After a week of public hearings in Detroit, Philadelphia and San Francisco, we can safely say that cleaner, more efficient cars and trucks are a popular commodity.

More than 500 people, including concerned citizens, public health officials, veterans, small business owners, environmentalists and consumer advocates, came out to testify in support of the Obama administration’s proposal to strengthen fuel efficiency and carbon pollution standards for cars and light trucks. 

Thanks to these standards from the U.S. EPA and National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA), the average new car you’ll see on the lot in 2025 will get 54.5 mpg and spew 35% less carbon pollution than the models in 2016.  That’s a big deal – and a big win for American families.

So just how broad is public support for these proposed standards?  Very!  Poll after poll has shown that Americans overwhelmingly support better fuel efficiency.  But this support is more than just a checked box on a survey – it’s real stories from real people.

It was great to have the hearing kicked off by Michigan Congressman John Dingell, who praised the standards and said “I am pleased that EPA and NHTSA are joining together to reach out and listen to what the American people have to say.”  The Go60 mpg coalition, which the Sierra Club is a part of, was featured in the New York Times’ piece on the hearing.

In Philadelphia last Thursday, we saw record turnout for an EPA hearing with more than 150 people coming out to stand up for clean cars including Sierra Club President Robin Mann (pictures above at the left).  There were so many moving testimonies – including Retired Lieutenant General Richard Zilmer, who spoke about his first hand experience with the dangers of depending on a fuel supply line in Iraq, and Colleen Kennedy, a local resident with serious health conditions that have been exacerbated by smog pollution from cars.

 Finally on Tuesday of this week, EPA and NHTSA held their last public hearing in San Francisco where Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune testified and called these standards the “biggest single step we’ve ever taken to move beyond oil and tackle climate disruption.”  Check out the rest of his testimony here.

The lone voice of opposition at all three hearings:  the National Automotive Dealers Association (NADA).  Yet with several individual dealers coming out to testify in support of the standards, even the industry publication Automotive News knows that NADA needs to stop exaggerating the costs and underselling the benefits of the standards.

The Sierra Club live-tweeted each hearing from @SierraClubLive.  Here are some of the highlights:

•  @SierraClubLive  NADA rep claiming that car buyers don't look at mpg. Yet 3/4's of Americans support strong #cleancars standards: bit.ly/xpL2sT
• @SierraClubLive  Chevy dealer Thiel: "We're going to go on with this until 2025 and I'll tell ya what, we're ready for it!" #cleancars
• @SierraClubLive  Big shout out to the Raging Grannies for telling us to clean up our cars in song at #Detroit hearing! #cleancars
• @SierraClubLive  For a sense of the ratio of those supporting vs opposing #cleancars standards today, see the score from Brady vs Tebow last wkd
• @SierraClubLive  Robin Mann: "The planet is screaming and the time has come for us to stop turning a deaf ear." #cleancars #beyondoil
• @SierraClubLive  Rabbi Waskow: "I call it global scorching. Warming is too pleasant." #cleancars #CleanAir #Philly
• @SierraClubLive  .@Sierra_Club volunteer Bryan Crenshaw shows a picture of his son. 54.5 mpg is about our kid's future. #cleancars pic.twitter.com/2jeOt5C0
• @SierraClubLive  Local City Council Pres. Jeanette MacNeille: "For me as an asthmatic, #cleancars mean less trips to the emergency rm"pic.twitter.com/XRlzhu86
• @SierraClubLive  Wow, amazing defense of the role of @EPAgov & #cleancars from Colleen Kennedy who has a serious heart condition.pic.twitter.com/Su93ArSf
• @SierraClubLive  #cleancars are incredibly popular! Support vs opposition at today's #Philly hearing about 100 to 1. NADA took its toys & went home
• @SierraClubLive  Brune: As a father of two young kids, I'm relieved to know that the cars they'll drive in the years to come will use less oil. #cleancars

These hearings were not the only opportunity the public has to voice support for strong new clean cars standards.  You can send your comments until February13th.  Don’t wait -- help us show how broad and deep support is for clean cars!

 And, if you enjoyed reading these tweets from the clean cars hearings, follow @SierraClubLive and you can check out yesterday’s live updates from the DC Auto Show.  After years of saying they couldn’t make new cars or trucks that use less oil, it was clear from the showroom floor that the auto industry is in a race to do just that.

-- Ann Mesnikoff, Director of the Sierra Club Green Transportation Campaign

Not one month into the new year and we are already enjoying exciting energy developments out of North Carolina, Georgia, and now Arkansas.

Southwestern Electric Power Company (SWEPCO), a subsidiary of American Electric Power, announced today a power purchasing agreement of more than 400 megawatts of clean, renewable energy from wind farms in surrounding states. That amount of wind will "more than quadruple" SWEPCO's wind energy portfolio, boost the region's wind-energy sector, and make the air healthier for all living downstream.

This gust of wind-energy purchasing by the energy company was the result of a December settlement with the Sierra Club and Audubon. The settlement requires AEP to also retire Welsh 2, a dirty coal plant upwind of Arkansas in northeastern Texas. Together these two pieces will offset pollution from SWEPCO's new coal plant in Arkansas.

"Today, as a result of our recent legal settlement, hundreds of megawatts of clean wind energy will power homes and businesses in our region for the next 20 to 25 years," said Glen Hooks of the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign. "Unlike dirty coal, which pollutes our air, water, and communities, wind power produces zero pollution. And, this wind investment will save customers money because wind's fuel costs are zero."

SWEPCO powers more than a half-million people in Arkansas, Louisiana, and Northeast Texas. Prior to the settlement, SWEPCO's wind capacity totaled 110 megawatts. The utility expects this roughly $8 billion investment in clean energy to lower overall costs to customers by an average of a 0.1 cent per kilowatt-hour over the next ten years.

This is just one more example of a sweeping clean energy trend across the country and reflects what the energy experts are saying: Coal's future is dimming and clean energy is taking its place. People want clean energy. They want healthy air. And over the past three years the clean-energy revolution has been a bright job-creating story as we dig out of a tough economic recession. It's been a great 2012 so far, but we've just gotten started.

-- Photo courtesy Glen Hooks

The Sierra Club joined 350.org, the Energy Action Coalition, and the Natural Resources Defense Council, in organizing the event, which lauded President Obama’s recent Keystone Pipeline decision, while demanding an end to the dirty influence of Big Oil money in government.

Headlining the list of speakers were Senator Bernie Sanders (I – VT) (pictured above) and Representative Steve Cohen (D – TN), who both decried the political concessions bought by oil companies.  Said Sanders:

“We’ve got to end all of the tax breaks for the oil companies and coal companies and I’m going to introduce legislation to do just that.”

Cohen followed by adding:

“For too long, Big Oil has exercised far too much control in Washington.  It’s time for the people to stand up to their vaults of money and army of lobbyists and work to restore the government by the people, for the people.”

The protest proceeded to march to the office of the American Petroleum Institute, throwing penalty flags and calling a “democratic foul.”  The whistles were loud and the message was clear: it is high time to take the Big Oil money out of the halls of Congress.

-- David Loss, Sierra Club Green Transportation Campaign. Photos by Sally McGuire

The last time Congress succeeded in passing a long-term surface transportation bill was back in 2005, with the passage of SAFETEA-LU (“Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act - A Legacy for Users”).  That law expired in 2009, but has seen multiple short-term extensions meant to continue the funding and policy in the old law while legislators hash out a new bill.  This time, however, Congress seems seriousabout a negotiating a new, long-term deal.

It won’t be easy, however, as the House and Senate have dueling proposals, and differ on serious issues like funding sources and length of authorization.  Though still incomplete, the Senate bill would be a two-year provision that would greatly consolidate the federal transportation program.  This would include strong safety and performance provisions, and would help improve the condition of our roads and bridges.  Unfortunately, this might also mean less funding for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. 

To reach the finish line, the Senate must still pass a transit section, as well as funding for the proposal, as revenues from the gas tax are no longer sufficient to cover the need for our massive transportation system.

Ultimately, these bills fail to strike at the root of America’s transportation troubles: crumbling infrastructure and crippling dependence on oil.  The current state of disrepair of our transportation infrastructure is well documented. The Senate proposal admirably seeks to repair and maintain our existing infrastructure; hopefully the House will follow suit. Unfortunately, the proposals being floated by each chamber will need to be strengthened significantly to adequately address our dependence on oil, which is driven by transportation.

What we need is legislation focused on creating a new transportation system for the 21st century, one that addresses our crumbling infrastructure and helps decouple transportation from oil.  What might that bill look like?  Here’s a start:

• A provision to repair and maintain our infrastructure.  For the sake of both our health and our wallets, we desperately need to repair our ageing infrastructure, as poorly maintained roads cost the average driver thousands of dollars a year.  The Senate bill does include a provision that requires states to set targets for the condition of their infrastructure and focus road spending on repair and maintenance. It is important that the House include one as well.  Before we start building new roads and bridges, we need to pay the upkeep on the ones we already have.

• A focus on building a transportation network that maximizes travel options and accessibility, not one that encourages driving as the default.  Alternatives to automobile travel have always been forced to take a backseat, thanks to the help of disproportionate highway funding and commuter subsidies for driving.  Instead of cutting funding to programs ranging from pedestrian to rail infrastructure, we need to prioritize these alternatives while building and retrofitting communities so people have the option to walk, bike or take transit.

• No transportation funding from expanded drilling.  Opening public lands to oil drilling would destroy fragile ecosystems from the Gulf of Mexico to the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge and endanger public health.  And funding our transportation system with oil revenues is a surefire way to guarantee an oil-dependent future, complete with the smog and carbon pollution that come with it.  We need to tell Congress to say “NO!” to funding transportation through expanded oil drilling.

This March is an opportunity to overhaul our nation’s transportation policy and set a new course for the future — a future where Americans have safe, convenient options to get around and we don’t need oil to fuel our economy.  It’s a chance to set a new course that can cure our addiction oil.  Sticking to the old one would be madness.

-- Jesse Prentice-Dunn and David Loss, Sierra Club Green Transportation Campaign

President Obama has already said "no" to Keystone once, declaring that the risky project was not in our national interest.  A 1,700 mile pipeline running from Alberta, Canada to Texas, Keystone XL would move highly toxic and corrosive tar sands crude over some of our nation’s most critical water sources. And it would be run by Transcanada Corporation, a company that’s last pipeline spilled oil a dozen times in its first year of operation.  

Grassroots activists achieved a huge victory for clean air, clean water, and the health of American families by working tirelessly to stop Keystone XL in its tracks. But the President’s decision is not stopping Big Oil executives in their relentless pursuit to profit at any cost.

On Monday afternoon, officials from Transcanada directly advised Republican lawmakers on legislative strategy to revive the Keystone XL proposal during a Capitol Hill meeting according to a Politico report.

While most Americans couldn't get the time of day from a member of Congress, Congressional Republicans always seem to find time to get together with their Big Oil patrons. From securing generous subsidies to BP and Exxon to fighting against fuel efficiency standards, the results of their collaboration are rarely good for American families -- and this time was no different.

Following their strategy session, Republicans unanimously agreed to attach a provision forcing approval of Keystone XL to any viable bill –- including the upcoming extension of a middle-class payroll tax cut. In other words, they are plotting to push this highly risky pipeline on our country by tacking it onto a bill critically needed by American families, forcing legislators to vote for Big Oil's pet project in order to provide tax relief for working Americans.

Now, while millions are struggling to make ends meet, Big Oil billionaires and their political friends are huddling behind closed doors to hatch a scheme that will hold tax relief for the middle class hostage. They are proving yet again that they are willing to sacrifice anything –- whether it's the health or the wealth of American families –- to pad the profits of a few Big Oil CEOs.

This shameless tactic is clear evidence that our fight against Big Oil on Keystone XL is not over, and we will continue to have to stand up to deep-pocketed attacks against the air we breathe and the water we drink.

-- Tony Cani, National Political Director

Start spreading the news.

A plan to harness the power of the East River's currents in New York City has received the green light it needed thanks to a commercial license issued yesterday by the federal government.

The project is designed to generate more than 1 megawatt of power for the thousands of residents living on Roosevelt Island between Manhattan and Queens. The renewable power source, known as tidal power, would come from turbines installed on the river's floor. Verdant, which has been working on the project since 2002 and has already installed a handful of turbines, wants 30 generators in the river by 2015.

It's a first-of-its-kind project and it is worth watching to see whether tidal power will become a viable force in the clean-energy sector. Judging by the video above, I'd hate to be a fish caught in a tidal power farm. However, in this video interview on GristTV at about the 3:50 mark, a Verdant representative says that there have been no problems. 

"The largest impact that is unavoidable is the fact that there are rotating blades that are heavy in the water," he says. Because of that "there's a concern of impact with fish, the physical striking of fish, and generally changing the ecosystem as a result. There are also diving birds here in the East River. Thus far we have not seen any negative effects on the ecosystem."

-- Brian Foley

Bill Maher recently sat down with Bill Moyers.

For many years the Energy Information Agency has exaggerated coal’s prospects for the future, and every year has had to downgrade its projections. Today EIA again downgraded coal's future.

In the 2012 Annual Energy Outlook presentation about new coal generation they stated that no new coal generation is added “beyond that which is under construction,” and that coal’s percent of electricity generation will shrink from the current 44 percent to 39 percent between 2010 and 2035. This is noteworthy, since in its 2010 Outlook (released in 2011) the EIA projected that coal would drop to 44% of electricity generation by 2035, but just one year later the country already hit 44%.

• At least 33,000 megawatts worth of existing coal-fired power plants are expected to retire in the coming decades, not including any retirements due to the recently-finalized mercury and air toxics standard from the Environmental Protection Agency. (For reference, an average-sized coal-burning power plant is approximately 500 megawatts).

• The biggest difference from last year’s EIA projection is that more coal retirements will be driven by rising coal prices, state renewable energy standards and EPA clean air standards. All these signs point to reduced market share for coal and expanded market share for clean energy. 

• Coal’s market share of U.S. electricity production is expected to continue to drop, from 44 to 39 percent.

• No new coal plants are predicted to be constructed in the time period, beyond those few that are already under construction.

• The share of electricity production from clean energy sources (including hydropower and biomass) should increase from 10 to 16 percent during the time period.

• Overall electricity demand growth is expected to remain below one percent annually.

As I noted before, EIA has frequently overstated coal’s place in our electricity needs. Here is a sampling of what EIA said in 2006, 2008, and 2010.

2006 Annual Energy Outlook: 

The coal share is projected to decline slightly, from 50 percent in 2004 to 49 percent in 2020, before increasing to 57 percent in 2030. Additions to coal-fired generating capacity in the AEO-2006 reference case are projected to total 102 gigawatts between 2004 and 2025, as compared with 86 gigawatts in AEO2005. Over the entire period from 2004 to 2030, 174 gigawatts of new coal-fired generating capacity is projected to be added in the AEO2006 reference case, including 19 gigawatts at CTL plants.”

2008 Annual Energy Outlook:

“the coal share increases from 49 to 54 percent” between 2008 and 2030.  They further state that the US will need to install 263GW of new generating capacity in this period and 40 percent will be coal.”

2010 Annual Energy Outlook: 

In the Reference case, without (greenhouse gas) regulations, coal accounts for the largest share of total electricity generation (Figure 61). With slow growth in electricity demand, little new coal-fired capacity is added, and the coal share falls from 48 percent in 2008 to 44 percent in 2035.

Even today, EIA’s projections remain far too rosy for coal, though. While the EIA estimates that over the next 25 years approximately 33,000 megawatts of existing coal power will retire, the Sierra Club has identified over 38,000 megawatts of existing coal power that has retired or announced an upcoming retirement since January 2010 – and more are expected soon. There are about 340,000 megawatts of coal in the United States as of January 2010.

The data paint a brighter future where coal mining, burning and coal ash disposal does not threaten thousands of communities across the United States. Coal is being replaced with cleaner energy choices.  Here at the Sierra Club we are working overtime to help accelerate this trend by preventing the construction of new coal plants, retiring and replacing existing coal plants with clean energy, and keeping the large U.S. coal reserves out of world markets.

--Bruce Nilles, Senior Director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign.

The Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign works in partnership with Bloomberg Philanthropies and a nationwide coalition of allies to retire one-third of the nation's aging coal plants by 2020, replacing them with clean energy like wind and solar by 2030. Coal plants are the largest sources of climate disruption and toxic air pollution like mercury, soot and carbon pollution.

Social entrepreneurs are doing amazing work providing energy services to the poor but financing for this segment is incredibly tough to come by. Which is why, much like the Green Fund, delivering energy access for the poor could benefit from innovative sources of finance. Enter Arc Finance, which is pursuing an innovative source with tremendous potential – harnessing the billions of dollars in remittance flows sent each year by immigrants living in developed countries to their relatives in less developed countries.

In a must-read paper, Arc Finance lays out the gargantuan opportunity remittance flows present. Globally they increased 6% to reach $325 billion in 2011. Of that total 10% to 25% were used for household energy purchases in markets they surveyed. If these numbers held true across the global market a clean energy access finance opportunity of $32.5 - $81.25 billion annually exists.

To put that in perspective the Green Fund is supposed to reach $100 billion by 2020 (though its currently empty) and the entire clean energy market was only $260 billion in 2011. If even 1% of that market opportunity were tapped the world could add $3 to $8 billion annually to clean energy access coffers. This would be roughly the size of a World Bank energy portfolio, but dedicated entirely to clean energy access and not costly grid extensions. Most importantly, it would go to those households that need it most.

Combined with rapid innovation in energy service delivery at the bottom of the pyramid it is entirely possible to harness these flows. Mobile banking systems for example enable remittances to be sent directly from a mobile phone anywhere in the world, to one in rural India. Taken one step further - by connecting a mobile phone enabled remittance flow to a pay-as-you-go clean energy system – mobile banking lays the foundation for a truly revolutionary stream of clean energy financing. The best part is these systems exist today.

India’s Leapfrog Opportunity

Nowhere is the opportunity larger than India. In 2010 the subcontinent received an estimated $55 billion in remittance flows. It also just so happens to be home to the largest number of energy poor households in the world, near universal cell phone penetration, and tremendous innovation in energy service delivery for the poor.

In short, India has all the ingredients for success, it just requires a vision that is not limited by the aid trap (that clean energy is too costly for the poor to pay for themselves) or the grid fallacy (that costly grid extensions are the only way to deliver energy for the poor). The global community can continue to talk the talk on energy access or we can put our money and effort where our mouth is. 2012 is the year to make clean energy access happen, innovative sources of financing like harnessing remittance flows are the way to make it happen.

-- Justin Guay, Sierra Club International Program

Exxon Mobil agreed Thursday to pay $1.6 million in penalties to the state of Montana over water pollution caused by a pipeline break last summer that fouled dozens of miles of shoreline along the scenic Yellowstone River.

Montana Department of Environmental Quality director Richard Opper said the penalties in the case mark the largest in the agency's history. The Texas oil company will pay $300,000 in cash and spend $1.3 million on future environmental projects, according to a copy of the document obtained by The Associated Press.

Also Thursday, Exxon increased its estimate of how much crude spilled into the river during the July 1 accident near Laurel to 1,509 barrels, or more than 63,000 gallons. That's up from earlier estimates of 1,000 barrels spilled — a number that Gov. Brian Schweitzer had disputed as too low.

Remember, if the filthy Keystone XL tar sands pipe ever saw the light of day, a similar blowout would make Exxon's Yellowstone River blunder look like an innocent hiccup:

It would irreparably harm the environment, compromise the Ogallala Aquifer, and affect perhaps millions of Americans in the Midwest. That's because the Keystone XL pipe, if approved, would be pumping more than 20 times the amount the Exxon pipeline was delivering before it ruptured.

-- Brian Foley