This is a quick update to our last post.

So far there has been light coverage in the Austin American Statesman and a local blog, Eye on Williamson County. We anticipate an article in Sunday’s Williamson County Times, and press conference organizer Paige Menking got a call from a reporter with the San Antonio Current which has been critical of CPS’s nuclear proposal. Staff at the Statesman also indicated they would send a reporter to Georgetown’s city council meeting on Tuesday to cover SEAK students officially presenting their request to the city.

We now have video of the press conference available, so enjoy!

SEAK Press Conference in Opposition to CPS Nuclear Proposal from Public Citizen on Vimeo.

Today at noon, a group of students at Southwestern University known as SEAK, Students for Environmental Activism and Knowledge, held a press conference at the Williamson County Courthouse asking Georgetown’s city council to reconsider its support for 2 new nuclear reactors proposed for the South Texas Nuclear Project. The project is currently led by CPS Energy of San Antonio and NRG Energy, a private utility company based in New Jersey.

Connor Hanrahan, a senior at Southwestern and president of SEAK, called on the city council to “reconsider [its] support for this project, and to do so in a public forum where the voices of citizens can be heard.”

Hanrahan was referring both to Georgetown’s long range energy plan which includes a substantial investment in nuclear power, and to an appearance made by the city utility’s Jim Briggs at a public meeting hosted by CPS Energy in San Antonio.

“It was premature for the utility to be showing public support for this project,” said Trevor Lovell of ReEnergize Texas. He noted that the nuclear project faces stiff public opposition in San Antonio. Mr. Briggs was 1 of 17 individuals speaking in favor of the plant at the public meeting held on September 28. A total of 63 individuals spoke in opposition to the plant at the same meeting.

Matthew Johnson of Public Citizen’s Texas Office spoke about the growing financial risk associated with Georgetown’s plan.

“The estimated cost of the nuclear expansion at the South Texas Project has doubled since Georgetown’s city council approved their energy plan,” Johnson said. “There’s a strong case to be made that rethinking that plan with new assumptions would be appropriate to protect ratepayers.”

Siting a recent article by Asher Price of the Austin American Statesman describing a
conflict over water between LCRA and southeast Texas rice farmers, Lovell also expressed concern about the impact the new nuclear reactors would have on water flowing in the Colorado River.

“In a drought year the 2 reactors currently at STP consume almost half the flow of the Colorado River where it meets gulf coast estuaries. Adding two new reactors will put wetland wildlife at substantial risk and may wipe local rice farmers out completely.”

The coalition plans to speak at the Georgetown City Council meeting next week and deliver a letter to each Council member asking them to rescind their support of the project and reconsider their commitment to 30% nuclear in their current 2035 energy plan.

A video of the press conference will be available later today.

Last spring a coalition of student leaders from all over Texas pressured state lawmakers to pass a bill providing student bodies greater authority to create “environmental service fees” on their campuses. In a session that produced very few new laws HB 3353 passed with bipartisan support, a major legislative victory for us at ReEnergize Texas.

Across the country, 94 colleges and universities have established such fees which pay for renewable energy, land conservation, local food projects and more, but the only one in Texas is at Texas State University in San Marcos. The students who helped get HB 3353 passed are now working together to change all that. Their goal is to make Texas the leading state when it comes to campuses with student-driven green funds.

“Our first statewide conference call was a great success,” said Jacob Bintliff, a student leader from UT Austin. “We had students from 8 different campuses, everyone is pretty much on board, and we’re all reaching out to neighboring campuses to broaden the coalition.”

The final language of the bill limits student bodies to imposing fees no larger than $5 per semester. The issue must be voted on by the students during a student election, which are usually held each spring. So far the students are reporting great success.

“We met with the president of SGA for the University of Houston, and he seems very supportive so far,” says Jason Cantu, lead organizer for the ReEnergize Houston chapter.

These campaigns have been very popular nationally as well. According to research done by Jacob Bintliff, only 3 such efforts have ever been defeated. He notes that in 2 of these cases it seems possible that campus politics, rather than the merits of the campaign, may have been responsible for the defeats.

Still, students hoping to create green funds for their campuses will have an uphill battle. The tough economic times are leading some students to question the timing of the campaigns.

My response – referendum campaigns are tough, but even if it looks hopeless the campaign itself will raise awareness, bring new people to your cause, help you build new partnerships and help unify your group. Even if you lose, you will build the skills and networks you need to win next year.