Legalectric

It had to happen, there’s a “First Puppy” on doggyspace…

… and on the front page of the New Yorker

… and here’s a few First Dogs, that beauty in the back is probably undercover Secret Service:

So who’s the First Dog going to be?  The doggyspace lobby is working hard on this one…

Autumn is at the Humane County of Goodhue County and looking for a home:

She was found as a stray, and went to the shelter on October 15, so it’s time for you to go take her for a run around the block, a test drive, and she if she’s the doggie for you.  She’s nearly 6 years old, born in July (how do they know???) and she’s up to date on shots.  From the shaving on her belly, and her right front leg, it looks like she’s just been spayed.  She looks so much like Kenya!

Humane Society of Goodhue County

1213 Brick Ave

Red Wing, MN 55066
Phone: 651-388-5286

Hours: 10-5 Monday-Sunday

Autumn’s page HERE

Yes, it’s baaaaaaaaack!  It’s the Power Plant Siting Act Annual Hearing and Potluck.  It’s from 10:00 a.m. to high noon only, no evening session, so this is it!  Bring your Comments, your critical thinking cap, and a dish to pass!  Bring your own plate and silverware so we can make it nearly ZERO WASTE!

Here it is, direct from the PUC:

————————————

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the staff of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission will convene the annual public hearing on the Power Plant Siting and Transmission Line Routing Program from 10:00 to 12:00 a.m. on Tuesday, December 30, 2008.

Metro Square Building
Small Hearing Room, Third Floor
121 7th Place East, Suite 350
St. Paul, Minnesota, 55101.

The annual hearing is intended to advise the public of matters relating to the siting of large electric power generating plants and routing of high voltage transmission lines and to afford interested persons an opportunity to be heard regarding any aspects of the Commission’s activities, duties, or policies pursuant to the Power Plant Siting Act, Minnesota Statutes section 216E.001-.18, or its Power Plant and Transmission Line Siting Rules, Minnesota Rules chapter 7849.5020 to 7849.6500.

At the hearing the public will be afforded an opportunity to be heard through the presentation of oral or written statements. Written statements may also be submitted for inclusion in the annual hearing record by delivery to the Commission’s offices at the address above by the close of business on January 31, 2008. The staff recognizes that the time and location makes it difficult for all interested persons to attend, and emphasizes that written comments are encouraged and will be given equal consideration.

Direct all inquiries and written comments regarding the annual hearing to: Bob Cupit, Phone 651-201-2255, email: bob.cupit@state.mn.us.

———————————

Power Plant Siting and Transmission Line Routing Program Annual Hearing
Tuesday, December 30, 2008

10:00 AM start time
Utilities represented: Energy Facilities, Electricity, Natural Gas

Agenda – Public Hearing

Annual Review of Energy Facilities Permitting Programs

I. Introductions
II. Overview of Programs
a.   Public Utilities Commission – Facility Permitting Unit
b.   Department of Commerce – Energy Facility Permitting Unit
c.   PUC and DOC coordination of authorities and processes
III. Projects Reviewed
a. Projects completed in 2008
b. Pending and anticipated projects
i. Electric Facilities Subject to Power Plant Siting Act
1. Generating Plants
2. Transmission Lines
ii. Other Jurisdictional Energy Facilities
1. Wind Projects
2. Pipelines
IV. Public Questions and Comments
V. Adjourn

or

Either way, it’s all the same, corporate whores who can’t get it up! Today, a little accountability.

Today Environmental Defense’s office in Washington D.C. was occupied and re-branded “Environmental Offense.” Yes, the office of ED was occupied by members of Global Justice Ecology Project, Global Forest Coalition, and Rising Tide North America and Rising Tide Ecuador. ED was scoured and tested by Green & Wash LLC, and awarded with a CRAP credit… Certified Realists for Atmospheric Privatization, that is…

First Hand Account of Environmental Defense Occupation

ED Update on It’s Getting Hot in Here

Today, Environmental Defense, tomorrow, the Izaak Walton League/Wind on the Wires? The Doris Duke Foundation? (Doris Duke just dumped $750k into National Resources Defense Council for Cap & Trade). The Joyce Foundation? I hope they understand that we know who they are and we know what they’re doing!

The office was taped off as a Global Warming Crime Scene:

Here is the full statement in technicolor from Dr. Rachel Smolker, daughter of one of the founders of Environmental Defense, Robert E. Smolker, taken from the Global Justice Ecology Project site:

My name is Rachel Smolker. When I was a child, growing up on Long Island, my father, Robert E Smolker, along with Charlie Wurster, Dennis Puleston and Art Cooley, used to sit around in the living room sipping their beers and discuss environmental issues. My father, an ornithologist, was observing the thinning of predatory bird eggshells caused by DDT, Rachel Carson’s seminal work on the impacts of pesticides was still relatively warm off the presses, and their were already many, many indications that virtually all ecosystems were in decline: the beautiful wetlands surrounding our island were contaminated and littered with garbage, fisheries were declining, and from afar, the drumbeat of deforestation, pollution, and climate change. Yes, way back then. Climate change was an issue very few knew anything about, but I would say it came as no surprise o those who spent time in the natural world and understood the delicate intricacies of ecological systems on a tiny blue speck of a planet, more or less accidentally blanketed in a thin and accommodating atmosphere.

I watched these men as they talked, sometimes seriously, sometimes with tremendous humor, and almost always with a deep sense of commitment and comeraderie. I was 10-12 years old, on the brink of puberty and frankly not all that much interested, but I respected them and as I grew up recognized the importance of this phenomenon, called EDF, which germinated out of the couches of my home.

My father and his friends celebrated their capacity to act together when EDF achieved bans on DDT in the early 70s. They brought lawyers and scientists and fundraisers and administrators and many others onboard and expanded the organization, experienced and overcame some growing pains and enjoyed a number of victories.

My father passed away in 1985. By that time, EDF had at least a few offices dotted around the country, and sizeable resources. The organization was, already, under the leadership of Fredd Krupp. Before his death, he complained to me that he “did not approve of the direction in which the organization was headed”.

Why? What was he foreseeing? I think I understand now:

EDF has swelled and mushroomed into the darling of the corporate world: advocating for “market incentives” to “encourage” corporations to stop their destructive practices, provided they do not cause “economic hardship”. Like the corporations you have befriended, you too have become entirely beholden to the gods of endless economic growth. The goal of protecting the environment has been relegated to the back seat.

EDF’s corporate partnership approach sounded friendly and sort of “new” back in the 80’s. Sure, perhaps there was some potential in trying to reform polluting practices “from the inside”. EDF proudly designed the market trading system for sulphur emissions causing acid rain, among numerous other accomplishments. That emissions trading model, hailed as a breakthrough in “harnessing market forces in service of environmental goals”, has now been carried over to the international arena and become the central approach to addressing global warming emissions.

Carbon emissions trading is now formally enshrined within the Kyoto Protocol, and within almost every state, federal and international initiative for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It has in fact become pretty much the only game in town.

You argue that it is the “least expensive” means of lowering emissions, allowing companies to avoid costly abatement by purchasing credits from others who could more easily reduce their emissions. A sort of “kinder gentler” approach to lowering carbon emissions.

But let me ask you. Is it working? Has it worked? Will it work fast enough? Is it in our best interests at this point to make things kind and gentle and inexpensive for these polluters? Is that our priority?

I would ask that you take a trip outside of Washington, put on your boots and jeans and anoraks: travel to the Arctic community of Kivalina and talk with the folks there who are filing suit against your bedfellows in the fossil fuel industry over the extermination of their community and their entire lifestyle. I say, you are guilty by association. EDF has become the mistress of murderers. While James Hansen and others suggest they should
be put on trial for their crimes against humanity, you would have us reward them!

You would have us reward them by turning the atmosphere into private property, dividing it into pieces and generously bequeathing the pieces as gifts to these corporate criminals. And in doing so, you provide them with a license to carry on with their dirty business and pretend to be doing something other than advancing their own profits. While they drill and mine and pump and plunder with one hand, the other is busy shaking hands with Fred Krupp. EDF has been the primary architects and advocates of “market approaches” which do nothing but pad the coffers of climate criminals while doing nothing to avert global warming.

EDF has turned itself into a corporate makeover facility. The most polluting companies on earth walk in here seeking advice on how to better paint themselves green. EDF does the paint job and then hands out free samples and an eternity’s worth of coupons for future cash-in. What comes out the other end is business as usual, and a few added digits on the organization‚s salary balance sheets.

I have two young children. I am not going to launch into a teary-eyed appeal to you about their future, don‚’t worry.

No: I am going to tell you something about being a parent that I think is relevant: When my children do something naughty, do I yell at them and take away some privileges? Or do I offer them a candy in exchange for halting their naughtiness? Welllll- some would advocate the candy approach, but what happens when they realize that the outcome of their naughtiness is to receive candy? Of course they can’t wait to be naughty again! That is your approach to dealing with polluting corporations; reward them with permits to pollute and a new paintjob.

That is why they are knocking down your doors. Your Climate Action Partnership? Well, no shit Sherlock – the dirtiest most polluting industries made windfall profits off the European Emissions Trading Scheme, which has been deemed completely ineffective if not counterproductive as a means of reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.

No wonder these corporations are eager to sign on to the CAP and have you championing such an approach! They know the climate change grim reaper is on his way. They see the writing on the walls. Would they prefer to be regulated and fined and forced to behave like proper citizens of the global community? Or would they prefer to hide behind some smoke and mirrors, receive permits to pollute, pass along the cost of purchasing those permits to their ratepayers if possible, and then rake in rewards for sort of maybe doing what they should absolutely for the sake of us all should be doing in any case? You provide them the means to enhance profits and paint themselves green at the same time! WoW!

We cannot pretend that handing out permits to pollute and then trading them around like baseball cards is even remotely related to seriously reducing emissions. It is a great get-rich-quick scheme for the brokers, marketers and financiers who enjoy playing games with my childrens‚ future, and it is a huge gift to the polluting criminals.

Offsetting emissions is a similar deceit, nothing but another fine arrangement of smoke and mirrors that allow some people to “feel good” while continuing to carry on business as usual. They provide a convenient way to sidestep and avoid real and necessary change. It is, without question, a lovely idea to provide funding to really good “quality” projects that hold promise of reducing emissions, but there are more straightforward ways to get there that do not require unfounded and unreliable measures of carbon flow, additionality, verifiability or permanence, and do not confuse fossil and biological carbon. We clearly
need to halt, not offset emissions, even where it is a hard thing, a very hard thing to do.

We are here today because we have simply had enough. In fact we reached that point quite a while ago, and since then have been gathering our courage and building the solidarity that is required to stand up for the very future of life on earth in the most effective, meaningful manner possible. It is a mightily sad state of affairs, when a group of dedicated activists, who are keenly aware of the dire crisis we are facing, must come to the offices of one of the world‚s biggest and most influential “environmental organizations” to protest. People you see before you have chained themselves to the gates of coal fired power plants and to the doors of the World Bank. They have stood up to corporate thugs and threats, they have put themselves in harms way to stand up for what is right and what MUST be done to protect the future of life.

We cannot afford to wait, or to fail, or to only half succeed at this point.

EDF: It is time to admit to the failure of the market based policies you are advocating: The Kyoto Protocol, the European Trading Scheme – these have failed us, and in the process have blinded and bedazzled so many that the real solutions to the crisis have fallen into the shadows where they are languishing. Now it is time to face the facts and turn every ounce of your substantial weight towards DEMANDING that your corporate bedfellows strip off their phony green veneer, halt the pillaging of our futures, and give REAL solutions to climate change their due opportunity. Yes it will be hard, yes it will force change upon the polluters. But the cost of inaction, or ineffective action, will be much, much greater.

The incoming administration has made it clear that they intend to adopt a cap and trade legislation, along with a suite of other questionable steps intended to address the crisis of climate change, including “clean coal,” nuclear energy and agrofuels. EDF as a massively influential organization will undoubtedly play a role in shaping this legislation. It is time to stop pandering to the corporate criminals. We can no longer make corporate profits a priority over swift and severe measures to avoid catastrophe. We can no longer concern ourselves with making it easy or less costly or any other such warm and fuzzy goodwill towards the corporations that are responsible for the destruction. We can no longer count on the magic of markets to achieve the deep, real, meaningful and essential changes that are needed.

EDF: I wish I could say I am proud of my own father’s legacy! But it is, sadly, the case that I have to apologize, offer disclaimers, make explanations when pronouncing my relationship to this organization. I can hear my father rolling over in his grave! EDF has strayed so far from his vision, from the mission of protecting and advocating for the environment, that it would now be completely unrecognizable to him. Were he to rise up from the dead, I can only hope that these plush digs and six figure salaries would convince him there is no relationship between the current manifestation of this organization and himself.

For me, it is deeply ironic that I find myself here today, taking action against this organization which so shaped my early world view, and which I have now come to see as a primary obstacle to averting planetary crisis: the architects and powerful advocates of extraordinarily dangerous and distracting policy advice.

I HOPE that the people working here will take a very deep look in the mirror and ask yourselves: are we REALLY doing the right thing? Are we true to our mission? To ourselves? To our children and to the future of life on this little blue speck?

CLICK HERE : Native Village of Kivalina and City of Kivalina – Complaint for Damages

Moventas, a company that builds wind turbine gearboxes, is coming to Faribault, Minnesota. So I learned when yakking with an attorney in Faribault. Wind turbine gearboxes… Now that’s the sort of economic development we need – a lot better than a new prison, eh? But there’s a catch — it’s JOBZ which means massive tax exemptions. CLICK HERE FOR JOBZ HOME PAGE. It’d probably be easier to list what few taxes they will pay. How will the community provide the infrastructure they want, provide schools for the workers kids, provide the roads and airport and maybe train siding they’ll want? Here’s perks they’ll get, per the “Moventas deal closer to reality” article below:

• Corporate franchise tax exemption;

• Income tax exemption for operators or investors;

• Sales tax exemption on goods and services used in the zone;

• Property tax exemption on commercial and industrial improvements, but not the land;

• Wind energy production tax exemption;

• Employment credit for high-paying jobs.
This is a company I know zip about, so I’m getting up to speed. From their site, there are two manufacturing sites in the U.S. that make wind gear boxes, one in Portland, OR and another in Big Spring, TX.

Moventas coming to Rice County

John Agliata, special to the News

A wind turbine gearbox manufacturer is building its first North American assembly plant in the Rice County area, a move that will provide a multimillion dollar spark for the local economy, said city and company officials Thursday.

Finland-based Moventas, which employs about 1,300 people worldwide, announced Thursday morning it would be building a 75,000-square-foot assembly and distribution facility in the Met-Con Business Park that is currently in Wells Township by Interstate 35. Faribault city officials said they expect that land to become part of Faribault by October 2009.

The project is part of a nearly $145 million worldwide expansion for the company, its third expansion in the past three years.

Along with the facility will come about 90 jobs and an initial annual payroll of roughly $4 million, said Jim Bjork, Moventas’ vice president for the North American expansion project. Peter Waldock, community development director for Faribault, said the hope is the facility could one day employ as many as 200 people if the wind energy market continues to grow.

Moventas’ wind turbine division makes gearboxes that provide a key step to help convert wind into an alternative form of energy. The company is the largest independent manufacturer for wind turbines. While other gearbox manufacturers such as Winergy — the largest in the industry — are bigger, they are owned by a turbine manufacturer.

Construction on the roughly $8 million facility will start in October and be completed in September 2009, said Troy Zabinski, vice president of development for Met-Con, which spearheaded the deal.

In addition to the jobs the completed project will create, the construction of the facility will mean more employment for area workers. Zabinski said Met-Con, which as of last week had 403 employees, will be able to keep more people employed during the winter months than it typically does. He said its employee roster typically falls to about 350 in the winter but it will be fully staffed this season.

When the facility is finished, Met-Con will retain ownership of the facility and lease it to Moventas. Terms of the lease have not been finalized, Zabinski said.

Project history

Moventas hired Bjork in October 2007 to research setting up an assembly plant in North America. Rising fuel prices and calls to reduce dependence on foreign oil for energy in the United States have led to greater interest in alternative energy sources, such as wind.

“The United States is one of the world’s fastest growing wind power markets, with the annual installation of new capacity expected to double by 2010,” Bjork said. “Being closer to our U.S. customers will further strengthen Moventas’ position in the … U.S. market.”

An important aspect for the company was to make sure a North American plant would be supplied by vendors with quality components to build the high-precision gearboxes.

By the end of 2007 the company was satisfied that would be the case, Bjork said, and the project moved forward with site selection. The upper Midwest was the target because of its proximity to the company’s potential vendors and customers, Bjork said.

“The closer you can get to the action, the lower your shipping costs in or out are going to be,” Bjork said.

That brought the states of Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Wisconsin and Minnesota into play.

Bjork said the first priority was to separate the states that say they want wind energy businesses from those that back their words with economic incentives and a solid labor market.

Minnesota was one of the states that passed that initial test — mainly because of its business climate. Among the things that helped it do so was its JOBZ — Job Opportunity Building Zones — program. Passed by the Legislature in 2003 and launched on Jan. 1, 2004, the JOBZ initiative provides tax relief to companies that start up or expand in targeted areas of Greater Minnesota.

Once its interest in the state was confirmed, the company looked at individual labor markets, doing studies on each community it was considering. This area scored high.

“Faribault has a nice market. You’ve got Faribault, Owatonna (and) Northfield all within a 40-minute commute. For certain professional positions, you’ve got the southern suburbs of the Twin Cities that are attractive. It’s a good, educated workforce,” Bjork said.

Officials from Faribault, Rice County and Wells Township cooperated and worked with Met-Con, which Zabinski said was one of five developers originally being considered for the project. In addition, state Rep. Patti Fritz (DFL-Faribault) and Sen. Dick Day (R-Owatonna) wrote letters in support of the project. The chambers of commerce for Faribault and Minnesota got involved, as did Tim Penny, president and CEO of the Southern Minnesota Initiative Foundation.

That cooperation and widespread support was key to Moventas proceeding with Faribault as an option.

“The fact that they worked together demonstrated they were willing to get into this highly competitive market. That was impressive,” Bjork said. “If it were a train wreck like it can be when different agencies get involved, I would have very quickly walked away from that. They made it very clear that they wanted to work with us.”

Part of that cooperation came in the form of financial incentives. The city will pay $600,000 toward infrastructure improvements leading out to the business park. The county will contribute $3.2 million, the state will pitch in $500,000 and Met-Con will pay $400,000.

Bjork had worked with Met-Con before when he was with another Finnish company, Uponor, based in Apple Valley.

“I knew that I wanted to at least get a quote from them,” Bjork said of Met-Con. “They always have had a good reputation. They did what they said they were going to do.”

The two companies started talking about the land at Met-Con’s new business park.

“Overall, the prospect of working with a quality builder who does what they say they are going to do and making it a reasonable overall package seemed attractive,” he said.

Company officials came to Faribault twice, once in April, once in June, the city’s Waldock said. Faribault’s efforts were strongly on the marketing side.

“We talked about our quality of life, our proximity to the metropolitan area, the lakes and other environmental features, about our education system and all of those things that make Faribault a great community,” Waldock said.

One of those things was South Central College. School officials gave presentations to Moventas about how it could help train its employees and perhaps even provide assembly plant workers at some point.

As the process went along, communities were eliminated from consideration until there were two — Faribault and Cedar Falls, Iowa.

“Then it’s about the people,” Bjork said. “Does the market have the horsepower to provide the candidates to fill the job? The last thing you want to be doing a couple of years down the road is hiring 50 or 100 people that the market doesn’t have or busing them in from somewhere else or reducing your standards.”

In addition, the facility’s proximity to the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport played a role in the decision, as did the Met-Con Business Park’s location along the Interstate 35 corridor.

“What it all boils down to is that the most important thing is going to be to attract good people to work for us, and being visible on the I-35 corridor will make people who are driving to and from the Twin Cities stop and wonder what we’re all about,” Bjork said. “This is going to be Moventas’ North American headquarters for its wind businesses. Location matters.”

Faribault’s role

Moventas has facilities elsewhere in North America, though none do manufacturing. A facility in Portland, Ore., services gearboxes — rebuilding them, testing them and sending them back into service. An operation in Greenville, S.C., does service work for the company’s industrial operation, which provides gearboxes for such things as pulp paper plants. There are also facilities in Big Spring, Texas, and Cambridge, Ontario.

“(The Faribault facility) will very quickly become our largest facility in North America. Some of the people working in Faribault are not going to be focused just on Faribault. There will be people in human resources, in information technology, in quality control, in supply chain management that will be deeply involved in Faribault but will also have responsibilities outside of Faribault.”

The expansion in Faribault will handle mostly new business, though some production will be shifted here from Finland.

“It’s not going to leave a void for long, though, because Finland’s operation is rapidly increasing capacity,” Bjork said.

What kind of jobs?

Of the 90 people expected to be hired, approximately 20 of those jobs would be white collar positions, said Bjork, who will soon start to recruit his leadership team. He declined to say how many people he is hiring for that team or what salary they would earn. He did say, however, that the hope is to find most or all of them from within commuting distance.

Once that leadership team is established, which he said could be by the end of the year, the effort will transition to hiring shift leaders and assembly operators. The starting wage would be from $13 to $15 an hour with the possibility for advancement and promotion.

“It’s important to have cost effective labor but even more important to have highly competent labor. Making a mistake in this business is very, very costly,” Bjork said. “So we’re going to be looking for good people with a good work ethic. We aren’t expecting to find people who have assembled things quite like what we assemble. We’re mainly looking for a work ethic, people ideally with factory experience who have done shift work.”

Bjork expects the plant to operate nearly around the clock, with two shifts as the norm and up to three or four as needed. He said he wasn’t sure how the hiring process would go and would wait for his leadership team’s ideas and vision.

“It’s all about building a positive culture from the beginning,” Bjork said. “I know that one of the most important things for me is that it’s a renewable energy field. I like going to work everyday in a place that’s part of the solution.”

Moventas deal now closer to reality

Moventas lands $25,000 for staff training

So what’s a wind gearbox? Here’s a couple brand new ones:

Here’s their Moventas Wind Turbine Gears Brochure.

What about that huge state-of-the-art Excelsior-Henderson factory that’s sitting vacant in Belle Plaine?  What about that Chrysler plant in Newark, Delaware that’s soon to be closed?  Time for some wind manufacturing in the U.S.!