RICHMOND, Va. -- After passing the Clean Economy Act this year, Virginia is in the vanguard of states moving toward 100% clean electricity. But a new report shows barriers such as low electric-vehicle inventories could prevent the Commonwealth from reaching that goal.

The Virginia Drives Electric report shows more than half of Virginians say they are likely to consider an electric vehicle for their next car, according to Stuart Gardner, program director at Generation 180, which put out the report. But the state lacks pro-EV policies such as those in neighboring Maryland, including requiring automakers to sell a certain number of low-emissions cars.

"We compared six comparable cities in Maryland vs. Virginia and we found, of those six cities, Virginia had 44% - 54% fewer electric vehicles in stock," Gardner said. "So inventory is really a barrier that the average Virginian, even if they want to go electric, they can't because they're just not there at the dealer."

The president of the Virginia Automobile Dealer's Association says it supports efforts to increase EV sales, but policymakers need to conduct additional studies about financial incentives and battery-charging infrastructure in the state.

Gardner said spending time on more studies will just delay taking action on what he thinks is an alarming level of transportation emissions in the Commonwealth. He said the time is right because the General Assembly convenes January 13, and is considering two bills related to EVs. One is a clean-car standard that requires manufacturers to send a certain number of EVs to the state.

"And the other is an incentive, an equitable incentive, that puts, as they say, cash on the hood to help people buy the electric vehicle, to really drive demand, to get people to switch, have their next car to be electric," he said.

In a letter to Virginia's General Assembly leadership, a coalition of environmental groups called on lawmakers to make transportation electrification a top priority for the upcoming session. The group said transportation is the single largest source of greenhouse-gas emissions in the state, making up 48% of carbon-dioxide emissions.


get more stories like this via email

SALT LAKE CITY -- A researcher at the University of Utah said plans for generating renewable energy should include a power source right under our feet.

Whether by plan or accident of geology, Utah has some of the highest potential in the nation for generating geothermal energy. Across the state, super-heated geothermal water is already being used to make electricity, as well as for spas, space heating, agriculture and aquaculture.

Joseph Moore, principal investigator for the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (Utah FORGE) at the University of Utah Energy and Geoscience Institute, said if you can dig a deep enough hole, you can capture heat from the earth's mantle to make sustainable, reliable power.

"The goal is to be able to generate electricity or direct use anywhere in the world," Moore explained. "We can drill deep enough, the heat's there; it's just extracting that heat. We put the hot water, after it's been used, back in the ground - so, it is renewable."

Utah FORGE is a Department of Energy (DOE) funded project tasked with developing the technologies and tools needed for Enhanced Geothermal System reservoirs.

Moore said Utah now has three geothermal power plants that generate a combined 72 megawatts of electricity, enough to supply about 72,000 homes.

He pointed out once fully developed, geothermal has virtually limitless potential across the region.

"Right now, we find the hottest temperatures at the shallowest depths in the West, so that's Utah, Nevada, California," Moore outlined. "A little bit to the north - Idaho, Oregon. A little bit to the south - New Mexico, Wyoming."

He cautioned natural geothermal resources are not currently sufficient to reach the DOE's 2050 goal, but he predicts once the technology being developed in Utah matures, it could potentially generate enough power to run the entire country.

Sarah Wright, executive director of Utah Clean Energy, agreed geothermal power could become a major addition in the fight to counter climate change. She added it does not cost much, in terms of cents per kilowatt-hour.

"It is affordable," Wrights stressed. "It's less than 10 cents, and probably around 8. And it's a pollution-free, carbon-free resource that provides energy all day and all night."

HARRISBURG, Pa. - Some environmental groups are formally requesting that Pennsylvania's Environmental Quality Board raise the bond amounts companies pay to drill oil and gas wells.

The Sierra Club, the Clean Air Council and four other groups have sent two petitions, asking the board to adopt full-cost bonding, both for conventional and unconventional oil and gas wells. Drillers currently pay only a fraction of the bond amount needed to clean up and plug abandoned wells, which leak methane and raise environmental concerns.

Ankit Jain, associate attorney with the Sierra Club's environmental law program, said this increase is a critical way to hold companies accountable for the impacts they leave on communities nearby.

"We want the amount of money that you'll get back from plugging the well to be the same amount of money as it would actually cost to plug the well itself," he said. "So now, you have every incentive to plug the well, because you just get that money back anyways. And it's not left unattended to pollute the environment and eventually, for taxpayers to spend money cleaning up."

The groups are asking the board to raise the bond amount to $38,000 per conventional well, and $83,000 per fracked well. Pennsylvania has more than 6,000 so-called "orphan" gas wells, with hundreds of thousands yet to be found, according to the state Department of Environmental Protection.

About 5% to 8% of all methane emissions in Pennsylvania are caused by abandoned oil and gas wells, according to a study by Stanford and Princeton universities.

Alex Bomstein, a senior litigation attorney for the Clean Air Council, said this pollution risk can have major consequences for residents living around well sites.

"So it's a huge and essentially unquantified problem that we're all experiencing the consequences of, in terms of the results of exposure to toxins," he said, "often without people realizing that part of the reason they're sick is because of the pollution from these abandoned wells."

The state Department of Environmental Protection is required to respond to the petitions within 30 days about whether they meet the legal requirements for the board to consider them.

DES MOINES, Iowa -- This fall, the Iowa Utilities Board is hosting meetings to inform the public about a proposed underground pipeline, which would transport carbon emissions for sequestration.

Supporters argued it can help reduce harmful emissions in the atmosphere, while environmental advocates countered the risks are far greater than any proposed benefits.

The line, which would run across 30 Iowa counties, would feed into a larger underground system moving carbon dioxide captured from biofuel plants to North Dakota, where it would be stored.

Carolyn Raffensperger, of the Science and Environmental Health Network, said while it sounds like a noble idea, it's counterproductive.

"It requires so much more energy to collect the CO2 from, say, an ethanol plant, that you're going to increase the emissions in carbon dioxide simply through the increased need for power," Raffensperger asserted.

And if there's a leak, she pointed out, there could be serious health risks with transporting and storage of the carbon dioxide, which also could be compressed into liquid form for renewable fuels.

Summit Carbon, the company behind the project, said construction and operations will create jobs, but opponents said the firms benefit from federal tax breaks at the public's expense. The hearings for impacted counties began this month and run through mid-October.

While the company insists the storage would be safe and secure, Raffensperger, who is based in Iowa, emphasized landowners near the proposed route should know it would be classified as a hazardous liquid pipeline. She added there are better ways to spend resources to combat harmful emissions.

"This is a solution for the fossil-fuel industry to keep doing business as usual," Raffensperger remarked.

Instead, she urged policymakers to focus on expanding clean-energy projects, such as wind and solar, while bolstering infrastructure that aims to improve water quality. Her group claims there would be just as many job opportunities with such investments.

Meanwhile, public comments can be submitted to the Iowa Utilities Board either online or through the mail.