of this due to energy efficiency and none due to renewable energy.
  • PNM Resources, the parent company of PNM Electric, sold a Texas business for $270M in November 2011 and the Board authorized the company to buy back $230M of shares. 80% of PNMR shares are owned by financial institutions.
  • Compensation for the top five executives was $8.3M in 2010, up by 68% since 2008.
  • All of their strategic goals are shareholder improvements. None related to customers, rate payers, employees, or the environment.
  • Earnings before taxes have increased from $6M in 2008 to about $150M in 2012, an increase of 2500%.
  • Base rates have increased by $182M from 2008 to 2012.
  • 79% of the base rate increase has gone to improving profits.

PNM’s 2011 Integrated Resource Plan

PNM filed it's Integrated Resource Plan on July 17, 2011. The Coalition for Clean Affordable Energy (CCAE), the Sierra Club and others filed an objection to the IRP in mid-August.

Attachments include the PNM IRP, several presentations made by PNM during the IRP process from September 2010 to June 2011.

The filing to the NM PRC by the various interveners is also attached.

This is a summary of the low-lights of the plan:

  • Continues business as usual
  • Does not comprehend any environmental laws in main plan.
  • Misses Renewable Energy Act requirement – 13% in 2030 vs law of 20% in 2020.
  • Excludes impact of new building codes in demand forecast.
  • Energy efficiency impact declines after 2020 – equivalent to removing CFLs
  • No serious consideration for transition from coal to clean energy

San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Information

Intervention in the PNM, and NMED appeal of the EPA ruling on BART at San Juan

Op-ed published in Albuquerque Journal and Santa Fe New Mexican. Original draft created by David Van Winkle. Jeff Cappella edited it to make it appeal to a wider audience.

The official EPA rulings on BART for SJGS

NMED position on BART for SJGS, issued in June 2010 that shows that their position at that time was that SCR was required.

2005 Consent Decree required PNM and the other owners of SJGS to make certain reduction in pollution output


Four Corners Power Plant (FCPP) Information

The 11/18/2020 attachment is the APS presentation to the Arizona Corporation Commission that shows the financial costs of implementing pollution controls at FCPP and APS' plan to close units 1-3.


Sustainable Eldorado Residents Alliance

SERA1

WHAT IS SERA?

We are a large group of committed Eldorado area residents forming an ecological partnership with our environment by conserving natural resources and inspiring action to ensure a sustainable and resilient future for our community.


Power plant sued over pollution controls

Originally published in the Santa Fe New Mexican on October 5 by Susan Montoya Bryan | The Associated Press

Coalition wants Four Corners to install state-of-the-art equipment to reduce emissions

ALBUQUERQUE — A coalition of environmental groups on Tuesday sued the owners of one of the nation's largest coal-fired power plants over allegations that the plant has failed to install the best available equipment to control pollution.


Albuquerque institutions go solar

AlbqAcademy1-1mWPVarray_2.jpg

By Jeff Potter

Recent projections by the University of New Mexico Bureau of Business and Economic Research for population growth in central New Mexico are eye-opening. By the year 2035 there will be another Bernalillo County-size increase in the population along the Rio Grande corridor. These projections lead to concerns such as water availability, infrastructure limitations, and residential and business electricity supply.


Local Advocates Join Global Effort to Solve Climate Change

Flash Mob © Lindsay Marisol Archuleta

Flash Mob Seeks End of Coal

Albuquerque – 9/24 -Today more than 100 activists held a flash mob at the New Mexico State Fairgrounds to demand solutions to climate change. With the motto Sol Not Coal on bandanas, signs and flyers, dancers and volunteers created a high-energy spectacle right in front of the State Fair’s natural resource pavilion.

Watch the video


Albuquerque residents to “Kick Coal” at downtown Washington Park Unique event will show support for clean energy & moving beyond coal

Kickball © Miles Cliatt

Albuquerque, NM – On Saturday, September 10th, Albuquerque-area residents will gather at Washington Middle School Park to demonstrate the need to “kick” New Mexico’s addiction to dirty and dangerous coal-fired power. Those in attendance will join in a large “coal kickball” game. The fun and informative day will allow people in Albuquerque to learn about New Mexico’s addiction to coal-fired power, and what they can do to help speed the necessary transition beyond coal and to a clean energy economy that benefits all New Mexicans.


Syndicate content