This morning SB 1154 moved out of the Florida Senate's Communications, Energy and Public Utilities committee "after heated debate," reports the Sun-Sentinel's Julie Patel on the "House Keys" blog.
If the Bill makes it into law it would require 20 percent of Florida's power to be "clean" energy by 2020 -- though nuclear energy would be allowed to constitute a full 25% of that quota, with 50% coming from wind and solar and an additional 25% from biomass and other renewables.
As Patel writes, "FPL has said it supports including new nuclear power to help curb costs and promote fuel diversity."
You bet! And, hey, the bill includes language that would authorize a "Go Green Florida" license plate, to boot!
Read Julie Patel's full blog post on SB 1154, here.
Showing posts with label wind. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wind. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
Nuclear would get 25% of all new "clean energy" under Florida Senate bill
The Florida Senate's energy and utilities committee is set to hear first thing Tuesday morning Senate Bill 1154, which would define nuclear power as "clean energy" and allow for a full 25% of all new "clean energy" generated in the State to come from nuclear power.
The St. Pete Times reports today that only half of new clean energy in the State as defined by the Senate bill would actually come from wind and solar, with another 25% from biomass, solid waste and other renewables.
The Times' staff says that "lobbyists for companies including Gulf Power and FPL hurried to the Capitol this morning to dissect the committee's just-released proposal for new "clean energy" standards in Florida." FPL and Progress Florida each have nuclear plant proposals under consideration by the Florida Public Service Commission.
The Times also says that no Florida House bill has yet been filed and that House members are waiting to see what happens with the Senate bill.
Track SB 1154's progress, here.
Read the full text of SB 1154, here.
Read the story at the St. Pete Times "The Buzz" Florida Politics blog, here.
The St. Pete Times reports today that only half of new clean energy in the State as defined by the Senate bill would actually come from wind and solar, with another 25% from biomass, solid waste and other renewables.
The Times' staff says that "lobbyists for companies including Gulf Power and FPL hurried to the Capitol this morning to dissect the committee's just-released proposal for new "clean energy" standards in Florida." FPL and Progress Florida each have nuclear plant proposals under consideration by the Florida Public Service Commission.
The Times also says that no Florida House bill has yet been filed and that House members are waiting to see what happens with the Senate bill.
Track SB 1154's progress, here.
Read the full text of SB 1154, here.
Read the story at the St. Pete Times "The Buzz" Florida Politics blog, here.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Competing FL Senate bills signal battle over "clean" vs "renewable energy"
The Tampa Tribune reports today on the battle lines being drawn in the State Legislature over the definition of "clean" energy versus truly "renewable" energy sources.
Sen. Lee Constantine (R-Altamonte Springs) has introduced "Senate Bill 2490, a measure requiring that 20 percent of the power provided by Florida electric utilities be made with renewable resources such as wind and solar," the paper reports.
That bill is now up against "SB 2328, that would require utilities to get 20 percent of their power from 'clean' energy sources, including nuclear, by 2020," introduced by Sen. Charlie Dean (R-Inverness).
Dean's bill supports the efforts of FPL and others to have "nuclear" defined as clean energy within the parameters set by Gov. Christ for taking Florida "green" by 2020. The Florida Public Service Commission (PSC) has already rejected that definition, but it appears that nuclear-friendly lawmakers are now trying to legislate the definition in Tallahassee.
According to the Trib, "nuclear power accounts for 18 percent of the electricity produced by Progress Energy. FPL produces about 19 percent of its power from nuclear plants."
The Tampa Tribune story can be read online, here.
Sen. Lee Constantine (R-Altamonte Springs) has introduced "Senate Bill 2490, a measure requiring that 20 percent of the power provided by Florida electric utilities be made with renewable resources such as wind and solar," the paper reports.
That bill is now up against "SB 2328, that would require utilities to get 20 percent of their power from 'clean' energy sources, including nuclear, by 2020," introduced by Sen. Charlie Dean (R-Inverness).
Dean's bill supports the efforts of FPL and others to have "nuclear" defined as clean energy within the parameters set by Gov. Christ for taking Florida "green" by 2020. The Florida Public Service Commission (PSC) has already rejected that definition, but it appears that nuclear-friendly lawmakers are now trying to legislate the definition in Tallahassee.
According to the Trib, "nuclear power accounts for 18 percent of the electricity produced by Progress Energy. FPL produces about 19 percent of its power from nuclear plants."
The Tampa Tribune story can be read online, here.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Gov. Crist wants diversified energy supply, FPL continues to push nuclear
The FPL PR campaign against choosing renewables that actually offset carbon emissions and in favor of gas-fired and nuclear-powered generation doesn't miss a beat.
While Florida Gov. Charlie Crist was telling the State legislature in Tallahassee that his "administration is committed to a diverse energy supply that balances solar, wind and nuclear," FPL spokespersons were continuing to push their two-part messaging built around zero-carbon emissions to the media.
First, goes the messaging, if John and Jane Q. Public want cleaner energy, then they should be be prepared to pay higher prices for it on their monthly electricity. Witness a perfect example of the messaging as picked up and localized in today's story in Florida Today titled "Want cleaner energy? Get ready to pay."
That's customers who should pay ... with no shouldering of the cost or responsibility for clean energy accruing to "good corporate citizen" FPL's investors, who in February saw their shareholder dividend payouts increased by 6 percent to 47.25 cents per share hot on the heels of FPL Group's announced 4Q-08 increase in profits of 82%, even as fuel costs to the energy giant were falling like a rock.
Second part of the messaging? Note FPL spokesperson Randy Clerihue's comment to Florida Today:
Or, if you have a problem with nuclear -- maybe that pesky little detail, that nobody has yet figured out how to safely dispose of the radioactive waste generated by nuclear plants that tends to hang around the planet for millions of years -- then why not try gas-fired plants as the next best thing! Just witness the wonders that the West County Energy Center is doing for the environment in Barley Barber swamp ...
No emphasis on conversion to true renewables like solar here in the Sunshine State, no real dedication to harnessing the winds that blow almost constantly across the Florida peninsula.
Just take what's on offer from FPL and the PSC and the politicians whose campaign coffers are filled with FPL-linked donations funnelled by the legions of FPL lobbyists deployed around the state. True competition will be blocked, communities from South Daytona to Biscayne Park who want to renegotiate their FPL franchise agreements in order to switch to providers who can help them convert to alternative renewable energy will be bullied ....
Oh, and by the way, you'll also have to pay for it -- and in 2010, FPL customers will have to pay for two new reactors at Turkey Point to the tune of nearly a billion dollars more -- whether you like it or not!
So, thanks Guv ... glad you're committed to energy diversity, but we'd like to see a bit more real "balance" in the equation, so that solar- and wind-generated power can come close to the nuclear-powered and coal-fired electricity that FPL keeps sending us through the grid and that required to subsidize, like it or not!
While Florida Gov. Charlie Crist was telling the State legislature in Tallahassee that his "administration is committed to a diverse energy supply that balances solar, wind and nuclear," FPL spokespersons were continuing to push their two-part messaging built around zero-carbon emissions to the media.
First, goes the messaging, if John and Jane Q. Public want cleaner energy, then they should be be prepared to pay higher prices for it on their monthly electricity. Witness a perfect example of the messaging as picked up and localized in today's story in Florida Today titled "Want cleaner energy? Get ready to pay."
That's customers who should pay ... with no shouldering of the cost or responsibility for clean energy accruing to "good corporate citizen" FPL's investors, who in February saw their shareholder dividend payouts increased by 6 percent to 47.25 cents per share hot on the heels of FPL Group's announced 4Q-08 increase in profits of 82%, even as fuel costs to the energy giant were falling like a rock.
Second part of the messaging? Note FPL spokesperson Randy Clerihue's comment to Florida Today:
... that 70 percent of FPL's fuel for powering electricity-producing turbines comes from natural gas and nuclear power. Natural gas has about half the carbon emissions of coal while nuclear power has zero carbon emissions.The clear subtext of that statement is that nuclear is clean and green, with zero carbon emissions, so if Floridans want clean energy and zero carbon emissions, they should be prepared to put up with FPL's ongoing expansion of nuclear energy.
Or, if you have a problem with nuclear -- maybe that pesky little detail, that nobody has yet figured out how to safely dispose of the radioactive waste generated by nuclear plants that tends to hang around the planet for millions of years -- then why not try gas-fired plants as the next best thing! Just witness the wonders that the West County Energy Center is doing for the environment in Barley Barber swamp ...
No emphasis on conversion to true renewables like solar here in the Sunshine State, no real dedication to harnessing the winds that blow almost constantly across the Florida peninsula.
Just take what's on offer from FPL and the PSC and the politicians whose campaign coffers are filled with FPL-linked donations funnelled by the legions of FPL lobbyists deployed around the state. True competition will be blocked, communities from South Daytona to Biscayne Park who want to renegotiate their FPL franchise agreements in order to switch to providers who can help them convert to alternative renewable energy will be bullied ....
Oh, and by the way, you'll also have to pay for it -- and in 2010, FPL customers will have to pay for two new reactors at Turkey Point to the tune of nearly a billion dollars more -- whether you like it or not!
So, thanks Guv ... glad you're committed to energy diversity, but we'd like to see a bit more real "balance" in the equation, so that solar- and wind-generated power can come close to the nuclear-powered and coal-fired electricity that FPL keeps sending us through the grid and that required to subsidize, like it or not!
Monday, February 11, 2008
FPL's St. Lucie wind-turbine plan illegal, says Commissioner
St. Lucie County Commissioner Doug Coward has said flat out that FPL plans to put wind turbines on public conservation land within the county is illegal.
In a story this week published online at TCPalm.com, Coward was quoted as saying FPL plant to put six wind turbines "on property it owns and three on Blind Creek Park — state-owned environmentally sensitive land leased by the county" is illegal because voters never authorized construction of the turbines on the conservation property.
In a story this week published online at TCPalm.com, Coward was quoted as saying FPL plant to put six wind turbines "on property it owns and three on Blind Creek Park — state-owned environmentally sensitive land leased by the county" is illegal because voters never authorized construction of the turbines on the conservation property.
In 1994, St. Lucie County voters agreed by referendum to pay additional taxes so the county could acquire environmentally significant land for recreation and the protection of wildlife habitat. Coward read the ballot language to residents, which he called clear and unambiguous."If you notice there is no mention of an industrial wind turbine in that referendum language," Coward said. “The county attorney has reviewed the proposal, and he has determined the use of this site (Blind Creek) is illegal. What are we debating? Let’s all go home.”
Read the full story online, here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Click on image
