TEXAS ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT

Deutsche Bank makes two particularly interesting points in a research note about Exxon Mobil: The company will probably make a big acquisition sometime in the next decade, and Big Oil is grappling with convincing kingdoms and socialist government to share their oil resources.

Deutsche argues that the best use of the cash Exxon has been bringing in during the boom is to buy a big company during the bust.

"Volumes have been broadly flat, and we continue to expect ExxonMobil to make a major acquisition within the next decade as a means to sustain itself. The obvious candidates has been Russia; it may now be through JV with Brazil. The country's massive presalt resource fits all the requirements of ExxonMobil: massive resrouce scale; massive project management challenges, massive capital requirements; long plateau production levels, adn actual ownership access to the resrouce for ExxonMobil. The final requirement now is the toughest to meet, as global oil (for now) is concentrated in the hands of kingdoms and socialist governments which will not likely share ownership."

Deutsche doesn't seem to count Exxon's acquisition of XTO Energy, which gives Exxon big access to natural gas plays. Deutsche analysts prefer oil, because the analysts expect oil prices to remain stronger than natural gas prices.

Oil remains the big prize. The note says:

"Of course volume growth in itself does not allay the greatest fear of the investor as regards all major oil deals, which is that as reserves globally concentrate into the hands of governments, so the marginal growth barrel for the privafte companies becomes lower return because of greater tehcnical and cost challenges, for example, low grade heavy oil or extreme deepwater."

Exxon will hold its annual analyst meeting on Thursday.

Click here to read the report.

From Eric Aasen:

Move over, you sexy, sleek, sophisticated Ferraris, Maseratis and Aston Martins: Make room for the Toyota Prius, the Chevrolet Volt and the Ford Fusion Hybrid.

These green cars were featured prominently at this year's Dallas Auto Show - and generated plenty of buzz among the crowds of car fans who flocked to the turntables and spotlights to get a closer look.

The event at the Dallas Convention Center featured about a dozen hybrids, a number that has grown in recent years, said Marianne Jones, the auto show's director of communications. The four-day show ended Sunday.

Cap and trade seemed like a sure thing just a year ago. A slew of big businesses supported it, and the House of Representatives had passed its bill, with many Texas Democrats voting for it.

Then the Senate got hold of it, which precipitated a series of legislative revolts and defections of businesses from groups that support the effort. To recap: there was a boycott of Senator Barbara Boxer's bill by Republican members of the Senate Environment Committee; an effort to revive bipartisan climate-change legislation by Senators John Kerry, Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham; a push by Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) in the Senate and Texas' Joe Barton (R-Arlington) in the House to overturn the EPA finding that greenhouse gases endanger public health; a legal challenge of that EPA finding by Texas Gov. Rick Perry and others; and, finally, a revolt against the nascent regulatory action by coal-state Democrats who don't trust the EPA. The Wall Street Journal has a good story today that discusses the last of those items.

Grist suggests that Big Oil is to blame for the Senate stasis. That would be a change from the dynamic in the House, where Rep. Gene Green of Houston lamented that refiners lacked influence.

So is cap-and-trade "dead," as Sen. Lindsey Graham told environmentalists according to the Washington Post? The bill that Graham, Kerry and Lieberman are building supposedly involves a sector-by-sector approach, instead of an economy-wide cap on emissions. The Greenwire story (the Graham link above) reports that the bill is likely to use a cap-and-trade system to control emissions from the utility and manufacturing sectors. In the meantime, the senators and their press aides are working to reframe the proposal as something more palatable than cap and trade, which Republicans have labeled "cap and tax" since it would undoubtedly increase electricity and fuel prices.

It is difficult to predict whether a climate-change bill will be approved this year (although it seems unlikely), but CQ (subscription required) reports today that the Democratic "revolt" is more a venting exercise during an election year. The Democratic legislation would delay EPA regulation for two years, but would not prohibit it. And the Senate would have to schedule floor time to debate it, which seems difficult given the legislative pile-up that involves health reform, jobs bills, etc. "It helps them in terms of meeting the needs of their constituents," Kerry told CQ. "And that's fine."

It appears that cap and trade will remain a Senate sideshow for the rest of this year. At some point, perhaps in the next couple weeks, Kerry et al. will unveil their bill, which will kick off a new flurry of lobbying by industry and enviro groups. It will likely be more modest than the House version. It will probably treat refiners better to secure the support of oil-patch Democrats like Mary Landrieu of Louisiana. It will probably make concessions for natural gas, which should win support from senators whose states have experienced the shale-gas boom. And Gov. Perry will still say it's bad for Texas.

The anti-smart meter folks are taking a new strategy. Some are refusing to allow Oncor to install new digital meters.

Oncor spokesman Chris Schein said meter installers encounter about a handful of people each day who refuse to allow the workers to switch the meters.

This morning, 20 people refused.

Schein said some had seen incorrect news reports that the Public Utility Commission instructed Oncor to halt installations. Not true. The PUC on Thursday agreed to hire an outside company to test the meters, but commissioners didn't stop installation.

Some people are complaining that the new meters can cause electricity bills to rise. A group of Oak Cliff dwellers started a group to oppose smart meters, called Smart UR Citizens. They have a blog and a petition.

Oncor spokesman Schein isn't sure what the company normally does when a customer refuses to allow Oncor onto the premises. Technically, the meter belongs to Oncor, even though it might be behind a gate on private property.

Readers, if you've had this experience, please tell us about it in your comments or email me: esouder@dallasnews.com.

Jump for the text of the Smart UR Citizens petition.

From Dave Michaels:

A group of Democratic senators may seek to halt stimulus funding for wind-energy projects over concerns that the program is subsidizing jobs overseas.

The dispute was prompted by a proposed wind farm in West Texas, whose investors planned to use Chinese-made turbines and seek a $450 million stimulus grant. The senators insist that stimulus funds shouldn't go to projects that get most of their materials from abroad and create "the bulk of their jobs" in other countries.

"I don't know anyone who thinks it's right that we use tax dollars to hire workers in other countries," said Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio. "The right thing is for the government to figure out how to do the program right in a way that works for American companies."

The project's developers say they're doing that. Austin-based Cielo Wind Power LP says more than 70 percent of the turbine parts are American-made, including its steel towers and blades.

The project prompted debate in two Senate committees on Thursday, where both Democratic and Republican senators questioned administration officials about whether the project should benefit from the stimulus. The U.S. Energy Department said any effort to suspend the wind stimulus program would cost U.S. jobs and set back efforts to expand clean-energy manufacturing in the country.

Click here for the full story.

Public Utility Commission agreed on Thursday to hire a company to independently test the accuracy of new smart meters, putting to rest concerns that the meters cause bills to jump.

The three commissioners agreed during an open meeting to engage a third party to test meters installed by Oncor and Centerpoint Energy. PUC staff will try to hire someone within the next two weeks for the tests.

The program would extensively test meters in the Bell County area, where the commission has received many complaints, and allow any customer to request testing of his new, high-tech meter. Commissioners instructed Oncor and Centerpoint to waive the normal $25 testing fee.

Eventually, the commission might hike electric delivery rates for all consumers to pay for the program.

"We will ride herd over this process because we want to be unbiased, third party, objective," PUC Chairman Barry Smitherman said.

The program is a reaction to concern among consumers and legislators that the new meters being installed across the state have caused electric bills to rise.

The New York Times reports on a cultural connection between a belief in evolution and doubt about global warming.

For example, the story says: "Last year, the Texas Board of Education adopted language requiring that teachers present all sides of the evidence on evolution and global warming."

The article points out an opposition trend, called the Creation Care movement. Creation Care adherants believe it is a Christian's duty to care for the earth and to help prevent global warming.

However, according to this article, the cultural connection is stronger between creationism and global warming doubt. The article goes on:

Lawrence M. Krauss, a physicist who directs the Origins Initiative at Arizona State University and has spoken against efforts to water down the teaching of evolution to school boards in Texas and Ohio, described the move toward climate-change skepticism as a predictable offshoot of creationism.

"Wherever there is a battle over evolution now," he said, "there is a secondary battle to diminish other hot-button issues like Big Bang and, increasingly, climate change. It is all about casting doubt on the veracity of science -- to say it is just one view of the world, just another story, no better or more valid than fundamentalism."

Not all evangelical Christians reject the notion of climate change, of course. There is a budding green evangelical movement in the country driven partly by a belief that because God created the earth, humans are obligated to care for it.

Yet there is little doubt that the skepticism about global warming resonates more strongly among conservatives, and Christian conservatives in particular. A survey published in October by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found that white evangelical Protestants were among those least likely to believe that there was "solid evidence" that the Earth was warming because of human activity.

Two newspaper giants, The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, published pieces over the weekend about the TXU buyout. It's interesting reading, nice recaps of what's happened since the company became Energy Future Holdings three years ago.

The Wall Street Journal writes about the number of George W. Bush cronies the company hired to get the buyout deal past the Texas Legislature and regulators. It doesn't mention Ron Kirk, Barack Obama's U.S. trade rep, and the guy in charge of TXU's legislative lobbying effort.

The New York Times offers an in-depth description of the deal and how it might unravel. The key sentence: "The buyout was, in effect, a gargantuan bet that natural gas prices would keep climbing; instead, plunging prices coupled with a hobbled national economy have cut into the cash the company generates."

Folks, the deregulated market requires a certain amount of computer savvy and a whole lot of research to get through to maximize its benefit to Texans. You can read a bunch about the subject in a big piece that I helped Elizabeth Souder with last week.

I just switched my provider in hopes for savings. I've got a 2,200-square-foot house in Lake Highlands that gets very little sun exposure, and our highest bill for electricity was just under $200 with StarTex power. We're not a great example of how Deregulation can help because, frankly, we don't use enough energy in a year to get a huge price difference. We only use about 10,000 kilowatt hours a year.

But my 2-year deal with StarTex is up this month, and I went shopping. Click onward for what I decided to do.

Updated with dollar amount.

Since my last blog update 40 minutes ago, Oncor decided to add more funding to its solar incentive program this year.

The company had already gone through more than $5 million in incentive funding for the popular subsidy this year, and had closed the program. Now, as of Friday, the Oncor solar subsidy program is again open for business, with another $2.5 million oin funding.

"We are reallocating money so we can continue to operate through the end of the year," said spokeswoman Carol Peters.

Peters said the company had been considering expanding funding this year, as it made big incentive payouts during the past few weeks, but hadn't made a firm decision until now. She said Oncor will continue to monitor demand so see if the program needs more funding.

Looks like it's a go for Oncor's sister company, TXU Energy, to market its solar lease program. TXU is owned by Energy Future Holdings, which also owns 80 percent of Oncor.

Oncor's incentive program for solar panels has been hugely popular. So popular, in fact, that Oncor has already handed out all of the incentive money for this year.

It's February.

"It's like tickets to a rock concert," said Oncor spokesman Chris Schein, about the various incentive programs the company operates.

Spokeswoman Carol Peters said 72 projects have been installed so far this year using Oncor incentives. The company has handed out more than $5 million this year.

Since the program began in 2009, Oncor has paid subsidies for 15 commercial, 9 government or nonprofit, and 129 residential projects. Those projects amount to 1,577 kilowatts of capacity.

Peters said anyone who wants to participate in the program next year should sign up during the fourth quarter of 2010.

Peters said Oncor is considering adding more funding for 2010, but hasn't made a decision yet.

What does this mean for TXU Energy's new solar program, which will depend on those incentives? I'm waiting to hear from TXU.

The Texas Department of State Health Services collected blood and urine samples from residents in the Dish area to test whether natural gas activity is affecting their health.

DSHS spokeswoman Allison Lowery said the department collected the samples from 28 randomly-selected adults last month.

"We're going to be looking at those samples to try to determine if there are elevated levels of vocs -- volatile organic compounds -- and that would include benzene," she said.

Dish, which hosts natural gas compression stations and other natural gas production equipment, is the town that conducted its an air quality study last year. That study prompted the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to study air quality across the Barnett Shale natural gas field, finding elevated levels of benzene in some places.

Lowery said the mayor of Dish, Calvin Tillman, had asked the DSHS to conduct the health study.

The department sent the blood and urine samples to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta for analysis. Results are due in the next week or so, she said. She said the department will notify the study participants of the results and issue a report to the community.

Here's an update on the discussion earlier this week about whether Oncor gave customers enough information about power outages during the snow storm.

Oncor spokesman Chris Schein says it occurs to him that customers don't realize just how dumb the electric grid is.

For example, Oncor might send a truck to fix a power line in a neighborhood, and most of the houses come back online. So the worker leaves for the next job, not realizing that a few houses are still out because of a second problem on the line. Until those customers call Oncor to say they still don't have power, Oncor doesn't know.

That's pretty dumb. And pretty frustrating for people sitting in the dark while the lights go on everywhere else in the neighborhood.

Advanced meters are supposed to address this issue because Oncor will be able to communicate with each meter and with technology along the lines. If there's a problem, Oncor will know which homes are affected, and have an idea of where the problem lies.

Because Oncor has begun to install smart meters, Schein said, techies were able to pull information from databases to help workers identify problem spots during the snow storm. Schein said this saved about 3,000 man hours.

However, Oncor doesn't yet have systems in place to automatically pull such information from the grid. Schein said those systems should be installed next year, making it even easier for Oncor to identify outages.

Meanwhile, the tree trimming problem persists. Schein said some people remain without power because they -- or their neighbors -- refuse to allow Oncor to trim fallen tree limbs from the lines.

Schein said one swell citizen parked his Hummer underneath his tree to prevent Oncor from removing a limb that had caused outages in the neighborhood. Here's the best part: The guy still had power at his own house. He just didn't care if the neighbors froze.

The Sierra Club plans to sue Energy Future Holdings and its power plant unit, Luminant, for air pollution violations at the Big Brown coal-fired power plant.

The environmental advocacy group said the plant, Luminant's oldest coal plant, contributes to ozone in North Texas. The club also accused the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality of looking the other way.

Luminant spokesman Allan Koenig said in a statement the company is in full compliance with all regulations.

"We are in full compliance with all regulatory requirements and remain proud of our environmental record. We believe this claim is legally flawed. The Sierra Club indicated that it looks forward to 'working cooperatively' with us, and we welcome that opportunity just as we have in the past," Koenig said in an email.

Jump for the full press release from the Sierra Club.

The House Energy and Commerce committee today requested information about hydraulic fracturing from eight oilfield services companies. The companies include Halliburton, BJ Services, Schlumberger, Frac Tech Services, Superior Well Services, Universal Well Services, Sanjel Corporation, and Calfrac Well Services.

The move is significant because one of the committee's senior Democrats, Rep. Diana DeGette of Colorado, thinks the EPA should regulate the environmental impact of hydraulic fracturing, which is widely used to create gas wells in the Barnett Shale. Critics like DeGette think that fracking chemicals, including diesel-based fluids, could seep into underground water sources. Her main complaint has been the lack of federal regulation of the practice (it is left up to states to supervise the safety of oil and gas drilling.) In a hat tip to DeGette, the committee's top two Democrats, Chairman Henry Waxman and Rep. Ed Markey, write in a letter today that "there is virtually no federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing."

The committee has apparently been moved by the knowledge that some companies use diesel fuel as part of the cocktail they shoot underground. The big three oilfield services firms -- Halliburton, BJ Services and Schlumberger -- agreed in 2003 to stop using diesel fuel to fracture wells near underground drinking water sources. But the committee asserts that at least two of those three firms "continued to use diesel fuel in their fracturing fluids after signing the 2003 agreement with EPA." The committee's letter (pdf) says little is known about whether other companies, which have grabbed a larger share of the market in recent years, use diesel fuel in their fracturing mix.

Here is what the committee is seeking:

The Committee is requesting the most recent data on the types and quantities of chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing fluids with additional information on whether the companies injected these fluids in, near, or below an underground source of drinking water. The Committee also is requesting documents related to any allegations that the hydraulic fracturing caused harm to human health or the environment.

DeGette quickly responded that she welcomes the investigation. "I am particularly troubled by the revelation that companies have been using diesel fuel, apparently in violation of the Memorandum of Agreement with EPA. Natural gas is an important fuel for our energy future, but we must ensure that the way we retrieve natural gas does not endanger drinking water."

Markey, D-Mass., foreshadowed this move one month ago when his committee probed the subject with Fort Worth-based XTO Energy and Irving-based Exxon Mobil. Markey said there was no "conspiracy" to ban hydraulic fracturing, but that Democrats want to make sure it's done safely:

I just want to once again say there is no secret plot here to ban hydraulic fracturing given the fact that there have been 1 million wells I heard that have been drilled using that technique.

Two stories in print today offer hope to the nuclear power industry.

NRG Energy Inc. and CPS Energy said Wednesday they've resolved their differences over funding for two new nuclear power reactors at the South Texas Project. The resolution keeps the project in the running for the federal loan guarantees necessary to finance Texas' first new reactors in decades.

And, according to the Wall Street Journal, a new type of nuclear reactor--smaller than a rail car and one tenth the cost of a big plant--is emerging as a contender to reshape the nation's resurgent nuclear power industry.

Small reactors address some of the problems companies face as they consider building the usual, large reactors: Cost, finding enough cooling water, and the logistics and time it takes to build the massive equipment.

Shrinking reactors, however, doesn't address concerns among some environmentalists about nuclear waste storage and the risk of a terrorist attack on the reactor.

There's an old adage that says if the left and the right are mad at you, you must be doing something right. Maybe that applies to the situation President Barack Obama finds himself in concerning his energy policy.

Texans know that Gov. Rick Perry thinks Washington is using energy and climate-change policies to punish Texas and its dominant fossil-fuel industries. The governor, who is running for reelection on this theme, exploited this idea during his speech Wednesday announcing a lawsuit against the EPA over its greenhouse-gas endangerment finding.

Well, the Greens aren't happy with Obama, either. The New York Times today carries a story with the headline, "Environmentalists cooling on Obama." It cites a list of grievances including the president's support of loan guarantees for new nuclear plants and his embrace of "clean coal" technology.

One of the more interesting quotes comes from Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, who unloaded on clean coal after Obama mentioned it during his State of the Union speech:

"N.R.D.C. knows there is no such thing as 'clean coal,' " Ms. Beinecke wrote in a blog post after the State of the Union address. "Every single step in the coal power cycle is dirty, from the profoundly destructive mountaintop removal mining to the smokestack emissions, which are responsible for 24,000 deaths a year."

As a somewhat proud owner of a car that recommends premium gas to run "optimally" (and I know there's plenty of smart folks out there who think premium gas buyers are dumb as stumps - my Dad is one of them, so spare me the talk about gas - I've heard it!), I can't help but notice that the difference in price right now between regular gas and premium unleaded gas is much, much higher than it has been.

At the Texaco at Royal and 75, the gap is now 40 cents a gallon. (I never buy gas there - it's almost always the most expensive around) Even at the Costco, the gap is 28 cents. It's typically been 15-20 cents in my experience, and in many places as little as 12-15 cents.

If you do gasbuddy.com or other gas-finding services, the gap between the cheapest regular gas and the cheapest premium is about 30 cents a gallon.

What gives? Answers after the click.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry is a renowned climate skeptic, but he's not the first person to challenge the EPA's endangerment finding. Last week, three groups petitioned the EPA to reconsider its finding that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger public health. That set the stage for possible regulation of CO2 under the Clean Air Act.

The groups include: the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a think tank and conservative advocacy outfit; the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, an organized group of climate-change skeptics; and the Science and Environmental Policy Project, which has challenged the United Nations over findings that buttressed previous climate-change treaties. Greenwire says in its story yesterday that Freedomworks, the advocacy group headed by former Rep. Dick Armey of Denton County, is also involved in the challenge. (Interesting side point: Armey supports Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison in her campaign against Perry.)

In their petition to the EPA, these three groups cite "scientifically flawed studies" as their basis for challenging the agency's decision. Many, if not all, of the studies come from the UN Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change, which most recently was accused of exaggerating the thawing trend of Himalayan glaciers. The CEI et al petition also cites omission of "critical temperature data" and manipulation of data to achieve desired outcomes. See the petition here (pdf).

From the Associated Press:

Gov. Rick Perry and other top Texas officials on Tuesday announced a legal challenge to the federal government's finding that greenhouse gases are dangerous to people, claiming the ruling was based on flawed science.

The EPA in December issued an "endangerment" finding about carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, setting the stage for future rules restricting such emissions.

Texas - which leads the nation in greenhouse gas emissions and is frequently at odds with the EPA - announced it has asked a federal appeals court to review the endangerment finding. The state also asked the EPA to reconsider it. EPA officials in Washington didn't immediately return a call seeking comment.

"The EPA's misguided plan paints a big target on the backs of Texas agriculture and energy producers and the hundreds of thousands of Texans they employ," Perry said. "This legal action is being taken to protect the Texas economy and the jobs that go with it, as well as defend Texas' freedom to continue our successful environmental strategies free from federal overreach."

Click here for the full story.

I don't know if Oncor truly did all it could to restore power as quickly as possible during the storm last week, as the company claimed. I do know that some customers expect magic. And Oncor isn't in the magic business.

This article reveals worrying expectations that some people have about electricity.

According to the story, Leon Simmons, a 69-year-old Oak Cliff resident, had to move in with his daughter in Cedar Hill when his power went out. He called Oncor to ask if the power had been restored, and the Oncor representative told him to go home and find out.

But the Oncor rep wasn't being flip. Unless you have an advanced meter, Oncor really doesn't know if your house has power. If your power goes out, Oncor only finds out when you call. Oncor might send someone to fix the line, but you are the only person who knows if the power is back on at your particular house.

The new, advanced meters Oncor is installing throughout North Texas are designed to fix this issue by allowing Oncor to communicate with the meter at your home.

Second, Oncor encountered several customers who refused to allow crews to trim trees back from the lines so that power could be restored. According to the article, Oncor had to call in the police in Dallas, Richardson and Fort Worth to allow repairs.

In many cases, fallen tree limbs caused the power outages. So, it seems clear that in many cases, those tree limbs would have to be removed to fix the lines. Some people might choose tree limbs over electricity, but their neighbors might prefer light, heat and television.

Again, I'm not saying Oncor behaved perfectly. I don't know. I'm just saying that public ignorance about electricity doesn't help.

Updated with statement from NRG.

The first federal loan guarantees for new nuclear reactors went to Georgia. Not Texas.

A couple of years ago, a planned expansion by NRG Energy at the South Texas Project seemed like an obvious first choice for the loan guarantees. NRG proposes building two new reactors using technology already in use elsewhere, and NRG was moving the project along faster than any other nuclear project.

But last year, as NRG and its partner, CPS Energy, squabbled over cost estimates and politics, a project in Burke, Georgia, continued to make progress. That project won the first guarantees.

If NRG and CPS can negotiate a resolution to their differences quickly, the South Texas expansion might still net a federal loan guarantee. And NRG has said it needs a loan guarantee to be able to afford the project, which will cost around $10 billion.

NRG said in a statement:

"We are pleased to see that DOE has started the process of issuing loan guarantees to start the nuclear renaissance in earnest. With the current issues between the partners, the STP Expansion was obviously not a contender for the first loan guarantee. However, we are continuing positive discussions with CPS Energy and hope we can achieve a settlement shortly that will allow the strengths of our project in certified technology, proven EPC contractor and contract, site and state support to put it clearly in lead position for the second loan guarantee."

Meanwhile, I think the situation calls into question whether nuclear reactors can be built in states that have deregulated their wholesale power industries. Power companies in regulated areas can expect to recoup their investments from ratepayers, and to begin doing so quickly.

But in deregulated areas like Texas, power plant investors must pay to build the plants, and hope to recoup the investment by selling electricity. If power prices drop, plant owners in deregulated states run the risk of going bust. This is particularly true for plants that cost $10 billion to build.

NRG has spent years working out ways to share the financial risk with investors and other partners. Legal issues with CPS put this process on hold.

Jump for the announcement from the Department of Energy.

Public Utility Commission Chairman Barry Smitherman is acting as a marriage counselor of sorts.

Smitherman on Friday facilitated talks between CPS Energy and NRG Energy, the companies that had planned to build Texas' first new nuclear reactors in decades, but had a falling out. The lawsuits and distrust between the partners could kill the project.

PUC spokesman Terry Hadley said Smitherman met with Nuclear Innovation North America chief executive Steve Winn and chairman David Crane, who is also chief executive of NRG, which created NINA. From the CPS side, Acting General Manager Jelynne LaBlanc-Burley and Chairman Charles Foster attended.

Hadley said the meeting at PUC headquarters in Austin lasted about four hours, and the group agreed to continue talking.

Smitherman told the San Antonio Express-News he wasn't asked to intercede by anyone, and he has the full support of Gov. Rick Perry, who appointed him to the commission.

"As a chairman of the PUC, I am incredibly focused to make sure there is plenty of energy in the state," he told the Express-News. "It's an incredibly important project. It's important that we get this project done."

NRG and CPS, the San Antonio municipal utility, are joint owners of the South Texas Project nuclear power plant, along with Austin Energy. NRG and CPS agreed to jointly invest in building two new reactors, but when San Antonio officials became concerned about the cost of the expansion, the relationship between the companies began to unravel into lawsuits and accusations.

Unless the sides can continue to cooperate on the project, the expansion could be doomed. Without CPS, NRG would have to find another investor quickly, in order to win the federal loan guarantees that are necessary to keep the project affordable.

Few Americans consider Steven Chu a household name.

We, Gentle Readers, are those Americans. So let's get our geek on, and enjoy Energy Secretary Chu's celebrity status this weekend.

The Department of Energy says Chu will appear on ABC's Extreme Makeover: Home Edition this Sunday. The DOE and Oak Ridge National Laboratory helped design an efficient home and neighborhood learning center in Washington.

The builders used efficient technologies, including an insulated concrete form foundation, triple-layer insulated windows, hybrid electric water heaters and a geothermal heat pump, compact fluorescent lighting, and solar panels for electricity, the DOE said in a press release.

Will Chu wield a hammer? Will he wear a tool belt? Will he tear up when the family discusses its hardships? The program begins at 8 p.m. Central.

The natural gas industry is paying inordinate attention to Calvin Tillman, the mayor of tiny Dish, Texas.

Sure, he's the guy who commissioned the air quality study that has triggered more studies around the Barnett Shale, as well as political chatter about drilling moratoriums and new regulations. If these things come to pass, drilling and completing natural gas wells could become much more expensive for producers.

The typical -- and wholly expected -- industry response has been to point out the limitations of the Dish air quality study and to counter the results with other data.

But something has changed in the past few weeks. As Mayor Tillman heads to New York and Pennsylvania next week to tell his story in six towns, industry groups have begun to attack.

Now, the Texas Pipeline Association has told Tillman it will officially request a list of the people who contributed to the town's legal fund.

And an industry advocacy group called Energy in Depth issued a snarky press release that poses questions to Tillman. The questions are designed to show that natural gas drilling isn't as worrisome as Tillman might say.

So why is the natural gas industry so afraid of the mayor of a town of 362 people?

"We are very concerned about what's happening in New York, so anytime someone comes to exaggerate or possibly lie about their experiences, we're going to fight that," said Jeff Eshelman, a spokesman for Energy in Depth.

As I've stated on this blog before, I think natural gas executives worry that if regular people become fearful of drilling, politicians will place stlff regulations on the industry and people won't be very eager to lease their land to producers. Those outcomes could make drilling and completing a well more expensive, and, in some cases, unprofitable.

Jump for the Energy in Depth press release.