[Vision2020] Climate Protection Agreement: US Conference of Mayors

[Ted Moffett]

All-

Did Nancy Cheney sign?  I'm just an uninformed rube lost in the wheat and
pea fields!

http://www.allentownpa.org/prDetail.asp?prKey=285

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATE: Monday, July 24, 2006

The mayors of the three largest communities in the Lehigh Valley on Friday
announced their joint endorsement of a Climate Protection Agreement
sponsored by the U.S. Conference of Mayors.

"There is no doubt that as local leaders, we must do all we can to encourage
environmentally friendly practices, and the best way to do that is to lead
by example," said Allentown Mayor Ed Pawlowski. "I want to thank my
colleagues for joining me in this signing ceremony to demonstrate our mutual
commitment not just to our own cities, but to the Lehigh Valley, the nation
and the world."

The agreement calls on state and federal officials to enact policies and
programs to comply with the Kyoto Protocol to reduce global warming, cut the
United States' dependence on fossil fuels and accelerate the development of
clean, economical energy resources and fuel-efficient technologies such as
conservation, wind and solar energy, efficient motor vehicles, and
bio-fuels.----------------------

I'd paste in the details of this Climate Protection Agreement, but it can be
read at the link above.
I do not understand how we can reasonably separate the issues of global
warming from CO2 emissions and fossil fuel depletion/dependence from the
issue of our local transportation problems.  These serious problems will
impact the Moscow/Pullman area in a negative way, and thus are valid local
issues for long term planning.

Other local governments are specifically addressing these crises. They
recognize that the solutions can come from the bottom up.

Of course the Moscow/Pullman area is not Seattle or Portland, and though it
seems many tend to view the local area as making an insignificant
contribution to global warming, 10-20 local areas of our size add up to the
same CO2 impact as a large urban area.  Perhaps looking at the solutions
other cities are adopting is a good idea?  I think it is clear our local
governments could be doing more to address the global warming fossil fuel
depletion crisis:

http://www.seattle.gov/environment/climate_protection.htm

Areas of Impact -- How are we reducing our emissions?
**

*Smart Growth: *Reducing urban sprawl is one of the most effective climate
protection strategies. The Mayor's "smart growth" strategies for Seattle's
Center City and urban centers reduce global warming pollution by reducing
dependence on cars and increasing energy efficiency

*Greenhouse gas reduction: *Seattle City government has already reduced our
greenhouse gas emissions by more than 60 percent by constructing green
buildings and operating alternative fuel vehicles.

*Transportation choices:* The City's work to expand transportation choices
-- including light rail, buses, streetcars, and improved bike and pedestrian
opportunities -- will reduce the number one source of global warming
pollution in our region: motor vehicle emissions.

*Recycling:* Our goal of achieving a 60% recycling rate by 2008 avoids
thousands of tons of greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the need for
materials and energy.

*Sustainable forests:* Seattle banned commercial logging in the Cedar River
Watershed and is committed to restoring 2,500 acres of urban forests by
2024. Forests absorb and store global warming pollution.

--------------------------

One of my main objections to the previously proposed new Moscow High School
that is now abandoned due to the failure of the levy, was that it's
construction did not appear to emphasize alternative energy and energy
conservation, though I doubt this issue had much to do with the failure of
the levy.

Anyway, even if the quantity of fossil fueled powered vehicular traffic in
the Moscow/Pullman area remained stable, which it won't, it would still
be critical to locally reduce reliance on fossil fuels to address global
warming and fossil fuel depletion.
Local cellulosic biofuel production from local agricultural products to
derive fuel for local transportation might be an idea worth investigating.
This is a more advanced form of biofuel production that does not have to
rely on food stocks like corn.  Straw and even wood chips can be processed
into biofuel.

I am not sure there is enough renewable biomass, without seriously reducing
food production, in range of the Moscow/Pullman area, but imagine if locally
we could make our own renewable CO2 neutral fuel to power our vehicles, and
say goodbye to rising gas prices because of the endless crisis in the Middle
East, not to mention the eventual depletion of oil?  Is it possible this is
a future economically practical industry for the Moscow/Pullman area?  Even
if it only provides a fraction of our fuel needs?

Anyway, it appears cellulosic biofuel production is coming to Idaho with a
major biofuel plant proposed for Southern Idaho via investment from Iogen:

http://www.free-press.biz/2-2006/Cellulosic-Ethanol.html

Article quoting U of I economist below:

http://www.aginfo.com/reportView.cfm?recordid=1505


  05/17/04 Turning straw into ethanol By: Bill
Scott<http://www.aginfo.com/bioview.cfm?authorid=3> For
Monday, May 17, 2004 Click here for
bio<http://www.aginfo.com/bioview.cfm?authorid=3>
------------------------------
  <http://www.aginfo.com/audio/LOA051704BillCopy.mp3>Idahoans have used
straw from harvested wheat, barley and oats for livestock feed and bedding,
for rehabilitating burned public lands and other uses. Now a group of
Idahoans is investigating opportunities to use natural plant sugars from
straw to make ethanol fuel or polymers for packaging. University of Idaho ag
economist Paul Patterson estimates that eastern Idaho produces more than one
million tons of straw annually from irrigated wheat and barley. That's
enough to feed an ethanol production facility. Because Idaho farmers have
been harvesting, storing and transporting straw for years and years, that
infrastructure is already in place.

PATTERSON –"It would just probably just have to be ramped up to a higher
level. Then the issue that comes up is that technology with large bales
really the most efficient way for handling the straw when you starting to
look at the magnitude of straw that one of these plants might utilize."

Enter Duane Grant. He's the Rupert farmer who is using a 450 thousand dollar
USDA matching grant to determine the most efficient way to process, store
and deliver the straw to an ethanol plant.

GRANT –"You try and actually harvest the straw off of 400 thousand acres.
We're talking about 1.6 million bales of straw if we ultimately harvest the
straw in four by four by eight-bale configuration. Is the bailer the best
system for harvesting that straw or should be instead look at some kind of a
loafing technology or some new kind of technology that we really haven't
ever used before."

Grant will start to analyze the data later this year so that he can develop
a turnkey business plan for a grower co-op to work with Iogen and its
partner, Shell Oil. Iogen is a privately held Canadian company that is
looking to the Idaho Falls area as one of four potential sites for its
second multi-million dollar ethanol production plant.

HLADK –"They have a very high yield. It is basically an irrigated desert,
very consistent supply, a big grain industry in the area which means
stability in the future."

Iogen spokesman Maurice Hladk also points to one glaring deficiency in
Idaho, or anywhere in the US, and that's a lack of a national energy policy
and in this election year there's a good chance 2004 will end without an
energy bill being passed.

 ------------------------------
 For more information about Bill Scott, the author of this article; Click
here <http://www.aginfo.com/bioview.cfm?authorid=3>

-------------------------------------------
Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060805/68c0bc39/attachment-0001.htm