Where there's a Will, there's a way

The SJR has a story about Amtrak being promoted as an eco-friendly travel option. I like taking it to Chicago whenever I go. I don't have to pay for parking or deal with city traffic. And as much as I like Amtrak, I'm in love with the L. I even wrote a song about the Red Line. Yes, I'm a dork.

The story is a good example of how passenger rail drives economic development. Land values and businesses grow around good public transportation. That means there are some up-sides to the possibility of having a high-speed passenger rail corridor and multi-modal center in the middle of downtown Springfield along the 3rd Street corridor.

Yes, there are problems with installing double tracks along the 3rd St corridor, just as there are problems with consolidation on 10th. Neither option is going to cause the destruction of downtown. It's a little irritating to see the downsides of one option over-hyped while drawbacks to the other are ignored. In some ways, the 3rd Street corridor will help downtown grow.

We'll only see the full economic and environmental benefits if we abandon the idea that public transportation is only for people with no other travel options. The trouble with the proposed multi-modal on 11th is that it's based on twenty year old backward ideas about mass transit.

The proposed 11th Street site is surrounded by important social service agencies. No one has been able to answer whether they plan to: 1) Force service agencies out to make room for the promised economic development, or 2) Ask tourists to walk by two shelters, rehab centers and the county jail near a high crime neighborhood at nighttime if they want to visit Springfield. Those are the only two options and neither one sounds appealing.

The local press finally started covering the full picture so we should be able to have a rational discussion about high-speed rail soon, without all the apocalyptic talk of Springfield's impending doom.

This song has been stuck in my head for the last two days...

Posted by Will at 3:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

One cause of the controversy over high-speed rail in Springfield is the popular view that passenger rail is primarily a Chicago-area issue. The impact and possibilities for downstate seem to be considered an afterthought, if at all.

A few news articles suggest that Springfield isn't the only downstate town not at the planning table. The Pantagraph reported:

It's not just Springfield where the push for high-speed rail has taken officials by surprise.
At the McLean County Regional Planning Commission, for example, executive director Paul Russell said the proposed changes are not on the radar of McLean County transportation officials. "Neither we nor County Highways have received anything on this yet," Russell wrote in an email Wednesday.

Asked if there any planning documents that would outline the effects of high-speed rail on McLean County, Russell said there are not. "Currently there are no plans in place that specifically address this," Russell noted.

Many local officials haven't been briefed on the potential changes. "This is the first I've heard of it," Pontiac City Manager Bob Karls said Monday.

If you're in the Chicago area then you've had several years of public discussion.

The Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency Program ("CREATE"), announced by the City of Chicago, the Illinois Department of Transportation and the major railroads in June 2003, calls for a $1.5 billion program of railroad infrastructure improvements in the Chicago area, most of which would be funded by local, state and federal governments.

The current CREATE plan calls for elevated, passenger-only tracks for Chicago METRA trains. Something similar might resolve most of the objections in Springfield, but that isn't being discussed either.

Rail advocates call the current plan transitional but the public may react by deciding that what's being called high-speed rail isn't worth the expense and hassle. This isn't the way to build long term support.

(Official Chicago metro-area map)

There's plenty of blame to go around for the Chicago-centric approach.

IDOT and other state officials could have done more to engage downstate towns earlier. Elected officials and planning commissions in Springfield and other downstate cities could have paid more attention to passenger rail instead of holding onto outdated attitudes about public transportation. Chicago-based "statewide" environmental groups should realize that being a public interest group must include reaching out to people in all parts of Illinois.

Ultimately, we have no one to blame more than ourselves. It's up to the public to demand good planning and pay attention to what our government is doing. I'd be happy to see Springfield agencies continue this effort at public outreach after the current rail issue is over. But, I suspect they'll go back to making decisions quietly in the background and sporadically engaging the public when it suits their interests. They can do that because we let them.

This episode must serve as a wake-up call that planning for Illinois passenger rail can never again be treated as a Chicago issue.

Posted by Will at 12:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Illinois General Assembly couldn't agree on a budget but the House did pass a resolution to express support for improved fuel economy and vehicle polluting emissions standards that President Obama recently proposed at the federal level. This was an easy vote since it doesn't require the state to take any action and the auto-industry agreed to the new standards.

The resolution passed Sunday night with 94 votes in favor and 24 against. Among the 24 most ardently committed against any action to curb global warming or improve mileage standards for consumers were the Springfield area's two Representatives, Poe and Brauer. Those 24 form the Shimkus wing of the legislature when it comes to environmental laws.

The resolution supports standards similar to the Illinois Clean Car Act that state environmental groups pushed for over a year. Incidentally, one of the organizations most active in lobbying against the Clean Car Act was the Illinois Auto-Dealers Association. The Green Auto stores that sponsored Springfield's Earth Awareness Fair are Association members and regularly contribute to the political fund which helped stop the top environmental bill in the state this year.

Posted by Will at 1:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Illinois Sierra Club Director Jack Darin gives his take from an Illinois perspective on the big news about Obama's proposal to reduce polluting auto emissions.

Change comes in many ways. Sometimes Illinois is way out front, like when we passed our 25% by 2025 renewable energy requirement in 2007, that Congress will hopefully finally echo for the country this year. In this case, we also did our part, but President Obama beat us to it, and we are all grateful and better off for it.

One of Obama's first primary campaign policy speeches was given in Detroit about the need for the industry to change. Seeing him follow through is a major victory and it's one of the reasons I wanted him to become President.

There's more to do though. Time for the next challenge.

Posted by Will at 5:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Friday is Bike to Work Day! Pray for nice weather.

Along with a workplace challenge, the regional planning commission arranged for a cool biker bonus:

Bikers can also stop by Grab-A-Java (1702 S. 6th St. or 3115 Hedley Rd.) to cool down at one of their water stations and pick up a coupon for a free cup of coffee. Cafe Moxo (411 E. Adams) will also be offering a free cookie to anyone biking to work who brings their helmet into the restaurant with them.

If you're ready to make a more aggressive statement for including bicycles in city development then you want to join a special edition of Springfield's Critical Mass Friday. They normally meet on the last Friday of every month, but because its Bike to Work day, they're also riding on May 15. Meet at 5:30 pm at the Old State Capitol.

Try to be there early, 5:30 is suppose to be the start time not the meet-up time. They ride slow on public streets to accommodate all skill levels.

Wes' email explains what it is.

--WHAT IS CRITICAL MASS?

The first Critical Mass ride was in September 1992 in San Francisco. There were 48 people. The ride increased in size by about 75% each month so that by, Critical Mass had almost 500 riders and was becoming well known among bicyclers in the city. A couple months after that people in other cities started noticing and began other Masses. Police and local politicians noticed the rides and have struggled ever since with how to deal with them. Rides now take place in cities across the US, Canada, throughout South America, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, India, Asia, and Africa.

--CRITICAL MASS IS LEGAL, BUT CONTENTIOUS.

Critical Mass is completely legal. By state law, bicyclists are granted all the rights on the road and are subject to all the same rules as car drivers and motorcyclists. Riding two abreast is permitted in car lanes. However, inevitably, when a mass of riders takes over a portion of the streets, this is a contentious activity in a culture so dependent on cars. Even 6 to 8 riders make a statement, especially as we shout “WHOSE STREETS? OUR STREETS” as we ride! Critical Mass is not a form of “direct action” because it does not “directly” solve or address a problem. Also, Critical Mass is not a form of civil disobedience because it is entirely legal. However, the rides illuminate the power of direct action and civil disobedience. When we assert our right to the road, taking back a portion of the streets that is legally ours to take, motorists and others take note. Our rolling protest proclaims that we need to carve out space for ourselves, that city development should not discount other forms of activity than driving, that wars for oil do not represent our political will, and that we can forcibly diversify this landscape by inserting ourselves into the public sphere.

Posted by Will at 11:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Representative Karen May, sponsor of the Illinois Clean Car Act, spoke at the clean car wash last week in Springfield. The Sierra Club loaded her statement to the press on YouTube. The sound isn't the easiest to hear so you'll have to turn it up.

In case anyone was wondering, we used biodegradable, non-toxic soap that's safe for rivers and streams.

And just because I keep getting the song stuck in my head, here's Car Wash. I think it was released the year I was born. Is that George Carlin?

Posted by Will at 3:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

WAND TV covered the clean car wash yesterday and they even allow their videos to be embedded. You'll have to watch a short commercial before the story.

Posted by Will at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I had fun at the clean car wash earlier today. UIS Social Work students volunteered with the Sierra Club to clean up people's cars for free and let them know how the Illinois Clean Car Act would help clean the air by reducing pollutants from cars.

In this picture I'm standing next to Representative Karen May, the bill's main sponsor, who spoke to the press. Representative LaShawn Ford, on the right, is a co-sponsor, and on the left is one of the volunteers, Eli. Illinois Sierra Club Director, Jack Darin, spoke as well. WICS and WAND TV showed up so look for us on the news tonight.

Panera Bread on Dirksen was very supportive by letting us use their water, hose, parking lot and buckets. Ace Hardware donated other supplies. Thank you Panera and Ace!

I think this is a picture of men standing around while women work. I promise it wasn't like that the whole time.

We attracted some random drivers going by and the response was very positive. This is one of those issue that the public overwhelmingly supports but oil and auto industry lobbying dollars thwart the will of the people.

Everybody had a good time today and hopefully we got the word out about an important bill in the General Assembly.

Posted by Will at 3:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Sierra Club and UIS Social Work students are having for a FREE car wash near Panera Bread in Capital City Shopping Center on Dirksen Parkway in Springfield on Thursday, April 23, Noon – 2:00pm.

The car wash is to inform citizens that Illinois can adopt a cleaner car standard, which will cut pollution linked to asthma attacks and reduce carbon dioxide, the primary pollutant associated with global warming. We’re washing cars and bicycles to highlight that “cleaner” cars are available and already sold in other states. Participants will have the chance to learn more about the Illinois Clean Car Act and sign a post card to show their support.

Posted by Will at 6:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Two recent articles contrast lobbying efforts over the Illinois Clean Car Act. The Illinois Times talked with students during the environmental citizen lobby day last week. They represent the vast majority of Illinois residents who want manufacturers to modernize by producing more fuel efficient, less polluting cars.

Angela Caputo at Progress Illinois writes about the auto industry spending millions to fight new emissions standards even while they tell legislators they support building more fuel efficient vehicles. Their talk is cheap but the billing hours of lobbyists are not.

Maybe American auto companies would be in better shape today if they spent those millions on research and updating their manufacturing plants, instead of manipulating the political system in their favor and running misleading ad campaigns.

Posted by Will at 3:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Mayor Davlin was in Washington DC this week with a delegation trying to make sure Springfield makes the most of the stimulus money.

Also in DC last week were over 10,000 young people for the Power Shift 2009 youth climate change summit.

I wonder if they ran into each other.

Posted by Will at 10:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

During his first week in office, Obama directed the EPA to reconsider their decision to stop California from enacting improved fuel emissions standards. The Illinois Clean Car Act that I keep writing about would have Illinois join the 14 other states adopting those standards.

The Sierra Club has a page up asking people to show their support for cleaner cars by sending in a self-portrait with car keys before the EPA hearing. Reversing the EPA decision is the next step in reducing polluting emissions from cars sold in Illinois and other states. It seems kind of corny but I'll send in my picture because it's important.

Posted by Will at 11:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A coalition of environmental groups are holding a state lobby day in Springfield. Even if you're not an expert on policy issues this is a good opportunity to let state Representatives and Senators know that you want them to support environmental stewardship. You can register online here.

One of the top priorities for Illinois environmental groups this year is the Illinois Clean Car Act. The bill number is the date for earth day, HB 422. It already has 33 co-sponsors from both parties but it will need a push on lobby day to pass.

Posted by Will at 2:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I thought the SJR decided not to publish my letter to the editor but it showed up today.

Last year, George Bush blocked 14 states from enacting tougher auto emissions standards that would improve fuel economy and reduce pollutants. It was a political delaying tactic done in defiance of recommendations made by Environmental Protection Agency experts. I was happy to see President Obama direct the EPA to reconsider that decision on Monday. It’s good to see science and the public interest being taken seriously by our president again.

Also last year, the Illinois General Assembly failed to take action on the Clean Car Act, which would have our state join the 14 others adopting improved standards. Now that the road is clear at the federal level, it’s time for Illinois lawmakers to reconsider the importance of reducing oil consumption and pollutants from vehicles.

The price of gas is lower for the time being, but our long-term energy and transportation problems have not gone away. There’s no shortage of alternative solutions. The technology to improve fuel efficiency and reduce emissions already exists. Many cars on the road today meet the higher standards of the Clean Car Act, including some with conventional engines, hybrids, and E85 vehicles. We only lack more political leaders who are willing to take bold action to stop Detroit automakers from repeating the same mistakes all over again.

Posted by Will at 9:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Obama is wasting no time making good on his campaign promises. The New York Times reports in a pun-laden article that Monday morning, President Obama will direct the EPA to reconsider the Bush administration's obstruction of fourteen states that want to improve auto emissions standards.

When the EPA denied the request to implement the Pavely emissions standards many experts thought it was a political delaying tactic by the Bush administration in defiance of agency scientists. Obama's action puts cleaner cars back in the fast lane. I'm sorry, I couldn't help throwing in just one pun.

The Illinois Clean Car Act, which I wrote about last year, would make Illinois the first Midwestern state to enact the higher standards. The General Assembly didn't vote on the bill in the last session, but it will be introduced again this year. Environmental and other public-interest groups created the Illinois Climate Action Network to push for climate change legislation and the Clean Car Act will be a top priority.

Typically, auto-industry lobbyists politically blackmail legislators with the threat of lost jobs if they improve fuel efficiency and emissions standards. But, it's obvious why the economic downturn is hurting GM and American car companies more than Toyota, which is selling smaller, more fuel efficient cars.

If American car companies want a multi-billion dollar bailout from taxpayers then they shouldn't be allowed to keep repeating the same mistakes. Now is the time for change.

Posted by Will at 9:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Both parties in the Illinois state Senate picked new leaders with better environmental records than their predecessors. Democrats picked John Cullerton as Senate President and Republicans picked Christine Radogno to lead their caucus. Both Senators were endorsed for re-election by the Sierra Club this year.

The Illinois Environmental Council gave Cullerton an 86% rating on their 2007 scorecard. He scored better with 100% in both 2005 and 2004.

Christine Radogno received a 71% rating in 2007, 83% in 2005 and 75% in 2004. That's unusually good for a Republican.

Both Cullerton and Radogno are co-sponsors of the Clean Car Act. That was one of the top priorities pushed by environmental groups this year and they will continue to advocate for it next year.

Hopefully, the change will result in the Senate passing more pro-environment legislation and maybe Radogno will encourage the rest of her caucus to move in the right direction.

Posted by Will at 11:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I'm giving the Clean Car powerpoint presentation for the SAGE meeting at UIS Wednesday November 12, 4:00pm, UHB 1004.

The Sierra Club along with other statewide environmental groups made the Clean Car Act an issue in close elections for state representative and had a lot of success getting new clean car supporters elected. There will be another push to get it passed next year.

Posted by Will at 5:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In case you missed it, tree-hugger has a post about the EPA releasing this year's fuel economy guide. Its odd to see that the most fuel efficient car only gets 48/45mpg. I had a friend with a Geo Metro in the 90's that got 50 mpg on the highway with a conventional engine. Sure, not everyone wants a smaller car like that, but why haven't we made more progress in the last decade?

Of course, this post is an excuse to encourage people one more time to come to my "Cleaner Cars and Alternatives" talk and powerpoint presentation for Sustainable Springfield Inc tonight at 7:00pm, Dove Center, Prairie Heart Institute 6th & Mason St, Springfield. People in other cities have had excellent things to say about it and this is the only time I'm presenting it in Springfield.

Posted by Will at 2:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I gave my Clean Car presentation for Sierra Club meetings in Champaign and Peoria this week. I have fun talking about it and it was nice to have people respond enthusiastically and ask questions. Since getting involved with the Clean Car Campaign I've met some very interesting people (interesting in a good way) with interesting alternative vehicles.

After the Champaign meeting I was lucky enough to go Twiking with Matthew Childress. The Twike is a three-wheeled human-electric hybrid vehicle with seats for two and storage space.

In the picture above you can see that my feet are on the pedals. Pedaling helps power the car but you can drive it without pedaling if you like. Regenerative braking helps recharge the batteries.

Matt gave me a quick lesson and let me take it for a spin around a parking lot on the UIUC campus. It took a little getting used to, but its very easy to drive around. It got plenty of looks going down Green Street near campus and he took it up to the speed limit with good pickup on Neil Street. He drives it to work every day and gets to park in motorcycle spots since that's how the Twike is registered with the state.

I tried to imagine how a woman might react if I told her I was picking her up for a date on a motorcycle and showed up in a Twike. hmm... Matt says the Twike is a popular "people magnet."

Overall, it seems like a fun vehicle practical for daily commuting. You can read more about it and watch a video at his website.

My last Clean Car presentation before the election is for the Sustainable Springfield Inc meeting this Thursday, October 23, 7:00pm, Dove Center, Prairie Heart Institute 6th & Mason St, Springfield. The owner of Springfield's Comuta Car says he's planning to come so maybe he'll let people check it out after the meeting.

Posted by Will at 11:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Over a year ago I agreed to chair the Illinois Chapter of the Sierra Club's Clean Car campaign and I've been blogging about cars ever since. The main campaign objective is to support the Illinois Clean Car Act that would have Illinois join the 14 other states adopting the higher Pavley auto emissions standards. I was hoping we'd be done by now but since the Illinois General Assembly failed to act, we're still pushing.

Election season is the perfect time to hold legislators responsible for their actions (or inaction), and several statewide environmental groups are asking candidates to commit to passing the bill next year. As part of that effort, I'm doing several powerpoint programs around the state to let people know more about the bill and build public support for reducing toxic emissions.

The focus will be on the Illinois Clean Car Act, what it will do, and why reducing vehicle emissions is an important part of the effort to curb global warming. The second part is a brief overview of alternatives to our current transportation options and debunking some popular myths heard in the debate over high gas prices and alternative fuels. By the end of the program I hope you'll have a good understanding of the overall national and state debate over a complex issue.

Here are the details to pass along:

Cleaner Cars and Alternatives
Presentation by Will Reynolds, Illinois Sierra Club Clean Car Chair

Peoria
Sierra Club, Heart of Illinois Group meeting
Wednesday, October 15th, 7:00 p.m.
Forest Park Nature Center,
5809 Forrest Park Drive, Peoria

Champaign
Sierra Club, Prairie Group meeting
Tuesday, October 14th, 7:00pm
Champaign Public Library, Robeson A Room
200 W. Green, Champaign

Springfield
Sustainable Springfield Inc. meeting
Thursday, October 23, 7:00pm
Dove Center, Prairie Heart Institute
6th & Mason, Springfield

Another date may be added for Schaumburg in late October. All meetings are free and open to the public. I gave the presentation to the Chicago Sierra Club Group in June and got excellent feedback. I promise it won't be boring!

Posted by Will at 12:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I might make the "screw you" posts a regular series. Last night I happened to see GM Vice Chairman Bot Lutz on the Colbert Report to talk about the Chevy Volt. He said he believes global warming is caused by sunspots, not CO2, as the scientific community overwhelmingly believes. In other words, he's a zealot that shouldn't be taken seriously. After the interview I got the feeling that most of the American auto industry executives need to admit that their business model failed spectacularly and resign to make room for new people who can adapt to the times.

Stephen Colbert jokingly asked Lutz if the Volt will get a guy laid. Lutz said you might attract certain types of women who are environmental activists and don't wear makeup. Nice.

You know what Bob? I like dating environmental activist women. I appreciate a women who's informed and cares enough to do something. I'm more attracted to a woman who isn't easily fooled by a talk radio host or oil industry lobbyist who tells creative stories about man-made CO2 not contributing to global warming. One day I'll drive a Tesla roadster to Green Fest and take an electric car load of tree-hugging hotties for a spin (at least in my dreams).

Incidentally, did you know that Scarlett Johansson's latest act of environmental activism is to participate in a campaign to promote recycling cell phones? Answer The Call will give you a postage paid form to mail your cell phone for safe recycling to keep toxins out of landfills.

(Tree-hugging activist Scarlett Johansson probably thinks electric cars are sexy)

The interview reminded me of the smarmy SUV commercial where a kid doesn't want his dad to drive him to practice in "that part of town" with "those people" over there who look down on people that don't drive hybrids. Give me a break. What marketing genius decided that the way to sell a hybrid is to insult your environmentally conscious customer base?

I want to like what GM is doing with the Volt but Lutz, along with their lobbying against Pavley emissions standards, is making it very hard.

Here's the interview:

Posted by Will at 3:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

There's a lot of news today about GM showing off the production model of their first plug-in hybrid, the Chevy Volt, due in 2010. Ideally, I'd like my next car to be a plug-in hybrid (assuming I can eventually afford one) because it offers the best combination of high fuel economy, long distance driving ability, and low emission levels.

Treehugger has several posts including photos, specs and videos from GM.

I'm really enjoying the irony that after years of using scare tactics to claim that better fuel economy standards would cost American jobs, GM is now looking to an environmentally friendly plug-in hybrid to save their company. I'd like to think that the auto-industry, and other industries, will put that old boogie man to rest, but I'd be surprised if they did.

The leadership of the United Auto Workers should remember this the next time they think about siding with company scare tactics against environmental regulations. They weren't doing their members any favors when they argued against better CAFE standards. GM should have started going this direction years ago.

Posted by Will at 1:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

The Springfield Citizens Club held a forum on oil Friday morning. When they do their larger Tuesday evening programs they make an effort to have people from both sides of an issue, but that's understandably not always the case with their shorter Friday morning programs. This was a one-sided presentation from the oil industry but it was interesting to hear their perspective.

Dave Sykuta of the Illinois Petroleum Council was the most predictable speaker. His job is to represent the financial interests of the oil industry, no matter how it effects everyone else, and everything he said reflected that. I didn't expect to agree with anything he said but it turns out that we'd both like to see a Cards-White Sox world series.

Sykuta took the usual rhetorical tactic of the oil industry and their talk radio stooges who blame everything on environmentalists. He kept urging people in the audience to get involved in the political debate so that the big bad Sierra Club and NRDC aren't the only groups with a voice. With Orwellian irony he presented the oil companies as helpless victims of a political process rigged against them.

I'm sure it must be awfully difficult for the oil industry to scrape together enough money to buy influence with politicians, especially with two oilmen in the White House. Poor fellas. I really feel for them. He seemed especially irritated by Senator Dick Durbin, which confirms my belief that Durbin is doing an excellent job.

(My suggestion for Sykuta's Holloween costume)

The main source of power for environmental groups is public support and the strength of their arguments, unlike the oil industry that relies on campaign contributions, conservative voices in the media and their economic power. Sykuta referred to people not wanting "smelly" refineries near them but he didn't mention the public health effects of those refineries or auto tailpipe emissions. His industry is having a hard time precisely because the public is becoming more educated and involved.

Sykuta used the common straw-man argument that those who oppose more drilling want to "do nothing." Early in the presentation he said the oil industry supports conservation and alternative fuels, but later he claimed we would be primarily reliant on gasoline for another 40-50 years. That makes it pretty clear that their talk about supporting alternatives is a smokescreen.

Planning to stay dependent on oil for another 50 years equates to doing nothing. We don't need to wait 50 years to use technology that's available today. If more drilling is the only answer we pursue then we'll always be at the mercy of the oil industry.

By contrast, environmentalists have been the ones proposing realistic solutions for decades. How much less would Americans be spending on gas if we had taken the advice of environmentalists over the years by having better federal fuel economy standards? We're paying a high price for taking the oil industry approach of doing nothing.

Sykuta also had plenty to say about the problems with biofuels but I never heard the word "electric car" pass his lips. Its the solution the industry doesn't care to acknowledge. They'd prefer we do nothing other than buy more of their product. Doing nothing is exactly what the industry stood for when they opposed the Illinois Clean Car Act, which would have resulted in improved fuel economy, lower toxic emissions, and more alternative cars on the road.

One word that repeatedly came up during the program was China. China, India and the rest of the world are expected to dramatically increase their oil consumption in the coming years. Grady Chronister, of Qik n Ez, was the most frank about the fact that its unlikely new drilling will lower the price of gas in the long run because of rising demand from China.

I asked the panel whether the industry would continue to expand drilling for Canada's tar sands oil if the price of gas came down. It costs more to drill and refine oil from that source which is why the industry hasn't pursued it as aggressively in the past as they are now. Engineer Bob Podlasek acknowledged that the push for Canada's tar sands and coal-to-liquid fuel are "market driven" meaning that they're more realistic investments now that oil prices are very high.

It confirmed my belief that the real motivation for drilling in these new areas is to make more oil available for China and other nations. It won't lower the price of gas because low gas prices would make the more costly oil sources uneconomical. The oil industry is exploiting high gas prices to argue for something they've wanted to do for many years.

Gas prices will never come down as long as we follow the oil industry path of doing nothing but drill, drill and more drill. If we want to be free of high gas bills then we need to make the switch to hybrid and all-electric cars. Then we can all be like the Prius drivers who snicker at people putting $4.00 per gallon gas into their Escalade.

Posted by Will at 10:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Two environmental events are happening in central Illinois Tuesday.

The Illinois Environmental Council has a town meeting in Decatur.

Climate Change: How Does It Affect Decatur?
Town Hall Meeting
Tuesday, June 24, 6:30 p.m.
Decatur Public Library
130 N. Franklin St.
J. Elizabeth Madden Auditorium

The Sangamon Valley Group of the Sierra Club annual potluck is Tuesday at 6:30 in Carpenter Park. The newsletter had the incorrect date so be sure to come on Tuesday, June 24.

Posted by Will at 2:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I've gotten many google searches about the Waverly ethanol plant since I wrote about it several times and I've been contacted by people fighting similar plants in Wisconsin and Indiana. The SJ-R reports that Heartland Ethanol dropped plans for the Waverly plant and six others.

The plant was controversial for the odd zoning change to place it in a rural, non-industrial area; the company's reputation for hiring cheap, non-union labor from out of state; few details from the company about the environmental impact; and unanswered questions about where the massive amounts of water needed to run the plant would come from and how local wells might be effected.

If the press listed the names of local investors it might tell us why the county board was in such a hurry to approve the plant despite opposition from neighbors. The fact that it was rushed through with so many critical question unanswered was a case study in poor planning.

Posted by Will at 5:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The SJR has a story about David Brunson and his 1981 electric Comuta-Car. I've seen David park downtown and someone stops to take a picture every five minutes. He's a good person to have this car because he's approachable and doesn't mind talking about it.

Hopefully the paper won't mind me uploading one of their images.

They even went blog-style and put a youtube video on their website of David driving the car.

Posted by Will at 12:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

The Chicago Group of the Sierra Club invited me to make a presentation in my role as the Illinois Chapter Clean Car campaign chair. I'll speak about the Illinois Clean Car Act to adopt lower emissions standards, the need to reduce global warming emissions from vehicles, overview alternative fuel options (including which ones are distractions from polluting industries), and why its so hard to get out of the mess we're in even when gas is $4.00 per gallon.

It's open to the public so feel free to show up if you're in the area! The details:

Clean Car Educational Forum
with Will Reynolds, Chapter Clean Car Campaign Chair
Sierra Club Illinois Chapter Office
70 E. Lake, Suite 1500.
Thursday, June 12
Forum begins at 7:00 pm.

Posted by Will at 3:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Auto Alliance, a lobbying front group for the auto industry, announced today the addition of a new celebrity member to their lobbying team, Count Floyd. Alliance CEO Dave McCurdy lauded the addition saying, "We think Count Floyd is the perfect fit for our legislative strategy."

Count Floyd, formerly host of Monster Chiller Horror Theater, introduced scary movies that often turned out not to be so scary after all.

The Auto Alliance has made many of its own scary predictions about the Illinois Clean Car Act. If industry lobbyists are to be trusted (and goodness knows they should be) farmers will starve, car dealers will go out of business and no one will be able to buy a pickup truck in Illinois ever again. These predictions are sure to come true just as previous industry predictions about the calamity that would result from federal requirements that the industry use seat belts, air bags, and improve mileage standards all came true.

Posted by Will at 8:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Kelm and Kirk show on WMAY interviewed an auto industry lobbyist this morning about the Illinois Clean Car Act. I should have called in before their guest because they only took one caller afterwards and it wasn't me. On the other hand, I did win free tickets to the Hot Rod Super Nationals for being the first caller to know what CARB stands for, (California Air Resources Board). Woohoo!

Their main objection to the bill (and an argument used frequently by the auto industry) seemed to be that it would have us follow the standards set by CALIFORNIA! (Start playing scary music now).

That's right, big bad scary California where they have horrible things like hippie tree huggers and liberal Hollywood elites! Wooah! Scary isn't it?!

As a little background for anyone who doesn't read my blog regularly, federal law allows California (and no other state) to set its own auto emissions standards beyond the minimum set at the federal level. Other states can join onto the California standards and fourteen have so far. Illinois could choose to opt out of the California standards at any point in the future if CARB suddenly proposed that we all have to drive foot peddled Flinstones cars or something else unbearable.

The lobbyists from the Alliance of Auto Manufacturers used one of their common scare tactics by claiming that the standards could halt ethanol production. To set the record straight, Karen May had a chart at her press conference yesterday showing at least 20 flex fuel vehicles currently on the market that meet the California standards. For more details you can read this letter from CARB answering a Minnesota State Senator's questions about how the standards would impact biofuels. And here's an analysis of consumer savings under the Act put together by the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Posted by Will at 7:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I went to a press conference this morning held by State Representative Karen May, the chief sponsor of the Illinois Clean Car Bill. She spoke about the poll showing 90% support for the bill and her desire to have a vote within the next week.

Several Representatives spoke about their experience owning and trying to buy hybrid cars. Karen May told of being put on a waiting list, not getting the chance to take a test drive and being discouraged from buying one. Rep. Mike Boland was put on a waiting list to get an American union-made hybrid sent directly from Detroit. They had interns call auto dealers around the state and found that most don't carry hybrids at all or have long waiting lists. Just last week I had two people tell me how difficult it was to buy a hybrid in Springfield. They even had dealers try to talk them out of it.

This is important because auto industry lobbyists are telling legislators that the Clean Car Bill will limit consumer choice. These lobbyists live in a bizarro world where consumers, given the option of two nearly identical vehicles, will pick the one that pollutes more and gets worse gas mileage. Here in the real world, auto manufactures are not meeting consumer demand for hybrids and higher mileage cars.

The fourteen states that already signed onto the higher standards are first priority for getting lower emissions cars, including hybrids. By making Illinois the 15th state, the Clean Car Bill will provide consumers with the options they're asking for.

A Chicago news station recently did a good story about this problem.

Also during the press conference Susana Mendoza (who drives a Prius) and several other legislators mentioned the large number of post cards and phone calls they received in favor of the Clean Car Bill. Republican Rep. Beth Coulson spoke about the health effects auto emissions have on children and asthmatics. I can feel my asthma bother me when I'm breathing in the fumes during heavy traffic in Chicago so I can appreciate a bill that will result in fewer children having that problem.

Downstate Rep. Naomi Jakobsson was there showing that the bill has support around the state and across party lines. As gas prices continue to rise I'm sure voters will remember in November who stood with 90% of the public and who stood with the oil industry special interests.

Posted by Will at 4:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Clean Car Bill is shaping up to be the top priority of Illinois environmental groups in this year's state legislative session. A poll commissioned last week by a coalition of groups called the Illinois Climate Action Network shows 89% of Illinois residents support the Clean Car Act even with more up front costs for vehicles. This is an issue where overwhelming public opinion and good policy are pitted against short sighted, wealthy special interests.

It amazes me that so many legislators are still siding with the oil and auto industries with gas prices over $4.00 per gallon. The oil industry approach of fighting emissions and mileage standards has failed, and their outrageous doomsday scenarios about the disasters that will result from more regulation don't stand up to the facts.

You can download the complete results for the poll here.

One part I find interesting is strong support for the Clean Car Act among union households despite the United Auto Workers short sighted decision to stand with the auto manufacturers. The UAW leadership needs to take notice that their members who make over-sized gas guzzlers are the ones losing their jobs right now. Environmental regulations aren't the problem. Frankly, the UAW national leadership owes their members an apology for years of standing beside industry CEO's who fought the very fuel economy standards that might have saved more American jobs. When are they going to stop repeating the same mistakes?

Below is a copy of the press release about the poll from ICAN:

Illinois Climate Action Network
Illinois CAN

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 27, 2008

ILLINOIS RESIDENTS SEE CLEAN CARS AS SOLUTION TO HIGH GAS PRICES
89% of State in Favor of Paying More Up Front to Save Even More Later

Chicago, IL – From Cairo to Carol Stream, from Collinsville to Charleston, Illinois residents are saying loud and clear that they want cleaner, more fuel-efficient cars. In a statewide poll conducted by InTouch, a remarkable 89% of people surveyed said they support or strongly support the idea of paying $1,000 more for a new car at the time of purchase if they can recoup those costs in gas savings within two years. Even more remarkable is that 65% of those surveyed put themselves in the “strongly support” column.

The poll comes just days before an expected crucial vote in the Illinois House of Representatives on House Bill 3424, sponsored by Karen May (D-Highwood). The legislation would require Illinois to adopt the Clean Car Standards already in effect in 14 other states nationwide. These standards are significantly stricter than those of the federal government, and include a landmark regulation of carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas most responsible for global warming. The worse the fuel efficiency, the more carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted—so as cars use less gas, they emit less CO2.

When compared to the recently-revised federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program, 85% of respondents support requiring stronger standards that would take effect more quickly. The Clean Car Standards will be phased in over an eight-year period; the average fuel economy for passenger cars will start at six miles more per gallon than under the new CAFE program and will increase to 9.5 miles per gallon more in the final year. By 2020, the Clean Car Standards will save Illinois drivers nearly $1.9 billion in fuel costs compared to the new federal CAFE standards. Moreover, by reducing demand for gasoline, the Clean Car Standards will help keep gas prices in check.

Noteworthy in this election year was the finding that 73% of those surveyed said they would be more likely to support a candidate who votes in favor of adopting the Clean Car Standards, while only 11% who would support a candidate opposed to the legislation.

“In this era of $4/gallon gas, people need long-term help,” said Howard A. Learner, Executive Director of the Environmental Law & Policy Center. “Adopting the Clean Car Standards is a true win-win-win: Good for our economy, good for our environment, and good for our respiratory health.”

“We commend Rep. May for her leadership on this important issue,” added Rebecca Stanfield, state director of Environment Illinois. “Now it’s time for the entire General Assembly to sit up and take notice. Our state’s residents are on record saying they want cleaner, more fuel efficient cars.”

“Between now and 2020, global warming pollution will be reduced by around 40% more in Illinois under the Clean Car Standards than the new CAFE program,” said Ron Burke, Director of the Midwest Office for the Union of Concerned Scientists, a national group. “Plus, the new CAFE program does nothing more to reduce smog-forming pollutants, which will be cut under the Clean Car Standards.”

Jack Darin, director of the Sierra Club’s Illinois chapter, added, “What’s so encouraging about the poll results is that they’re close to uniform statewide. Adopting the Clean Car Standards totally unites our state. Urban folks, rural folks—everyone wants more fuel efficient, cleaner cars, SUVs, and pick-ups.”

Of note is that the $1,000 incremental cost for a vehicle complying with the Clean Car Standards will not be reached until model year 2016. The additional costs will be lower in earlier years, meaning that drivers will recoup those dollars even more quickly through fuel savings.

The Clean Car Standards are supported by a wide range of constituencies. For example, poll results were identical in union and non-union households, with a slightly higher proportion of union respondents saying they would gladly foot a higher bill for a new car up front, in exchange for lower gas prices down the road.

InTouch conducted the poll of 1,798 residents on May 22, 2008. Its margin of error is +-2.31%.

The poll was commissioned by the Environmental Law and Policy Center, Environment Illinois, Sierra Club, Illinois Chapter, and the Union of Concerned Scientists. The groups are members of the Illinois Climate Action Network.

The mission of the Illinois Climate Action Network is to advocate for the policies necessary in Illinois to reduce global warming pollution to 1990 levels by 2020 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Illinois CAN member groups are: CNTEnergy, Environment Illinois, Environmental Law and Policy Center, Faith in Place, Illinois Environmental Council, Midwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, Natural Resources Defense Council, Respiratory Health Association of Metropolitan Chicago, Sierra Club, Protestants for the Common Good, The Nature Conservancy and the Union of Concerned Scientists.

For more information about Illinois CAN and the Illinois Clean Cars Act, visit
www.illinoisclimateactionnetwork.org.

###

Posted by Will at 12:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (1)

The SJR published my letter to the editor about the Illinois Clean Car Act today. I was hoping they would publish it while the legislature was still in town but at least they used it.

Car makers hypocritical in fighting Clean Car Act

I recently saw another Ford hybrid commercial that brags about their commitment to researching new technologies that will reduce their vehicles’ negative impact on the environment.

Unfortunately, the same car companies that spend millions letting us know about their sparse efforts for the environment are also funding an expensive lobbying campaign in Springfield to defeat the Illinois Clean Car Act.

The Clean Car Act (HB 3424) would have Illinois join 13 other states that require auto manufacturers to further reduce vehicle emissions that contribute to respiratory problems, smog and global climate change. The achievable standards only require the use of existing technologies that have already been developed and applied.

Besides benefiting public health and the environment, the standards encourage improved mileage in vehicles that will help drivers save on gas beyond the minimum federal fuel economy requirements.

Research is important but it shouldn’t be cited as a tactic to delay the use of existing technologies. If car companies are as serious about protecting the environment as their TV advertisements and lobbyists claim, then they should end their hypocritical opposition to the Illinois Clean Car Act.

Now is the time to contact your state legislator and ask them to stand up to short-sighted special interests in the oil and auto industries.

Will Reynolds

Springfield

Posted by Will at 2:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I know someone getting the new Chevy Malibu Hybrid so I looked it up to find that it only gets an extra two miles per gallon. Its a mild hybrid that puts some of the extra power into acceleration instead of fuel economy. GM did the same thing with Saturn hybrids. I don't see the point. I'm holding out hope for the Chevy Volt.

According to this article GM might finally be getting it:

With gas prices near $4 a gallon, and sales of GM's big trucks and SUVs falling, the automaker announced 3,500 layoffs at the factories making those vehicles earlier this week. On Wednesday, it announced a first-quarter net loss of $3.25 billion.

So going green has become vital to the automaker's survival, GM Chairman and Chief Executive Rick Wagoner said in a speech Thursday in San Francisco. That's why it's pushing the forthcoming hybrid-electric Chevrolet Volt, part of a "major transformation" at GM, he said.

Wagoner goes on to say later in the article, "Energy supply, sustainable growth, CO2 emissions, fuel economy - these are top concerns around the world,"

Yet at the same time the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, of which GM is a member, is fighting against new laws that address those problems. If Wagoner means what he says then he will end GM's opposition to the Pavley emissions standards in Illinois and other states.

For no particular reason, here's Car Song by Elastica:

Posted by Will at 5:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Arizona is now the 14th state to adopt improved car emissions standards. A bill to make Illinois the next state is currently before the General Assembly and is facing fierce opposition from auto-industry lobbyists.

Here's a press release about the Arizona decision:

NEWS RELEASE

For Immediate Release, May 6, 2008

Contacts: Sandy Bahr, Sierra Club, Grand Canyon Chapter
Michelle Harrington, Center for Biological Diversity

Clean Car Rule Receives Final Approval:
Measure Will Help Clean Up Arizona's Air and Protect Public Health

PHOENIZ, Ariz. Today, the Governor's Regulatory Review Council approved adoption of a final rule to implement a California Low Emission Vehicle "Clean Car" program in Arizona by a vote of 5 to 2. This makes Arizona the fourteenth state in the country to adopt this standard.

At least 13 other states have adopted Clean Car Standards, including Arizona's neighbors, California and New Mexico. Under the Clean Car Rule, each automobile manufacturer is required to demonstrate that its fleet of passenger cars and light-duty trucks delivered for sale in Arizona on or after January 1, 2011, meets an average emissions standard for greenhouse gases. It will reduce greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles by about 32 million metric tons from 2012 to 2020 and will also reduce pollutants that contribute to ground-level ozone formation, a major issue in Arizona. Implementation of the rule is expected to reduce 5,505 tons of carbon monoxide, 892 tons of hydrocarbons, and 1,436 tons of oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) in 2018.

"Most of Arizona's pollution comes from cars and trucks, and about 39 percent of Arizona's greenhouse gas emissions also come from vehicles," said Sandy Bahr, conservation outreach director of the Sierra Club's Grand Canyon Chapter. "With our rapid growth and an increase in miles traveled that outpaces that growth, our emissions could grow by as much as 200
percent from 1990 to 2020. That is totally unacceptable. This Clean Car Rule will help us reduce emissions, clean up the air and help do our part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."

The Phoenix area has a serious ozone problem that is at its worst during the hot summer months. Ozone is formed when sunlight reacts with volatile organic compounds emitted from vehicles, industry, and other sources. Transportation is the number one contributor to ozone pollution. Because of the weather patterns, areas in the northeast valley such as Fountain Hills suffer most from this pollution. In 2005, there were 30 exceedances of the federal health standard for ozone. Arizona recently received another failing grade from the American Lung Association of Arizona for ozone pollution.

"A serious review of climate science supports immediate and significant reductions in greenhouse pollution from personal vehicles," said Michelle Harrington, a conservation manager with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Fortunately, a look at the technologies already available tells us those reductions are possible. This is a good step in the right direction."

This Clean Car Rule will not be onerous nor decimate the automobile industry as some manufacturers have indicated, and it will not mean that everyone must buy a hybrid vehicle. The technology - outside of hybrid technology - already exists for cars and trucks to meet these standards. Other measures that can help vehicles meet the standards include direct
injection, advanced valve control, downsized engines with turbo, electric accessories, integrated starter generators, and automatic manual transmissions, among others.

"The clean cars program will ensure diverse choices for Arizona consumers and cleaning up our air will ease the burden on taxpayers by helping with our ever-rising health costs," said Tina Beattie, Arizona coordinator of Republicans for Environmental Protection.

"This is an important step for Arizona to promote clean air and to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions," said Susan Higgins with the Arizona Public Health Association. "We applaud the governor and the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality for stepping up to show leadership on this important issue."

###

Posted by Will at 1:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

One of the things I've been most impressed with about Obama's platform is his outspoken support for reducing oil consumption and lowering vehicle emissions. After Tim Russert did his best impersonation of a conservative talk radio host for ten minutes of Rev. Wright questions, Obama had the chance to talk about a few real issues, including cars. From the transcript of the interview this morning:

MR. RUSSERT: How long before our automobiles are off of gasoline oil and, and using something like an alternative fuel?

SEN. OBAMA: Well, you know, I, I think that if we decided right now that we were going to make the kind of investment I've proposed--$150 billion over 10 years--then I think at the end of the decade we could have a auto industry that has significantly reduced our consumption of oil by as much as 35, 40 percent. And the technologies exist right now for plug-in hybrids. You know, we should continue to investigate the possibilities of electric cars. The problem is is that we have not been serious about it, and Detroit ended up making investments in SUVs and large trucks because that's where they perceived a competitive advantage and that's where they felt they could make the most profit. I think it was a mistake for them not to plan earlier. Now we're seeing a huge growth in fuel-efficient cars that is benefitting the Japanese automakers, and Detroit is getting pounded some more. And I think that we can make those cars here in the United States. By the way, that's going to be our expert market over the future. China already has higher fuel efficiency standards than we do. If we want to compete for those markets, then we're going to have to invest in technology. The government can help, but the automakers have to make some changes. And I didn't say that just in front of environmental groups, I went to Detroit and said it in front of the automakers. That's the kind of truth telling we need from the next president.

Posted by Will at 3:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Illinois Sierra Club has a new section on its website for the Illinois Clean Car Bill. If you click on the "Take Action" button it leads to a page where you can send an email message to your State Representative and Senator. I know I've asked people to contact their Representative about the Clean Car Act before but this would be a good time to actually do it if you haven't yet.

Posted by Will at 1:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

One of the top three bills environmental groups pushed for during their citizen lobby day at the State Capitol Wednesday is the Clean Car Act. The bill would have Illinois join 13 other states in adopting a higher standard for vehicle emissions, which are the second highest man-made source of pollutants that contribute to global warming. It's the same bill I wrote about last year but this time it looks like a vote by the full General Assembly is likely to happen soon.

The environmental lobby day had around 175 people come from across the state and various organizations including the Sierra Club, Illinois Environmental Council, Illinois Audubon Society, Faith in Place, Protestants for the Common Good, and others. Among other victories, four new people were added as co-sponsors to the Clean Car Bill that day: Susan Mendoza, Maria Antonia Berrios, Paul Froehlich, and LaShawn Ford, who I had the chance to meet with.

The auto industry is pushing hard against this bill in every state that's considering it. They convinced the UAW and Auto Dealers Association to go along with their agenda. Among the most frequently used of their many suspect arguments is that it will cost jobs. It's the same scare tactic used against every environmental and safey regulation for the last 30 years.

The simple fact is that the auto-industry wasn't wrecked by regulations requiring seat belts, air bags, fuel economy standards or any of the other standards that industry lobbyists assured us would put people out of work. It's amazing that anyone still falls for that tired old argument.

What really puts people out of work is the stubborn refusal of American car companies to produce the high mileage, low emissions, and alternative fuel vehicles that the public is asking for. If Detroit wants to blame someone for causing job loss they need to stop pointing the finger at environmentalists and look in the mirror of their gas guzzling SUV.

The legislature will be back in session on Tuesday. During the next week is a good time to contact your state Senator or Representative to make sure they support the Clean Car Bill. The best way to combat the slick lines of big money lobbyists is for legislators to hear from people in their own district.

Posted by Will at 1:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The suburban Daily Herald reports about Illinois being recognized as a rising star among states taking action on clean energy issues. The recognition came from a report by a coalition group called Environment America. They rated states based on their renewable energy, auto-emissions, energy efficiency and building code policies.

Illinois missed being rated a Gold or Silver star state but was named a rising star based on new laws that call for the state to "receive 25 percent of its electricity from renewable resources by 2025, with 75 percent of that power coming from wind. The same legislation also requires steady increases in energy savings through energy efficiency improvements."

The Daily Herald article reported:

State Sen. Kirk Dillard said he believed the state needed to build on its progress "so that we can become a gold star state in the next report."

To that end, leaders with the Sierra Club called on the General Assembly to pass legislation mandating tougher emission standards for vehicles.

Posted by Will at 12:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The coal industry is getting nervous. They see the national push to reduce global warming emissions and how difficult it is to build new coal fire power plants. They're working on a variety of ways to promote the use of more coal in an economy where carbon emissions will be regulated by the federal government.

One of those potential new markets is experimental coal-to-liquid fuel technology. Phillip Gonet, The President of the Illinois Coal Association, has an Op-Ed in today's State Journal-Register promoting coal-to-liquid as the latest solution to American dependence on foreign oil.

When reading Gonet's piece its important to remember that he has one job: to promote the agenda of his special interest group. Reducing dependence on foreign oil and protecting the environment are not his concern. His only job is to create new markets for the coal industry. If you want an organization that attempts to benefit all citizens then you should look to a public interest group such as the Sierra Club.

I'm amused by Gonet's suggestion that conserving energy and hybrid technologies are unrealistic "pipe dreams." The reality is that these technologies are available today. We have existing technology to improve fuel economy for conventional cars, and create practical hybrid vehicles. Using technology to do more with less is both achievable and cost effective.

Much less realistic is the unproven technology Gonet refers to such as carbon capture and storage technologies. That has not yet been proven to be an economically or scientifically viable alternative.

The Illinois Coal Association is one of the most powerful special interest groups in the state because it succeeds at getting state and local governments to provide millions in subsidies and corporate welfare to an already profitable industry while the renewable energy industry gets next to nothing. Is it really forward thinking policy to spend public money on experimental, unproven coal projects like FutureGen rather than creating new jobs by luring facilities that build proven technologies like wind turbines and solar panels?

According to the EPA, the full life cycle global warming emissions of coal-to-liquid fuel without theoretical carbon capture technology are twice that of conventional gasoline. Even with the carbon capture technology, which is not yet in use, it still increases global warming emissions.

This handy chart shows the impact of different alternative fuels. Illinois farmers will be happy to see that cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel are the best options. Even electric cars powered by coal power plants produce fewer global warming emissions than coal-to-liquid.

Add to that consideration the harmful effects of mountain-top removal and long-wall mining methods. Is taking good farm land out of production really the best option for Illinois?

Gonet has a difficult job of increasing markets for coal in a political environment that is increasingly unfriendly to outdated, high-pollution energy sources. Luckily for him, the Illinois Coal Association has a lot of money to throw around at politicians. For the rest of us, there's no good reason to buy his pipe dreams about coal as a "clean fuel" technology.

Posted by Will at 3:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (1)

I didn't get the chance to write about this story when it broke but I wanted to make sure people are aware of Illinois' involvement. From the Environmental News Service:

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today sued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to force the agency to take action on California's request to limit greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles.

Filed today in Washington, the precedent setting lawsuit charges the federal agency with an unreasonable delay in reaching a decision on a California law known as the Pavley bill, which mandates a 30 percent reduction in motor vehicle emissions by 2016, starting with model year 2009.

"California has a long and proud history of leadership in reducing pollution and fighting for clean air for our residents. And we are upholding that tradition today by filing a lawsuit against the federal government that takes a big step forward in the battle against global warming," Governor Schwarzenegger told a news conference at the state capitol.

Other states are allowed to adopt the California standards, once they're approved, and that's what the Illinois Clean Car Bill sponsored by Rep. Karen May would do. Although Illinois has yet to join the other states which have voted to adopt the California Pavley standards, Illinois is among the 14 states joining California's lawsuit against the EPA.

The Wall Street Journal covers an interesting aspect of this story in an article about the electric industry supporting the proposed auto emissions standards. Its an indication that the electric industry knows they're fighting a losing battle against laws to curb global warming and are trying to divert the brunt of those laws to auto-makers.

Posted by Will at 4:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

One of the most frequent claims automobile industry lobbyists make when arguing against improving mileage requirements and other environmental standards is that new regulations will cost American jobs.

Two weeks ago GM announced that they're laying off workers at its Hamtramck plant due to low demand for two models of gas-guzzling cars made there. The good news for workers at the Hamtramck facility is that they'll start producing a new plug-in hybrid called the Chevy Volt starting in 2010. One has to wonder how many jobs might have been saved had General Motors committed earlier to meeting market demand for cars that get better mileage and pollute less.

Today Chrysler made a more severe announcement that it will cut 12,000 jobs in North America. This time the cuts will effect Illinois workers at the plant in Belvidere.

Chrysler is ending production of four models due to low demand: the PT Cruiser convertible, Chrysler Pacifica sport-utility vehicle, Chrysler Crossfire car and Dodge Magnum wagon. All four models get under 30mpg on the highway according to the company website.

This part of the story is important to note:

“These actions reflect our new customer-driven philosophy and allow us to focus our resources on new, more profitable and appealing products,” added James Press, Chrysler’s other co-president. “Further, these product actions are all in response to dealer requests.”

The short sighted actions of car manufacturers who push gas-guzzling cars onto the public have cost more American jobs in the auto industry than environmental regulations ever have or ever will. Its time to put the bogus industry scare tactics about "lost jobs" due to improved mileage standards to rest. If anything, forcing companies to produce more fuel efficient cars that consumers want could have saved thousands of American jobs.

Posted by Will at 12:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

My letter to the editor about electric cars and the Illinois Clean Car Bill received a response published in the State Journal-Register today. Steve McGrew writes that people should save gasoline by not slamming on the gas peddle. He's absolutely correct. That's another good way to use less gas and thereby reduce your carbon footprint.

I have to disagree with the other assertions in McGrew's letter. He suggests that electric cars won't reduce carbon emissions because most power generation comes from coal & natural gas, which also contribute to global warming. First, only about half of power generation in Illinois is from coal-fire power plants with most of the rest coming from nuclear plants.

Closer to home, McGrew should keep in mind that CWLP is now using some wind power and more is on the way, thanks to the clean energy agreement with the Sierra Club. In the near future, CWLP will add a green buy-in program that will allow people to pay an additional cost to ensure that more wind power is used to power their home (or their electric car). The agreement calls for several other measures that will result in CWLP reducing CO2 emissions to below 1990 levels for its native load.

Finally, electric cars produce less CO2 even when powered by coal plants because they use energy more efficiently. A study by Carnegie Mellon institute is one of several sources that tell us running an electric car powered by coal plants still produces less CO2 than driving a conventional car. So even someone who gets their power from coal plants shouldn't be discouraged from driving electric.

Of course, McGrew and anyone else concerned about where we get our power is welcome to join the Sierra Club's continuing efforts to promote renewable energies that will reduce emissions that cause global climate change.

Posted by Will at 1:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The State Journal-Register published my letter to the editor about the Illinois Clean Car Bill.

Going green could help automakers

I recently watched “Who Killed the Electric Car?” for the second time at the Liberty Brew & View showing at Capital City Nights. Even on second viewing I’m still shocked by the short-sighted efforts auto manufacturers took to keep electric cars out of the hands of willing customers.

I hope anyone who hasn’t seen the movie will take the time to view it because it’s hard to believe until you hear the entire story of what happened to the electric car in California.

After the movie, state Rep. Mike Boland spoke about the Illinois Clean Car Bill that will require automakers to use existing technology to produce the kind of vehicles consumers are asking for that have better mileage and pollute less. Boland spoke about auto-industry lobbyists opposing the Clean Car Bill in Springfield using the usual scare tactics about lost jobs.

They make the same bogus predictions every time any environmental or safety regulation is proposed from seat belts to air bags.

In fact, Toyota recently surpassed General Motors in sales by offering hybrids and other cars that pollute less than gas-guzzlers. Requiring cars with lower levels of polluting emissions saves drivers money at the gas pump by improving mileage, and it will create new American jobs by forcing American car companies to offer the kind of car consumers want.

Automobiles are the second-largest sources of emissions that cause global climate change. The Illinois Clean Car Bill is an easy choice where doing what’s sensible for the environment also makes good economic sense. I hope our local representatives will soon join Mike Boland in co-sponsoring the Illinois Clean Car Bill.

Will Reynolds, Springfield

Posted by Will at 10:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Chris Britt's cartoons are often gutsy but he ventured out into new territory with today's cartoon about ethanol.

I wonder if the SJ-R publishers will be hearing from ADM and its other big agribusiness advertisers? I wish I had confidence that ethanol is helping family farmers as much as its helping corporate mega farms, but I doubt it.

Posted by Will at 11:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Yesterday General Motors announced it's laying off 767 workers at its Hamtramck assembly plant because of low demand for the cars made there, the Buick Lucerne and Cadillac DTS. According to the company website those cars get 16 and 15 miles per gallon in the city, respectively.

Thanks to the recent UAW contract with General Motors, there's a guarantee that the plant will at least remain open. The contract also tells us that the saving grace of the plant, and the potential for jobs to be restored in the future, is the new Chevy Volt that will be built there starting in 2010.

The Chevy Volt will be a plug-in hybrid, which is the technology I think offers the best combination of fuel savings, low emissions, and convenience for those driving more than short distances.

This is a good sign for GM. I've been waiting for a Saturn hybrid that isn't an SUV for years, only to be disappointed by the meager mileage improvements and much higher cost of their new Saturn hybrid sedan.

I've heard auto-industry lobbyists make bizarre claims that cleaner car regulations will limit consumer choice, as though consumers are still demanding cars with terrible mileage in the days of $3.00 per gallon. It looks like, with the changes at the Hamtramck plant, that GM will finally start responding to market demand for more environmentally conscious cars.

Hopefully, this will be a turning point for the company and an end to the backward claims that producing environmentally friendly cars means losing jobs. As we see in Hamtramck, just the opposite is true. I wonder how many jobs could have been saved had they produced a good plug-in hybrid sooner?

Posted by Will at 4:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

Several interesting topics came up at the Liberty Brew & View showing of "Who Killed the Electric Car?" Tuesday night. Over 30 people came to see the movie and hear Illinois State Representative Mike Boland talk about the Illinois Clean Car Bill and other clean energy legislation he's supporting.

Representative Boland mentioned one of the tired old scare tactics auto-industry lobbyists are using against the Illinois Clean Car Bill: that it will cost jobs. They use this rationale so often that they don't even bother to explain or justify the claim anymore. How exactly will it cost jobs? Can't union auto workers make a lower polluting car just as well as old outdated ones? If anything is costing American jobs its the failure of American car companies to offer hybrid and other lower polluting cars that consumers are asking for.

Boland also brought up an electric car company that would like to open a new plant, creating 200 jobs, in Rock Island. One barrier is a state regulation barring smaller electric commuter cars from crossing state highways. This particular brand of car has some speed limitations (not true of all electric cars) that prevent it from traveling on state and federal highways. Boland's bill would allow those cars to go across state highways so they can at least travel across towns that have a state highway going through them.

One point that became obvious during the movie is that American car companies are resisting using existing technology to offer all-electric, and plug-in hybrid vehicles. Earlier this year General Motors lost its place as the nation's top selling car manufacture by allowing foreign car companies to take the lead in offering hybrids and other low-emissions vehicles.

Its unfortunate that the United Auto Workers union is siding with auto-manufacturers in their short-sighted opposition to the Illinois Clean Car bill as well as improved federal CAFE standards. Ultimately, GM's outdated business model and insistence on sticking by yesterday's technology is costing far more American union jobs than any environmental regulation.

I support unions but I don't think the political arm of the UAW is serving its membership well on this issue. After all, when car companies aren't scapegoating environmentalists for lost jobs, they're usually blaming high union wages and benefits for moving plants to cheaper labor markets. Better environmental regulations may be what saves American car companies from their own poor business strategies.

Posted by Will at 3:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

State Representative Mike Boland will speak after the Liberty Brew & View showing of "Who Killed the Electric Car?" happening this Tuesday, October 16, 7pm at the Capital City Bar & Grill in Springfield.

Boland is a progressive downstate Democrat from Moline with an excellent record on environmental issues. He spoke in favor of the Illinois Clean Car bill when it passed the House Environmental Health committee earlier this year.

Liberty Brew & View is one of the highlighted "it" selections in the Illinois Times this week. I've been getting a lot of enthusiastic responses so I think we'll have a good turn-out Tuesday.

Posted by Will at 11:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Here's a trailer for the next film being presented by Liberty View & Brew, "Who Killed the Electric Car?"

If you know anything about this movie then you've probably heard enthusiastic praise from friends and reviewers. This showing will be a little unique because Liberty View & Brew is about taking action in addition to thinking about an issue.

Stick around after the movie for information about how to resurrect the electric car and support the Illinois Clean Car bill to improve auto-emission standards. We'll have post cards to your legislator and a soon-to-be-confirmed guest speaker. Besides all of that, this is your chance to see it on a big movie screen with friends, food and beverages.

Who Killed the Electric Car?

Capital City Bar & Grill
Capital City Shopping Center
3149 S Dirksen Pkwy
Springfield, IL 62703

Posted by Will at 3:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The third quarter issue of the Illinois Sierra Club's newsletter, Lake & Prairie, was published recently. It includes a short article I wrote which overviews the drive for Illinois to adopt the California Pavley clean car standards, plus an article about the campaign's first clean car wash.

You can find the newsletter at the Illinois Chapter website or download the pdf directly here.

I found a good interview in the Sacramento Bee with the namesake of the California standards, Fran Pavley.

"...it's not a choice between the environment and the economy. Business leaders, progressive ones worried about the 21st century and the impact of not doing anything -- they're on board.

Why the federal government continues to drag its feet is amazing to me. We see this as a wonderful business opportunity."

Posted by Will at 11:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The Detroit Free Press reports on an interesting, yet completely unsurprising, development in the push for states to enact improved auto pollution standards.

The Bush administration organized a stealth lobbying campaign, with the auto industry’s help, to oppose California’s effort to set fuel economy standards, the chairman of the House Oversight committee said Monday.

In a letter to the top White House environmental official, U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., asked the administration to repudiate the lobbying, saying it should have made its objections public rather than leaning on members of Congress and state governors to oppose California’s rules. Waxman has scheduled a committee hearing on the issue for Tuesday.

California lawmakers want to set strict controls on greenhouse gas emissions from new cars and trucks that would result in a fuel economy standard of 43 miles per gallon by 2016 for cars and some trucks. Automakers vehemently oppose the rules, and have fought California and 14 other states from imposing them.

Posted by Will at 8:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I was glad to see the SJ-R cover a couple of issues yesterday that I've written about before. One is about recommendations made by the Illinois Climate Change Advisory Group with a focus on the proposed standards for lowering pollution from cars.

A spokesman for the auto manufacturers is quoted making some of the same bogus claims they always make along with a disingenuous claim that they're pushing for better fuel economy standards at the federal level. The auto lobby has stopped better fuel economy standards from becoming law for years and if they support any improvement at all its a weak version to avoid the passage of something meaningful.

The auto industry tells the same horror stories about increased costs, lost jobs and their inability to create new technology every time a new regulation is proposed. And on the rare occasion that a new proposal does become law the car companies manage to comply without experiencing the predicted doomsday. It amazes me that so many lawmakers and journalists allow industry lobbyists to make the same discredited claims over and over without requiring them to provide any backing evidence.

The industry lobbyist also complained that building different versions of the same car for different states will cost them more money. I'm skeptical of their claims about the size of increased costs to consumers but the goal of environmental groups isn't to have manufactures making different versions of the same car.

If Illinois with its large car market were to join the 13 other states adopting the California Pavley emissions standards it would pressure car manufactures to make the less polluting cars in all states. It could in effect become the new national standard without action by the federal government.

As much as I appreciate that they covered the issue, its disappointing that most of the article was dominated by unsubstantiated claims by two industry lobbyists with no quotes from any environmental group. Was Illinois EPA Director Doug Scott supposed to represent the environmental viewpoint? I'm sure leaders of environmental groups currently suing the EPA will be amused to learn that Doug Scott is their new spokesperson.

The story focuses on car regulations but the advisory group made a series of recommendations, many of which received the support of industry and union leaders in the group. Their reports are worth checking out here.

Also worth reading is this editorial in the Salt Lake Tribune supporting the Republican Governor of Utah in his efforts to enact the same standards Illinois is considering.

Posted by Will at 11:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Under federal guidelines each state has the option of adopting federal standards for auto-emissions or the more stringent California standards. The California Pavley standards, named after the sponsor of the bill, would enact further reductions of pollutants that cause global warming.

A federal judge ruled today against attempts by the auto industry to block implementation of the Pavley standards. This is significant for Illinois because the Illinois Clean Car bill would have Illinois adopt the California Pavley standards.

I haven't seen any news coverage yet, but the Sierra Club issued a press release with several statements from their Chief Climate Council, David Bookbinder.

"This decision should put the nail in the coffin of the failed arguments of the auto industry. In this trial they used every tired argument about safety, job losses, lack of technology, and doubts about the science of global warming that they had--the same things they have been saying to the public and to Congress for decades. We have long known these arguments were not true and Judge Sessions’ ruling indicates that he did not believe them either."

Additionally, the same clean car proposal received the endorsement last week of the Illinois Climate Change Advisory Group. Momentum is building for less polluting and more fuel efficient vehicle standards in Illinois.

Posted by Will at 4:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Crain's Chicago Business has an article about the proposal for Illinois to adopt the California clean car standards. The auto emissions proposal from the Governor's committee on global warming is identical to Illinois House Bill 3424, which I've written about before.

Posted by Will at 2:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Clean Energy Springfield blog has a new poster named Kevin. I'll let him decide how much of an introduction he wants to give for himself on his blog, but he's very knowledgeable on a variety of energy and environmental issues.

His first post is on an issue I've had many people bring up lately: mercury in compact florescent light bulbs. I've heard a few people bring up the mercury content of CFL's with a defeatist attitude, suggesting that they aren't an effective way of reducing mercury pollution, but Kevin points out they're still a good product as long as they're disposed of properly.

CES Blog was originally meant to be a group blog, but other than a couple posts I wrote early on, it has been written entirely by Greg Claxton. Its definitely nice to have Kevin join the blog. While you're over there, check out the cool graphic in the sidebar representing the wind speed at the farms supplying Springfield's wind energy.

I recently added EarthlingAngst to my list of Illinois blogs. Her focus is on global warming and her post yesterday focuses on one of my favorite topics, clean car alternatives.

One of the arguments the auto industry lobbying groups make against better car emission regulations in Illinois is their spurious claim that it will limit consumer choice. I find it unlikely, given current gas prices, that consumers are going to eagerly demand cars that get fewer miles to the gallon when they're finally given a choice of better mileage vehicles.

My own frustration is the lack of choices American car companies are currently offering those interested in hybrid, or plug-in hybrid cars. Even when American car companies do offer hybrids, its typically an SUV or sedan that makes limited use of hybrid technology with disappointing mileage improvements. Why should I spend the extra money on an American hybrid if I'm only getting 30 or 45 mpg instead of the 60 mpg I can get with a Prius? American auto companies and workers are the ones suffering most from this half-hearted approach that doesn't respond to consumer demands.

Posted by Will at 12:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

If you go to the back of Conservation World at the state fair near the DNR headquarters you'll find the tent for environmental groups. There you'll see a new Lexus hybrid, a solar panel demonstration, displays for Lincoln Memorial Gardens and the Environmental Law & Policy Center, plus a free raffle for a push lawn mower, a gift basket from Food Fantasies, and other prizes. Sorry, the Lexus isn't part of the raffle.

While you're there you can sign a post card to the Illinois General Assembly in support of the Clean Car bill that will have Illinois adopt the stricter California emissions standards for cars. You can get one of the cool energy campaign buttons for filling out a card while they last. I'll be there for part of the day Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday if anyone wants to stop by to say hi and keep me company.

Another bonus for those visiting Conservation World is 17th Street Barbecue from Murphysboro. They have the best pork BBQ sandwich in America. I don't eat much meat, but I make an exception for 17th Street.

Have fun at the fair this year!

Posted by Will at 1:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias brought his Green Rewards program announcement tour to Springfield today. I attended the press conference held at the Farmer's Market downtown, which by the way, is a great place to buy organic food and support local farmers.

Local state Representatives Rich Brauer and Raymond Poe were on hand to lend their support along with Representatives Mike Boland, Susana Mendoza, Linda Chapa LaVia, Brandon Phelps, Harry Osterman and maybe one or two others that I think I'm forgetting. Its always good to see bipartisan support for an environmental initiative that also helps consumers save money.

Of course, if the Representatives want to get really serious about promoting lower mileage and cleaner burning vehicles they should sign on to co-sponsor the Clean Car Bill. Two of the Reps at the press conference already have, but not Poe or Brauer.

Posted by Will at 6:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Illinois State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias announced his "Green Rewards" program that will give a $1,000 rebate to buyers of hybrid and electric cars who use a loan from an in-state bank. The Sun-Times article states:

Giannoulias said he bought his hybrid in December because of concerns about global warming, which is caused, in part, by burning gasoline. He has also pledged to replace his office's aging fleet with hybrids or other fuel-efficient vehicles.

hat-tip to Jack Darin.

Posted by Will at 8:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Journal-Register has an article worth checking out today about the Illinois advisory group on energy and climate change issues. I mentioned the group in a previous post about Illinois clean car legislation, of which I've written numerous times.

The car standards referenced in the article are currently in the legislature in a bill sponsored by Karen May. It has nineteen co-sponsors, including Mike Madigan, but none are from the Springfield area.

CWLP's purchase of wind power brings them very close to the proposed renewable energy standard ahead of schedule. Any utility or city that works on reducing global warming emissions now will be in a better competitive financial position once everyone is required to meet minimum standards by either the state or federal government.

Posted by Will at 9:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Ok, who watched the Live Earth concerts? I saw some of it online where you could switch between concerts in city to city. Very cool.

The Foo Fighters put on an excellent show and Melissa Ethridge put a lot of passion into her performance. The musicians were good but one of the best moments came from Robert Kennedy Jr who always makes a powerful argument for the environment.

A few quotes from his speech: "Good environmental policy is identical to good economic policy."

"If we raise fuel economy standards in our automobiles by only one mile, we generate twice the amount of oil that's in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. If we raise fuel economy standards by 7.6 miles per gallon we yield more oil than we now import from the Persian Gulf."

"The most important thing you can do is to get involved in the political process and get rid of all these rotten politicians that we have in Washington DC...who are nothing more than corporate toadies for companies like Exxon and Southern Company, these villainous companies that consistently put their private financial interests ahead of American interests and ahead of the interests of all of humanity."

"And we have a press that has completely let down American democracy...that's giving us Anna Nichole Smith and Paris Hilton instead of the issues that we need to understand to make rational decisions in a democracy."

It gets better. Watch the video!

You can watch the performances at the Live Earth website or on YouTube. As much as I pay attention to the issue I still heard about new ways to make a difference. The best way to make the whole event worthwhile is to do something new in your personal life to stop global warming!

Added on edit: I guess Microsoft didn't like the speech being on Youtube so here's a new link.

Posted by Will at 9:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

There are a few news items about fuel economy that I've been meaning to write about. The Star Tribune has a good editorial about legislation that passed the Senate to improve fuel efficiency. Also, if you missed coverage of the Senate energy bill, check out this New York Times article. The Senate's support for better fuel standards is encouraging but pro-pollution Republicans managed to block legislation that would have encouraged a responsible course on clean energy generation.

The above Star Tribune editorial mentions this interview with Dick Durbin and Missouri Senator Kit Bond about fuel standards. Kit Bond, who receives hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the oil and auto industries, chooses to ignore the interests of the people he represents by repeating the bogus scare tactics of the auto industry. Durbin had a great line about the auto manufacturers and their doomsday predictions:

I think America can meet this challenge. I'm optimistic. And I think, if some of the Detroit manufacturers spend a little more time with their engineering department rather than their legal department, that they could meet this challenge.

Barack Obama is talking a lot about this issue. His statement about the Senate bill calls it a "modest first step" and mentions his Low Carbon Fuel Initiative. He also introduced a bill with Republican Orrin Hatch and Maria Cantwell to promote plug-in hybrids, which I think is the most promising technology for the near future.

Clean Cars is an issue I've been focusing on lately and all of this news reminds me of why I think Illinois has the best representation in the US Senate of any state in the nation.

Posted by Will at 2:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In case anyone is wondering why I seem to be obsessed with cars lately, it's because I'm chairing the Illinois Sierra Club's committee to promote clean car legislation. Several other groups are promoting the legislation so hopefully my blog isn't the only place you'll hear about it. I checked out the status of the bill on the General Assembly website today and noticed that Mike Madigan is now the chief co-sponsor. The deadline for action was extended as well.

I don't know if it will be voted on before the end of this session but it doesn't look dead yet. Still no Springfield area legislators have signed on as co-sponsors.

Posted by Will at 3:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Once in a while I see news stories about hydrogen cars or coal to liquid fuel technologies that may or may not be economically feasible at some point in the future after more development and millions (or billions) of dollars in proposed subsidies to industry. Meanwhile, we have several ways to increase fuel economy and decrease our reliance on foreign oil right here and now.

Treehugger blog has a post about hybrid electric cars partially powered by solar roofs. Click on the link to see how it looks.

“All the technology is there,” Johanson said. “It’s just the larger manufacturer taking the next step.” For the first 40 miles of a commute, the cars use batteries rather than gas. Forty miles a day is equal to 50 cents a gallon off the utility grid.

With gas prices expecting to break $4 a gallon in the near future, Johanson said they will be gaining in popularity. To date, the company has manufactured nearly 100 of the kits to individual buyers. “Four dollars is the break-even point for these kits,” Johanson said. “Then it pays for itself in two years. That’s where the economics makes sense for the kits. Do you want to own it or do you want to rent energy for the next three years?”

Posted by Will at 2:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

The Illinois Clean Car bill I've been writing about would have Illinois adopt the California standards for auto emissions that are stricter than current federal standards. The Sacremento Union has an article today about California's fight with the EPA to get final approval for their improved standards. What's more applicable for us in Illinois is that it gives an excellent overview of what's happening nationally and how we fit into the bigger picture.

From the article:

While the federal government has authority to make air pollution rules, California has unique status under the Clean Air Act to enact its own regulations as long as it receives permission from the EPA. Other states can then follow either the federal or California standards.

Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington are ready to implement California’s emissions standards, according to California officials, while six other states are actively considering them: Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, New Hampshire, New Mexico and North Carolina.

Tuesday’s hearing in suburban Arlington, Va., came after more than a year of inaction since California submitted its waiver petition in 2005.

I've seen a few news articles about a proposal to suspend the Illinois gas tax to give drivers a break. At best that's a short term band-aid. If the legislature wants to get serious about saving drivers money on gas they need to adopt standards that will force car companies to provide more fuel efficient vehicles. Reducing consumption of fuel is also the most effective way to reduce our dependence on large amounts of foreign oil.

As the car commercials say, "There's no better time to act than now! Hurry before its too late!"

Posted by Will at 5:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Last week I wrote about the hearing for the Illinois Clean Car Bill in the House Environmental Health Committee. It turns out that the roll call for votes in committee aren't published on the General Assembly website so it took me a little while to confirm how everyone voted.

Those voting "yes" for Clean Cars.

Karen May (D - Highwood)
Mike Boland (D - Moline)
Paul Froehlich (R - Schaumburg)
Julie Hamos (D - Evanston)
Greg Harris (D - Chicago)
Elaine Nekritz (D - Des Plaines)
Al Riley (D - Matteson)

Those voting "no."

Dave Winters (R - Rockford)
Kevin McCarthy (D - Orland Park)
Patricia Bellock (R - Westmont)
Patricia Lindner (R - Sugar Grove)
Robert Pritchard (R - Sycamore)

As you can see, only one Republican voted for the bill, and one Democrat voted against it. The growing list of co-sponsors currently includes two Republicans and sixteen Democrats.

I believe the bill's sponsor, Karen May, said that she doesn't plan to bring the bill up for a vote in the full house until she's confident it has enough support to pass. That means its time to call up State Representatives who haven't signed on yet as co-sponsors to House Bill 3424.

If you live in the Springfield area you're either represented by Raymond Poe or Rich Brauer. Their contact information is:

Rich Brauer - District 100
(217) 782-0053

Raymond Poe - District 99
(217) 782-0044

Everyone else can find their State Representative on this list. If your representative is on the Environmental Health Committee you might also call to thank them for a "yes" vote or ask them to reconsider their "no" vote.

Posted by Will at 10:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Yesterday I attended a hearing on the Illinois Clean Car bill in the Illinois House Environmental Health Committee. The bill would cause Illinois to join 13 other states that have adopted the California "Pavley Law" standards for reducing car emissions beyond the minimum federal requirement.

One of the speakers in favor of the bill was Jack Darin, Illinois Director of the Sierra Club, who chaired a working group appointed by the Governor which is making the reccomendation to adopt the California standards.

Automobiles are the second largest source of pollutants that cause global warming after coal power plants. The California standards would reduce those emissions as well as other pollutants that cause asthma and other health problems. Its expected that much of the reduction would come through increased fuel efficiency, which means car buyers will spend less on gas.

The automobile manufacturers brought in some of their big guns from California, D.C. and Chicago to lobby against the bill. Their main spokesperson was the ironically named Steven Douglas (we were short distance from the Stephen A. Douglas statue on the Capitol lawn) from the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. The Alliance is a joint project of the major car manufactures and they send Steven from California to all over the country to lobby against government interference in their right to pollute the planet we all live on.

I thought Steve was mostly full of crap but never more so than on his points about consumer choice and electric cars. Perhaps most annoyingly, he made some ridiculous statements about the high cost of electric cars and their limited driving range. Having just watched the documentary, Who Killed the Electric Car, I know that the technology exists to make affordable zero emissions electric cars that have a reasonable driving range. The Tesla would be my dream all-electric car, just in case anyone wants to know what to buy me for Christmas.

The most shocking part of the film was that the car companies refused to let the owners of electric cars in California renew their leases. They took electric cars away from consumers who wanted them and had them all demolished. That pretty well sums up the auto-manufacturer's' commitment to consumer choice when it comes to clean cars.

Still, Steve asserted that it was Clean Car regulations that would limit consumer choice in his unlikely scenario that consumers will soon be rushing to purchase higher mileage vehicles, when finally given a choice, as gas prices surpass $3.00 per gallon.

I was very happy to see two Representatives, Mike Boland and Elaine Nekritz, make the same point about consumer choice which I wrote about in a previous blog post. They both spoke of their desire to buy an American, union-made car that gets great gas mileage, such as a hybrid. Nekrtiz said that she could only find one car that met her criteria of being green and American made. American car companies are not giving consumers good choices and the UAW is not representing its membership well when they support company efforts to resist providing a product that consumers want.

The other argument of the car manufacturers' is that they don't have the ability to meet the regulations. Historically, that's an argument that is always made, yet they somehow find a way to meet whatever requirements are passed without the doomsday scenarios coming to fruition. And historically, the car manufacturers do no more than they are required to do. One thing I do appreciate from the testimony of the opponents is that I gained an appreciation for how complex this issue is, so I plan on doing more research.

The bill passed committee on a 7-5 vote. I didn't write down how each member voted so I'll post that information when the transcript is available on the House website.

Posted by Will at 11:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Alternative fuels and cars became my theme this week so I'll make a quick Friday post bringing peoples' attention to an article in Business Week that a friend sent me, which has implications for the several proposed ethanol plants in this area.

Lurking behind ADM's gloomy news are doubts about the future of corn ethanol. A growing number of analysts, once bullish on the product, are warning that an oversupply may be coming as soon as this year. On Apr. 27, a Lehman Brothers (LEH) report projected that production will outstrip demand in the second half of 2007, measuring the domestic thirst for corn ethanol at 420,000 barrels per day but supply at 445,000 barrels a day, mainly because the U.S. lacks the infrastructure to move the product to market.

"There's tremendous capacity coming online, but the infrastructure isn't there to keep up with it," says Michael Waldron, an oil markets research analyst at Lehman Brothers who co-authored the report. "We need a nationwide system to pipe it, and until that happens, we'll likely have an excess of product."

Posted by Will at 1:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Last night I finally watched the documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car?" I've been meaning to watch it for a while but I was worried it would be a little boring and depressing. Thankfully, it turned out to be pretty exciting and I was shocked by some of the things I learned.

The answer to the movie's title isn't as simple as blaming major automakers, as one might expect. For all the complexities of the issue, I still came away with the belief that US automakers have absolutely no credibility when they claim they can't meet tougher government fuel standards. They don't need more time to research better electric battery technology or start some new project like hydrogen fuel cells.

They had the electric car technology at least ten years ago and they could be producing the cars today. In fact, they might create more American jobs for those workers who have to modify existing manufacturing plants or build new ones.

One of the most aggravating things I learned is that GM once released an electric Saturn that they later took off the market. I've been wishing for years that Saturn would produce a hybrid or electric car (besides an SUV which I have absolutely no interest in owning). I like my Saturn because it has more American made and assembled parts than any other car on the market. I want to be able to buy a green car that is union made by American workers, but American car companies are idiotically not giving me that option. Hello?! McFly! Why are you forcing me to buy a foreign car, GM? I learned that Saturn is finally coming out with more hybrids in the near future but they should have had them on the market years ago.

I don't want to give away any more spoilers so just go rent the movie. Don't worry, you'll like it.

Posted by Will at 4:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (1)

The US Senate has been holding hearings about increasing fuel efficiency standards for cars. As they always do, US auto manufacturers had a representative claiming the requirements would cost American jobs. I've been searching for an explanation of that argument with no success. It sounds more like a scare-tactic than an argument.

A series of other articles paint a different picture. First, the list of the most fuel efficient cars on the market is dominated by foreign car companies, with the Toyota Prius topping the list. Then Toyota outsold GM for the first time, while GM lays off workers, had declining profits and falling stock value. It doesn't take a genius to see the pattern here, does it?

This post has been in my head for a while but it was a comment Barack Obama made in Detroit that made me finally type it out.

"Here in Detroit, three giants of American industry are hemorrhaging jobs and profits as foreign competitors answer the rising global demand for fuel-efficient cars," he said.

"The need to drastically change our energy policy is no longer a debatable proposition. It is not a question of whether, but how; not a question of if, but when. For the sake of our security, our economy, our jobs and our planet, the age of oil must end in our time."

Lack of action on the federal level is prompting states to take their own action. Maryland is the latest state to pass their own clean cars legislation. Momentum is building to do the same in Illinois, which is something I'll write more about another day.

cross-posted from CESblog

Posted by Will at 2:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The SJ-R has several articles on ethanol yesterday and today. It reminded me of the renewable energy forum at UIS on April 19 that I never got around to writing about so I'll take this as an opportunity.

The forum featured three speakers, the first of which was Rebecca Stanfield, the state Director of Environment Illinois. She spoke about the major sources of pollutants that cause global warming, the top two being coal power plants and automobile emissions, and proposed legislation to reduce those emissions in Illinois.

The other two panelists focused their attention on ethanol. David Pimentel, Professor of Ecology and Agricultural Sciences at Cornell University, is a leading critic of ethanol. His central argument is that the energy required to create ethanol, when you account for everything from growing the crops to the refining process, is greater than the amount of energy derived from burning the fuel.

I've heard this argument before but I still felt that ethanol is beneficial for reducing our dependence on foreign oil. So I was particularly struck by Pimentel's claim that we import 1 1/2 gallons of oil from the middle east to produce 1 gallon of ethanol. Overall, I thought his presentation was pretty devastating toward the claim that current methods of producing corn-based ethanol provide any benefits for the environment.

Unfortunately, one of the scheduled panelists, John Caupert of the Corn-to-Ethanol Research Center at SIUE, couldn't attend, so I can only guess what defense he would have made for corn-based ethanol.

The third panelist in attendance was Stephen Long, professor of Plant Biology and Crop Sciences at UIUC, who is part of an ethanol research project that received a large grant from BP. I eagerly awaited a fist fight between Pimentel and Long, but was disappointed with nothing but the kind of polite, passive-aggressive disagreement that's typical for academics.

Long made an interesting analogy for his argument by showing pictures of a Wright Brothers plane and a modern jet. He showed a chart of various studies on the efficiency of ethanol production, which suggested not all research is as bleak as Pimentel's findings, but he didn't make much of a defense of current methods of producing corn-based ethanol. Instead, he argued that we shouldn't discount the future potential of ethanol based on an analysis of today's technology.

However, Long's vision of the future of ethanol was not focused on corn, but rather other crops such as switchgrass and miscanthus in particular. I had never heard of miscanthus, but apparently it grows well in Illinois and Long believes it can be used to produce ethanol much more efficiently than corn.

If he's correct, that brings up a number of issues for policy makers. What structural changes would need to be made to the agricultural market in Illinois down the road if farmers switch some of their corn production to miscanthus or switchgrass and are their ways to minimize the financial risk involved? Will ADM, one of the strongest supports of corn ethanol, be a barrier to that change or can they be brought on board?

More locally, if corn based ethanol turns out to be a passing fad, can ethanol plants being built, such as the one in Waverly, be cheaply converted to other forms of ethanol production, or will we be left with an abandoned eyesore in 10 or 15 years? That was one of the many questions I didn't hear asked, at least publicly, by the county board when they rushed through approval of the Waverly plant. Hopefully the SJ-R articles will spur a more critical discussion since the county board tends to avoid public controversy.

Regardless of the future of ethanol, its clear that the most effective thing we can do immediately to reduce emissions is to improve fuel efficiency and require stricter pollution control equipment on new cars. You would think that improving mileage would be the easiest and most politically popular action since it also lowers the amount of money people spend on gas, but once again, the oil and auto industries are blocking action. I'll write more about that on another day.

Posted by Will at 4:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This is one of the most ridiculously outrageous things I've seen in a while so I have to pass it along.

David and Eileen Wetzel don't get going in the morning quite as early as they used to.

So David Wetzel, 79, was surprised to hear a knock on the door at their eastside home while he was still getting dressed.

Two men in suits were standing on his porch.

"They showed me their badges and said they were from the Illinois Department of Revenue," Wetzel said. "I said, 'Come in.' Maybe I shouldn't have."

...The agents informed the Wetzels that they were interested in their car, a 1986 Volkswagen Golf, that David Wetzel converted to run primarily from vegetable oil but also partly on diesel.

Wetzel uses recycled vegetable oil, which he picks up weekly from an organization that uses it for frying food at its dining facility.

"They told me I am required to have a license and am obligated to pay a motor fuel tax," David Wetzel recalled. "Mr. May also told me the tax would be retroactive."

Since the initial visit by the agents on Jan. 4, the Wetzels have been involved in a struggle with the Illinois Department of Revenue. The couple, who live on a fixed budget, have been asked to post a $2,500 bond and threatened with felony charges.

Posted by Will at 12:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)