I-184 Public Information Meeting
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+2469) 2 months ago
Top
Posted by The man from snowy plains (-110) 2 months ago
http://meic.org/2017/11/montana-initiative-184-good-intentions-not-supportable/

I 184 not a good deal.
Top
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+2469) 2 months ago
Here's a link that rebuts MEIC's Brian Fadie's comments and explains why I-184 is a good initiative.

https://www.mtcares.org/w...-meic1.pdf

Also, here's another link that explains things.

http://www.mtcares.org/ex...nitiative/

Russ Doty will be explaining I-184 at Miles Community College, Rm. 106, on Wednesday, March 7th. Please plan to attend.

Ultimately, it will be up to Montana's voters to decide on I-184 -- if it makes it to the ballot in November.
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+13692) 2 months ago
Here is the text of the initiative:

https://www.mtcares.org/w...-final.pdf

I (think I) am a fairly intelligent person and I find this document confusing. Anything this confusing isn't ready for prime time and needs additional time to ruminate. If you want any chance to understand it you'll have to go to the presentation at MCC. Hopefully, the other side of the story will hold a meeting so everyone understands all that is being purposed.

-As currently written, I would oppose it as it tramples on the Sovereignty of Tribal Nations. White colonizers need to stop with this behavior.

-Before we get all wild and crazy with renewable energy, we need to have a plan to address long-term waste streams, in about 20-25 years. This needs to be added to the costs. The costs in this document ignore this fact/need.

-I think we ought to look at rooftop photo-voltaic solar rather than taking large areas of land out of production for solar farms. As a society, we haven't thought through the renewable energy paradigm very will. That needs to change before we accept initiatives like this one.
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+1
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+2469) 2 months ago
Richard, as a society we didn't think through the fossil fuel paradigm very well -- for example, "According to a study published by MIT, air pollution from power generation causes 52,000 premature deaths per year and a study published by NYU revealed that the health costs associated with premature births from fossil fuel emissions add up to nearly $5 billion. A study published in the journal Science Advances of over 1.1 million births in Pennsylvania over nearly a decade found that women who lived within two miles of a fracking site were more likely to give birth to low-weight babies. Furthermore, Bureau of Labor Statistics’ data shows that workers employed in mining, quarrying, oil and gas extraction are nearly four times as likely to incur fatal and severe injuries than the average worker in the U.S.

From fossil fuel extraction to combustion, an array of health consequences are unleashed on local communities."

See below for other public health effects:

https://climatenexus.org/...sil-fuels/
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+11308) 2 months ago
The most amazing thing here, is that Snowy is in cahoots with the MEIC.

No wonder there is four feet of snow on the ground here in early March. Hell has frozen over.
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+3
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+13692) 2 months ago
Reply to Mary Catherine Dunphy (#375252)
Mary Catherine Dunphy wrote:
Richard, as a society we didn't think through the fossil fuel paradigm very well -- for example, "According to a study published by MIT, air pollution from power generation causes 52,000 premature deaths per year and a study published by NYU revealed that the health costs associated with premature births from fossil fuel emissions add up to nearly $5 billion. A study published in the journal Science Advances of over 1.1 million births in Pennsylvania over nearly a decade found that women who lived within two miles of a fracking site were more likely to give birth to low-weight babies. Furthermore, Bureau of Labor Statistics’ data shows that workers employed in mining, quarrying, oil and gas extraction are nearly four times as likely to incur fatal and severe injuries than the average worker in the U.S.

From fossil fuel extraction to combustion, an array of health consequences are unleashed on local communities."

See below for other public health effects:

https://climatenexus.org/...sil-fuels/


Which is why we shouldn't make the same mistake twice.
Top
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+2469) 2 months ago
Richard: The entire world is switching to renewable energy because it does not pose the same health hazards as fossil fuels do both to humans and to other species on the planet. And, it mitigates climate change. It's not a perfect solution but it is much better and will probably improve as technology improves.

Actually, the Montana Climate Assessment scientists when they spoke at Fort Keogh recently said their climate modeling show Montana getting plenty of snow pack for a number of years -- full rivers and streams. However, their climate modeling also shows lots of "too much" heat when it does warm up. I'm waiting to see if this summer will get too hot and another flash drought will dry up grass and crops like it did last year. I'm wishing they will be wrong in their assessment but only time will tell.

It's hard to believe, given how cold the winter has been in Montana, but according to NASA January 2018 was fifth warmest January on record:

https://climate.nasa.gov/...on-record/

I've heard it's been colder in Montana than in Alaska this winter.

https://climate.nasa.gov/...he-arctic/
Top
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+2469) 2 months ago
Here is a link to the Executive Summary of the Montana Climate Assessment Report:

"The 2017 Montana Climate Assessment focused on three sectors that Montana stakeholders identified as important to their lives: water, forests, and agriculture. The MCA found that all three of these sectors have experienced impacts from climate change over the last half century. In addition to exploring how the past climate has changed and its effects on Montana, the MCA explored how future projected climate change would also affect water, forests, and agriculture across the state. The overall objective of the MCA is to inform Montanans about the state’s changing climate so that they can better plan for the future."

http://montanaclimate.org...ve-summary
Top
Posted by The man from snowy plains (-110) 2 months ago
https://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/wind-subsidies-end/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2017/05/30/why-do-federal-subsidies-make-renewable-energy-so-costly/

Richard Bonine is exactly correct. Solar and Wind both have their downside. Yet MCD loves too dig up stats can't be confirmed in the real world. Wild fires, vehicle emission and typical weather inversions happen in high populations areas in this country that travels by air and roads. Fuel cell technology is proven,Natural gas in, water out is coming of age.
The western electrical grid is an magnificent engineered marvel. Most of the coal fired plants in the central western states supply power to the California coast. Along with the hydro power we've all had reasonable power prices.
Solar and Wind are not the holy trail.
If you understand steam boiler generation station they are designed too operate at full load. Not at intervals of wind and sun.
Basic metal 101, Ya can't have the heat and stretch then the Cool and shrink..
If anything, efficient housing for heating and cooling is a place for government intervention. More hydro and nuclear is the obvious choice.
Emissions Standard are up for a change in the capital. Let's hope for common seance solutions over a reasonable and responsible time frame.
Top
Posted by The man from snowy plains (-110) 2 months ago
GOVERNORS’ POLICY STATEMENT

MCD IS OBVIOUSLY IS NOT IN SYNC WITH REALITY. THE WESTERN GOVERNORS HAVE A PLAN THAT INCLUDES FOSSIL FUELS.
Face it factoid Mary your out of touch, at least try to find a little balance

1. Western Governors recognize the following as energy policy priorities for the West:
a. Secure the United States’ energy supply and systems, and safeguard against risks to
cybersecurity and physical security.
b. Ensure energy is clean, affordable, and reliable by providing a balanced portfolio of
renewable, non-traditional, and traditional resources.
c. Increase energy efficiency associated with electricity, natural gas, and other energy
sources and uses to enhance energy affordability and to effectively meet environmental
goals.
d. Advance efficient environmental review, siting, and permitting processes that facilitate
energy development and the improvement and construction of necessary electric grid
(transmission and distribution) and pipeline infrastructure, while ensuring
environmental and natural resource protection.
e. Improve the United States’ electric grid’s reliability and resiliency.
f. Protect western wildlife, natural resources, and the environment, including clean air
and clean water, and strive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
g. Make the West a leader in energy education, technology development, research, and
innovation.
h. Utilize an all-of-the-above approach to energy development and use in the West, while
protecting the environment, wildlife, and natural resources.
2. Western Governors support increasing the development and use of energy storage,
alternative transportation fuels, and alternative vehicles.
3. Western Governors call on the federal government to lift a barrier to domestic free trade
between the contiguous United States and the noncontiguous states, territories and U.S. flag
islands by the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 by allowing those jurisdictions to receive
energy commodities produced in the mainland but transported by foreign vessels, should
those jurisdictions, and the jurisdictions whose ports are being used to ship these materials,
desire it.
4. Redundant federal regulation of energy development, transport, and use is not required
where sufficient state, territorial, or flag island regulations exist. Existing state authority
should not be replaced or impeded by Congress or federal agencies.
Top
supporter
Posted by Jeri Dalbec (+2467) 2 months ago
I found the Western Government Statements interesting. I also found this which would be from their most recent meeting, I believe. A good read. Just a comment but I think the Polar Vortex is having quite a time with all of us☺

http://westgov.org/images...Energy.pdf
Top