Public Comment on The Governor’s Task Force on Global Warming Strawman Proposal - June 19

Informations

• Publié par: Olle
• Nombre de lectures: 34
• Langue: English

Extrait

Public Comment on The Governor’s Task Force on Global Warming
Comprehensive Strawman Proposal

Received on June 19, 2008


Comments from Page
Michele Schuster 1
Dawn Lingo 2
Todd Stuart 3
Karen and John Cleary 5
red judy 6
Dave Dahlberg 7
Terry Hansen 8
Tom Allen 9
Mark F. Dahlberg 9
Dan Kohler  10
Jeff Anthony 11
Kenneth J. Klein  11
Marcia Hartwig 12
Heidi Blankenship 12
John Siegert 13
Jessica Dexter 14
Debra Schneider 14
Robert J Hintz 15
Paul Schneider 15
Don Ferber 16
David Knuti 17
Stephen Steinhoff 18
Robert Hill 19
Comments from Wisconsin Religious Leaders 19
David Knuti 21
Kerry Thomas 22
Kevin Kawula 24
Scott Manley 24
Satya Rhodes-Conway 25
CFW Wheelock 25
George Meyer 26


From: Michele Schuster
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 5:46 AM
To: DNR GLOBALWARM TF COMMENTS
Subject: Strawman Proposal
Thank you for all the work being done regarding this complex and critical issue! My concern is
that the Strawman Proposal does not go far enough, fast enough.

My belief, based on my reading and facts given on many scientific PBS programs, is that Global
Page 1 of 28 Warming is more advanced and serious than most people in Wisconsin know. Further,
impressively researched investigative reports show another important clue - that our Federal
Administration has censored the science that has allowed to be reported on Global Warming. As
a result, the severity of the threat to life on Earth was minimized. An official employed by the
Federal Government took the risk of speaking out in a program called "The Age of Warming"
produced by and aired on CBS! That CBS was willing to show such a program might be
significant to anyone who puts most stock in mainstream media. (Unfortunately, it aired during
the Super Bowl.)

Europe and some other areas of the world are far ahead of our country in understanding and
action. I believe that all U.S. citizens and public servants would do well to take Global Warming
as our most serious challenge EVER. We came together as a country during World War II. We
can do it again. Even as the daughter of a WWII Veteran, I believe that Global Warming is a far
more serious situation! Can we all act together? Can we work even harder to put party
differences and business interests aside?

Please consider (again?) the need for:
* Numeric global warming reduction targets based on the most current, sound science
* MANDATORY early action to reduce global warming pollution
* Home-grown clean energy and energy efficiency solutions to address global warming in
Wisconsin


From: Dawn Lingo
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 7:28 AM
To: DNR GLOBALWARM TF COMMENTS
Subject: Comments regarding task force on global warming
Dear Task Force Members,

I urge you to reconsider the important impact your decisions will have on our childrens' future,
on Wisconsin's future and on the future of our planet. I implore you to consider the following:

1. Oppose the gutting of a past Conservation Priority, the Renewable
Energy and Energy Efficiency Bill (Act 141). Specifically, the Task
Force should:

Leave the definition of renewable energy alone! The recommendations
attempt to change the definition to non-renewable forms of power,
like large-scale hydro and derivatives of fossil-fuels.
Keep green-pricing programs honest! Right now, citizens can enroll
in special programs where they choose to purchase clean, green
energy at a higher rate. Every time they do so, it is green energy
IN ADDITION TO the 10% renewable energy standard required by law.
The Task Force recommendations propose to change that and count the
green energy citizens are paying for TOWARDS the utilities' required
10% renewable energy goal.
Page 2 of 28
Prevent double-counting of renewable energy! Act 141 required a 10%
renewable energy standard by 2015, and provides an incentive for
companies that move quickly towards that goal to sell their
renewable energy credits to other companies who are unable to move
as quickly, with those credits being good for a maximum of 4 years.
The Task Force recommends that the expiration date on the energy
credits be removed, meaning that renewable energy credits could be
counted indefinitely and replace actual renewable energy.

2. Support strong, science-based emission reduction targets by
including a specific pollution reduction timeline and amounts for
those reductions: Stabilize emissions by 2010; reach 2005 levels by
2012; 25% reduction from 1990 levels by 2020; and 80% reduction from
1990 levels by 2050.

3. Support Wisconsin's current nuclear moratorium, which requires
that any proposed nuclear facilities must demonstrate that they have
a plan for nuclear waste storage. The recommendations would remove
this waste storage requirement.

4. Encourage action now, not later, by creating incentives for
small, immediate cuts in global warming gases. The recommendations
include no such incentives which could mean that Wisconsinites see
no reductions any time soon.

Dawn Lingo
Kenosha, WI


From: Todd Stuart
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 7:44 AM
To: DNR GLOBALWARM TF COMMENTS
Subject: WIEG Comments - Strawman Proposal
To: Roy Thilly
Tia Nelson

From: Todd Stuart, Executive Director
Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group, Inc.

Re: Comments on Strawman Proposal

Date: June 19, 2008

The Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group, Inc. (WIEG) submits the following comments
regarding the strawman proposal from the Task Force Co-Chairs. WIEG appreciates some of
Page 3 of 28 new initiatives designed to mitigate costs and industry issues. However, we still have significant
concerns particularly with respect to cost, competitiveness and the process involved.

What kind of economy we’ll have for the next several decades will be determined in the next
couple months here in Wisconsin and in Washington D.C. Given the enormous consequences of
our work on this Task Force, we are puzzled by what appears to be a “take it or leave it”
proposal where we have a week or two to digest and then vote. Due to problems with the
modeling and the speed at which this Task Force is moving, nobody has a good idea of: a) how
much this strawman proposal will cost, b) what kind of economic benefit will be created, and c)
how much Greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced in Wisconsin. Task Force members should
demand a better understanding of these questions before approving the strawman. Is there any
harm in getting a better handle on the consequences before pressing forward?

There is no commercially available control technology to eliminate or store carbon at this time.
When we created regulations to fight Acid Rain, there was readily available, off the shelf
technology. Even completely switching our fleet to natural gas would not get Wisconsin to the
carbon reduction goals outlined in the Executive Order. Under the strawman, Wisconsin would
be investing billions over the next several decades to obtain emission reductions that are sure to
be negated by China alone within only a few weeks.

Industrial customers need reliable electricity at affordable rates. We are primarily concerned
about economic survival. Quite frankly, we are struggling to absorb the rising costs of fuel and
the existing mandates and controls. We are going to see billions in increases just from the costs
of the current 10% RPS in addition to CAIR, CAMR, etc. These existing costs will mean
double digit increases. The question is – do we add fuel to that fire by going above and beyond
the coming federal standards?

There will be 1,000 jobs lost just in the paper industry alone this year. There are over 1,000 jobs
lost in the automotive sector recently. Other big name, major manufacturers have announced
thousands of job cuts this year. With oil well over $100 a barrel and gasoline topping $4 a
gallon, we are urging extreme caution with the strawman recommendations.

WIEG has the greatest concerns with respect to the cap & trade proposal and the expanded RPS.

Cap & Trade: The stated preference of the strawman was for a federal cap & trade system,
with a second choice of a regional cap & trade. WIEG believes a regional cap & trade should
not be an option as it is a policy doomed to failure. In order to have a successful market, there
needs to be economies of scale for buyers and sellers. WIEG prefers an international program
for cap & trade, or at minimum, a federal program.

Expanded Renewable Portfolio Standard: WIEG has consistently opposed this proposal due
to the overall cost and infeasibility. Some Wisconsin utilities are finding the current 10% RPS to
be problematic. We have some utilities building wind when their de