TEXAS CHAPTER The Texas Chapter of the African American Environmentalist Association, founded in 2002 to work on state-wide issues, is an organization dedicated to protecting the environment, enhancing human, animal and plant ecologies, promoting the efficient use of natural resources and increasing African American participation in the environmental movement.
Director delmetria millener 
thawriterhoo.com
AAEA's main goals are to: Deliver environmental information and services directly into the black community. We work to clean up neighborhoods by implementing toxics education, energy, water and clean air programs. AAEA includes an African American point of view in environmental policy decision-making and resolves environmental racism and injustice issues through the application of practical environmental solutions. 
Live Webcam of Austin Capitol We welcome all races interested in working for improvements in the African American community. We appreciate your assistance AAEA Organization Goals: 1. Protect the environment. 2. Promote the efficient use of natural resources. 3. Enhance human, animal and plant ecologies. 4. Increase African American participation in environmental movement. 5. Deliver information and services directly into the black community. 6. Clean up neighborhoods by implementing toxics education, energy, water and clean air programs. 7. Include an African American point of view in environmental policy decision-making. 8. Resolve environmental racism and injustice issues through the application of practical environmental solutions. 1402 Corinth Street, Ste. 210, Dallas, Texas 75215, 972-979-0665
To: AAEA Headquarters, Washington,DC Privacy Policy: AAEA will not release any information about members to anyone, anytime, for any reason. Copyright (c) 2009 African American Environmentalist Association. All Rights Reserved. Lone Star LINKS
State Tree - The pecan is the state tree of Texas. The sentiment that led to its official adoption probably grew out of the request of Gov. James Stephen Hogg that a pecan tree be planted at his grave. (Acts of 1919, 36th Legislature, regular session, p. 155; also Acts of 1927, 40th Legislature, p. 234.) State Flower - The state flower of Texas is the bluebonnet, also called buffalo clover, wolf flower and el conejo (the rabbit). The bluebonnet was adopted as the state flower, on request of the Society of Colonial Dames in Texas, by the 27th Legislature, 1901. (See acts of regular session, p. 232.) The original resolution designated Lupinus subcarnosus as the state flower, but a resolution (HCR 44) signed March 8, 1971, by Gov. Preston Smith provided legal status as the state flower of Texas for "Lupinus Texensis and any other variety of bluebonnet."
Bluebonnet, the official State Flower,blooms in most parts of Texas in April.
State Bird - The mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos) is the state bird of Texas, adopted by the Legislature at the request of the Texas Federation of Women's Clubs. (Acts of 1927, 40th Legislature, regular session, p. 486.) First Year of Deregulation (2002) A number of issues regarding deregulation in Texas have surfaced. Among the most important are the findings that Texas consumers are benefiting from lower electricity prices despite the slow process by which consumers are switching electricity providers. As guaranteed under Texas' deregulation law, all consumers were guaranteed 6% savings below regulated rates as of January 1, 2002. Larger savings are possible depending on the rates offered by alternative providers. Among the new providers, New Power Company is offering the lowest rates and has attracted the most customers, especially in Houston and Dallas. According to New Power Company's spokeswoman, Terri Cohen, the average consumer can save about $120 per year using their rates instead of incumbent rates. Statewide, 150,000 homeowners out of 4.7 million have switched to a new electricity service supplier, despite complaints that it takes too long to officially switch suppliers. The Electric Reliability Council of Texas, the state's power grid operator, reported that switching retail providers takes 30 days on average. Ms. Cohen confirmed that it can take up to 60 days to switch customers from their old providers. Additionally, activating new service takes two to three days longer. The Texas Public Utility Commission (PUC) has received other complaints relating to electricity deregulation, such as slamming and deceptive trade practices. The PUC is currently investigating complaints that Energy America's door-to-door sales team has made misleading statements about their service. Michael Patterson, a spokesman for Energy America, said the company's compliance official is working with the PUC to address the problem if there is one. As a result of the volume of complaints, that are averaging 500 per month, the PUC has announced that it has hired new consumer service staff.
Houston Chronicle, February 14, 2002 Several Texas officials and energy suppliers met this week to discuss the status of Texas' deregulation plan at XENERGY's Thirteenth Executive Forum. The assessment on deregulation's efforts thus far has been very optimistic. More than one-half of the electricity purchased by large customers in Texas comes from competitive suppliers rather than the local utility. Texas Public Utility Commissioner Brett Perlman predicts that at least 750,000 Texans will switch their electric suppliers by the end of 2002. Commissioner Rebecca Klein described the competitive electric market as "healthy" and told the forum that customers who have switched suppliers are experiencing savings of up to 12 percent. Additional customers are expected to switch this spring and summer, because the state is planning a multimillion dollar consumer education program. The CEO for the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) Thomas Noel, also commented that Enron's recent problems will not greatly impact the ERCOT market.
PR Newswire, February 28, 2002 Major Benefits to Customers From Deregulation? Wait A Minute Or Two Recent research conducted by the energy consulting firm Xenergy finds that electric deregulation in Texas has resulted in major benefits for both providers and customers. The results of Xenergy's study demonstrate that alternative suppliers are profiting in the new market, while customers are saving money. All electricity consumers received a 6 percent discount on their electric rates when deregulation took effect January 1, and additional savings in the range of 10 to 30 percent are possible if customers shop for a competitive supplier. The study indicates that the Retail Electric Providers (REPs) are working to earn customer contracts, as many consumers are wary of switching suppliers in the wake of the Enron debacle. REPs are using their direct sales force, telemarketing, door-to-door, intercept, and multi-level marketing to sign up large nonresidential customers. Xenergy Vice President Bruce Humphrey says that Texas' success can be attributed to the deregulated market's design, competitor strategy, and the good fortune of low wholesale prices. AAEATexas Note: These positive assessments have been disputed by some observers later in the year.
Additionally, Tom Michelman, a senior consultant at Xenergy, says that the Public Utilities Commission and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) have effectively coordinated the wholesale and retail markets to facilitate the deregulated market's success. A recent article in Business Magazines & Media also recognized ERCOT's influence on the management of electrical production and consumption to sustain electrical reliability. Also, because ERCOT is solely responsible for interconnection, rather than sharing oversight with utilities, interconnection costs have been reduced. Texas' comprehensive education campaign has also been touted as a key element to promote competition within the state. The legislature approved a 65 cent per megawatt-hour fee to generate funds for the campaign, which included radio and print media, public service announcements, television advertisements, and frequent contact with local community organizations.
PRIMEDIA Business Magazines & Media, April 2, 2002; PR Newswire, April 4, 2002 Savings From Deregulation? Research released by the Wattage Monitor shows that deregulation is saving money for Texans who switch to a competitive supplier. The Wattage Monitor's survey of residential and commercial consumers provides quantitative data on the results achieved by deregulation since its start in January. The savings for an average residential consumer ranges from approximately $5 per month in the Texas-New Mexico Power territory to over $8 per month in the Reliant and West Texas Utility territories. In large metro areas, like Houston and Dallas, savings for commercial customers can exceed 30% a month. "Deregulation in Texas is real and is providing real savings for both business and residential consumers. While there are consumers with many questions, the Wattage Monitor system will help consumers overcome any confusion and make quicker, more informed choices about their electric service," said Wattage Monitor President Gerald Alderson. Mr. Alderson told The Dallas Morning News that most consumers are interested in switching if the savings are at least $5 per month.
Wattage Monitor Press Release, January 28, 2002; The Dallas Morning News, January 29, 2002 Texas Stops Building Power Plants? One third of the construction plans for new power plants in Texas has been put on hold or completely abandoned. This is causing concern as to whether Texas will have enough power to meet its future energy needs. A review by the Houston Chronicle found that 12 of the 29 projects that were to go on line within the next years are not going forward. Sufficient energy supply should exist for the next two or three years, but concerns exist after that time. "We just opened a project to look into this isse," said Brett Perlman, a Public Utility Commissioner. "This is a long-term issue we need to work on in Texas. We don't want to put Texas in the California position of having demand sort of sneak up on us." Deregulation has changed the market for generation plants; under regulation, utilities earned a guaranteed profit for building enough capacity to serve their customers. Now a power plant will only be built if the builders expect to sell electricity at a price high enough to make a return and profit on the investment. With demand forecasted to grow at about 3.5 percent per year, the state needs to add a minimum of 2,000 megawatts per year. Currently there are about 6,800 megawatts for completion in 2002 and an additional 3,800 slated to come on line in 2003 and 2004. Projects that are being developed for one or more big users appear to have a better chance of being built than those competing to supply the state's grid. For example, Cinergy and BP are constructing a 550-megawatt power plant in Texas City that will generate power mainly for BP. Additionally, many old plants in Texas are expected to be decommissioned, contributing to tight power supplies. The ability of Texas' power grid to distribute the power is also of concern. The North American Electric Reliability Council has forecast that power grid congestion will get worse over the next ten years as very little new transmission will be added. The Texas Public Utility Commission is looking at market incentives to ensure companies maintain enough generation to provide a power reserve.
Houston Chronicle, January 28, 2002 Changing Electricity Providers Recent reports of pitfalls in Texas' newly deregulated electricity market note that some customers are being left without electricity for several days. Reportedly, deregulation is complicating the way that orders for new electricity service are placed and processed, in that consumers may select from a number of retail electricity providers (REPs) when they decide to order new service or switch to a different provider. After being notified by a customer, the provider must contact ERCOT, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas. ERCOT, which is responsible for managing the power grid, then notifies the current utility that its customer has opted to change service. Before January 1, 2002, only the regulated utility needed to be contacted; now there are three different entities involved with the change. The usual wait for a service change had been 24 to 48 hours. Now, it typically takes two to five days. The Houston Chronicle is reporting that one Houston family endured 10 days without electricity while waiting for power in their new apartment. Tom Noel, ERCOT's president and chief executive officer, explained that "we've traded off reduced rates for a little less convenience. In other words, in the past when there was a monopoly utility in this city, they [consumers] made one phone call, and that was the only party they needed to call." This issue had impacted enough consumers to cause the state's Public Utility Commission to place it on the agenda at last week's open meeting. Terry Hadley, a spokesman for the Austin-based commission, said that the delays are of concern to the commission and that it is looking to improve the process.
Houston Chronicle, January 17, 2002 Deregulation Hurdles Texas' recently inaugurated electric deregulation plan has begun experiencing some difficulties, reducing expected consumer benefits since its start on January 1, 2002. Approximately 500,000 low-income Texans are not receiving a promised 10 to 20% rate discount. The deregulation plan that opened Texas to retail electric competition mandated this discount for poor Texas families. The discount may amount to $4 million per month, or about $8 per month per consumer, according to Randy Chapman, director of the Texas Legal Services Center. The Department of Human Services has provided NCS Pearson, the party responsible for administering the low-income discount program, with a list of eligible residents. Apparently, incorrect or incomplete data has led to a 47% error rate in matching eligible consumers with the discount. "This is a crisis problem that should have been fixed before restructuring was implemented on January 1. These systems should have been adequately tested to prevent customers from being overcharged," contested Chapman in a statement to the Public Utility Commission (PUC). PUC spokesman Terry Hadley responded that the agency has been working to resolve the problem. Other service-related problems have arisen due to computer problems and changes. Chief Executive of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) Tom Noel stated that normal service changes, unrelated to switching to a new electricity supplier, were not tested during the pilot period prior to inception of the formal program. Noel and TXU spokesman Carol Peters explained that service changes are more difficult now than they used to be. Anti-slamming measures in the new law add additional procedures and delay requests for service changes. In addition to these difficulties, consumers are being warned to pay attention to hidden costs associated with switching to a new supplier. Under the new competitive system, consumers will not be able to switch until their next scheduled meter reading, which typically occurs quarterly. Those wanting to switch now may have to pay between $24 and $35 for an additional reading if their utility offers it. Andrea Sharam, representing the Energy Action Group, also warned that consumers should be aware of "standing charges" and more expensive bundled products and services that are sold via door-to-door sales. Ms. Sharam said that more advertising is necessary to educate residents on the details of switching in a deregulated electricity market.
The Age, January 6, 2002; Utility Spotlight, January 7, 2002; Houston Chronicle, January 9, 2002; Forth Worth Star-Telegram, January 9 and January 10, 2002 1st Day of Texas Utility Deregulation (2002) The first day of deregulation under the Texas Electric Competition Act began this Tuesday. Six investor-owned utilities are participating in this week's start, allowing an estimated 125,000 residential ratepayers to switch to new providers. Rates for these customers are expected to reduce between 8 and 18 percent. Customers will have the option to call their provider or mail in a notice indicating their intention to change electricity providers. Consumer advocates continue to raise concerns about competition despite the confidence expressed from state regulators. One concern is that competition would only exist in true form in major metropolitan areas such as Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth. The large customer base provides the incentive of profit for new providers. Thomas E. Noel, chief executive officer of ERCOT, the entity responsible for managing 85 percent of the Texas power grid, expects a successful transition into the deregulation plan. "We completed testing of all market participants late in November, and everyone passed, and everyone has been 100 percent certified," Noel stated. Texas regulators are also confident that the state's 20 percent daily surplus of electric power will prevent a California-like crisis. Deregulation has been delayed until at least January 1, 2005, for El Paso and January 1, 2007, for the Texas Panhandle. These areas are serviced by Xcel Energy, which continues to operate as a price-regulated utility subject to the jurisdiction of the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT).
Amarillo Globe-News, January 3, 2002; Forth Worth Star-Telegram, January 3, 2002; The New York Times, January 3, 2002 The Electricity Utility Restructuring Weekly Update is available on the Internet at
www.eren.doe.gov/electricity_restructuring/weekly.html
Texas Deregulated in 2002--We Have Some Questions -
Where is there a current need for a power resource in Texas? - What will happen if this need is not met, if there is a current need?
- Where is there a growing substantial need for power?
- Where is the largest predicted increase in electricity use going to occur?
- Who are the most vocal companies/agencies in finding more power resources for Texas?
- Who are the most powerful companies/agencies in finding more power resources for Texas?
- Are there companies currently eager, willing and prepared to build a power producing plant in Texas? If so, who are they?
- Based on there being a probable need for an increased power resources in Texas, what is keeping companies from building power sources?
- Is there a "romance" story in Texas -- of a power source meeting the dire needs of its customers and users being pleased with their needs being met? Is there an opposite story?
- Is there a law(s) in Texas that drastically hinders building a power resource?
- Who are the current power providers in Texas?
- How long have current power providers been providing power to Texas?
- Where are the power providers located? (city/county)
- Who owns the current power plants?
- How many people does each of the power resources of Texas service?
- How much, if any power, is sold to other states?
- Does Texas receive any power from outside of Texas?
- Are all power providers in Texas 50% owned by Texas sources (investors/cities/state)?
- How many owner/investors in power production in Texas, own or invest in other plants in Texas, US and world? Where are they located (city/county)?
- Who are the promoters of nuclear power in Texas?
- Who are the developers of power plants in Texas?
- What is the geographical structure for power plants in Texas?
- Are there developers/owners/investors/regulators in Texas currently seeking to develop, own, invest and or regulate other plants outside of Texas?
Texas Deregulates Electricity Starting on January 1, 2002, Texans can choose their electricity providers. The ultimate goal of deregulation is to enhance our current effective and efficient electricity delivery system with a better, more competitive system that will produce increased efficiencies and low prices. There hasn't been a big rush by residential customers to switch to other suppliers. Deregulation has been slow to provide choice in areas where it has already been enacted. And the California debacle has frightened the public. Deregulation will come however.  Unlike California, Texas deregulated the wholesale electrical market in 1995, providing a time buffer to work out any problems before introducing retail deregulation this year. And also unlike California, which did not build any new power plants for ten years, Texas has built about 30 power plants in the state in the last six years. Officials say the state's electrical supply exceeds demand by 23 percent. Nor does the state's plan mandate the sort of retail price caps that crippled the California utilities. California kept controls on retail prices while eliminating controls on wholesale prices. That isn't deregulation. Hopefully, the Texas model will work. Rates Not Decreasing Under Texas Deregulation  Texas utility TXU has applied for a rate increase of six percent, which would raise customer rates to approximately nine cents per kilowatt-hour. When deregulation went into effect on January 1, 2002, TXU's rates were automatically decreased by six percent, as mandated by law. Now the utility is asking for a rate increase to cover the rising costs of natural gas. Retail providers that compete with TXU's regulated price have recently raised their rates in anticipation of TXU's rate increase. The request has been approved by an administrative judge and is now awaiting decision with the Texas Public Utility Commission. Fort Worth Star-Telegram, June 7, 2002 and June 10, 2002 Deregulation To Be Suspended in Southeast Texas Entergy Corp. expects to file an agreement this month with the Texas Public Utility Commission (PUC) to delay competition in southeast Texas until the middle of 2003. In March the PUC suspended deregulation in Entergy's service territory until September 15, 2002. Four investor-owned utilities, including Entergy, have yet to restructure after the passage of Texas' deregulation bill in 1999 and competition has been postponed in these utilities' markets. The Beaumont Enterprise, May 31, 2002 Enron Manipulated Texans Too The Texas Public Utility Commission (PUC) issued a report on June 3 that recommended Enron Power Marketing, a unit of Enron Corporation, be fined $7 million and required to issue refunds for earnings that resulted from market manipulation last summer in north and west Texas. The report states that Enron engaged in "enormous overscheduling" and "anti-competitive behavior." The PUC recommended a fine of $5,000 for each 15-minute period in August 2001 for which Enron overscheduled load-1,416 of which have been identified. PUC staff considered other factors in determining the fine such as Enron's alleged uncooperative behavior with the PUC investigation, which also includes five other companies, and flagrant, repeated violations. According to Danielle Jaussaud, Director of Economic Analysis for the PUC market oversight division, Enron scheduled more than 500,00 percent of the power it needed to cover demand in northern Texas and more than 1,000,000 percent of the actual load for western Texas.
Houston Chronicle, June 4, 2002 Officials with the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) and the Austin office of Consumers Union have drawn parallels between Enron's alleged market manipulation in California and operations of Enron and five other companies in Texas. Texas utility officials suspect that Enron may have used similar tactics to those used in the California market to artificially cause congestion on the state's power grid, and then make money by easing it. The companies allegedly scheduled more power than was needed at peak times, and then collected fees to remove the power from the transmission system to clear the way for other energy providers. The PUCT believes that six companies made more than $1 million each through the artificially created congestion.
Fort Worth Star-Telegram, May 8, 2002; Austin American-Statesman, Electricity Reliability Council of Texas and Deregulation The Feld Group, a technology consulting firm, was hired to evaluate the Electricity Reliability Council of Texas' (ERCOT) systems related to problems with switching electricity customers to new providers and issuing billing statements. On May 21, the firm reported that ERCOT needs to make significant  improvements to solve the customer service issues. The changes, which include improving communications and transactions methods and strengthening hardware, could cost Texas customers more money through their electricity bills. ERCOT claims that it is responsible for providing more services than many other grid operators, and is not being compensated enough for the high level of services. The Council's 2002 budget is $94 million, compared to $105 million allotted to New York's grid operator, which allegedly performs fewer functions. ERCOT's funds come from Texas electricity customers, who pay approximately 22 cents per month to support the agency. Consumer groups say that customers could be forced to pay more for improvements to a system that they claim worked fine before deregulation was enacted in the state.
The Dallas Morning News, May 22, 2002 During a legislative oversight committee hearing in Texas, state lawmakers reprimanded the director of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) for delays in transferring customers to new energy providers. Tom Noel, ERCOT director, said that the current success rate of 81 percent is a significant improvement from the 50 percent success rate that was measured on February 15. ERCOT's goal is to reach a 95 percent success rate by year's end. Lawmakers made it clear that the current switch rate and ERCOT's goal do not meet their expectations, as the transfer is not soon enough for energy providers that are ready to start serving new customers. Approximately 150,000 TXU customers and 90,000 Reliant Energy customers have gone without electricity bills-some for up to four months—supposedly due to billing errors within ERCOT's computer system. Director Noel expects a report soon that will recommend several system improvements.
Despite the frustration over the customer transfer errors, the Center for the Advancement of Energy Markets rated Texas as leading the nation in electricity restructuring. The organization publishes the Retail Energy Deregulation Index, evaluating states based on their success in bringing better prices and services to residents, the soundness of the deregulation plan, and the percentage of customers voluntarily switching power providers.
The Dallas Morning News, May 9, 2002; Fort Worth Star-Telegram,
May 9, 2002; Reuters, May 7, 2002 Electricity "Provider of Last Resort" Though Texas' restructuring law gives TXU Corp. the right to send all ele ctricity customers with unpaid bills to the so-called "provider of last resort," the Texas utility has done only a minimum amount of switching to date. TXU Chairman Erle Nye reported that the utility is trying to work with the customers and said that they have found that many of the customers do not understand the rules. The provider of last resort would require a two month deposit and charge higher rates to restore service. The Public Utility Commission of Texas has said that it will review the provision for the provider of last resort in Texas' restructuring law. Consumer groups have filed complaints about the provision because they say it unfairly subjects switched customers—most of whom are low-income customers—to higher rates.
Fort Worth Star-Telegram, May 15, 2002 The Electricity Utility Restructuring Weekly Update is available on the Internet at
www.eren.doe.gov/electricity_restructuring/weekly.html
NEWS & EVENTS
2008 CBC Science and Technology Braintrust On September 26th, Congresswoman Johnson (D-TX), left, a long-time member of the House Science Committee, will host the Science and Technology Braintrust. The Braintrust is a panel discussion that is part of a larger event called the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation's Annual Legislative Conference. This year's Braintrust will focus on the technology of energy and environmental conservation. We will discuss sustainability from the academic-, corporate-, and federal perspectives as well as the education and skills needed for students of color to pursue careers in these areas.
Event: Science & Technology Braintrust: How Science is Saving the Environment. A panel discussion on novel efforts to promote sustainability, and the science behind the efforts.Date: Friday, September 26, 2008, from 9-noonPlace: Washington, D.C. Convention Center, Room 149-AAudience: Approximately 100. Many will be school children from the D.C. area, and there will also be federal agency officials, nonprofit leaders, and other policy leaders.
Panelists:
- Sheryl Lee Ralph - Actress and education advocate
- Norris McDonald - President, African American Environmentalist Association
- Miquela Craytor - Executive Director, Sustainable South Bronx
- Miranda Anderson - Director of Corporate Affairs for Sustainability, Wal-Mart
- Bob Langert - Vice President of Corporate Social Responsibility, McDonald's
- Donald Foley - Executive Director, Progressive Automotive XPRIZE- DC
- Area Schools
Moderator:- Cynne Simpson - Anchor, ABC7/WJLA-TV Hello. I am writing on behalf of the Morris K. Udall Foundation. After
looking at your website, it seems our organizations have an overlap in
missions. The Udall Foundation is currently encouraging students to seek
nomination for our $5,000 scholarships. We would appreciate it if you would
post our opportunity on your website. Our scholarships would probably
interest people involved with your organization and viewers of your website.
I am attaching the program description to this email, as well as copying it
below. Please pass the opportunity on via email to those who might benefit
from it, and post it on your website.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Thank you,
Christine Claro
Scholarship Opportunity
Deadline is March 3, 2004 (internal institutional deadlines may be earlier)
Announcing the Morris K. Udall Scholarship Program
Eighty $5,000 scholarships available for sophomore and junior undergraduate
students in two categories:
-Native American and Alaska Native students studying fields related to the
environment, health care, or tribal public policy are eligible for the
scholarship. Native American and Alaska Native scholars have come from such
backgrounds as American Indian studies, political science, sociology,
geography, anthropology, tribal policy, economic development, government,
health care, health sciences, and health policy.
-Any college sophomore or junior studying fields related to the environment.
Majors have included environmental engineering, agriculture, biology and
other natural sciences, natural resource management, political science,
sociology, anthropology, geography, cultural studies, history, public
policy, and pre-law. It is anticipated that the candidate’s plan of study
will include coursework in ethics and public policy and/or public or
community service experience in the area of the candidate’s career field.
The Udall Scholarship is by nomination only – students must be nominated by
the Udall Faculty Representative on campus. Faculty Representative contact
information and the application materials are available on our website at
www.udall.gov
Please contact Melissa Millage with any questions at (520) 670-5542, or by
email at millage@udall.gov
Deadline for applications is March 3, 2004.
_________________________________________________________________
Surf and talk on the phone at the same time with broadband Internet access.
Get high-speed for as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local service
providers in your area). https://broadband.msn.com
| |
