“Federal policy-makers are under mounting pressure to cut costs.  The Administration has identified two major initiatives—data center consolidation and cloud-computing—that promise to improve government services and save taxpayers billions of dollars,” said DC⁴ Coalition Executive Director David Taylor.

“While these initiatives enjoy broad support within the tech community, Congress cut requested funding in FY 2012.  Part of their justification for doing so has been concern that implementation of these initiatives may fall short of the Administration’s performance and budgetary objectives.  The DC⁴ Coalition will work with the Administration and Congress to address those concerns and improve the prospects that agency data center consolidation and cloud transition activities move forward.”

Click here for Official Press Release

By Jim Snyder – Apr 4, 2012 12:00 AM ET

“The party split on energy used to be less pronounced, according to Dan Tate, a lobbyist with Washington-based Capitol Solutions whose clients include Tokyo-based Honda Motor Co. (7267) and Generators for Clean Air, a coalition of utilities that includes Columbus, Ohio-based American Electric Power Co. (AEP)

“Energy was oil-and-gas-producer states versus consumer states,” Tate, a former aide in President Bill Clinton’s administration, said in an e-mail. “Renewables had a coastal constituency and few detractors because they were such a small percentage of energy. Now even these regional issues have taken on a partisan sheen.”

Click here for full article.

Natural gas contains about 5 to 10% CO2 and must go through a purification process to reduce the CO2 level to 2% in order to be able to be shipped through pipelines to the end consumer.  The VCU scientists’ material has been shown to remove “even that 2 percent CO2 impurity, which would result in a purer gas that burns hotter than the unprocessed fuel. And the 2 percent of volume occupied by CO2 would also be saved, which could make a big difference in the fuel tank when compressed natural gas (CNG) is used to power vehicles.” The benefits of using cleaner, hotter natural gas appear vast, and as E&E reports, the natural gas purification industry stands to gain a lot if this technology is employed on a mass scale.

The science and technology behind the new material, called BILP (benzamidazole-linked polymers) is fascinating. As E&E describes, “A 1-gram chunk [of BILP], although tiny, contains within it the surface area of 11 tennis courts. The material is covered in pores, so that when natural gas is passed over the material, the CO2 impurity gets trapped in the cavities.”

We often write on our blog about the need for public-private partnerships and federal investments in research and development of promising new technology. So far, this seems to be one of the success stories from such an R&D investment. As one of the VCU scientists said, “The government and industry are trying to come up with an alternative way to capture CO2, and one of the most promising approaches is to develop solid [material].” We’ll be following this technology to see if it can be brought to commercial scale, and if so, what effect the technology will have on the larger natural gas industry and the promise of a “hydrogen economy” of the future.

WASHINGTON – Following a 2007 Supreme Court ruling, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today proposed the first Clean Air Act standard for carbon pollution from new power plants. EPA’s proposed standard reflects the ongoing trend in the power sector to build cleaner plants that take advantage of American-made technologies, including new, clean-burning, efficient natural gas generation, which is already the technology of choice for new and planned power plants. At the same time, the rule creates a path forward for new technologies to be deployed at future facilities that will allow companies to burn coal, while emitting less carbon pollution. The rulemaking proposed today only concerns new generating units that will be built in the future, and does not apply to existing units already operating or units that will start construction over the next 12 months.

“Today we’re taking a common-sense step to reduce pollution in our air, protect the planet for our children, and move us into a new era of American energy,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “Right now there are no limits to the amount of carbon pollution that future power plants will be able to put into our skies – and the health and economic threats of a changing climate continue to grow. We’re putting in place a standard that relies on the use of clean, American made technology to tackle a challenge that we can’t leave to our kids and grandkids.”

Currently, there is no uniform national limit on the amount of carbon pollution new power plants can emit. As a direct result of the Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling, EPA in 2009 determined that greenhouse gas pollution threatens Americans’ health and welfare by leading to long lasting changes in our climate that can have a range of negative effects on human health and the environment.

The proposed standard, which only applies to power plants built in the future, is flexible and would help minimize carbon pollution through the deployment of the same types of modern technologies and steps that power companies are already taking to build the next generation of power plants. EPA’s proposal is in line with these investments and will ensure that this progress toward a cleaner, safer and more modern power sector continues. The proposed standards can be met by a range of power facilities burning different fossil fuels, including natural gas technologies that are already widespread, as well as coal with technologies to reduce carbon emissions. Even without today’s action, the power plants that are currently projected to be built going forward would already comply with the standard. As a result, EPA does not project additional cost for industry to comply with this standard.

Prior to developing this standard, EPA engaged in an extensive and open public process to gather the latest information to aid in developing a carbon pollution standard for new power plants. The agency is seeking additional comment and information, including public hearings, and will take that input fully into account as it completes the rulemaking process. EPA’s comment period will be open for 60 days following publication in the Federal Register.

More information: http://epa.gov/carbonpollutionstandard/

As we’ve talked about on our blog before, access to clean water is becoming a greater challenge—both domestically and internationally. E&E’s ClimateWire published a fantastic article this morning entitled “US not immune to water challenges.” In it, reporter Julia Pyper writes that there are two main issues facing the water supply in the United States: quality (agriculture uses about 70% of fresh water in America) and quantity (which is becoming particularly important as water supplies are decreasing in the Southwest, an area that also sees high population growth).

But, as Pyper points out, the issue is starting to gain Congressional attention—35  Congressional members sent a Dear Colleague Letter yesterday asking for increased federal spending in the public water system. The letter points out the decrease in investment in water initiatives that has occurred in the past few decades: “according to a report by Corporate Accountability International, today our public water systems face an annual $23 billion investment gap. Thirty-five years ago, the federal government covered 78 percent of water system funding for capital projects. Today, it is a paltry three percent, leaving cities and towns across the country bearing the difficult challenge of pulling together funds for public water systems.”

In the face of population growth and rising global temperatures, this is clearly an unsustainable trend to continue. Furthermore, as local governments face increasing cuts to the budget, placing the burden on them is not a feasible solution.  Federal investment in the public water system seems to be all but inevitable. We are pleased that this issue is getting more attention—and think that partnerships like the one the State Department has formed are a great first step. But, as Glenn Pickett, chief external affairs officer with the Nature Conservancy (which has signed on to the State Department’s Initiative) said, “We have some unfinished water business here in the U.S. even as we think about how to help other countries deal with water issues around the world.”  

For many, bipartisanship became the selling point on the bill. When asked whether he preferred a two-year transportation bill or a five-year transportation bill, Secretary LaHood said, “I prefer a bipartisan bill.” Sens. Boxer (EPW Chairwoman) and Inhofe (EPW Ranking member) who could not be on more opposite ends of the spectrum on most policy issues, had nothing but praise for the other. As Matt Sledge reports for The Huffington Post, Sen. Boxer stated, “Really, I have to say that Senator Inhofe and I and our staffs really became close family as we worked through this. And I am so moved at the way we were able to come together, all of us.” Stephen Lee Davis has a different take on the bipartisan nature of the bill. As he writes for Transportation for America’s blog, “Today’s 74-22 vote in favor of the Senate transportation bill was no anomaly, it was just one more in a long line of transportation bills approved by strong bipartisan majorities. All but one of the most recent transportation bills passed with votes over the 80 percent mark, and quite a few were well over 90 percent in favor.” But, as we have seen so often this Congress, history and precedence have little effect on the legislative process, so the bipartisan nature of this bill should not be underestimated. Perhaps Emil Frankel, Visiting Scholar at the Bipartisan Policy Center, put it best when he writes on BPC’s Bipartisan Beat Blog, “this bill passed the Senate because of a strong commitment by EPW Chair Barbara Boxer and Ranking Member James Inhofe that it was going to be a bipartisan bill. In that regard, they had the support of the Senate leadership, and they never wavered. This was an extraordinary demonstration of bipartisan leadership, something that is all too rare in the current climate.”

It is extraordinary that it has taken eight extensions (or approximately 900 days as Ethan Fawley reported for fresh-energy.org last month) for the Senate to pass a bill that invests in our crumbling infrastructure.  And yet Congress’ work is still not done: Speaker Boehner has said that he will not consider a bill until after the current extension runs out.  Here’s to hoping the glimmer of bipartisanship doesn’t end in the Senate…

Energy and Water Appropriations: Secretary Chu appeared before the E&W Subcommittee on Wednesday to discuss DOE’s FY2013 appropriations. Much of the questioning focused on nuclear issues, particularly finding a safe path towards for waste disposal.

House: On Monday, the House returns from a week-long recess. Speaker Boehner announced on Thursday that it will not take up a transportation bill until after the April recess. In the meantime, a short-term extension of indeterminate length should hit the Floor sometime the week of March 26^th. The House also continues with its Appropriations schedule, with several hearings coming up in the next two weeks.

Senate: The Senate is taking up a series of votes on judges, and the Reopening American Capital Markets to Emerging Growth Companies Act.

House: In Session 3/19-3/29

3/21- Appropriations, Subcommittee on THUD, Hearing on Overview of Transportation-HUD FY13 Appropriations Draft Bill

3/22-Appropriations, Subcommittee on THUD, Hearing on FAA, Highway Administration, Railroad Administration FY13 Appropriations

3/27- Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Hearing on EERE, Fossil Energy, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability in FY13 E+W Appropriations.

3/28- Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Hearing on ARPA-E and Loan Guarantee Program in FY13 E+W Appropriations

Senate: In Session 3/19-3/30

3/20- Armed Services, Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities Hearing on cybersecurity R&D and FY13 Defense Budget Request

3/20- ENR Confirmation Hearings for EIA, Interior, and FERC

3/20- EPW Clean Air and Safety Subcommittee Hearing on EPA Power Plant Rules

3/22- EPW Hearing on FY13 EPA Budget

3/20- EPW Clean Air and Safety Subcommittee Hearing on EPA Power Plant Rules

TECHNOLOGY CAN SOLVE AMERICA’S ENERGY CRISIS

The earth shook one year ago in north-central Japan, a tsunami swept in and the cascading series of disasters at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant captured the world’s attention, then and now, with the question: How can we do it better?

The call from President Obama for the U.S. to lead the way in developing safer and economically competitive energy technology is being boldly answered by American private industry.

Years before the safety of nuclear reactors was jeopardized by the devastating hydrogen explosion at Fukushima, U.S. scientists successfully developed revolutionary technology that promises to create safe, clean and virtually unlimited electrical power.

With innovative fast-spectrum nuclear reactors, we in the technology industry believe we have found a way to concurrently answer the crucial challenges facing the future of nuclear energy:

1) Safety at all cost: There are new, compact fast reactors with fail-safe technology and revolutionary cooling and cladding systems to protect the very people whose future they are powering.

2) Economics: Designs are cost-competitive with coal and natural gas.

3) Proliferation resistance: We safeguard by achieving a closed fuel cycle and running reactors for 30-60 years without refueling.

4) Practical waste disposition: These new reactors run on “spent” fuel from conventional reactors, solving the problem of disposing of the past-generation waste stockpile.

Industry is addressing these challenges with a new generation of “convert and burn” fast reactors. These technologies, through their ability to burn U-238 from natural uranium, depleted uranium and so-called “spent” fuel waste from conventional light-water reactors, are game changers for the nuclear industry. And game changers we hope for our nation’s energy policies.

Click here to continue reading.

In Time Magazine’s Global Spin Blog, Krista Mahr writes “There is no shortage of worrying revelations in the report. Among the most frightening is the fact that the government was preparing for the possibility of having to evacuate Tokyo while assuring its millions of residents that everything was ok.” Can you imagine evacuating a city of 12.8 million people? That is equivalent to nearly ten times the population of Manhattan.

So what does that mean for nuclear?  That we’re grappling with the same problems we’ve been facing since we built the first US reactor in 1957:  safety, economics, nuclear waste disposal, and proliferation concerns.  If we really want to hedge against natural gas and promote fuel diversity, we must maximize our investment in the research and development of alternative energy sources.  For nuclear, we need a cheaper way to make power without sacrificing safety, promoting proliferation, or adding to our nuclear waste problem. Scientists tell us that it can be done, but the government needs to help.   

Nuclear Containment Buildings, from eia.gov

There’s a lot of promising technology out there that has the potential to improve nuclear power, but to bring these technologies to market, we need strong public-private partnerships. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission won’t permit a nuclear power plant without knowing it is safe and proliferation resistant, but companies can’t prove that their technology is safe without assistance from the government. While it is private industry that is coming up with these new ideas and wants to bring them to market, the Department of Energy must be involved with the testing of innovative technologies. We need a partnership among industry, the Department, the labs, and universities if we are ever to develop a new reactor that is safe, proliferation resistant, cost-effective and reduces our nuclear waste output.

 As Dailytech.com reports, “While nuclear power received some bad publicity last year after the earthquake in Japan caused a nuclear meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi plant, which led to U.S. senators demanding that the NRC repeat a costly inspection of nuclear power, nuclear power is making a comeback.”  As we talked about in our last post, seeing how any power source can be competitive against $3/mmbtu natural gas is a stretch, but we need a public-private partnership to produce the next generation of nuclear power plants if we are ever to have the nuclear renaissance many desire.   

Bingaman CES: On Thursday, Senate ENR Chairman Jeff Bingaman introduced his Clean Energy Standard Act of 2012. The bill requires that large power companies supply increasing amounts of electricity from low-carbon sources like wind, solar, nuclear and natural gas beginning in 2015. By 2035, 84 percent of power produced by large utilities will come from low-carbon sources, according to the legislation. Read More.

Transportation: House Republican leadership abandoned a five-year $260 million Transportation bill and have moved toward a new, 18-month bill. Read More.

Congressional Outlook:

Budget: Both Chambers are in session next week with the House working on their budget resolution and both chambers moving forward with the appropriations process. 

Rising gasoline prices will continue to dominate debate on and off the Hill.  On Thursday, the New York Times published a front-page articleon the possibility that gasoline prices could surge to $5 per gallon. The issue has become the focus of election-season partisan fights on the Hill and on the campaign trail in the past weeks.

House: In Session 3/5-3/8; Recess 3/12-3/16

3/6: Appropriations E+W Subcommittee Hearing on National Nuclear Security Administration

3/7: Appropriations E+W Subcommittee Hearing on Nuclear Energy

3/7 Natural Resources Full Committee Hearing on CEQ FY13 Budget

3/7: Appropriations, Subcommittee on THUD Hearing on DOT FY13 Budget

Senate: In Session 3/5-3/16

3/6: Budget Full Committee Hearing on FY13 Budget

3/13: ENR Full Committee Hearing on DOE Loan Guarantee Program

3/14: Appropriations E&W Subcommittee Hearing on FY13

Anticipated Administrative Action:

Greenhouse Gas New Source Performance Standard Expected Soon

Other Important Dates:

Court decision on CO2 Rules expected in coming months.