<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: TXU Buyout tied to Environmental Agreement</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/</link>
	<description>Blogging the science and policy of global warming</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 07:13:20 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Climate 411 &#187; Banks Consider Risks in Financing Coal Plants - Blogs &#38; Podcasts - Environmental Defense</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/comment-page-1/#comment-772</link>
		<dc:creator>Climate 411 &#187; Banks Consider Risks in Financing Coal Plants - Blogs &#38; Podcasts - Environmental Defense</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 23:46:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/#comment-772</guid>
		<description>[...] Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and Ceres sent a letter to the three lead banks financing the TXU deal we helped broker. We said the banks no longer could ignore CO2 in their investment [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and Ceres sent a letter to the three lead banks financing the TXU deal we helped broker. We said the banks no longer could ignore CO2 in their investment [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Climate 411 &#187; Global Warming Policy 2007: Ten Victories - Blogs &#38; Podcasts - Environmental Defense</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/comment-page-1/#comment-710</link>
		<dc:creator>Climate 411 &#187; Global Warming Policy 2007: Ten Victories - Blogs &#38; Podcasts - Environmental Defense</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:22:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/#comment-710</guid>
		<description>[...] TXU coal expansion stopped. This wasn&#8217;t strictly a policy victory since it occurred in the business arena, but it was a huge victory nonetheless. Environmental Defense hammered TXU with court suits and a damaging television campaign for its plans to build new dirty coal plants. TXU&#8217;s stock price went down and a buyer took them over - contingent on approval by Environmental Defense and the National Resource Defense Council. Among the concessions was agreement to halt construction of eight new coal plants. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] TXU coal expansion stopped. This wasn&#039;t strictly a policy victory since it occurred in the business arena, but it was a huge victory nonetheless. Environmental Defense hammered TXU with court suits and a damaging television campaign for its plans to build new dirty coal plants. TXU&#039;s stock price went down and a buyer took them over &#8211; contingent on approval by Environmental Defense and the National Resource Defense Council. Among the concessions was agreement to halt construction of eight new coal plants. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Chameides</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/comment-page-1/#comment-39</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Chameides</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2007 20:43:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/#comment-39</guid>
		<description>It is indeed ironic that the environmental victory of preventing TXU from building eight CO2-spewing coal-fired power plants has led TXU to propose building two nuclear power plants. Nuclear power creates negligible greenhouse gas emissions, but raises other critical concerns such as safety and disposal of waste.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is indeed ironic that the environmental victory of preventing TXU from building eight CO2-spewing coal-fired power plants has led TXU to propose building two nuclear power plants. Nuclear power creates negligible greenhouse gas emissions, but raises other critical concerns such as safety and disposal of waste.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beth Wellington</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/comment-page-1/#comment-38</link>
		<dc:creator>Beth Wellington</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 06:32:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/#comment-38</guid>
		<description>So what do you think of the article in the Wall Street Journal, &quot;TXU Sheds Coal Plan, Charts Nuclear Path&quot; By Rebecca Smith

TXU Corp. has scrapped plans to build a large fleet of coal-fired power plants in Texas but hasn&#039;t altogether abandoned its expansion efforts. Instead, it hopes to build the biggest nuclear-power plants in the U.S.

TXU has shifted its focus to nuclear power at a time when three other organizations — NRG Energy Inc., Exelon Corp. and Amarillo Power — have said they, too, may build nuclear plants in Texas. If all the plans materialize, Texas could have more reactors than any other state in a decade&#039;s time, built in a deregulated market where missteps would be borne by shareholders …</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So what do you think of the article in the Wall Street Journal, &#034;TXU Sheds Coal Plan, Charts Nuclear Path&#034; By Rebecca Smith</p>
<p>TXU Corp. has scrapped plans to build a large fleet of coal-fired power plants in Texas but hasn&#039;t altogether abandoned its expansion efforts. Instead, it hopes to build the biggest nuclear-power plants in the U.S.</p>
<p>TXU has shifted its focus to nuclear power at a time when three other organizations — NRG Energy Inc., Exelon Corp. and Amarillo Power — have said they, too, may build nuclear plants in Texas. If all the plans materialize, Texas could have more reactors than any other state in a decade&#039;s time, built in a deregulated market where missteps would be borne by shareholders …</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Marston</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/comment-page-1/#comment-37</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Marston</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2007 14:12:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/#comment-37</guid>
		<description>Nothing in our praising of the new buyer&#039;s commitments to curb global warming changes the legal status of the opposition to Oak Grove. We are not the party opponent to those plants, and did not and could not compromise anyone else&#039;s legal rights.

Early in the coal fight in Texas, before we had many resources for legal fights, the environmental groups coordinated opposition and divided the permits among the groups. Environmental Defense took the lion share of the permits to oppose, but another group (Robertson County, Our Land, Our Lives) agreed to lead on Oak Grove.

Frankly, we and the Public Citizen group tried to get mayors from cities like Dallas to act earlier, but they did not act to oppose coal plants until the Oak Grove application was through the &quot;State Office of Administrative Hearings&quot; process.

The Our Land, Our Lives group continues in the same legal position as before. I have now explained this to Mayor Miller of Dallas, who is not an attorney, and she seems to understand that the TXU deal does not and could not make it harder to defeat the Oak Grove plant.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nothing in our praising of the new buyer&#039;s commitments to curb global warming changes the legal status of the opposition to Oak Grove. We are not the party opponent to those plants, and did not and could not compromise anyone else&#039;s legal rights.</p>
<p>Early in the coal fight in Texas, before we had many resources for legal fights, the environmental groups coordinated opposition and divided the permits among the groups. Environmental Defense took the lion share of the permits to oppose, but another group (Robertson County, Our Land, Our Lives) agreed to lead on Oak Grove.</p>
<p>Frankly, we and the Public Citizen group tried to get mayors from cities like Dallas to act earlier, but they did not act to oppose coal plants until the Oak Grove application was through the &#034;State Office of Administrative Hearings&#034; process.</p>
<p>The Our Land, Our Lives group continues in the same legal position as before. I have now explained this to Mayor Miller of Dallas, who is not an attorney, and she seems to understand that the TXU deal does not and could not make it harder to defeat the Oak Grove plant.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bparsons</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/comment-page-1/#comment-36</link>
		<dc:creator>bparsons</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2007 17:35:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/#comment-36</guid>
		<description>what about this.....

[The buyout] doesn&#039;t resolve the fundamental environmental problems that made the huge fleet of proposed coal plants so controversial across the state and the nation. Solving those would require a longer effort to make basic changes in how Texas deals with energy and the environment.

Texas will still be the largest emitter of GHG, and the deal might make it harder to fight ongoing battles with existing plants and permits in other areas.

Local battles over the three remaining new TXU coal plants and five others that other companies still could build in Texas will continue as well. In particular, TXU&#039;s proposed two-unit Oak Grove facility in Robertson County is the subject of a permit fight before the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

Oak Grove&#039;s two units and a new unit at TXU&#039;s Sandow plant in Milam County are the only ones the company proposed that would burn Texas lignite, the most-polluting form of coal. The others would have burned cleaner Wyoming coal. Opponents said they would continue to fight the Oak Grove permit. But Dallas Mayor Laura Miller, who is leading a coalition of cities against the new TXU plants, said the TXU deal could make it harder to defeat that plant.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>what about this&#8230;..</p>
<p>[The buyout] doesn&#039;t resolve the fundamental environmental problems that made the huge fleet of proposed coal plants so controversial across the state and the nation. Solving those would require a longer effort to make basic changes in how Texas deals with energy and the environment.</p>
<p>Texas will still be the largest emitter of GHG, and the deal might make it harder to fight ongoing battles with existing plants and permits in other areas.</p>
<p>Local battles over the three remaining new TXU coal plants and five others that other companies still could build in Texas will continue as well. In particular, TXU&#039;s proposed two-unit Oak Grove facility in Robertson County is the subject of a permit fight before the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.</p>
<p>Oak Grove&#039;s two units and a new unit at TXU&#039;s Sandow plant in Milam County are the only ones the company proposed that would burn Texas lignite, the most-polluting form of coal. The others would have burned cleaner Wyoming coal. Opponents said they would continue to fight the Oak Grove permit. But Dallas Mayor Laura Miller, who is leading a coalition of cities against the new TXU plants, said the TXU deal could make it harder to defeat that plant.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JPOliva.org &#38;#187; Blog Archive &#38;#187; TXU power buyout a victory for breathers</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/comment-page-1/#comment-35</link>
		<dc:creator>JPOliva.org &#38;#187; Blog Archive &#38;#187; TXU power buyout a victory for breathers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Mar 2007 01:36:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/#comment-35</guid>
		<description>[...] Now all the effort seems to have paid off. A key component of the deal between TXU and investors Texas Pacific Group and Kohlbert Kravis Roberts &#38; Co (KKR) is the scrapping of plans to expand the coal operations and a commitment to reduce carbon emissions and increase production of energy from renewal resources like wind and solar. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Now all the effort seems to have paid off. A key component of the deal between TXU and investors Texas Pacific Group and Kohlbert Kravis Roberts &#38;#38; Co (KKR) is the scrapping of plans to expand the coal operations and a commitment to reduce carbon emissions and increase production of energy from renewal resources like wind and solar. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Marston</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/comment-page-1/#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Marston</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2007 18:21:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/#comment-34</guid>
		<description>Note that we are not a party to, and thus have not agreed to, allowing the Oak Grove permit (for two of the units) to go forward. That decision is the responsibility of the Robertson County, Our Land, Our Lives local group, who is the party opponent in that permit proceeding.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Note that we are not a party to, and thus have not agreed to, allowing the Oak Grove permit (for two of the units) to go forward. That decision is the responsibility of the Robertson County, Our Land, Our Lives local group, who is the party opponent in that permit proceeding.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill Chameides</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/comment-page-1/#comment-33</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill Chameides</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2007 18:54:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/#comment-33</guid>
		<description>We don’t yet know what technology will be used for the three new plants. If they are the standard pulverized coal plants it will mean an extra 21 million tons of CO2 per year. But by stopping the construction of 8 others we prevented the emissions of 57 million tons of CO2 per year.

Moreover, (1) TXU has committed to lowering their emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 – in other words, TXU will significantly lower emissions regardless of the type of plants they build; and (2) TXU will work to pass a national cap on greenhouse gas emissions which will make their pledged reductions mandatory.

If you ask me that’s a pretty good package.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We don’t yet know what technology will be used for the three new plants. If they are the standard pulverized coal plants it will mean an extra 21 million tons of CO2 per year. But by stopping the construction of 8 others we prevented the emissions of 57 million tons of CO2 per year.</p>
<p>Moreover, (1) TXU has committed to lowering their emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 – in other words, TXU will significantly lower emissions regardless of the type of plants they build; and (2) TXU will work to pass a national cap on greenhouse gas emissions which will make their pledged reductions mandatory.</p>
<p>If you ask me that’s a pretty good package.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Enrique</title>
		<link>http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/comment-page-1/#comment-32</link>
		<dc:creator>Enrique</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2007 16:56:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/#comment-32</guid>
		<description>As I read the agreement, The company will still be able to build three more coal plants. How much CO2 will be emitted from those plants? What kind of technology is KKR  going to use on building the coal plants? gassification?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I read the agreement, The company will still be able to build three more coal plants. How much CO2 will be emitted from those plants? What kind of technology is KKR  going to use on building the coal plants? gassification?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->