“Solving Climate Change Saves Billions.” That’s the sub-title for Architecture 2030’s new blueprint for how to tackle the climate crisis here in the United States. Not bad, huh? The report is worth a read, both for the innovative solutions that are offered, but also for the tone and approach.

The graph above should be in the board room of every investment firm in the country - certainly all the banks, like Bank of America and Citi, who are still dumping money into the coal industry. Here’s a sample from the report that drives the point home:

Many times, complex problems require the simplest of solutions. One of the most important questions facing those attempting to solve the climate change crisis is, “How do we reduce CO2 emissions dramatically and immediately?” The simplest answer is, “Turn off the coal plants.”

Click here to download the complete report (pdf).

First, a bit of history:

Standard Oil, the company John D. Rockefeller founded and turned into an economic superpower, was forced to break up into roughly 34 different companies around 1911. Two of these pieces eventually became Exxon and Mobile respectively. As you all know, these two companies are now combined, which has created the worlds largest integrated oil company. Since this new economic superpower was born from the Standard Oil breakup, the Rockefeller family still has significant power within ExxonMobile - through stock ownership, trusts, and personal clout.

This is a very good thing. They are on the offensive.

A statement issued yesterday by the Rockefeller family was a warning shot, saying that Exxon’s leadership is “failing to address the future of energy and related industry hurdles,” and that “a majority of the family is now so concerned about the direction of ExxonMobil Corporation that it is urging a major change.”

The Rockefeller family has previously taken many pro-environment steps, but, of late, the steps are becoming bolder. Multiple family members are now pushing for major change at Exxon due to concerns over the company’s direction under Chief Executive Rex Tillerson (a runner-up for Fossil Fool of the Year). They want to see his job split, with an independent chairman appointed to the board.

An excerpt from the Wall Street Journal:

“They are concerned Exxon’s senior management has tunnel vision and is too absorbed with the challenges of daily management of multibillion dollar oil and natural-gas projects to ask hard questions about the future of fossil fuels. Mr. Tillerson and other Exxon executives have said they believe oil and gas will represent the vast majority of energy consumption for decades.”

Keep your eyes and ears open as several family members are scheduled to have a news conference this Wednesday on the issue.

The Ohio state Senate unanimously passed legislation setting strong new renewable energy and energy efficiency standards last week, sending the bill on to Governor Ted Strickland for signature. Sub. Senate Bill 221 establishes a 12.5% by 2025 renewable energy standard (RES), making the Buckeye State the 26th state in the nation to adopt a renewable energy requirement for electric utilities (see this previous post on numbers 24 and 25). The legislation also includes a strong energy efficiency standard that is expected to result in a 22% cumulative reduction in energy usage by 2025.

According to the American Wind Energy Association, the Ohio RES is expected to result in 5,000-7,000 MW of new wind power capacity by 2025 and early-year targets will drive 650-750 MW of new wind power installation over the next 4 years. The bill also includes a small solar “set-aside” to help boost solar power in the Buckeye State.

To ensure significant in-state renewable energy development, at least half of all new renewable energy generation must occur in Ohio, and the other half can occur in neighboring states. The legislation is expected to help jump start interest in wind and solar manufacturing in Ohio’s world-class manufacturing centers and could spark a “green collar jobs” boom in a state that has been hurt by the steady loss of manufacturing sector jobs.

The renewable energy legislation has national significance. As Ohio becomes the 26th state to adopt an RES, the majority of US states now have renewable energy standards on the books. In addition, Ohio is the fourth largest electricity consuming state in the nation (behind only Texas, California and Florida), ensuring that this state policy will move the needle nationally for renewable energy.

[Solar Ohio image credit: GreenEnergyOhio.org]

Remember that number global warming deniers throw around — those 500 scientists that have supposedly signed onto a letter denying the existence of anthropogenic climate change? 500. It’s a number you hear on the nightly news near the end of many stories on climate change, and it’s also a number invented by the Heartland Institute, one of Washington’s most conservative thinktanks.

As it turns out, that the number is a fabrication. Our friends over at DeSmogBlog sent questionnaires to each signer, and received back some interesting quotes. Here’s a sampling of the responses they got:

I am very shocked to see my name in the list of “500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares”. Because none of my research publications has ever indicated that the global warming is not as a consequence of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, I view that the inclusion of my name in such list without my permission or consensus has damaged my professional reputation as an atmospheric scientist.”

Dr. Ming Cai, Associate Professor, Department of Meteorology, Florida State University.

They have taken our ice core research in Wyoming and twisted it to meet their own agenda. This is not science.”

Dr. Paul F. Schuster, Hydrologist, US Geological Survey

I am horrified to find my name on such a list. I have spent the last 20 years arguing the opposite.”

Dr. David Sugden. Professor of Geography, University of Edinburgh

I have NO doubts ..the recent changes in global climate ARE man-induced. I insist that you immediately remove my name from this list since I did not give you permission to put it there.”

Dr. Gregory Cutter, Professor, Department of Ocean, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Old Dominion University

The list of rejections goes on and on, exposing deniers for who they really are — pawns of the fossil fuel industry, and fabricators. Next time somebody asks you about the “500 scientists who do not believe global warming is real,” tell them the real story: That youth are leading the way to a safe climate — that we are building an unstoppable movement more powerful than the special interests.

I attended a five hour long talk this past week with leaders in both the national and local world of alternative jet fuel research and development. Alternative jet fuel seemed a long ways off until the recent announcement that Virgin Atlantic Airlines had managed to fly a Boeing aircraft on a bio-fuel blend. That fuel was supplied by a Washington state company and the largest supplier of biodesiel in the U.S., Imperium Renewables. Imperium’s president was on hand as were a number of other important figures in the world of alternative jet fuels, including the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the US Air Force, a Boeing representative, a few folks from NETL (National Energy Technology Lab), climate champ Congressmen Jay Inslee and a rep from CAAFI (Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative).

The conversation was divided into two primary possible solutions, bio-jet fuel and coal to liquid technology.

First, the good news. It seems that the movers and shakers behind bio-fuels are beginning to understand that we cannot power our vehicles (on the ground or the air) on either our food crops or on unsustainably harvested plants from the Amazon. The mix used on the Virgin flight was made in part from the babassu nut, a nut that thrives in a complete eco-system (although it still comes from South America). Congressman Inslee, a long time proponent of alternative fuels, spoke about the need to develop sustainable alternative fuels that would reduce green house gas emissions without contributing to further environmental destruction. There was also much excited talk about the prospects of algae as a fuel source. And the Air Force is certainly on board, both with making their aircraft more efficient and with helping in the advancement of alternative fuels. And as we all know, when the military gets behind something, things get moving. (And yes, their main motive is still to “put fire and steel on the bad guys” as one colonel put it).

Now for the bad news. Coal to liquid technology.

Thankfully, right now, it’s still a ways off thanks in large part to the tough time that king coal has been experiencing this past year. With increased research and development dollars it could be available sooner. But one rep from NETL made it clear that there are hurdles to be leapt by spending the longest portion of his talk on the difficulties associated with the technology as well as the new infrastructure that must be built and the as yet unproved sequestration technology that is a must. Congressman Inslee talked with him over lunch before speaking and he made it clear that he does not see coal to liquids as a viable alternative at this time which is heartening. I asked the reps from NETL if they think that by the time coal to liquid technology is feasible (2020 by their estimates) it will be outmoded due to tighter GHG emission standards and decreased support for coal in general. The rep said no, that we still have a lot of coal to use up. But she also said that we will probably see an increase support for coal once a federal policy is adopted to regulate GHG emissions, AKA, a cap and trade which is almost certain with our new president.

Here is what I took away as my primary concern: Coal has had a tough year, we’ve seen that. But that has largely been due to the uncertainty surrounding legislation aimed at reducing GHG emissions as individual states adopt their own policies and Bush refuses to sign any federal cap and trade legislation. With so much uncertainty, lenders and other previously pro-coal folks are getting cold feet, but that could change once the new rules are cemented in place and folks know what they are working with. So, our challenge will be to help maintain king coal’s difficulties once a new cap and trade policy is adopted and to insure that the fallacy of clean coal is never adopted.