amyklobuchar_amy

Whatever is she thinking?  Amy Klobuchar, Senator Amy Klobuchar,  did it again… a STUPID STUPID move… she’s been stumping for coal gasification (STUPID), transmission (STUPID), and now she thinks burning garbage is a good thing (WAY STUPID).

She signed on to a letter to Senators Jeff Bingaman and Lisa Murkowski to include garbage incineration in the definition of “renewable.”

waste-to-energy-letter

Oh, pleeeeeeea-ze…

Waste-to-energy can provide double brenefits: it diminishes waste reserves and produces clean energy while offsetting greenhouse gas emissions.

Through the combustion of waste that would have otherwise been landfilled, these facilities decrease our reliance on fossil-fuel fired electric generation.

So, once more with feeling, rattle Amy’s cage and let her know that GARBAGE IS NOT RENEWABLE!  BURNING GARBAGE IS NOT CLEAN ENERGY!  As the MPCA says, BURNING GARBAGE IS MAKING POISON!

USE “EMAIL AMY” FORM – CLICK HERE

or

Washington, DC

302 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
phone: 202-224-3244
fax: 202-228-2186

Metro Office

1200 Washington Avenue South, Suite 250
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Main Line: 612-727-5220
Main Fax: 612-727-5223
Toll Free: 1-888-224-9043

Contact Senator Jeff Bingaman

Contact Senator Lisa Murkowski

He says goodbye to Yucca Mountain, and in with a Federal Transmission bill — what a deal…

screamhomer

Yes, it’s that bad.  Call everyone…

Clean Renewable Energy and Economic Development Act as introduced

Here’s the DRAFT bill:

Senate Transmission Bill

CALL EVERYONE AND SAY “NO!”

One thing it would do that’s wrong-headed: If it’s claimed to be “for renewable” it’s presumed “needed.”  What’s wrong with that?

1) Rebuttable Presumption is a shift of the burden of proof.  On what basis?  DUE PROCESS RED FLAGS!

2) What about a commitment to any percentage of renewable changes whether it is needed or not, what about a percentage changes impacts on environment, property values or EMF or or or or or.  Electrons don’t care, cannot be ID’d as to generation, and impacts on environment and ratepayers remains the same no matter what’s on it.

3) FERC mandates that transmission be open to all comers — it pretends that it’s “for renewables” when FERC says transmission servces whoever is there, ready to interconnect.

4) What about need:

Nothing about “renewable” claim changes whether it is needed, whether there is a better way, whether those MW could be accomplished through conservation, through load shifting.
Nothing about “renewable” claim address whether renewables could be produced close to load, whether taking nonrenewables off near renewable site or in other locations would make room for renewables (maybe demonstrate this by taking a map with generation and xmsn on it, and highlight coal plants existing and in queue and how many MW there — you’ll see that’s where the transmission is planned)

5) Unreasonably favors that 70%, non-renewable, contrary to policy

6) RES – use of electricity is down, we don’t need MORE, instead we need to shift the percentages to a higher percentage of renewables.

(Maybe offer rebuttable presumption for renewable replacing coal generation and interconnecting at that site?  HA!)

Tell them “NO, OVER MY DEAD POLAR BEAR!”

… starting with that dreadful Sen. Amy Klobuchar:

Washington, DC

302 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
phone: 202-224-3244
fax: 202-228-2186

Metro Office

1200 Washington Avenue South, Suite 250
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Main Line: 612-727-5220
Main Fax: 612-727-5223
Toll Free: 1-888-224-9043