[Note: Senator Sanders had to attend via teleconference, due to the Health care vote today in the Senate]
The following is paraphrased. If there are any unclear bits, it’s probably because I couldn’t type as fast as Senator Sanders spoke. I also didn’t catch the first minute or so, so it starts at an awkward point… Items in square brackets [like this] are from me either filling in detail for clarity, or filling in chunks where I couldn’t keep close.
We’re in an unprecedented position. Worse than any time since the Great Depression – not only in terms of the health care system and wars, but an economy in very bad shape. Green house gasses (GHGs) and global warming add a global problem to the mix. As the most powerful country on earth, we have to be the leaders. For many years, the US was not present in the climate discussion and we had a President who barely acknowledged the issue. We must make substantial cuts in GHG emissions. I will fight to make strongest possible bill.
Last year, we spent 350 billion importing oil from S. Arabia, Venezuela, etc. If we invested a fraction of that into sustainable energy and efficiency, we could be the world leader. When you invest in efficiency, renewables, etc. you create millions of new, good paying jobs. When you do that, you reduce GHGs, you reduce dependence on fossil fuels, you create millions of jobs – it’s a win-win-win.
We’re currently trying to shape national policy. If you have policy ideas speak w/Kelly Lucci (VT office) and Darrin Springer (DC).
2 things:
1) Shape national legislation as best we can. There is enormous opposition from oil, coal, and right wing politicians. The current Senate bill is better than the House bill, but nowhere near strong enough.
I’m also trying to make VT the model for what the rest of the country should look like in terms of GHG emissions and sustainability. We are generally regarded as leaders in US in terms of efficiency. We consume less electricity than we used to consume, which is tremendous. Despite that, first, as a state, we all know that we can do better. And second, if the rest of the country caught up to VT in terms of efficiency, we are talking prevention of creation of over 300 new coal burning plants.
We are NOT doing as well in implementation of sustainable energy. We have a long way to go. You know the wind controversy. I think there’s great potential, not only in terms of farms, but in terms of small inexpensive turbines all over the state and throughout rural America. We can see a situation where people are producing 40% or more of their electricity from their own location. Solar – in VT we understand it, but others don’t. [Unstated, but implied: you don’t have to be in the desert southwest for solar to be viable.] We are better located than say, Germany for solar power [VT is closer to the equator]. NJ has been very aggressive in terms of solar. We’re trying to bring money into state for more. Last year, we got funding from DOD (defense dept) to make the VT National Guard base the greenest base in America ($5 mil last year, expect another $5 mil this year). They’re looking at Solar, Geothermal, biomass and efficiency.
For state residents, we got a solar hot water grant for $500k for solar hw systems at large housing developments. Substantial money is coming into state via energy environmental block grants. We’re seeking money for green a jobs training program. We need to train workers to deal with wind and solar. Hope we will see a significant expansion in solar, wind in the state. There’s an upcoming conference on geothermal in next couple of months. Biomass has huge potential. Middlebury College is heating their campus with biomass (Combined Heat and Electric). We’re seeing district heating projects. There’s great potential out there.
In many ways, this is the great moral challenge of our moment. The way we will succeed is grassroots mobilization. If we can educate people & help make homes more efficient, expose people to the products that are out there, we can make a difference.
It’s not an accident that DOE is giving $69 mil to promote a smart grid in VT. It’s a direct result of the fact that VT is already moving forward aggressively on these technologies.
Our energy, transit, land use planning – we are in the moment to make change. We (VT) are positioned to be a world leader in this realm.
Q& A Session:
Question:
Global warming is more important than health care & Afghanistan. How do we move it beyond politics as usual?Answer:
The real need is to fundamentally change our national priorities. The only way we make things happen is through strong grassroots activism. If millions of people come together and demand government not represent the greedy & powerful lobbyists, we can make the transformation.I could give a long speech about how every progressive initiative is being met with enormous opposition & huge sums of money. Politics is a 365 day a year effort. We’ve gotta keep pushing. White house needs grassroots support. The fate of the planet depends on reducing GHG emissions. We’ve gotta rally the public, knock on our neighbor’s doors.
Question:
Will you fight to keep nuclear energy out of the national bill?Answer:
Very few members of the Senate are willing to raise that cry. When you talk about the energy bill & special interests’ power, you’re not just talking about coal and oil. All the right wing politicians say “we need a nuclear renaissance.” They’re talking construction of hundreds of new nuclear plants. It’s not just right wing republicans, but many democrats saying that as well.I presented a chart at last meeting. When you talk about nuclear power, there are two issues.
I asked “will you please raise your hand if you know which state will accept all nuclear waste.” No one raised their hand. There is no state in the country that wants it. Yucca Mountain was supposed to take the waste from current plants, but not any more. The Senate leader is from Arizona. He doesn’t want the waste in his state.
But the waste is not going to be the major argument: it’s the cost.
We had a chart showing that if you want to generate new energy in America, the cheapest way to go is efficiency. Then wind, then solar, and all alt energy options: all of them are cheaper than nuclear.
We can produce 29% just from solar thermal in US SW. Forget pv, that’s just solar hot water concentrators [to make steam].
It’s not just the waste or the potential danger, it’s the cost that makes nuke a non-starter. Bad news: a lot of republicans and some dems are pushing nuke.
New leg to introduce 10 million rooftops.
Question:
How long do we have to wait for a revenue neutral carbon tax?Answer:
The idea is out there, but cap & trade is more actively supported (it’s the train that’s moving), and current legislation includes cap & trade, not a carbon tax. Companies are pushing for foreign offsets, so they can get all their offsets in places where the labor is cheap. When Goldman Sachs looks at this, [speculation is a big incentive].Opposition to having any climate/energy bill at all is fierce.
What you’re [conference attendees] doing is enormously important. If we can knock on every door, give out quality information, and tell people how to make their homes and town buildings more efficient, we can show the country and the world how to transform their energy use.
Question:
What can we do in VT, since our Senators and Rep are on board.Answer: [Sanders had to go vote, this was answered by Kelley Lucci, state level energy and environment staff]
You are already in the process of addressing that. We’re impressed w/proliferation of the town energy committees around the state. We can be an international leader by our example, having more impact than we realize outside the borders of our state.
Mataliandy did a good job of paraphrasing what Senator Sanders had to say at the conference, quite accurate.
But the Senator seemed to use two terms interchangeably which are, in our current situation, mutually exclusive.
The goals are the second sentence. To achieve those goals you need to be very selective about what projects you proceed with considering that $$ are limited.
For a dollar spent, hands down, improving efficiency has the best return for all the goals stated. Photovoltaics have the longest/worst return. Yet that is where the lions share of the federal $$ are going in Vermont.
When I think of all the energy and greenhouse gases that could be saved and all the jobs created for the ten million to be spent putting PVs on the National Guard building I can’t help but feel that this initiative is sadly misguided.
I know I’ll get slammed for this statement. People will say that we need to do all these things. People will say that once you improve efficiency, you still need power.
All I’m saying is that for the $$ available, if you really want to save energy, reduce greenhouse gases, reduce reliance on foreign sources of energy and create jobs the money needs to spent on improving efficient use of energy before you put PVs on things.
All the renewable energy people I’ve met agree that efficiency and conservation comes first. If people want to buy PVs and put them on their buildings – – that’s great. As a matter of public policy we need to do efficiency and conservation first. Once those efforts reach maturity after many years of concerted effort, then perhaps it will be time to focus more on the less cost effective approaches.
PJ