Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist. [Use this link to see all of our posts on Dourson.] That lyric from a Chuck Berry signature song, “Memphis, Tennessee,” takes on a haunting new meaning in light of the latest evidence of contamination of the Memphis Sand aquifer, a main drinking water source for the city, with the […]

By Richard Denison

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist.

[Use this link to see all of our posts on Dourson.]

That lyric from a Chuck Berry signature song, “Memphis, Tennessee,” takes on a haunting new meaning in light of the latest evidence of contamination of the Memphis Sand aquifer, a main drinking water source for the city, with the highly toxic solvent tetrachloroethylene (also known as perchloroethylene (PCE), or more commonly PERC).  Lest there be any doubt about the human toll this is taking, read this local woman’s heart-wrenching story.

The source of PERC in this case is a former dry cleaning business that is now a hazardous waste site, and because of Sharri Schmidt’s case is now nominated to become a Superfund site.  The chemical is still widely used in dry cleaning as well as in many other uses.  It’s a probable human carcinogen, and is also toxic to the brain, kidney and liver.

As I write, Dourson and Beck are making decisions that will help determine how the risks of PERC and other chemicals are assessed and whether or not they need to be regulated.

Unfortunately, Schmidt is far from alone.  PERC contamination of drinking water is widespread in this country.  To name just a few, have a look at these stories from towns and cities in North Carolina, Indiana, Nevada, Arizona, Montana, and New York.

Data compiled by the Environmental Working Group from local water utilities shows that PERC was detected in tap water samples taken by water utilities in 44 states that serve 19 million people.

One might hope and think that affected local communities could turn to the US Environmental Protection Agency for help in such situations.  The sad truth is that under the Trump administration this may well not be the case.  Trump has nominated Michael Dourson to lead EPA’s chemical safety office, who, despite the fact that he’s yet to be confirmed, is already working at EPA as a special advisor to Administrator Scott Pruitt.  And Pruitt has already installed as a political appointee to that office Nancy Beck, who until May was a senior official at the American Chemistry Council (ACC), the chemical industry’s main trade association.

So what do Dourson and Beck have to do with PERC?  

Before they arrived at EPA, they were co-authors on a 2016 paper that was funded by ACC.  That paper, published in the industry’s go-to journal, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, asserts that the acceptable risk levels EPA has set for 19 chemicals are all too stringent and should be relaxed by anywhere from 2.5 to 150 fold.

Among these 19 chemicals is PERC.  Dourson and Beck call for EPA’s standard for the chemical to be relaxed to a level that is 12.5 times less protective.

Even more alarming, PERC is one of the first 10 chemicals that EPA is examining right now under the recently reformed Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).  TSCA is implemented by the same office Dourson is nominated to lead and in which both he and Beck serve as politically appointed advisors.

To summarize:  As I write, Dourson and Beck are making decisions that will help determine how the risks of PERC and other chemicals are assessed and whether or not they need to be regulated.  Both of them have only recently worked for the chemical industry.  PERC is made by numerous companies that are members of ACC, Beck’s former employer and the funder of the Dourson-Beck paper.

Yet neither of them has recused themselves from making decisions about its risk and regulatory responses.  Indeed, as I noted earlier, Beck’s ethics agreement gives her wide latitude to work on issues in which ACC has financial interests in order to ensure those interests are taken into account.  And in Dourson’s nomination hearing held by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on October 4, he was repeatedly asked if he would, if confirmed, recuse himself from work on chemicals he had been paid by industry to work on, and he repeatedly refused to say he would do so.

Residents of Tennessee, North Carolina, Indiana, Nevada, Arizona, Montana, New York and any other of those 44 states where PERC is contaminating drinking water simply can’t afford to entrust their health to individuals with such clear conflicts of interest.  To start, they should tell their Senators to reject Dourson’s nomination to head EPA’s toxics office, and urge them to insist that political appointees who worked for the chemical industry must fully recuse themselves from such matters.

 

Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist. [Use this link to see all of our posts on Dourson.] That lyric from a Chuck Berry signature song, “Memphis, Tennessee,” takes on a haunting new meaning in light of the latest evidence of contamination of the Memphis Sand aquifer, a main drinking water source for the city, with the […]

Dynegy, a Texas-based energy giant, is pulling out all the stops in Illinois to keep uneconomic and dirty coal plants running. Dynegy is Illinois’ largest producer of coal-fired electricity, but the falling prices of other power sources, including renewable energy, have hurt the company’s bottom line. Last year, Dynegy tried to ramrod customer-funded coal subsidies […]

Dynegy, a Texas-based energy giant, is pulling out all the stops in Illinois to keep uneconomic and dirty coal plants running. Dynegy is Illinois’ largest producer of coal-fired electricity, but the falling prices of other power sources, including renewable energy, have hurt the company’s bottom line. Last year, Dynegy tried to ramrod customer-funded coal subsidies […]

Dynegy, a Texas-based energy giant, is pulling out all the stops in Illinois to keep uneconomic and dirty coal plants running. Dynegy is Illinois’ largest producer of coal-fired electricity, but the falling prices of other power sources, including renewable energy, have hurt the company’s bottom line. Last year, Dynegy tried to ramrod customer-funded coal subsidies […]

By Christie Hicks

Dynegy, a Texas-based energy giant, is pulling out all the stops in Illinois to keep uneconomic and dirty coal plants running.

Dynegy is Illinois’ largest producer of coal-fired electricity, but the falling prices of other power sources, including renewable energy, have hurt the company’s bottom line. Last year, Dynegy tried to ramrod customer-funded coal subsidies into the Future Energy Jobs Act at the last minute, but Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and our allies successfully blocked that effort.

But, like the Hydra of Greek mythology, when we cut off one head, more appeared. The legendary Dynegy hasn’t given up on its quest for a coal bailout, and the company is tapping nearly every avenue of government along the way.

Pollution limits

For almost a year, Dynegy worked with the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to re-write pollution standards so that the company can run its dirtier plants more often, earning bigger profits and keeping those coal plants afloat. The current rules, negotiated 10 years ago, placed limits on emissions from certain power plants.

3 ways Dynegy is trying to make Illinoisans bail out its aging coal fleet
Click To Tweet

The proposed rule change would aggregate emissions  – an important change that would allow Dynegy to calculate its emissions relative to its entire fleet and permit double the greenhouse gas pollution the corporation emitted last year.

The reason for changing the pollution standards has nothing to do with limiting pollution or protecting public health. In fact, according to the Chicago Tribune, Illinois EPA director Alec Messina “said the goal is to keep the financially struggling coal plants open.”

The rule is now pending before the Illinois Pollution Control Board, which is accepting public comments and will hear expert testimony in early 2018.

Legislative route

Less than a month after the rule changes were proposed, a group of Illinois House representatives introduced a bill that would provide Dynegy with a customer-funded bailout.

EDF estimates the legislation would raise rates on Central and Southern Illinois residents by more than $400 million per year.

Rather than have Dynegy retire its most polluting, least profitable power plants, the proposed law would force customers to pay to keep the plants open. EDF estimates the legislation would raise rates on Central and Southern Illinois residents by more than $400 million per year. That staggering request raises even more eyebrows given that, days after the legislation was filed, Vistra Energy, another Texas power giant, announced it was merging with Dynegy and creating over $5 billion in excess capital.

Lawmakers heard testimony about the proposal last Tuesday. EDF and other environmental and consumer advocates, along with the Illinois Attorney General’s Office, criticized the proposal and pointed to evidence showing the harm it would cause to the state.

No reliability “challenges”

As if these two efforts weren’t enough, last month, the Illinois Governor surprised us with a concerning request to the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC). Referencing reliability – a topic that is oft-cited by coal supporters as of late – Gov. Rauner requested a report on the “current challenges” in Dynegy’s territory. (Presumably, the “challenges” referenced are one and the same as those about which Dynegy has complained to the Illinois legislature and the public in recent days.)

The ICC obliged the Governor with a report that finds there is a projected surplus of electricity in Dynegy’s region and grid reliability is sound.

Although ensuring reliability is the responsibility of the regional grid operator, and not the state’s regulatory agency, the ICC obliged the Governor with a report that finds there is a projected surplus of electricity in Dynegy’s region and grid reliability is sound. In other words, it’s unlikely that a world without Dynegy’s coal plants would result in any loss of power because the grid is able to make more electricity than we’ll likely need.

At the same time, the report proposes a number of policy options the state could take in response to the Governor’s concerns. Such options range from allowing the current competitive market to function as normal (a healthy option) to requiring long-term contracts for coal generation to guarantee profits for coal plants (aka bailouts).

A stakeholder process to discuss whether there is a need to take action will likely begin this month.

Clean, efficient energy challenging coal

The pro-coal push is hardly unique to Illinois. Around the country, natural gas and renewable power sources are driving expensive coal out of the competitive market. Simultaneously, a number of factors – including increasingly more efficient lighting and appliances – have caused energy consumption to plateau and even decrease in some areas. Meanwhile, job growth in clean energy (wind, solar, and energy efficiency) far outpaces coal jobs – more than three-to-one.

Job growth in clean energy (wind, solar, and energy efficiency) far outpaces coal jobs – more than three-to-one.

Given all of this, it is no surprise that coal generators are seeking relief anywhere they can find it. Energy Secretary Rick Perry is even proposing bailouts at the federal level, which would prop up expensive, aging coal plants like Dynegy’s. The reality is that none of Big Coal’s efforts can reverse the rising tide, and Illinois should continue its march to a clean energy future – not bail out the energy source of the past.

Cleaner energy sources have been squeezing coal in Texas and across the country.

Cleaner energy sources have been squeezing coal in Texas and across the country.

By Emilie Litsinger

Bringing fishers and fishery managers from different places together through fishery exchanges is a powerful way to learn and build trust as you explore new approaches to manage fishing. After attending  and leading dozens of fishery exchanges over the years, I have been amazed by the peer-to-peer discussions that take place, regardless of language barriers or cultural differences, and the candor of government officials and fishers describing the challenges they have faced or successes they have worked to achieve. It is incredible to see participants hear about something new or innovative that they could bring back to their communities.  The excitement is contagious.

While there are always major differences between fisheries that make some aspects of learning challenging or even inapplicable, we want people to recognize and appreciate the uniqueness of ones fishery. There is not a “one size fits all” approach to managing fisheries because each fishery has its own set of characteristics based on the history of the fishery, culture of the area, species composition, governance structure, resources, and most importantly fishers and their accustomed fishing practices.  These exchanges are an opportunity to share experiences with others and to learn from each other about new and different approaches that can be adopted to improve fisheries management.

Recently, EDF and our partner Rare-Philippines organized a Japan-Philippines exchange for a delegation from the Philippines to visit several fisheries in Mie Prefecture, Japan.  We were particularly inspired to see firsthand what happens when fishers are empowered by the local government to make day to day management decisions: they pursue solutions that improve their livelihoods, and the long term sustainability of the fish they depend on. Those attending included champion mayors and their local government staff from eight municipalities that all have legally approved TURF+Reserves and are in the process of implementing these new systems on the water. 

The focus of the exchange was to share experiences from the Philippines in designing TURF+Reserves in municipal waters with the longstanding coast-wide network of TURFs in Japan whose origin date back to the 17th century.  We met with government officials from Mie prefecture, professors from the University of Tokyo, Ama divers in Toshijima, and cooperative members from the Mie Gaiwan cooperative, the Wagu Spiny lobster cooperative, and the Toshijima cooperative.  We also had the opportunity to visit three fish landing sites to see offloads and witness the auction system.

Japanese fishers leading sustainable management efforts, with government support:

Japanese coastal fisheries are struggling to adapt to today’s changing world – an ageing fleet, shifting species range due to climate change and environmental degradation and incorporation of science-based management. However, it’s clear that fishers are empowered through the strong role devolved to them from the prefecture government to make day-to-day management decisions of their fisheries. They play an integral part in the decision making process, adapting to changes on the water and the dock. As a result, they have innovated and improved their cooperatives to keep them operational.

Over the years, changes have been made where cooperatives have merged and they have diversified their products to include live, fresh, and frozen products.  Often times, they are involved in decisions to set much more stringent fishing regulations.  For example, the Mie prefecture government sets minimum size limit restrictions that cooperatives often decide among themselves to adjust—setting more conservative limits to allow for more spawning to take place and leave resources for future generations.

The fisher cooperatives play a much bigger role in the day-to-day management of the coastal fisheries and decide how the fishers in the coop will fish and sell their product, while the prefecture government plays important roles to set them up for success.

These include:

• administering fishing rights (managed access/TURF) to the fishing cooperatives and setting general fishing requirements such as size limits, seasonal closures, gear restrictions;
• conducting research and developing new fishing technologies;
• acting as a bridge between the fisher cooperatives and the research development as extension workers; and
• supporting infrastructure projects and new developments for the fishing industry.

Collaborating yields benefits for people and fish:

The Wagu Spiny Lobster cooperative described the revenue pooling arrangement that they have developed over the years as a way to reduce fishing effort through harvest coordination.  During several months of each fishing year, their 26 members decide to split up into five groups and jointly use only five boats for all the members.  They all go out and fish in a special zone dedicated to the pooling system and share the revenue.  Each group rotates through their membership of which boats they will be using so that boat use is spread evenly among the members.

The coop members we met with who practice the pooling arrangement said that by sharing their experience and knowledge of best fishing practices and best fishing grounds, they were able to make more by targeting larger lobsters and using good handling practices to improve the quality.  They are able to do this because they are fishing as a group instead of competing with one another, so they can take their time fishing to think more about quality.  They are also reducing their operating costs through this arrangement by sharing vessels and the input costs of fishing.  Finally, they shared that self-policing is very prevalent during the pooling fishing season as everyone is making sure that everyone follows the rules.

I am always so inspired to hear directly from fishers about their ingenuity and innovative ways they are adapting their harvesting strategies and marketing techniques to the impacts of climate change with shifting species composition, coral bleaching, changing consumer choices, unpredictable global markets, and declining resources.  I will never miss out on an opportunity to attend a fishery exchange because I learn so many new things each and every time that inspires me and forces me to think creatively about fisheries management reform in the places I work to ensure thriving fisheries for fishers and marine resources alike.

Bringing fishers and fishery managers from different places together through fishery exchanges is a powerful way to learn and build trust as you explore new approaches to manage fishing. After attending  and leading dozens of fishery exchanges over the years, I have been amazed by the peer-to-peer discussions that take place, regardless of language barriers […]

By Katie Anderson

Supply Chains: vital to tackling deforestation…

Leadership within corporate sustainability continues to reach new heights as companies innovate to catalyze more progress.  Early sustainability efforts focused on philanthropy. Next, companies embraced the business value of engaging in operational efficiency, such as efficient use of water or energy.

The current wave? Supply chain engagement: realizing that the bulk of their environmental impact comes from outside their operational walls, leading companies are reaching back across the chain to suppliers and producers to drive improvements.

Katie Anderson, EDF+Business

Companies and non-profit partners still have a lot of work to do to determine how to adequately engage in continuous improvement across a supply chain and measure performance in a transparent way. But even if they solve this puzzle, it isn’t sufficient to tackle our biggest, hairiest environmental problems—like deforestation.

In the deforestation space, direct supply chain engagement is vital to manage corporate risks and catalyze improvements. But any company that attempts long-term supply chain engagement on their own typically creates a situation in which individual farms are reducing forest loss, but the landscape around them is still filled with rapid deforestation. Imagine "islands of green" in a sea of deforestation.

…but what's the next step?

Enter the next stage of corporate sustainability leadership: local policy engagement. By engaging with policymakers in the core regions from which they source, companies that have zero deforestation commitments can catalyze local government-led initiatives that strive for long-term landscape scale reductions in forest loss and improvements in productivity. Companies can add a critically important voice to the policy table while providing support for local initiatives that advance their zero deforestation goals and promote those of policymakers.

Within the deforestation space, we call this type of policy engagement a jurisdictional approach. Rather than only going farm-by-farm to ensure sustainability, a jurisdictional approach allows companies to work alongside governments to create entire regions that are improving along deforestation and productivity metrics.

When companies collaborate with local governments, entire regions can be protected from…
Click To Tweet

We see more and more companies express that they alone cannot solve the problem of deforestation, and that they will need to collaborate to scale results. Just yesterday at COP23, Walmart announced a new Forest Policy that indicates that jurisdictional approaches will need to be part of reaching its goal of zero-net deforestation:

"Walmart recognizes that no company can solve deforestation on its own and that we must leverage our ability to promote sustainable agricultural production and sourcing beyond our private brands, and even beyond our retail supply chain. We recognize the importance of collaboration with our suppliers, our peers, governments and NGOs to address deforestation and promote sustainable production at an industry level. This will require new approaches and solutions at both the jurisdictional and landscape level that drive results on the ground by engaging both governments, to improve policy and increase scale, as well as the market with clear demand signals for more sustainable products."

This is just the first step, and true engagement will take time and effort over the next several years to build relationships and drive change at scale. However, policies like this one send a strong signal: big business is looking to partner with governments to catalyze change. Companies seeking to participate in collaborative solutions are looking to governments to lead.

For companies like Walmart that have been engaging in supply chain deforestation strategies for many years, jurisdictional approaches are the next leadership step necessary to drive additional progress at scale.

Which company will be next?

Supply Chains: vital to tackling deforestation… Leadership within corporate sustainability continues to reach new heights as companies innovate to catalyze more progress.  Early sustainability efforts focused on philanthropy. Next, companies embraced the business value of engaging in operational efficiency, such as efficient use of water or energy. The current wave? Supply chain engagement: realizing that […]

As one of the earliest representatives of an international environmental organization working in China, I have witnessed the progress of environmental protection collaboration between the US and China in the past 20 years and witnessed many specific incidents that have given me a good understanding of the different roles played by each country and how they have changed over time.

By Guest Author

President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump in Beijing with President Xi and his wife Peng Liyuan on November 8, 2017 | Photo: State.gov

By Zhang Jianyu, Managing Director for Global Strategy, EDF. See also his interview in China Daily, Expert: China, US now equals in pollution fight.

As one of the earliest representatives of an international environmental organization working in China, I have witnessed the progress of environmental protection collaboration between the US and China in the past 20 years and witnessed many specific incidents that have given me a good understanding of the different roles played by each country and how they have changed over time.

In 1999, the Chinese Premier at that time – Premier Zhu Rongji, visited the US and signed the very first environmental protection memorandum of collaboration between the Chinese and US environmental protection agencies. This memorandum spurred 10 collaborative sub-projects and was also the first practical environmental protection collaboration since the signing of the technology collaboration memorandum in 1979. The first sub-project was the SO2 emissions trading program, which EDF participated in creating. At the same time, I had just completed my studies in the US and was heading back to China to participate in this exciting, US- China environmental protection collaboration.

With the changes in China’s societal and economic developments and the political turnover in the US, the collaboration between the countries has entered a new phase that is showing new characteristics.

In the following years, China implemented several policies to promote the country’s environmental protection by referencing similar US policies and experiences such as pollution emissions trading, daily penalty system, green supply chain, and emissions permit system.

I had participated in the implementation of those policies and experienced first-hand how willing US colleagues were to share experiences and in return, how willing the Chinese Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) was to learn from them. I will never forget when Ms. Cheryl Wasserman from the US EPA’s Compliance and Enforcement Bureau even enlisted her husband – who was working at EPA as well—to help record a remote training course on the top 10 characteristics of US environmental enforcement.

Recent U.S. administrations

Climate change is an important example of a new kind of bilateral relationship between China and the US. President Xi and President Obama had jointly issued three climate change-related agreements and set stage for the creation and success of the Paris Agreement and the developments in the arena of international climate change.

Both sides were working towards a common goal despite the differences in their positions and tension-filled negotiation processes. Fortunately, both nations’ leaders participated in person at the last minute and confirmed the US emissions reduction targets and China’s resolution to launch the largest carbon market in the world.

Today, with the changes in China’s societal and economic developments and the political turnover in the US, the collaboration between the countries has entered a new phase that is showing new characteristics.

Exchanges at the governmental level still continue. For example, in May 2017, China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) visited the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) National Enforcement Investigation Center to conduct a survey in preparation for establishing a Chinese national environmental enforcement support agency.

Environmental issues also remain a critical bilateral focal point, as was the case at the U.S.-China Social and Cultural Dialogue concluded in Washington DC in Sept, 2017. In addition, the collaborations between the US states and Chinese provinces are still thriving.

Chinese companies are becoming more active on the global stage. On May 10, 2017, the CEOs from 30 multinational corporations, with EDF's support, issued a joint statement in the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times urging the US government to stay in the Paris Agreement. For the first time in history, a CEO from a Chinese corporation – Mr. Zhang Yue from Broad Group was among them.

In the summer of 2017, California not only renewed  the AB-32 bill that was passed in 2013 to 2030, with the support of EDF, but continued to make efforts to expand its outreach. During California Governor Jerry Brown’s visit in June 2017, he was warmly received by President Xi. Prior to Governor Brown’s visit, he had expressed the interest in discussing with China the possibility of linking California ETS with China’s future national carbon market. EDF has been playing a bridging role in the formation of this initiative, and we hope to continue supporting both sides to fulfill their objectives.

Today

On President Trump’s first visit to China as president, he was accompanied by a trade delegation consisting of 29 U.S. corporate representatives, 11 of which represent energy and environment corporations.

Presidents Trump and Xi signed the US-China collaboration agreement, which includes text regarding energy and environmental protection cooperation – evidence that exchanges and collaboration in the energy and environment sectors are still a primary focus for the two countries’ strategic development.

As a witness and a participant of US-China environmental exchanges, I have personally felt the changes in the interactions between the US and China on environmental protection and from which represents a reflection of the changes in political relations between the two nations. I hope environmental protection will always be a key topic and connection for both sides as we only have one Earth.

Look around the U.S. and you’ll find plenty of examples of smart policy that is driving the adoption of cleaner, more efficient energy resources. In particular, California, New York, and Illinois are all leveraging policy to reduce carbon pollution and transition to a 21st century electric grid. But in addition to those success stories, markets […]

By John Hall

Look around the U.S. and you’ll find plenty of examples of smart policy that is driving the adoption of cleaner, more efficient energy resources. In particular, California, New York, and Illinois are all leveraging policy to reduce carbon pollution and transition to a 21st century electric grid.

But in addition to those success stories, markets also are achieving significant clean energy results – and nowhere is that more evident than here in Texas.

In 2001, the Lone Star State transitioned to a competitive electricity market that (for the most part) puts the cheapest energy resources on the grid first. Since then, wind has grown from supplying less than 1 percent of the state’s electricity to over 20 percent for the first half of 2017. And as cheap natural gas remains plentiful and renewable costs keep falling, expensive coal is getting pushed out of Texas’ market. In fact, wind is expected to overtake coal as soon as next year.

The market

About 90 percent of the state is part of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), which is a self-contained electricity market (many other markets are regional and span across multiple states). As an excellent Vox article by David Roberts recently put it, Texas is “probably the closest thing the country has to a ‘free market’ in electricity. Power is procured entirely through competitive bidding.”

This means the market typically gives preference to the lowest-cost resources first. There are exceptions, though, for emergencies and other abnormal scenarios.

How clean energy is set to overtake coal in this competitive electricity market
Click To Tweet

Coal on its way out

Coal plant closures are the clearest sign of how Texas’ electricity market is working. Running and maintaining coal plants is expensive (without even considering the hidden costs), and the majority of plants were built decades ago. Cheaper options – which often happen to be cleaner – abound.

Recently the state’s largest power generator, Dallas-based Luminant, made a splash when it announced it will close three major coal plant complexes early next year. These plants have a combined seven units that represent over half of the power generator’s total coal capacity, and the state’s grid operator has officially given the green light to close them. Why close them? According to Luminant, the decision is “a result of challenging plant and market economics.”

And it’s not just Luminant that is struggling. Last year, a report from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis looked at seven of Texas’ aging coal plants and “concluded that these plants’ days are numbered simply because they cannot compete.”

The Vox article summarized it well: “The steady decline of coal in Texas has […] everything to do with relentless market discipline.”

Meteoric rise of clean energy

According to Environment Texas, since 2007, Texas has seen a remarkable 21,466 percent increase in the amount of electricity it gets from the sun and a 639 percent increase in wind power production.

As technology is consistently improved and refined, the cost of generating electricity from renewables continues to come down. And global forecasts show economics are on clean energy’s side: The International Energy Agency recently declared, “The era of expensive renewables is over." Moreover, solar and wind basically have zero fuel costs since the sun shines and the wind blows for free.

These favorable economics have helped boost wind and solar in Texas’ market. According to Environment Texas, since 2007, Texas has seen a remarkable 21,466 percent increase in the amount of electricity it gets from the sun and a 639 percent increase in wind power production. There are now more than 10,000 wind turbines in the state.

The transition to a clean energy economy is creating thousands of jobs, slashing pollution, and saving water. It’s also bringing investment to Texas: Big businesses – like Amazon – are investing in Texas wind left and right.

All of these benefits should be enough to move decision-makers, and policy is undeniably crucial to delivering a clean energy future. But if state leaders won’t act, Texas is evidence that a well-designed competitive market can push coal plants to close and clean energy to soar.

This post originally appeared on our Energy Exchange blog.

Small scale fisheries are critically important for the provision of food security, livelihoods, and economic development for billions of people. Most of these fisheries appear to be under-performing with respect to conservation, food production, revenue, and the quality of the livelihoods they can support. Many factors related to successful small-scale fisheries management have been articulated […]