George LeMieuxNew Sen. George LeMieux -- appointed in September by Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R) to serve through the end of 2010, finishing out the term of retired Mel Martinez -- has yet to vote on any key legislation that might give us clues as to whether he would support the Kerry-Boxer climate bill. 

He said after his appointment that he would want to study specific climate legislation before coming down on one side or the other, while also stressing that the nation needs to "move toward renewable energy,” which he said includes nuclear power.

LeMieux previously served as chief of staff for Crist, who emerged in 2007 as one of the nation's most proactive Republican governors on climate change.  While working under Crist, LeMieux organized a high-profile Climate Summit in 2007, at which Crist signed executive orders calling for the state to cut its greenhouse-gas emissions and increase energy efficiency.  Said LeMieux in 2007, "There might have been a time where the jury was out [on climate change], but the jury is in now, and we know this is an issue. We can't afford to ignore it and be wrong."

LeMieux also worked with Crist to lay the groundwork for a statewide cap-and-trade program to reduce emissions.  LeMieux wrote on his website at the time, “As the second fastest growing state with respect to annual increase in greenhouse gases (GHG), the creation of a cap and trade program was necessary and timely to address the challenge of climate change.”

LeMieux's Senate appointment drew positive reactions from green groups like the Ocean Conservancy, which said it was "optimistic" about the new senator because of "his strong record on climate change."

But the situation is complicated by the fact that LeMieux is essentially acting as a placeholder for Crist, who is running for the Senate seat LeMieux now occupies.   Crist, who faces a conservative primary challenger, recently backed away from his support for cap-and-trade, not wanting to be seen as too liberal.  LeMieux, a loyal Crist backer, may feel pressure to withhold his support from the Kerry-Boxer climate bill. 

Track the debate and take action >>>

On the other hand, LeMieux might be more inclined to back a climate bill now that Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.) has teamed up with Democrat John Kerry (Mass.) to push for moderate climate legislation. 

Do you know more about this senator’s stance on climate legislation?  Tell us.

Find out about other senators by clicking on their names in the right column.

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

What to make of the new climate poll

Obama administration officials grateful for early spring

While Louisiana struggles to restore coastal wetlands ravaged in large part by decades of oil and gas drilling, its senior senator is leading the effort to lift the ban on drilling off Florida's Panhandle.

U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) is the lone co-sponsor of legislation sponsored by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) to open up new areas in the eastern Gulf of Mexico to oil and gas development. Introduced last month, Senate Bill 1517 would allow drilling in federal waters 45 miles off the Panhandle's coast. Current law bans drilling any closer than 125 miles off Panhandle beaches and 235 miles off Gulf Coast beaches from Tampa south.

Opposing the Murkowski-Landrieu plan is U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), a longtime foe of offshore drilling. He joins other Florida leaders worried about drilling's impact on the state's lucrative tourism industry, which in 2008 alone generated more than $65 billion for Florida's economy and $3.9 billion for the state in tax revenue. Nelson has criticized the drilling bill as giveaway to the oil industry, McClatchy reports:

"This isn't even thinly veiled," Nelson said. "It's an oil industry bailout plan. And it's Alaska and Louisiana's senators plan to boost their own revenues in tough economic times. But even in the toughest of times, there are some things states shouldn't sell out, like Florida's economy and environment."

Why is Landrieu pushing the plan? She says it's out of concern for rising oil prices -- though the U.S. Energy Information Administration says drilling in areas that are currently restricted would result in negligible savings to consumers. Meanwhile, Landrieu and and Murkowski are among the top congressional recipients of campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics' OpenSecrets.org database, the industry is Landrieu's second-biggest contributor besides lawyers, investing more than $711,000 in her campaigns over the past 12 years. In the 2008 election cycle, she ranked first among all congressional recipients of oil and gas PAC contributions, receiving more than $171,600.  The oil and gas industry is Murkowski's third-biggest contributor after leadership PACs and electric utilities, donating more than $286,000 to her campaign over the past seven years; she's also the top recipient of oil and gas PAC contributions in the current election cycle.

Last year the League of Conservation Voters placed Landrieu on their "Dirty Dozen" list of lawmakers, noting that her lifetime score from the environmental advocacy group of 43 percent made her the worst Democratic senator on environmental issues among those running for re-election.

"For a Senator from Louisiana, which faces severe consequences from global warming, to fail to protect Louisiana is disappointing," LCV's Tony Massaro said at the time. "Senator Landrieu joins the [Dirty Dozen] because she acts more to protect Big Oil than the future for the people of Louisiana."

A football field lost every 38 minutes

Sen. Landrieu was among those who suffered personal losses from Hurricane Katrina four years ago, as the storm and the subsequent levee failures and flooding destroyed her lakeside home in New Orleans.

One reason the devastation to inland areas like New Orleans was so severe when the Category 3 storm hit Louisiana is because coastal wetlands that once served as storm breaks have been swallowed by the Gulf of Mexico. Over the past 75 years, Louisiana has lost more than 2,300 square miles of coastal wetlands -- an area equivalent in size to the entire state of Delaware.

Between 1990 and 2000, Louisiana lost about 24 square miles of land each year -- equivalent to about one football field lost to the sea every 38 minutes, according to the state's Department of Natural Resources.

While some of Louisiana's land loss can be blamed on natural processes, coastal experts say most of the destruction is due to human alteration of the landscape. One factor is the extensive levee system constructed along the Lower Mississippi River that prevents sediment from depositing naturally along the coast. Another key factor is the thousands of miles of oil and gas pipelines and canals cut through coastal wetlands, opening them up to saltwater intrusion that kills vegetation and leaves the land vulnerable to erosion.

In fact, between 40 and 60 percent of Louisiana's coastal wetlands loss can be traced to oil and gas activities, according to the Gulf Restoration Network. From 1983 to 2008, for example, Houston-based Shell Oil dredged 8.8 million cubic yards of coastal lands in Louisiana while laying its pipelines -- activity that GRN and other environmental advocates calculated as having caused the loss of 22,624 acres of wetlands.

Land loss is not the only environmental damage from oil and gas drilling. Last month alone, an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico contaminated several beaches along the Texas coast, while a leak from a Shell pipeline 30 miles off the Louisiana coast created a nine-mile-long slick in the Gulf.

Storms increase the risk oil and gas drilling pose to the environment. Four years ago, Hurricane Katrina and Rita together caused 124 offshore spills that dumped more than 743,000 gallons of pollution into the ocean, according to the federal Minerals Management Service [PDF]. Onshore spills from pipelines, tanks and refineries added another 9 million gallons of pollution to the mess.

Pattern of delay

If no decisive action is taken to address coastal erosion, Louisiana is expected lose another 500 square miles of land by 2050 -- and that will have enormous consequences for communities throughout the state's coastal parishes, where almost 2 million people live. And unfortunately, the current processes for addressing the problem are anything but decisive.

This past June, Steven Peyronnin, executive director of the Coalition to Restore Coastal Louisiana, testified at the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works' hearing on Louisiana's coastal restoration. Noting that scientists and engineers have the expertise to restore sustainability to the landscape and protect vulnerable communities, he said what is lacking is a sense of urgency.

Peyronnin pointed out that it's been more than four years now since the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers submitted a final report recognizing the severe wetland loss in coastal Louisiana and recommending five critical restoration projects for the near term. While Congress authorized these projects under the Louisiana Coastal Area (LCA) section of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, only one is scheduled to begin construction before 2012. That meant none were eligible for funding under the recent economic stimulus package.

"Not only is the lack of progress a troubling obstacle to restoring a sustainable coast, but it has also negated the ability to leverage federal opportunities that could provide desperately needed funding streams and a strong sense of urgency," Peyronnin told the committee. "Without a single project ready for construction, LCA projects were not considered in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 because they fell far short of the shovel ready requirement intended to urgently move projects forward."

In authorizing the LCA, Congress also directed the Secretary of the Army to come up with a comprehensive long-term restoration plan, but this still has not been done. Instead, the Corps is relying on an older document -- the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Technical Report -- that has shortcomings. For example, it provides no framework for how restoration efforts work with navigation activities, which currently focus on dumping sediment too far offshore to maintain coastal wetlands.

Peyronnin testified that the delay of LCA projects and the Corps' failure to comply with congressional mandates show that the traditional model for carrying out coastal restoration projects is "ill-suited" to respond to the crisis.

"If this pattern of delay continues," he warned, "it will eliminate any chance of success."

Earlier this month, Louisiana officials released recommendations for speeding up Corps projects, which currently take an average of 40 years to complete. But the recommendations remain in the discussion stages.

A starker choice for Florida

Sen. Landrieu has long been an advocate for coastal restoration efforts. For example, the annual energy and water appropriations bill recently passed by the Senate contained hundreds of millions of dollars for Army Corps projects in Louisiana that she championed, including coastal restoration initiatives.

But her push to allow the oil and gas industry to expand its operations in the Gulf of Mexico while federal processes to address land loss remain in disarray would inevitably mean putting other areas of the Gulf Coast at risk of the same drilling-related wetlands destruction experienced by Louisiana.

Unlike Louisiana, Florida has long opposed drilling off its coast, seeing it as a threat to the state's $65 billion annual tourist economy. When Chevron discovered natural gas deposits in Florida waters in the late 1980s and early 1990s, for example, the state objected to plans to tap them, leading the Bush administration to buy back leases from Chevron, Conoco and Murphy Oil for $115 million.

This past April, amid concern about rising energy prices, the Florida House passed a bill allowing offshore drilling in state waters -- but the measure died in the Senate.

Then along came Murkowski's and Landrieu's bill, which resembles an amendment in a Senate energy bill written by Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) that would also permit oil and gas rigs within 45 miles of Florida's Gulf coast, McClatchy reports. But unlike Dorgan's proposal, the Murkowski-Landrieu plan includes a revenue-sharing provision to sweeten the deal.

In 2006, another piece of legislation sponsored by Landrieu gave Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas 37.5 percent of proceeds from fuel production in the Gulf -- returning to the states an estimated total of $6 billion a year that previously went to the federal government. The arrangement aimed to compensate them for the environmental cost of pipelines and other infrastructure.

Florida wanted no part of that earlier deal, but Landrieu hopes the revenue-sharing provision will hold appeal because of the state's fiscal crunch. As she wrote in a June op-ed that ran in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call:

Had revenue sharing been a part of the bargain, Floridians would have faced a choice involving rewards and not just risks. Given Florida’s current $6 billion budget deficit, such a choice would be starker today.

But as Sen. Nelson has pointed out, the proposal is hardly a panacea for Florida's financial woes, since the money states raise from offshore drilling in federal waters can be used only to repair damages caused by drilling, such as coastal restoration and pollution cleanup.

The question facing the Senate is whether that makes drilling worth the environmental damage that Florida will inevitably suffer.

(This story originally appeared at Facing South)

Related Links:

Toward a medically defensible energy policy

The tar sands blow

Oil: enough energy to melt glaciers!

Gainesville’s feed-in tariff program is limited to 4 megawatts of solar PV each year. The program is already fully subscribed through 2015 — a 24-megawatt commitment.Photo courtesy U.S. NRELClean energy advocates in Europe have long considered the feed-in tariff as an antidote to the industrial world's fossil fuel dependency. Now, the United States and Canada are starting to catch on as well.

Feed-in tariffs (FITs) guarantee that anyone who generates electricity from a renewable energy source -- whether they are a homeowner, small business, or large electric utility -- is able to sell that electricity into the grid and receive long-term payments for each kilowatt-hour produced. Payments are set at pre-established rates, often higher than what the market would ordinarily pay, to ensure that developers earn profitable returns.

The FIT is credited for the rapid deployment of wind and solar power among world renewable energy leaders Denmark, Germany, and Spain this past decade. Similar policies have since been adopted by many other countries, leading the FIT to become the most prevalent tool for promoting renewables.

In North America, its adoption has been relatively slow. As public support for renewable energy increases, however, more governments are adopting FIT policies -- often as a complement to the widely used Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) that require utilities to purchase minimum amounts of renewable electricity.

Several U.S. states and Canadian provinces began serious consideration of the FIT last year. More than a dozen states, one province, and numerous municipalities have since implemented some form of FIT.

"We've reached a tipping point where a feed-in tariff is no longer such an odd idea for America," said Paul Gipe, the author of several books on wind energy and a FIT advocate. "In fact, it's the best idea for rapid development of the massive amount of renewable energy that's needed now."

Renewable energy projects have often struggled to gain the confidence of investors, a problem the FIT policy addresses by ensuring that anyone with a sun-drenched roof or windy backyard may receive funding for a set period of time, normally 15-20 years.

"A lot of the charm of the feed-in tariff is solid, take-it-to-the-bank security and confidence for the investing community," said U.S. Representative Jay Inslee, a sponsor of legislation that would establish a nationwide FIT, at a Washington, D.C. briefing earlier this month. "You get access to what is very difficult to get right now: financing."

Not all FIT policies are created equal. The North American programs enacted to date often limit the level of economic incentive, the project size, and the renewable energy source, compared to large-scale programs enacted in Europe. Small-scale renewable energy advocates are praising FIT programs approved this year in Gainesville, Florida; Vermont; and Ontario as examples that North America should follow.

Gainesville, Florida

Florida, the Sunshine State, is blessed with bountiful solar resources to support renewable electricity. In the northern city of Gainesville, the municipal utility has helped ratepayers purchase their own solar panels since 1997. The program has partially financed some 40,000 watts of solar photovoltaic (PV) panels, but until recently there was no incentive for homeowners to install the panels properly.

"We weren't getting energy bang for the buck," said John Crider, an engineer with Gainesville Regional Utilities' strategic planning department. "People could get the rebate check and put their solar panel in the shade."

Last year, Assistant General Manager Ed Regan visited Germany, the world's leader in grid-connected solar PV, on a trip coordinated with the Solar Electric Power Association. Impressed by Germany's FIT policy, Regan convinced the Gainesville City Commission to approve the first FIT for solar PV in the United States. The utility promised that solar providers who signed up for the program before 2011 would earn $0.32 per kilowatt hour for 20 years, an estimated 4-6 percent return on investment.

"We assume, as time goes on, it will be cheaper to buy and install solar equipment," Crider said. "The rate we pay goes down as well, to keep the return ideally constant."

The utility, which is otherwise reliant on coal and natural gas for its power generation, wanted to be sure that electricity costs would not increase more than 1 percent due to the FIT, Crider said. The decision led the utility to limit the program to 4 megawatts total of solar PV each year. The program is already fully subscribed through 2015 -- a 24-megawatt commitment. Before the Gainesville program, the entire state of Florida had installed 2.5 megawatts of solar electricity capacity.

The FIT gained the city's support mostly to boost the local economy. More than 220 companies in Florida produce, sell, or install solar PV products, according to the Apollo Alliance, a San Francisco-based organization that champions "green jobs" nationwide.

"Our primary motive is not to get the cheapest energy and keep profits high for investors, because we don't have investors," Crider said. "For the municipality, we have a larger vision.... Create a local, thriving marketplace for local solar providers."

Vermont

With two-thirds of Vermont's electricity contracts set to expire in 2012, the state was in a position this year to change its energy portfolio. Meanwhile, Vermont was far from its 2025 goal of 25-percent renewable energy -- renewables were supplying less than 10 percent.

The state offered a "net-metering" program that allowed residents to feed renewably generated electricity into the grid, offsetting some or all of their electric bills. Hundreds of small-scale systems resulted, but these combined to meet a mere 0.02 percent of the state's electricity load.

"We were trying to alter the entire energy paradigm, but we were on a very slow trajectory," said Andrew Perchlik, executive director of Renewable Energy Vermont.

The net-metering program did not allow participants to turn a profit, a problem given that small-scale power generation projects required the same costly permits as commercial power plants. Too few Vermonters had reason to participate.

Legislators had considered adopting a FIT, but the policy lacked grassroots support until a new coalition of business leaders, environmentalists, and utility executives formed a renewable energy consensus. The group met before the state's politicians convened in January and settled on the framework of what would become Vermont's first FIT, which they call a "standard offer."

"Increasingly, utilities are realizing that customers are asking for renewable energy. In the long run, it will be less expensive than the alternative," said Robert Dostis, a former state House of Representatives energy chairman who now directs external affairs for Green Mountain Power. "By being at the table, we were able to contain the enthusiasm of some of the renewable energy advocates and have them understand the rate impact of some of their ideas."

The legislature settled on a 50-megawatt program that limited individual projects to 2.2 megawatts each. Starting in January 2010, 20-year contracts will be available for developers of large- and small-scale wind, solar, and biogas power projects.

Opponents said the public would reject the idea of paying more for renewable energy projects -- the highest rate, $0.30 per kilowatt-hour of solar energy, far exceeded the $0.04 many ratepayers were being charged at the time. "That was not the case at all," Perchlik said. "Some 80 percent wanted renewable energy, and they were willing to pay 5 percent more."

The energy bill cleared the Democrat-controlled legislature easily. In May, Republican governor Jim Douglas allowed the bill to become law despite his concerns about it. He said the FIT "fails to recognize the current viability of renewable energy in a competitive setting and will needlessly increase costs to Vermont consumers so as to subsidize this one favored business sector."

Although program specifics have yet to be finalized, Vermonters are expressing growing interest. Dostis predicts that the program will fulfill its 50-megawatt limit by 2012. "I think this is really going to propel development," he said.

Ontario

During the 2007 provincial campaign, Ontario's Liberal party promised it would close every coal-fired power plant across the province by 2014. Premier Dalton McGuinty said the plant closures would benefit human health and meet half of the party's commitment to reduce greenhouse gases 15 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.

Following the election, the Liberal party secured 71 of the Legislative Assembly's 107 seats. Despite clear political support, shuttering 18 percent of the province's power source is no easy feat. The Liberals had already pledged to close the coal plants during their previous term, only to push back their own deadline.

Since 2006, the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) began offering a FIT system that provided 20-year payments of 11 Canadian cents (US$0.09) per kilowatt-hour for small-scale hydro, wind, and biomass power projects, and 42 Canadian cents (US$0.34) for solar projects. More than 1,000 megawatts of projects were installed during the first year, but renewable energy advocates criticized the payments, particularly for solar energy, as too small.

In March, the province announced that its proposed Green Energy and Green Economy Act would establish a revised FIT modeled after Germany's. The bill set payments for on-shore, off-shore, and community-based wind power; rooftop PV and ground-mounted PV power; small hydropower; and various biomass power options. Payments would depend on the project size for each technology.

The proposal was instantly applauded by renewable energy supporters. "The Green Energy Act is the most progressive renewable energy policy in North America in three decades," said Gipe, who advised the Ontario Sustainable Energy Association. "There was a decision to pay what it costs to develop renewable energy. It's clear to the public, transparent to everyone."

An OPA-conducted survey found 150 developers who were interested in the new FIT and were willing to construct 15,000 megawatts of electric capacity -- enough to produce the equivalent of 20 percent of Ontario's electricity consumption.

Gipe also solicited support from Ontario's farmers, whom he advised would be eligible to receive payments for wind turbines on their property.

"I went to every farm group I could," Gipe said. "This is an opportunity to revitalize the Ontario economy ... not just to revitalize the rural economy, but the entire industrial economy of Ontario."

The proposal was approved in May. It now stands as the most generous FIT policy in North America.

This article is a product of Eye on Earth, Worldwatch Institute's online news service. For permission to reprint Eye on Earth content, please contact Juli Diamond at jdiamond@worldwatch.org.

Related Links:

Freeing the grid

Is there a tradeoff between economics and the environment?

‘Heretic’ battles straw man

In a disappointing move, the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee gave its blessing for offshore drilling in Florida last week, potentially opening Florida’s coasts to oil and gas development.

This is a major reversal that reneges on the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006, which offered the oil and gas industry rights to 8.2 million acres in the eastern Gulf in exchange for the protection of coastal eastern Gulf waters. It also precluded drilling in the remainder of the Gulf Coast and the Florida Panhandle from 125 to 150 miles from shore.

This agreement was supposed to remain in place until 2022, but would be undone if this bill becomes law.

You should expect to hear the argument, again, that we need offshore drilling to keep gas prices down – that the state of the economy requires it. I wonder, then, how drilling hawks will respond if a spill devastates Florida’s beaches or reefs. According to a federal study, tourism contributes $40 billion to Florida’s economy each year and supports half a million jobs.

The U.S. Energy Information Agency has predicted that offshore drilling, even at peak production, will save consumers just pennies at the gas pump. And that’s assuming the gas even gets sold to Americans rather than China, India or any of the other increasingly energy-hungry countries in the world. Not to mention that it will take years for peak production to be realized and for any economic changes to be felt.

To open Florida’s shores to drilling sets us up to accept all the risks of oil and gas development without any of the promised benefits. Lower gas prices and energy security from offshore drilling are mirages at a time when fossil fuels are increasingly outdated – and with this news from Florida, your favorite beach could be the next one threatened by offshore drilling.

Related Links:

Inhofe to Boxer: “We Won, You Lost, Now Get a Life!”

Merkley wants Senate jobs bill to help finance building efficiency retrofits

Reflecting on the lameness of my profession

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist declared his candidacy for U.S. Senate on Tuesday, aiming to help recover an increasingly endangered species -- the moderate Republican -- in increasingly hostile habitat -- Washington, D.C. Crist is running for the seat now held by fellow Republican Mel Martinez, who intends to leave the Senate when his first term ends in 2010.

Crist has been proactive on climate change, in the mold of Arnold Schwarzenegger. In October 2008, his administration unveiled an ambitious climate plan.

Grist's Amanda Griscom Little interviewed Crist last year and asked about his commitment to the climate cause:

Griscom Little also asked Crist about his resistance to new coal-burning power plants in his state. "I don't like coal -- I flat don't like it," he said, while also noting, "I don't want to close the door on coal if it can be done clean."

Like many in his state, Crist long opposed offshore oil drilling, but then he awkwardly and reluctantly shifted his position last year when trying to get on John McCain's VP short list.

"It's the last thing in the world I'd like to do, but I also understand what people are paying at the pump, and I understand the drag it is on our economy," Crist said in June 2008, shortly after McCain called for ending the federal ban on offshore oil and gas exploration. "Something has to be done in a responsible, pragmatic way."

Crist is thought to have a good shot at the Senate seat, and if he wins, it could be a nice plaform for a 2012 presidential run. As the AP reports, "He has maintained approval ratings in the high 60-percent range despite the state's gloomy economy, budget cuts, a high foreclosure rate and the highest unemployment level since 1975. That popularity is credited to an unwavering optimism, bipartisan attitude and the projection of a sense that he cares."

Related Links:

George LeMieux (R-Fla.)

Sen. Landrieu’s plan to export Louisiana’s coastal destruction to Florida

North American feed-in tariff policies take off

Climate change is a global problem—but as of yet, there’s no global solution. That’s why mayors across the U.S. are taking action, from building green to organizing bike rides, from redeveloping downtowns to cutting emissions. Here are just a few of the municipal leaders who have worked to take our collective future into their own hands.

Bloomberg unveils his grand Plan.PlanNYC 20301. Michael Bloomberg, New York City.
Pop.: 8.2 million
Call New York the accidental eco-city: cram millions of people onto an island, and you’ve got to figure out how to build up, not out. Throw a big park in the middle, and voila: you’ve got an anti-sprawl city that values open space. During his tenure, Bloomberg has made the most of that happy accident, creating an ambitious 127-point initiative called PlanNYC 2030 that encompasses everything from reclaiming waterfronts to repairing electrical grids to reducing traffic congestion. (OK, that last one hasn’t gone so well.) A year after unveiling the plan in 2007, the city had launched a full 93 percent of its components.

Nickels at a climate rally with King County exec Ron Sims, since tapped to head HUD.Oran Viriyincy 2. Greg Nickels, Seattle.
Pop.: 594,000
In some ways, Greg Nickels became synonymous with the phrase “green mayor” after spearheading the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement in 2005. Since then, more than 900 of Nickels’ fellow mayors have come on board, Republican and Democrat alike, from all 50 states. No stranger to eco-ideas at home, Nickels—who has led the Emerald City since 2002—has also been instrumental in bringing light rail to the area, pushing to increase investments in open space, and launching an ongoing series of “clean and green” community-service events. He’s up for reelection this year, and one challenger says he hasn’t done enough on the environment. Only in Seattle.

Newsom uses a white hanky to demonstrate clean diesel emissions. Seriously!MTC3. Gavin Newsom, San Francisco.
Pop.: 765,000
Another mack daddy of sustainability, Newsom is almost too green to believe. Since he took office in 2004, the city has reduced government emissions to below 1990 levels, launched the nation’s largest solar incentive program, banned plastic bags, and introduced ambitious green building and green jobs programs. Sometime in the not-too-distant future, city leaders hope to increase wind power by the Bay, including underwater turbines at the Golden Gate Bridge. Speaking at a conference of green IT entrepreneurs this spring, Newsom—who also recently confirmed his 2010 gubernatorial ambitions—offered up his city as guinea pig: “If you have an idea, let me know. We are a laboratory for innovation.”

Malloy in a glamorous mayoral moment.Will Merydith/flickr4. Ed Malloy, Fairfield, Iowa.
Pop.: 9,650
In November, the city fathers in this liberal southeastern Iowa outpost unanimously adopted a Green Strategic Plan. Their vote was more than ceremonial: they also secured a state-funded grant to hire a sustainability coordinator, inventory their greenhouse gases, and create educational materials for residents. The new plan envisions everything from conserving energy to supporting local farms. Malloy, who’s been mayor since 2001 and heads up a local oil company, says the environment-economy connection is clear. He hopes Fairfield’s ideas will catch on: “We want to create a model community, a virtual template that other small towns can adopt to create the same results.”

What a difference a Daley makes.www.drugabuse.gov5. Richard Daley, Chicago.
Pop.: 2.8 million
Since announcing his intention to make Chicago the country’s greenest metropolis, Daley has made great strides. Green roofs cover or are planned for 3 million square feet, topping everything from City Hall to a McDonald’s. Redevelopment and landscaping have revitalized gathering places across the city, from prominent landmarks like Grant Park to neighborhood playgrounds. And the Windy City is committed to increasing its use of renewable energy (though a recent revelation showed things lagging in that area). Chicago is even bidding to host the 2016 Olympics—a bid that hinges on the event being the greenest Olympics in history.

Franklin, my dear, she does give a damn.City of Atlanta6. Shirley Franklin, Atlanta.
Pop.: 519,000
Often held up as the poster child for sprawl, Atlanta boasts more green than meets the eye—and Franklin is to thank for much of the recent progress. Mayor since 2002, she has attacked infrastructure and intangibles with the same gusto, from overhauling the city’s sewer systems to creating a Climate Action Plan. The city is building a public-transit BeltLine, is tops in LEED-certified buildings, and has implemented practices in City Hall that led to a 20 percent decrease in energy usage. A comprehensive private-sector group called Sustainable Atlanta is developing recommendations for further actions, and all eyes are on the future. “We are building a green, sustainable city,” Franklin says. “We do this for our children, and we do this because it is the right thing to do.”

Planner, politico, father, grandfather.RalphBecker.com7. Ralph Becker, Salt Lake City.
Pop.: 179,000
Building on the groundbreaking work of predecessor (and official Grist crush) Rocky Anderson, Becker—who took office in 2008—has already made ripples in the eco-community. Upon taking the helm, Becker introduced his Blueprint for a Green City, in which he pledged to improve public transit, expand greenways, create neighborhood centers to promote walkability, and improve air and water quality. And the former urban planner isn’t just talking the talk; among other concrete steps, the city is piloting hybrid police cars and has undertaken an overhaul of its city code to make sustainability easier for all residents to achieve.

Don’t mess with Jerramiah.Byron Smith/Jersey Journal8. Jerramiah Healy, Jersey City.
Pop.: 242,000
He’s a rough and tumble guy running a historically rough and tumble city. But that just goes to show that green can be pursued anywhere, by anyone. Healy was recently given a Green Leadership Award by the state U.S. Green Building Council chapter. During his five-year tenure, he has held polluters accountable, opposed a controversial reservoir development scheme, and redeveloped brownfields. Up for reelection this month, Healy recently introduced ordinances that would require city departments to pursue LEED certification and green purchasing, and is reportedly considering a ban on plastic bags.

Manny being Manny.City of Miami9. Manuel Diaz, Miami.
Pop.: 410,000
Though some critics have dubbed him “Concrete Manny” due to his love of development, Diaz is paving the way for sustainability in Miami. An early signatory to the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, he created Miami’s first sustainability department and a community-wide Green Commission. He has pushed green building, led an energy-retrofit of City Hall that included solar-panel installation, and is converting the city’s fleet to more efficient vehicles. Late last year Diaz launched Bike Miami Days, and this spring the city hosted a week of events leading up to Earth Hour. “We’re on the front line of global climate change here,” Diaz told Newsweek in 2007. “The water level doesn’t have to rise too much for us to be riding around Miami in canoes.”

Walker? I’d rather bike.Robert the Noid/flickr10. Elaine Walker, Bowling Green, Ky.
Pop.: 53,000
This TV producer-turned-politician has her hands full, from increasing affordable housing to contending with the crash of Big Auto, but green is on her radar screen. Transportation issues loom large in this western Kentucky city, and Walker has worked with local bike-advocacy groups (even creating a Mayor’s Bike Ride) and launched a Rethinking Transportation Choices task force. A signatory to the Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, she is a proponent of green building and downtown redevelopment. “There’s too much of a perception that going green is a little bit out there and idealistic,” she has said. “It’s not idealistic—it’s vital.”

Cicilline envisions a model future.Cicilline.com11. David Cicilline, Providence, R.I.
Pop.: 175,000
In late March, this native son signed an order requiring all new municipal buildings to be LEED-certified, saying such a move would help create jobs and boost the economy. It was the first step in a 30-point plan called Operation Opportunity that seeks to help this mid-sized New England city rise from the doldrums; other steps include doubling the recycling rate, creating a green jobs training corps, and finalizing site plans for wind turbines. Cicilline, at the wheel since 2003, has also named walkability and sustainable leadership among his goals for the city.

Get your Phil.Tom Story/ASU12. Phil Gordon, Phoenix.
Pop.: 1.6 million
The long-time Phoenician made a splash in March when he unveiled a 17-point sustainability plan for the desert megalopolis he’s run since 2004. During his tenure, Gordon has already overseen eco-upgrades ranging from LED traffic lights to LNG buses, as well as bringing light rail to the city. The new plan aims to make Phoenix the first carbon-neutral city in America, through green job training, building retrofits, and a massive investment in solar energy. It’s making Phoenix hot in a whole new way.

Coleman (left) and Rybak do their thing.Lou Michaels13. Christopher Coleman, St. Paul.
Pop.: 274,000
14. R. T. Rybak, Minneapolis.
Pop.: 377,000
The Twin Cities are in the hands of two progressive mayors intent on doubling the metro region’s eco-efforts. Coleman and Rybak, elected in 2005 and 2001 respectively, have both made sustainability a priority—Minneapolis, for instance, doles out climate change grants to neighborhood organizations, while St. Paul created its own hybrid car-sharing program. Together, the two leaders have created an annual sustainability report and a green manufacturing initiative, and they’re bringing bike-sharing to town. It’s all part of an effort, they say, to make theirs the most livable cities in the country.

Dixson, far left, leads the groundbreaking of Greensburg’s first eco-home.Greensburg GreenTown15. Bob Dixson, Greensburg, Kansas.
Pop.: 850
Talk about inheriting someone else’s problem: Bob Dixson became mayor of Greensburg in 2008, exactly a year after it was devastated by a tornado. But Greensburg has rallied, and the former postmaster is now overseeing the town’s much publicized green rebuilding effort (which has also been documented for TV). Learning as he goes, Dixson has become an eco-evangelist of sorts, traveling the nation to talk up renewable energy, green building, community spirit, and the common sense behind green. “In rural America,” he told Smithsonian magazine earlier this year, “we were always taught that if you take care of the land, the land will care of you.”

Related Links:

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Making buildings more efficient: rationalizing retrofit markets

Is there a tradeoff between economics and the environment?

An architect's rendering of Babcock Ranch, the solar-powered city planned east of Fort Myers.Kitson and PartnersFlorida developer and former NFL lineman Syd Kitson sent out a coy press release Wednesday promising the biggest news in the history of press releases, to be revealed Thursday. And in truth … it’s sort of a big deal.

The housing collapse be damned, Kitson & Partners announces it will build a planned city near Fort Meyers with 19,500 homes, offices, retail shops, and light industry. Its electricity will come from the world’s largest solar voltaic power plant, a $300 million, 75-megawatt plant to be built on-site by Florida Power & Light. That’s nearly twice as large as the current largest plant in Germany, says Time magazine.

The planned city—Babcock Ranch—will include a smart grid to let residents monitor and adjust their energy consumptions. More than half of its 17,000 acres will be permanently protected as greenways and open space, according to the Miami Herald.

I’ve been hearing something went wrong with the economy lately, plus maybe something about the housing market. Does Kitson know about this?

"Some people think I got hit in the head a few too many times," he told Time. "But I still believe deeply in Florida. And the time has come for something completely different."

Reports the Herald: “Kitson said all of the plans are contingent on the real-estate economy recovering, but he believes the green aspects of the project will entice many who will bypass traditional developments now in foreclosure.”

Construction for the solar plant could begin later this year, depending on approvals. Groundbreaking for the city center could begin next year.

"Solar is just the first step," Kitson told reporters yesterday, according to Greenwire. "Babcock Ranch will be a true living laboratory of the new-energy economy ... where innovative companies can design, build and use the renewable and efficient technologies that customers across the country and around the globe will need."

Much more back at the ranch, er, the ranch’s glitzy website. And it’s worth comparing to Abu Dhabi’s self-contained Masdar City.

The green, green roofs proposed for Babcock Ranch.Kitson and PartnersThe Herald has more backstory:

The Sierra Club’s Florida chapter fought Kitson earlier plans, but was won over by the current incarnation. “We were thrilled,” Florida staff director Frank Jackalone told the Herald.  “It provides a model for the country -- a high benchmark for others to try to reach.''

Related Links:

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

Energy and climate scramble the usual left-right political divisions. Many of the big fights are not among parties but among regions and levels of government.

In the U.S. Congress, to be sure, the Republicans=obstructionists formula holds with virtually no exceptions save a tiny handful of remaining Senate "moderates." Republican obstructionists are joined in the House and -- more problematically -- the Senate by a group of Democrats from states with energy-intensive industries. Depending on how they’re counted, there are up to 15 such Senate Dems, more than enough to assist Republicans in a filibuster.

At the state and local level the partisan picture is far more complicated. Some of the leading governors on the issue are Republicans, notably California’s Arnold Schwarzenegger and Florida’s Charlie Crist. Some of the most problematic are Democrats from energy states like West Virginia’s Joe Manchin and Virginia’s Tim Kaine. The city-level picture is even more muddled. At last count, 935 mayors have signed the U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, from every political party and every state in the country.

Ultimately, the political battle over climate and energy is how to manage the transition from a high-waste, high-pollution, cheap-energy economy to … the opposite. Those vulnerable to being hurt by the transition span political parties and demographics, and getting over the chasm will require fresh thinking.

Related Links:

Is there a tradeoff between economics and the environment?

A Penny Saved Is…

Lawsuit accuses Virginia power company of poisoning Dominican community with toxic coal ash

Related Links:

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

Related Links:

Climate Denial Crock of the Week: The big mist take

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

Cast your vote for the best climate journalism

Related Links:

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen

Climate Denial Crock of the Week: The big mist take

The U.S.-India climate ‘partnership’

Related Links:

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Freeing the grid

Clean energy opportunities

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

Florida's intent buy out a giant sugar operation in a move to restore the Everglades is being complicated by a competing offer from the Lawrence Group, a Tennessee farming company.

sources:

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

Will Africa’s farmland become a ‘resource curse’?

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R) is set to announce Tuesday that his state is modifying a deal struck this summer to buy out a massive sugar company in the Everglades and turn the company's land back into wetlands. The retooled deal will likely cost the state about $400 million less than the original plan and would not include purchase of some of the company's expensive assets like a sugar-processing plant and railroad lines.

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

Related Links:

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

John McCain’s troubles are the world’s troubles

Make the kids pay: The economic effects of climate change on future generations

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

Related Links:

Treat energy efficiency like a utility

This Friday, don’t just Buy Nothing—use nothing!

Growing up green: How to shop for a green baby