Consumers Union  •  Natural Resources Defense Council  •  Sierra Club Michigan Chapter

New Poll Reveals Michigan Residents Support
Strong Lighting and Appliance Efficiency Standards

Nearly 80% of Voters Back the Use and Expansion of Energy Efficiency Technologies

CHICAGO, IL (September 15, 2011) – New polling shows that even as the state legislature considers a bill promoting outmoded and inefficient lighting technology, Michigan residents solidly support energy efficiency technologies and would like the government to play a leading role in setting higher standards for appliances, light bulbs, and other household products. The opinion data comes from a new Public Policy Polling survey released today by public interest groups.

“Supporting energy efficiency standards means more jobs, lower electricity bills and more product choices for consumers,” said Natural Resources Defense Council energy advocate Becky Stanfield. “You simply cannot get any of those benefits by clutching the status quo in a century-old technology of an incandescent bulb. It’s just plain common sense – and that’s why the people of Michigan support the expansion of efficiency standards with all the benefits that come with them.”

Some of the poll’s notable findings include:

• 77 percent of voters in Michigan support expanded use of energy efficiency technologies to help meet our energy needs and reduce energy costs.
• 85 percent of Michigan voters say they have already installed energy efficient products in their own homes or businesses.
• 62 percent of voters agree that switching to more efficient lighting is an effective way to reduce energy waste.
• There’s a strong bipartisan consensus on the issue with 84 percent of Democrats, 76 percent of independents, and 69 percent of Republicans supporting energy efficiency standards.
• Voters strongly support the federal government setting minimum energy efficiency standards for various household products with 62 percent in favor for appliances to only 27 percent opposed; and 64 percent in favor for light bulbs to only 27 percent against.
• In addition to federal action, 58 percent of voters would like the state government to require electric utilities like Detroit Edison and Consumers Energy to help their customers become more energy efficient. 

The survey also found that elected officials who attempt to weaken or delay energy efficiency standards could pay a price at the polls. Forty-eight percent of voters said they would oppose such efforts by their members of Congress at the polls to only 25 percent who would react favorably to those efforts.

In the first year of utility efficiency programs in Michigan, the reduction in demand totaled 375,000 mwh, enough to power more than 37,000 homes. The projection for this year is that the programs will reduce demand by twice that amount or about 750,000 mwh.

“The numbers show that we take energy efficiency seriously in Michigan---as we should, since it has created jobs and saved ratepayers a ton of cash,” said Michigan Sierra Club Director Anne Woiwode. “It’s time for the state legislature to catch up because we’ve only gotten to the low-hanging fruit. Silliness like the ‘dumb light bulb bill’ - which has the potential to cost Michiganders over $357 million every year - threatens to undo a lot of the good work that has been done.”

“Consumer Reports recently tested a variety of energy efficient light bulbs newly available in stores. We found that these models use over 75% less energy, last nearly 10 times longer than traditional incandescent bulbs, and can save consumers hundreds of dollars over the life of the bulb,” said Ellen Bloom, Director of Federal Policy and the Washington, DC Office of Consumers Union. “Expanding energy standards means promoting energy efficiency, enhancing the lighting options available on the market, and helping American consumers save billions of dollars in electric bills.”

The survey had a sample size of 900 voters with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percent. It was conducted via telephone from August 25 to 28 by Public Policy Polling.

###

Consumers Union of United States, Inc., publisher of Consumer Reports®, is a nonprofit membership organization chartered in 1936 to provide consumers with information, education, and counsel about goods, services, health and personal finance. 

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is an international nonprofit environmental organization with more than 1.3 million members and online activists. Since 1970, our lawyers, scientists, and other environmental specialists have worked to protect the world's natural resources, public health, and the environment. NRDC has offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Livingston, Montana, and Beijing. Visit us at www.nrdc.org 

Founded in 1892, the Sierra Club is the nation’s oldest and largest grassroots environmental organization. There are more than 1,400,000 members and supporters in 50 states, Puerto Rico and Canada. For 44 years the Michigan Chapter has represented Sierra Club members and supporters throughout the Great Lakes State.   

(Press release from Michigan Department of Agriculture & Rural Development)

Commission on Agriculture & Rural Development
Seeks Public Input on Agricultural Management Practices

Deadline to provide comment: September 28, 2011

LANSING, Mich. - The Michigan Commission of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Michigan Department of Agriculture & Rural Development (MDARD) today announced a Public Input Meeting and review period has been scheduled for September 28, 2011 in order to gather comments on the 2012 drafts of the state’s Generally Accepted Agricultural and Management Practices (GAAMPs). 

Public comment will be taken on the following GAAMPs: Manure Management and Utilization, Cranberry Production, Site Selection and Odor Control for New and Expanding Livestock Production Facilities, Farm Market, and Irrigation Water Use.  The GAAMPs regarding Nutrient Utilization, Care of Farm Animals and Pesticide Utilization and Pest Control have no proposed changes for 2012.

The GAAMPs Public Input Meeting will be held at 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday,

September 28, 2011, in the Lake Superior Conference Room at the State of Michigan Library & History Center located at 702 West Kalamazoo Street, Lansing, MI.

Written comments may be submitted to MDARD’s Environmental Stewardship Division,

P.O. Box 30017, Lansing, MI 48909 and postmarked no later than September 28, 2011, or sent via e-mail to casteelh@michigan.gov by 5 p.m. on September 28.  MDARD will forward all comments received by the due date to the respective GAAMPs Task Force chairpersons for consideration prior to final review and adoption.

The Michigan Right to Farm Act provides nuisance protection for farms and farm operations.  In order to have this protection, the farm or farm operation must conform to GAAMPs, which are set by the Michigan Commission of Agriculture and Rural Development.  These GAAMPs are reviewed annually by scientific committees of various experts, and revised and updated as necessary.  Public comment is accepted and considered before final versions of the GAAMPs are approved. 

For a copy of any of these GAAMPs including the proposed revisions, please visit www.michigan.gov/gaamps, or contact the MDARD’s Environmental Stewardship Division at

(517) 373-9797, or toll free at (877) 632-1783.

August 22, 2011

Michigan Environmental Groups Caution Touting
Only Economic Impact of Natural Gas Drilling

LANSING – Michigan citizens groups cautioned focusing solely on the economics of natural gas use following the release today of an analysis touting potential economic impact of additional electricity from natural gas in Michigan.

The report, entitled "The Economic Impact of Replacing Coal with Natural Gas for Electricity Production," was undertaken by Professor Bill Knudson, a marketing economist with the Product Center for Agriculture and Natural Resources at Michigan State University. The report did not focus on environmental impacts concerning hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," which is a natural gas extraction process that uses dangerous chemicals for exploration. Indeed, thousands of contamination incidents from natural gas operations using fracking have been reported nationwide, highlighting the negative consequences the extraction method has on the environment.

"The potential economic benefits of natural gas use could easily be overshadowed and dashed entirely by the negative effects the dangerous fracking process could have on Michigan’s waters," said Cyndi Roper, Michigan Director for Clean Water Action. "We must ensure that we protect our Great Lakes and other water resources. Our waters provide a steady stream of revenue from tourism and support hundreds of thousands of jobs for Michiganders."

Clean Water Action, Sierra Club and other groups are calling for a delay in new fracking operations in Michigan until strong regulations are in place, including implementing public accountability measures and requiring companies to fully disclose all chemicals they plan to use in the process.

"By refusing to disclose the unknown chemicals they inject into our environment, the natural gas industry is recklessly threatening our state’s air, water and public health," said Rita Chapman of the Sierra Club. "The public has a right to know what is in our water and we must hold the industry accountable by establishing safeguards for fracking and preventing further contamination."

Chapman also pointed out that the MSU study failed to factor in any analysis that included clean energy sources such as wind and solar or energy efficiency as a replacement for energy produced now by coal.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced proposed rules covering air pollution caused by fracking, including significant reductions of emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change, and air toxins known or suspected of causing cancer and other serious health effects. Michigan’s natural resources are vulnerable to gas drilling activities, and implementing these safeguards will alter the economics of natural gas as an alternative to coal.

"Natural gas drilling is yet another dangerous fossil fuel distraction," said Roper. "Michigan is already creating jobs in the clean energy sector through wind, solar and energy efficiency. Michigan lawmakers should stop clinging to our dirty fuel past and embrace the future or, once again, we’ll be left behind."

Thursday, August 11, 2011

MORE INFO:  Cyndi Roper, 517-490-1394

                         Mike Berkowitz, 248-345-9808

U.S. Report Today Triggers Call For Michigan Action
Recommendations on Controversial Natural Gas Fracking

LANSING, MI--Citizens groups today called on Michigan lawmakers and federal officials to take action on proposals to protect Michigan’s waters following the release today of recommendations from the federal government to reduce public health and environmental impacts of natural gas drilling using fracking.

“It’s great that the federal government is identifying problems with fracking and offering some solutions,” said Mike Berkowitz of Michigan Sierra Club. “But Great Lakes state lawmakers must step up and not leave it just to Washington to protect our waters. We must establish oversight of the natural gas industry here in Michigan.”

A federal Department of Energy advisory panel report released today includes a series of recommendations to develop ‘strong’ regulations on gas drilling. Those regulations include extensive air pollution controls, full tracking of drilling wastewater, disclosure of all air and water pollution as well as chemicals used, and rules that take into account the cumulative impact of the drilling of thousands of wells in certain regions or watersheds. The report release by DOE follows recent disclosure of a federal Environmental Protection Agency report documenting groundwater contamination during the 1980s linked to fracking.  The gas industry has insisted fracking poses nothreat to groundwater, an assertion now challenged by the EPA disclosures.

“While the Obama Administration can take action right now on some of these proposals, the Michigan Legislature and Congress must act immediately as well,” said Cyndi Roper, Michigan Director of Clean Water Action. “The public cannot be adequately protected until Congress and theMichigan Legislature eliminate loopholes for the oil and gas industry in environmental laws.”

As part of the Obama Administration’s national energy plan, DOE established a Natural Gas Subcommittee under their Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (SEAB) to make recommendations concerning environmental and public health impacts of natural gas drilling in the U.S.

This report is the first of two expected to be issued by the Natural Gas Subcommittee; the second report will be issued 90 days from now. The full report and more information on SEAB is available at:

http://www.shalegas.energy.gov/

Clean Water Action, Sierra Club and other citizens groups have called for a delay in fracking in Michigan until the state has adopted protections for Michigan’s Great Lakes water system, including groundwater.  The groups have called for the state to take important measures before new natural gas drilling can resume, including the following:

• Protect Michigan’s water supply by eliminating a special interest exemption from state water use laws so natural gas companies are treated the same as all other large water users in Michigan.  Standards for fracking must be adopted that ensure there are no adverse impacts on our water resources as a result of water withdrawals.
• Protect water quality by requiring public disclosure of specific fracking chemicals used by natural gas companies when they apply for a permit to extract.  The public’s right to know what is in our water outweighs any corporate claims of confidentiality involving the use of chemicals.  The Michigan Legislature must regulate fracking operations to ensure they are safe, including proper disposal of chemical waste and other byproducts of fracking.
• Require public participation in the permitting process so all of the facts are known before a permit is issued and all stakeholders—including citizens who own wells, fish streams and use drinking water—have the right to be heard.

Year After Oil Spill, Green Groups Urge Upton, Walberg
to Put Residents First, End Attacks on EPA

EPA is critical to protecting air, water and must be allowed to do its job

GALESBURG 26 July 2011 – Michigan’s top environmental groups today recognized the one-year mark of the massive oil spill in the Kalamazoo River by calling on Congressmen Fred Upton (R-St. Joseph) and Tim Walberg (R-Tipton) to do everything in their power to prevent future spills and support the Environmental Protection Agency in its mission to protect and clean up our water, air and land. Representatives of Clean Water Action, the Sierra Club and the National Wildlife Federation held a media event today at River Oaks County Park alongside a closed section of the Kalamazoo River that is still undergoing clean-up efforts.

"The fact of the matter is that Congressmen Upton and Walberg should know better than anyone in Congress that the EPA is critical to protecting the water we drink and the air that we breathe," said Cyndi Roper, Michigan director of Clean Water Action. "Instead, they are working to weaken the EPA at the expense of the public health. The oil spill last year left people ill, destroyed property values and damaged our natural resources in ways that will be felt for years to come. It is a devastating reminder that the EPA plays a critical role in protecting our land, air and water."

The oil spill spewed nearly 850,000 gallons of crude oil into the Kalamazoo Watershed. Clean up is still going on, with the river remaining closed to the public. The pipeline owned by Enbridge Inc. was transporting raw tar sands oil when it ruptured a year ago. Tar sands oil is also known as diluted bitumen, which is a highly corrosive, toxic and unstable blend of crude from Alberta, Canada. In a press call last held last week, the EPA revealed that heavy metals have been found in the Kalamazoo River, and that clean-up may take much longer than first anticipated.

Upton and Walberg voted on July 13 for H.R. 2018, legislation that threatens the water quality in our lakes and rivers and the safety of our drinking water sources. The legislation would roll back key enforcement provisions of the Clean Water Act, provisions that allow the EPA to act to protect our waters and our public health. H.R. 2018 passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 239 to 184. In addition to voting for the bill, Upton and Walberg voted against an amendment that would have ensured continued protection of municipal drinking water sources. In short, the bill would threaten the progress the nation has made since the 1972 Clean Water Act gave the federal government the primary role in cleaning up the nation’s waters.

"It’s difficult to imagine how the oil spill would have been managed without the EPA overseeing the cleanup," said Rita Chapman, the clean water program director for the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter. "As incomplete as the cleanup still is today, it would have been far worse without the EPA. People want our lakes and rivers to be safe for swimming, fishing and boating, and certainly we all expect to have clean sources of drinking water. It’s outrageous that Representatives Walberg and Upton would limit clean water protections, especially with the effects of last year’s oil spill still being felt so acutely by the very people they represent in Congress."

Upton, who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, also is working to accelerate the construction of another tar sands pipeline that will run from Alberta, Canada, to the Gulf Coast – a span of more than 2,000 miles. TransCanada, a Canadian pipeline company, has proposed a pipeline called Keystone XL, which would carry up to 900,000 barrels per day of tar sands oil right through the Ogallala Aquifer and six American heartland states, including Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas.

"Before any pipeline project gains approval, like the Keystone XL, we need to fully understand what happened with the Enbridge tar sands pipeline and the dozens of other pipeline spills that have happened in the last year," said Beth Wallace, Community Outreach Regional Coordinator for the National Wildlife Federation’s Great Lakes Regional Center. "Congress needs to focus on increased pipeline safety to ensure that our communities, natural resources and wildlife will never face another oil spill disaster like the one in the Kalamazoo River. We call on Congressman Upton and Congressman Walberg to put the health and safety of Michigan residents first, rather than Big Oil special interests."

July 21, 2011

Bloomberg Philanthropies commits $50 million
to Sierra Club's Beyond Coal Campaign
to move America toward cleaner energy

Grant a 'game changer' that will effectively retire one-third of the nation's aging coal fleet by 2020 

Alexandria, VA. Today the Sierra Club announced a partnership with Bloomberg Philanthropies that will effectively retire one-third of the nation's aging coal fleet by 2020, replacing it with clean energy. The partnership includes a $50 million commitment over four years to the Beyond Coal Campaign that will fuel the Sierra Club's effort to clean the air, end the coal era, and accelerate the transition to cleaner, cost-effective energy sources.

Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune was joined for today’s announcement by Michael R. Bloomberg. They appeared outside a coal-fired plant in Alexandria, Virginia.

In the U.S., coal is the leading cause of greenhouse-gas emissions, and coal’s pollution contributes to four out of the five leading causes of mortality -- heart disease, cancer, stroke, and respiratory illness. Coal emits almost half of all U.S. mercury pollution, which causes developmental problems in babies and young children, as well as being a major contributor to asthma attacks. Coal pollution causes $100 billion in health costs annually.

"If we are going to get serious about reducing our carbon footprint in the United States, we have to get serious about coal. Ending coal power production is the right thing to do, because, while it may seem to be an inexpensive energy source, the impact on our environment and the impact on public health is significant," said Bloomberg. "Coal is a self-inflicted public health risk, polluting the air we breathe, adding mercury to our water, and the leading cause of climate disruption."

Bloomberg added: "The Beyond Coal Campaign has had great success in stopping more than 150 new coal-fired power plants over the past few years and is empowering local communities to lead from the front while Congress continues to watch from the back. That is why I'm pleased to support the Sierra Club and its allies, and I encourage others to do the same."

The $50 million grant will fill a significant portion of the campaign's projected $150 million four-year budget and will have a significant impact in advancing the efforts of the Beyond Coal campaign.

The partnership will play a key role in helping the Sierra Club achieve their impact goals of:

• Cutting 30% of coal production by 2020
• Reducing mercury pollution from coal by 90% by 2020
• Replacing a majority of coal with clean energy

From an organizational perspective it will:

• Increase the number of Sierra Club campaign states from 15 to 45
• Increase the active member and supporter base from 1.4 million to 2.4 million people
• Double the size of full-time Sierra Club staff working on the campaign from 100 to 200

Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune thanked Bloomberg for the grant, calling it a "game changer" in the fight against coal. He also praised Bloomber's farsighted vision and understanding of how protecting public health, developing innovative energy sources, and addressing climate change are all inextricably linked. He also welcomed his business savvy and track record for success to the campaign.

"This partnership will help the Sierra Club to work with communities nationwide as they tell one coal plant after another that inflicting asthma and other diseases on their children is unacceptable and that they will not accept coal pollution in their neighborhoods.

"Coal relentlessly dirties our water, air, and lungs and fixing the problem cannot be left to Washington," said Brune. "Nor can coal's contributions to climate disruption be left to international bodies. Mike Bloomberg's strong clean air agenda as Mayor of New York, and his Chairmanship of the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, shows that he understands that actions are being taken, and that the most significant ongoing successes will be won city by city, by dedicated people across America."

Beyond Coal campaign successes to date include:

• The campaign has stopped 153 new coal-fired power plants from being built, preserving market space for clean energy.
• Nearly 10% of the current coal fleet is now slated for retirement.
• New mountaintop removal mining permits have slowed to a trickle.
• Victories at 16 colleges and universities, where Sierra Student Coalition members have won fights to shut down coal plants on their campuses.
• Hundreds of thousands of people mobilized in support of strong clean air and water protections
• The biggest clean air agreement in the history of the Southeast with the TVA settlement.

Studies show that replacing coal's pollution with clean energy is possible and as coal prices are going up, wind and solar are coming down. Iowa already gets more than 15% of its energy from wind power, and San Antonio recently decided to shut down one of its dirty coal plants and install over 400 MW of solar power, what will be one of the largest solar installations in the world. Meanwhile, the green job sector is growing -- the wind industry already provides more jobs in the U.S. than the coal industry.

The Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign started as a three-person campaign in 2002 and has quickly grown into a powerhouse effort that is changing the way America produces energy. In 2001, the Administration at the time met with coal industry representatives as part of a closed-door energy task force, to craft plans for a new "coal rush" -- the construction of 150 new coal-fired power plants. Had the industry prevailed in building these plants, the nation would have been locked into the use of 19th-century dirty fuels for the foreseeable future. The potential for entrepreneurs to develop wind, solar and other clean technologies would have been crippled. Working with local people in neighborhoods across the country, Sierra Club organizers began fighting Big Coal’s efforts to push through these plants. Together, they achieved one victory after another.

Mary Anne Hitt, Director of the Beyond Coal Campaign, called coal "an outdated fuel that is making our kids sick and has no place in a modern energy economy."

"We're already winning in cities across the country. Community by community, people are standing up and saying no to coal, saying that they are ready for the clean energy economy. Now we’re ready to take this campaign to a whole new level."

This is the second major climate initiative by Bloomberg Philanthropies following the recent involvement and investment in the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group (C40). Bloomberg Philanthropies is focused on climate action, taking a realistic view that progress will come not from national governments and international bodies, but instead by driving action at the city and local level. 

### 

Note: The press conference took place today on the Potomac River in front of the GenOn coal-fired power plant in Alexandria, Virginia. The Alexandria community has rallied around the need to end the plant’s burning of coal and is one of many localities across the country that are active partners in the Beyond Coal Campaign.

Michael Brune - Executive Director, Sierra Club
415-977-5662    Follow on Facebook and Twitter 

Watch the thank-you video.

Citizens Criticize Snyder for Allowing Controversial Rogers City Coal Plant to Move Forward

June 29, ROGERS CITY – Citizens groups today criticized the Snyder Administration for giving the green light for the construction of a highly controversial coal plant in Rogers City, saying the decision will raise costs for ratepayers who are already struggling financially and hurt public health.

In 2010, the State of Michigan said Wolverine Power Supply Cooperative, which wants to build the plant, failed to show Michigan needed another coal plant to meet energy demand.

"Gov. Rick Snyder is blindly approving a dirty coal plant without considering the high cost to ratepayers and its impact on people’s health and safety," said Wayne Vermilya, from Onaway, MI "The people of Michigan have said time and time again that they do not want another coal plant. By refusing to listen to Michigan citizens, Gov. Snyder is showing that he puts Big Coal profits ahead of people’s well-being."

"This decision not only showcases the shortcomings of our permitting process and poor understanding of ‘air-quality,’ but also the Snyder Administration’s ignorance on Michigan's energy issues and job creation," said Ric Evans, a candidate for director on the Great Lakes Energy Co-op board, which is a member of the Wolverine cooperative. "There is considerably more job growth potential in energy efficiency, weatherization and clean energy technologies than any antiquated coal plant could ever produce, and for a fraction of the cost. While this decision is not all that surprising, it is still incredibly unfortunate for the people of Michigan, and especially for the folks downwind of this plant – and ultimately, we are ALL downwind of this plant."

Wolverine Power Supply Cooperative wants to build a new $2-billion dirty coal plant that will financially burden Wolverine’s 200,000 co-op members, 26 percent of whom live below the poverty line.

In 2010, the State of Michigan’s Department of Natural Resources and Energy rejected a permit for Wolverine to build a coal plant in Rogers City. The DNRE said Wolverine failed to show Michigan needed another coal plant and found that any new demand for energy could be met by clean energy sources. If Wolverine built the coal plant in Rogers City, ratepayers’ bills would go up an estimated $76 a month to pay for the coal plant that wouldn’t be needed. Today’s decision by the Department of Environmental Quality effectively allows Wolverine to move forward anyway and build the coal plant.

"More coal will only send us backwards on clean energy and energy efficiency, which are the real engines of job growth across the nation and globally – not more coal," Anne Woiode, Sierra Club Michigan Chapter director said. "The citizens of Rogers City and across Michigan are united in calling on large utilities to stop building coal plants and start investing more clean energy and energy efficiency. Gov. Rick Snyder is moving Michigan backwards, not forward, with this reckless decision."

Thousands of Michigan citizens have voiced opposition to new coal plants such as the one in Rogers City. Building new coal plants would saddle ratepayers with the cost of those new facilities, even though there is no need for new coal plants in Michigan and future energy demands can be met with renewable energy sources and increased energy efficiency.

A new coal plant will also worsen air pollution, increase dangerous emissions such as mercury and carbon dioxide, and harm public health. The Rogers City coal project could also open the door to a landfill quarry for coal ash, an additional danger to public health.