World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Fossil-fuel phase-out

Article Id: WHEBN0012686181
Reproduction Date:

Title: Fossil-fuel phase-out  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Sustainable energy, Carbon-neutral fuel, Climate change mitigation, Hydroelectricity, Extinction risk from global warming
Collection: Climate Change Mitigation, Emissions Reduction, Energy Policy
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia

Fossil-fuel phase-out

The Farmington coal mine disaster kills 78. West Virginia, US, 1968.
Deepwater Horizon oil spill discharges 4.9 million barrels. (2010)

Fossil fuel phase-out is the proposed energy transition beyond fossil fuels through multiple means, including transport electrification, decommissioning of operating fossil fuel-fired power plants and prevention of the construction of new fossil-fuel-fired power stations. Its purpose is to reduce air pollution, mining tragedies, and greenhouse gas emissions which cause climate change.[1] A move to the many forms of renewable energy is involved in shifting away from fossil fuels.


  • Problems of fossil fuels 1
  • Studies about fossil-fuel phase-out 2
  • Coal 3
  • Legislation and initiatives to phase out coal 4
    • G20 4.1
    • Australia 4.2
    • Canada 4.3
      • Ontario 4.3.1
    • China 4.4
    • India 4.5
    • Germany 4.6
    • New Zealand 4.7
    • South Africa 4.8
    • United Kingdom 4.9
    • United States 4.10
      • California 4.10.1
      • Maine 4.10.2
      • Texas 4.10.3
      • Washington state 4.10.4
      • Utility action in the US 4.10.5
  • Public support for a coal moratorium 5
    • Opinion polls 5.1
      • Opinion Research 5.1.1
      • Gallup 5.1.2
      • ABC News/Washington Post 5.1.3
    • CLEAN call to action 5.2
    • Environmental Defense Fund 5.3
    • Other groups supporting a coal moratorium 5.4
    • Shareholder resolutions in favor of a coal moratorium 5.5
    • Prominent individuals supporting a coal moratorium 5.6
    • Prominent individuals supporting a coal phase-out 5.7
    • Mayors supporting a coal moratorium 5.8
    • Local governments supporting a coal moratorium 5.9
  • Move toward renewable energy 6
    • Toward hydroelectricity 6.1
    • Toward wind power 6.2
    • Toward solar 6.3
      • Solar photovoltaics 6.3.1
      • Concentrated solar power 6.3.2
    • Carbon-neutral and negative fuels 6.4
    • Toward biofuels 6.5
    • Toward Biomass 6.6
  • See also 7
  • References 8
  • External links 9

Problems of fossil fuels

Using computer modeling he developed over 20 years, Mark Z. Jacobson has found that carbonaceous fuel soot emissions (which lead to respiratory illness, heart disease and asthma) have resulted in 1.5 million premature deaths each year, mostly in the developing world where the non-fossil fuels wood and animal dung are used for cooking. Jacobson has also said that soot from diesel engines, coal-fired power plants and burning wood is a "bigger cause of global warming than previously thought, and is the major cause of the rapid melting of the Arctic's sea ice".[2]

In 2011, new evidence has emerged that there are considerable risks associated with traditional energy sources, and that major changes to the mix of energy technologies is needed:

Studies about fossil-fuel phase-out

In 2008, James E. Hansen and eight other scientists published the 38-page journal article "Target Atmospheric CO2: Where Should Humanity Aim?" which called for phasing out coal power completely by the year 2030.[5]

More recently Dr Hansen, considered the father of climate change [6] has stated that continued opposition to nuclear power threatens humanity's ability to avoid dangerous climate change.[7] The letter, co-authored with other climate change experts declared "If we stay on the current path," he said, "those are the consequences we'll be leaving to our children. The best candidate to avoid that is nuclear power. It's ready now. We need to take advantage of it." and "Continued opposition to nuclear power threatens humanity's ability to avoid dangerous climate change."

Also in 2008, Pushker Kharecha and James E. Hansen published a peer-reviewed scientific study analyzing the effect of a coal phase-out on atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) levels.[8] Their baseline mitigation scenario was a phaseout of global coal emissions by 2050. The authors describe the scenario as follows:

Kharecha and Hansen also consider three other mitigation scenarios, all with the same coal phase-out schedule but each making different assumptions about the size of oil and gas reserves and the speed at which they are depleted. Under the Business as Usual scenario, atmospheric CO2 peaks at 563 parts per million (ppm) in the year 2100. Under the four coal phase-out scenarios, atmospheric CO2 peaks at 422-446 ppm between 2045 and 2060 and declines thereafter. The key implications of the study are as follows: a phase-out of coal emissions is the most important remedy for mitigating human-induced global warming; actions should be taken toward limiting or stretching out the use of conventional oil and gas; and strict emissions-based constraints are needed for future use of unconventional fossil fuels such as methane hydrates and tar sands.

In the Greenpeace and EREC's Energy (R)evolution scenario,[9] the world would eliminate all fossil fuel use by 2090.[10][11][12]


Coal consumption trends 1980–2012 in the top five coal-consuming countries (US EIA)
Coal-fired power plants provide 45% of consumed electricity in the United States.[13] This is the Castle Gate Plant near Helper, Utah.

Coal is one of the largest sources of energy, supplying 27 percent of the world's primary energy in 2006.[14] Coal also accounts for up to one-third of global carbon emissions. To decrease carbon emissions and thus possibly stop extreme climate change, some have called for coal to be phased out.[15][16] Climatologist James E. Hansen said "We need a moratorium on coal now...with phase-out of existing plants over the next two decades."[17]

Some nations have decreased their coal consumption thus far in the 21st century, the greatest reductions being in the United States (coal consumption reduced by 176 million metric tons per year over the period 2000-2012), Canada (reduced by 21 million tons per year) and Spain (20 million tons per year). Other nations have increased their coal consumption in the same period, led by China (increased 2,263 million metric tons per year in the period 2000-2012), India (increased 367 million tons per year), and South Korea (59 million tons per year). Worldwide, coal consumption increased 60% during the period 2000-2012.[18] As of 2012, 1200 new coal power plants were reportedly being planned worldwide, most of them in China and India.[19]

In the 2011-2013 period, the OCED group of Western European countries has increased the use of coal, attributed largely to the low cost of coal and the high price of imported natural gas in Western Europe.[20]

According to Scientific American, the average coal plant emits more than 100 times as much radiation per year than does a comparatively sized nuclear power plant, in the form of fly ash.[21]

Some believe that coal should not be phased out, considering that longer-term global economic growth cannot be achieved without adequate and affordable energy supplies, which will require continuing significant contributions from fossil fuels including coal. In this viewpoint, clean coal technology could reduce greenhouse gas emissions compatible with a low-emissions future.[22] Some environmentalists and climatologists support a phase-out and criticise clean coal as not a solution to climate change.[23] Entrepreneurs promote improved regulations and modernised technology.

Legislation and initiatives to phase out coal


The 20 leaders of the world's top industrialized nations, as well as key countries with developing economies, have agreed to phase out their subsidies for International Energy Agency estimate that eliminating fossil fuel subsidies worldwide would cut global greenhouse gas emissions by 10% or more by 2050.[24][25][26]

Despite such pledges, a 2012 report by Oil Change International which analyzed 2011 spending by the world's wealthy nations found five times as much being spent on fossil fuel subsidies than climate aid: $58 billion was spent in fossil fuel subsidies that year, as compared with $11 billion spent by such nations towards climate adaptation and mitigation in developing countries, with figures for the U.S. at $13 billion in fossil fuel subsidies versus $2.5 billion in climate aid for 2011.[27]


The Australian Greens party have proposed to phase out coal power stations. The NSW Greens proposed an immediate moratorium on coal-fired power stations and want to end all coal mining and coal industry subsidies. The Federal Government's proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, an emissions trading scheme will, if enacted, make it more difficult for new coal-fired power stations to be developed. The Australian Greens and the Australian Labor Party also oppose nuclear power, a proven viable base load power alternative. The Federal Government and Victorian State Government want to modify existing coal-fired power stations into clean coal power stations. The Federal Labor government extended the mandatory renewable energy targets, an initiative to ensure that new sources of electricity are more likely to be from wind power, solar power and other sources of renewable energy in Australia.

Australia is one of the largest consumers of coal per capita, and also the largest exporter. The proposals are strongly opposed by industry, unions[28] and the main Opposition Party in Parliament (now forming the party in government after the September 2013 election).



Ontario has passed coal phase-out legislation.[29] Ontario had run large coal power plants to supplement nuclear power. Nanticoke Generating Station was a major source of air pollution, and Ontario suffered "smog days" during the summer. In 2007, Ontario's Liberal government committed to phasing out all coal generation in the province by 2014. Premier Dalton McGuinty said, "By 2030 there will be about 1,000 more new coal-fired generating stations built on this planet. There is only one place in the world that is phasing out coal-fired generation and we're doing that right here in Ontario."[30] The Ontario Power Authority projects that in 2014, with no coal generation, the largest sources of electrical power in the province will be nuclear (57 percent), hydroelectricity (25 percent), and natural gas (11 percent).[31]


There are currently no plans to phase out coal burning power stations in the People's Republic of China on the national level. In fact, it's quite the reverse.

China’s exceedingly high energy demand has pushed the demand for relatively cheap coal-fired power. Each week, another 2GW of coal-fired power is put online in China. Coal supplies about 80% of China's energy needs today, and that ratio is expected to continue, even as overall power usage grows rapidly. Serious air quality deterioration has resulted from the massive use of coal and many Chinese cities suffer severe smog events.

As a consequence the region of Beijing has decided to phase out all its coal-fired power generation by the end of 2015. [32]

In addition to the huge investments in coal power, China is also building large nuclear power plants. The largest hydro power plant in the world, the Three Gorges Dam, is also the largest power plant of any kind, and it operates in China.


India is in no way phasing out coal or fossil fuels in general. The annual report of India's Power Ministry has a plan to grow power by about 80GW as part of their 11th 5-year plan, and 79% of that growth will be in fossil-fuel–fired power plants, primarily coal.[33] India plans four new "ultra mega" coal-fired power plants as part of that growth, each 4000MW in capacity.


In 2007, Germany announced plans to phase out hard coal-industry subsidies by 2018, a move which is expected to end hard coal mining in Germany.[34][35][36][37][38] Solar and wind are major sources of energy and renewable energy generation, currently (December 2013) around 15%,[39] and growing. Coal is still a major source of power in Germany, but is gradually being replaced by renewable energy.

In 2007 German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her party agreed to legislation to phase out Germany's hard coal mining sector. That does not mean that they support phasing out coal in general. There were plans to build about 25 new plants in the coming years. Most German coal power plants were built in the 1960s, and have a low energy efficiency. Public sentiment against coal power plants is growing and the construction or planning of most of those plants have been stopped.[34][35][36][37][38]

New Zealand

In October 2007 the Clark Labour government introduced a 10-year moratorium on new fossil fuel thermal power generation.[40] The ban was limited to state-owned utilities, though an extension to private sector was considered. The Key National government elected in November 2008 repealed this legislation.

South Africa

South Africa's power sector is currently the 8th highest global emitter of CO2.[41] Around 77% of South Africa's energy demand is directly met by coal,[42] and when current projects come online, this ratio will increase in the near term.

There are no plans to phase out coal-fired power plants in South Africa, and indeed, the country is investing in building massive amounts of new coal-fired capacity to meet power demands, as well as modernizing the existing coal-fired plants to meet environmental requirements.

On April 6, 2010, the World Bank approved a $3.75B loan to SA to support the construction of the world's 4th largest coal-fired plant, at Medupi.[43] The proposed World Bank loan includes a relatively small amount - $260 million - for wind and solar power.

Rated at 4800MW, Medupi would join other mammoth coal-fired power plants already in operation in the country, namely Kendal (4100MW), Majuba (4100), and Matimba (4000), as well as a similar-capacity Kusile, at 4800MW, currently under construction. Kusile is expected to come online in stages, starting in 2012, while Medupi is expected to first come online in 2013, with full capacity available by 2017. These schedules are provisional, and may change.

Some estimate that after Kusile and Medupi come online, South Africa will then derive 94% of its domestic energy from coal.

United Kingdom

Ed Miliband announced that no new coal-fired power stations will be built in Britain from 2009 onwards unless they capture and bury at least 25% of greenhouse gases immediately and 100% by 2025 although at the time this was a statement of intent rather than something he was able to enforce.[44]

Chris Huhne has confirmed that the legislation required to allow his office to enforce emissions standards are proceeding.[45]

The UK is also subject to the EU's Large Combustion Plant Directive covering non-CO2 emissions which is expected to bring many older plants to a close over the next few years as they are too expensive to upgrade.[46]

United States

Estimated effect of a carbon tax on sources of United States electrical generation (US Energy Information Administration)
Total energy consumption in the US by source: comparing fossil fuels with nuclear and renewable energy.
US electrical generation: fossil fuels vs. nuclear and renewable energy

In 2007, 154 new coal-fired plants were on the drawing board in 42 states.[47] By 2012, that had dropped to 15, mostly due to new rules limiting mercury emissions, and limiting carbon emissions to 1,000 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour of electricity produced.[48]

In July 2013, US Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz outlined Obama administration policy on fossil fuels:

Then-US Energy Secretary Stephen Chu and researchers for the US National Renewable Energy Laboratory have noted that greater electrical generation by non-dispachable renewables, such as wind and solar, will also increase the need for flexible natural gas-powered generators, to supply electricity during those times when solar and wind power are unavailable.[50][51] Gas-powered generators have the ability to ramp up and down quickly to meet changing loads.[52]

In the US, many of the fossil fuel phase-out initiatives have taken place at the state or local levels.

California electricity generation by source, 2010 (data from US EIA)
Sources of electricity generated in Maine. 2010 (US EIA)
Sources of electricity generated in Texas, 2010 (US EIA)
Sources of electricity generation in Washington state, 2010 (US EIA)


California's SB 1368 created the first governmental moratorium on new coal plants in the United States. The law was signed in September 2006 by Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,[53] took effect for investor-owned utilities in January 2007, and took effect for publicly owned utilities in August 2007. SB 1368 applied to long-term investments (five years or more) by California utilities, whether in-state or out-of-state. It set the standard for greenhouse gas emissions at 1,100 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour, equal to the emissions of a combined-cycle natural gas plant. This standard created a de facto moratorium on new coal, since it could not be met without carbon capture and sequestration.[54]


On April 15, 2008, Maine Governor John E. Baldacci signed LD 2126, "An Act To Minimize Carbon Dioxide Emissions from New Coal-Powered Industrial and Electrical Generating Facilities in the State." The law, which was sponsored by Rep. W. Bruce MacDonald (D-Boothbay), requires the Board of Environmental Protection to develop greenhouse gas emission standards for coal gasification facilities. It also puts a moratorium in place on building any new coal gasification facilities until the standards are developed.[55]


In 2006 a coalition of Austin on February 11 and 12th, 2007.[56] Over 40 citizen groups supported the mobilization.[57]

In January, 2007, A resolution calling for a 180-day moratorium on new pulverized coal plants was filed in the Texas Legislature on Wednesday by State Rep. Charles "Doc" Anderson (R-Waco) as House Concurrent Resolution 43.[58] The resolution was left pending in committee.[59] On December 4, 2007, Rep. Anderson announced his support for two proposed integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) coal plants proposed by Luminant (formerly TXU).[60]

Washington state

Washington has followed the same approach as California, prohibiting coal plants whose emissions would exceed those of natural gas plants. Substitute Senate Bill 6001 (SSB 6001), signed on May 3, 2007, by Governor Christine Gregoire, enacted the standard.[61] As a result of SSB 6001, the Pacific Mountain Energy Center in Kalama was rejected by the state. However, a new plant proposal, the Wallula Energy Resource Center, shows the limits of the "natural gas equivalency" approach as a means of prohibiting new coal plants. The proposed plant would meet the standard set by SSB 6001 by capturing and sequestering a portion (65 percent, according to a plant spokesman) of its carbon.[61]

Utility action in the US

  • Progress Energy Carolinas[62] announced on June 1, 2007, that it was beginning a two-year moratorium on proposals for new coal-fired power plants while it undertook more aggressive efficiency and conservation programs. The company added, "Additional reductions in future electricity demand growth through energy efficiency could push the need for new power plants farther into the future."[63]
  • Public Service of Colorado[64] concluded in its November 2007 Resource Plan: "In sum, in light of the now likely regulation of CO2 emissions in the future due to broader interest in climate change issues, the increased costs of constructing new coal facilities, and the increased risk of timely permitting to meet planned in-service dates, Public Service does not believe it would not be prudent to consider at this time any proposals for new coal plants that do not include CO2 capture and sequestration.[65]
  • Xcel Energy noted in its 2007 Resource Plan that "given the likelihood of future carbon regulation, we have only modeled a future coal-based resource option that includes carbon capture and storage."[65]
  • Minnesota Power Company[66] announced in December 2007 that it would not consider a new coal resource without a carbon solution.[65]
  • Avista Utilities[67] announced that it does not anticipate pursuing coal-fired power plants in the foreseeable future.[65]
  • NorthWestern Energy[68] announced on December 17, 2007, that it planned to double its wind power capacity over the next seven years and steer away from new baseload coal plants. The plans are detailed in the company's 2007 Montana Electric Supply Resource Plan.[69]
  • California Energy Commission (CEC) has initiated its review of two 53.4-megawatt solar thermal power plants that will each include a 40-megawatt biomass power plant to supplement the solar power.[70]

Public support for a coal moratorium

Opinion polls

Opinion Research

In October, 2007, Civil Society Institute released the results of a poll of 1,003 U.S. citizens conducted by Opinion Research Corporation.

The authors of the poll reported: "75 percent of Americans –-including 65 percent of Republicans, 83 percent of Democrats and 76 percent of Independents—would 'support a five-year moratorium on new coal-fired power plants in the United States if there was stepped-up investment in clean, safe renewable energy—such as wind and solar—and improved home energy-efficiency standards.' Women (80 percent) were more likely than men (70 percent) to support this idea. Support also was higher among college graduates (78 percent) than among those who did not graduate from high school (68 percent).[71]

The exact question posed by the survey was as follows: More than half of power plant-generated electricity comes from coal. Experts say that power plants are responsible for about 40 percent of U.S. carbon dioxide pollution linked to global warming. There are plans to build more than 150 new coal-fired power plants over the next several years. Would you support a five-year moratorium on new coal-fired power plants in the United States if there was stepped-up investment in clean, safe and renewable energy –such as wind and solar –and improved home energy-efficiency standards? Would you say definitely yes, probably yes, probably no, definitely no, or don't know.

The results were as follows:[72]

  • 30% "definitely yes"
  • 45% "probably yes"
  • 13% "probably no"
  • 8% "definitely no"
  • 4% "don't know"


In 2013, the Gallup organization determined that 41% of Americans wanted less emphasis placed on coal energy, versus 31% who wanted more. Large majorities wanted more emphasis placed on solar (76%), wind (71%), and natural gas (65%).[73]

ABC News/Washington Post

A 2009 ABC/Washington Post poll found 52% of Americans favored more coal mining (33% strongly favored), while 45% opposed (27% strongly opposed). The most support was for wind and solar, which were favored by 91% (79% strongly favored).[74]

CLEAN call to action

In October, 2007, fifteen groups led by Citizens Lead for Energy Action Now (CLEAN) called for a five-year moratorium on new coal-fired power plants, with no exception for plants sequestering carbon. The groups included Save Our Cumberland Mountains (Tennessee); Ohio Valley Environmental Council (West Virginia); Cook Inlet Keeper (Alaska); Christians for the Mountains (West Virginia); Coal River Mountain Watch (West Virginia); Kentuckians for the Commonwealth (Kentucky); Civil Society Institute (Massachusetts); Clean Power Now (Massachusetts); Indigenous Environmental Network (Minnesota); Castle Mountain Coalition (Alaska); Citizens Action Coalition (Indiana); Appalachian Center for the Economy & the Environment (West Virginia); Appalachian Voices (NC); and Rhode Island Wind Alliance (Rhode Island).[75]

Environmental Defense Fund

The US-based

  • US greens say coal must go - BBC News
  • Germany resolves to use 100 percent renewable energy
  • Tipping point: Perspective of a climatologist. in State of the Wild 2008–2009: A Global Portrait of Wildlife, Wildlands, and Oceans. W. Woods, Ed. Wildlife Conservation Society/Island Press, pp. 6–15.

External links

  1. ^ IPCC. (2007) "Climate change 2007: the physical science basis (summary for policy makers)"
  2. ^ David Perlman. Scientists say soot a key factor in warming San Francisco Chronicle, July 28, 2010.
  3. ^ " Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power"
  4. ^ Cost of electricity by source
  5. ^ Hansen, J., Mki. Sato, P. Kharecha, D. Beerling, R. Berner, V. Masson-Delmotte, M. Pagani, M. Raymo, D.L. Royer, and J.C. Zachos (2008). : Where Should Humanity Aim?"2"Target Atmospheric CO. Open Atmos. Sci. J. 2: 217–231.  
  6. ^
  7. ^
  8. ^ Kharecha, P.A., and J.E. Hansen. and climate"2"Implications of "peak oil" for atmospheric CO. Global Biogeochem. Cycles (22): GB3012.  
  9. ^ [1]
  10. ^ "Energy Revolution". Greenpeace International. Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  11. ^
  12. ^ "Science news and science jobs from New Scientist - New Scientist". Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  13. ^ "Electric Power Monthly - Table 1.1. Net Generation by Energy Source". US Energy Information Administration. 2011-02-14. Retrieved 2011-02-27. 
  14. ^ World Consumption of Primary Energy by Energy Type and Selected Country Groups December 31, 2008 Microsoft Excel file format table
  15. ^ Kharecha, P.A., and J.E. Hansen, and climate,"2"Implications of "peak oil" for atmospheric CO Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 22, GB3012, doi:10.1029/2007GB003142
  16. ^ * by Jeff Goodell. 324 pagesBig Coal: The Dirty Secret Behind America's Energy Future
  17. ^ Rosenthal, Elizabeth (23 April 2008). "Europe Turns Back to Coal, Raising Climate Fears". The New York Times.  
  18. ^ US Energy Information Administration, International statistics: coal consumption, 2012.
  19. ^ Damian Carrington, “More than 1,000 new coal plants being planned, The Guardian, 19 Nov. 2012.
  20. ^ US EIA, Multiple factors push Western Europe to use less natural gas and more coal, 27 Sept. 2013.
  21. ^ "Coal Ash Is More Radioactive than Nuclear Waste: By burning away all the pesky carbon and other impurities, coal power plants produce heaps of radiation". 2009-05-18. Retrieved 2009-05-18. 
  22. ^ "Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions - The Potential of Coal". Coal Industry Advisory Board/International Energy Agency. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development/International Energy Agency. Retrieved 28 July 2014. 
  23. ^ "Clean Coal: Wave of the Future or Empty Rhetoric?". Worldwatch Institute. Worldwatch Institute. Retrieved 28 July 2014. 
  24. ^ "Leader's statement on the Pittsburgh summit". The White House. 2013-04-01. Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  25. ^ "Remarks by the President at G20 Closing Press Conference". The White House. 2009-09-25. Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  26. ^
  27. ^ Wealthy Nations' Fossil Fuel Subsidies Are Five Times Greater Than Climate Aid
  28. ^ Australian Options Magazine, CFMEU on coal phase out
  29. ^ Ontario's Coal Phase-out Will Have Drastic Consequences, Say The Thinking Companies. February 16, 2005
  30. ^ "Ont. Liberals promise to close coal plants by 2014". CTV News. Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  31. ^ Ontario Power Authority, Long-Term Energy Plan 2013, module 3, 2014.
  32. ^
  33. ^
  34. ^ a b "Germany to shut down coal mines in 2018". Forbes. January 30, 2007. 
  35. ^ a b "End of an Industrial Era: Germany to Close its Coal Mines". Spiegel Online. 2007-01-30. Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  36. ^ a b "German plan to close coal mines". BBC News. January 29, 2007. Retrieved May 2, 2010. 
  37. ^ a b Gonzalez, David. "The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia". International Herald Tribune. Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  38. ^ a b "The World From Berlin: Good Riddance to Coal Mining". Spiegel Online. 2007-01-30. Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  39. ^ "Germany targets 47% Renewable Energy Production by 2020". Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  40. ^ "New Zealand issues ten-year ban on new thermal power plants". Power-Gen Worldwide.  
  41. ^
  42. ^
  43. ^ Webster, Ben (April 6, 2010). "Britain may block World Bank loan for coal plant in South Africa".  
  44. ^ Vidal, John (April 23, 2009). "Clean coal push marks reversal of UK energy policy". The Guardian (London). 
  45. ^ "Huhne promises no more coal plants without CCS". BusinessGreen. 17 Aug 2010. Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  46. ^ "Large Combustion Plant Directive « Industrial emissions". Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  47. ^ Eco Concern: Coal Plant Boom
  48. ^ New Rules Limit Coal Plants
  49. ^ Ernest Moritz, Excerpts of Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz’s Remarks at National Energy Technology Laboratory in Morgantown, US Department of Energy, 29 July 2013.
  50. ^ April Lee and others, Opportunities for synergy between natural gas and renewable energy, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Dec. 2012.
  51. ^ John Funk, DOE boss says shale gas could benefit wind and solar, Cleveland Plain Dealer, 18 Jan. 2012.
  52. ^ US EIA, Natural gas-fired combustion turbines are generally used to meet peak electricity load, 1 Oct. 2013.
  53. ^ "SB 1368 Emission Performance Standards". Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  54. ^ "California Takes on Power Plant Emissions: SB 1368 Sets Groundbreaking Greenhouse Gas Performance Standard," Natural Resources Defense Council Fact Sheet, August 2007.
  55. ^ Rhonda Erskine, "Maine Governor Baldacci Signs Bill to Reduce Carbon Dioxide Emissions," WCSH, April 15, 2008
  56. ^ "Stop the Coal Rush" Rally & Lobby Day Set for February 11 & 12", Sierra Club Lone Star Chapter.
  57. ^ Stop the Coal Rush! Participating Organizations
  58. ^ Text of HCR 43
  59. ^ Legislative history of HCR 43
  60. ^ Rep. Anderson press release, December 4, 2007.
  61. ^ a b Christina Russell, "Wallula Coal Plant Proposal Controversial Among Students, Faculty," Whitman College Pioneer, 11/15/07
  62. ^ "Progress Energy Carolinas Customer Service Phone Number, Reviews". Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  63. ^ "Progress Energy Carolinas sets goal of doubling efficiency savings to 2,000 MW," Progress Energy Inc press release, June 1, 2007.
  64. ^ "Public Service Company of Colorado". Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  65. ^ a b c d "Don't Get Burned: The Risks of Investing in New Coal-Fired Generating Facilities," Synapse Energy Economics, 2008, p. 11 (PDF file)
  66. ^ "Minnesota Power, an ALLETE Company - Home". Retrieved 2013-12-27. 
  67. ^
  68. ^
  69. ^ "NorthWestern Energy Plans For More Wind; Says New Coal is Too Risky," Renewable Northwest Project, 12/17/07.
  70. ^
  71. ^ Opinion Research Corporation, A Post Fossil-Fuel America, Executive Summary, National Opinion Survey Produced for Citizens Lead for Energy Action Now (CLEAN), A Project of the Civil Society Institute, October 18, 2007
  72. ^ Opinion Research Corporation, A Post Fossil-Fuel America, National Opinion Survey Produced for Citizens Lead for Energy Action Now (CLEAN), A Project of the Civil Society Institute, page 18, October 18, 2007
  73. ^ Gallup, Americans want more emphasis on solar, wind, natural gas, 27 Mar. 2013.
  74. ^ ABC News/Washington Post, Energy policy has initial support, 28 August 2009.
  75. ^ CLEAN press release, October 18, 2007.
  76. ^ EDF, Natural gas policy, accessed 4 Oct. 2013.
  77. ^ EDF, Why natural gas is important, accessed 4 Oct. 2013.
  78. ^ Larry Bernstein, Environmental Defense Fund scolded by other green organizations on ‘fracking’, Washington Post, 22 May 2013.
  79. ^ Mark Brownstein, Why EDF is working on natural gas, 10 Sept. 2012
  80. ^
  81. ^
  82. ^
  83. ^
  84. ^
  85. ^
  86. ^
  87. ^ Citizens
  88. ^
  89. ^ "Moratorium on Coal Financing," accessed April 2008.
  90. ^ Nobel Lecture, Oslo, December 10, 2007
  91. ^ Tom Sanzillo statement on YouTube
  92. ^ "Google CEO ERic Schmidt offers energy plan," San Jose Mercury News, 9/9/08
  93. ^ "E. Idaho Mayor Doesn't Want Coal-Fired Plant in State," Associated Press, 10/14/07.
  94. ^ Letter from Dana Wilson to Warren Buffett, June 1, 2007.
  95. ^ "Event Report: Step It Up SLC," 11/3/07.
  96. ^ Mayor Dave Norris (2007-12-14). "Clean Energy for Cville & Beyond". CvilleDave. Retrieved January 2008. 
  97. ^
  98. ^ "Board calls for coal plant moratorium," The Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier, 1/16/08.
  99. ^ a b  
  100. ^ Terra-Gen Press Release, 17 April 2012
  101. ^ CEZ Group: The Largest Wind Farm in Europe Goes Into Trial Operation
  102. ^ "Gujarat's 214MW solar park named as Asia's largest single PV plant". PV Tech. 23 April 2012. Retrieved Apr 2012. 
  103. ^ "Site plan of Charanka Solar Park, Gujarat, India".  
  104. ^ Asia's largest solar field 'Gujarat Solar Park' switched on in India
  105. ^ Website
  106. ^ Installed Capacity
  107. ^ Qinghai leads in photovoltaic power
  108. ^ "DOE Closes on Four Major Solar Projects". Renewable Energy World. 30 September 2011. 
  109. ^ Steve Leone (7 December 2011). "Billionaire Buffett Bets on Solar Energy". Renewable Energy World. 
  110. ^ "NRG Energy Completes Acquisition of 250-Megawatt California Valley Solar Ranch from SunPower". MarketWatch. 30 September 2011. 
  111. ^ "Exelon purchases 230 MW Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One from First Solar". Solar Server. 4 October 2011. 
  112. ^ Edwin Cartlidge (18 November 2011). "Saving for a rainy day". Science (Vol 334). pp. 922–924. 
  113. ^ Martin and Goswami (2005), p. 45
  114. ^ Leighty and Holbrook (2012) "Running the World on Renewables: Alternatives for Transmission and Low-cost Firming Storage of Stranded Renewables as Hydrogen and Ammonia Fuels via Underground Pipelines" Proceedings of the ASME 2012 International Mechanical Engineering Congress & Exposition November 9–15, 2012, Houston, Texas
  115. ^ Graves, Christopher; Ebbesen, Sune D.; Mogensen, Mogens; Lackner, Klaus S. (2011). "Sustainable hydrocarbon fuels by recycling CO2 and H2O with renewable or nuclear energy". Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 15 (1): 1–23.   (Review.)
  116. ^ Holte, Laura L.; Doty, Glenn N. ; McCree, David L. ; Doty, Judy M. ; Doty, F. David (2010). and Water"2"Sustainable Transportation Fuels From Off-peak Wind Energy, CO. 4th International Conference on Energy Sustainability, May 17–22, 2010. Phoenix, Arizona: American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Retrieved September 7, 2012. 
  117. ^ "First Commercial Plant". Carbon Recycling International. Retrieved 11 July 2012. 
  118. ^ "George Olah CO2 to Renewable Methanol Plant, Reykjanes, Iceland" (
  119. ^ "First Commercial Plant" (Carbon Recycling International)
  120. ^ a b Center for Solar Energy and Hydrogen Research Baden-Württemberg (2011). "'"Verbundprojekt 'Power-to-Gas (in German). Retrieved September 9, 2012. 
  121. ^ a b Center for Solar Energy and Hydrogen Research (July 24, 2012). "Bundesumweltminister Altmaier und Ministerpräsident Kretschmann zeigen sich beeindruckt von Power-to-Gas-Anlage des ZSW" (in German). Retrieved September 9, 2012. 
  122. ^ Okulski, Travis (June 26, 2012). "Audi's Carbon Neutral E-Gas Is Real And They're Actually Making It". Jalopnik (Gawker Media). Retrieved 29 July 2013. 
  123. ^ Rousseau, Steve (June 25, 2013). "Audi's New E-Gas Plant Will Make Carbon-Neutral Fuel". Popular Mechanics. Retrieved 29 July 2013. 
  124. ^ "Doty Windfuels". Retrieved 2012-11-01. 
  125. ^ "CoolPlanet Energy Systems". 2012-10-24. Retrieved 2012-11-01. 
  126. ^ "Air Fuel Synthesis, Ltd". Retrieved 2012-11-01. 
  127. ^ Lackner, Klaus S.; et al. (2012). capture from ambient air"2"The urgency of the development of CO. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109 (33): 13156–62.  
  128. ^ Eisaman, Matthew D.; et al. (2012). extraction from seawater using bipolar membrane electrodialysis"2"CO. Energy and Environmental Science 5 (6): 7346–52.  
  129. ^ Goeppert, Alain; Czaun, Miklos; Prakash, G.K. Surya; Olah, George A. (2012). capture from the atmosphere"2"Air as the renewable carbon source of the future: an overview of CO. Energy and Environmental Science 5 (7): 7833–53.   (Review.)
  130. ^ a b c Pearson, R.J.; Eisaman, M.D.; et al. (2012). , Water, and Renewable Energy"2"Energy Storage via Carbon-Neutral Fuels Made From CO. Proceedings of the IEEE 100 (2): 440–60.   (Review.)
  131. ^ Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft (May 5, 2010). "Storing green electricity as natural gas". Retrieved September 9, 2012. 
  132. ^ a b The Royal Society (January 2008). Sustainable biofuels: prospects and challenges, ISBN 978-0-85403-662-2, p. 61.
  133. ^ a b Gordon Quaiattini. Biofuels are part of the solution, April 25, 2008. Retrieved December 23, 2009.
  134. ^ EPFL Energy Center (c2007). Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels Retrieved December 23, 2009.
  135. ^ Biomass Energy Center. Retrieved on 2012-02-28.
  136. ^ Eartha Jane Melzer (January 26, 2010). "Proposed biomass plant: Better than coal?". The Michigan Messenger. 
  137. ^ Zhang, J.; Smith, K. R. (2007). "Household Air Pollution from Coal and Biomass Fuels in China: Measurements, Health Impacts, and Interventions". Environmental Health Perspectives 115 (6): 848–855.  
  138. ^ "Announcement". Archives of Virology 130: 225. 1993.  
  139. ^ Springsteen, Bruce; Christofk, Tom; Eubanks, Steve; Mason, Tad; Clavin, Chris; Storey, Brett (2011). "Emission Reductions from Woody Biomass Waste for Energy as an Alternative to Open Burning". Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 61 (1): 6.  
  140. ^ 2009 State Of The World, Into a Warming World, Worldwatch Institute, 56–57, ISBN 978-0-393-33418-0
  141. ^ Gustafsson, O.; Krusa, M.; Zencak, Z.; Sheesley, R. J.; Granat, L.; Engstrom, E.; Praveen, P. S.; Rao, P. S. P. et al. (2009). "Brown Clouds over South Asia: Biomass or Fossil Fuel Combustion?". Science 323 (5913): 495–8.  
  142. ^


See also

Using biomass as a fuel produces coal or natural gas in some cases (such as with indoor heating and cooking).[136][137][138] Utilization of wood biomass as a fuel can also produce fewer particulate and other pollutants than open burning as seen in wildfires or direct heat applications.[139] Black carbon – a pollutant created by combustion of fossil fuels, biofuels, and biomass – is possibly the second largest contributor to global warming.[140] In 2009 a Swedish study of the giant brown haze that periodically covers large areas in South Asia determined that it had been principally produced by biomass burning, and to a lesser extent by fossil-fuel burning.[141]

. biochemical conversion, and chemical conversion, thermal conversion. Biomass can be converted to energy in three ways: biofuel, biomass can either be used directly, or indirectly—once or converted into another type of energy product such as renewable energy source As a [135]

Toward Biomass

The challenge is to support biofuel development, including the development of new cellulosic technologies, with responsible policies and economic instruments to help ensure that biofuel commercialization is sustainable. Responsible commercialization of biofuels represents an opportunity to enhance sustainable economic prospects in Africa, Latin America and Asia.[132][133][134]

Biofuels, in the form of liquid fuels derived from plant materials, are entering the market. However, many of the biofuels that are currently being supplied have been criticised for their adverse impacts on the natural environment, food security, and land use.[132][133]

Toward biofuels

Nighttime wind power is considered the most economical form of electrical power with which to synthesize fuel, because the load curve for electricity peaks sharply during the warmest hours of the day, but wind tends to blow slightly more at night than during the day, so, the price of nighttime wind power is often much less expensive than any alternative.[130] Germany has built a 250 kilowatt synthetic methane plant which they are scaling up to 10 megawatts.[120][121][131]

Such renewable fuels alleviate the costs and dependency issues of imported fossil fuels without requiring either electrification of the vehicle fleet or conversion to hydrogen or other fuels, enabling continued compatible and affordable vehicles.[130] Carbon-neutral fuels offer relatively low cost energy storage, alleviating the problems of wind and solar intermittency, and they enable distribution of wind, water, and solar power through existing natural gas pipelines.[130]

Such fuels are considered carbon-neutral because they do not result in a net increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases.[127] To the extent that synthetic fuels displace fossil fuels, or if they are produced from waste carbon or seawater carbonic acid,[128] and their combustion is subject to carbon capture at the flue or exhaust pipe, they result in negative carbon dioxide emission and net carbon dioxide removal from the atmosphere, and thus constitute a form of greenhouse gas remediation.[129]

The Carbon Recycling International in Grindavík, Iceland has been producing 2 million liters of methanol transportation fuel per year from flue exhaust of the Svartsengi Power Station since 2011.[118] It has the capacity to produce 5 million liters per year.[119] A 250 kilowatt methane synthesis plant was constructed by the Center for Solar Energy and Hydrogen Research (ZSW) at Baden-Württemberg and the Fraunhofer Society in Germany and began operating in 2010. It is being upgraded to 10 megawatts, scheduled for completion in autumn, 2012.[120][121] Audi has constructed a carbon-neutral liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant in Werlte, Germany.[122] The plant is intended to produce transportation fuel to offset LNG used in their A3 Sportback g-tron automobiles, and can keep 2,800 metric tons of CO2 out of the environment per year at its initial capacity.[123] Other commercial developments are taking place in Columbia, South Carolina,[124] Camarillo, California,[125] and Darlington, England.[126]

Carbon-neutral fuels are synthetic fuels (including methane, gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel or ammonia[114]) produced by hydrogenating waste carbon dioxide recycled from power plant flue-gas emissions, recovered from automotive exhaust gas, or derived from carbonic acid in seawater.[115] Commercial fuel synthesis companies suggest they can produce synthetic fuels for less than petroleum fuels when oil costs more than $55 per barrel.[116] Renewable methanol (RM) is a fuel produced from hydrogen and carbon dioxide by catalytic hydrogenation where the hydrogen has been obtained from water electrolysis. It can be blended into transportation fuel or processed as a chemical feedstock.[117]

Carbon-neutral and negative fuels

Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) systems use lenses or mirrors and tracking systems to focus a large area of sunlight into a small beam. The concentrated heat is then used as a heat source for a conventional power plant. A wide range of concentrating technologies exists; the most developed are the parabolic trough, the concentrating linear fresnel reflector, the Stirling dish and the solar power tower. Various techniques are used to track the Sun and focus light. In all of these systems a working fluid is heated by the concentrated sunlight, and is then used for power generation or energy storage.[113]

The 150 MW Andasol solar power station is a commercial parabolic trough solar thermal power plant, located in Spain. The Andasol plant uses tanks of molten salt to store solar energy so that it can continue generating electricity even when the sun isn't shining.[112]

Concentrated solar power

Many of these plants are integrated with agriculture and some use innovative tracking systems that follow the sun's daily path across the sky to generate more electricity than conventional fixed-mounted systems. Solar power plants have no fuel costs or emissions during operation.

Many large plants are under construction. The Desert Sunlight Solar Farm is a 550 MW solar power plant under construction in Riverside County, California, that will use thin-film solar photovoltaic modules made by First Solar.[108] The Topaz Solar Farm is a 550 MW photovoltaic power plant, being built in San Luis Obispo County, California.[109] The Blythe Solar Power Project is a 500 MW photovoltaic station under construction in Riverside County, California. The Agua Caliente Solar Project is a 290 megawatt photovoltaic solar generating facility being built in Yuma County, Arizona. The California Valley Solar Ranch (CVSR) is a 250 megawatt (MW) solar photovoltaic power plant, which is being built by SunPower in the Carrizo Plain, northeast of California Valley.[110] The 230 MW Antelope Valley Solar Ranch is a First Solar photovoltaic project which is under construction in the Antelope Valley area of the Western Mojave Desert, and due to be completed in 2013.[111]

As of January 2013, the largest individual photovoltaic (PV) power plants in the world are Agua Caliente Solar Project, (Arizona, over 247 MW connected - to increase to 397 MW), Golmud Solar Park (China, 200 MW), Mesquite Solar project (Arizona, 150 MW), Neuhardenberg Solar Park (Germany, 145 MW), Templin Solar Park (Germany, 128 MW), Toul-Rosières Solar Park (France, 115 MW), and Perovo Solar Park (Ukraine, 100 MW). The Charanka Solar Park is a collection of solar power stations of which 214 MW were reported complete in April 2012,[102] on a 2000 ha site.[103] It is part of Gujarat Solar Park,[104][105] a group of solar farms at various locations in the Gujarat state of India, with overall capacity of 702 MW.[106] There are a total of 570 MW of solar parks in Golmud, with 500 MW more expected in 2012.[107]

Solar photovoltaic cells convert sunlight into electricity and many solar photovoltaic power stations have been built. The size of these stations has increased progressively over the last decade with frequent new capacity records.

The 71.8 MW Lieberose Photovoltaic Park in Germany.

Solar photovoltaics

Toward solar

There are many large wind farms under construction and these include Sinus Holding Wind Farm (700 MW), Anholt Offshore Wind Farm (400 MW), BARD Offshore 1 (400 MW), Clyde Wind Farm (350 MW), Greater Gabbard wind farm (500 MW), Lincs Wind Farm (270 MW), London Array (1000 MW), Lower Snake River Wind Project (343 MW), Macarthur Wind Farm (420 MW), Shepherds Flat Wind Farm (845 MW), and Sheringham Shoal (317 MW).

Many of the largest operational onshore wind farms are located in the United States and China. The Gansu Wind Farm in China has over 5,000 MW installed with a goal of 20,000 MW by 2020. China has several other "wind power bases" of similar size. The Alta Wind Energy Center in California, United States is the largest onshore wind farm outside of China, with a capacity of 1020 MW of power.[100] As of February 2012, the Walney Wind Farm in the United Kingdom is the largest offshore wind farm in the world at 367 MW, followed by Thanet Offshore Wind Project (300 MW), also in the United Kingdom. As of February 2012, the Fântânele-Cogealac Wind Farm in Romania is the largest onshore wind farm in Europe at 600 MW.[101]

A wind farm is a group of wind turbines in the same location used to produce electric power. A large wind farm may consist of several hundred individual wind turbines, and cover an extended area of hundreds of square miles, but the land between the turbines may be used for agricultural or other purposes. A wind farm may also be located offshore.

First wind farm consisting of 7,5 MW Enercon E-126 turbines, Estinnes, Belgium, 20 July 2010, two months before completion; note the 2-part blades.

Toward wind power

There are a few examples of hydroelectric power stations that have been proposed but never built. One example is the Rampart Dam. This 5000MW project would dam the Yukon River in Alaska. Current law prevents this project from being built, so laws would need to be changed.

Grand Coulee Dam is a hydroelectric dam on the Columbia River. The dam has an installed capacity of 6,809 MW and is the largest electric power-producing facility in the United States.

Toward hydroelectricity

Renewable energy is energy that comes from resources which are naturally replenished such as sunlight, wind, rain, tides, waves and geothermal heat. As of 2012, 17% of global final energy consumption comes from renewable resources, with 8.5% of all energy from traditional biomass, mainly used for heating, and 3.3% from hydroelectricity. Other renewables (small hydro, modern biomass, wind, solar, geothermal, and biofuels) accounted for another 4.9% and are growing rapidly.[99] The share of renewables in electricity generation is 20%, with 15% of electricity coming from hydroelectricity and 5% from other renewables.[99]

Move toward renewable energy

  • In January, 2008, Black Hawk County (Iowa) Health Board recommended that the state adopt a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants until it enacts tougher air pollution standards.[98]

Local governments supporting a coal moratorium

In January 2008, Charlottesville, VA, mayor Dave Norris blogged in favor of a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants.[96] On December 19, 2007, Charlottesville passed the Charlottesville Clean Energy Resolution[97] putting the city on record as supporting a moratorium.

[95] In November 2007, Salt Lake City mayor

On June 1, 2007, Park City, Utah, mayor Dana Wilson wrote a letter to Warren Buffett expressing the city's opposition to three coal plants proposed by Rocky Mountain Power.[94]

On October 13, 2007, Pocatello, Idaho, mayor Roger Chase told other mayors from across the state attending an Association of Idaho Cities legislative committee that he favored a moratorium no new coal plants in the state.[93]

Mayors supporting a coal moratorium

  • Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, called for replacing all fossil fuels with renewable sources of energy in twenty years.[92]

Prominent individuals supporting a coal phase-out

  • Banker and financier Tom Sanzillo, currently First Deputy Comptroller for the state of New York, called for a moratorium on new coal plants in the state of Iowa. Citing slow growth in electricity demand and better alternative sources of energy, Sanzillo said, "It's not only good public policy, it's great economics."[91]

Prominent individuals supporting a coal moratorium

"RESOLVED: Shareholders request that BOA’s board of directors amend its GHG emissions policies to observe a moratorium on all financing, investment and further involvement in activities that support MTR coal mining or the construction of new coal-burning power plants that emit carbon dioxide.[89]
  • Trillium Asset Management, a social investment management company, submitted the resolution "Moratorium on Coal Financing" to Bank of America in the 2007–2008 shareholder resolution season. The resolution concluded:

Shareholder resolutions in favor of a coal moratorium

Other groups supporting a coal moratorium

"Demand for natural gas is not going away, and neither is hydraulic fracturing. We must be clear-eyed about this, and fight to protect public health and the environment from unacceptable impacts. We must also work hard to put policies in place that ensure that natural gas serves as an enabler of renewable power generation, not an impediment to it. We fear that those who oppose all natural gas production everywhere are, in effect, making it harder for the U.S. economy to wean itself from dirty coal."[79]

EDF counsel and blogger Mark Brownstein answered: [78] The policy has been criticized by some environmentalists.[77]

This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Hawaii eBook Library are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.