Home Blog Page 2070

Dominion is just too into itself!

By
pontoon
-
1

( – promoted by lowkell)

Dominion Transmission has begun its last-ditch effort to get landowners to agree to survey by having an attorney send letters to 226 landowners along the proposed route of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.

The letter says things like it’s to the benefit of the landowners to agree to survey so owners can direct surveyors to sensitive areas of their property.  But it also makes clear landowner requests cannot be guaranteed.

It also talks about how allowing survey helps Dominion gather the necessary information for the federal government. In the end, the letter says Dominion has done everything it is legally required to do and that Dominion is just sending this one last request before it gets a court order to trespass on private property. The letter says nothing about the pending lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of VAcode section 56-49.01.

In the Richmond Times Dispatch article Dominion states 73% of 2,500 landowners have agreed to survey. 73% equals 1,825 landowners. Why has Dominion only mailed 226 letters?  What happened to the other 449 landowners. Of the 226 letters 189 are to Virginians. 90 of whom are in Nelson, 46 in Augusta.  One would think Dominion would realize its proposed ACP isn’t wanted in these areas and might look elsewhere! They prefer to bully and threaten our citizens.  

Our General Assembly and other elected officials have allowed Dominion to have its way for far too long. Dominion has become much too into itself. They’re in for a fight they aren’t used to waging. The opposition is organized and growing. Perhaps regular citizens can show our elected officials how its done…how to fight for what’s right and to stop new fossil fuel infrastructure that will certainly contribute to climate change.

Tom Perriello 2010 Outperformed Mark Warner 2014 in Southside Virginia

By
FreeDem
-
3

( – promoted by lowkell)

Yesterday I blew open the claim from the Warner campaign that they ran significantly ahead of Democratic performance in Southwest and Southside Virginia. But I had a thought on a more nuanced pro-Warner argument that I wanted to question today.

Putting aside the grand claims of Warner’s success in rural Virginia, suppose there’s an argument that with the older, more white electorate that by its very nature turns out in off-years Democrats have to campaign as more centrist, bipartisan political creations in order to hit roughly the same performance we see in presidential turnout years, even in rural localities. Trying to run as a proud Democrat and campaign on issues that mobilize our base risks alienating more voters than it turns out to the polls, a la Udall in Colorado.

While I can’t explain away what happened in Colorado, I can provide some counterpoint to the idea that the only way to sustain Democratic performance in an off-year is to run as a watered down centrist.

What if you compared Mark Warner’s 2014 performance with another Virginia Democrat who lost in a lower turnout off-year, Tom Perriello in 2010?

For this I only compared the localities that were entirely within Virginia’s 5th District prior to the 2010 redistricting, which also meant not including the split counties of Bedford, Henry, and Brunswick. I dropped the cities of Martinsville and Bedford (which no longer exists) because they were entirely contained in those split counties, these are a geographically cohesive sample.

I only looked at the two-party vote, ignoring the role of the two independent candidates in each election. In all but two localities (Danville and Halifax), Perriello received a higher percent of the vote than Warner. In some it was minor; their difference in the city of Charlottesville was half a percent. In others it was much larger, like almost 6% in Buckingham.

The result is that while both candidates lost the combined counties, Perriello received 48.9% of the vote and Warner only 46.9%. As noted, it’s not just explained by liberal areas like Charlottesville. Perriello ran better in several small rural counties like Buckingham, Greene, Appomattox, and Campbell.

The 2010 race featured higher turnout, on both sides, with 196,251 total votes, compared to 158,566 in 2014. Warner lost these counties by 9,806 votes; Perriello had a narrower gap at 4,467.  

With a 17,000 vote margin, picking up just 5,000 can matter.

Because of the influence of turnout, Warner actually did better in a few counties when you look at the vote margin, not percentage. In Halifax, Franklin, and Pittsylvania, the Warner and Perriello percentages were within less than half a percent, but turnout was down from 2010. This meant that Warner actually closed the gap by over 1,600 votes in these counties compared to Perriello.

The Warner campaign would believe that is the price Democrats pay in midterm years. Hope that lower turnout and a more conservative campaign message prevents Republicans from running up their margin with the older, more white electorate.

But that’s not always the way the math works. Although Warner was half a point ahead of Perriello in Charlottesville, the total number of voters who came out was down by a quarter in 2014. Perriello gained almost 2,200 more votes out of Charlottesville than Warner because of the higher turnout. Yes, his unapologetic campaign may have turned out some Republicans, but it turned out even more Democrats.

And it works beyond just liberal Charlottesville and Albemarle. Around 4,500 votes in Charlottesville and Albemarle, but then around 1,700 more in the other rural northern counties in the district like Greene and Buckingham, hardly your typical people’s republic or liberal commune. Although small rural counties, the better turnout and performance picked up around 100 votes in Charlotte, Cumberland, and Prince Edward counties, each. Finally, in Danville where Warner ran just barely ahead of Perriello in percent the higher turnout translated into almost 600 votes.

Some pundits would have us believe that Democrats have to make a choice. Run as liberals and you get higher turnout and better performance in college towns and the big cities, but you alienate the rest of America and end up shooting yourself (and your campaign) in the foot. At least in this corner of Southside and Central Virginia that’s not the case. A strong, populist campaign worked not just in the college town, but in most of the small towns and rural counties. Even taking away Danville, Charlottesville, and Albemarle, Perriello did better than Warner in the remaining small, mostly rural counties.

Virginia is a more diverse, more urban state than this sample of counties. The math for a more proud Democratic campaign works here, and could work statewide.  

[poll id=”

140

“]

Virginia News Headlines: Wednesday Morning

By
lowkell
-
1

Here are a few national and Virginia news headlines, political and otherwise, for Wednesday, November 12.

*Tribute fills Mall with rock, respect

*China, U.S. strike deal to limit greenhouse gases (Finally, some good news — thank you President Obama, Secretary Kerry, etc.)

*China, America and Our Warming Planet (John Kerry: “The U.S. will reduce emissions by 26 to 28 percent by 2025. China will try to reach peak emissions before 2030.”)

*The coming climate onslaught (“President Obama readies a sweeping list of executive actions.” This is absolutely necessary, urgent actually. Do it!)

*The Worst Voter Turnout in 72 Years (“Apathy, anger and frustration at the negative tone of the campaigns resulted in the lowest percentage of voter participation since 1942.”)

*Hillary’s Going to Have a Primary After All, and She Should Be Grateful (I tend to agree — primaries are generally good things for a number of reasons.)

*Kaine expects Senate debate on troops fighting ISIS

*Ed Gillespie’s ‘nearly flawless’ campaign was enough to take Loudoun. Just not quite the state. (Combined with a totally lame campaign by Mark Warner — even if one of his top aides, David Hallock, still doesn’t get it.)

*Virginia legislators deal on Obamacare and transport money, judges a hang up

*Spoiled by politics (“A measure that saves insurance for thousands of Virginians should enjoy universal support. But lawmakers refused to work together, choosing to score cheap political points than do what’s right.”)

*Schapiro: Warner could learn a lesson from his old boss (“Warner’s voter-mobilization effort was anemic, undercut by a campaign narrative that did little to do what McAuliffe emphasized above all else in his 2013 victory for governor: Invigorate the Democratic base of women, students, suburbanites, environmentalists, labor and minorities.” Bingo.)

*Mark Warner’s campaign knew race would be a nail-biter (If they really did, they certainly didn’t let people know about it so they could feel a heightened sense of urgency.)

*Dave Brat ready to start work after swearing-in Wednesday (The nightmare/freak show begins…)

*Hanrahan: Coal is a dead end for Appalachia (“Jaculyn Hanrahan Hanrahan is a Catholic Sister who is Director of the Appalachian Faith and Ecology Center located in Wise County Virginia.”)

*Kaine asks EPA to exempt Danville tile factory (Hmmmm.)

*Hall: Pipeline proponents have little to say (“Focus instead on sustainable renewable sources of energy” — exactly!)

*Bay’s annual loss of life (We need to do a lot more towards saving the Bay, including strong efforts to reduce/avoid runoff.)

*Sessoms pledges “thorough review” of conflict allegations

*Former Gov. McDonnell Makes Public Appearance (“Both face decades in prison.”)

*Williams wins NL Manager of the Year (Well deserved, for the regular season anyway.)

*It’s the last mild day before a cold

blast arrives and sticks around

A primary challenge for Mark Sickles in 2015?

By
Northern Virginia Progressive
-
2

For a growing number of Lee and Mount Vernon District Democrats, the incessant commercials for car title loans are like fingernails scraping on a blackboard.   The car title lenders — who loan at interest rates of 100%-200% or more annually and cheat low-income residents out of their assets, continue to spread up and down Route 1 and other corridors in our district like a cancer eating away an area otherwise poised for a remarkable future of growth.  

There is growing buzz that 2015 will be the year that these voters finally voice their concerns in the most logical way possible — to defeat one of the industry’s biggest cheerleaders, our local Delegate Mark Sickles.   One of the largest recipients of campaign contributions from car title lending industry, Delegate Sickles parrots the increasingly untenable view that these loans somehow help the people that receive them, when the evidence clearly shows that this industry preys on low-information consumers in the worst way possible.

The 43rd district contains some of the most upwardly mobile people of Virginia in the vibrant and growing neighborhoods Kingstowne, Huntington, Rose Hill, Van Dorn, and others.  People are renovating homes, moving into fresh new condominiums and high quality new apartments, and building new homes in this district at a pace exceeding that of almost any part of the state.  The absolute last thing that these civic-minded residents want are the bright blaring signs of predatory payday lenders spreading through their neighborhoods.

The playbook for primary campaign against Del. Sickles would practically write itself.   Focus on the large contributions from payday lenders to Sickles campaign, then to some of his particularly ridiculous statements about the “valuable service” these loans offer to borrows, and then cut to real-world examples of how these lenders with their 200% interest rates are increasingly causing our lower-income neighbors to lose the transportation that takes them to their jobs and thus their livelihood.   A downward spiral for some of the most vulnerable members of our community, facilitated by their own representative in the General Assembly’s support of legislation that paved away for the rapid expansion of title lenders in our district.

Delegate Sickles’s anemic run for Congress this year underscored how vulnerable he is if he actually has to run in a contested race.  Some who care deeply about this issue are seriously considering a run.  Let’s hope they do.

After “After Virginia Votes”: A Response to a “Radical Centrist”‘s Election Analysis

By
FreeDem
-
3

(I listened to this program, and yeah, it was extremely lame, particularly on the part of the Warner campaign representative, who simply had nothing interesting to say. – promoted by lowkell)

Today I attended VPAP’s “After Virginia Votes” panel discussion on the 2014 election featuring senior strategists for both the Warner and Gillespie campaigns. Aside from helping to lower the average age in the mostly octogenarian filled room at George Mason University’s Fairfax campus, I attended to hear how Warner advisor David Hallock would try to spin the near defeat for his boss.

Sadly, the sometimes candid conversation between David Hallock and Paul Logan paled in comparison to the sparks between Chris LaCivita and Ellen Qualls during VPAP’s 2013 analysis. Now that was an analysis worth attending! LaCivita is an unapologetic political hack, in the most delightful way possible, who never shies away from defending his dirty approach to politics. No wonder many of my friends simply call him “the devil.” Compare that to Logan and Hallock shifting uncomfortably in their seats trying to defend the practice of spamming inboxes in order to raise low donor funds.

Hallock at several times made the point that the lack of engagement during the midyear election depressed both volunteer enthusiasm and eventual voter participation, particularly among the Democratic base. While bemoaning the difficulties of getting Democratic constituencies to the poles, he clung to defending Warner’s “statewide” campaign that stressed bipartisanship and reaching out to Southwest and Southside Virginia.

Perhaps Democratic disengagement is not a fact of life for midterm elections, but a byproduct of the type of campaign Warner ran?

In his concluding remarks, Hallock made the case that the Democratic Party needs to do a better job of engaging our voters and turning them out in off-year elections.

Let’s talk about that.

First, I was surprised by Hallock’s claim that Warner ran eight to ten points ahead of Democratic performance in parts of Southwest and Southside Virginia. At first, believing maybe he meant lower turnout years like 2013, I made sure to pay attention when he specifically mentioned Tim Kaine’s Senate campaign as a comparison.

Consider the historic coal country counties of Southwest Virginia that were once a bedrock of Democratic support (Check out Kenton’s excellent analysis of Southwest Virginia.)

Southwest Virginia Counties

Tazewell County-

    Warner 2014: 26.6%

    Obama 2012: 20.6%

    Kaine 2012: 24.2%

Russell County-

    Warner 2014: 37.6%

    Obama 2012: 30.8%

    Kaine 2012: 35.5%

Scott County-

    Warner 2014: 27.1%

    Obama 2012: 24.0%

    Kaine 2012: 28.0%

Buchanan County-

    Warner 2014: 38.7%

    Obama 2012: 32.1%

    Kaine 2012: 35.7%

Dickenson County-

    Warner 2014: 41.9%

    Obama 2012: 35.8%

    Kaine 2012: 40.5%

Wise County-

    Warner 2014: 28.2%

    Obama 2012: 25.0%

    Kaine 2012: 28.7%

Lee County-

    Warner 2014: 34.9%

    Obama 2012: 26.9%

    Kaine 2012: 30.4%

This is not a story of Warner running eight to ten points ahead of Tim Kaine. This is at most running 4.5 percentage points ahead in one county; for the most part Warner was right around the same range as Kaine. And while Warner was ahead of Obama in some areas, it’s a lower range than Hallock’s eight to ten claim would lead you to believe.

So much for Warner’s immense appeal in Southwest Virginia, what about Southside? I pulled a handful of localities just to look:

Pittsylvania County-

    Warner 2014: 36.2%

    Obama 2012: 35.4%

    Kaine 2012: 36.1%

Danville City-

    Warner 2014: 57.9%

    Obama 2012: 60.5%

    Kaine 2012: 59.9%

Halifax County-

    Warner 2014: 46.2%

    Obama 2012: 46.5%

    Kaine 2012: 46.2%

Charlotte County-

    Warner 2014: 40.9%

    Obama 2012: 42.4%

    Kaine 2012: 42.8%

Mecklenburg County-

    Warner 2014: 42.0%

    Obama 2012: 45.9%

    Kaine 2012: 44.1%

Lunenburg County-

    Warner 2014: 40.9%

    Obama 2012: 46.8%

    Kaine 2012: 46.6%

Warner didn’t just fail to run eight to ten points ahead of Democrats in Southside Virginia, you can’t even see a trend of him doing better at all than Barack Obama and Tim Kaine.

I don’t have time to run the numbers for the entire state, but once the dust settles, the Warner campaign’s claims of running significantly ahead of Democrats in rural Virginia will come under question and be found lacking in support.

An easier way to look at this is to check the results in the Congressional districts (I’m using VPAP’s percentages for Congressional districts, which are preliminary).

1st-

    Warner 2014: 42.0%

    Obama 2012: 45.5%

    Kaine: 2012: 41.2%

2nd-

    Warner 2014: 47.9%

    Obama 2012: 50.0%

    Kaine: 2012: 52.0%

3rd-

    Warner 2014: 76.8%

    Obama 2012: 78.8%

    Kaine: 2012: 79.2%

4th-

    Warner 2014: 46.6%

    Obama 2012: 48.7%

    Kaine: 2012: 50.0%

5th-

    Warner 2014: 43.6%

    Obama 2012: 45.8%

    Kaine: 2012: 47.0%

6th-

    Warner 2014: 37.1%

    Obama 2012: 39.4%

    Kaine: 2012: 40.9%

7th-

    Warner 2014: 40.8%

    Obama 2012: 41.6%

    Kaine: 2012: 44.7%

8th-

    Warner 2014: 66.7%

    Obama 2012: 67.6%

    Kaine: 2012: 69.3%

9th-

    Warner 2014: 37.8%

    Obama 2012: 34.8%

    Kaine: 2012: 38.1%

10th-

    Warner 2014: 46.1%

    Obama 2012: 48.7%

    Kaine: 2012: 50.4%

11th-

    Warner 2014: 59.1%

    Obama 2012: 62.3%

    Kaine: 2012: 63.6%

Warner ran behind Obama in every district but one, the 9th District. Other western and southern Virginia districts with significant rural populations, such as the 4th, 5th, and 6th, still had Warner running behind Obama like in the rest of the state.

If I see any trend, it’s that Warner ran behind Obama by the same two points in almost all Congressional districts, except for three points behind in the 11th and 1st, but only a point behind in the 7th and 8th. During the VPAP discussion, Hallock said the energy and enthusiasm behind Brat lifted turnout in the 7th district and hurt the Warner campaign there, but it also seems to have minimized his drop-off from Obama by giving die-hard Democrats in the ruby-red district a reason to vote.

The Warner campaign wants us to believe that it couldn’t afford to talk up the Democratic Party and its accomplishments because it needed to pad its margins in rural Virginia. I don’t see the padding.

What lessons can we learn from 2014? Well that’s something I wish the DPVA would have a candid and frank discussion on. They clearly aren’t going to do that, so comment below with your thoughts.

Video: “Not Larry Sabato” Uses a Gazillion Maps to Analyze Virginia Election 2014

By
lowkell
-
0

Fascinating analysis, tons of data and maps (and “cartograms”) — great stuff by Ben Tribbett. Check it out. One interesting point made by Ben is that John Foust now could be seriously vulnerable next year, in his reelection campaign for County Board. Also, as for the Foust congressional campaign in the 10th CD, Ben argues that Foust pretty much lost the election when his campaign failed to define Comstock as a right wingnut. In addition, Ben believes that Comstock isn’t in the least bit worried about Foust running again 2016. I strongly agree with Ben’s analysis.

P.S. Ben also cuts loose on the Arlington County Board as “insular” and “arrogant,” “just don’t get it,” etc.

P.P.S. On the special election for Comstock’s House of Delegates seat, Ben says Democrats can only win if they define the Republican candidate early.

Virginia News Headlines: Tuesday Morning (Veterans Day 2014)

By
lowkell
-
5

Here are a few national and Virginia news headlines, political and otherwise, for Tuesday, November 11. Thanks to everyone who serves, or has served, our country.

*Mitch McConnell’s mission: Degrade and destroy the Obama presidency (Yep, that’s always been the case.)

*Waiting for Republicans to Act on Immigration Is Pointless (Again, the bottom line is that the Senate passed a bill with nearly 70 votes, there were enough votes  in the House to pass it, but Boehner/Cantor et al. wouldn’t even allow a vote. So…long past time for executive action on this important issue!)

*Catherine Rampell: Voter suppression laws are already deciding elections

*America’s Historically Shameful Election Day Turnout (So pathetic.)

*The Supreme Court Might Gut Obamacare. Your State Could Save It. (“So if a state wants to save its residents’ health insurance, all it would need to do is set up its own exchange.”)

*Mike Bloomberg takes his money local (“‘You can keep hitting your head against a wall, or you can go elsewhere,’ Bloomberg said in a statement to POLITICO. ‘Change is really possible at the state and local level.'”)

*Falling oil prices provide lift for hulking SUVs (Falling oil prices are not, despite what the media and politicians always tell you, an unmitigated positive.)

*Virginia Continues to Lag Behind Neighbors in Clean Energy Jobs (Thanks Dominion…and Dominion-bought-and-paid-for state legislators!)

*3 Ways Ed Gillespie Used Digital to Give Mark Warner a Run For His Money (“Having Twitter surrogates tweet out the campaign’s message.”)

*Gillespie says he’s not interested in running for governor

*Legislature approves 13 judges but delays higher-court picks

*Divided JLARC panel delays decision on Medicaid study

*General Assembly approves budget fix despite conservative revolt

*Casey: Photo ID law is ‘voter fraud at its worst’ (“Virginia Whittaker, 93, has been voting in Virginia elections for 72 years. But last Tuesday, she couldn’t because she lacked a valid photo ID.” Outrageous.)

*Virginia Beach mayor must explain

*Group begins campaign to better protect the James River

*Va. legislature nixes plan to dip into road funds (“A plan to borrow $50 million from the highway fund put 2013 transportation overhaul at risk, critics said.”)

*Former Sen. Rick Santorum speaks at Liberty University’s convocation

*Democrat and two Republicans lining up to replace Comstock in Va. House of Delegates

*Web site ranks Arlington public schools 38th in the country

*UPDATE: Loudoun supervisors decide against raising their pay (What, crazed bigot Eugene Delgaudio doesn’t deserve more money for his fine work? LOL)

*Don’t forget the sunscreen. This Veterans Day will be sunny and mild.

Map Shows Howze Strongest Along Columbia Pike; Vihstadt in North Arlington

By
lowkell
-
4

Thanks to Ben Tribbett for the following map, which shows election results from last Tuesday for the Arlington County Board race. The color coding is as follows: Blue=Alan Howze (D) by 10%+; Green=Alan Howze by less than 10%; Red=John Vihstadt (R/I/whatever) by 10%+; Orange=John Vihstadt by less than 10%. So, basically, the anti-Columbia-Pike-streetcar candidate (Vihstadt) did the worst along diverse, relatively less affluent Columbia Pike (Rt. 244). Vihstadt did the best mostly in overwhelmingly white, affluent, large-single-family-home, northernmost Arlington (also folks who aren’t likely to be using the streetcar, of course). In contrast, the pro-Columbia-Pike-streetcar candidate (Howze) did best along Columbia Pike and worst in northernmost Arlington. Also interesting is to compare this map to the one Ben did of crossover voting, which generally showed the highest Warner/Beyer/Vihstadt voting pattern north of Route 50. Thoughts?

Scientists to Gov. McAuliffe: EPA’s Clean Power Plan a Great Opportunity for Virginia

By
lowkell
-
5

I received the following press release a little while ago and thought it was well worth passing along. On a related note, I just finished reading Virginia Climate Fever, which makes abundantly clear what's at stake for Virginia if we don't take strong action ASAP.

 

Richmond, VA – Today, 15 climate scientists from top universities across the Commonwealth are urging Governor Terry McAuliffe to address climate change impacts on Virginia’s economy and health by meeting the carbon reduction targets under the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan. The scientists, who have offered to meet with the Governor, also write that reducing fossil fuels combined with energy efficiency would create jobs, diversify Virginia’s energy supply and revitalize the state’s flagging economy. In addition, Virginia’s efficiency and renewables goals alone, if achieved, would satisfy the Commonwealth’s obligation under EPA’s Clean Power Plan.

 

"Surveys show that most people in Virginia correctly understand that climate change is happening, and that it is already causing our weather to become more extreme," said Dr. Edward Maibach, Director of the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University. "They are beginning to understand that climate change isn't just a problem for people in the future, it is our problem, here and now, and we need to make good decisions about how best to deal with it."

 

Projections in recent reports by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change earlier this month and the National Climate Assessment in May have starkly laid out how humans are driving climate change and what’s at stake for Virginia and the United States as a whole if we do not reduce carbon pollution. Both reports show that Virginia communities face flooding, particularly in areas such as Newport News, from rising sea levels, more extreme weather events, ocean acidification coupled with periods of drought and heavy rain.

 

“The changes are happening here and now—sea level rising, hotter and drier weather for longer periods of time, intense rainfall events—that trend will continue and increase and it demands action,” said Dr. James L. Kinter III, Director of the Center for Ocean-Land-Atmosphere Studies and Professor of Climate Dynamics at George Mason University. “We look forward to being a resource for Governor McAuliffe and the Commonwealth in developing strategies to address the threats climate change represents to our society, our health and our economy.”

Please see letter below.

Governor Terry McAuliffe

1111 East Broad StreetRichmond, VA 23219

Dear Governor McAuliffe,

 

We, the undersigned scientists and academicians of Virginia, representing a broad range of disciplines, write this letter to convey the importance of addressing climate change, fully utilizing the tools at your administration’s disposal in your single term. One of these tools is the EPA’s Clean Power Plan.

 

As you know, humans are negatively affecting the climate in the United States and worldwide.  This fact was just reaffirmed by the UN IPCC Synthesis Report on November 2, 2014.  The impacts in Virginia include rising sea levels (perhaps three feet or more by 2100), ocean acidification that adversely affects fisheries, increases in the heaviest rainfalls, more weather extremes, more frequent and severe droughts, and potentially more intense hurricanes and intensified tornado patterns.

 

These expected changes will impact our state. With its diverse economy and proximity to the coast, Virginia is particularly vulnerable.  The changing climate will also affect human health.  Heat-stress is a danger to humans that leads to increases in cardiac arrests and lowered worker productivity. Increased temperatures also threaten the respiratory health of Virginians by increasing ground-level pollution and allergens. Increased frequent flooding impacts building structures and degrades indoor air quality through enhanced mold growth. Finally, our warming climate presents added risks to vector-borne diseases and water-borne illness. Simply put, Virginia’s economy and residents are vulnerable to climate change.

 

But with peril comes opportunity: by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, you can create jobs, diversify our energy supply and revitalize our state’s flagging economy.

 

Embracing the targets for emissions reductions in the EPA’s Clean Power Plan is a great opportunity for you to accomplish this in your single term, particularly if cleaning up energy production is combined with reducing energy consumption through more efficiency. Indeed, transforming the state’s economy while also being a national leader in clean energy and energy-efficient technology is already within reach: the state’s efficiency and renewables goals alone, if achieved, would satisfy the State’s obligation under the proposed rule.

 

We offer ourselves and our expertise to your office.  The undersigned are able and willing to meet with you – to provide current and accurate information so that informed decisions can be made. Only with accurate information can your office, and the Commonwealth, chart a wise path in the coming years and decades.

 

We call on you to embrace this opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, create jobs, diversify our energy supply, increase our energy efficiency and revitalize our state's flagging economy.

 

With Regards,

 

Dr. Andres Clarens, University of Virginia

Dr. Steve Cox, Virginia Tech

Dr. Howard Epstein, University of Virginia

Dr. Purusottam Jena, Virginia Commonwealth University

Dr. William Keene, University of Virginia

Dr. Jim Kinter, George Mason University

Dr. Deborah Lawrence, University of Virginia

Dr. John Little, Virginia Tech

Dr. Garrick Louis, University of Virginia

Dr. Thomas Lovejoy, George Mason University

Dr. Ed Maibach, George Mason University

Dr. Linsey Marr, Virginia Tech

Dr. Karen McGlathery, University of Virginia

Dr. Jennie Moody, University of Virginia

Dr. Hans-Peter Plag, Old Dominion University

President of Virginia Advanced Energy Industries Coalition Demolishes SCC’s “Shoddy Work”

By
lowkell
-
0

Somehow I missed this op-ed in my morning news roundup, but it’s a must-read for anyone who cares about Virginia’s energy and economic future. The following are a few key points by Virginia Advanced Energy Industries Coalition (VAEIC) President Francis Hodsoll regarding the Virginia State Corporation Commission (SCC)’s recent “analysis” (using the word VERY loosely!) of the EPA’s Clean Power Plan. Note that the mission of VAEIC is to “[promote] open markets for clean and secure advanced energy technologies in order to create jobs and position Virginia as a magnet for talent and innovation in the advanced energy sector.”

*”[N]eighboring Mid-Atlantic states [have] created 290,000 clean energy jobs while Virginia [has] stood still.” Crazy.

*Even crazier is that the Virginia SCC is now “aggressively trying to block the creation of entire new clean energy industries” in our state. What on earth? To put it mildly, this is “a strange position for an agency with a mission that includes improving public service and providing objective, timely and expert assistance.”

*The SCC’s recent “analysis” of the EPA’s Clean Power Plan is, among other things, “inexplicably flawed and error-filled” (e.g., “the SCC assumed that Virginia would cut pollution in the most expensive way possible – building a new nuclear plant, with a price tag above $20 billion”).

*How flawed is the SCC’s analysis? Example: their “analysts” falsely claimed “that the EPA ignores the costs of retiring old, dirty power plants that will be retired anyway.” In fact, “over 60 percent of that [coal-fired] generation capacity – 1,796 megawatts – was already going to be mothballed” anyway. And, Hodsoll adds: “The remaining retirements represent just 4 percent of total state electricity needs. That’s something basic energy efficiency and clean energy can easily replace.”

*The SCC also ignores a few important facts: ” Solar modules costs have plunged 80 percent since 2008. Wind turbines costs are down 29 percent. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates solar dropping another 12 percent this year.” That’s why corporate America is scrambling to build solar power – “because it makes economic sense” right now (and even more so every year that goes by).

*Now here’s the truly insidious part. “Not only did [the SCC] ignore the facts, its staff aggressively publicized this ‘report.’ The only rationale I can assume is this anti-growth, anti-business community ‘report’ was meant to force Gov. Terry McAuliffe to turn away from a $1 billion a year opportunity to create jobs and save consumers money.” It’s truly outrageous, and the SCC “staff members who wrote this document should be called to account.”

I’d just add that the corporate media, with a few exceptions, has utterly failed on this one. Instead of just parroting a deeply flawed “analysis” by an agency “led” by a bunch of pro-coal Republicans, the media should have done its job and critically analyzed this hit job by a deeply politicized agency with zero credibility. As for Gov. McAuliffe, he should file the SCC’s “analysis” where it belongs – the ol’ “circular file.”

1...2,0692,0702,071...3,275Page 2,070 of 3,275












EVEN MORE NEWS

POPULAR CATEGORY

©