Western Guvs Still Googly-Eyed for "Clean Coal"

WASHINGTON — Colorado Governor Bill Ritter urged the federal government to step up its pursuit of clean-coal technologies to better diversify the nation’s energy portfolio. “Blending cleaner forms of carbon-based resources with renewable resources like wind and solar will lead to a more secure energy future,” said Gov. Ritter. Ritter have his remarks at the National Governors Association annual winter meeting in Washington. The theme of the annual meeting and is "Securing a Clean Energy Future."

Unfortunately, the Governor suggested that Washington get more aggressive in providing incentives and other public-private opportunities to spur advances in clean-coal, coal-gasification, coal- to-liquid and other related technologies.

Ritter and others in the Western Governors Association have adopted a policy resolution encouraging acceleration in the development and deployment of alternative transportation fuels and vehicle fuel efficiency. The resolution was based upon a new report delivered to the Governors by their Advisory Committee on Transportation Fuels for the Future. Alternative fuels considered included biofuels (ethanol, biomethane/biogas, and biobutanol), bio- and renewable-diesel, electricity, coal-to-liquids, natural gas/propane and hydrogen.

Honestly, I wish my Governor was not pleading for advancements in clean coal and especially coal-to liquids. Ritter has had a very progressive energy policy thus far, and he has made renewables and the New Energy Economy his number one priority. But the political part of me gets it that part of the coalition that got him elected included mine workers and other union laborers. In other words, coal is big business in Colorado, and anyone working in energy out here knows it. The question is, how do we stabilize our growing energy needs and dependence on coal and then begin to scale it back?

Environmental groups have been very supportive of Ritter thus far, but his position on the elusive 'clean coal' may come back to haunt him.

Western Governors Association
Governor Bill Ritter Press Release
Cherry Creek News - Feb 23, 2008

Feed-in Tariff Introduced in Illinois House

Last week, I wrote a post at sustainablog about the second renewable energy feed-in tariff being introduced through legislative channels in the United States. Illinois Representative Karen May (D-Highland) has introduced HB 5855, or, the Illinois Renewable Energy Sources Act, which is more or less based upon the feed-in legislation introduced in Michigan last fall. The bill would require utilities to purchase renewable energy from any producer at a fixed rate for a fixed period of time.

Read more at sustainablog...

Snow Day

In a departure from my usual content, I decided to post some pictures from my day of skiing Monday at Arapahoe Basin in Colorado. I've been skiing at 'A-Basin' for about 13 years and it has got to be one of the coolest places on earth to ski. Known for its expert terrain, hordes of ebullient dogs, high winds, frigid temps, charcoal grills and microbrews, sweet and pungent aromas, and lots of smiling locals, the Basin has no condos, no fur coats and no clubs. And now, it's also known for a new lift on the ski area's backside - known as Montezuma Bowl - which increases the ski-able terrain by 80%. Certainly there are ecological implications to this expansion - but that critique will have to wait. I will mention, however, that the management at Arapahoe Basin has made environmental stewardship a priority, and they have taken many progressive steps towards lightening the area's ecological footprint.

Clean Tech: "It's the Institutional investors, stupid."

[The following article was originally published at CleanTechnica on February 15, 2008]

Nearly 50 leading U.S. and European institutional investors managing over $1.75 trillion in assets released a climate change action plan at the United Nations that calls on Congress to introduce national policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 90% below 1990 levels by 2050. U.S. institutional investors also pledged $10 billion dollars over two years in renewable energy technologies and project development, energy efficiency, green building and clean technologies. The group of investors also wants the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to insist that companies listed in New York and elsewhere disclose their exposure to climate change risk. The plan aims for a 20% reduction in energy used in core land and building investments over a three-year period.

The two largest pension funds in the US, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, with some $246.7 billion under its management, and the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, $168.8 billion strong, were both on board with the institutional investor coalition. These two large and incredibly wealthy pension funds tend to be leaders in the institutional investor arena. George McPherson, senior managing director of the DC-based private equity firm Global Environment Fund said he expects other pension funds to create more programs geared towards clean technology over the next year.

The initiative was unveiled at the Investor Summit on Climate Risk hosted in New York by the United Nations Foundation and Ceres’ Investor Network on Climate Risk. Ceres is a national network of investors, environmental organizations and other public interest groups working with companies and investors to address sustainability challenges such as global climate change.

John Sweeney, the president of the AFL-CIO, a federation of unions, told the summit that some of the $5 trillion of union workers’ retirement funds should be invested in ways that help fight climate change. “These deferred wages of working people are the capital that can fuel the energy economy of the future,” he said.

Summit attendees were also given information from a new report, which concluded that major investments in energy productivity over the next 10 years could bring in double-digit rates of return.

The Take-Home Points:

1. Institutional investors are one of the most important macro-economic drivers in this economy. Many of the assets that the large institutional investment funds have to invest, are collections of people’s retirement funds and 401Ks. People often do not worry a whole lot about their pension funds, and how they are invested, as long as they see a return on their investment. With that said, it is good to see institutional investors combine their tremendous economic clout to put pressure on the federal government while taking some social responsibility themselves.

2. The record-breaking profits of the big oil companies like Exxon Mobil and Chevron over the last few years was made possible, in part, by the large amount of broad-based investment from large institutional investors. People may talk out of one side of their mouth about the evils of big oil without even knowing that their retirement nesteggs are being lined with the profits of those same companies. Institutional transparency and accountability are important to socially-conscious investors, and I see this as a step in the right direction.

3. Clean tech investors (both large and small) want long term security and stability before they are willing to invest significant capital. Investors and industry need certainty over what the regulatory regime will be over the next two to three decades before they release the billions of investment capital that will finance the shift we need to make to a low-carbon economy.

ClimateBiz

Earth Times

Reuters

LiveMint (India)

International Herald Tribune

Photo Credit: chatirygirl via flickr

Just a Reminder of What We Are Up Against

BlogNod: Climate Science & Policy Resource Guide

The science has spoken. The debate is over. Climate change is real and human actions are contributing to the acceleration of the buildup of heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide. Well, that is at least what the American public is being spoonfed by the media, presidential candidates, pundits, and each other. Despite the doom-and-gloom forecasts and the daily stories about threatened polar bears habitats, bleached coral reefs, melting ice caps, rising sea levels and the ultimate demise of our planet, I think this new awareness is largely a good thing. But before we start high-fiving each other and dumping tubs of Gatorade on the scientists contributing to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, we have a little unfinished business to take care of.

Although it would be nice to, we don't need to convince everybody on the planet that climate change is real and that humans are causing it. But we do need to make sure that the deniers and delayers don't gain any more traction in the public discourse about climate change than they already have - and below are a few bloggers who are doing just that.

• A Siegel at the Energy Smart blog wrote a piece today about General Motors' Vice Chairman Bob Lutz who said "global warming is a crock of $#!T," adding that, "I’m a skeptic, not a denier. Having said that, my opinion doesn’t matter." Well, actually Bob, your opinion does matter, it matters to your stockholders, your machinists, your sales people, your parts suppliers, and to the discourse in general.
  
• If you want some sound data and real science to back up your climate change arguments, I suggest heading over to the Climate and Energy Project blog (CEP), where Maril Hazlett has assembled a noteworthy collection of links and snippets from some of the most authoritative scientific organizations on the planet and their official positions on climate change.
  
• Relatedly, Maril Hazlett has also been doing a remarkable job at the CEP blog of tracking the debate in the Kansas legislature about the landmark Holcomb case. Kansas' legislators are attempting to overturn the Kansas Department of Health's denial of a permit for a coal-fired power plant expansion.
  
• Finally, Craig Rubens at earth2tech has put together a worthy summary of the seven different carbon bills currently being considered in Congress (I know that this is less science than it is policy, but what else would you expect from a wonk like me?!).

Illustration: Biology Science Fair Projects

Data: US Electricity Rates Vary. But, They're All going Up

The differences between what people pay for electricity across the country are substantial. But one thing that nearly ratepayer knows is that electricity rates are on the rise. The table below shows just how wide the disparity (source: JEA - the electric utility for Jacksonville, FL). There are certainly rates higher and lower than these, but this is only a survey and I do not know the methodology. What I find most striking is the high price of electricity in Alaska which is an indicator of the high price transmission. If there were more microgrids and distributed generation, Alaska would have cheaper rates. (Note: to determine the price per kilowatthour just move the decimal three places to the left - i.e. Fairbanks pays $0.178/kwh)

Quarterly Rates Quarterly survey - January 2008 (per 1,000 KWH) COMPANY LOCATION KWH1000 Golden Valley Electric Assoc.*** Fairbanks, AK 178.07 PECO Energy Co.* Philadelphia, PA 153.68 San Diego Gas & Electric Co.* San Diego, CA 152.05 City of Ft. Meade** Ft. Meade, FL 145.86 Public Service Co. of N.H.* New Hampshire (Portions of) 143.17 City of Tallahassee** Tallahassee, FL 140.90 City of Dover (McKee Run G.S.)** Dover, DE 139.48 Baltimore Gas & Elec. Co.* Baltimore, MD 138.30 Public Service Electric & Gas Co.* Newark, NJ (Other portions of NJ) 137.23 Pascoag Fire District** Pascoag, RI 134.95 Keys Energy Services** Key West, FL 132.84 City of Vero Beach** Vero Beach, FL 132.17 Chugach Electric Assoc., Inc.*** Anchorage, AK 131.41 Southern California Edison* Southern California 129.12 Sierra Pacific Power Co.* Reno, NV 128.38 City of Ocala** Ocala, FL 127.32 Nevada Power Co.* Las Vegas, NV 125.36 Ft. Pierce Utilities** Ft. Pierce, FL 122.00 Beaches Energy Services Jacksonville Beach, FL 119.23 Gainesville Regional Util.** Gainesville, FL 118.54 City of Lakeland** Lakeland, FL 118.23 Sacramento Mun. Util. Dist.** Sacramento, CA 117.64 City of Bartow** Bartow, FL 115.93 We-Energies* Milwaukee, WI 114.62 City of Clewiston** Clewiston, FL 113.23 Kissimmee Utilities** Kissimmee, FL 112.07 Progress Energy Florida* St. Petersburg, FL 112.05 Department of Water & Power** Los Angeles, CA 109.05 Commonwealth Edison Co.* Chicago & Northern IL 107.10 South Carolina Electric & Gas * Columbia, SC 105.62 Entergy Gulf States,Inc.* Baton Rouge, LA (& other parts of LA) 104.56 Alabama Power Co.* Alabama (Portions of) 104.20 Florida Power & Light Co.* Miami, FL (& other portions of FL) 103.00 Okefenoke REA*** N.E. FL & S.E. GA 103.00 Gulf Power Co.* Northwest Florida 102.93 Orlando Utilities Commission** Orlando, FL 97.95 Clay Electric Cooperative*** Clay County, FL 97.50 JEA** Jacksonville, FL 95.93 Utah Power* Salt Lake City, UT 93.99 Progress Energy Carolinas* Raleigh, NC 93.53 Georgia Power Co.* Atlanta, GA (Other port. of GA) 91.31 Tucson Electric* Tucson, AZ 85.97 Pacific Power* Oregon 85.92 Santee Cooper South Carolina (Portions of)**** 82.86 Elec. Power Board of Chatt.** Tennessee (Portions of) 81.97 Marietta Board Light & Water** Marietta, GA 78.99 Memphis Light Gas & Water Div.** Memphis, TN 77.37 Omaha Public Power District**** Southeast Nebraska 76.91 Albany Water, Gas & Light Comm. Albany, GA 75.70 City Public Service** San Antonio, TX 75.32 Monongahela Power Company* Northern West Virginia 72.52 Appalachian Power Co.* Roanoke, VA 71.96 Dalton Utilities** Dalton, GA 66.84 Seattle City Light** Seattle, WA 62.20 AmerenUE* St. Louis, MO 58.85 (Provided by JEA) Includes base rate, fuel adjustment charge, and applicable franchise fees. * Investor-owned Systems ** Municipal Systems *** Rural Electric Coop. Systems **** Federal, State & District Systems

The Birth of CleanTechnica

As some of you may already know, I have begun to publish some of my work on the Green Options network. While this has been mostly at Jeff McIntire-Strasburg's long-running, sustainablog, I have also done a few posts at Planetsave. While I will continue contribute to these and other GO projects, one of the blogs that I was brought on board for has finally launched, and I am very excited to be a regular contributor at CleanTechnica.com, where I will publish every Friday (and as timely news rolls in). The folks at GO have assembled a collection of authoritative voices on clean energy technologies, the cleantech industry, renewable energy policy, and more. There should be lots of good stuff going on at CleanTechnica, and I am happy to be a part of it.

Here at ecopolitology, business will carry on as usual. I'll still provide the same brand of comparative ecopolitical analyses and continue with my less formal takes on the (re)emergence of the global green energy movement (and probably more regularly, too).

Greening of the USA: An Ecopolitical Animation

(Click on image for animation) From the US Department of Energy's Wind Powering America Year End Wind Capacity maps of the U.S. from 1999-2007. Excellent visual representation of where wind energy is being developed, along with the rate and intensity of that development.

House Tries Tax Package for Renewables...Again

An aide to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said that the House Ways and Means Committee is putting finishing touches on a tax package that would rescind tax breaks for big oil and use the revenue to provide incentives for renewable energy and energy efficiency programs. Called the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008, H.R. 5351 is a wide-ranging $17.5 billion renewable energy and building-efficiency bill is more inline with the Senate version of the bill produced last week. The changes mean that the bill is not much different from the one Democrats tried to push through at the end of 2007.

Even though Republicans have repeatedly blocked their efforts in the Senate, the Dems are relying on the same financing plan that produced Senate opposition last year, repealing tax breaks granted to oil and gas companies. That move begs this question: Is there any reason to believe that such legislation will pass this time? Yes.

But this time around, the Dems will need to win the battle over issue framing - especially when respected news outlets like the Associated Press are already leading off articles with sentences like:

"The House is going to make another run at imposing more than $17 billion in taxes on major oil companies."

Do not be fooled.

Republicans will undoubtedly raise a stink in opposition to the proposal, arguing that the U.S. should not be 'punishing' American companies that are developing our oil and gas reserves. But in the context of the current credit woes, the downturn in the housing market and general macro-economic slowing, Republicans should be careful about how they frame their opposition. Big oil is seeing record profits while millions of Americans are losing their homes or are in danger of losing them every month. In 2007, Exxon Mobil Corp.earned an astounding $40.6 billion, and Chevron Corp. reported a profit of $18.7 billion.

From the Dow Jones Newswire:

Under the bill, Congress would extend for three years, until Dec. 31, 2011, tax credits for investments in wind-power developments, geothermal and trash combustion facilities, and other projects that generate power from so-called renewable energy. For projects that get up and running starting in 2010, the total amount of tax credits that can be earned would be limited to 35% of a facility's costs. The measure is estimated to result in tax breaks of $6.57 billion over 10 years.

Congress would also extend for eight years, through the end of 2016, tax credits for commercial investments in solar-energy equipment. Congress would extend until the end of 2014 the tax credit for homeowners who buy solar panels or solar hot water heaters. The tax credit would also be more generous, doubling to $4,000 from $2,000.

Photo Credit: Bob Cox via flickr

The Oregonian

CNNMoney

Renewable Energy Access

Feed-in Tariffs: The Quick and Dirty

Quite a lot of people come to ecopolitology looking for information on renewable energy laws called feed-in tariffs (FIT's). Miguel Mendonca, of the World Future Council wrote an excellent post at Celsius, which gave an excellent introduction to FITs and an elaboration of how and why the policy mechanism works. I have excerpted a portion of that post below. For information and guidance on actually drafting a feed-in law, go the Policy Action on Climate Toolkit (PACT) website.

"FIT laws place a legal obligation on utilities to purchase electricity from renewable energy installations. The tariff rate is guaranteed, and in the best examples, for a long period — say 20 years. The tariff rate is scientifically determined for each technology, to ensure profitable operation of the installation.

There are different design options for the law, including tariff degression; this reduces the rates each year — meaning for example that PV gets a lower rate if you install next year than if you install this year. One, it encourages swift take-up; two, it encourages manufacturers indirectly to increase design efficiency. If you are going to receive a lower rate, you want to generate more electricity. This drives innovation, making renewable energy a more rapidly evolving field — which is precisely what we all need.

The costs of the scheme should be shared among all end-users, so that no-one is overly burdened. In Germany (perhaps the most effective system, developed and supported politically since 1990), their law has made them a world leader in renewable energy, generated billions of dollars a year in exports, created in the region of a quarter of a million jobs, saved towards 100m tons of CO2 annually in recent years, and set records for installed capacity across many technologies — all at the cost of around $1.80 per household, per month."

Photo Credit: ChiKurt via flickr

Pine Beetles Cross the Divide

[This post was originally published at sustainablog on January 22, 2008. It is the first of two parts addressing the pine beetle epidemic in Colorado and what the mountain communities are doing about it. Part two can be found by clicking on this link]

Colorado has 1.7 million acres of lodgepole pine forests. Though, if you have any desire to see any of those trees alive, I’d suggest you move rather quickly. State and federal officials recently announced that the mountain pine beetle epidemic grew by a half a million acres in 2007, bringing the total infestation in the state to about 1.5 million acres. Foresters indicated that the epidemic would virtually eliminate every acre of lodgepole pines in the next three to five years.

Up until quite recently, the pine beetle epidemic in Colorado was limited to a five county area along the Continental Divide. However, recent forest surveys indicate that the beetle has crossed the Divide and is moving eastward. The Forest Service’s annual surveys that are produced by ’stitching’ together aerial photographs have enabled the forest service to illuminate the rapid acceleration of the beetles’ northeasterly march. Once restricted to high country hamlets like Breckenridge, Fraser and Steamboat Springs, the hungry beetles are quickly moving into the foothills and front range near Denver, Boulder and Fort Collins. According to Kyle Patterson at Rocky Mountain National Park, the pine beetles have reached “epic proportions.”

Although the beetle is a full-time resident of the temperate coniferous forests of the Rocky Mountains, their numbers have grown exponentially in the last ten years, fed by a ‘perfect storm’ of contributing factors, including a steady pattern of rising temperatures.

Extreme cold temperatures can reduce beetle populations. But, ever since the most recent outbreak began in the mid-1990s, the extremes have not been extreme enough. For freezing temperatures to affect a large number of larvae during the middle of winter, temperatures of at least 30 degrees below zero must be sustained for at least five days.

Locals have come to accept that, for the most part, the beetle cannot be stopped, only adapted to. The good news is that folks in the mountain towns of Colorado are not willing to simply let the beetles win. Facing daily changes to their familiar green landscapes, and dealing with the potential of catastrophic wildfire, large-scale erosion leading to watershed quality problems, and loss of tourism dollars, communities in Colorado are forming innovative, multilevel collaborative partnerships to come up with new ideas and plans of action for an epidemic that knows no political boundaries.

The biggest obstacle for community organizations is not political will, it is the significant resources required for the large-scale thinning of at-risk areas. Currently, the average price of thinning one acre of forests in Summit County, CO is about $2000. Limited funding obviously means that not every acre can be treated. The reason for the high cost of forest thinning is that there is no market for the beetle-kill wood. According to Gary Severson of the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments:

“There’s simply not enough public money to thin the forests. The only way to do this is to find some way to add value to this material. With small-diameter lodgepole pine, there aren’t a lot of options.”

But, at least there are some options, and some pretty good ones at that. I will address some of the very innovative solutions to this sticky problem in part two.

Colorado State Univ. Cooperative Extension

The Denver Post

The Fort Collins Coloradoan

Photo Credits: Canadian Forest Service.

Care to Win a Free Book?

Then just go to sustainablog and leave a comment as to what environmentally-themed book you think is a must read for the next president. Do this and you'll be entered into a drawing to win Power of the People: America's New Electricity Choices, by Carol Sue Tombari.

Colorado Dems Favor Obama by 2 to 1 in Caucus

Updated Percent Attendance UnCommitted Clinton Edwards Kucinich Obama Richardson 11:24 PM 98.78 % 119853 1253 38587 102 57 79344 18

My thinky box no worky for to make good words for blog. Now is sleep. Be back tomorrow with smart talk.

The Bluing of a Red State?

Here are some recent poll numbers from a Denver Post Online Straw Poll as of 4:37 PM MST
n=3578.

[Note: Keep updated with timely news at Virtual Vantage Points, and follow "SuperTuesday"on Twitter.]
[Please keep these three points in mind about the Colorado caucuses:
1. The only Coloradoans who have voted yet are overseas.
2. Colorado has a closed-caucus, meaning that only registered party members (of at least two months prior to Feb 5th) may vote in the caucus.
3. Colorado's Democratic delegates will be proportionally allocated. All of Colorado's Republican delegates will go to a single candidate (winner-take-all).]

Who is your pick for president?

Barack Obama
1110 Votes, or 31.02 %

Hillary Clinton
935 Votes, or 26.13 %

Mitt Romney
779 Votes, or 21.77 %

John McCain
365 Votes, or 10.20 %

None of the above
274 Votes, or 7.657 %

Not caucusing
115 Votes, or 3.214 %

The Calm Before the Storm? (or vice versa?)

It does not appear as though a fast-moving winter storm that rolled through Colorado's front range last night will have any sort of significant impact on voter turnout for this evening's presidential caucuses, at least here in CO. The state is expected to continue churning toward the upper midwest, potentially bringing However, this storm is just the latest of several for communities across the four-corners region. In Chama, New Mexico where 33 inches has fallen since Saturday, Gov. Bill Richardson has called in National Guard support to help clear the snow-blocked roadways and assist stranded residents with collapsed roofs.

Above the city of Fort Collins, we only got about 5-6 inches of the dry, fluffy powder, but parts of the Denver foothills were hit with up to 9 inches. The storm is still expected to bring some snow and heavy winds to parts of Colorado's eastern plains, generally considered a conservative Republican stronghold.

Turnout is expected to be high across most parts of the state. Colorado is one of several states that moved up its party primary elections to increase voter turnout and attract more candidate attention. Republican and Democratic officials are both predicting record-turnouts for tonight's caucus. Yet, I must wait.

And as tough as it is for me to do so, I basically need to sit on my hands until about 6pm (MST) when I will head about two miles down the road to my tiny little caucusing location in Masonville, CO (pictured above). The official proceedings at my local precinct will not start until 7pm (though the micropolitics are scheduled to commence around 6-ish when my neighbors are stopping by for a beer before we head up the road).

Keep updated with timely news at Virtual Vantage Points, and follow "SuperTuesday"on Twitter.


Denver Post
Rocky Mountain News
Photo: Tim Hurst

Happy Birthday to Green Options Media

As busy as I was with all of the caucusing and primaries going on today, it nearly slipped my mind that my friends at Green Options have just turned one year old today. So, go pay them a visit and read any of the birthday retrospectives written by some of GO's best.

Hardly newbies to the green blogosphere, the founders of Green Options have built their 'flagship' sustainablog, which was written and managed by Jeff McIntire-Strasburg since 2003 before he opened it up to a broader collection of voices in 2007. GO assembled a solid group of experts, pundits and writers (including yours truly) to launch several green blogs including ones on green building, green entrepreneurship, environmental news and activism, green cars and renewable fuels, and green crafts, just to name a few. There are several more websites that are in the design phase and I would hate to spoil the surprise as to what they are about, but you will be seeing them very soon.

Once again, I want to thank the GO community for letting me contribute to their new green blog playground, and I wish them nothing but continued success.

Giga Tuesday: Live-Blogging the Live-Bloggers

This weekend I was contacted by David Wescott at It's Not a Lecture to participate in a project he and others are working on for Giga Tuesday. Essentially, David and others will be 'live-blogging the live-bloggers' at all day long and well into the night at Virtual Vantage Points. In addition to the team of analysts and blog-monitors he is working with at Virtual Vantage Points, Wescott also recommends that you follow along "SuperTuesday"on Twitter.

Instead of merely following the ubiquitous and mundane exit polls and incomplete returns, Wescott et al are taking punditry to a whole new level. Wescott writes:

"I'm going to look at how communities you wouldn't necessarily think of as inherently political discuss the primary and if they use their blogs or networks to get more involved. I'm particularly interested in the environmental community, which I haven't heard much about in the debates or from mainstream media. I'll be looking at them over the course of the evening and passing along any nuggets of wisdom I find. I'm also going to compare and contrast the discussions from political bloggers in different states, to see if national issues are truly the driving topics or if there are state-based issues playing a leading role."

Cool, huh? Wescott plans on focusing on the environmental community and their take on today's election returns.

The party has already begun at Virtual Vantage Points and at SuperTuesday on Twitter, so be sure to stop in for this first-of-its-kind event. And if you can vote today. Please vote and tell your friends to vote (be sure to thank a pollworker).If you are still undecided and need some last minute help, Jason Phillip has put together some very useful links at Sustainablog that will help you green your vote.

Thanks. And be sure to check back throughout the day for updates at ecopolitology, Virtual Vantage Points and at SuperTuesday on Twitter.

Greening-the-Vote Scorecard from EnviroWonk

For those of you wanting to put some green into your voting calculus for tomorrow's largest-ever day of caucuses and primaries (aka: Giga Tuesday), a couple of new crib-sheets appeared around the green blogsophere. Envirowonk, the new spinoff blog from the stalwart EcoGeek, was just launched last week and, so far it has been putting together some good, insightful posts. Additionally, The Good Human has put together the enviro platforms for Obama and Clinton. Read up. And if you can vote tomorrow, DO IT AND TELL YOUR FRIENDS TO DO IT!

Obama and Clinton Get Wonky w/o Any Ecopolicy

Last night's Democratic debate was certainly for the wonkish at heart. I found both of the candidates were rather sharp with the enunciation of their platforms, citing numbers, facts, figures, etc. They were not sharp, however, with the enunciation of their environmental policies. Their wasn't a single question asked of the two candidates about energy and/or environmental policy in throughout the whole thing. How could this be, especially in the all-things-eco Los Angeles, California? This is another in a series of debates sponsored by the coalition, Americans for Balanced Energy Choices. And of all the questions asked in the four debates, not a single one has addressed the politics of climate change. Last night, Mrs. Clinton briefly uttered the words "climate change", but only while paying tribute to John Edwards and thanking him for the issues he had fought for during his campaign.
Noteworthy quips from the debate:

“It did take a Clinton to clean up after the first Bush, and I think it will take a Clinton to clean up after the second.” -Clinton

“I was friends with Hillary Clinton before, I will be friends after” -Obama

“We HAVE a president who basically ran as the ‘CEO-MBA President’ and I am not too happy with the results.” -Clinton

“You can tell just by looking at us - you can tell we are not more of the same.” - [I'll let you imagine who said this one]