News

Studio updates.

Solar Stoves Available from Zambia

Meet Rosa and Clement.  They want to sell you a solar stove from Zambia

ROSA SOLAR STOVES Green Energies Project In Zambia

Health - Energy - Environment - Education - Agriculture - Tourism

ROSA LUKONDE KATUNA

CLEMENT MUSONDA KANKOMBA

Tel: +260974579031/ +260962075001 / LUSAKA, ZAMBIA

Email: musondakankomba@gmail.com; rosalukonde@gmail.com

INTRODUCTION TO THE PROJECT

Solar Heater 1.jpg

We are manufacturing and selling solar stoves and promoting green activities such as solar panels. The most common cooking fuel in urban Zambia is charcoal1 , with firewood also used in rural areas. The burning of fuels for cooking causes indoor air pollution and consequent health problems, as well as carbon emissions and deforestation. Solar stoves allow people to cook with reflected sunshine, without any need to obtain fuel. Cooking with the sun has health, environmental and economic benefits. We are passionate about sharing this exciting technique with more people in Zambia.

We are looking for support to obtain equipment to set up a workshop for making these stoves: drill machines; electric circle saw; bench; spanners; scissors etc. We will also need to buy materials to make the stoves – we would like to start with 10 box cookers; 5 parabolic cookers; 5 solar food dryers and 5 heliac solar cookers. Rosa Solar Stoves is situated in Los Angelos Road / John Laing 63/55 in Lusaka, Zambia.

It is a company registered by the Registration Office PACRA: Patents and Companies Registration Agency in the Republic of Zambia. It is registered under the index number BN No.: 320180000990.

We are excited to introduce you to the project, and thank you for your support. Eng. Clement MUSONDA

1. Solar Photovoltaic System Solar pump equipment / 210 W / 24 V - This system can be used in hospitals for water and sanitation. Access to clean water is very important for hospitals, allowing them to maintain hygiene and treat patients more effectively. A solar pump can move water from a borehole to a tank using energy from the sun. Water from the tank is then available whenever it is needed.

- In the agricultural sector, the system can provide water for farming activities and fisheries.

- It can also be used in education, as schools, nurseries and universities all need water for their activities.

Solar Heater 2.jpg

2. Solar cookers If we all used solar cookers, we would: – Reduce air pollution and promote health. Our towns and cities would be cleaner and more pleasant, and people would no longer cough and choke whilst cooking dinners on a smoky fire. In Zambia in 2015, 74 people per 100,000 died as a result of diseases related to indoor air pollution .

– Reduce deforestation. When firewood and charcoal are used for cooking, this means valuable trees are cut down. Zambia currently has one of the highest rates of deforestation in the world . Cutting down trees can cause the loss of top soil, a reduction in rainfall and reduced soil fertility. In this way once fertile regions turn into desert. Cooking with the sun means there is no need to cut down trees for cooking fuel.

- Reduce climate change. Emissions of carbon dioxide are driving the climate changes that are leading to unpredictable droughts and floods across the world. By protecting trees, and using the sun instead of burning fuel, we can reduce emissions and help to tackle this global problem.

- Improve nutrition and tackle cholera. Foods slow-cooked on a solar cooker retain their nutrient contents and vitamins well. Solar cookers can be used to pasteurize water for avoiding water borne diseases such as cholera and typhoid fever. Education about solar cooking can be combined with health activities and nutrition programmes. Solar cookers can also be used to dry foods and preserve them for longer.

- Create jobs. We will need people to construct solar energy ovens and dryers in our new workshop. Other important jobs are to provide education on solar cooking methods, and to sell the cookers. We have experience with using a range of different solar cookers for cooking, drying and water pasteurization.

Solar Heater.jpg

Parabolic solar cooker: These cookers reach higher temperatures so can be used for frying.

Heliac Solar cooker : We used it to boil water to help stop cholera. 4,202 people became ill in a recent cholera outbreak, which killed eighty five people in Zambia, mostly here in Lusaka.

Solar food dryer : Drying is the easiest and cheapest method of conserving food. A solar dryer can considerably speed up this process. The warm air draws water from fresh food and thus conserves it without destroying vitamins and without affecting the nutrient content. Food to be dried is cut in halves, sliced or shredded and placed on the screens. Fruit should not be too ripe and juicy to avoid dripping. Tea leaves and herbs should be dried without very large stems. The length of time with any drying procedure depends on the water content of the food, the temperature and the humidity in the air. Tea and herbs only need a few hours but tomatoes and fruit may take several days to dry. The solar dryer can be used in health, agriculture and education; saving energy and helping the environment. Each tray can take 5 kgs of food. The dryer can take 30 kgs of food, which will weigh around 20 kgs after drying. The interruption of the drying process at night is an advantage because fast drying produces crusts that obstruct further drying. The moisture from the food soaks into the crust overnight, so the next day the drying process can continue unhindered. The warm air reaches 40-50°C. 

Norris McDonaldComment
LNG Liquefaction Ship

Shell built the world’s second floating LNG facility in 2013.  Prelude weighs in at 600,000 tonnes, which is six times the weight of the world's largest aircraft carrier.  Prelude, a "floating liquefied natural gas facility" is 1,600 feet long and 243 feet wide. That makes it the biggest ship in the world.  

LNG Prelude.jpg

As a floating natural gas facility, it will be posted off the coast of Western Australia for 25 years, acting more like a platform than a mobile vessel.  The ship will be anchored to the sea floor with a 93-metre-tall turret while it processes 175 Olympic swimming pools' worth of liquid natural gas year-round.

LNG Prelude 1.jpg

Gas will be harvested from the ocean, processed on board and then transferred to transport ships.  The ship could be supplied by pipelines from the mainland.  In the past, offshore gas had to be piped onto land and liquefied in shore side plants. But with the mega-ships, offshore LNG can be processed on site.

LNG Prelude 2.jpg

Prelude has three 6,700-horsepower engines, giving it the combined power of about 152 cars.  The ship floated out of dry dock for the first time in late November 2013. It began its job off the coast of Western Australia in 2017.   

Prelude was built by the Technip /Samsung Consortium (TSC) in South Korea for a joint venture between Royal Dutch Shell, KOGAS and Inpex.  It is made with more than 260,000 tonnes of steel. At full load, it will displace more than 600,000 tonnes, more than five times the displacement of a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier. The hull was launched in December 2013.

The main double-hulled structure was built by the Technip Samsung Consortium in the Samsung Heavy Industries Geoje shipyard in South Korea. 

Prelude FLNG was approved for funding by Shell in 2011.  Analyst estimates in 2013 for the cost of the vessel were between US$10.8 to 12.6 billion.  Shell estimated in 2014 that the project would cost up to US$3.5 billion per million tons of production capacity. 

The Prelude FLNG system will be used in the Prelude and Concerto gas fields in the Browse LNG Basin, 120 mi off the coast of Australia; drilling and gas production are both expected to begin in 2016. It has a planned life expectancy of 25 years. The Prelude and Concerto fields are expected to produce 5.3 million tonnes of liquid and condensate per year; this includes 3.6 million tonnes of liquified natural gas, 1.3 million tonnes of condensate, and 400,000 tonnes of liquified petroleum gas.

Natural gas will be extracted from wells and liquefied by chilling it to −260 °F.  The ability to produce and offload LNG to large LNG carriers is an important innovation, which reduces costs and removes the need for long pipelines to land-based LNG processing plants. 

It will produce 110,000 barrels of oil equivalent (BOE) per day.

On 25 July 2017, after a journey of 3,600 miles from its construction site in South Korea, Prelude arrived on site in Western Australian waters. It will begin its hook-up and commissioning phase, and is expected to become operational in 2018.    (Fast Company, 10/12/2009, News.com, 12/9/2013, Wiki)

Norris McDonaldComment
No Money In Supporting Nuclear Power For Environmentalists
NorrisGreenLeaf.jpg

PRESIDENT'S CORNER

By Norris McDonald

It was refreshing to see the New York Post article about a recent paper by Matthew C. Nisbet, a communications professor at Northeastern University, that examined the climate-change and energy grants given by 19 green-leaning philanthropies — including familiar names like the Hewlett, Kresge and MacArthur foundations.  His conclusion: America’s biggest environmental groups seldom, if ever, talk about the climate-change benefits of nuclear energy. Why not? There’s no money in it. 

As the first environmentalist to publicly and aggressively support nuclear power in the climate change and global warming era, I can testify that Professor Nisbet's conclusion is absolute true.  I have been working as a pro-nuclear environmental activist for 18 years and I can barely pay my rent.  I also seriously doubt that my recommendation to the nuclear industry to start funding the environmental groups to support nuclear power will be adopted because they probably are not willing to put up the tens  to hundreds of millions of dollars it would take to get them to acknowledge the obvious: that nuclear power is the best weapon against global warming.

Here are some of the findings from his paper:

Between 2011 and 2015, the 19 foundations made 2,502 grants totaling nearly $557 million to environmental groups like the Sierra Club (the largest single recipient, with nearly $49 million in grants), Natural Resources Defense Council and Environmental Defense Fund.

Of that $557 million, the big environmental groups received nearly $187 million to promote renewable energy and efficiency. They got another $92.5 million for “climate change-related communication, media and mobilization” and nearly $82 million to oppose hydraulic fracturing and to “promote actions to limit/oppose [the] fossil fuel industry.” But “no grants were focused on promoting nuclear energy, though $175,000 in grants were devoted to opposing nuclear energy for cost and safety reasons.”

To underscore: Over a five-year period, some of America’s biggest foundations doled out more than half a billion dollars to some of America’s biggest environmental groups and not a penny was spent promoting nuclear energy, even though nuclear provides about 20 percent of US electricity and twice as much emissions-free juice as all US solar and wind, combined.

Why would any of the large environmental groups risk losing many millions of dollars to support correct science as it relates to nuclear power and global warming?  Nisbet’s paper is important because it exposes the anti-nuclear orthodoxy that prevails at some of America’s biggest philanthropic groups. Just as important, it shows that those same philanthropic groups are ignoring the conclusions of the world’s top climate scientists.

Norris McDonaldComment
President Trump Invokes National Security To Save Nuclear Power Plants
DonaldTrump4.jpeg

President Donald Trump ordered his Energy Secretary Rick Perry to take immediate action to stem power plant closures, arguing that a decline in coal and nuclear electricity is putting the nation’s security at risk.  Impending retirements of fuel-secure power facilities are leading to a rapid depletion of a critical part of our nation’s energy mix and impacting the resilience of our power grid.   AAEA supports President Trump's order and we look forward to promoting Energy Secretary Rick Perry's recommendations.

NuclearPowerPlant1.jpg

Under the Energy Department’s draft plan, the administration would take action under two laws: the Federal Power Act that allows the government to guarantee profits for power plants amid grid emergencies, and the 68-year-old Defense Production Act, a Cold War-era statute once invoked by President Harry Truman to help the steel industry.

For two years, the Energy Department would direct the purchase of power or electric generation capacity from a designated list of facilities “to forestall any future actions toward retirement, decommissioning or deactivation,” according to the memo. The proposed Energy Department directive also would tell some of those facilities to continue generating and delivering electric power according to their existing or recent contracts with utilities.

It’s not clear that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission would go along with the plan. Although the administration could aim to bypass the electric regulators completely, FERC could play a role in any effort to require grid operators to make out-of-market payments to electric generators.

Trump’s directive comes as administration officials search for ways to extend the life of money-losing coal and nuclear power plants that face competition from cheaper natural gas and renewable energy. The plants are considered “fuel-secure” because they house coal and nuclear material on site and are not dependent on pipelines that can be disrupted, wind that stops blowing or a sun that sets.

The department’s strategy, outlined in a memo that would use authority granted under a pair of federal laws to establish a “strategic electric generation reserve” and compel grid operators to buy electricity from at-risk plants. The steps are necessary to protect national security.

The move comes as Trump uses similar national security arguments to justify market interventions aimed at protecting other treasured political constituencies -- steelworkers and automakers -- at the expense of U.S. allies.

A FirstEnergy Corp. subsidiary requested immediate intervention from Perry’s agency in late March, after the Ohio-based company announced it would shut three nuclear power plants feeding the nation’s largest grid, operated by PJM Interconnection LLC.

Some 12,000 megawatts of coal-fired power are expected to retire this year, according to the National Mining Association.  (Bloomberg, 6/1/2018)

The American Lung Association Should Support Nuclear Power
American Lung Association.png

The American Lung Association (ALA) is the preeminent organization that is dedicated to protecting our lungs.  As such, the ALA should support nuclear power because it is the preeminent emission free electricity generator.  The African American Environmentalist Association (AAEA) decided to support nuclear power in 2000 principally because it does not produce smog forming or greenhouse gases.    AAEA also believes nuclear power represents a tool for achieving environmental justice in vulnerable communities suffering from disproportionate amounts of air pollution.

According to ALA's Policy Principle on Energy:

The American Lung Association strongly supports measures to prevent lung disease, reduce the incidence and exacerbation of lung disease. The American Lung Association believes that protection of lung health and a sound U.S. energy policy are compatible goals that require an emphasis on energy conservation, energy efficiency, and the use of cleaner energy resources, including a transition from coal and oil to cleaner alternatives. Our overarching principles call for the implementation of effective air quality programs and standards, transitioning to a clean energy future, with a commitment to promote environmental justice.

NuclearPowerPlant2.jpg

ALA should include nuclear power in emphasizing technologies that are compatible with protection of lung health and sound U.S. energy policy.   Because nuclear power plants do not emit the nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, and particulate matter, all precursors to ozone production and smog, the technology, by its very nature, is a friend to our lungs.  

According to ALA's policy position for Focusing on Environmental Justice:

The American Lung Association recognizes that energy and transportation sources of air pollution are often located near where many people, especially communities of color or lower income, live and work, which means their exposure to pollutants emitted can be more immediate and disproportionately harmful. The American Lung Association recognizes that, for many reasons, people in those communities also face a greater burden of lung disease, making them even more vulnerable to these pollutants.  The American Lung Association supports the formulation, execution and enforcement of health and environmental laws and policies to address these factors, clean up contributing sources and reduce such exposures.  The American Lung Association will work to reduce the disproportionate health burdens borne by economically disadvantaged and politically disenfranchised communities.

In terms of baseload electricity generation, nuclear power is the best way to power society with the energy it needs while reducing air pollution exposures.  If ALA wants to work to reduce the disproportionate health burdens borne by economically disadvantaged communities, it should aggressively promote the continued operation of our nation's nuclear fleet.

AAEA has a long history of promoting nuclear power to mitigate environmental injustice.  We have promoted environmental justice and nuclear power as complements in California, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, Virginia, and Mississippi.  We have presented testimony before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), state legislatures, state agencies, and city agencies.  AAEA drafted and led the fight to pass the environmental justice law for New York City.  

In its policy position on Nuclear Electricity, the ALA states:

Before nuclear generating capacity is expanded, the American Lung Association believes that two key thresholds must be met. First, the expansion of capacity must be economically viable without direct government subsidies. Second, the nuclear industry must demonstrate that it can reduce the continuing risks to safety and the environment. The American Lung Association supports measures to improve the health and safety of uranium mine workers, and the communities where they live, including protection from harmful air pollutants.

All energy sectors receive government subsidies and will continue to receive such support.  Nuclear power competes for these subsidies just like the other energy sectors.  Nuclear power has demonstrated its safety because not one person in the United States has died from a radiation accident at a commercial nuclear power plant.  Moreover, considering how much emission free electricity the nuclear industry has produced over the past fifty years, it has to be considered a major benefit to the environment.  Mining safety has improved since the early days when our nation was rushing to utilize uranium for military purposes.  

All of the energy sources produce emissions in the production and transportation of their construction.  Yet none of the other sources spend the rest of their operational lives producing emission free electricity.  (ALA Public Policy Position - Energy

AAEA President Speaks at Nuclear Energy Assembly 2018
NorrisNEA.jpg
                   Michael Pacilio, Norris McDonald, Bob Perciasepe and David Gattie

                  Michael Pacilio, Norris McDonald, Bob Perciasepe and David Gattie

AAEA President Norris McDonald participated in the Nuclear Energy Assembly (NEA) conference in Atlanta, Georgia on Tuesday, May 22, 2018.  It was the Nuclear Energy Institute's 65th Annual Industry Conference and Supplier Expo.  The Nuclear Energy Assembly (NEA) is the yearly conference of the nuclear technologies industry that brings together industry leaders from all levels. Joined with the annual meeting of the North American Young Generation in Nuclear (NAYGN), this conference celebrates the future of nuclear energy.

The NEA was held at the Atlanta Marriott Marquis and included about 1,000 participants. The theme of the panel McDonald appeared on was:

"Why a Sustainable America Will Be Nuclear Powered"

11:30 a.m. –12:30 p.m.

Michael Pacilio (moderator) Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Exelon Generation

David Gattie Associate Professor, Environmental Engineering University of Georgia

Norris McDonald Founder and President African American Environmentalist Association

Bob Perciasepe President Center for Climate and Energy Solutions

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy Signs Nuclear Support Bill
PhilMurphySignsEnergyBills.png

New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy signed a bill on Wednesday, May 23, 2018 that will save two struggling nuclear power plants in the state.  The legislation would require utility customers to spend more than $300 million a year to rescue nuclear power plants run by Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG).

Murphy signed the nuclear legislation as well as measures boosting wind and solar energy, mandating that half the state’s energy come from renewable energy by 2030.

AAEA presented testimony in support of the legislation in December 2017 and in February 2018.  We also wrote a letter to the governor encouraging him to sign the bill.  

Illinois and New York also have moved to compensate nuclear plants for their zero-carbon value.  New Jersey, with the other states, adopted zero-carbon energy credits, in which the state issues credits to nuclear plants for generating carbon-free power, which they can sell on the open market to raise revenue.

The U.S. depends on the nation’s 99 nuclear reactors for 60 percent of its carbon-free electricity.  (Washington Examiner, 5/24/2018)

PJM Wrong On Reliability Without First Energy Nuclear Plants

The PJM deactivation analysis that planned retirements of three FirstEnergy nuclear facilities in Ohio — the 896 MW Davis Besse plant, the 1,247 MW Perry plant and the 1,811 MW Beaver Creek facility do not present a reliability threat in the short term is wrong.   The PJM conclusion does not include compliance with Environmental Protection Agency Criteria Pollutants, particularly ozone attainment requirements. 

 Davis Besse

Davis Besse

The emissions free nuclear plants offset the nitrogen (NOx) loads from coal plants that contribute to the formation of smog.  Because wind and solar do not have the capability to replace baseload electrical power, natural gas will be the replacement fuel of choice.  Thus NOx from natural gas generation will contribute to the non attainment status for ozone, which reduces reliability if the PJM expects states to comply with the Clean Air Act.

PJM is also relying on speculative new transmission projects to provide reliability.  Such a dice throw is unreasonable.  Approval of proposed transmission projects are meeting significant resistance and are not getting approvals all over the country.  PJM says it can retain reliability through projects already planned in its Regional Transmission Expansion Plan. Again, such planning does not account for PJM states being in none compliance of the Clean Air Act for ozone.  Ignoring health effects is not a good reliability plan.  Another speculative conclusion by PJM is that, even with the retirements, they expect to have sufficient generation and transmission capacity to withstand two concurrent asset outages — a so-called "n-1-1" event.  "They expect?"  This should be a surety, not an expectation.  It is anything but sure.

 Perry

Perry

The reliability analysis is too narrow and does not give credit for the unique attributes of theirnuclear plants, particularly the emission-free nature of this type of generation.  The PJM reliability study ignores the value that these units offer the grid in terms of fuel diversity and zero-carbon and nitrogen emissions generation. 

PJM's new fuel security initiative, which seeks to identify and reward generators with secure fuel supplies, such as onsite stockpiles or dual fuel capabilities is flawed.  "Onsite stockpiles?"  Do they expect these facilities to stockpile wind and solar?  Onsite?  That is not going to happen.  Natural gas, fuel oil and coal are left.  All nitrogen generators.  The PJM should not be promoting any strategy that adds one more pound of NOx or particulate matter (PM) to the ambient air.  

BeaverValleyNuclearPlant2.jpg

If FirstEnregy does not receive emergency support, the Davis Besse plant will retire at the end of May 2020, while the Perry plant and one unit of Beaver Island would come offline at the end of May 2021. The final unit at Beaver is scheduled to close in October 2021. (Utility Dive, 4/30/2018) 

Vibranium and Uranium

PRESIDENT'S CORNER

NorrisGreenLeaf.jpg

Norris McDonald

Vibranium is a fictitious metal that appeared on Earth via a meteorite strike about 10,000 years ago.  The meteor crashed into the fictitious African nation of Wakanda. Vibranium is featured in the blockbuster movies Black Panther and Avengers: Infinity Wars.  Vibranium can absorb kinetic energy.  Vibranium was used to make the Black Panther suit.  Captain America’s shield was also made out of an alloy of Vibranium and iron.  Vibranium and Vibranium alloys were used to make Wakanda into a secret superpower.  The metal powered everything from hover craft to jets to trains to shooting weapons. 

Uranium.png

Uranium is a real metal with seemingly magical powers.  Uranium is used to produce emission free electricity.  Nuclear power plants use uranium to produce 20% of America’s electricity.  Interestingly, it is the kinetic energy of the fission products in nuclear fission of uranium that produces most of the heat that is used to heat water to make steam to turn turbines to produce electricity.   Uranium can also be used to make weapons.

Uranium is as important in the real world as Vibranium is in the Marvel comics and movie worlds.  Uranium produced electricity does not emit any smog forming gases or greenhouse gases.  In a world threatened by global warming and climate change as the most important environmental issues facing humanity, uranium-produced electricity is an invaluable asset.  Uranium is our Vibranium.  And uranium is real.

Norris McDonaldComment
NJ Governor Phil Murphy Should Sign ZEC Program Bill

PRESIDENT'S CORNER

By Norris McDonald

NorrisGreenLeaf.jpg

Senate and House legislators in New Jersey passed S2313 and A3724, companion bills on April 12, 2018 that will ensure the continued operation of the Salem and Hope Creek nuclear power plants in that state.  The Zero Emission Certificate (ZEC) legislation provides needed financial support for the facilities.

Salem and Hope Creek power plants support more than 5,000 jobs, produce enough electricity to power 3 million homes per day and provide more than 90 percent of the state's zero-carbon electricity.  The bills preserve more than $800 million in annual economic activity across New Jersey.

AAEA testified at hearings in December 2017 and in February 2018 in support of the legislation.  Our phone calls to legislators and an Op Ed the day before the vote also hopefully helped in convincing legislators to support the bills. AAEA concentrated on the health effects of closing the plants.  

The passage of these bills in New Jersey comes in the wake of similar actions taken by lawmakers in New York and Illinois who recognized the economic and environmental benefits of commercial nuclear energy in those states. 

The New Jersey Legislative Black Caucus  overwhelmingly voted to support nuclear power, giving 90% of its vote to  the House and Senate bills. Only two out of twenty members voted against legislation to keep two of the states nuclear plants open.  AAEA encouraged the members to support the legislation.

Clearly, the NJ Legislative Black Caucus understands that minority communities are particularly vulnerable to air related illnesses with the highest rates of asthma attack, emergency room visits and hospitalizations in the state. These vulnerable communities are helped by the ability of Hope Creek and Salem nuclear facilities to deliver incredible amounts of baseload electricity without producing any of the air pollution that hurts these areas.

Governor Phil Murphy signed Environmental Justice Executive Order 23 on April 20 directing the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), with support from other state agencies, to develop guidance on how all state departments can incorporate environmental justice considerations into their actions. Environmental justice touches a wide variety of issues related to quality of life, including housing, health, and transportation.

Clearly Governor Murphy understands the link between environmental justice and the effect nuclear power has in mitigating environmental injustice.  Governor Murphy recently expressed his support for nuclear energy in a quote to The New York Times, “I believe the biggest bridge we have to our clean energy future are the nukes.”   Because nuclear power does not emit any smog forming gases, it is a major clean air asset.  This clean air asset is also an environmental justice asset because African Americans throughout New Jersey suffer most from the negative effects of air pollution.  The governor expands on his support for environmental justice,

“All of our residents regardless of race, color, ethnicity, religion deserve to live in communities free from the effects of pollution and are entitled to participate in decision-making that affects their environment, their communities, their homes and their health. Good environmental policy is something that must lift all communities. The Executive Order I am signing will ensure state agencies are considering the cumulative impacts of their actions in overburdened communities on an ongoing basis.”

The governor understands that low-income communities and communities of color in New Jersey and across the country often bear the brunt of pollution and the impacts of climate change.  Further exemplifying the disparity, between 2012 and 2016, the rate of asthma for African Americans was 17.2% compared to 12% for whites in New Jersey. 

For these reasons, we encourage Governor Murphy to sign the bill.

[Support Letter To Governor

Norris McDonaldComment
New Jersey Governor Signs Environmental Justice Executive Order
 Governor Phil Murphy

Governor Phil Murphy

Governor Phil Murphy signed an Executive Order on April 20 directing the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), with support from other state agencies, to develop guidance on how all state departments can incorporate environmental justice considerations into their actions. Environmental justice touches a wide variety of issues related to quality of life, including housing, health, and transportation.

“All of our residents regardless of race, color, ethnicity, religion deserve to live in communities free from the effects of pollution and are entitled to participate in decision-making that affects their environment, their communities, their homes and their health,” said Governor Murphy. “Good environmental policy is something that must lift all communities. The Executive Order I am signing will ensure state agencies are considering the cumulative impacts of their actions in overburdened communities on an ongoing basis.”

Low-income communities and communities of color in New Jersey and across the country often bear the brunt of pollution and the impacts of climate change. 

Further exemplifying the disparity, between 2012 and 2016, the rate of asthma for African Americans was 17.2% compared to 12% for whites in New Jersey.  (Office of Governor Phil Murphy)

Text of Executive Order 23 is online.

Norris McDonaldComment
New Jersey Legislative Black Caucus Supports Nuclear Power
NewJerseyLegislativeBlackCaucus.png

The New Jersey Legislative Black Caucus  overwhelmingly voted to support nuclear power, giving 90% of its vote to  the House and Senate bills. Only two out of twenty members voted against legislation to keep two of the states nuclear plants open.  AAEA encouraged the members to support the legislation.

Clearly, the NJ Legislative Black Caucus understands that minority communities are particularly vulnerable to air related illnesses with the highest rates of asthma attack, emergency room visits and hospitalizations in the state. These vulnerable communities are helped by the ability of Hope Creek and Salem nuclear facilities to deliver incredible amounts of baseload electricity without producing any of the air pollution that hurts these areas.

Zero Emission Certificate Program - Vote of the NJ Legislative Black Caucus

Senate Session    4/12/2018  -  Yes {28}  No {9}  Not Voting {3}   S2313

1) Senator Rice, Ronald L. (Chairperson) – Yes

2) Senator Turner, Shirley K. – No

3) Senator Gill, Nia H. – No

4) Senator Cunningham, Sandra B. – Yes

5) Senator Singleton, Troy – Yes

Assembly Session  4/12/2018  -  Yes {60}  No {10}  Not Voting {8}  Abstains {1}  A3724

6) Green, Jerry - Not Voting (Deceased)

7) Sumter, Shavonda E. – Yes

8) Barclay, Arthur – Yes

9) Conaway, Herb, Jr. – Yes

10) Jasey, Mila M. – Yes

11) Tucker, Cleopatra G. – Yes

12) Blonnie Watson - ?

13) McKnight, Angela V. – Yes

14) Timberlake, Britnee N. – Yes

15) Holley, Jamel C. – Yes

16) Wimberly, Benjie E. – Yes

17) Johnson, Gordon M. – Yes

18) Taliaferro, Adam J. – Yes

19) Speight, Shanique – Yes

20) Reynolds-Jackson, Verlina - Yes

Senate and House legislators in New Jersey passed S2313 and A3724, companion bills that will ensure the continued operation of the Salem and Hope Creek nuclear power plants in that state. Salem and Hope Creek power plants support more than 5,000 jobs, produce enough electricity to power 3 million homes per day and provide more than 90 percent of the state's zero-carbon electricity.  The bills preserve more than $800 million in annual economic activity across New Jersey.

AAEA testified at hearings in December 2017 and in February 2018 in support of the legislation.  Our phone calls to legislators and an Op Ed the day before the vote also hopefully helped in convincing legislators to support the bills. AAEA concentrated on the health effects of closing the plants.  

The passage of these bills in New Jersey comes in the wake of similar actions taken by lawmakers in New York and Illinois who recognized the economic and environmental benefits of commercial nuclear energy in those states. 

Norris McDonaldComment
New Jersey Passes Legislation To Keep Nuclear Plants Open

Senate and House legislators in New Jersey today passed S2313 and A3724, companion bills that will ensure the continued operation of the Salem and Hope Creek nuclear power plants in that state. Salem and Hope Creek power plants support more than 5,000 jobs, produce enough electricity to power 3 million homes per day and provide more than 90 percent of the state's zero-carbon electricity.  The bills preserve more than $800 million in annual economic activity across New Jersey.

AAEA testified at hearings in December 2017 and in February 2018 in support of the legislation.  Our phone calls to legislators and an Op Ed the day before the vote also hopefully helped in convincing legislators to support the bills. AAEA concentrated on the health effects of closing the plants.  

The passage of these bills in New Jersey comes in the wake of similar actions taken by lawmakers in New York, Illinois and Connecticut who recognized the economic and environmental benefits of commercial nuclear energy in those states. 

Norris McDonaldComment
Arizona, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York & New Jersey Nuclear Power Crises

Eight nuclear power plants in five states are facing closure.  This represents an extreme emergency in terms of electricity production and clean air protection.

NuclearPlant2.jpg

An Arizona ballot initiative could prematurely close the state’s sole nuclear plant, Palo Verde.   If the ballot initiative succeeds in the November 2018 election, Palo Verde will close in 2024 instead of in 2044, according to its operator, Arizona Public Service (APS).   The initiative would require 50 percent of Arizona’s electricity to come from renewable sources like solar and wind.  The initiative excludes nuclear from the clean energy mandate.  In order to accommodate such a large increase in intermittent energy from solar and wind, APS believes it would need to close Palo Verde and replace it with natural gas.  The Palo Verde Generating Station is the largest power plant in the United States by net generation

Nuclear’s importance is especially acute in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Maryland (PJM) Interconnection system, America’s largest competitive power market, spanning 13 states.

Ohio's FirstEnergy plans to close three of its nuclear plants in Ohio and Pennsylvania.  The three nuclear plants that FirstEnergy plans to shut down by 2021, plus Exelon’s Three Mile Island nuclear plant, which is scheduled to close next year, produced more energy than all of the wind and solar generation combined in PJM.

Illinois moved to compensate nuclear plants for their zero-carbon value.  New York has implemented a similar program.  Both states have adopted zero-carbon energy credits, in which the state issues credits to nuclear plants for generating carbon-free power, which they can sell on the open market to raise revenue.  Unfortunately, Indian Point nuclear power plant was left out of the New York program.  When it closes, replacement power will come from inner city plants, which will increase negative health effects in those communities.

New Jersey is proposing a zero carbon program similar to the Illinois and New York models.  AAEA has testified at hearings in support of the legislation.  

Ohio considered a similar proposal, but it failed to advance, and no such mechanism exists in Pennsylvania, the two states where FirstEnergy’s closing plants operate.  Pennsylvania appears to be constrained by political considerations.  The election in November could be leaving legislators squeamish about advancing controversial energy legislation.  (Environmental Progress, Washington Examiner, 4/10/2018)

Norris McDonaldComment
New Jersey Nuclear Power Support Legislation - S2313 & A3724

FULL BILL

A3724 is the identical bill in the Assembly

SUMMARY

This bill directs the Board of Public Utilities (board) to establish a Zero Emission Certificate (ZEC) program. Under the bill, a ZEC is a certificate, issued by the board or its designee, representing the fuel diversity, air quality, and other environmental attributes of one megawatt-hour of electricity generated by an eligible nuclear power plant selected by the board to participate in the ZEC program.

To participate in the ZEC program, a nuclear power plant is required to:  (1) be licensed to operate by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission by the date of enactment of this bill and through 2030 or later; (2) demonstrate to the satisfaction of the board that it makes a significant and material contribution to the air quality in the State by minimizing emissions that result from electricity consumed in New Jersey; (3) provide financial information to the board demonstrating that the plant will cease operations unless the nuclear power plant experiences a material financial change; (4) certify annually to the board that the nuclear power plant does not receive any direct or indirect payment or credit under a law of this State, or any other state, or a federal law, or a regional compact, that would eliminate the need for the nuclear power plant to retire prematurely, despite its reasonable best efforts to obtain any such payment or credit; and (5) submit an application fee to the board in an amount to be determined by the board, but which is not to exceed $250,000, to be used to defray the costs incurred by the board to administer the ZEC program.

The board is to determine the price of a ZEC each energy year under the formula provided in the bill.  Within 90 days after the conclusion of an energy year, each electric public utility (utility) in the State is required to pay each nuclear power plant that received ZECs for that prior energy year for the total number of ZECs received by the nuclear power plant multiplied by the percentage of electricity the utility distributed in the State as compared to other utilities in the State.

The board is to order the full recovery of all costs associated with the utility’s procurement of ZECs through a non-bypassable, irrevocable charge imposed on the retail distribution customers of the utility in the amount of $0.004 per kilowatt-hour.  This charge may be reduced by the board if certain conditions are met as specified in the bill.  Excess monies collected by utilities through the charge are to be refunded to their customers.

A nuclear power plant selected by the board to participate in the program is to initially receive ZECs through the end of the first energy year in which the plant was selected, plus an additional three energy years thereafter, and then is subject to review by the board triennially for renewed eligibility for additional, three energy year periods.

     A nuclear power plant selected by the board to participate in the program may suspend or cease operations under certain circumstances, including circumstances in which events prevent the selected nuclear power plant from continuing operations despite the plant’s reasonable efforts to continue operations.  If a selected nuclear power plant ceases operations during an eligibility period for any reason other than those specified in the bill, the plant is to pay a charge to the utilities that purchased ZECs from the selected nuclear power plant in an amount equal to the compensation received for the sale of ZECs since the board’s last determination of the selected nuclear power plant’s eligibility to receive ZECs.  A selected nuclear power plant would not be authorized to lay off personnel except for employee misconduct or underperformance issues.  Finally, the bill requires the board to conduct a study to evaluate the program within 10 years. 

Norris McDonaldComment
New Jersey Legislature Considers Nuclear Power Support

PSEG believes it will have to close its nuclear plants within three years without some form of assistance due to mounting competition from cheap natural gas.

The New Jersey State Legislature held a joint hearing of the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee and the Assembly Telecommunications and Utilities Committee to consider S. 877 to establish a Nuclear Diversity Certificate Program and A-2850 to establish and modify clean energy and energy efficiency programs, establish zero emission certificates program and modify the State's solar renewable energy portfolio standards.

AAEA President Norris McDonald testified at the hearing [full written statement].  AAEA is supporting the legislation and wants Governor Phil Murphy to sign the bill.

 NJ S877, lays out a path for subsidizing the state's nuclear power plants, overhauling the solar program and jump-starting offshore wind development.  Senate President Steve Sweeney is the bill's primary sponsor.  A-2850 is the House version of the Senate bill.

The bill would allow nuclear plant operators to apply for a subsidy from the Board of Public Utilities (BPU). If approved by the BPU, the subsidy would cost roughly $300 million annually. The solar amendment is expected to tack on an extra $423 million annually. There are no estimates yet for provisions related to energy efficiency or offshore wind.

The bill was voted out of committee along party lines, with Democrats largely in favor of the legislation. It was released from the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee 8-3 with one abstention. The Assembly Telecommunications and Utilities Committee cleared it 5-3.

The subsidy, as well as the provisions related to solar and offshore wind, would be paid for through charges on ratepayers' utility bills. 

The current legislation would require that 35 percent of the state's electricity come from renewable energy sources by 2025, and that 50 percent come from renewables by 2050. It also would call on the BPU to outline a method for installing 600 megawatts of energy storage by 2021, and 2,000 megawatts by 2030.  (Politico NJ, "After last-minute revisions, controversial energy bill heads to the Senate floor," By Danielle Muoio)

Norris McDonaldComment
2-Year Budget Bill Extends Nuclear Production Tax Credit

The 2-year budget bill passed last night extends the Nuclear Production Tax Credit.

The 2005 Energy Policy Act provided a tax credit of 1.8 cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity produced from new reactors, but set a deadline of 2020 for the plants to be in service. The new bill removes that deadline, which would ensure that the two Westinghouse AP1000 reactors being built at Southern Nuclear Operating Company's Vogtle site in George could benefit from the credit. 

 AAEA President Norris McDonald at signing of Energy Policy Act of 2005

AAEA President Norris McDonald at signing of Energy Policy Act of 2005

[Note: The Center worked diligently for the passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and particularly for the inclusion of the Nuclear Production Tax Crecit, and was invited to attend the signing of the legislation as a Special Guest of The White House in Albuquerque, New Mexico].

Unforeseen events—the Chapter 11 filing by Westinghouse, regulatory delays associated with first-of-a-kind engineering projects, and Fukushima—will result in the units coming online after 2020, therefore missing the opportunity to receive the PTC.

The tax credit is applicable to the first 6,000 megawatts of new nuclear capacity that come online. The completion of Vogtle 3 and 4 will leave a significant amount of remaining capacity that future small modular or advanced reactor projects will be able to access.

The small modular reactor design closest to construction is from NuScale Power LLC, which in January became the first to submit a design certification application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NuScale plans to build a first commercial power plant at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Idaho National Laboratory, owned by Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems and operated by Washington state-based utility Energy Northwest. It is expected to begin commercial operations by 2026.  (NEI, 11/2/2017, Background/NEI, Greentech Media, 2/9/2018)

October 6, 2017

Norris McDonaldComment
New Jersey Needs Hope Creek and Salem Nuclear Plants

NEW JERSEY NEEDS ITS NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

NORRIS MCDONALD | DECEMBER 11, 2017

[Link To Article]

It would be a huge step backward to close New Jersey’s largest sources of clean electric generation and replace them with fossil fuels

We all know of the bad stuff that flows into the air from fossil-fuel power plants. They emit CO2, which contributes to climate change; NOx and SOx, which contribute to acid rain; and particulates that adversely affect human health. Particulates are nasty — they contribute to early death in infants and the elderly, and impact individuals with decreased lung capacity, such as those with asthma.

I have firsthand experience. The memory of my young son’s reaction to my being intubated during an asthma attack is permanently seared in my memory. There are real-world, life and death and quality-of-life effects from putting more pollution in the air.

And the ill effects of air pollution, particularly particulates, are not shared equally by all in society. They fall hardest on those who live near power plants. I have never seen a coal or gas plant nestled in among suburban homes with rolling lawns and three-car garages. I have, however, seen them jammed between row houses in neighborhoods filled with poor families, many of them people of color.

Environmental injustice

Power plants fueled by coal or natural gas are prime examples — though far from the only examples — of environmental injustice: placing environmental hazards in neighborhoods of the un-empowered.

This is why I believe that New Jersey’s nuclear power plants should be preserved. In places where nuclear plants have closed, coal plants have been restarted or natural gas plants have run more, and even expanded. Air emissions rose considerably. It makes no sense to close New Jersey’s largest sources of clean electric generation and replace them with fossil fuels. It would be a huge step backward — and the burden would fall on those who can least afford it.

The amount of emissions is not insignificant. Replacing nuclear plants in New Jersey with fossil fuel-burning plants would have the same impact of adding 3 million more cars (gas combustion, not electric) to New Jersey’s roads.

A report by the Brattle Group estimates that closing the nuclear plants would result in 17,315 tons of additional particulates being released in the air and cost the state more than $100 million a year — mainly in increased medical costs and decreased productivity — again, falling mostly on those who can least afford it. This is on top of the nearly 14 million tons of CO2 that would be released into the atmosphere. The Brattle group found that the public health and environmental costs of closing the nuclear plants would exceed $700 million a year in New Jersey — a cost that will not be equally distributed.

Nuclear power is clean and, in New Jersey, situated in less-populated areas. They are safe neighbors; someone living near a coal pile is exposed to more radiation than someone living near a nuclear power plant.

Energy prices will climb

I need to add one more factor that often goes overlooked. If New Jersey’s nuclear plants close, the cost of energy will go up. Nuclear plants currently supply half of New Jersey’s electric generation. If those plants close, they will be replaced by more costly units — it is the way of free markets. In fact, the cost of electricity will go up much more than it would cost if we were to preserve these plants. This burden, too, falls disproportionately on those at the lower end of the economic spectrum. While their electric bills may be smaller than those who live in McMansions with in-ground pools, the percent of their income that goes to utilities is much higher. They simply cannot afford that burden, especially when it can be avoided.

The benefits of nuclear power are well-known — nuclear energy is good for the environment, ensures fuel diversity, and creates good-paying jobs. The cost of closing nuclear plants would be significant and spread across society.

Many will focus on the burden this will place on the workers at the plants and the communities that surround them. We need to factor in, as well, the impact on those who live near coal and gas plants that will be more active if nuclear plants close. We need to be finding ways to lessen the economic injustice of plants in the urban cities, not make it worse.

To learn more about the fate of New Jersey’s nuclear plants, please visit www.NJNeedsNuclear.com and sign up to stay informed.

Norris McDonald is president of the African American Environmentalist Association (AAEA). Founded in 1985, the AAEA is the nation’s oldest African-American-led environmental organization. The AAEA is dedicated to protecting the environment; enhancing human, animal and plant ecologies; promoting the efficient use of natural resources; promoting African-American ownership of energy resources and infrastructure and increasing participation in the environmental movement.

Norris McDonaldComment
New Jersey Hearing on Saving Nuclear Power Plants

FULL WRITTEN STATEMENT

Testimony of Norris McDonald

President

African American Environmentalist Association

Before the

New Jersey Legislature

Senate Environment and Energy Committee

And

Assembly Telecommunications and Utilities Committee

Public Hearing On

Strategies to Prevent the Premature Retirement of Existing, Licensed, and Operating Nuclear Power Plants

Committee Room 4, 1st Floor, State House Annex

Trenton, NJ

Monday, December 04, 2017 - 10:00 AM

[Excerpt]

Introduction

My name is Norris McDonald and I am the founder and president of the African American Environmentalist Association (AAEA). We are the nation’s oldest African American-led environmental group and we are dedicated to protecting the environment, promoting the efficient use of natural resources, enhancing human, animal and plant ecologies, promoting increased African American ownership of energy resources and infrastructure and increasing African American participation in the environmental movement.

We support strategies to prevent the premature retirement of Hope Creek and Salem nuclear power plants.  These existing, licensed, and operating nuclear power plants are an invaluable asset in mitigating air pollution in New Jersey.  The state is in nonattainment for ozone, which is a component of smog, and negatively affects the health of New Jersey residents.  Any support the New Jersey state legislature can provide would be a Godsend to people suffering from asthma and other air pollution related illnesses.  Minority communities are particularly vulnerable to air related illnesses with the highest rates of asthma attack, emergency room visits and hospitalizations in the state.  These vulnerable communities are helped by ability of Hope Creek and Salem nuclear facilities ability to deliver incredible amounts of baseload electricity without producing any of the air pollution that hurts these areas.

Nuclear power plants represent our most important facilities for efficiently producing large amounts of baseload electricity while not producing air polluting emissions. It is for these reasons that we support the PSEG Nuclear nuclear fleet.  Hope Creek and Salem nuclear facilities are invaluable clean air assets in New Jersey.  Hope Creek and Salem are also uncredited assets in New Jersey’s ongoing goals to improve air quality.

We were the first environmental group in the United States to support nuclear power starting in 2001.  We support nuclear power because operating the plants do not create smog-forming gases or greenhouse gases.  We are also particularly interested in mitigating air pollution in New Jersey because African Americans represent most of the asthma hospitalizations in the vast majority of counties in New Jersey.

FULL 15-Page Written Statement

Norris McDonaldComment
New York City CO2 Reduction From Buildings Proposal
NewYork.jpg

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) has a plan to force thousands of aging buildings there to become more energy efficient.  The initiative would mandate that owners of existing buildings larger than 25,000 square feet invest in more efficient heating and cooling systems, insulation and hot-water heaters in the years ahead.

If approved by the City Council, the requirements would apply to about 14,500 private and municipal buildings, which the mayor’s office says collectively account for nearly a quarter of New York City’s emissions. Most buildings would need to comply with new efficiency targets by 2030, or their owners would face penalties.

In 2014, de Blasio announced his “80×50” plan, with a goal to reduce those emissions 80 percent from 2005 levels by the year 2050. In June, de Blasio signed an executive order reaffirming the city’s commitment to the international Paris climate accord just days after President Trump announced his intention to withdraw the United States from the agreement.

The de Blasio administration will propose annual penalties that increase with a building’s size and its fossil-fuel usage. Beginning in 2030, a 30,000-square-foot apartment building that exceeds certain energy targets would pay $60,000 for each year it doesn’t meet the new standards, according to the mayor’s office. A building with 1 million square feet that was operating outside the required efficiency standards would pay as much as $2 million in annual penalties. Buildings not in compliance also would be prevented from receiving permits for major renovations.

The administration insists the new initiative could lead to lower long-term energy costs and create as many as 17,000 “green jobs” as older structures are retrofitted. But many owners are likely to face big upfront costs to meet the new requirements.

New York is not alone in working to curb greenhouse-gas emissions. After Trump’s announcement that he would pull the United States out of the Paris climate pact, numerous governors, mayors and businesses independently pledged to push forward with emissions reductions. A group called Climate Mayors — which has 377 members, including de Blasio — committed to working toward the goals laid out in the Paris agreement. (Wash Post, 9/13/2017)

Norris McDonaldComment