Los Angeles will be off coal by 2025 at the latest

Kristin Eberhard, Legal Director, Western Energy and Climate Projects, Santa Monica
Today the Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) Board unanimously approved its plan to get off of coal by 2025 and replace it with cleaner energy. This is the culmination of years of work and negotiation, and sets the stage for the largest municipal utility in the country to be coal free by 2025 at the latest, but possibly sooner.
LADWP currently has two sources of coal power: Navajo Generating Station in Nevada where LADWP is a 21% owner, and Intermountain Power Project (IPP) in Utah where LADWP purchases approximately 2/3 of the power. California law requires LADWP to stop getting power from these plants when the current contracts end: in 2019 for Navajo, and in 2027 for IPP. LADWP has long planned to get out of Navajo four years early - by 2015. They plan to sell their share in the plant to one of the other co-owners, who will then continue to operate the plant, thus acheiving pollution reductions for LADWP, but not necessarily achieving any pollution reductions from that facility.
Now, the utility has a definitive plan for getting off of coal at IPP early - by 2025 at the latest. This move will achieve significant pollution reductions, as it will shut down the coal plant permanently. Today the board took an important step along that path by voting to approve amending the existing contract with IPP to allow purchase of natural gas power, rather than just coal power, before the contract ends in 2027.
Pending approval by the other 35 smaller utilities (5 in Southern California, and 30 in Utah) who purchase power from IPP, this clears the way for decommissioning the coal plant and building a smaller natural gas plant on the site beginning around 2020.
LADWP plans for a smaller plant because they will first prioritize cleaner resources - energy efficiency and renewables - and build the natural gas plant only as large as necessary to meet power needs and to maintain power on the 500 mile long Direct Current (DC) transmission line that connects the IPP site to Los Angeles. The smaller plant will free up capacity on the transmission line to bring more renewable power into Los Angeles. The line has a capacity of 2,400 MW and currently carries 400 MW of renewable into LA.
Even with conservative assumptions about energy efficiency, the change from coal to natural gas will reduce LADWP's GHG emissions nearly 60% below 1990 levels in 2025.
LADWP's Projected GHG Emissions
Source: LADWP presentation on LA's Clean Energy Future
Of course the definitive date for exit from coal is big news. But a date certain that locks us in to further pollution would not be a win, so the flexibility around timing and sizing are really important components that make this plan a good one.
Flexibility around timing means that LADWP is locked in to getting out of IPP two years earlier than required, but could get out even sooner. The bonds on IPP will not be paid off until 2023, so it is currently unlikely that LADWP and the other utilities would agree to get out before those are paid off. However, the cost of coal compared to natural gas, renewables and efficiency is in flux, and as that information changes over the next few years, the financial calculation could shift towards it being desirable to get out of the plant sooner.
Flexibility around sizing means that LADWP is locked in to reducing the plant size by 1/3, but could choose to reduce it even more before construction starts. The current IPP coal plant produces 1,800 MW of power, and LADWP purchases about 1,200 MW of that power. The new natural gas plant on the site would produce 1,200 MW with LADWP taking about 600 MW of that power. It plans to replace LADWP and the other utilities will make the final analysis of how big the plant should be in 2018. This gives LADWP the opportunity to continue pushing the bounds on their newly-reinvigorated energy efficiency programs, as well as to continue making progress towards the state requirement to get 33% of their power from renewable by 2020. If those two efforts are going well, it is possible that they will decide to make the natural gas plant even smaller.
Now that the Board has approved amending the existing power sales contract, the next steps are:

• Get the other 35 utilities to also approve the amendment (summer 2013)
• Write a new power sales contract from 2027-2077 and get all purchasers to sign (by end of 2013)
• Analyze power system needs and decide on necessary size of plant (2018)
• Get proposals for building a natural gas plant with most recent and efficient technology (2019)
• Get approval for the new plant from the California Energy Commission (2020)
• Begin construction on the new plant (2020)
• New plant comes on-line (2025)

Dr. Pickel, the Los Angeles Ratepayer Advocate also gave a presention on the costs of getting out of coal and agreed that "climate change is a key world problem" and that LADWP and California play a n important role in showing that we can achieve GHG emissions reductions in a cost-effective manner.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/kgrenfell/los_angeles_will_be_off_of

Reviewing the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline: The more we learn, the worse it looks

Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, Director International Program, Washington, D.C.
The State Department released its draft environmental review of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline that would take tar sands from Canada to the US Gulf Coast for export. Past reviews severely underestimated the very serious harm to our climate, health, communities and water from the Keystone XL pipeline and expansion of tar sands extraction and refining. Unfortunately, this draft review is no different. My colleague Anthony Swift has already outlined here, the five necessary ingredients for an environmental review of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. As my colleague Danielle Droitsch writes here, the State Department review misses the mark on all five.
This draft environmental review fails our climate, our communities, our waters and our health. At several key moments over the past months - election night, his Inauguration Address, and the State of the Union, President Obama has responded to widespread public concerns about the need to fight climate change with strong words calling for action. Action to fight climate change must include stopping dirty projects as well as putting clean energy alternatives into place. It is time for the US to draw a line and say no to dirty energy projects starting with the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline.
Yet, this draft review makes the same mistake as earlier reviews of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. It fails to acknowledge that the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline will drive expansion of the tar sands. With alternative pipeline proposals to the west and east coasts stalled due to public opposition and rail such a high cost option, Keystone XL remains the gateway to the higher prices of overseas markets for expensive tar sands. NRDC has analyzed the ways in which the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline will make climate change worse.
What we already know from existing analysis is that the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is not in our national interest. The pipeline means worsening climate change. Piping it through the US heartland would put our ranchers and farmers at risk from difficult to clean up oil spills. And sending it to the Gulf Coast only makes our country a dirty oil gateway to overseas markets. This is a project where multi-national oil companies reap in the benefits while US communities take the risks.
We'll continue taking a hard look at this draft environmental review. And we know that the many people across the US and Canada who are concerned with tar sands expansion and the Keystone XL pipeline project will be weighing in to make their voices heard. A draft environmental review is just the first step in the process to assess this project and to determine if it is in the national interest. During the next step, the public can make its voice known. We are still far from a decision on this project and it would be premature to mistake a draft environmental review for the end of the process.
This post was updated by the author.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/sclefkowitz/reviewing_the_keystone_x

New Video Brings Clean Energy Vision to People

Carl Zichella, Director of Western Energy Transmission, San Francisco
Communicating complex ideas to general audiences about why they should care about what goes on in the acronym-drunk world of the electricity industry is no mean feat, but as a new video released today underscores, this task is incredibly important if we are going to build support for a clean energy vision that can help us fight climate change.
That's also why the Western Clean Energy Advocates' new video about what constitutes a doable and meaningful clean energy vision for the West is so impressive. It clearly and amusingly explains how we can blend demand-side resources like energy efficiency and controlling power demand fluctuations in our Smart Grid, that when combined with large scale renewable energy and transmission upgrades, can displace dirty power in our electricity mix.
Nationwide, electric power plants are responsible for 40 percent of our climate-changing emissions, which is why the Natural Resources Defense Council's groundbreaking proposal, Closing the Power Plant Carbon Pollution Loophole, calls for states and the federal government to partner in setting new carbon pollution standards to cut emissions from existing power plants by 26 percent by 2020.
The video is part of an effort to raise awareness on electric choices being made today. We need to do our part in the West as we look ahead to the $200 billion that will be invested over the next 20 years in electric infrastructure to replace aging facilities and meet growing energy demand in our region. When the Western Clean Energy Advocates group released its "Western Grid 2050" report to much in August 2011 with former Colorado Governor and clean energy champion Bill Ritter spearheading the release, it urged the governors of Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Wyoming, Washington and Utah to adopt its Clean Energy Vision.
Since the report was issued, many of its recommendations ranging from sharing reserve energy for renewable balancing to better forecasting of when renewable energy will be available have been recognized as operational necessities for a more efficient and renewable energy friendly grid. Progress has been made on implementing many of them - such as the limited initial adoption of an Energy Imbalance Market I reported on this week - though we still need to bring them to more widespread use. To do that we need public support to demand that grid operators and regulators take the steps necessary to make it happen.
Coming on the heels of the President's State of the Union address, in which the climate challenge was put squarely back on the national agenda, a tool like this video is a useful tool of persuasion and hope that can show people the ingredients needed to build a clean energy future. Share it with your friends, family, and colleagues. If you are a blogger, blog on it. If you are a Twitterphile, by all means tweet.
It's just a little thing, but where communications are concerned, little things can sometimes make a big difference for our planet's future.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/czichella/new_video_brings_clean_ene

Fight Keystone XL Tar Sands Pollution and Protect the Climate

Rocky Kistner, Communications Associate, Washington, DC
Up in the pristine Canadian boreal forests and freshwater deltas of Alberta, home to caribou, whooping crane and native communities settled long before Europeans arrived, a poisonous sore is being gouged out of the carbon-rich soil, a massive tar sands oil mining operation that could have huge climate impacts for people across the globe.
New information shows that oil industry plans to more than triple production of tar sands oil in the coming decades will include additional dirty petroleum byproducts, making it even harder for Canada to meet its planned greenhouse gas emission targets. Right now there is one major project standing in the way of tar sands expansion-a roadblock that Canadian oil interests are desperate to crash through.
That roadblock is the Obama Administration's decision whether to grant a permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, a $7 billion project that would pump more than 800,000 barrels of toxic tar sands crude each day from Alberta's forests through America's agricultural heartland to refineries in the Gulf, where much of the oil would be processed and exported. The administration is expected to release a supplemental Environmental impact Statement soon, with the final Keystone decision expected in coming months.
You can help stop the tar sands devastation and protect the climate. Watch this video about climate threats posed by the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline and find out how to join the February 17 Forward on Climate Rally in Washington, DC.
Climate scientists warn that further development of fossil fuel energy sources like tar sands oil will spell disaster for the planet's climate, a point made clear in the release of the draft study of the National Climate Assessment this month. "If we fully develop the tar sands resources we will certainly lose control of the climate, we will get to a point where we can no walk back from the cliff," says University of St. Thomas energy expert John Abraham, who has studied the climate impacts of tar sands oil emissions.
That's because tar sands oil is particularly dirty--at least three times as carbon intensive as conventional oil--resulting in a refining process that includes carbon-intensive byproducts like petroleum coke-or petcoke-that can be burned like coal in refineries at the receiving end of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline in Texas. According to a new report released by Oil Change International, petcoke burned from tar sands oil would equal the climate pollution of five additional coal fired power plants, boosting overall carbon emissions from the Keystone XL pipeline by 13 percent. Oil Change International research director Lorne Stockman describes it this way:

"The refineries at the end of the Keystone XL pipeline are some of the biggest petcoke factories in the world today. By supplying them with tar sands bitumen, the petcoke embedded in the tar sands would find its way to the world market...petcoke from the tar sands is making coal fired generation dirtier and cheaper and this puts another nail in the coffin of any rational argument for further exploitation of the tar sands."

Oil industry supporters claim that if the Keystone XL pipeline is not built, tar sands oil will find its way to other markets through future North American pipelines built to the east or west coasts. But many researchers say those projects are mere pipedreams, since the tar sands industry faces major opposition from local communities on the east and west coasts, where residents are worried about tar sands oil spills and other environmental impacts. The Pembina Institute's Nathan Lemphers worked on a new comprehensive report that lays out the facts surrounding tar sands expansion and the Keystone XL pipeline, which he says is a crucial lynchpin in the development of the tar sands:

The Keystone XL pipeline is critical for further expansion of the oil sands. Major financial institutions in Canada have said that the lack of pipeline capacity is a rate limiting step for the oil sands...if it's (Keystone XL) not build, it'll start to moderate the growth of the oil sands and it will send a clear signal to the financial community and the oil sands community that they need to address the carbon emissions that come from the oil sands.

Tar sands processing plant in Alberta Photo: David Dodge, The Pembina Institute
But growing opposition to the Canadian tar sands is not just a not-in-my-backyard concern--everyone is hurt by higher emissions from the dirtiest oil on the planet. The scientific community is especially concerned about rapidly melting Arctic ice, rising sea levels and extreme weather events associated with climate change that we are already witnessing. In December, some of the country's top climate scientists sent President Obama a letter urging his administration to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, citing last year's recent record-setting temperatures and storms as evidence that we need bold action to cut global fossil fuel emissions.
Earlier in January, 70 groups wrote President Obama urging him to take bold and decisive action to help protect the nation against climate change's ravages. Danny Harvey, an energy and climate expert at the University of Toronto, said it best in our video: "Right now President Obama faces a critical choice. There's no better time to say no to further expansion, say no to business as usual, and to begin the process of turning things around."
On February 17, join people from all walks of life, from climate scientists to ranchers and farmers, who will gather in Washington, DC, to call for strong action to fight climate change. The Forward on Climate Rally will point the way for Obama to shape his climate legacy. One of the most important decisions he can make is to reject the Keystone pipeline and to tell the EPA to set carbon standards for power plants.
We the people have the power to demand action from our political leaders, to tell the lobbyists and oil industry fat cats that we're tired of their business-as-usual dirty energy campaigns. We want clean energy solutions that create new technologies and long-term job opportunities, including money-saving projects like NRDC's innovative plan to cut coal-fired power plant pollution.These are the kinds of investments that will build a more sustainable planet for all who inherit the Earth.
That's certainly worth fighting for. Because if we don't, who will?
For more information on how to sign up and participate in the February 17th march, check out the Forward on Climate Rally site.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/rkistner/up_in_the_pristine_boreal.h

Fight Keystone XL Tar Sands Pollution and Protect the Climate

Rocky Kistner, Communications Associate, Washington, DC
Up in the pristine Canadian boreal forests and freshwater deltas of Alberta, home to caribou, whooping crane and native communities settled long before Europeans arrived, a poisonous sore is being gouged out of the carbon-rich soil, a massive tar sands oil mining operation that could have huge climate impacts for people across the globe.
New information shows that oil industry plans to more than triple production of tar sands oil in the coming decades will include additional dirty petroleum byproducts, making it even harder for Canada to meet its planned greenhouse gas emission targets. Right now there is one major project standing in the way of tar sands expansion-a roadblock that Canadian oil interests are desperate to crash through.
That roadblock is the Obama Administration's decision whether to grant a permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, a $7 billion project that would pump more than 800,000 barrels of toxic tar sands crude each day from Alberta's forests through America's agricultural heartland to refineries in the Gulf, where much of the oil would be processed and exported. The administration is expected to release a supplemental Environmental impact Statement soon, with the final Keystone decision expected in coming months.
You can help stop the tar sands devastation and protect the climate. Watch this video about climate threats posed by the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline and find out how to join the February 17 Forward on Climate Rally in Washington, DC.
Climate scientists warn that further development of fossil fuel energy sources like tar sands oil will spell disaster for the planet's climate, a point made clear in the release of the draft study of the National Climate Assessment this month. "If we fully develop the tar sands resources we will certainly lose control of the climate, we will get to a point where we can no walk back from the cliff," says University of St. Thomas energy expert John Abraham, who has studied the climate impacts of tar sands oil emissions.
That's because tar sands oil is particularly dirty--at least three times as carbon intensive as conventional oil--resulting in a refining process that includes carbon-intensive byproducts like petroleum coke-or petcoke-that can be burned like coal in refineries at the receiving end of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline in Texas. According to a new report released by Oil Change International, petcoke burned from tar sands oil would equal the climate pollution of five additional coal fired power plants, boosting overall carbon emissions from the Keystone XL pipeline by 13 percent. Oil Change International research director Lorne Stockman describes it this way:

"The refineries at the end of the Keystone XL pipeline are some of the biggest petcoke factories in the world today. By supplying them with tar sands bitumen, the petcoke embedded in the tar sands would find its way to the world market...petcoke from the tar sands is making coal fired generation dirtier and cheaper and this puts another nail in the coffin of any rational argument for further exploitation of the tar sands."

Oil industry supporters claim that if the Keystone XL pipeline is not built, tar sands oil will find its way to other markets through future North American pipelines built to the east or west coasts. But many researchers say those projects are mere pipedreams, since the tar sands industry faces major opposition from local communities on the east and west coasts, where residents are worried about tar sands oil spills and other environmental impacts. The Pembina Institute's Nathan Lemphers worked on a new comprehensive report that lays out the facts surrounding tar sands expansion and the Keystone XL pipeline, which he says is a crucial lynchpin in the development of the tar sands:

The Keystone XL pipeline is critical for further expansion of the oil sands. Major financial institutions in Canada have said that the lack of pipeline capacity is a rate limiting step for the oil sands...if it's (Keystone XL) not build, it'll start to moderate the growth of the oil sands and it will send a clear signal to the financial community and the oil sands community that they need to address the carbon emissions that come from the oil sands.

Tar sands processing plant in Alberta Photo: David Dodge, The Pembina Institute
But growing opposition to the Canadian tar sands is not just a not-in-my-backyard concern--everyone is hurt by higher emissions from the dirtiest oil on the planet. The scientific community is especially concerned about rapidly melting Arctic ice, rising sea levels and extreme weather events associated with climate change that we are already witnessing. In December, some of the country's top climate scientists sent President Obama a letter urging his administration to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, citing last year's recent record-setting temperatures and storms as evidence that we need bold action to cut global fossil fuel emissions.
Earlier in January, 70 groups wrote President Obama urging him to take bold and decisive action to help protect the nation against climate change's ravages. Danny Harvey, an energy and climate expert at the University of Toronto, said it best in our video: "Right now President Obama faces a critical choice. There's no better time to say no to further expansion, say no to business as usual, and to begin the process of turning things around."
On February 17, join people from all walks of life, from climate scientists to ranchers and farmers, who will gather in Washington, DC, to call for strong action to fight climate change. The Forward on Climate Rally will point the way for Obama to shape his climate legacy. One of the most important decisions he can make is to reject the Keystone pipeline and to tell the EPA to set carbon standards for power plants.
We the people have the power to demand action from our political leaders, to tell the lobbyists and oil industry fat cats that we're tired of their business-as-usual dirty energy campaigns. We want clean energy solutions that create new technologies and long-term job opportunities, including money-saving projects like NRDC's innovative plan to cut coal-fired power plant pollution.These are the kinds of investments that will build a more sustainable planet for all who inherit the Earth.
That's certainly worth fighting for. Because if we don't, who will?
For more information on how to sign up and participate in the February 17th march, check out the Forward on Climate Rally site.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/rkistner/up_in_the_pristine_boreal.h

Roadmap to New Clean Energy and Climate Initiatives in Governor Cuomo's 2013 State of the State

Kit Kennedy, Counsel, Air and Energy Program, New York
This afternoon Governor Cuomo announced a bold set of expanded clean tech, clean energy and climate mitigation initiatives in response to Superstorm Sandy as one of the cornerstones of his State of the State speech. The text of his speech weighs in at a hefty 285 pages. For those who don't have time to dive in, NRDC has highlighted the key new programs on clean energy, climate mitigation and climate resilience in his speech here.
These include: a new green bank to leverage private financing to advance renewable energy; lowering the cap on power plant greenhouse gas emissions in New York; extending New York's solar power program; and restoring natural systems like dunes and wetlands to protect against future climate-related extreme weather events.
And for those who want even more details, here's a fuller guide focused on the clean energy and climate mitigation initiatives announced today.
Green Bank
As the Governor Cuomo said this afternoon, the States are engaged in a foot race toward the clean energy future - and whichever State gets there first will get the prize. The boldest initiative announced today is a new $1 billion New York green bank to leverage public dollars with a private-sector match to spur the clean economy. This exciting new initiative will advance New York's advantage in the clean energy race. My colleague Doug Sims - who has been one of NRDC's key thought leaders on clean energy finance - provides the details here. (And Doug's primer on green banks clean energy finance is even cited at footnote 24 of the Governor's speech!).
New Cabinet-Level Energy Czar
In another major positive change, the Governor announced that Richard Kauffman, a seasoned energy and clean-energy finance who has served as a top advisor to U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, will serve as New York's new energy czar. Kauffman is the right person at the right time to execute New York's new climate resilience and mitigation strategies, including leading the launch of the Green Bank and pulling together New York's diverse clean energy programs.
Reducing Power Plant Greenhouse Gas Pollution in New York State
In his speech, the Governor stressed again that climate change is real and that the time to act is now. Acting on recommendations from the NYS 2100 Commission, the Governor announced that New York will be lowering the limits on greenhouse gas pollution from New York Power plants as part of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. As the Governor explained, reducing the State's greenhouse gas pollution cap will provide an additional $100 to 150 million for New York State to invest in repowering existing inefficient power plants to reduce carbon emissions and assisting communities that lose a big part of their tax base when coal-fired power plants are retired. In the wake of the suffering inflicted by Superstorm Sandy, this announcement - which could help to forestall the frequency and severity of other future extreme weather events-- couldn't be more timely.
Solar Power
The Governor announced a ten-year extension of New York's solar energy program - the New York Sun program -at a level of $150 million a year. This will allow many thousands more New Yorkers to install solar panels on their roofs, lowering their bills and generating their own clean power. It will bring us closer to the attainable goal of getting 2,000 MW of power from solar energy by 2020. As the Governor explained, extending New York Sun will "attract significant private investment in solar photovoltaic systems, enable the sustainable development of a robust solar power industry in New York, create well-paying skilled jobs, improve the reliability of the electric grid, and reduce air pollution." We also hope that the New York legislature will move forward to make this important program the law. My colleague Pierre Bull provides details here.
Electric Cars
Moving forward with the deployment of both renewable energy and electric cars is important for New York to move beyond dirty fossil fuels. Today the Governor announced new initiatives to scale up electric cars in New York, from building a statewide network of 3,000 public and workplace charging stations, to funding primarily from investor-owned utilities for incentives for electric car deployment to reforming regulations at the State and local level to facilitate electric car charging and remove other barriers to electric cars. My colleague Luke Tonachel has explained why 2013 could be a key year for fuel efficiency and electric cars, and today's announcement could add to the progress.
Clean On-Site Power, Smart Grid and Building Code Resilience Improvements
The Governor also mentioned a number of initiatives to move the State forward on clean "on-site" distributed generation, "smart grid" improvements and improving the resilience of New York's building code. As I have explained, these kinds of programs can help make New York's electricity system more resilient - to help keep the power on in times of high stress such as hurricanes or heat waves and to help restore power more quickly when it goes down. The NYS Ready Commission - on which I serve - is expected to deliver more detailed recommendations on these issues in the future.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/kkennedy/roadmap_to_new_clean_energy

Latest Shell Debacle in Alaska Part of a Larger Pattern of Risk and Failure

Frances Beinecke, President of NRDC, New York City
Shell Oil's string of failures in its Arctic Ocean drilling attempts continued into the New Year. One of the company's drill rigs ran aground near Alaska's Kodiak Island with 150,000 gallons of diesel fuel and other petroleum products onboard. In the face of a winter storm, all four of its tow vessel's engines failed. Then the tow line failed, and repeated efforts to re-attach lines and tow the rig clear of danger failed as well.
One storm thwarted Shell's plans to haul its rig to Seattle for maintenance. Yet the North is a region of storms. It is home to churning seas, punishing winds, frigid temperatures, and months of prolonged darkness. The oil giant's failure to prepare for and cope with plausible weather conditions and the resulting threats to human life and the environment make it vividly clear: Shell has no business trying to drill in the Arctic Ocean.

Shell's drill rig, the Kulluk, ran aground New Year's Eve. Photo credit: U.S. Coast Guard Petty Officer 3rd Class Jonathan Klingenberg.
The dangers don't end in the Arctic. This drill rig debacle occurred 1,000 miles from Shell's drill site. The challenges and risks of Arctic drilling extend through the entire 2,000-mile delivery route to Seattle shipyards. And they leave countless coastal communities and marine ecosystems vulnerable to accidents like this one in Kodiak.
Shell has poured billions of dollars into offshore Arctic drilling, but no matter how much it spends, it cannot make the effort anything but a terrifying gamble. And if Shell, the most profitable company on Earth, can't buy its way to safety in Alaska, nobody can.
The grounding of Shell's drilling rig is not an isolated incident. It is part of a larger pattern in which Shell has proven no match for the elements. NRDC and our partners are calling for an immediate suspension to drilling activities in the Arctic Ocean based on this record of failure.
In July, one of Shell's drill ships slipped anchor and nearly ran aground in the Aleutian Islands on its way to a drill site in the Chukchi Sea. That same month, Shell conceded that it would not, as the government understood, collect 90 percent of any oil spill, but only "encounter" that much of it.
Through August, Shell had to keep its spill response barge the Arctic Challenger in Bellingham, Washington because it was plagued with so many problems. The barge is a linchpin in Shell's emergency plan, designed to be stationed between Shell's two drilling sites always at the ready. Yet the Coast Guard wouldn't certify it as seaworthy until the company dealt with 400 issues, including wiring and other safety shortcomings.
Then, when Shell started preliminary drilling without the spill response barge, within 24 hours its rig the Noble Discoverer had to flee from a 30-mile long iceberg that bore down on the drill site.
In September, Shell's containment dome-used to capture oil in the event of spill-was "crushed like a beer can" during pre-deployment testing. If this critical piece of spill response equipment couldn't function in the mild environs of the Bellingham harbor, imagine what could happen in the rough seas of the Arctic.
Shell's subsequent retreat from the Arctic was marred by punishing weather and problems evacuating drilling crews, disconnecting cables to the seabed, and refueling. Then the Coast Guard detained the Noble Discoverer for safety and pollution violations, after it limped into harbor with propulsion difficulties on its way south.
These are just some of the failures Shell has created as it tries to open our Arctic Ocean to oil development. The region can't afford any more of these kinds of mishaps. It's time to stop endangering the world's last wild ocean-and all the communities and marine life it supports. This video, narrated by Robert Redford, reveals some of the other wonders put at risk by Shell's Arctic drilling plans:
We must not sacrifice one of our remaining untamed places in reckless pursuit of oil. We know we have to leave oil in the ground or destructive climate change will become unstoppable. If not in the pristine and vulnerable Arctic Ocean, then where?
We don't need to endanger this wild region when we have better options. The new clean car standards issued in 2012 alone will double the fuel efficiency of America's car fleet and cut our need to import oil by one-third. We can power our economy without despoiling our wild places. Click here to tell the Obama Administration to stop Shell's reckless Arctic offshore scheme.

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/fbeinecke/latest_shell_debacle_in_ar