Podcasts about Puc

We are excited to share this Special Edition with you. We had the opportunity late last week to visit with Jimmy Glotfelty, Commissioner on the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC). Jimmy was appointed as Commissioner by Governor Abbott in 2021 following an extensive career in the energy and power public and private sectors, including Founder of Clean Line Energy, Senior Policy Advisor to US Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham, Energy Policy Director to then Texas Governor George W. Bush, Legislative Director for Congressman Sam Johnson, and Executive and Managerial roles at Calpine Corporation, ICF Consulting and Quanta Services. Jimmy was recently and additionally directed by the Governor (letter linked here) to lead a new Working Group focused on the future of nuclear energy in Texas. It was our honor not just to visit with Jimmy but to help him publicize the Working Group's efforts in order to allow for anyone who has ideas or thoughts to aid in evaluating advanced nuclear energy to be able to share them with the Commissioner.   In our discussion, Jimmy shares background on the group's creation and goals, Texas' position to be a leader in nuclear energy, as well as the role of Texas communities. On Thursday, September 28th, the first public meeting will take place in Austin (details linked here) to discuss the Working Group's proposed organizational structure, process and timeline for the coming months. Jimmy reiterated the group's willingness to hear all opinions, including voices from underserved communities and those who are opposed to nuclear. We also discuss which other states are preparing to build nuclear sites and how nuclear can position Texas to have reliable and clean power for decades to come, how to address short-term power and transmission issues, how the Working Group will collaborate with the Federal government, the feedback Jimmy has received so far, and Jimmy's personal interest in the cause. We ended with Jimmy's vision for power in Texas in ten years. We are confident that Jimmy and his team are prepared for the challenge and were thrilled to spend time with him.   Mike Bradley kicked us off by highlighting that bond markets are under pressure given the FED's recent dialogue that interest rates are likely to stay higher for longer, which pushed the 10-year yield to 17-year high of 4.5%. From a commodities standpoint, he highlighted that Brent and WTI price were relatively unchanged on the week given that Saudi remains vigilant with crude oil production management, which is keeping global physical crude oil markets tight. He also noted that WTI could be getting additional price support due to Cushing crude oil storage levels nearing 10-year seasonal lows. He highlighted that broader equity markets were down roughly 4-5% over the last five trading days due to lingering concerns around interest rates, crude oil prices, a US government shutdown, and the UAW strike against the three largest US automakers. He also noted that two high profile IPOs have recently traded under their recent IPO price which could be a worrisome sign for equity markets. Mike wrapped by noting that the UK government looks to be pushing out the phase out date for their ICE vehicle sales from the current date of 2030 out to 2035. Brett Rampal joined and contributed his nuclear perspective and questions in the discussion.   If you are in the area, we hope you'll consider joining the Commissioner on Thursday or tune in online. Updates on the Working Group's progress will be available on the PUC website (linked here) under Project #55421. Thanks to you all!

In this episode, Maine State Senator Nicole Grohoski discusses an upcoming ballot measure that gives Maine voters the opportunity to replace the state's unpopular for-profit utilities with a nonprofit public utility.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsMaine's two big investor-owned power utilities — Central Maine Power and Versant Power — are not very popular. In fact, they boast among the lowest customer satisfaction scores of any utilities in the country, perhaps because their customers face some of the nation's highest rates, suffer more and longer outages than average Americans, and pay more to connect rooftop solar than ratepayers in almost any other state. This November, Mainers will vote on a radical alternative: a ballot measure to replace the two for-profit utilities with a single nonprofit utility that would be called Pine Tree Power. Maine and many other states already have lots of small nonprofit municipal utilities, but this would mark the first time a whole state with existing private utilities decided to make them public en masse.Naturally the utilities are opposed and have dumped $27 million and counting into a campaign to crush the measure; supporters have mustered just under $1 million. To discuss this David vs. Goliath fight, I contacted one of its champions, Democratic state Senator Nicole Grohoski. We discussed why she thinks a public utility would perform better, what it would do for clean energy, how it would be governed, and what other states can learn from the effort. With no further ado, Maine State Senator Nicole Grohoski. Welcome to Volts. Thank you so much for coming.Nicole GrohoskiThank you so much for having me. I'm thrilled to be with you today.David RobertsI am super excited to talk about this issue. There's a lot of ins and outs I want to cover, but maybe let's just start with a brief history of this thing. So the idea here is, as I said in the intro, to replace Maine's two big investor-owned utilities, Central Maine Power and Versant Power, with a single publicly owned main utility called Pine Tree Power. Tell me who first had that idea? Where did it first pop up? I know it was legislation and then it got vetoed. Just tell us a little bit about how we got to where we are now.Nicole GrohoskiThe history is really interesting, and I'll try to not spend too much time on it, but I think it's really important to start with the reality here in Maine as a backdrop. So a couple of things that are important to know for listeners is that we, as Mainers, find that our electricity isn't really affordable or reliable and our utilities aren't trustworthy. So we have, for many years running now, the worst customer satisfaction in the country, some of the highest rates in the country for electricity, and those just keep going up. We have experienced a 20% increase this summer, with another increase coming in January.And we also have the most frequent outages in the country. And there are a couple of other reliability metrics that we're not doing so well on, including the length of outages and how long it takes to restore power. So basically what we see here in Maine is that the status quo of these for-profit multinational corporations is just not working for us. About a tenth of our residents in Maine received disconnection notices earlier this year because they just couldn't afford to pay their bills. And it's not working for companies or big corporations that really rely on low cost and reliable electricity to compete.So that's kind of the background. So a number of us were wondering, does it have to be this way? Is there an alternative to worst of the worst? We are Maine, we are very proud and independent, and we like to be leading, but this is not the way that we wanted to be leading. So there was a lot of grassroots pressure. In 2017 we had a big storm, and the power was out for days. But at the same time, there was a billing fiasco, which resulted in billing errors for over 100,000 customers, which is in a state of 1.3 million people, that's a very big percent.So there was a lot of pressure, a lot of phone calls to legislators, to the Public Utilities Commission, to the public advocate about these utilities. And so I think that really planted a seed for a number of folks. Specifically, Maine's first public advocate pointed out to some members of the legislature, including Representative Seth Barry at the time, myself, and a few others, that there were other options and that the financial and local control aspects of those options might be really helpful for Maine. So we started meeting in 2019 with the previous public advocate, economists, labor, legislators, people that were part of a group called CMP Ratepayers Unite.And that's when we formed this idea of creating a consumer-owned utility for Maine that would be non-profit and similar to the ten other consumer-owned utilities we have in Maine. I don't know that we had a name for it at that time, but we do now call it the Pine Tree Power Company. So those were the early days. And then to sort of fast forward, the Legislature commissioned a study which was done by London Economics International in 2019 to learn more about the economics and also legal pathway here. Then, of course, 2020, everybody knows what happened then, things kind of went on pause. And then in 2021, we wrote a bill. And that bill passed in both chambers in Maine with bipartisan support. As you mentioned, the governor did veto that bill.David RobertsAnd that bill was to create the utility or to put the question to voters.Nicole GrohoskiThat bill put the question to voters, and it's very similar to the language that we'll be voting on this November. So we did revise the language based on some feedback from the governor, and that is the language that is now in front of us to vote on this November, November 7. And in order to get the question on the ballot we had hundreds of volunteers working together to collect around 80,000 signatures in total, which is a little bit above the requirement needed to get a question on the ballot in Maine.David RobertsI'm a little curious why — this is a Democratic Governor Mills. What was her rationale? I mean, I guess I can imagine her rationale for opposing the public utility, but what was her rationale for opposing asking voters what they thought? Did she have a good rationale?Nicole GrohoskiNot in my opinion. I'm sure in her opinion it was great. But we read the veto letter for the most part. There was very little in there that was substantive. Some of those minor changes that we made are all things that we would have happily made in advance had we had outreach from her office about them. You know, the unfortunate thing with governors in Maine is that we have yet to elect one that has campaigned using our clean elections, publicly funding campaign option, which is something that most legislators use. So you can draw your own conclusions there about the — money in politics may have been at play.I can't say for certain.David RobertsYeah, we should just make a note here because a couple of podcasts we've done here on Volts are about state laws prohibiting utilities from using ratepayer money to lobby and pay off politicians. Maine does not have one of those laws.Nicole GrohoskiWell, we actually did just pass a law. We were one of four states earlier this year to be sure that ratepayer dollars are not going for lobbying. You know, industry membership, group memberships.David RobertsOh, interesting.Nicole GrohoskiYou know, Edison Electric, for instance, Chambers of Commerce, et cetera. So that is a new law. It will be in effect in about a month. So we'll see if that improves things.David RobertsJust in time or actually just a smidge too late. So the bill of particulars here then, against these two utilities, as you say, they have really low ratepayer satisfaction scores, lots of power outages, more than usual, higher rates, some of the highest rates in the country. Like every state, Maine has a Public Utility Commission that is meant to regulate its utilities. That has members appointed by the governor or elected? I'm not sure how it goes in Maine.Nicole GrohoskiIn Maine, the commissioners are appointed and then subject to Senate approval.David RobertsSo why not just use the PUC to sort of get these utilities in line? That seems like it would be the sort of first order of business.Nicole GrohoskiIt's a great question. I mean, I think everyone kind of wants to default to using the systems we have in place, but I have a couple of thoughts about that. Our Public Utilities Commission I do think is full of folks who are hardworking and really trying to get under the hood with utilities. But there's a lot of information there that the utilities really understand best. And so when you have questions, you're going to ask the utilities and there is sort of a long term back and forth relationship there. Some people might call how that turns into regulatory capture sometimes.Additionally, we do have the ability to fine the utilities if they're not performing up to snuff and that has happened. It doesn't happen that often, and the most recent fine, I think was around $10 million. At the same time they had a significant rate increase and are pulling out over $100 million in profit every year. So it's not really proportional and we could theoretically increase those fines a bit. But there is hesitance. I think the legislature has interest in doing some of that but the utilities are of course not interested and I think we would see another veto pen action is my guess.But all that being said, this effort to create a consumer utility has led to a lot of us just digging down into what is the history of utilities in this country and regulation. And what we found is that utilities are natural monopolies so it makes sense for there to be regulation because there isn't competition. But the folks who sort of started the effort to create public utilities commissions were those who were going to be regulated. And so there has been this hand in glove relationship since the start around the regulators and the regulated.David RobertsIt's not ideal.Nicole GrohoskiThat's probably a subject of a whole other podcast but —David RobertsIt doesn't work quite like you would want it to.Nicole GrohoskiExactly. And additionally, I would say I have recently been talking to folks in other states and other people have served as public advocates. And what I find remarkable is the backflips and cartwheels that we go through with regulation to try to outfox the utilities when, by no fault of their own, the investor owned utilities are created with their number one mission to be maximizing repair profit. So it's like we could keep trying to think of creative and clever ways to balance this out. But at the end of all of it, I keep coming back to the fact that we don't have our roads, which are critical to our economy and our safety and our way of life in the private sector; and nor are our schools, nor is our military.Why does it make sense for something as important as our electricity grid to be subject to for-profit motivations?David RobertsListeners will be rolling their eyes right about now because this is something I say I find a way to say it almost every episode no matter what we're talking about. But utilities, they are structured such that they make money insofar as they spend money. So all they really want to do is deploy more big infrastructure. And so as you say, like PUCs find these elaborate Rube Goldberg mechanisms to sort of beg and plead with them to do things like efficiency or distributed energy, know on and on, inter, regional transmission, name it, all of which are sort of just counter to the basic incentive.So as you say, you can spend the rest of your life coming up with more and more elaborate ways to try to trick them into doing something against their interests. But at a certain point you just got to grapple with the central issue which is that they're set up wrong, they're set up badly, they're set up to not want things that are in the public interest and at a certain point you got to just deal with the root cause. Anyway, sorry to go off on my standard canned rant there. So then a skeptic will say these two utilities, just so people are clear about this, these are not vertically integrated utilities.These are just distribution utilities. They just have wires, they just distribute power. They do not own generation. They're dealing with a certain set of supply issues, a certain set of power plants, a certain geography. Maine is very heavily forested which is a nightmare for transmission lines for all the obvious reasons. So it just has a sort of set of things that it's dealing with. And so I guess the skeptic is going to ask what reason do we have to believe that given the sort of same resources that Pine Tree, a public utility, would perform any better?Nicole GrohoskiWell I think we have a lot of evidence that it would because we already have ten consumer owned utilities in Maine. Just for an example, there is one that's called Eastern Maine Electric Co-op. That's a traditional co-op. It is more rural than most of Maine. You might find it interesting that it is serving about 1.2% of the state's load in kilowatt hours but it is in an area that's twice the size of Rhode Island. Now EMAC, which is in rural downeast Maine is directly adjacent to the territory of Versant that I live in and the cost for delivery in EMAC is nine cents and the cost for delivery in Versant is 13.1 cents per kilowatt hour.So I don't think that's just some kind of magical happenstance that when you take profit out of the equation you're just paying less. We know that together CMP and Versant are sending out about — was last year was $187 million a year in profit. So I think if Mainers are in charge of our utility we can decide do we want to use that money to lower rates? Do we want to use it to reinvest in the grid to increase reliability? And I think it would probably be a mix of both of those things.David RobertsAnd that amount of money you think is material enough that it would show up as improved performance, show up as measurably improved performance?Nicole GrohoskiI do think so. I mean I think for your listeners, while Maine is large and rural we do have 1.3 million people. So, when you sort of divide those numbers out it does make a difference. And we've had some independent economic analysis that shows us that Mainers would be saving on average $367 a month, excuse me, a year, because of the fact that we're basically going from expensive rent for the grid to a lower cost mortgage. So I think it's easy to explain it to folks in terms of, like, "What's better when you're looking for housing, dropping your money down a rent hole, black hole for the rest of your life, or swapping out to a mortgage where you've got a lower interest rate than what we see now with the guaranteed return on equity that happens for our for-profit utilities."David RobertsYeah, this was another piece I wanted to ask about. So part of why you think this will be cheaper for ratepayers is just you take that huge slice of profits that are going, as you say, out of state to the owners of these utilities and keep that in state and that alone will buy you some better service. There's also the issue of investor-owned utilities expect and want and are guaranteed relatively high rates of return on their investments and often resist making investments if the rate of return is lower than that. But as you say, a public power utility can be more patient with its capital, right?Can make investments with lower returns as long as they pay off eventually, right?Nicole GrohoskiYeah. So we see here in Maine that the utilities are getting a ROE of 8% to 12%. And we know that firstly that's kind of astounding because it's not all that risky. Most people are paying their bills.David RobertsCrazy. It's guaranteed. It's huge and it's guaranteed. It's wild what it is. This is like the safest business on the planet as being a regulated utility.Nicole GrohoskiCouldn't agree more. And on the flip side, the Pine Tree Power Company can access low-cost capital through revenue bonding at 3-5%. So when we think about paying off that debt over many years with compounding interest, when we think about the fact that our grid really isn't ready to electrify our economy and experts expect it's going to need to be, increased two to three times. Now is the right moment in time, I think, to move away from high cost, low-risk investment to low cost, low-risk investment before we literally triple our grid.David RobertsTell us a little bit about how the utility would be governed or structured and what implications you think that might have.Nicole GrohoskiI love this question. I am a public servant and so I believe in local governance and people getting to vote and go to public meetings and have a say and all that is built into the ballot question. So the Pine Tree Power Company would have elected board members and there are seven of them, one for each grouping of five Senate seats, state Senate seats. And those members then turn around and appoint six members who have specific expertise in things like utility law and management, concerns of workers, concerns of economic, environmental and social justice, things like that, that we really want to make sure those folks are at the table.And this group of 13 people, they serve six-year terms each of them. And of course, there's like a little bit of a lead-in time because they'd all be elected at once, where some of them served shorter terms at the start. But point is, they are people in our communities. They have to be living in Maine. They have open meetings that are subject to freedom of access laws. And in order to best serve the public, I think they would be doing a lot of public outreach. And that's something that in talking to managers and board members from other consumer utilities in the country, I've been really impressed with how much local engagement they have. I think Sacramento Municipal Utility District, they said they're hosting 1300 community meetings a year.David RobertsGood grief.Nicole GrohoskiA couple a day on average. But they have, I think they said 95% customer satisfaction. So people feel like they're valued, their experience matters and they also have a plan to get to 100% clean energy by 2030. So our Pine Tree power governance is very much in the spirit of "It's a public good. It should be publicly governed."David RobertsThere's a little bit of a controversy in Maine a few years ago. I don't remember all the details, but it was about a big transmission line that would have brought hydro from Canada down through the woods of Maine. It was fought and I believe killed by popular resistance. And there was a lot of, at least nationally there was a lot of talk of like here again we have environmentally minded locals blocking things for environmental reasons, but in a short-sighted way that's going to be worse for the environment overall. In the long term, they're NIMBY's. We've got to figure out a way of dealing with this problem, et cetera, et cetera.So this leads to my question, which is: if you have a governing board that is elected by local people, and it is the local people who are often the source of the NIMBYism, do you not have some fears? That this would lead to a more NIMBY rather than less NIMBY operation of the utility, which is going to be difficult when, as you say, this is the time when every state everybody needs to be increasing and bolstering their transmission systems. Do you worry that local control is going to translate into more rather than less NIMBY opposition to new lines?Nicole GrohoskiI'll put it in a way that I think makes sense to me as a person in Maine who's intimately familiar with what you laid out, which is at the root of that decision, was a fundamental lack of trust in Central Maine Power. A trust that it would be doing anything in our best interest, that it would be giving us appropriate benefits, that it was really after anything more than profits. And so I think it wouldn't be true that as soon as Pine Tree Power was created that everyone would immediately trust the company. But I do think it would be a fresh start.And on top of that, with elected and appointed leaders spending time in communities and just energy literacy, I think in general would increase because it's something we would be talking about more if we had to elect the board. I'll say I think that people's interest in energy policy has gone through the roof this year compared to where it was in the past. And people are asking just really great questions, a new curiosity around electricity that I hadn't seen before growing up here. So I think that the outcome would actually be that folks would feel like they had a say in how the transmission was cited, who was benefiting if we remove the profit motive.Imagine if that money that would have gone to profit was actually going to community benefits. That might really change how people feel. And I think that here in Maine we are sort of skeptical of what's being pushed on us by people from away, quote unquote, is a saying we have. I don't always love it, but it is accurate in this case. You've got Central Main Power, owned by Avangrid, then owned by Iberdrola, based in Spain, telling us, "Oh, we've got this great deal for you." And people are skeptical of that. So I think we have a greater chance actually of doing transmission right and in a way that people can accept if there was this broader community process and a lack of for-profit skepticism that comes naturally to us here.David RobertsOne of the criticisms of the two existing utilities is that they're kind of slow-walking clean energy in particular. So I wonder if you could just say a word about what that means and why and how we think Pine Tree would be better on that score. Because it's not obvious. These are just wires utilities, right? So they're not dealing directly with clean energy generation. So what are the issues around clean energy and how will Pine Tree be an improvement?Nicole GrohoskiSo, historically, we have seen that the utilities do spend a lot of time and money in the State House, not just behind the scenes, but also right out publicly testifying against clean energy bills. Now, that has slowed in recent years, but certainly in the previous gubernatorial administration, that was a very common practice.David RobertsIf I could just pause there, I guess I just don't fully understand why, like, if you're a company that's just running wires, what's it to you?Nicole GrohoskiRight back to the return on equity question. So, these utilities make more money when they build transmission lines than when they upgrade the distribution system. They get a higher rate of return, right? So it is in their best interest to continue with the model of large far-off generation facilities compared to local rooftop solar type solutions or microgrids or battery storage. So that's the first part of the problem, I think. And secondly, I think some of these utilities just really are not very nimble. They're sort of in the business that they've been in for a long time and thinking about how to create a dynamic grid that has time of use rates that actually work, for instance, or bidirectional power.We have had smart meters in this state for over a decade and I can't see how they're being used in any kind of smart way. I mean, people are still calling the utilities to let them know the power is out.David RobertsIt's just baffling to me. Like, if I'm in the utility business, this is like my time to be a hero, you know what I mean? After 100 years of sleepy operation in the background, all of a sudden the world is calling upon me to be cutting edge and be the hero and save the world and instead, I'm just going to "I just want to keep doing things the way I've been doing." I don't know, people are disappointing.Nicole GrohoskiNo comment.David RobertsYeah. So I read in one of the stories about this. One of the opponents of this measure said, quote, "The people behind this proposal have no actual plan to lower rates, improve reliability and enable a swifter energy transition." The implication being that the fans of this measure just think that making the utility public is going to be sort of automagically, make everything easier and cleaner and cheaper, but there's no actual plan to do so. Is there a specific plan for how Pine Tree would operate and how it would do these things? Has anyone modeled out sort of you know what I mean?Is there more than just hope that the structure will do the work for you?Nicole GrohoskiWell, I think that the person who said that spent some time cherry-picking certain things in the ballot language but missed the bigger picture here, which is we have to start by saying yes on November 7 and then at that time then we have an election for the board of directors and it goes on from there. But until that time the Maine Public Utilities Commission cannot compel the utilities to give over their very private data to do that kind of in-depth modeling that is going to be the very next task for the Pine Tree Power Board once it exists and that is spelled out in the ballot question. You know, these utilities, I'm just going to be level about it: They don't have a plan either.And I can tell you that because the legislature last year had to pass a law requiring them to do integrated grid planning and think about how is it going to work to increase renewables on the grid, to increase demand as people install more heat pumps and use electric vehicles. They're not doing that or if they are doing it they're not doing it in any kind of way that is transparent or subject to review. So I think it's like a great bait and switch tactic.David RobertsAren't they supposed to create integrated resource plans? I thought that was something that all utilities had to do.Nicole GrohoskiI think they have some planning, but it is clear from the way that the interconnection queues are looking, the very high cost they're pushing onto developers for even just what turns out to be basic grid maintenance, there isn't really — maybe they have something that says "plan" at the top, but I'm not sure that all the nuts and bolts are actually there.David RobertsYeah, I meant to hit on interconnection before because that's one of the critiques also is that they are slow-walking interconnection of distributed resources, etc. Presumably they're doing that, or at least they say they're doing that to protect the grid. Do we have reason to believe they're slow-walking that on purpose such that Pine Tree could substantially speed up the interconnection queue?Nicole GrohoskiWe do have reason to believe that specifically because of all the complaints that we've received as legislators. We did ask the Public Utilities Commission to look into this and they hired the Interstate Renewable Energy Council, or IREC, to do a study. And the IREC findings were basically especially around Versant, which is in eastern and northern Maine. These guys are some of the worst actors we've ever seen in the United States. They are requiring things that they can't justify why they're requiring them, and we can find no reason from an engineering perspective to require them. And your listeners might find it fascinating to know that for Versant customers, the average cost of interconnecting your rooftop solar to the grid is $10,000.David RobertsJesus.Nicole GrohoskiThat is not normal is what I'm told. Another great story that I've heard from a couple of constituents is that they need a transformer upgrade to interconnect their rooftop solar. Okay, that might be true, and that upgrade is going to cost you $1,000 - $1,500. But we can't get the parts for two years.David RobertsOh my goodness.Nicole GrohoskiNow the same solar installers that are working in my area are also working in CMP's area Central Maine Power. Because I live my district includes both, and the installers are saying "CMP says they can get it in two months." So then I asked my constituents "Can you file a formal complaint at the PUC using this process we had to create because this is such a rampant issue?" And when they do that and go through the whole process, then that transformer has arrived and been installed within two to three months time. So I don't know what to say about it.I can only say what I see from the outside and the experience that I have heard about from people that pick up the phone and call me. But it seems shady to go from two years to two months.David RobertsLet's grapple here with what is probably the biggest and most difficult issue around all this, which is say Maine voters say yes to this, and it goes forward. Basically, it would involve the state of Maine buying these two utilities assets from the utilities, and depending on who you believe those assets are worth anywhere from $5 to I think CMP is now saying it could get up to $13 billion. So that's a big public expense. So how's that going to get financed? Who's going to pay it? How long is it going to take to pay it? Have we thought through in any detail how that process works?Nicole GrohoskiYes, definitely. And that was a big part of what the London Economics analysis included was that legal analysis of what that purchase price process would look like. We also have been able to look at this transition as has happened in other communities in the country, and we created an expedited and refereed process to determine the purchase price. And all told, from this fall to switch over to Pine Tree Power, we expect it to take three to four years. What we know from the LEI study is that this is a completely legal and constitutional effort. It's helpful to remind folks that because these are actual monopolies, they only have the right to be doing business because we give it to them.And in the Maine statutes, it literally says the PUC can take it away.David RobertsYeah, I mean, of course, again, this drives me crazy. I'm reading articles about this and of course, just once I'd like there to be a good argument had in public instead of idiots. But all the Republicans are now saying "This is a communist takeover of private business by the state. It's Communists. Why don't we call it Chinese electricity?" I've read, some of the dumbest quotes.Nicole GrohoskiAre you in the comments section?David RobertsNo, these are legislators. This is not even I mean, there's barely a distinction anymore. But like, the Republican legislators are saying this now. So it's worth just emphasizing the point that you just made, sort of drawing a line under it, which is these businesses have been granted a monopoly by the state and granted guaranteed returns by the state. So of course the state can take that back. Of course this is legal. Like if the state grants, the state can take away if the state is granting it on the grounds that it will be of service to the state's residents and it's not anymore, then of course the state can take that monopoly back.It's just crazy viewing. It's not like Maine is going to go take over the potato chip industry.Nicole GrohoskiWe have no interest in that.David RobertsThis is not a normal business. Utilities are not normal private businesses. They are state basically state created entities. And so of course, the state can uncreate them if it wants to. Sorry, I know that will not have any effect at all on the dumb things Republicans say about this.Nicole GrohoskiWell, I do want to clarify. We do have some really strong Republican support, from certain legislators as well as just regular folks. I mean, that was the greatest thing about collecting signatures for this initiative, which I did and my family did and many other people I know was that when you remove it from a debate in a state house, regular people just get it. They get that this is really important to our economy to have an electricity grid that works for us and for our health and safety. And they also understand that maybe this is not a place for profits.And I've had folks wearing Birkenstocks and folks wearing MAGA hats sign the petition because I think Maine people are really resilient. We are proud of our ability to solve problems and I think the majority of us believe this is something that we can do and that we probably could do it better than some far-off foreign monopoly.David RobertsAnyway, I interrupted you. You were talking about how these giant bills are going to get paid. Basically you say it's going to take about four years to do all the work, to transfer everything over. Would the $5 billion or however much it turns out to be, be paid off over those four years or how will it be financed?Nicole GrohoskiNo. So we did meet with some municipal bond banks. This sort of acquisition, like in the case of Long Island, has been paid off over a long period of time. And that's how we're able to see the rate reduction. You know again, similar to renting versus owning. I was able to buy a home. My mortgage is less than my rent would be, but I am still paying it off. And even with the interest, it's still less. So we have the ability through revenue bonding to borrow that money backed by the ratepayers, not actually by the state government and the general fund, but by the ratepayers.We have the ability to borrow that money, and then pay it off over time, and borrow more as we need to build out the grid.David RobertsWould it being a public utility enable it to draw on state money? Because one of the points a few pods ago we were talking about a new offshore wind bill that would draw money from state coffers rather than from ratepayers. And one of the sort of arguments and defense of that is taking tax money from state taxpayers is much more progressive than taking it from ratepayers. Basically you're getting a much more progressive source of funding. Is there any talk of Pine Tree being able to draw on state money or would it still just operate as a utility and get all its money and revenue and stuff from ratepayers the same way a private utility would?Nicole GrohoskiThe enabling statute has it separate. I think that that is really important, especially to our union workers because they had concerns about becoming public sector workers and what that would mean for their right to strike, for instance. So we have ensured that they are private sector workers.David RobertsOh, interesting.Nicole GrohoskiWhether or not a future legislature might say we're able to maintain that and have the utility doing efficiency programs that are paid through the taxpayer dollars versus ratepayer dollars, I can't predict. To your point about regressivity, one of the things that is required in the bill language for the Pine Tree Power Company is to establish lower rates for low income residential customers in the first five year plan. So we are trying to address that challenge that you're absolutely correct. It's the regressive funding structure, unlike taxation.David RobertsAlso, one of the criticisms of these utilities is that they're sending all these cutoff notices, they're cutting off people from power, which is bad for all obvious reasons. But is Pine Tree going to pledge not to do that? And if it doesn't do that, where does that money to cover those people's rates come from? Because that would seem like an additional expense because whatever you might say about cutting people off, it does save the utilities money.Nicole GrohoskiRight. Well, we do have what's called the Arrearage Management Program here in Maine and that does help folks get out of arrears and that is ratepayer funded program. So that is a somewhat fiscally progressive approach to that. You know the details of that program are probably more than you'd want to know. But the long and short is if you get back on track then some of your debt will be just forgiven. But it's not forgiven by the utilities, it's forgiven by your neighbors.David RobertsRight. Well, would Pine Tree pledge not to cut people off? Like, is that part of the campaign here or how would it treat cutoffs ?Nicole GrohoskiYou know, it's a good question that surprisingly I don't know if anyone has posed to me it is not in the legislation one way or the other. I'm of the belief that if rates go down and we could have rates that were income stratified to some extent, that the amount of disconnection notices that we saw earlier this year would go way down just economically. But I think it would be really a decision of the board. And then I'm also not sure if the Public Utilities Commission if there are any rules on the books because this utility, unlike a lot of consumer utilities in the country, is regulated by the Public Utilities Commission as if it were an investor owned utility.So, there may be specific rules about that already.David RobertsYeah, I would just think though, if you're trying to sell this, making this public rather than private, one of the things you could sell is like we think this is a public right to have electricity on some level.Nicole GrohoskiThe one other thing about it that just comes to mind is that a couple of years ago during COVID, people were especially concerned about the disconnection notices, not knowing if they were going to be receiving a next paycheck but we were told that the disconnection notices were necessary in order to provide certain assistance. So the utilities said, "Oh don't worry, we're not actually going to disconnect anyone but we have to do this to get them into this next program." So, I don't know if that would come into play here but I'm not convinced that the utilities wouldn't have ultimately shut the people off but that was a way that they spun it at least.David RobertsOne more kind of semi-technical question that's a little bit of a side thing but is of interest, I think, to Volts listeners. One of the provisions in the IRA, the Inflation Reduction Act, is that it makes some of the tax credits direct pay, which means you don't have to pay taxes to get it back. You can get it back directly as a check and one of the categories of entities that would qualify for this is tax-exempt entities. So I wonder, has anyone done any thinking, and maybe this is too in the weeds but done any thinking about what advantage it might pose for Maine to have its utility be tax-exempt, whether it will benefit from the IRA through that.Nicole GrohoskiIt is something we're thinking about because we were excited to see that direct pay provision sort of leveling the playing field for publicly owned generation which is another topic I'm very interested in, but I think it remains to be seen. In the case of Pine Tree Power, it is not allowed to own generation and it may be permitted to own some storage as is necessary to maintain the grid functioning. So I'm not entirely sure that that direct IRA provision would help in this case but what I think it does is sort of change the paradigm a bit there that may then also shift to other things. If the federal government says let's have an ITC or PTC for transmission lines, the next step might be —David RobertsPraise be.Nicole GrohoskiWell, let's make sure we set it up the same way we've just done with generation. Yes, I think it's a really important conversation even if it doesn't have a direct immediate effect on the Pine Tree Power Company.David RobertsInteresting. As I think anyone could predict just from what we've said so far, even knowing nothing else about it but what we've said so far, I'm sure people could predict that the private utilities in question are not excited about this happening and have mobilized to prevent it from happening. So tell us a little bit about the campaign against this. Is it as hysterical as one would predict?Nicole GrohoskiYeah, I mean hysterical is one word for it. Deeply troubling is another phrase that comes to mind. But these are utilities, like I mentioned, about the amount of profit that they make and that's just off of their Central Maine Power and Versant holdings. But Central Maine Power is just a small, small fraction of the entire Iberdrola conglomerate. So, yeah, we have seen them spending a lot of money against the campaign. They've put $27 million toward the campaign, both utilities, as of the end of June. So we expect to see more of course.David RobertsNot a small amount in a small state.Nicole GrohoskiNo. And honestly, talking to my neighbors, people are very upset by it. They're kind of irate that they're the people whose power goes out and doesn't come back on for a couple of days. They're the folks who had to spend $10,000 for a generator which isn't part of a clean energy solution last I checked. And there go the utilities putting $27 million toward just running ads.David RobertsYeah, I mean, are they experiencing it as a flood of ads? I mean, $27 million must allow you to kind of dominate the airwaves.Nicole GrohoskiYes, the airwaves are definitely bought up, as far as we can tell. And they have just their two donors, which are the utility parent companies, which are Avangrid and Enmax.David RobertsAre they funding 100% of this?Nicole Grohoski100%, yes. And these utilities, lest they tell you how amazing and green and climate-friendly they are, they are gas utilities, Avangrid and Enmax anyhow. And then on the flip side, we are a smaller organization. We don't have Mainers' pockets to pickpocket on a regular basis.David RobertsI'm guessing you guys haven't hit $27 million yet. How much money have you have?Nicole GrohoskiYou're closer to around a million, I think. And that's over 1000 donors, most of whom are just regular donors giving what they can because they understand these differences. And also I think the big difference is the utilities are putting out a lot of fear, doubt, scare tactic type ads. And on the flip side, what we're offering people is something different and something positive, something that we can all lean into and make sure that it succeeds because it would actually be ours. So I think that's resonating with folks.David RobertsWhat are the scare tactics specifically? Are they saying this will be expensive or what?Nicole GrohoskiYeah, expensive. I mean, you quoted some of their numbers and it's laughable. They're like, "Oh, we're going to get $13.5 billion." Well, they're worth $5.4 billion. That's what they pay taxes on. That's what they filed their official paperwork saying. So I think especially as we learn more and more about how decrepit certain portions of this grid are, they'd be lucky to get a little bit over that. So that's one of them. "Is there a plan? We don't have a plan, but do they have a plan?" is another one. You know what, a lot of it is just to my sensibility is a little insulting to Maine people.You don't know what you're doing, that kind of thing. Meanwhile, we're going to keep the line workers who are doing the work and we're giving them a retention bonus because we value their expertise, because they're the ones that actually know how the grids work, not the CEOs and the CFOs.David RobertsYeah, it is historically pretty easy though just to I mean, when you're fighting against change, you barely even need arguments. You know what I mean? You can just say "Booga booga booga change" and you're halfway there, it seems like.Nicole GrohoskiWell, I think that's why we're in such a unique position in Maine because while that can be kind of an initial gut reaction, I think people here are curious. We've certainly seen plenty of campaigns where one side was outspent a lot by the other and it didn't make a difference. We have led in other policy areas. Ranked choice voting could be one recent example. Clean elections one of the only states that splits our electoral college votes. So I think Maine people, I think we're interested in things that are different if they make sense to us.David RobertsWhere is the public on this? Do we know do we have enough polling or survey data or what have you to know kind of what the level of support is or where the public is on this? Do we have a barometer? Do we have a measure here?Nicole GrohoskiYeah, I think the most recent public polling was probably a couple of months ago. But what it showed was there were people that were solidly in each camp but a lot of undecided voters and it really put us in a dead heat in terms of the people that were decided. And what I think is interesting is folks are not being swayed by Central Maine Power and Versant ads mainly because we don't trust them. They have not been good faith actors.David RobertsAre they creating fake groups like "Mainers for puppy dogs and grandma"?Nicole GrohoskiYes, Maine Affordable Energy is one of them. Yeah, so they sound pretty good, but all you have to do is google that and you find out pretty quickly, because of our disclosure rules, that's 100% utility funded.David RobertsTo the extent that the public supports this, are they viewing it as primarily a green thing, a thing about clean energy? Or is it primarily " Screw these out of state —," you know what I mean? Like a Maine pride kind of thing. Is it a reliability? Do you know what it is about this that the public has taken from it? What it is the public is supporting when the public supports it?Nicole GrohoskiThat's a great question and it does vary depending on the person and their interest and maybe even where they live in the state because the utility rates are the worst where I live compared to all the other districts in the state. So it depends. I think if you're a person who tried to interconnect and you got told you have to wait two years and $10,000, then it might be about greening the grid. But I think for a lot of folks underlying whatever their specific reason might be, it is that question of trust. I think about this all the time we have aggressive clean electricity goals, but 50% of our carbon emissions in this state are coming from vehicles and we are the most heating oil dependent state in the country.So we've got to get people onto the electricity grid in order to have any hope of cleaning it up. But it's really hard for me to knock on someone's door and say, "I really hope you'll consider changing your whole house over to heat pumps, even though we have below zero temperatures sometimes. Or I know that the power went out for a week last year, but would you consider an EV?" So I think that in order to make this transition work, we have to have utilities that people trust and that are providing just basic service. People should not have to think as hard as they're thinking about if their electricity is going to be there for them.David RobertsYes, that's such an important point. And so generalizable too, like if electrification is the thing, then people have got to trust the institutions in charge of electrification and they do not have much public trust these days. So that's an interesting argument in favor, I think, of making utilities more accountable, more public. What about the other big argument against one of the big scare things is you have to buy all these assets, which is like a big bill, a big one-time bill. The other scare story is that utilities are going to immediately sue, that this is going to get mired in the courts, and that it's going to take 4, 5, 6, 7 years to even get it all settled, and until then it will be chaos and no one will know what's going on and blah, blah, blah.So realistically, what's your view of, say, voters approve this in November? What is your view of sort of how that plays out and when and how the inevitable legal wrangling gets resolved?Nicole GrohoskiBasically, the Pine Tree Power Board will offer a certain amount for the utility infrastructure. I don't expect that the utilities will accept that on first pass you're buying a used car, you don't just take the first price. Right. So we would expect some negotiation, but if that doesn't work, then it will go to the courts. And there is a refereed process that's spelled out in the legislation in the Superior Court that then can be appealed to the Supreme Court in the state of Maine. But there are timelines set up. So it cannot go on for years and years and years, because at some point, if you lose or win a case, that's it.You have one appeal. I think it's funny that this argument is coming from the utilities because if there are any lawsuits and if it got dragged out, as they say, even though we've protected against that to the best of our ability, that's coming from them. That is a choice that they are making.David Roberts"Don't make us do this."Nicole GrohoskiYeah, so it's kind of ironic but additionally, one of the things that comes up is how do we know the utilities will continue to invest in the meantime? And it's like the best parallel I could say to that is if I'm going to sell my house, I don't just stop fixing things before I sell it. I keep it up in really good shape. And in fact, utilities would have an incentive to invest more because usually they don't just sell it for exactly what it's worth. There's usually a multiplier. We expect it to be like 1.5 times.So we actually have increased the oversight capacity of the Public Utilities Commission to ensure that there isn't any of that sort of last-minute gold plating going on, because that is actually what we'd expect, not the further disrepair scenario.David RobertsOh, so you think if this goes through, they'll plow a bunch of money into high dollar upgrades just to boost their price that you have to pay for them?Nicole GrohoskiThat's what I would do if I were them. Fortunately, we're going to keep an eye on that on behalf of Maine people. But if you are able to invest a million dollars here and in two to three years time make $1.5 million because that's the multiplier that the courts assign, that's pretty good.David RobertsYeah. So what's your timeline in your head then? What do you envision? At what point is there just the one public utility operating and all this is behind us? Were you willing to predict?Nicole GrohoskiYeah, we're looking at fall 2027, so four years from now, and that includes having the elections for the board members next year. So that's the first major hurdle, which I think is exciting, especially because living in one of the more rural parts of Maine, we don't always feel here that our interests are represented at the Public Utilities Commission, which is folks from southern Maine. And I think this geographic component is really compelling to, you know, so that's our first step. And then basically we have to get a lot of information. I mean, the board would have to get a lot of information from the utilities in order to know what purchase price they should put forward, what's the business plan, what does the revenue bonding look like, and make sure they can secure that financing through a large municipal bond market.So that takes time and we want to make sure we do it right. On the other hand, doing nothing is also a risk that I think sets people in my generation and folks younger than me behind economically and environmentally for decades. So a couple of years to do it right is definitely worth it.David RobertsOkay, final question then. I can see lots of Maine-specific reasons why one might argue that this is a good deal; these utilities are particularly bad, Maine has a particular set of problems, it has a particular sort of public culture, a culture of participation and a culture of civic engagement, et cetera, et cetera. Lots of Maine-specific reasons why you could make the case for this. I wonder, to what extent do y'all have your eyes on other states and trying to make this the beginning of something bigger? Like, do you believe that taking private utilities public is a good idea across the board?Is that something you'd like to see become a national trend or are you just purely focused on Maine? How do you think about the influence this may or may not have on other states?Nicole GrohoskiI think that all the issues we've had in Maine are what led us to looking around for solutions, but it is a structural imbalance that we have with the regulated monopolies when they're for profit. So, I do think it is something that is exportable to other states. We people in our coalition have been working with and talking to people elsewhere in the country who are looking to make a similar transition also elsewhere in the world. It's kind of interesting. The Scottish power is also owned by Avengrid, which owns Central Maine Power, and they are looking to become a public, truly public utility over there.So, in doing this work, we've found a lot of interest for that business model change. And I think as we become another case study, we are standing on the shoulders of other case studies that have happened in this country. And as we become another one for folks, I think that we'll see some opportunities arise. And I would like to see that because I want every American to be able to afford their electricity and to be able to have clean energy and not a lot of hurdles to getting there, because we are literally all in this together as a country and as a world with our climate crisis.David RobertsThat seems like a wonderful note to wrap up on. Nicole Grohoski, thanks so much for coming on and walking through this with us. It's super fascinating and I think it will be an example to the rest of the country one way or the other. However it plays out.Nicole GrohoskiWe're hoping that we're a positive "yes" example. We're working every day toward that. And I want to thank you, David, for having me on and talking about this topic, which is, I think, endlessly important and fascinating.David RobertsAgreed, agreed. OK. Thanks, Nicole. Thank you for listening to the Volts podcast. It is ad-free, powered entirely by listeners like you. If you value conversations like this, please consider becoming a paid Volts subscriber at volts. WTF. Yes, that's volts.WTF so that I can continue doing this work. Thank you so much and I'll see you next time. Get full access to Volts at www.volts.wtf/subscribe

Leandro Vieira e Sophia Martins, escritora e especialista em vendas no mercado imobiliário, batem um papo sobre vendas, negócios e como os profissionais podem estruturar uma carreira baseada em vendas para atingir um padrão de vida dos sonhos. > Ouça no Spotify e acompanhe o Café com ADM pelo grupo exclusivo no WhatsApp. Conteúdo patrocinado MÊS DO ADMINISTRADOR Se você quer reforçar o papel do profissional de administração nas organizações, filie-se ao CFA e ajude a construir o futuro da profissão. EVENTO ONLINE E GRATUITO Participe da Terceira Jornada Acadêmica de Administração. As inscrições podem ser feitas por aqui. Sobre a entrevistada Sophia Martins é corretora de imóveis com uma década de experiência na área. Tem formação superior e mestrado em Direito pela PUC de São Paulo, além de MPAs em Administração e Negócios pela Mackenzie e Harvard e MBA pela Fundação Getúlio Vargas. Ela é certificada CIPS, uma das mais importantes certificações internacionais na área imobiliária, emitida pela National Association of Realtors, dos Estados Unidos. Nas redes sociais, Sophia acumula mais de 1 milhão de seguidores com dicas sobre vendas, mercado imobiliário e atendimento de excelência. Ela é autora do livro A Profissão de Milhões, lançado este ano e que está a caminho de se tornar um best-seller na seção de Administração e Negócios.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Troy Cross and Bitcoin Bassload Treble + Bass = Energy Grid Harmony   In this electrifying episode of BitBuyBit, Max and Jon speak with energy market expert and Pleb Miner Mafia Capo, Bitcoin Bassload as well as Philosopher and Bitcoin enthusiast Troy Cross from the Bitcoin Policy Institute.   The relationship between Bitcoin mining and the American energy industry is complex, nuanced, wrought with acronyms, oversight, and regulation. The purpose of this conversation is to find where we agree and disagree on the relationship between Bitcoin mining and the energy industry and what we as Pleb Miners can do when our energy is focused and pointed in the same direction. Troy and Bassload come from different perspectives when looking at the relationship between Bitcoin mining and energy, but their hearts and minds are focused on making sure that Bitcoin wins.   In this discussion Bassload defines terms like the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Regional Transmission Organizations (RTO), and Independent Systems Operators (ISO) and explains how regulation and government policy steer energy markets. He discusses the Physical Grid versus Policy Grid, balancing authorities, generation fleet mix, and Meredith Angwin's fatal trifecta for the grid: over reliance on renewables, backing up the renewables with just in time resources, and overdependence on neighbors. Bassload offers advice on creating relationships with energy providers: 1. Print the load 2. Pay an invoice. Bitcoin Bassload's Energy Market Inflows can be found on his Substack in which he puts out frequent updates.    Troy discusses the unique characteristics of Bitcoin mining and its relationship with energy, particularly in the context of environmentalism and regulatory arbitrage. He highlights that Bitcoin's decentralized nature and algorithmically fixed production makes it resistant to local regulations and taxes. His point in conveying this, is that Bitcoin mining can take advantage of excess energy in regions with corrupt governments, it can bypass restrictions, and potentially disrupt the energy market. The discussion emphasizes that Bitcoin's fundamental value is tied to the cost of energy rather than fiat currency. Over the long term, government regulations and subsidies may not significantly impact Bitcoin mining, or its adoption. Troy expands on this theory in this recent article.   Treble and Bass = Grid Harmony   Terms and Definitions   FERC- FERC was originally called the Federal Power Commission to then become the Federal Regulatory Commission created on October 1 1977. The FPA was originally designed to coordinate federal hydropower development (in 1920) then in 1935 it was given the independent regulatory status to then regulate both hydropower and electricity.  Then in 1938 the natural gas act gave FPA jurisdiction over interstate NG pipelines and wholesale sales.  FERC was created due to a response to the oil crisis of 1973 and thus passing the Department of Energy Organization act of 1977 in an effort to consolidate agencies into a ‘department of energy'. DOE was born.  Congress insisted that the independent regulatory body be retained. FERC originally was to determine whether wholesale electricity prices were unjust and unreasonable  If so regulate the pricing and give some refunds to ratepayers FERC an independent organization that its commissioners are appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate Order 888 was issued in 1996 which created the RTO's (regional transmission organizations) in response to the Energy Policy Act in 1992.       RTO's- Organized by FERC to have what were the former power pools to ‘rebrand' themselves as independent transmission operators that would be able to compete in a wholesale electric market administered by RTO's.  PJM, NYISO and ISONE were first in line. Like an ISO they operate transmission systems and develop innovative procedures to manage transmission equitably.    ISO's- Independent System Operators were designed to consolidate and manage the operation of transmission facilities to provide nondiscriminatory open transmission service for all generators and transmission customers.   Traditional wholesale markets were in the SE, SW and NW and most were vertically integrated where they own generation, transmission and distribution systems to serve electricity consumers.  They also many include federal systems: Bonneville Power System Tennessee Valley Authority Western Area Power Administration   At the wholesale level, the RTO's and the ISO's is managing economic dispatch of generators and its auctions to the clearing price.  Less expensive power gets dispatched first.  RTO controls the bids, they know the cost of fuel, and they know the marginal cost of the next kwh your generator plant makes.  One can add a risk premium to the bids but the RTO's are checking. (Meredith Angwin)    TYPES of RTO's and ISO's CAISO- California Independent System Operator ERCOT- Electric Reliability Council of Texas SPP- SouthWest Power Pool MISO- Midcontinent Independent System Operator (15 states and canadian province of Manitoba)  SouthEast Power Pool PJM- Pennsylvania New Jersey and Maryland NYISO New York Independent System Operator ISONE Independent System operator of New England    Vertically integrated- this is where the same entity owns all of the generation, transmission and distribution to service electricity consumers in the given region that they are in.   PUC's- Public Utility Commission were designed to do a couple of things: Balance the needs of consumers AND utilities  Ensure safe and reliable utility service at reasonable rates Protect public interest Educate consumers to make independent and informed utility choices Typically the PUC's were designed for the consumer, but they are also heavily “in bed' with the utilities Regulate electric, gas, telecommunications, water and wastewater facilities Typically appointed by the governor serving 4-6 year terms. Typically regulate all investor owned utilities in their state Municipalities and cooperative utilities are often exempt from PUC regulations    PUCs often use non-adjudicatory processes to address new and evolving issues. This would include traditional rulemakings, in addition to informal stakeholder collaborative processes. Over the past decade, the stakeholder process has become one of the mainstays of issue resolution. In these proceedings, professional facilitators are often used and the parties work toward a narrowing of issues or their complete resolution through a negotiated or shared agreement. Typical participants include utilities, ratepayer advocates, environmental advocates, and industry advocates.    Load Shape- the amount of energy consumption one uses, measured in watts or kilowatts over a period of time.  When looking at the curve of how that energy is consumed, the shape of that curve is what is monitored.  If flat, good.  If not and seeing spikes means that the shape is inconsistent with the amount of watts consumed over time   BTU- A British Thermal Unit, the base unit of measure for measuring energy in the US.  a btu is the amount of energy required to heat one pound of water    Joule- joule, unit of work or energy in the International System of Units (SI); it is equal to the work done by a force of one newton acting through one metre. Named in honour of the English physicist James Prescott Joule, it equals 107 ergs, or approximately 0.7377 foot-pounds.   Watt- the SI unit of power, equivalent to one joule per second, corresponding to the power in an electric circuit in which the potential difference is one volt and the current one ampere. 1 watt = 1J/s   Baseload- Baseload electricity generation creates 24/7 power to the grid to meet the base energy needs of the U.S. While peaking generation must follow the varying hourly electricity needs as demand rises and falls, base load generation operates constantly to support the increment of demand that is always there no matter the time of day or day of the week. https://energytransition.nema.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/NEMA-QuickFacts-Baseloadgeneration.pdf   Balancing Authority- The BA makes sure that the supply of power on the grid is exactly matched with the requirement for power always.  The BA must keep voltage within a narrow range and balance demand on the grid.  The BA must also make sure that the VARs (Volts Amps Reactive) are in balance. Refer to page 28-30 of shorting the grid.  “A well run grid is like a good bicyclist on a smooth road, while a more difficult grid (more sudden ups and downs in power or energy requirements) requires more of a balancing-type energy (Meredith Angwin).  60Hz or 60 cycles per second in the US 50HZ or 50 cycles per second everywhere else The responsible entity that integrates resource plans ahead of time, maintains load-interchange-generation balance within a balancing authority area, and supports interconnection frequency in real time.   Energy Auction House- mentioned above and see pages of Mereidth Angwins book shorting the grid pages 91-93   Generation Fleet Mix Nuclear  Coal Natural Gas Oil Hydro Solar Wind Geothermal   Renewable energy- Renewable energy is energy produced from sources like the sun and wind that are naturally replenished and do not run out. Renewable energy can be used for electricity generation, space and water heating and cooling, and transportation. Non-renewable energy, in contrast, comes from finite sources that could get used up, such as fossil fuels like coal and oil. (DOE definition) energy from a source that is not depleted when used, such as wind or solar power. "the environmental benefits of renewable energy" (Oxford Dictionary)   Net Zero- net zero means cutting greenhouse gas emissions to as close to zero as possible, with any remaining emissions re-absorbed from the atmosphere, by oceans and forests for instance. To ‘go net zero' is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and/or to ensure that any ongoing emissions are balanced by removals. (university of oxford) REC- Renewable Energy Credits A renewable energy certificate, or REC (pronounced: rěk, like wreck), is a market-based instrument that represents the property rights to the environmental, social, and other non-power attributes of renewable electricity generation. RECs are issued when one megawatt-hour (MWh) of electricity is generated and delivered to the electricity grid from a renewable energy resource. RECs include several data attributes, including:* Certificate data Certificate type Tracking system ID Renewable fuel type Renewable facility location Nameplate capacity of project Project name Project vintage (build date) Certificate (generation) vintage Certificate unique identification number Utility to which project is interconnected Eligibility for certification or renewable portfolio standard (RPS) Emissions rate of the renewable resource *Note: This list is not exhaustive and, depending on the market in which the REC is generated, other attributes may be associated with the certificate   Three buckets  o   financial- everything to do with pricing, hedging, derivative markets for energy, from wholesale to retail  o   physical- infrastructure related, engineering and design of the implementation and installation of large equipment o   regulatory- politics, rules and regulation from governing bodies aka FERC, DOE, PUC, ISO, RTO and alike.   We hope this to be the first of many discussions on Bitcoin's relationship with energy markets and energy providers. If you enjoyed the discussion in this episode, let us know by boosting on Fountain.    Ungovernable Misfits Socials https://www.ungovernablemisfits.com   Twitter  https://twitter.com/ungovernablemf   Ungovernable Misfits Socials https://www.ungovernablemisfits.com   Twitter  https://twitter.com/ungovernablemf     Show Sponsor - Foundation Devices   Foundation builds Bitcoin-centric tools that empower you to reclaim your digital sovereignty. As a sovereign computing company, Foundation is the antithesis of today's tech conglomerates. Returning to cypherpunk principles, they build open source technology that “can't be evil,”    Thank you Foundation Devices for sponsoring the show.  Use code BITBUYBIT at check out for $10 off your purchase.   https://foundationdevices.com   Show Sponsor: sx6.store   SECURE YOUR BITCOIN IN MARINE GRADE, 316L STAINLESS STEEL!  

En un nuevo capítulo de Réplica, Daniel Mansuy conversó con el licenciado en derecho y profesor de la PUC, Cristián Villalonga, sobre su libro "Revolución y Ley: " del Centro de Estudios Bicentenario.

In this episode, Johanna Bozuwa of the Climate and Community Project shares a progressive vision for permitting reform and the factors that could speed up the US clean-energy buildout.(PDF transcript)(Active transcript)Text transcript:David RobertsTo achieve its Paris climate targets, the US is going to have to build out an enormous amount of clean energy and clean-energy infrastructure in coming years. But that buildout is going slowly — painfully, excruciatingly slowly — relative to the pace that is necessary.This has given rise to considerable debate on the left over what, exactly, is slowing things down. Much of that debate has come to focus on permitting, and more specifically, on permitting under the National Environmental Protection Act, or NEPA.A deal that would have put some restrictions on NEPA in exchange for reforms to transmission planning was effectively killed by progressives toward the end of the last congressional session, leading many people inside and outside the climate movement to accuse progressives of being The Problem. They are so attached to slowing down fossil fuel development with NEPA, the accusation goes, that they are willing to live with it slowing clean energy. And that's a bad trade.Progressives, not surprisingly, disagree! Their take on the whole permitting debate is summarized in a new paper from the Roosevelt Institute and the Climate and Community Project: “A Progressive Vision for Permitting Reform.”The title is slightly misleading, since one of the central points of the paper is that permitting under NEPA is only a small piece of the puzzle — there are many other factors that play a role in slowing clean energy, and many other reforms that could do more to speed it up. I called up one of the paper's co-authors, Johanna Bozuwa of the Climate and Community Project, to ask her about those other reforms, the larger political debate, and the progressive community's take on speed. All right, then. With no further ado, Johanna Bozuwa from the Climate and Community Project. Welcome to Volts, and thank you so much for coming.Johanna BozuwaThank you so much for having me, David.David RobertsThis is a hot topic, as you're well aware, permitting and the larger issues around it. And so, before we jump into specifics, I wanted to start with a few sort of broad, call them philosophical, questions.Johanna BozuwaPerfect.David RobertsAs you know, progressives have been under quite a bit of fire lately, not only from their typical opponents on the right and in the fossil fuel industry, but from a lot of sort of centrists and even a lot of sort of allies in the climate movement. For — I think the general idea is they are too attached to stopping fossil fuels and not yet supportive enough of building out renewable energy. And the mechanisms that they rely on to slow and stop fossil fuels are also slowing and stopping renewable energy. And so I think the general critique is that they ought to swing around and be more pro-building and loosen these requirements, et cetera, et cetera. I'm sure you've heard all this.Johanna BozuwaYes.David RobertsSo I guess I'd just start with this question. Is, do you think the progressive — and by the way, I meant to say this by way of a caveat, I'm going to be sort of using you as a spokesperson for progressivism, which I think we both realize is ridiculous.Johanna BozuwaRight, exactly.David RobertsProgressives are heterogeneous just like anybody else. There's no official progressive position. But as a crude, let's just say as a crude instrument here, we're going to ask you to speak for that perspective as you see it.Johanna BozuwaPerfect.David RobertsSo in your opinion, do you think progressives have taken it into their heart that things are moving too slowly and they desperately need to move faster?Johanna BozuwaMy answer to that question is that I think speed is progressive. You know, David, I don't need to tell this to you or any of the people that listen to this podcast or even progressives. We're dealing with the existential threat of the climate crisis and lives are on the line. And so I think that as progressives, we do need to take the speed question seriously. And I think what I would push back on is the fact that people have this myopic focus on permitting as the thing that's slowing everything down. And especially when I'm talking about permitting, NEPA permitting.David RobertsRight. We're going to definitely get to that.Johanna BozuwaYeah. And I just think that when it comes to this question of "Do progressives believe in speed?" I think that they actually very much do. And one of the things that I get frustrated with sometimes, when I hear these arguments like "Oh, progressives don't want to build anything," I think what progressives are interested in is building the right thing. And if we think about the United States and how our energy system rolls out today, we have a real issue that fossil fuels can expand at the same time as renewable energy is expanding. Like when it comes to fossil fuels, we can actually export that.We are now the biggest net exporter of LNG and crude oil. And I think that progressives are particularly aware that if we do the wrong thing on permitting then we're actually not only expanding renewable energy — and maybe poorly done renewable energy — but also the fossil fuel industry knows how to use these tools so much better than our renewable energy developers. And we are going to see just a massive expansion that we absolutely don't need right now. If we think the climate crisis matters.David RobertsWhat about the argument which goes like this: Fossil fuels are reaching sort of a structural peak and decline. Renewable energy is getting cheaper and cheaper and cheaper. It's on the rise. So if you just, all things being equal, make it easier to build everything across the board, renewable energy will win that race and so it's worth doing.Johanna BozuwaI just don't think that argument is true, look at how much power the fossil fuel industry still has in making these decisions. Like if we look at who is behind the recent push for permitting reform: It was largely the oil and gas industry. There's definitely some more nuance that's there, but they have significant power to move things and move them faster than the clean energy world. It's a question of when you're rolling back some of these bedrock environmental laws that the pie — it's not that the part of renewable energy in the pie is getting bigger. It's that even if we are getting more renewable energy, the pie itself has expanded so that we're having fossil fuels and renewables expanding at the same time.And it's not fully pushing out the power of the fossil fuel industry.David RobertsWell, then, how about this? And this is the final philosophical question before we get down to some nuts and bolts. Do you agree that there are going to be trade-offs as we pursue speed? This is, of course, the big discussion right now is that if you really double down on speed, if you really pursue speed with everything you've got, there are inevitably going to be some trade-offs, some other progressive values that have to take a backseat. And that might be other environmental impacts. It might be impacts on communities. It might be, you know, name it. It might be that we have to loosen up a little bit on those other things.Do you think that there are those trade-offs?Johanna BozuwaI think that there are some trade-offs. You, I think, had my colleague, Thea Riofrancos, on the pod some time ago talking about lithium extraction, right? And the fact that if we are going to decarbonize our transportation sector, it is going to take extraction in order to accomplish that. Right. And there are substantial and significant impacts that has in terms of water contamination in some of the most drought-impacted parts of the United States, that is something that we need to be thinking about. And I think what my hesitation is when it comes to so much of this conversation is that we're talking about deregulation as the way to do speed instead of actually talking about planning and coordination.And from my perspective, it's the planning and coordination that allows us to think through the decisions we're making with a far better sense of what's happening instead of a "get government out of the way, we'll figure it out" project that — it didn't really do great things for the planet. Are we going to do that again and trying to fix it? That seems like a silly mistake to make.David RobertsYeah, that's a really important distinction. I'm glad we get that out up front. Because I hate when we go from, "Yes, there are trade-offs" to therefore "Let it rip, let everything go." As Thea said on the podcast, we can acknowledge those trade-offs and thoughtfully try to minimize them through planning.Johanna BozuwaExactly.David RobertsSo let's start with this. As you say, there's this sort of what we're calling the permitting debate, quote unquote. Permitting debate is actually a bunch of debates and they're all kind of getting squished together under this notion of permitting. But in fact, there's a lot of things going on here other than permitting. So maybe talk just a little bit about all the disparate things that are now sort of getting lumped together under that rubric.Johanna BozuwaExactly. So I think just to put a point on it, often when people are talking about permitting, they're talking about this unfocused conversation about cutting red tape. But really what it comes down to is where the fight is right now in particular on the national stage is around NEPA. So the National Environmental Policy Act, but wrapped up into all of their arguments are all these other pieces that actually are maybe more of the problem than particularly NEPA. So, you know, four of them, just to start us off, obviously we do have NEPA. That's part of the permitting process.We have local and state zoning permits, approvals, things like that. You know, going to Georgia County to make sure that you can put something through. Then you have third, these contracts or arrangements that are actually between private organizations. David, I know you had folks talking about internet connection queues — that often is part of the permitting debate, but it's actually about who gets to go onto the transmission that's being built.David RobertsLet me pause there because I want to make a point that I'm not sure everybody understands and I'm not even sure we made it in that pod. But the ISOs, the ...Johanna BozuwaIndependent service operators. I know I always mess it up. RTOs. ISOs.David RobertsYes, I know. ISOs and RTOs. I could never call that to mind. But anyway, the ones who are sort of running the transmission systems and running these queues are not public organizations. Those are not state organizations. They are private consortia of transmission organizations and utilities and things like that. So it's not something that the state can come in and just directly change. I just think that's worth sort of putting on the record.Johanna BozuwaI think that's a really important point and I think we'll probably dig into this further. But the idea that and I think you talked about this on the pod last time, but there are so many different kind of private actors that are operating within the RTOs and ISOs with not actually a huge amount of oversight, as it currently stands.David RobertsYes, or transparency.Johanna BozuwaOr transparency.David RobertsOr accountability, really.Johanna BozuwaYeah, exactly. And it turns out if we're looking at what's really miring the buildout of renewable energy, a solid amount of it is right there. Is in the interconnection queues. I think it was Southwest PowerPool — takes like eight years sometimes to get the developer to get their project through. And those are for projects that already have their offtaker and have all their permitting in place. So it just feels quite misguided for us to spend all of this time talking about permitting when we could be actually diagnosing the problem —David RobertsAnd you said there was a fourth.Johanna Bozuwa— and there's a fourth. The fourth one, I would say, is just operation and construction permits, like some of the pollution discharge stuff that is at some of these more local levels. And those four don't even include some of the other things that stop things, which is like access to capital, utility squabbles, supply chain slowdowns, these whole host of other issues that are just being swept under the rug because it's very alluring to say, guess what? I have the one quick fix to make sure that renewable energy gets built in the United States.David RobertsAnd local NIMBYism. I'd throw that in.Johanna BozuwaYeah, yeah, local NIMBYism, absolutely. Add it to the pile, exactly. So and NEPA's not going to do things about local NIMBYism in the same way that's the local and state zoning stuff.David RobertsYeah, I think people really want, for obvious reasons, they're frustrated by everything going so slowly and everybody wants there to be sort of like something to cut the Gordian knot, sort of one, as you said, one weird trick. And that's, I think, why people are grasping onto NEPA because it seems like that's one big thing we can argue about and change. But as you say, the reasons here are very disparate. But let's just take a second to talk about NEPA. I go back and forth on this, but is it, do you think the progressive position that NEPA is okay "as is" and doesn't need any changes?Like, do you think there are problems with NEPA and how it's administered?Johanna BozuwaOkay. My feeling on this is that the case about NEPA is overstated, especially as we describe so many other things, even outside of the permitting process that matters. But if we're going to talk about NEPA, I think overall the projects are going through pretty quickly. There was a new study, actually, this month by, I think, David Adelman that did a really comprehensive look at wind and solar NEPA reviews over the past ten years, and he found that less than 5% of Wind and solar projects required. The EIS, like the Environmental Impact Statement, which is the one that takes the most time usually, can be two and a half years or whatever, but they're going through with categorical exclusions or some of these faster ways to move wind and solar projects through, or just projects in general.And he found that there was very little litigation involved, which is often like the dog whistle, I feel like, of some of these folks who are calling for permitting.David RobertsYeah, I was surprised when I looked at that study. It's a relatively low percentage of those projects that get litigated after they're done.Johanna BozuwaRight, exactly. And I think if I were to make any improvements to NEPA, the thing I would do is bulk up the administrative state. Jamie Gibbs Pleune wrote a kind of corresponding piece of research to our permitting report where she investigated and talked about NEPA in particular with Roosevelt. But she was looking at another paper and found of 40,000 NEPA decisions that the US Forest Service looked at, the biggest causes of delays were actually from a lack of experienced staff, budget instability, and honestly, delays from the applicants themselves not getting their stuff in on time. So I just feel as if we're going to do anything to make NEPA better, give the BLM, give US Forest Service, give EPA far more funds, training, staff empowerment that's going to actually move these projects even faster through the pipeline when they're actually moving relatively quickly.And these places have experienced chronic understaffing and lack of empowerment. So there is work to be done there. I don't want to understate that, but I think that it's a reasonable thing for us to accomplish without rolling back and applying a very neoliberal frame to how we get this job done.David RobertsYeah, I would say it does seem like NEPA has sprawled a bit since it was passed. Originally, it was supposed to be major projects that came under NEPA review, and the court basically decided that all projects were under NEPA review. And so there's just thousands and thousands now that just have these little sort of not very long delays because they get these categorical exemptions. But there's just a lot of — it's very sprawling, it seems like, and unfocused. This is one of those areas where I feel like there are procedures of the administrative state that could work better and more effectively.But at this point, liberals, they've just been under assault for so long. And liberals just know if you open this can of worms, if you open it up to review, there's just a pool of piranhas that want to go in and strip it bare. And so they just don't open it for review. Like, there's so many things like this. Like, if we could have a good faith process of actually trying to do what NEPA is supposed to do better than NEPA does it, I feel like, yeah, there's stuff we could improve, but Joe Manchin doesn't want to improve it.Johanna BozuwaWe don't want Joe Manchin in charge of what NEPA looks like and what's the more muscular version that takes into consideration the real-life climate impacts. Because I don't know when you're talking there, David, a thing that comes up for me is the reality that we will have more things happening on the ground. Like, let's say you put transmission in, we have a wildfire crisis. Now all of a sudden, the stakes are higher when it comes to these things like environmental review that are very material that I think also aren't talked about as much as they should be. And so, yeah, I can imagine things being shifted and changed within NEPA so that it works better for the current context.But I think that, as you describe it, could be a real political problem for us to do that type of work right now. And we have other mechanisms that can move us much more quickly in the interim. Like, is this really the thing we want to be spending our time on as progressives? The answer is no.David RobertsAnd I also think if you look at the reforms that were sort of ended up getting jammed through, like of all the thoughtful things you could do to NEPA to make it work better, just a sort of — page limit, like a page limit on reviews: Seems like it's such a blunt instrument. It's such a crude way of approaching this.Johanna BozuwaOh, and I think it's going to get them into serious trouble. If you want a thing that is going to increase litigation, try adding an arbitrary deadline and page limit to something with no administrative capacity.David RobertsOkay. We could do a whole pod on NEPA, but I don't want to get too — our whole point is it's not the sole or even main impediment here. So at a slightly more granular level, let's talk about what you think is actually slowing down clean energy infrastructure build out. And there's a few categories your report covers starting with transmission, which is, I think, the big one.Johanna BozuwaYeah, totally. And I would agree with you. I mean, transmission planning is kind of in shambles in this country. It's not up to the job.David RobertsYeah, I don't think literally anybody on any side of anything would disagree with you about that.Johanna BozuwaExactly. And I think there are a couple of reasons for that. One is that multistate transmission buildouts are incredibly hard to do in a federalized system. We just have so many different actors that are vying to hold on to their particular part of the market, especially with our vertically integrated utilities that don't have much interest in allowing other utilities into their service territory. And in deregulated states, utilities are kind of out of the picture for deciding where new generation is being built. So there's not a lot of efficiencies that are built into that. So we just get this really haphazard development, if development at all, of our transmission system, which I think is just quite a failure.There are so many clear opportunities to do much more clear planning around this.David RobertsYes. And then what about big large-scale renewable energy projects like big solar, wind, geothermal, what is in practice, slowing down their build out?Johanna BozuwaYeah, so I think that when it comes to some of these larger scale projects around solar or wind, you're running again into projects that aren't thinking strategically about where they're being placed. So if we're looking at the amount of land that we're going to need with the energy transition right. Wind and solar take more space up than one natural gas plant. And I think that there's just like a clear lack of land use planning when it comes to these larger scale projects when we could be doing it far better. Right. And thinking about what are the areas that make sense and are going to limit the amount of impact on our landscape and on communities and actually deploy it in those areas.And I actually think there are answers to that question.David RobertsWell, we're not to answers yet. We're dwelling on problems.Johanna BozuwaOkay, all right —David RobertsSo how does that slow down? I mean, what does that manifest as? How does that slow down the build out?Johanna BozuwaYeah, well, the way that that manifests is that you're putting big renewable energy projects in tension with things like agriculture. You're putting big renewable projects in tension with our biodiversity goals. And so those are the things that are going to potentially mire the development and deployment of these larger scale projects — in addition to getting them attached to the transmission and making sure that it's colocated with the transmission we need.David RobertsYes, the aforementioned interconnection queue issue, which alone is like, "That's a lot of years," which as you say, that's a lot of years tacked on the end of all the other stuff they have to go through. Like once they have to go through all that other stuff, then they get in the interconnection queue and wait and wither, etc. And then another thing you take on here is a big piece of the clean energy buildout, which I think a lot of people don't really think about as much, maybe don't enjoy thinking about as much, which is the sort of minerals and metals aspect of it. A big part of IRA, the Inflation Reduction Act, is an attempt to onshore supply chains so that China does not dominate them.But that means onshoring some mines and some minerals processing which are not necessarily environmentally friendly, not necessarily things people like having in their backyard. So what's slowing those things down?Johanna BozuwaI guess I would say there are two pieces that are happening. One is just that this is a pretty new area and there are so many price fluctuations that are happening. There's all of these big mining companies that are shifting ownership, trying to figure out financing. Right? So there's a lot that's happening there. And mining companies are not the best known for having perfect environmental impact statements or anything like that, that's going to get them mired right. And then you add in the fact that as we talked about earlier, a lot of where these lithium reserves are is also in extremely — like the likelihood for drought is a lot higher if you're looking, for instance, at the Salton Sea in California or, you know, over in Nevada, these are places that we actually have to be extremely careful about. And also it just takes a really long time to build a mine like this isn't something that happens the next day. Right. It's like 10 to 15 years in the future type thing. So it is a longer time frame that's going to be even longer if we aren't thinking, again, about who is impacted, how they are going to be impacted by the mining itself. What is that going to do to air quality, water quality, all of these different things?It's a really big part of the permitting discussion, or of the transition discussion in particular that is being discounted in the United States.David RobertsAnd one more bit on problems, before we transition to recommendations. I noticed that one thing you don't get into a lot in the report is the expression of those state and local level permitting issues. And a lot of those I think, are tied to environmental review. And a lot — like, for instance, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is just sort of like legendarily at this point, a tool for local NIMBYs to stop things happening. Like we just read a story that was bouncing around Twitter a few days ago about these wealthy people — I forget what county they were in — but they were suing because someone had moved a playground closer to their house.They didn't like the sound of the kids playing and so they sued. And part of it was that the city had not done a proper environmental review under CEQA of moving the playground. And you hear stories like that all the time. Do you think you said that NEPA is not as big a problem as people say? Do you think state level environmental review is a serious problem, a serious barrier, at least in some places?Johanna BozuwaI think it just really depends on the place. And I think that's part of why as we were writing a national paper, being able to dig into the detail and differentiations between all of these different places seemed like a big haul for a small paper. So yeah, I think that there are these pieces at the local level, the zoning things, right? People are historic preservation boards that are saying like, "No rooftop solar because we don't like the look of it." Yeah, that's some BS in my mind and I think we do need to figure out how to manage that.And I think what this comes into conversation with is a little bit of like, what is the community review process? What does that look like and how do we manage that?David RobertsContemplating the variety and number of those instruments at the state and local level is really overwhelming and really does make the problem feel so intractable because it's just like, as you say in a federalist system, it's like every bit of reform is not just one bit, it's 50 bits. Every bit is 50 fights.Johanna BozuwaTotally agree. And I think that's why we get stuck in these gridlocks sometimes. And also when we get to solutions, I think there are some examples that we can draw on and utilize our little multi tool of ideas of how to move this forward.David RobertsFinal thing before that, because I forgot about this bit, but actually it's worth making a note that it's actually easier for fossil fuel infrastructure to get NEPA permits than it is for clean energy projects. It's something you note in the paper. If anything, NEPA is easier on these pipelines and stuff. Even though Joe Manchin is complaining ceaselessly about it.Johanna BozuwaYes, and I mean, I think that's why in particular, people who have been fighting the fossil fuel industry for so long, look to this group of folks, more center left folks, that are saying "Repeal NEPA, let's do it, we want to build." They're saying, "Oh my gosh. What you're doing by saying that is saying that the West Virginian that I have been fighting alongside is going to be decimated by this pipeline that's being passed now." So there are really high stakes and in a lot of the permitting process that we saw at the federal level, it also implicated the Mountain Valley pipeline.Right. And that type of infrastructure getting a pass when it couldn't even get some of its permits at the state level to just go forth is a really, I think, scary potential because that locks us into decades of extraction.David RobertsYeah, I feel like that was not covered well when this whole thing happened. You know, the Mountain Valley Pipeline: It's not that it was like stuck unfairly in a bureaucratic tangle. It just sort of straightforwardly was polluting and so it couldn't get the permits, the permits were rejected. It wasn't like stuck in some queue or something. It was just straightforwardly a polluting project that could not qualify under US law to go on. And it was just like jammed through. So I feel like the outrage of that didn't really penetrate partially because everybody's on this like "everything needs to go faster tip" and so they just kind of slotted it under there.But we don't want things that straightforwardly fail environmental review going forward do we?Johanna BozuwaExactly, like, I would like, that the Cuyahoga River does not catch on fire again. And that's the reason we have environmental review and NEPA. And also I would like it to be able to stop more fossil fuel infrastructure.David RobertsYeah, I know. And this is the other thing too, as though we're supposed to have some sort of content neutral opinions about permitting as such. I'm just like, "Well, I want more good stuff and less bad stuff. Can I have that opinion?"Johanna BozuwaExactly. That's so crucial too, where there are ways for us to stop permitting new fossil fuel infrastructure and permit the hell out of good renewable energy projects. That's a political possibility that Biden actually had signed up for and now is stepping back on.David RobertsYeah, I mean, it's politically tough, but let's be positive here. You have a lot of recommendations in here, all of which are juicy, all of which could probably have a podcast of their own on them. There's no way we can cover them all. But you sort of have your principles and recommendations grouped under three headings. And the first one, which I think is the one that is most directly germane to the speed question, is enabling more coordination and planning. And I think this is a huge thing. This is one of my soapboxes I get on all the time.I really want the climate movement to take this up is that we've had decades and decades of for lack of a better term, neoliberalism and this sort of instinctive free market stuff. And it's not like any major developed economy actually stops planning. What happens when you claim you're not planning and you claim you're being a free market is you just move planning behind closed doors or bury it in the tax code where no one can see it or understand what's happening. And then that results in whoever has the most power and money winning the planning fights.So I'm done with my soapbox. Let's talk about restoring our ability to do public, transparent, cooperative planning. Let's talk about a few of the items under here. And first is just land use planning. What do you mean by that and what would it look like?Johanna BozuwaSo, land use planning, as we talked about earlier, it turns out that one fossil fuel plant is a lot smaller than the types of assets that we need to build. That's just a reality of what we're working with. And so that necessitates far more land use planning to think about how do we get the most out of the least amount of space that is going to do the best for keeping the lights on. And so there are examples of how we can do this type of land planning. And one example I want to bring up actually is in California.So there was the Desert Renewable Energy Plan that was basically where states and federal agencies came together and they were looking at the Mojave and Colorado desert area. It's like 22 million acres.David RobertsVery sunny.Johanna BozuwaYeah, very sunny, exactly. Very sunny, very good for some solar. And what they did is that they coordinated a plan for this entire region so that it was prescreened for issues. So they said, okay, we're going to look at the biodiversity impacts of things being put here. We're going to look at the cultural or tribal impacts, the environmental potential impacts. And so after they did that kind of, what's called often like a programmatic study, that meant that the developers that came in to build the stuff there don't have to go through some more involved environmental impact assessment or study because it's already done.And so that meant that because they had done all of that work ahead of time, projects are getting approved so much faster. They're getting approved in less than ten months. And have, I think it's been now this zone has been around for about ten years and I don't think there is one litigation case. So that is just such a good example of land use planning where it's like thinking ahead of what we need and how we're going to do it. And that still does allow for private developers to come in, even though I might even argue that we could do even more planning and fill in the gaps with some public transmission or public renewable energy.But we can get into that later.David RobertsAnd we did an example from California, so I think now we're constitutionally obliged to do one from Texas too.Johanna BozuwaAbsolutely. Well, exactly. Thank you for setting me up so neatly, David, for the Competitive Renewable Energy Zones of Texas, which was such a success. So this is a very similar situation where the legislature directed the PUC, the Public Utilities Commission to plan where new generation and transmission was going to be located, routed, all of this. And so by doing so, they allowed for this proliferation of wind in Texas, a place where you might not expect a massive amount of wind to be. And I was reading a study the other day that said that in the past ten years, the CREZ line, so the Competitive Renewable Energy Zone, represents 23% of all new high voltage lines in the US.David RobertsGood grief.Johanna BozuwaRight?David RobertsYeah. They're actually building I mean, I don't know if people know this, they're actually building transmission in Texas. I'll just talk about how transmission never gets built. They're building it there because —Johanna BozuwaThey had a plan.David RobertsThey planned in advance. Yes, they had zones where it got approved and so you didn't have to then go there and do the entire like a transmission developer didn't have to go somewhere and then do the entire thing. Right. Do the entire review, do the entire land use review and the environmental review. They didn't have to start over every time that stuff was done in advance.Okay, point made. There more land use coordination and planning. That's the states doing it. But you could imagine the feds getting into that somewhat. You have these jurisdictional issues and federalism issues that are a bit of a tangle, but it does seem like the feds at the very least could do some informational, advisory planning and assessment on a bigger level, don't you think?Johanna BozuwaOh, absolutely. Actually, we do have a lot of private land in this country. Absolutely. But there is a lot of land that is owned by the federal government. So they're actually implicating a lot of this already. And it makes far more sense for an actor that has that kind of meso level understanding of what we need to build to be involved in those processes and be doing kind of a national assessment of where should those zones be. Like CREZ that's going to have all of these benefits and is going to allow for the most kind of efficient way for us to be deploying renewable energy while also taking into consideration these biodiversity, tribal nation relations and all of these things.That's a good role for the federal government to actually play.David RobertsOkay, we're going to pass quickly by two of these since I've done pods on them. But as you say, one is the interconnection process, which is probably the biggest thing right now, slowing down renewable energy getting built. I did a whole pod on that with RMI's Chaz Teplin a few weeks ago.Johanna BozuwaA fantastic one.David RobertsReally encourage everybody to go listen to that. There's a lot of recommendations in there for how to improve the interconnection process, how to improve things in batches. To return to a theme here, a lot of that has to do with just more and better planning on the ISO's parts.Once again, like, think in advance a little bit and you can skip some of this case by case stuff, but I encourage people to go listen to that pod. Another one, which we've touched on slightly, which I also did a pod on, is just and I think this is so important is just the capacity of the agencies that are doing these reviews. These are at the state level and at the federal level. These agencies have been cut to the bone. They're all, all understaffed, desperately behind, and that, of course, makes things go slower. So all these people who are whinging about reviews, if they're not talking about bulking up agency capacity, I just have trouble taking them seriously because that is the lowest hanging fruit you could do.But I did a whole pod on that several weeks ago about government capacity and about some of the provisions in the IRA that are meant to bulk up capacity at these agencies. It's just a matter of money and hiring. So we're going to check that one off the list. Let's talk a little bit about this next recommendation, which is about more publicly owned energy and transmission. What do you mean by that? What would that look like?Johanna BozuwaYeah, so this is kind of trying to answer the question of building where private companies will not, right? Like, we do have this problem of not having the long-range solution in the mind's eye, right? And we have this system in which there isn't a lot of this coordination that's in the mind's eye of a developer, right? Like, they're focused on their development, whereas the state government, federal government, has a little bit more of like, "Okay, what are we trying to accomplish? We are trying to handle the climate crisis. And that means we need to move as quickly as possible to deploy as much renewable energy as possible.And it turns out we actually do have some capacity and to actually build this ourselves." And we've done this in the past, admittedly, in a much less dense energy system. But the New Deal is a really good example of this, where the U.S. either directly financed or built itself a massive amount of transmission and energy infrastructure, like the Rural Electrification Administration that FDR put in place. It electrified 80% of the United States land mass in ten years. And when we're talking about the climate crisis, I would like to go at that clip. So I think if there are ways for us where we have a standstill where things aren't getting built fast enough, where can the federal government, the state government come in with a little political muscle and do that building?And I think that there are additional kind of benefits to doing this too, which include the fact that if you're building public renewables, for instance, you're also probably going to value having higher and better-paid jobs. You are probably going to, in comparison to a private developer, probably thinking a little bit more about some of those community benefits. And I think that there's a real win there that actually kind of creates a baseline for the rest of the private industry in a good way too.David RobertsInstead of just nudging and incentivizing private developers to do these things, we could just do them.Johanna BozuwaWe could just do them and we can also show them the way a little bit too. Right. Like right now, right. We just have the Inflation Reduction Act. Fabulous. We love the climate investments. It's so great. And also it just largely relies on tax incentives, right. And in those it's like you get a little bit more if you use local steel and if you have high wage jobs, all these things. And we could also just do that, build some public renewables and make it happen ourselves. And also when you have, particularly from a job perspective, right, like a public renewables entity that's building these developments with high wage work, that means that the private developers are afraid that they're going to lose all of their workers.So then they have to raise their wages too, which is a good thing.David RobertsRace to the top, I think they call that.Johanna BozuwaI would love a race to the top instead of a race to the bottom in our renewable energy world.David RobertsYes. Okay, we got to keep moving here. There's a long list. The next one is something we covered, I think, on the Thea Riofrancos post, which is just we know we have to build a lot of stuff, but that's not a fixed quantity of stuff we have to build. Right. We can be more efficient with how we use materials. We can try to build in a less material intensive way. So, you know, what Theo was talking about is encourage more walking and biking and multimodal transportation rather than cars, cars, cars. Like that's a choice. And there are other choices we could make to build a clean, but the less material intensive version of clean.There's a lot of different ways we can guide things in that direction.Johanna BozuwaOh yeah, absolutely.David RobertsEveryone should go listen to that podcast, too. This pod is like an advertisement for all my other pods.Johanna BozuwaI love it, I love it. Yeah. And just to kind of emphasize, the more that we can invest in efficiency, the fewer transmission lines we might have to build, right? Like if we have a bunch of houses that aggressively go in on multi units. Like, we're having more people housed in multi units. We're creating urban density. We're making the houses that we already have more efficient. All of those things accumulate and make it so that we actually don't have to do the same level of massive deployment, which is a huge win. So we have to — I think it's like questioning some of the assumptions, too, of how much do we need to build.David RobertsRight. Maybe not all our private vehicles need to be the size of military tanks and weigh three tons. This segues perfectly into the next one, which I feel like is underappreciated, which is supporting distributed energy resources. Talk about why that's part of going faster here. How does that fit into this picture?Johanna BozuwaSo let's say we're able to add rooftop solar to a lot of the rooftops that are around and implement microgrids and put in storage. These are all, again, things that are going to be a lot easier probably to deploy because they're smaller. There's less of this zoning permitting etc. that has to happen when it comes to some of the bigger stuff, where you're going to maybe need environmental review. And so by making those investments in distributed energy resources, you're actually lightening the load again on transmission development.David RobertsRight. It's kind of a piece of the previous one, really.Johanna BozuwaTotally.David RobertsIt's about being less material intensive.Johanna BozuwaExactly. And I also think the added benefit of doing that, of course, is the fact that we live in unreliable times and it adds additional reliability potential by having things like microgrids deployed.David RobertsYes, many future pods on that particular subject are in the works, are cooking in the Volts oven. Let's go to the second big category here, and this is where I have a little bit of skepticism. So this category is "Enhance community participation and consent." So this is what I want to talk about: You say, let's bring communities in more and earlier. And of course, I think most people, at least most people in my world, when they hear "more community involvement," their palms start sweating. They envision these local zoning meetings with old people shouting at city officials.They envision nothing ever getting done, everything getting blocked, NIMBY's everywhere. You have this sentence where it says, "Strengthening community participation early in the process will likely move projects forward faster without as much community opposition." Do we know that to be true? I want that to be true. I like the idea of it. Do we know that?Johanna BozuwaGreat question. It's worth interrogating. I'm going to borrow a little bit from my colleague that we've already referenced today, Thea Riofrancos, that she often says which is "Sometimes going fast isn't actually fast." So, you know, if we streamline, right, or NEPA gets streamlined or many of these other permitting processes, you cut the red tape and therefore you are steamrolling communities affected by the infrastructure. You're potentially hardening them against the project. And when they feel mad or disenfranchised, chances are they're going to throw the book at you. They're going to throw the book to stop the project. We talked about these arbitrary dates set by some of the permitting system.You're actually putting yourself up for far more potential litigation and drawn out legal battles because you actually haven't done the work that's necessary to bring that group on side, nor do you have all of your ducks in a row. So I think that there is a justification for defraying conflict and making our odds better at doing that. I'm not saying that we're not going to run into problems and there isn't going to be this annoying mob of Karens that's going to show up every once in a while. But I do think that our odds do look better when we do involve community.David RobertsThere's a cynical point of view here which says communities are always going to have their Karens. There's always going to be somebody who objects, no matter how early, no matter how much you consult, there's always going to be somebody who doesn't want something near them. The only way in the end to overcome this problem is to take those instruments of delay out of their hands, including the litigation tool, including the environmental review tool, including the community review tool, and just get a little bit more Chinese about the whole thing. Just go do stuff, even if — bulldoze, basically.I know we want to resist that conclusion, but I wish we knew better. I wish we had better models of moving quickly.Johanna BozuwaSo I think actually, since you mentioned the Chinese, I'm going to mention the Danish. And I think that part of this is actually like — we have this problem, right, that we know that deploying renewable energy, deploying clean energy is just incredibly important for the climate crisis. But the benefits are diffuse where the potential negative is pretty concentrated when it comes to these things. And so I think one question we can ask or the permit reviewers or whatever it is, or how we're thinking about developing these projects, is getting in their shoes and asking, what is in it for me?We can pay people to have some of this stuff, right? So the Danish government in the 1990s was building out a bunch of wind. And so one of the ways that they incentivized this wind development was by incentivizing that part of it is owned by the local government to give them a revenue stream. And that actually helped to limit the controversy. And you'll see that in Denmark, people have kind of higher concepts or like the polling is better for wind. And I was talking with this professor, Nick Pevzner from University of Pennsylvania, who was discussing this really interesting particular instance in which in one of these towns where they were going to be around the offshore wind, they actually brought in landscape architects to design the offshore wind. So that it would be aesthetically pleasing.David RobertsThe Danes give a shi-, give a dang, about how things look like. What a thought.Johanna BozuwaHuge difference.David RobertsYes, I know. You look at what's the one waste incineration plant in the middle of the town that's like gorgeous. It's got a laser display, I think it's got a ski hill on it. All these kind of things. It seems like we don't care here in the US. How ugly things are. Witness any sort of midsize town or strip mall or the periphery of any city. Everything's just like plain and ugly. Like what if we made things look nice that might improve community —Johanna BozuwaWe deserve nice things. Communities deserve nice things.David RobertsWe can have nice things. And you talk about we should do what's called a "Cumulative impact analysis."Johanna BozuwaYes.David RobertsAgain, to me on first blush that sounds like oh, bigger and more analysis: Surely that's going to slow things down. So how do you see that working?Johanna BozuwaWell, again, this kind of takes us to our planning. Right. Like cumulative impact analysis which New Jersey and New York have put in place is this way to discern not just the impact of the project but the accumulated impact of that project and what's already come to date. And I think what you would find in cumulative impact in these places, is that actually it's doing some of what we were talking about before, which is trying to fight off the bad and build more of the good. So that's a way to stop new fossil fuel infrastructure but maybe see benefit around solar or something like that.These are actually tools that, yes, as you say, at first glance you might think, "Oh my gosh, more? Really?" But what it's doing is assuring some of that larger meso level discerning and also in a lot of ways these are environmental justice tools too. Right. The reason that they're doing that is because it has so consistently been the same community that has had to shoulder the coal plant, then the gas plant, then the pipeline, then another cement factory. Right. And so they're trying to say, "Okay wait, this is out of control. Let's think about where we're putting this and how that's going to burden people."David RobertsSo the last category here is "Empower a just transition." And I don't think we need to go piece by piece through here since these are very familiar asks from progressive climate people, which is just stop permitting new fossil fuel facilities. Protect the communities that are getting hurt by fossil fuel pollution and set emission reduction targets that will phase out fossil fuels. I think those are all pretty straightforward. I do think the point here, though the larger point you're making with this section is worth underlining because it seems obvious to me, but also frequently left out of this debate, which is if you want to get renewable energy built faster: One way you could do that is through statute and regulation forcing fossil fuel out. Like, nothing's going to speed up renewable energy more than forcing fossil fuels out. Right. It seems so obvious, but it's weirdly left out here.Johanna BozuwaVery weirdly left out. It's a bizarre kind of development that we've seen in the climate realm, right? The IRA, for instance, that is a bill that is great. It creates a lot of carrots, but basically no sticks. And the reality is we need sticks if we're actually going to do this, right, as we were talking about at the kind of outset of the show, we can't let just the entire pie keep on getting bigger and bigger. We actually need to get rid of the fossil fuels. That's the point of what we're doing here. They're the reason that we have the climate crisis.And so, the best way to get rid of them is to just regulate them out of existence, like eliminate them. And I also think there's a certain amount of private industry hates regulation, but they do love certainty. So what is more certain than a decarbonization mandate that says, like, well, you need to be done by this date? And that actually gets us to more of the displacement than when we just say "Build, build, build just hopefully build the right thing for us, please please."David RobertsYes, I think that's true on several micro levels and it's true on a macro level too. One thing that would help us go faster is if we could just clearly articulate our goals. But we're sort of just hampered by having to beg Joe Manchin for his vote. And to get Joe Manchin's vote, you have to pretend that the whole pie is going to get bigger, that everything's going to grow. That's explicitly the grounds upon which he voted yes on Iraq. He sets it outright. He's like, I voted yes because I thought it was going to grow renewable energy and fossil fuels.In some sense, politically, we can't just come out and say the goal is to get rid of fossil fuels. That's where we're headed. It would just help everybody, private developers, state and local governments, if we were just on the same friggin page. Instead of sort of like backing into this, we're just backing into everything we do. Trying to sort of like wink wink at one another. Like we know what we're doing, they don't know what we're doing. It's just a bunch of confusion.Johanna BozuwaRight? And I think that it's also a little bit laughable because they obviously know what we're trying to do, right? Like, we're not really hiding the bag. And I think that this speaks to the need for us to be like, this is a 20-year fight, we're not done with the fight the progressive left needs to keep — we can't just have IRA and think that we're done and can wipe our hands. I mean, even this conversation that has come up on permitting shows that people are hungry and need more. And the question is okay, how do we build the actual political power so that Manchin isn't the one that's in the driver's seat?David RobertsYes.Johanna BozuwaI think one kind of last thing on this kind of community consent piece or community engagement that makes me really nervous to tie us back to the permitting realm, right. Is that the people who are potentially going to be railroaded by infrastructure that they don't want is rural America. And if you are pissing off rural parts of the United States right now, that's a very short-sighted game to be playing, right. Because you are potentially taking these rural folk who have just been beaten back again and again, and you're turning them to the right, to a growing fascist right, and giving away a massive voting bloc that is going to be crucial for us to continue to win and win again and keep winning until we actually solve the climate crisis.So I think when it comes to this kind of larger political project that we're doing on from a progressive perspective, we have to be wary of this idea that this is — not a get it fixed quick scheme.David RobertsYes. We do not want to tick off these particular communities any more than they're ticked off. I think if you talk to Biden administration officials sort of behind the scenes, they will tell you that part of the design of IRA, part of the thinking behind it is we need to flood these areas of the country that were hollowed out by neoliberalism, hollowed out by globalism. We need to flood them with new economic activity and new development or else our democracy is screwed. But it is also the case that you can't just go stomping things down here and there, willy-nilly, without community consent.They need to have a feeling that they're involved in where and how this is done.Johanna BozuwaYeah, we're trying to bring them into the fight for a populist amazing future, and shoving this down their throats I just don't think is the most effective tactic. And if you look back to the New Deal, right, so much of it was workers. It was people that were in more of rural America. There were so many of these folks who were standing up and fighting. And if we're not setting ourselves up for that same kind of sea change, then I'm afraid we're not going to be able to win this thing.David RobertsOkay. We are just about out of time. So just to kind of review, this is just, I think the point of your report, point of all this is to say the question of speed is not the same as the question of permitting. Technically speaking, permitting is a relatively small piece of the puzzle here. There's lots of other things we could be doing to speed things up that have nothing technically to do with NEPA or even technically to do with permitting. And we've reviewed a lot of them here, and I would commend people to your report to get a fuller picture of them and to think about them.But let me finish, I guess with, this is all a vision. I love this vision, but politics are politics and we live in a fallen world, et cetera, et cetera. So toward the end of last session, there was this chance to have a permitting deal, and basically it was these sort of arbitrary caps on NEPA reviews, the length of NEPA reviews and the Mountain Valley pipeline in exchange for some pretty substantial transmission stuff, some pretty substantial stuff on transmission, federal transmission planning. The progressive movement rallied to kill that. They called it Manchin's dirty deal. They rallied, they killed it.And what ended up happening was the NEPA stuff squeezed through somewhere else. The Mountain Valley pipeline squeezed through somewhere else, and the transmission stuff died. Looking back on that, do you think that was the right political move for the progressive movement to fight that bill? And more broadly, do you think the progressive movement is prepared to sort of make the political trade-offs which are going to be necessary since a lot of this stuff that you list in your report is just going to be very difficult with today's current political distribution of power?Johanna BozuwaYeah, great question, and I think my answer is that the progressive movement still did the right thing. We needed to fight — or the progressive movement folks who were in those fights needed to fight off and make very clear the MVP is not something that we can have — this permitting that's going to expand. It was a big toad to swallow. And I think if we look at some of the transmission stuff, like, sure, it was fine. Was it the things that we were fully looking for? I think it was Hickenlooper's bill, big wires that was in some of those kind of final fights, right.With the Fiscal Responsibility Act, his bill included something like a 30% interregional transfer. The DOE says we need a 120% increase in interregional transfer. That's just not even at the scale that we need, and we'd be giving up so much for it. So, yeah, we didn't fully win that fight, but I think that from what I'm hearing, kind of at the congressional level, there is the potential for another bite at the apple on transmission. There is still some, as we said earlier, right, everyone agrees that transmission is a boondoggle right now and a hot mess. So I think that should be one of the things that we're thinking about as the progressive movement.How do we do that? Right? But I don't think I would go back in time and say "Eh, we should just accept Manchin's deal." I think that it was an important political flag to stamp in the ground that, no, we actually don't believe that we should be expanding fossil fuels and renewable energy at the same time because that's not what we need to do. Saying all that, I do think there are things that we can be doing right now to advance transmission. For instance, FERC is looking at some of these interconnection issues right now. Biden should not rest on his laurels until he gets someone approved and appointed to the FERC board.David RobertsHey, there's Joe Manchin again being a jerk.Johanna BozuwaI know, it's so true. But there are things and again, we've already talked on this pod about stuff that can be done at the state level, too. We still have some cards to play in our hand to accelerate and prove our case increasingly and build the case for more federal implementation, too.David RobertsJohanna, thanks so much for coming on. I feel like lately the progressive environmental left has appeared in mainstream media and social media more as a weird caricature viewed from a distance than been able to speak for itself. So I'm glad to be able to have you on so we can talk through a little bit about how progressives see this and the larger issues at play and their specific recommendations, all of which I think are great. So people should check out your report. And thanks for sharing your time with us.Johanna BozuwaThank you so much for having me today, David. It's lovely.David RobertsThank you for listening to the Volts podcast. It is ad-free, powered entirely by listeners like you. If you value conversations like this, please consider becoming a paid Volts subscriber at volts.wtf. Yes, that's volts.wtf so that I can continue doing this work. Thank you so much, and I'll see you next time. Get full access to Volts at www.volts.wtf/subscribe

San Francisco's DA has filed corruption charges against two former City workers accused in a bribery scheme. It's the latest in a series of charges against a number of City workers that all started with the arrest of former PUC head Mohammed Nuru. This latest case isn't connected to Nuru at all, but the number of cases doesn't seem to be slowing down. For more on this, KCBS Radio's Bret Burkhart and Patti Reising spoke with KCSB insider Phil Matier

Ric O'Connell and Anna Sommers join Ahlmahz Negash, PhD and Paul Dockery for a deep dive into power planning best practices including planning for extremes, open source models, and best in class computational techniques.You can find the podcast on Apple Podcast, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Share with friends that are electric utility enthusiasts, like us!09:41 - how to explain power planning to a five year old19:00 - best practices in power planning58:10 - Ahlmahz's unfair question of the week: what about AI?1:03:50 - PUC-for-a-dayfor more about open source planning, GridLab recently collaborated with RMI on an open source modeling report. you can find it here.Public Power Underground, for electric utility enthusiasts! Public Power Underground, it's work to watch!

Last week, the Public Utility Commission of Texas voted to raise Texas' electricity tax by $500 million a year. On this week's Liberty Café, we'll learn how the PUC and […]

Community researcher Mr. X is on and we talk the Avista settlement with the Greens, and how we can comment to the PUC to upend the agreement. Jo County Commissioner Baertschiger adds his comment to that, the mayor recall and other issues.

The man who threatened to build and detonate a bomb at Muskifest has been jailed. The PUC has approved a revised settlement for an explosion that occurred 2019. Searches for homeschooling have spiked within a four-year period. And the Eagles are hiring those with autism to run a popcorn stand this football season.

Live do Conde! MBL é expulso da PUC: integrantes do movimento fascista são enxotados by TV 247

Xaropinho é a resposta!  Negócio é o seguinte... GG, nosso membro fantasma, veio aqui nesse podcast dividir sua vida no episódio 160... Abriu o coração sobre a fase ruim que estava passando e queria um ombro amigo pra chorar e nós demos esse ombro amigo. Mas acontece que nossos ouvintes decidiram promover uma nova rinha de fodidos, acusaram o GG de não ter uma vida tão merda assim, que tava reclamando por nada, uma tremenda confusão, enfim... Em resumo nós desafiamos nossos ouvintes a contarem histórias mais tristes que a do GG e nos provarem que eles eram mais fodidos que nosso otário favorito. No nosso grupo do Telegram nós avisamos que nossa caixa de e-mails estava aberta pra histórias tristes, e não valia uma história curta ou uma pequena passagem... Tinha que ser um período prolongado de derrotas ou, quem sabe, até uma vida inteira forjada na bosta. Se você também quer conhecer tristeza em primeira mão entra agora no nosso grupo de Telegram clicando aqui!!. Entra também no no nosso Instagram, por que não?? Nesse episódio: A vida após a fossa; Cuspindo no prato em que foi comido; Traquinagens no cinema; Semi-cornos; Serenata vs. Carro de Som; O Cinderelo paraquedista; Desavenças no Flipper; Um guru chamado Xaropinho; Agindo feito Gordão; Betando garotas em prol do academicismo; Boulos da Baja; Golpe da rifa; Quando os mendigos te ignoram; Cidade Maravilhosa: cagaram num defunto; Campo Grande vs. Manaus; Raquitismo Renal Hipofosfatemico; Cocô de Gato à milanesa; Menos que irmãos: brothers; A canalhice do video game; Meu irmão surdo; As estagiárias da PUC no alistamento militar; O gordinho da garupa; Candiru com cerveja; Minha desgraça morre comigo ...e muito, mas muito mais desgraça em segunda pessoa!!! Host: Scheid, o CEO. Bancada: GG, Farinhaki, Punk Willians, Michellzinho, General Maciel e Profeta[DLC].

Insurers Should Avoid Suing Each Other The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit certified to the California Supreme Court, the following question for our review: "Under California's Motor Carriers of Property Permit Act (Veh. Code, § 34600 et seq.; the Act), does a commercial automobile insurance policy continue in full force and effect until the insurer cancels the corresponding Certificate of Insurance on file with the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV or Department), regardless of the insurance policy's stated expiration date?" The Supreme Court in Allied Premier Insurance v. United Financial Casualty Company, S267746, Supreme Court of California (July 24, 2023) the California Supreme Court logically advised the court of its opinion based on the statute and California precedent. The certified question arose only in the context of claims for equitable contribution and subrogation between two insurance companies. It bears repeating that the plaintiffs in the underlying lawsuit were compensated to the full limits of Allied's policy under the terms of their settlement and that, at all relevant times, Porras, the trucker, properly maintained an active operating permit. BACKGROUND A carrier can satisfy that requirement by obtaining a policy of insurance. If a carrier does so, the insurer must submit a certificate of insurance to the Department as evidence that the "protection required under [section 34631.5,] subdivision (a)" is provided. The Act requires that proof of financial responsibility be continued in effect during the active life of the permit issued to the motor carrier. This requirement prohibits cancellation of a certificate of insurance without notice to the DMV by the insurer. United appealed to the Ninth Circuit, which certified the question of law to the Supreme Court. If the Act requires a commercial auto insurance policy to remain in effect indefinitely until the insurer cancels the certificate of insurance on file with the DMV, then Allied must prevail. If not, United must prevail. DISCUSSION Equitable contribution assumes the existence of two or more valid contracts of insurance covering the particular risk of loss and the particular casualty in question. The Act Does Not Extend the Policy Beyond the Term Contained in the Contract As to cancellation of a policy, the HCA provided that protection against liability shall be continued in effect during the active life of the trucker's permit, and that the policy of insurance or surety bond shall not be cancelable on less than 30 days' written notice to the PUC, except in the event of cessation of operations as a highway carrier as approved by the PUC. An uncancelled certificate of insurance that remains on file with the DMV does not cause the corresponding insurance policy to remain in effect in perpetuity. But that is not to say that an uncancelled certificate of insurance imposes no obligation of any kind on the responsible insurer. CONCLUSION Under the Act, a commercial automobile insurance policy does not continue in full force and effect until the insurer cancels a corresponding certificate of insurance on file with the DMV. The duration of the policy's coverage is regulated by its terms and those of any endorsement or amendment to the policy itself. The terms of an insurance contract generally determine the duration of the policy's coverage. Although an endorsement can amend the policy, neither the Act nor the specific endorsement requires extending coverage beyond the underlying policy's expiration date. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/barry-zalma/support

En la edición AM, hablamos con Luis Felipe Lagos, economista PUC y de la Chicago y consultor de empresas. También, con Matías Valenzuela, abogado of counsel del estudio Dalgalarrando y Cía.

Water rates could rise as much as 70% over the next three years, and as homeowners, you stand to pay a lot more than a big commercial business. City Cast Pittsburgh host Megan Harris chats with Ann Belser, the editor and publisher of Print, about why PWSA says it needs so much more money, how the state's getting involved, and what you can do to have your voice heard before the price per gallon goes up. Ann's work also publishes online with NEXTpittsburgh. Check out her piece detailing why the rate hike got delayed from its proposed July 8 start date. Another one should be dropping soon. The state wants to hear from you! If you want to weigh in on the proposed rate hike, the Public Utility Commission is holding in-person hearings on tomorrow, July 25 at 1 p.m. and 6 p.m. at the Jeron X. Grayson Community Center in the Hill District, and via Zoom at 1 p.m. and 6 p.m. on Thursday, July 27. You can use the event links on the PWSA website, check in with the PUC schedule directly, or send letters of support or objection to:  Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission Post Office Box 3265, Harrisburg, PA 17105-3265 Want some more Pittsburgh news?  Make sure to sign up for our daily morning Hey Pittsburgh newsletter. We're also on Twitter @citycastpgh & Instagram @CityCastPgh! Not a fan of social? Then leave us a voicemail at 412-212-8893. Interested in advertising with City Cast? Find more info here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sindicato do Ensino Privado (Sinepe-RS) que promove o 17° Congresso do Ensino Privado do RS entre os dias 19 e 21 de julho, no Centro de Eventos da PUC.

O episódio 142 do podcast Papo no Auge! está potente e discute um tema urgente e atual: meio ambiente. Para debater sobre políticas públicas voltadas a pautas ambientais, convidamos o Vereador Luiz Vieira, do PDT de Vinhedo/SP. o Vereador Luiz é um importante ator político ligado ao meio ambiente e seu currículo expõe isso: nosso entrevistado é bacharel em Políticas Públicas pela USP, mestre em Sustentabilidade pela PUC de Campinas e doutorando em Ambiente e Sociedade pela Unicamp. Antes de ser Vereador, foi Secretário de Meio Ambiente e Urbanismo na Prefeitura Municipal de Vinhedo/SP. Na nossa conversa, o Vereador Luiz Vieira falou sobre a importância de políticas públicas para o meio ambiente, discorrendo sobre a atuação de governos e de instituições na conservação dos recursos naturais, na mitigação dos impactos nocivos aos ecossistemas e na transição para uma economia verde. Papo do mais alto gabarito sobre a interseção entre política, ciência e meio ambiente. Como as decisões políticas podem moldar o futuro do nosso planeta? Ouça o Papo no Auge! --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/paponoauge/message

Leandro Vieira e Luiz Arruda, VP de Marketing, Clientes e Dados da Porto, batem um papo sobre Marketing Estratégico e mostram como desenvolver campanhas bem-sucedidas utilizando dados, tecnologia e muita criatividade. > Ouça no Spotify e acompanhe o Café com ADM pelo grupo exclusivo no WhatsApp. Conteúdo patrocinado GESTÃO DE RH Otimize os processos de seu departamento de Recursos Humanos com o Nydus RH. Conheça a solução. Sobre o entrevistado Luiz Arruda é VP de Marketing, Clientes e Dados da Porto. Ele tem formação superior em Ciências Econômicas e Gestão Empresarial pela PUC de São Paulo e MBA pela Business School São Paulo, além de formações no MIT, Harvard e Wharton School, nos Estados Unidos. Ele acumula passagens por grandes organizações e foi sócio-diretor de uma agência de Marketing antes de se unir à Porto, empresa em que atua desde 2020.

On Today's Episode: Utility regulators quietly drive the clean energy revolution — yet many energy industry participants know little about them. SunCast Host Nico Johnson pulls back the curtain today in an engaging conversation with Carrie Zalewski, former chair of the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC).Carrie leverages her experience as a regulator and energy attorney, plus her background in engineering, to bring a unique perspective to a discussion on the complex world of energy regulation. From influencing how public utilities spend money, to supporting clean energy initiatives and designing beneficial electrification plans that address storage and transmission, Public Utility Commissions (PUCs) tackle a wide range of critical issues affecting your every day life.Four years ago, Carrie joined the ICC from the Illinois Pollution Control Board, where she adjudicated complex environmental cases under the Illinois Environmental Protection Act, shaped critical rulemaking and worked to properly balance the interests of Illinois businesses and residents while protecting the state's land, air, and water.In 2021, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) named Carrie as head of a new resource group for Commission Chairs from all 50 states and regions to discuss relevant and timely topics. She's also participated in several influential organizations, such as the Organization of Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) States and the Climate Registry's Council of Jurisdictions.Carrie left the ICC on June 16, seven months before her five-year term expired, for personal and professional reasons. Her fingerprints and impact will be felt for much longer than her tenure might suggest. Today's conversation is wide-ranging and highlights exactly why it's so important for industry to understand and learn to work with the Commissioners responsible for regulating energy and other resources across the Nation. Carrie was generous with her time and extensive knowledge in helping guide us through the complex undertaking that commissioners engage as public servants.If you're interested in supporting renewables, gaining better insight into the outsize role of utility regulators or understanding how PUC decisions impact businesses and communities, this episode is a must-listen. Join Nico as he uncovers the intricacies of energy regulation and the significant role regulators have in shaping our clean energy future. You'll learn how engaging with state regulators can help you make a difference in the clean energy community and why, as a business or individual, it makes a lot of sense to do so. If you want to connect with today's guest(s), you'll find links to their contact info in the show notes on the blog at https://mysuncast.com/suncast-episodes/.SunCast is presented by Sungrow, the world's most bankable inverter brand.You can learn more about all the sponsors who help make this show free for you at www.mysuncast.com/sponsors.Remember, you can always find resources, learn more about today's guest(s) and explore recommendations, book links, and more than 609 other founder stories and startup advice at www.mysuncast.com.You can connect with me, Nico Johnson, on:Twitter - https://www.twitter.com/nicomeoLinkedIn -

O filósofo e escritor Rodrigo Nunes é o convidado do programa 20 MINUTOS desta segunda-feira (19/06) para uma conversa sobre os protestos da década de 2010 no Brasil, incluindo o junho de 2013.As chamadas Jornadas de Junho de 2013, em meio a fenômenos semelhantes em outros países, trouxeram como produto colateral um forte debate sobre as formas de organização política.Para muitos estudiosos, representariam a superação relativa do modelo vertical, sustentado por ferramentas tradicionais como os partidos, movimentos e sindicatos, que estariam sendo substituídos por coletivos mais fluídos e pelas redes sociais, em um processo que já foi chamado de horizontalização da política. Um dos principais especialistas no tema é nosso entrevistado de hoje, o professor e filósofo Rodrigo Nunes. Graduado em Ciências Jurídicas e Socias pela Universidade Federal de Pelotas, mestre em filosofia pela PUC do Rio Grande do Sul e doutor pela Universidade de Londres, atualmente é professor na PUC do Rio de Janeiro. Escritor e ensaísta, é de sua autoria o livro “Do transe à vertigem: ensaios sobre bolsonarismo e um mundo em transição”, publicado pela editora Ubu, casa pela qual também está lançando seu novo livro, “Nem horizontal, nem vertical”.---- Quer contribuir com Opera Mundi via PIX? Nossa chave é apoie@operamundi.com.br (Razão Social: Última Instancia Editorial Ltda.). Desde já agradecemos! Assinatura solidária: www.operamundi.com.br/apoio Siga Opera Mundi no Twitter: https://twitter.com/operamundi ★ Support this podcast ★

 Increible historia y viaje de un ser humano común y corriente que mediante el paso por momentos desafiantes encontró su paz interior y su Ikigai.  Escuchar la emocionante historia y perlas de aprendizaje de Peter Leatherbee en en este episodio.    Peter es CEO de las empresas Andecor, Colorado y Farellones. Peter es Ingeniero Civil y MBA de la PUC.    En este episodio:    Los unicornios, si existiran, no tirarian fuego. Gestión del miedo.   El primer paso, es dar un paso. Todo empieza con la mente.  Efecto bola de nieve. Una cosa buena lleva a otra cosa buena.     ººº    ¿Crees que este episodio te entregó valor?     Si es así, compártelo con tus amigos y colegas.    Además, me interesa tu feedback para mejorar el contenido de este podcast. Por favor escríbeme via LinkedIn contándome qué aprendiste en este episodio y cómo crees que podemos mejorar en la producción de este podcast.    ¿Quieres dar un salto en tu carrera, perder el miedo a hablar en pública y desarrollar una auto-confianza auténtica? Escríbeme vía LinkedIn para contarte acerca del programa online Créete el Cuento en la Práctica.    ¡Gracias! 

O Opinião desta semana vai falar sobre intolerância religiosa. Nos últimos 2 anos houve um aumento de 17% no número de denúncias no Brasil, a maioria feita por pessoas adeptas a religiões de matriz africana. Por que em um mundo cada vez mais integrado e globalizado, a intolerância às mais diversas crenças tem se tornado cada vez maior? No mundo todo há um histórico de perseguições religiosas que atravessam os séculos. Para falar sobre o assunto conversamos com o Professor da PUC de SP e Pastor da Igreja Baptista DAVI LAGO, com a Professora e Membro da Comissão de Direito e Liberdade Religiosa da OAB-SP MILENE CRISTINA SANTOS e com o Babalorixá, Mestre e Doutor em Semiótica pela USP SIDNEI NOGUEIRA.

People and Happenings on the Energy Scene. The host for this show is Marco Mangelsdorf. The guest is Jennie Potter. We pick up where we left off with former Hawaii Public Utilities Commission commissioner Jennie Potter and discuss topical energy issues such as energy people in the news, kWh pricing in the state, equity and challenges at the PUC.The ThinkTech YouTube Playlist for this show is https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQpkwcNJny6lQsvQmOsP0QUupA452eOm2Please visit our ThinkTech website at https://thinktechhawaii.com and see our Think Tech Advisories at https://thinktechadvisories.blogspot.com.

João Branco tem mais de 20 anos de experiência em grandes marcas de diferentes mercados. Como Vice-Presidente de Marketing, liderou o time que fez o McDonald's, duas vezes palestrante TEDx, colunista da Exame, UOL, Meio&Mensagem e MIT Tech Review. Autor do livro "Dê Propósito", professor da PUC e Startse.

Pennsylvania officials want to start testing the tissues of animals that may have been affected by the train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, last month. The state PUC has determined that PECO natural gas pipelines were not the cause behind an explosion in Pottstown nearly a year ago. A farm had to pull its goat-snuggling offering out of a few events after some people called it “exploitive.” Also, officers pulled over two culprits guilty of horsing around.

RENATA SOUZA: POR QUE A DIREITA MANDA NO RIO DE JANEIRO - Programa 20 MinutosPor que a direita manda no Rio de Janeiro? A deputada estadual pelo PSOL do Rio de Janeiro Renata Souza fala sobre o assunto em entrevista a Breno Altman no 20 MINUTOS desta sexta-feira (24/03). Durante várias décadas a cidade do Rio de Janeiro, além de capital da República, foi o principal centro progressista do país. Além de motor da cultura nacional, era ali que se concentravam alguns dos principais movimentos populares e onde partidos de esquerda tinham seus melhores desempenhos. Essa influência se propagou ao estado do Rio de Janeiro, quando Leonel Brizola foi eleito governador em 1982 e conquistou novo mandato em 1990. Mas, desde os anos 90, tanto a capital quanto as terras fluminenses, são governadas por políticos de direita e o fundamentalismo religioso atropelou as antigas vanguardas político-culturais da antiga Guanabara. Durante esse tempo todo houve uma importante oposição de esquerda, é verdade, mas com muitas dificuldades de restaurar sua importância sobre a capital e o estado.Para conversarmos sobre essa realidade, nossa convidada é Renata Souza. Deputada estadual no Rio de Janeiro pelo PSOL, ela é jornalista formada pela PUC e doutora pela Universidade Federal Fluminense, além de autora de “Cria da favela – resistência à militarização da vida”, livro publicado pela Boitempo em 2020.----Quer contribuir com Opera Mundi via PIX? Nossa chave é apoie@operamundi.com.br (Razão Social: Última Instância Editorial Ltda.). Desde já, agradecemos!Assinatura solidária: http://www.operamundi.com.br/apoio ★ Support this podcast ★

Host: Kevin Smith Dives into the weekly news most impactful to the HeartlandHEADLINE 1: Idaho hospital to stop labor and delivery services citing "political climate" and doctor shortages HEADLINESIdaho hospital to stop labor and delivery services citing "political climate" and doctor shortagesCBS https://www.cbsnews.com/news/idaho-hospital-bonner-general-stops-labor-delivery-services-citing-political-climate-doctor-shortages/Advisory Board- https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2023/03/22/rural-hospitalsTexas Mass Shootings Up 62.5 Percent Since Permit-less Carry Bill Reform Austin - https://www.reformaustin.org/public-safety/texas-mass-shootings-up-62-5-percent-since-permitless-carry-bill/LIGHTNING ROUNDMissouri,Republicans looking out for number 1...percentersMissouri House Democrats https://www.mohousedemcaucus.com/post/dems-respond-as-house-gop-votes-for-more-irresponsible-kansas-style-tax-cutsAmeren Missouri wants Right of First RefusalMissouri Independent  - https://missouriindependent.com/2023/03/20/missouri-kansas-utilities-back-bills-to-reestablish-monopoly-on-transmission-projects/Wyoming,Wyoming has become the first US state to outlaw the use or prescription of medication abortion pills.The Guardian - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/18/wyoming-becomes-first-us-state-to-outlaw-use-of-abortion-pills?CMP=Share_iOSApp_OtherTexas,Texas Electric gouge? Texas Tribune - https://www.texastribune.org/2023/03/17/puc-appeals-court-uri-prices/?utm_campaign=trib-social-buttons&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR2LBp_QWfCYZUkaapnJ2zK7KbbYD70TaV2Df5WPxejrlGPGwofijQ57sTY&mibextid=Zxz2cZWisconsin,Judge Candidates DebateAP - https://apnews.com/article/wisconsin-supreme-court-election-abortion-trump-81e311c9d0416d4a04489ad7a38c134dTennessee,Country Star Maren Morris tells TN to arrest herUSA Today - https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2023/03/22/maren-morris-takes-stand-against-tennessee-drag-show-bill-nashville/11524014002/Oklahoma,OK's Don't Say Gay BillKFOR Oklahoma https://kfor.com/news/oklahoma-legislature/oklahoma-dont-say-gay-bill-passes-house/Narrow win for Abortion carePolitico - https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/21/oklahoma-abortion-mothers-life-00088189Kansas,Kansas Republican fearmonger with what scraps they have left regarding AbortionAP - https://apnews.com/article/born-alive-abortion-bill-kansas-legislature-89b7276e071fda4808c96d9d3e8cce4eLastly, in the Ozarks of Missouri, Show me the toes!Springfield News Leader - https://www.news-leader.com/story/news/local/ozarks/2023/03/22/james-river-church-leader-says-woman-regrew-toes-during-a-service/70028744007/?fbclid=IwAR246xmpVxo0jzwvE6ZcWSselFy8tuz90oqYmmXT3quK46StyGtifbPMk9Y&mibextid=Zxz2cZ#lfjwjwcqjrzzgwbltrg

Matheus Moraes, co-fundador da healthtech Alice, explica como a empresa está reconstruindo o sistema de saúde no Brasil com foco na saúde preventiva e bem-estar dos trabalhadores numa relação em que todos ganham. Conteúdo patrocinado SAÚDE Conheça a Alice, um plano de saúde focado na prevenção e qualidade de vida dos colaboradores da sua empresa. Acesse o site e saiba mais. CARREIRA Estude na PUC de São Paulo com 25% de desconto nas mensalidades. Há vários cursos de especialização e extensão na área de negócios com inscrições abertas. Confira aqui. Sobre o entrevistado Matheus Moraes é co-fundador e Chief Business Officer da healthtech Alice, gestora de saúde que tem por missão tornar o mundo mais saudável. Nascido em Ipatinga/MG, se formou em direito na Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Ao longo da sua trajetória, trabalhou no Moip Pagamentos e 99 — onde assumiu a presidência em 2018. Em 2019, junto com André Florence, ex-99, e Guilherme Azevedo, ex-Dr. Consulta, fundou a Alice, que já recebeu 174,8 milhões de dólares de investimento desde a sua fundação.

Daily Standup Top StoriesBiden's 30% Crypto Electricity Tax May Be Too Blunt A SolutionCRYPTOMarch 15, 2023In his latest budget for Fiscal Year 2024, President Biden has proposed a new tax on electricity use from cryptocurrency mining. If the budget becomes law, a 30% tax will be phased in over three years. The […] IEA: Global Oil Demand Will Outstrip Supply In Late 2023March 15, 2023 Mariel AlumitThe IEA expects oil markets to swing from a surplus in the first half of 2023 to a deficit in the latter part of 2023. China's recovery is expected to drive global oil demand to […]UK ‘to class nuclear as environmentally sustainable'March 15, 2023 Mariel AlumitThe UK's Chancellor Jeremy Hunt has announced that nuclear will “subject to consultation, be classed as environmentally sustainable in our green taxonomy” – he also launched a competition, to be completed by the end of […]Kevin O'Leary Says Avoid Bank Stocks and Buy Energy Instead. Here Are 2 Names to ConsiderMarch 15, 2023 Mariel AlumitIn the wake of multiple bank collapses over the past week, many banking stocks' valuations have fallen sharply and are trading at deep discounts right now. One investor, however, that definitely won't be looking for […]Colorado's high energy costs are part of a regulatory ‘game'ENERGY POLICYMarch 15, 2023Colorado Utility Consumer Advocate chief: When ratepayers — stunned by doubling and even tripling of energy bills — cry out for help, the PUC patiently listens, but the public comments don't have much weight in […]Follow Stuart On LinkedIn and TwitterFollow MichaelOn LinkedIn and TwitterENB Top NewsENBEnergy DashboardENB PodcastENB Substack

A transformação digital também chegou ao setor de RH. Leandro Vieira e Guilherme Silva, Gerente de Produtos e Operações da Nydus, RHTech que está revolucionando o setor, fala sobre as transformações na área de recursos humanos e como a tecnologia pode ajudar a reduzir custos e aumentar a produtividade. Conteúdo patrocinado VENDAS Conheça o Gestão Max, ferramenta para gestão de vendas que pode otimizar o trabalho da sua equipe e potencializar os resultados. Acesse e preencha o formulário para saber mais. CARREIRA Estude na PUC de São Paulo com 25% de desconto nas mensalidades. Há vários cursos de especialização e extensão na área de negócios com inscrições abertas. Confira aqui. SEGURANÇA Você sabia que o Google mantém mais brasileiros seguros online do que qualquer um? Para saber como o Google protege sua navegação online, acesse g.co/centraldeseguranca. RH Melhorar a gestão de pessoas na sua organização só depende de você. Conheça a Nydus, solução integrada para departamentos de RH. Acesse aqui. INVESTIMENTOS Inscreva-se no Bossa Nova Summit, que acontece nos dias 23 e 24 de março em São Paulo, e garanta sua entrada em um dos eventos de investimentos mais esperados do ano. Acesse o site e saiba mais. Sobre o entrevistado Guilherme Silva é formado em Administração de empresas, está na Nydus há 17 anos e atua na área de projetos de sistemas para Recursos Humanos e gerenciamento das operações. É especialista em legislação Trabalhista e eSocial com foco em normas e processos.

Seu pai foi um dos melhores jogadores de polo aquático do mundo. Foi capitão da seleção brasileira por quase um década, participou dos Jogos de Tóquio em 1964 e do México em 1968, conquistou em 1963 a medalha de bronze na Universíade, foi  pentacampeão Sul-Americano, medalhista de prata e artilheiro do Pan-Americano de 1967, mesmo ano em que foi apontado entre os “10 mais” do esporte mundial. Profissionalmente foi superintendente do Grupo Folha, atuou como publisher, jornalista e engenheiro de software e foi um dos responsáveis pela criação do portal de notícias Uol. Sua mãe foi tenista e sempre uma grande incentivadora dos esportes na família. Foi dirigente do polo aquático brasileiro, lutou pela equidade de gênero no esporte e foi uma grande influenciadora para a inclusão das mulheres na disputa da modalidade nos Jogos de Sydney 2000, exatamente um século após a estréia masculina. Foi nesse ambiente esportivo e positivo que minha convidada e seus dois irmãos mais novos tiveram o privilégio de ser criados e educados. Aos sete anos de idade ela ingressou na natação já bastante influenciada pelo pai, que a colocava a prova desde criancinha no mar do Guarujá. Em 1986, aos 15 anos, decidiu largar a natação para jogar polo aquático, que só então começou a ser praticado no Brasil. Não por acaso, foi na mesma modalidade do pai que ela também se revelou uma atleta de ponta. Foi capitã da Seleção Brasileira de polo aquático por treze anos e a primeira brasileira a jogar profissionalmente no exterior, mais especificamente na Itália, onde conquistou entre outros, o título inédito da Copa dos Campeões da Europa. Em 1998, foi vice-artilheira no seu terceiro campeonato mundial e foi eleita uma das sete melhores jogadoras do mundo. No ano seguinte, conquistou a medalha de bronze nos Jogos Pan-Americanos de Winnipeg, no Canadá. Se formou em economia pela PUC de São Paulo e trabalhou durante 25 anos no Itaú-Unibanco, começando pela área financeira e depois nas áreas de desenvolvimento humano, qualidade, ouvidora e vendas. Motivada pela sua vontade de ajudar os outros e pautada em suas experiências pessoais e profissionais, ela desenvolveu uma teoria a respeito dos meios para se alcançar uma vida bem-sucedida e plena. Nasceu então o método WeTeam, que deu origem a uma empresa com o mesmo nome, de coaching, mentoria e treinamento para desenvolver o potencial humano para uma vida de realizações e felicidade. Conosco aqui a octa campeã brasileira de polo aquático, especialista na ciência da felicidade, fundadora da WeTeam, palestrante e mãe da também jogadora Alissa, da Giorgia e da Olivia, e eles, seus pais e as mais importantes referências em sua vida. Ele, que é o coautor com a filha do livro “Esporte, um palco para a vida” e sua mãe, que foi o sólido alicerce, importantíssima peça na rede de apoio dos filhos e incentivadora para que todos pudessem se tornar seres humanos da melhor espécie. Direto de Clearwater e Miami, o engenheiro Pedro Pinciroli Júnior, Olga Alice de Andrade Pinciroli e sua primogênita, Cristiana de Andrade Pinciroli Pascual. Inspire-se! SIGA e COMPARTILHE o Endörfina através do seu app preferido de podcasts. Contribua também com este projeto através do Apoia.se. Um oferecimento da @pinkcheekbrasil Idealizada e desenvolvida por mulheres apaixonadas por esportes, a Pink Cheeks é uma marca brasileira que está há 10 anos no mercado. Pioneira no segmento de dermocosméticos de alta performance e inovando com o conceito do sportcare. Reconhecida pela grande expertise em proteção solar devido aos altos fatores de proteção UVA e UVB, a Pink Cheeks conta com linha completa para proteção facial, corporal e até capilar, com produtos de alta qualidade e alta resistência à água e ao suor. A linha também possui produtos que minimizam os atritos causados pelos movimentos repetitivos durante a prática esportiva, desenvolvidos especialmente para atletas, por atletas. Além da inovação com o conceito de sportcare, o diferencial da Pink está na união da proteção de alta performance, beleza e multifuncionalidade, e conta com uma linha completa de maquiagem com proteção solar resistente à água e ao suor. Os produtos são altamente indicados para qualquer tipo de atividade, possuem fórmulas veganas, sem parabenos, são fáceis de utilizar e muito agradáveis no contato com a pele. Os produtos da Pink Cheeks podem ser utilizados a partir dos dois anos de idade. www.pinkcheeks.com.br/endorfina Utilize o cupom ENDORFINAPINK e ganhe um desconto. @pinkcheeksbrasil    

Na segunda parte da investigação sobre os reflexos da política armamentista de Bolsonaro, mergulhamos ainda mais fundo no mundo dos CAC e dos clubes de tiro. Mergulhe mais fundo Arma de Fogo no Brasil: Gatilho da Violência (link para compra) Armas para Quem?: a busca por armas de fogo (link para compra) Episódios relacionados: 2: Por que amamos as armas de fogo? (Parte 1) 3: Por que amamos as armas de fogo? (Parte 2) 84: Bangue-bangue à brasileira (parte 1) Entrevistados do episódio Bruno Langeani Bacharel em direito (Mackenzie) e em relacionais internacionais (PUC), mestre em políticas públicas (Universidade de York). É gerente do Instituto Sou da Paz e autor do livro Armas de Fogo no Brasil: Gatilho da Violência. Leonardo Del Pupo Luz Psicólogo pós-graduado em avaliação psicológica especialista em avaliações psicológicas para posse e porte de arma de fogo. Roberto Uchoa de Oliveira Santos Bacharel em direito (UERJ), tem especialização em gestão de segurança pública e justiça criminal (UFF), e é mestre em sociologia política na (UENF). É autor do livro "Armas para Quem? A busca por armas de fogo". Foi policial civil no Rio de Janeiro e chefe do Sistema Nacional de Armas (Sinarm) da Polícia Federal no norte do estado do Rio de Janeiro. Atualmente trabalha como escrivão na Polícia Federal na cidade de Campos dos Goytacazes (RJ). Ivan Contente Marques Advogado especialista em políticas públicas voltadas para a redução da violência armada. Membro do Fórum Brasileiro de Segurança, conselheiro do Instituto Fogo Cruzado e diretor da The International Action Network on Small Arms (Iansa). Ficha técnica Trilha sonora tema: Paulo Gama, Mixagem: João Victor Coura Design das capas: Cláudia Furnari Concepção, produção, roteiro, edição e apresentação: Tomás Chiaverini Trilha incidental: Blue Dot Este episódio contou com apoio do Instituto Fogo Cruzado. Tanto na concepção quanto no financiamento.

O número de caçadores, atiradores desportivos e colecionadores (CACs) cresceu 474% durante o governo Bolsonaro. Nos últimos 4 anos, foram registradas, em média, 691 novas armas de fogo por dia. Isso equivale a quase um milhão de revólveres, pistolas, espingardas e até fuzis em circulação. Esse crescimento do setor de armas de fogo se deveu, sobretudo, a uma política declaradamente armamentista de Bolsonaro. Foram ao todo 40 decretos e portarias que afrouxaram as regras, sabotaram o controle, e, na prática, permitiram o porte de arma de fogo. É o que especialistas chamam de "porte abacaxi". Algo que vai de encontro à lei 10.826, mais conhecida como lei do Estatuto do Desarmamento. Neste episódio, analisamos as medidas armamentistas do governo Bolsonaro e mergulhamos no universo dos clubes de tiro e dos caçadores, atiradores desportivos e colecionadores. Mergulhe mais fundo Arma de Fogo no Brasil: Gatilho da Violência (link para compra) Armas para Quem?: a busca por armas de fogo (link para compra) Episódios relacionados: 2: Por que amamos as armas de fogo? (Parte 1) 3: Por que amamos as armas de fogo? (Parte 2) Entrevistados do episódio Roberto Uchoa de Oliveira Santos Bacharel em direito (UERJ), tem especialização em gestão de segurança pública e justiça criminal (UFF), e é mestre em sociologia política na (UENF). É autor do livro "Armas para Quem? A busca por armas de fogo". Foi policial civil no Rio de Janeiro e chefe do Sistema Nacional de Armas (Sinarm) da Polícia Federal no norte do estado do Rio de Janeiro. Atualmente trabalha como escrivão na Polícia Federal na cidade de Campos dos Goytacazes (RJ). Bruno Langeani Bacharel em direito (Mackenzie) e em relacionais internacionais (PUC), mestre em políticas públicas (Universidade de York). É gerente do Instituto Sou da Paz e autor do livro Armas de Fogo no Brasil: Gatilho da Violência. Ficha técnica Trilha sonora tema: Paulo Gama, Mixagem: João Victor Coura Design das capas: Cláudia Furnari Concepção, produção, roteiro, edição e apresentação: Tomás Chiaverini Trilha incidental: Blue Dot Este episódio contou com apoio do Instituto Fogo Cruzado. Tanto na concepção quanto no financiamento.

RUDÁ RICCI: QUAL A POLÍTICA DE EDUCAÇÃO DO GOVERNO LULA? - Programa 20 MinutosRudá Ricci é formado em Ciências Sociais pela PUC de São Paulo, com mestrado e doutorado pela Unicamp, Ricci atualmente é presidente do Instituto Cultiva, além de consultor de diversa entidades vinculadas ao setor educacional. Também é autor de diversos livros. Entre esses, “O fascismo de massa no Brasil” e “Terra de ninguém”.Uma das questões mais relevantes do debate nacional é o rumo da educação brasileira. Desde a derrubada da presidenta Dilma Rousseff, em 2016, os governos Temer e Bolsonaro começaram uma escalada de contrarreformas tanto no ensino superior quanto na educação média e fundamental. Além de abrir ainda mais espaço para privatização do ensino, a lógica dessas administrações neoliberais foi desidratar o sistema educacional como formador da cidadania, reforçando o que Paulo Freire chamava de “educação bancária”, ou seja, colocar o ensino a serviço das necessidades operacionais do capitalismo brasileiro. Com o governo Lula, a expectativa é que essa longa etapa de retrocessos na educação chegue ao seu final. Não apenas para resolver gargalos orçamentários gravíssimos, especialmente em relação às universidades federais, mas fundamentalmente para colocar a educação pública, da creche ao doutorado, como um dos pilares de um projeto de desenvolvimento baseado na democratização do conhecimento, da crítica e da cultura.----Quer contribuir com Opera Mundi via PIX? Nossa chave é apoie@operamundi.com.br (Razão Social: Última Instância Editorial Ltda.). Desde já agradecemos!Assinatura solidária: http://www.operamundi.com.br/apoio ★ Support this podcast ★

Bruno Simantob, CEO da edtech Transfer English, explica como a empresa obteve um faturamento de R$ 30 milhões no primeiro ano de operações a partir de um investimento inicial de R$ 125 mil em um mercado que ainda tem espaço para crescimento. Conteúdo patrocinado CARREIRA Estude na PUC de São Paulo com 25% de desconto nas mensalidades. Há vários cursos de especialização e extensão na área de negócios com inscrições abertas. Confira aqui. PODCAST Ouça o Febraban News para ficar por dentro das novidades do mundo bancário e financeiro. Acesse aqui e acompanhe os últimos episódios. Sobre o entrevistado Bruno Simantob é CEO e fundador da Transfer English. Ele tem formação superior em Direito pelo IBMEC e estudou Administração de Empresas na PUC Rio e Empreendedorismo na Universidade de Tel-Aviv. Bruno tem ampla experiência em negócios digitais e criação de modelos de negócios escaláveis na internet. Foi a partir dessa experiência que Bruno enxergou uma oportunidade no mercado de aprendizado em inglês e vai compartilhar toda essa história com a gente.

Consuelo Saavedra y Nicolás Vial, conversaron con Horacio Gilabert el académico de la Facultad de Agronomía PUC y miembro del Centro de Cambio Global UC.

David Witkowski is the "Bill Nye" of radio frequency.  Our host John Koos chats with David about his career and consulting firm Oku Solutions.  Oku Solutions provides an array of services, including:Expert witness: Local government hearing support, and facilitation of council/board study sessions.Electromagnetic engineering: EME report audits, post-commission MPE testing.RF/Microwave forensics: Field testing, site search, spectrum clearing, interference hunting and source location.Broadband strategic action planning.Implementation of Wi-Fi networks using Hotspot 2.0, OpenRoaming, Google ORION, and private LTE/NR networks using CBRS.Legislative testimony, FCC filings, and standards research.Public policy, leadership briefings, and authorship of position papers, white papers, and e-books.Authorship and filing of comments to the FCC, PUC, and other regulatory agencies.You can reach David on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/dtwitkowski/ and his company website is located at https://www.okusolutions.com/ .