CLEAR

clear@lists.cheatlakeclear.org

661 discussions

Kayak loose in Cheat river (and lake...?)
by Duane330＠aol.com 16 Aug '07

16 Aug '07

Duane, I lost my boat and paddle at Coliseum on Sat. (Aug. 11). Boat is a red Bliss-Stick (MAC 1) Kayak, with some years on it. The paddle is a seven-2 white paddle with blue hand-grips. Please deliver to Ralph at Teeter Campground in Albright, WV (304) 329-3626. I am happy to offer a reward of $100 for return of the boat. My contact in Charlotte is 704-968-5836 or john.cowan(a)bankofamerica.com Thank you for any help you can provide! John Lawton Cowan Vice President Consumer Technology Quality & Productivity Bank of America work: 704.683.2836 mobile: 704.968.5836 = ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

1 0

Two Items <Milt Cohen & Watershed Day>
by Duane330＠aol.com 07 Aug '07

07 Aug '07

Two items. Today, August 7 th, West Virginia Public Radio will feature Milton Cohen, a founding member of CLEAR, on the program "Aging with Grace and Dignity". Please listen in at 3 pm or 9 pm. This is at 90.9 on the FM dial. Milt and Bert have retired to Rochester, NY, to reside near one of their sons. His 101st birthday is approaching. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The 2007 Watershed Celebration Day & Protecting Our Watersheds Institute will be held at Lakeview Resort on November 2nd and 3rd (Friday and Saturday). Early bird registration is due by September 28th, with the final registration deadline due October 15th. The only charge will be $150 for each individual that registers and does not attend. I hope that CLEAR can have four or five attendees. Let me know if you need more information, or go to: _www.wvca.us/wvwn_ (http://www.wvca.us/wvwn) or email: _wrc(a)wvca.us_ (mailto:wrc@wvca.us) ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

1 0

Moving Beyond Kyoto -- Al Gore
by Duane330＠aol.com 12 Jul '07

12 Jul '07

Moving Beyond Kyoto by: Al Gore 2 July 2007, New York Times WE — the human species — have arrived at a moment of decision. It is unprecedented and even laughable for us to imagine that we could actually make a conscious choice as a species, but that is nevertheless the challenge that is before us. Our home — Earth — is in danger. What is at risk of being destroyed is not the planet itself, but the conditions that have made it hospitable for human beings. Without realizing the consequences of our actions, we have begun to put so much carbon dioxide into the thin shell of air surrounding our world that we have literally changed the heat balance between Earth and the Sun. If we don't stop doing this pretty quickly, the average temperature will increase to levels humans have never known and put an end to the favorable climate balance on which our civilization depends. In the last 150 years, in an accelerating frenzy, we have been removing increasing quantities of carbon from the ground — mainly in the form of coal and oil — and burning it in ways that dump 70 million tons of CO2 every 24 hours into the Earth's atmosphere. The concentrations of CO2 — having never risen above 300 parts per million for at least a million years — have been driven from 280 parts per million at the beginning of the coal boom to 383 parts per million this year. As a direct result, many scientists are now warning that we are moving closer to several "tipping points" that could — within 10 years — make it impossible for us to avoid irretrievable damage to the planet's habitability for human civilization. Just in the last few months, new studies have shown that the north polar ice cap — which helps the planet cool itself — is melting nearly three times faster than the most pessimistic computer models predicted. Unless we take action, summer ice could be completely gone in as little as 35 years. Similarly, at the other end of the planet, near the South Pole, scientists have found new evidence of snow melting in West Antarctica across an area as large as California. This is not a political issue. This is a moral issue, one that affects the survival of human civilization. It is not a question of left versus right; it is a question of right versus wrong. Put simply, it is wrong to destroy the habitability of our planet and ruin the prospects of every generation that follows ours. On Sept. 21, 1987, President Ronald Reagan said, "In our obsession with antagonisms of the moment, we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world." We — all of us — now face a universal threat. Though it is not from outside this world, it is nevertheless cosmic in scale. Consider this tale of two planets. Earth and Venus are almost exactly the same size, and have almost exactly the same amount of carbon. The difference is that most of the carbon on Earth is in the ground — having been deposited there by various forms of life over the last 600 million years — and most of the carbon on Venus is in the atmosphere. As a result, while the average temperature on Earth is a pleasant 59 degrees, the average temperature on Venus is 867 degrees. True, Venus is closer to the Sun than we are, but the fault is not in our star; Venus is three times hotter on average than Mercury, which is right next to the Sun. It's the carbon dioxide. This threat also requires us, in Reagan's phrase, to unite in recognition of our common bond. Next Saturday, on all seven continents, the Live Earth concert will ask for the attention of humankind to begin a three-year campaign to make everyone on our planet aware of how we can solve the climate crisis in time to avoid catastrophe. Individuals must be a part of the solution. In the words of Buckminster Fuller, "If the success or failure of this planet, and of human beings, depended on how I am and what I do, how would I be? What would I do?" Live Earth will offer an answer to this question by asking everyone who attends or listens to the concerts to sign a personal pledge to take specific steps to combat climate change. (More details about the pledge are available at algore.com.) But individual action will also have to shape and drive government action. Here Americans have a special responsibility. Throughout most of our short history, the United States and the American people have provided moral leadership for the world. Establishing the Bill of Rights, framing democracy in the Constitution, defeating fascism in World War II, toppling Communism and landing on the moon — all were the result of American leadership. Once again, Americans must come together and direct our government to take on a global challenge. American leadership is a precondition for success. To this end, we should demand that the United States join an international treaty within the next two years that cuts global warming pollution by 90 percent in developed countries and by more than half worldwide in time for the next generation to inherit a healthy Earth. This treaty would mark a new effort. I am proud of my role during the Clinton administration in negotiating the Kyoto protocol. But I believe that the protocol has been so demonized in the United States that it probably cannot be ratified here — much in the way the Carter administration was prevented from winning ratification of an expanded strategic arms limitation treaty in 1979. Moreover, the negotiations will soon begin on a tougher climate treaty. Therefore, just as President Reagan renamed and modified the SALT agreement (calling it Start), after belatedly recognizing the need for it, our next president must immediately focus on quickly concluding a new and even tougher climate change pact. We should aim to complete this global treaty by the end of 2009 — and not wait until 2012 as currently planned. If by the beginning of 2009, the United States already has in place a domestic regime to reduce global warming pollution, I have no doubt that when we give industry a goal and the tools and flexibility to sharply reduce carbon emissions, we can complete and ratify a new treaty quickly. It is, after all, a planetary emergency. A new treaty will still have differentiated commitments, of course; countries will be asked to meet different requirements based upon their historical share or contribution to the problem and their relative ability to carry the burden of change. This precedent is well established in international law, and there is no other way to do it. There are some who will try to pervert this precedent and use xenophobia or nativist arguments to say that every country should be held to the same standard. But should countries with one-fifth our gross domestic product — countries that contributed almost nothing in the past to the creation of this crisis — really carry the same load as the United States? Are we so scared of this challenge that we cannot lead? Our children have a right to hold us to a higher standard when their future — indeed, the future of all human civilization — is hanging in the balance. They deserve better than a government that censors the best scientific evidence and harasses honest scientists who try to warn us about looming catastrophe. They deserve better than politicians who sit on their hands and do nothing to confront the greatest challenge that humankind has ever faced — even as the danger bears down on us. We should focus instead on the opportunities that are part of this challenge. Certainly, there will be new jobs and new profits as corporations move aggressively to capture the enormous economic opportunities offered by a clean energy future. But there's something even more precious to be gained if we do the right thing. The climate crisis offers us the chance to experience what few generations in history have had the privilege of experiencing: a generational mission; a compelling moral purpose; a shared cause; and the thrill of being forced by circumstances to put aside the pettiness and conflict of politics and to embrace a genuine moral and spiritual challenge. Al Gore, vice president from 1993 to 2001, is the chairman of the _Alliance for Climate Protection_ (http://www.climateprotect.org/) . He is the author, most recently, of "The Assault on Reason." ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

2 1

BE ACTIVE Re: transmission line
by Duane330＠aol.com 05 Jul '07

05 Jul '07

REMEMBER: The DOE National Interest Electricity Transmission (NIET) Corridor comments DEADLINE is July 6th! You should submit comments electronically at: _http://nietc.anl.gov_ (http://nietc.anl.gov) You can attach one file no larger than 10MB. So write a letter and attach it to an email. Or, just send an email letter. Address it to: The Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, OE-20 U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20585 "If you are commenting on Docket No. 2007-OE-01 (the draft Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor), your comments must be marked "Attn: Docket No. 2007-OE-01." So let's get all of our comments submitted a.s.a.p. Getting comment in on the excessively large area of the NIET Corridor is extremely important, covering essentially the northern half of West Virginia. Note that Gov. Manchin first supported this Corridor, but now opposes it, more or less. NOTE: There is no crisis in power on the East Coast. The eastern states need to (1) practice conservation and energy efficiency to the greatest extent possible, then (2) devise a plan that involves alternative fuels such that carbon dioxide emission can be REDUCED, not EXPANDED in the near and long term future. The "greenhouse effect" is real and huge! Duane Nichols, CLEAR and Board Member of MVCAC. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

4 3

Re: [CLEAR] [MVCAC] BE ACTIVE Re: transmission line
by Paul Brown 05 Jul '07

05 Jul '07

Jim, I think I speak for all of us in thanking you for your analysis. It would make an important contributiin as a letter to the editor (fewer than 600 words in the Dom Post) - I'd be willing to draft one for you if you like. It would also be an excellnt argument against the power line, especially n combination with the battery argument. Something like this: The stated reason is invalid on its face because new technology makes the power line obsolete. Then expose the actual motive, which screws customers in order to enrich allegheny. Thanks again. Could I use your analysis in my column? Paul Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512 >>> "James Kotcon" <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> 07/05/07 5:43 PM >>> Paul, et al.: You have obviously made the mistake of believing what Allegheny Energy says about their transmission line. :-) The purpose of the transmission line is NOT to relieve congestion or increase system reliability, no matter how many times Allegheny says so. The purpose is to make more money from Allegheny's old dirty power plants. They can do that by supplying more electricity to East Coast cities during peak periods. Installing batteries in those cities would allow those customers to recharge the batteries at night when demand is low and electricity is cheap, but Allegheny makes more money by selling during peak daytime periods. This is primarily due to the obscure way that electricity is priced on the wholesale market. The congestion is not so much a "capacity" congestion, but an "economic" congestion. It costs Allegheny approximately 3 cents per kilowatt to generate electricity, and another 3 cents per kilowatt to transmit it through the grid to your home. (All numbers used are approximate and may vary from year to year, but they illustrate the principles involved.) That retail price of 6 cents is a monthly average of all the plants and transmission lines and all their expenses used over a period of years. But at any given time, cheap base load plants like Fort Martin can generate electricity at 1-2 cents, while more expensive natural gas plants require up to 6-12 cents per kilowatt. Coal-fired base load plants take a lot of time to ramp up and shut off, so they are mostly used full time for "base load. Because it takes time to heat them up and cool them off, utilities keep looking for ways run their plants at night so they do not have to waste money and energy during start-ups and shut-downs. Natural gas plants can be turned on and ramped up very quickly, but their fuel costs are higher, so they are turned on only a few hours per day when needed for peaking power. The natural gas plants, and their higher costs, are averaged into your monthly bill with the coal plants. Within a given service territory, it makes sense to use the batteries to more completely utilize the lowest cost plants. But on the wholesale market, electricity is sold on an hour-by-hour, or even minute-by-minute basis. When demand is high, utilities need to buy the more expensive peaking power, often at prices of 12, 15, or even 25 cents per kilowatt. The Regional Transmission Operator (PJM) holds an hourly auction to determine the price of electricity, so each plant bids to deliver so many megawatts at whatever price they can afford. PJM then accepts bids, in order, from the lowest to the highest cost generators, until they have enough generation capacity to meet the demand for that particular hour. But every power plant whose bid is accepted is paid the same rate as the highest accepted rate, and any plants whose bids are higher (and whose electricity is not needed) will not sell any electricity and must be shut down until they are needed. This auction is rigged to provide an incentive for generators to bid the lowest price they can while still making a profit, as they make no money at all if they do not operate their plants. But the net effect is that wholesale generators who can generate very cheaply (1-3 cents) can sell that electricity for e.g., 24 cents if they can get it to the market and displace generators who cost 25 cents per kilowatt. Hence use of storage batteries would make good energy policy, but it does not make fabulous windfall profits for Allegheny because recharging the batteries at night (using nighttime base-load rates) would only make Allegheny 2-3 cents, not 12-24 that they can make during peak load periods. In fact, under this auction system, Allegheny wants to maximize the loads during peak daytime periods, so investments to even out the day/night peaks are counterproductive (for Allegheny). The only thing standing in Allegheny's way is the economic congestion on the current transmission grid, which prevents them from actually delivering the electricity to the highest paying customers. This is what the US-DOE describes as "economic congestion" which means that there is already enough generating capacity to meet the demand in East Coast communities, but with a new transmission line, electricity from these expensive East Coast plants could be economically displaced by Allegheny's older, dirtier, cheaper plants. US-DOE and Allegheny want us to believe that their is a "capacity congestion" which could lead to blackouts and system-wide collapse. But the capacity congestion really only occurs a few days per year, and could be addressed much more cheaply, while the economic congestion is the real driver that makes the power line cost-effective. Thus the real effect of the new transmission line is to dramatically increase Allegheny's profit potential, while making everyone's air dirtier. (Incidentally, this is the same mechanism that Enron used to manipulate the California markets and led to their energy crisis in 2000.) I am still unclear if it would assure that West Virginia customers would have to pay an increased cost for our electricity (in addition to paying for the power line) so that East Coast customers can pay less, but it seems likely. And that is the real reason for the new power line. JBK >>> "Paul Brown" <pbbrown(a)hsc.wvu.edu> 7/5/2007 4:09 PM >>> It can now be argued that the transmission line is no longer the optimal solution to power distribution problems, because a better technology is already in use in West Virginia and elsewhere. See following story: New battery packs powerful punch, http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/environment/2007-07-04-sodium-battery… By Paul Davidson, USA TODAY Batteries have long been vital to laptops and cellphones. They are increasingly supplying electricity to an unlikely recipient: the power grid itself. Until recently, large amounts of electricity could not be efficiently stored. Thus, when you turn on the living-room light, power is instantly drawn from a generator. A new type of a room-size battery, however, may be poised to store energy for the nation's vast electric grid almost as easily as a reservoir stockpiles water, transforming the way power is delivered to homes and businesses. Compared with other utility-scale batteries plagued by limited life spans or unwieldy bulk, the sodium-sulfur battery is compact, long-lasting and efficient. Using so-called NaS batteries, utilities could defer for years, and possibly even avoid, construction of new transmission lines, substations and power plants, says analyst Stow Walker of Cambridge Energy Research Associates. They make wind power * wildly popular but frustratingly intermittent * a more reliable resource. And they provide backup power in case of outages, such as the one that hit New York City last week. Such benefits are critical, because power demand is projected to soar 50% by 2030 and other methods of expanding the power supply are facing growing obstacles. Congress is likely to cap carbon dioxide emissions by traditional power plants to curtail global warming. Meanwhile, communities are fighting plans for thousands of miles of high-voltage transmission lines needed to zap electricity across regions. A test case in West Virginia American Electric Power (AEP), one of the largest U.S. utilities, has been using a 1.2 megawatt NaS battery in Charleston, W.Va., the past year and plans to install one twice the size elsewhere in the state next year. Dozens of utilities are considering the battery, says Dan Mears, a consultant for NGK Insulators, the Japanese company that makes the devices. "If you've got these batteries distributed in the neighborhood, you have, in a sense, lots of little power plants," Walker says. "The difference between these and diesel generators is these batteries don't need fuel" and don't pollute. The NaS battery is the most advanced of several energy-storage technologies that utilities are testing. The oldest and most widespread form of energy storage in the USA, pumped hydroelectricity, collects water after it spins a turbine and uses a small amount of electricity to send it back and repeat the process. Lead-acid batteries * the same kind used in cars * were installed by Southern California Edison in 1988. But the batteries, though inexpensive, typically fill warehouse-size buildings and last about five years. That's because the acid that connects positive and negative electrodes corrodes components. An NaS battery, by contrast, uses a far more durable porcelain-like material to bridge the electrodes, giving it a life span of about 15 years, Mears says. It also takes up about a fifth of the space. Ford Motor pioneered the battery in the 1960s to power early-model electric cars; NGK and Tokyo Electric refined it for the power grid. Since the 1990s, Japanese businesses have installed enough NaS batteries to light the equivalent of about 155,000 homes, says Brad Roberts, head of the Electricity Storage Association. In the USA, AEP is using the 30-foot-wide by 15-foot-igh battery to supply 10% of the electricity needs of 2,600 customers in north Charleston, says Ali Nourai, AEP manager of distributed energy. The battery, which cost about $2.5 million, is charged by generators from the grid at night, when demand and prices are low, and discharged during the day when power usage peaks. By easing strains on the grid, especially on the hottest summer days, the battery lets AEP postpone by about seven years the roughly $10 million upgrade of a substation and reduce the chances of a blackout, Nourai says. After it upgrades the substation, AEP can move the battery to another location. "Our vision is to have (batteries) throughout our system," he says. Storing wealth from wind farms A more intriguing goal is to wring more energy out of the wind farms that are cropping up across the country. Wind typically blows hard at night when power demand is low, producing energy that cannot be used. When demand peaks midday, especially in the summer, wind is often sporadic or absent. NaS batteries could let AEP store wind-generated power at night for daytime use. Next year, AEP plans to install another NaS battery in West Virginia to provide backup power in case of an outage * the first such application of the technology, Nourai says. The battery would kick in automatically, so customers would see no disruption. Other utilities are planning or considering the technology. In Long Island, N.Y., a group of utilities plans this summer to install an NaS battery at a bus depot. The battery is charged at night, when power prices are low, and discharged during the day to pump natural gas into tanks to provide fuel for the buses, says Mike Saltzman of the New York Power Authority. That cuts electric costs for the bus company and eases stresses on the grid. Pacific Gas & Electric is leaning toward installing a much larger, 5-megawatt battery by 2009, enough to power about 4,000 homes, says PG&E's Jon Tremayne. The biggest drawback is price. The battery costs about $2,500 per kilowatt, about 10% more than a new coal-fired plant. That discourages independent wind farm developers from embracing the battery on fears it will drive the wholesale electricity prices they charge utilities above competing rates, says Christine Real de Azua, spokeswoman for the American Wind Energy Association. Mass production, however, is expected to drive prices down, Mears says. He predicts NaS batteries will start to become widespread within a decade. Meanwhile, other storage devices are gaining traction, too. A group of Iowa municipal utilities plans to use wind turbines to compress air during off-peak hours that will be stored in an underground cavern. The air would be released at peak periods to run turbines and generate power for about 200,000 homes. Another technology, the flywheel, has a massive cylinder that can spin for days after being started by a generator. The cylinder can then activate a turbine to supply electricity for a few seconds or minutes when it's needed, for instance, to head off an interruption to a computer center from a lightning strike. "We'd like to see storage ubiquitous," says Imre Gyuk, head of energy storage for the Department of Energy, which helped fund the AEP project. "Stick it any place you can stick it." Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512 >>> <Duane330(a)aol.com> 7/5/07 3:50 PM >>> REMEMBER: The DOE National Interest Electricity Transmission (NIET) Corridor comments DEADLINE is July 6th! You should submit comments electronically at: http://nietc.anl.gov You can attach one file no larger than 10MB. So write a letter and attach it to an email. Or, just send an email letter. Address it to: The Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, OE-20 U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20585 "If you are commenting on Docket No. 2007-OE-01 (the draft Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor), your comments must be marked "Attn: Docket No. 2007-OE-01." So let's get all of our comments submitted a.s.a.p. Getting comment in on the excessively large area of the NIET Corridor is extremely important, covering essentially the northern half of West Virginia. Note that Gov. Manchin first supported this Corridor, but now opposes it, more or less. NOTE: There is no crisis in power on the East Coast. The eastern states need to (1) practice conservation and energy efficiency to the greatest extent possible, then (2) devise a plan that involves alternative fuels such that carbon dioxide emission can be REDUCED, not EXPANDED in the near and long term future. The "greenhouse effect" is real and huge! Duane Nichols, CLEAR and Board Member of MVCAC. See what's free at AOL.com.

1 0

Urgent. NIETC vote Mon. or Tue.
by Duane330＠aol.com 17 Jun '07

17 Jun '07

PLEASE FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO OTHERS WHO AREN'T CONNECTED YET. THANKS! Dear Citizen: On April 26, 2007, the Department of Energy issued two draft National Interest Electric Transmission (NIET) Corridor designations. SEE ATTACHMENTS 1 AND 2 for maps of the corridors. If these draft NIET Corridor designations are approved, they would include all or parts of eleven states and the District of Columbia for 12 years or more. THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY HAS ALSO IDENTIFIED CONGESTION AREAS OF CONCERN IN THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES, PARTS OF WASHINGTON AND OREGON, THE MIDDLE OF CALIFORNIA, AND SOUTHEASTERN ARIZONA. FOR MORE INFORMATION, GO TO THE DOE WEBSITE. All across the country, citizens are expressing serious objection to these draft NIET Corridor designations. Citizens are concerned about the size and life span of the corridors, the process by which they are being considered, and the potential eminent domain and environmental ramifications of the corridors. Even citizens who do not reside in states that would be impacted by these draft NIET Corridor designations are objecting to them. SURELY OUR NATION COULD FORMULATE BETTER 21ST CENTURY ENERGY POLICY THAT WOULD NOT INVOLVE THE DESIGNATION OF MASSIVE NIET CORRIDORS! In response to the draft NIET Corridor designations, Congressman Hinchey (D - New York) and Congressman Wolf (R - Virginia) have co-sponsored an Amendment to the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill, 2008, that says: NONE OF THE FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE IN THIS ACT MAY BE USED BY THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY TO DESIGNATE ANY GEOGRAPHIC AREA AS A NATIONAL INTEREST ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR UNDER SECTION 216(a) OF THE FEDERAL POWER ACT (AS ADDED BY SECTION 1221 OF THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005), AND NONE OF THE FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE IN THIS ACT MAY BE USED BY THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION TO TAKE ANY ACTION RELATED TO THE PROCESSING OR ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT UNDER SECTION 216(b) OF THE FEDERAL POWER ACT. This Hinchey/Wolf Amendment would postpone the designation of NIET Corridors for a one-year period. SEE ATTACHMENT 3 FOR THE CONGRESSMEN’S LETTER DATED JUNE 12, 2007, WHICH ADDRESSES THE REASONS WHY YOUR CONGRESSMAN OR CONGRESSWOMAN SHOULD SUPPORT THEIR AMENDMENT. The Hinchey/Wolf Amendment probably will be introduced on the House floor for a vote on Monday or Tuesday of this week. That’s why it’s so important for you to EMAIL AND FAX your Congressman NOW if you oppose the DOE’s draft NIET Corridor designations and if you support the Hinchey/Wolf Amendment. Use this link to email your Congressman and to identify a fax number: _http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L_ (http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L) SEE ATTACHMENT 4 FOR SAMPLE LETTERS YOU CAN USE OR MODIFY IN PREPARING YOUR EMAIL AND FAX. Thank you for your attention to this important issue! Barbara Kessinger Haymarket, Virginia PLEASE FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO OTHERS WHO AREN'T CONNECTED YET. THANKS! ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

EPA Region 3 Updates
by Duane330＠aol.com 31 May '07

31 May '07

EPA'S BIOLOGY TEAM DETERMINING CAUSE OF FISH KILLS The Wheeling Freshwater Biology Team began conducting a 7-day chronic toxicity test on May 15 for eight sites along the _South Branch of the Potomac and Shenandoah Rivers_ (http://www.wm.edu/geology/virginia/rivers/potomac-shenandoah.html) to identify the possible source or cause of the mysterious fish kills occurring there. Recent reports of dead and dying fish in the South Branch of the Potomac River are being investigated as is a substantial fish kill in the Shenandoah River and its tributaries in Virginia. Both states are actively cooperating and conducting research. EPA UPDATES AIR QUALITY WEBSITE EPA has made several air quality maps available depicting the current air quality conditions of the Mid-Atlantic region. The maps use the latest Air Quality Index (AQI) values for ozone and particulate matter, and can be found at EPA's "Air Quality" web page at _http://www.epa.gov/reg3artd/airquality/airquality.htm#currentcond_ (http://www.epa.gov/reg3artd/airquality/airquality.htm#currentcond) . The AQI describes the daily extent of pollution in the air, what associated health effects might be present, and what health effects may be experienced a few hours or days after breathing polluted air. For more information on the AQI visit EPA's AirNow web site at _http://www.airnow.gov_ (http://www.airnow.gov/) . ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Pennsylvania perspectives on powerline
by Duane330＠aol.com 29 May '07

29 May '07

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DeWeese seeks help on fighting high-voltage lines Thursday, April 26, 2007, By Jerome L. Sherman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette WASHINGTON -- Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Bill DeWeese yesterday called on Congress to repeal a federal law that could potentially allow energy companies to bypass state approval for the construction of new high-voltage power lines. At issue is Allegheny Power's plans to partner with Dominion Virginia Power in building a 240-mile, 500-kilovolt transmission line that would extend from Washington and Greene counties to substations in West Virginia and end in northern Virginia. Allegheny Power is seeking approval from Pennsylvania's Public Utility Commission, but the company is also asking the federal government to designate the project as a "national interest electric transmission corridor," or NIETC, meaning construction permits and eminent domain approval could be fast-tracked to circumvent state regulations. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 permits the creation of the electric transmission corridors. "This is an unprecedented usurping of state power," Mr. DeWeese, D-Waynesburg, told a U.S. House committee hearing yesterday. He argued that states have played a central role in approving the building of energy infrastructure "since the invention of the light bulb." He has joined a group of local activists, _stopthetowers.org_ (http://stopthetowers.org/) , in opposing Allegheny Power's Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project, or TrAIL, which would include new substations at the 502 Junction in Dunkard, southern Greene County, and North Strabane, Washington County. They say the project is unnecessary and would mostly benefit energy-hungry areas in New York, New Jersey and elsewhere. But David Neurohr, spokesman for Allegheny Energy, the parent company of Allegheny Power, said the new line is only aimed at local Pennsylvania energy demands, especially in rapidly growing areas of Washington County. He also noted that the project is mandated by PJM Interconnection, which manages electric transmission services of the Mid-Atlantic power grid in 13 states and Washington, D.C. During yesterday's hearing, local officials and activists from Maine, New York, and Virginia joined Mr. DeWeese in expressing concerns about the new federal law, and they seemed to have the sympathy of Democrats who won control of Congress last year. They're considering several bills that would restore some state powers. "As the law is written, a state may have little or no ability to determine whether a transmission line goes through one of its state parks, a historic battlefield, land protected by conservation easements, or private land," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, who chaired the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee hearing. Mr. Neurohr said Allegheny Power is focused on winning Pennsylvania state government approval for its project, even though it is also exploring the option of having the U.S. Department of Energy designate a national interest corridor in the state. "That's a bridge that we'll cross way down the road," he said. Allegheny Power's portion of the line extends about 210 miles at a cost of $820 million, with the total project estimated at more than $1 billion. The smaller portion of the line will be built and paid for by Dominion Virginia Power. Allegheny Power has said it will raise consumer rates to pay for the upgrades. Currently, customers pay 5 percent of their bill for transmission costs. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE FORMAT FOR THE PUBLIC MEETINGS IN JUNE WILL BE AS PRESENTED IN THE FOLLOWING INTERNET WEB SITE: _http://www.energetics.com/NIETCpublicmeetings/_ (http://www.energetics.com/NIETCpublicmeetings/) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< the allegheny front News Analysis: Proposed National Electric Transmission Corridors Raise Questions Ann Murray, Air date: 05/16/2007 OPEN: After the big electrical blackouts a few years ago, the US Department of Energy studied which parts of the country need the most help getting additional power to communities. The DOE has just proposed two National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors. The proposed Mid-Atlantic Area Corridor passes through Pennsylvania and surrounding states. Ann Murray joins me to talk about questions being raised about these power pathways. M: What does the DOE mean by calling these electrical corridors National Interest Electric Transmission corridors? A: The federal government believes these corridors- pathways for electrical transmission- serve the entire country in the sense that electrical power loss affects the national economy. In an effort to speed up development of major energy transmission lines that would help feed an always growing energy demand in the US, the federal government is trying to make the necessary lands available. M: How would the federal government make sure land is available for transmission lines? A: If corridor designations are approved, the DOE would set up a process that lets local governments, industries, individuals, and others haggle over energy transmission corridors for a period of time, then allow the federal or state government to sanction the use of eminent domain if necessary to make sure the corridors work on county, city, and private lands. M: How did the federal government get the authority to condemn land for transmission lines? A: It's the so-called "backstop" siting authority that Congress granted to the agency in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 It gave the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission the right to issue permits for construction of transmission lines and condemn right of way for those transmission lines. Until now, only state regulators and siting authorities possessed this authority. M: Eminent domain is a really controversial approach for securing land. I assume that prospect has raised some hackles? A: Yes, the prospect of government seizing property doesn't sit well with a lot of people including some local governments, people in Congress. The DOE is now taking comments during a public comment period that will run through July 6th. M: I understand that the DOE says because the current electrical grid is aged and stressed, the agency plans to be more assertive about getting these kinds of projects rolling. A: Yes, that right. US Energy Secretary Sam Bodman said in a recent press meeting that the government would take a more aggressive role in energy projects opposed by local groups. I'm quoting here:"The parochial interests that shaped energy policy in the 20th century will no longer work." M: There will be a public hearing in Pittsburgh to talk about the proposed corridor. When will that happen? A: The DOE hasn't announced the exact date but has said that the hearing will take place next month. Hearing are also underway in Washington,DC and New York and on the West Coast. M: The West Coast hearings cover the other proposed corridor? A: Yes, the other corridor is proposed for areas in the Southwest through California, Arizona and Nevada. M: How did the DOE decide where electric transmission corridors are needed? A: The agency did a study in 2005 that looked for areas on the electrical grid that are clogged and need additional pathways to get power. The DOE is charged with doing similar studies every three years. M: Will there be an environmental impact assessment on the land included for the proposed corridors? A: DOE contends that there's no need for an environmental assessment of these corridors, since they don't involve a proposal to build a specific line or any siting decisions. But the agency concedes that an environmental assessment of some type would be needed if a specific line is proposed within a corridor. The National Corridor designations don't necessarily mandate building new lines since the process still allows for other ways of reducing demand like conservation, improved energy efficiency, or locating extra generation close to customers. M: Where does the proposed corridor run through Pennsylvania? A: Through all the counties except in the north central and northwestern part of the state. M: Will the DOE designate other national power corridors ? A: Right now,there aren't any immediate plans to designate a National Corridor anywhere else in the country. M: Could trends in generation of alternative energy have any effect on building transmission lines? A: Trends in decentralized energy could make the need for transmission lines less relevant. Some energy experts predict that energy sources will become smaller and more localized by using solar, geothermal and wind power. M: Thanks , Ann. A: You're welcome, Matthew. More information about the proposed corridors and how to comment are on our web site alleghenyfront.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Power line project has wider relevance New Allegheny Power application asks for another transmission line Sunday, May 27, 2007, By Janice Crompton, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette As protesters and publicists alike gear up for state and federal hearings into plans for a high-voltage power line through Washington and Greene counties, it's become apparent that the consequences of the project could be felt statewide.Allegheny Power submitted an application last month to the state Public Utility Commission, seeking approval for the construction of 37 miles of 500-kilovolt power lines from a substation to be built in North Strabane, called Prexy, to a substation planned for Dunkard, Greene County. It also wants to build three 138-kilovolt power lines that would extend outward from the Prexy station. The project is part of a 240-mile transmission line to extend from Pennsylvania to existing substations in West Virginia and end in northern Virginia. The company has submitted a similar application to West Virginia. The Virginia portion of the line will be built by Dominion Virginia power company. Allegheny's portion of the total project extends about 210 miles at a cost of $820 million, with the total project estimated at more than $1 billion. As part of its review process, the PUC will conduct public hearings to determine if there is a need for additional power in the region and whether Allegheny Power has the best solution. Complaints from ratepayers and property owners are to be submitted to the PUC by Tuesday. The hearings, expected this summer, haven't been scheduled. All those who protest the project may offer comment at the hearings, even if they haven't filed a written complaint. A grass-roots organization that opposes the project, Stop the Towers, plans to fight the plan on two levels. The group, along with the more than 4,000 people who have signed petitions opposing the power lines, will protest the location of the line, which would affect hundreds of property owners. A newly formed legislative branch of the group, called the Energy Conservation Council of Pennsylvania, will litigate the need for the power line and concentrate its efforts on lobbying. Local opposition leaders say it's vital to win the battle with the PUC, especially because of federal intervention, and because other Pennsylvania communities could be facing the same issues soon. "If we don't win this in front of the PUC, we've lost," said Robbie Matesic, executive director of the Greene County Planning and Economic Development Department. If the project is turned down by the PUC, it could kick in a provision in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that allows the federal government to override state and local laws in certain cases. Recently, the U.S. Department of Energy designated a large swath of the northeastern United States., including 50 of Pennsylvania's 67 counties, as a potential "national interest electric transmission corridor," or NIETC. If the designation is approved by the DOE, it clears the way for the federal government to step in. If a state withholds construction approval for more than one year, denies approval, or if too many conditions are placed on construction of electric transmission lines within a NIETC, the federal government can intervene and approve the project. The law also authorizes the taking of private property by eminent domain for rights of way. Efforts to repeal that portion of the Energy Act are under way in Congress, including a bill recently co-sponsored by U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Johnstown, who, like most other public officials in southwestern Pennsylvania, opposes the project. The DOE is planning a public hearing for the Pittsburgh area next month on the NIETC designation. Rebecca Foley, of Jefferson, Greene County, said she and about 20 other Pennsylvania and West Virginia residents chartered a bus to attend a NIETC hearing May 15 in Virginia. She said she spoke briefly to DOE panelists and said they were "visibly moved" by the testimony from people who would be affected by the power line. Greene and Washington county commissioners have said the power line is becoming the most significant grass-roots issue in their memory. "People are concerned about the environmental issues for our children and what government does to property owners," Greene County Commissioner Pam Snyder said. The local power line issue also is seen as a harbinger of several other transmission projects being proposed for the state. The local upgrade was mandated by PJM Interconnection, which manages electric transmission services of the Mid-Atlantic power grid in 13 states and Washington, D.C. The line is part of PJM's five-year regional electric transmission plan, meant to address future energy needs at certain points in the grid. As part of a longer range 15-year plan, PJM is considering several additional proposals, including a joint venture between Allegheny Power and American Electric Power that calls for a $3 billion, 550-mile, 765-kilovolt transmission "superhighway," beginning at the Amos power station in Putnam County, in western West Virginia. It would travel through Maryland and southeastern Pennsylvania and end in Middlesex County, N.J. AEP also proposed a line closer to home, from Kammer-Mitchell power plant near Moundsville, W.Va., into Pennsylvania to the Prexy substation in North Strabane. From there, the line would traverse Central Pennsylvania to Conemaugh power plant in West Wheatfield, Indiana County, ending near the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Harrisburg. In Ohio, north of the Kammer-Mitchell plant, AEP proposed a line into Western Pennsylvania to the Keystone power plant in Shelocta, Armstrong County, east to the Sunbury Power Plant near Shamokin Dam in Snyder County. PJM spokesman Ray Dotter said the proposals and routes haven't been finalized and only are under consideration. "They are being analyzed," he said. "It doesn't necessarily mean it's going to happen." Local opponents of the project cite concern about property values, quality of life, and health and safety. They have questioned the need for the power lines and the rate increases that will go with it. Allegheny Power says the plan, called the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project, or TrAIL, is necessary to address power shortages in the East, and to provide additional power to the developing areas of central and northern Washington County, which could begin to experience rolling blackouts and brownouts within a few years if nothing is done. In its application to the PUC, Allegheny Power outlined four reasons the power line was needed, each involving the failure of existing 138-kilovolt lines because of demand. The outages would be widespread, and likely to occur during the early evening hours on hot days. "When it gets to be a hot day, everybody turns on their air conditioners," said David Neurohr, Allegheny Power spokesman. "If the existing 138-kilovolt system goes, the lights will go out," he said. But, Stop the Towers members and local officials have argued that Washington County has more than enough power for years to come, and that the company's intention is to tap local power plants for low-cost, coal-generated energy to ship to the power-strapped Eastern U.S., where energy plants are closing without being replaced. Even though the local plan is outlined in detail in the PUC application, it isn't mentioned at all in the application last year to the DOE, asking that the area be designated as a NIETC. Mr. Dotter said the reason was the DOE was looking at the issue from a regional perspective. The agency is trying to supply power to the East Coast, from New York to northern Virginia, an area which it identified as in "critical" need of more power in a study done last summer. "Everything is tied together," Mr. Dotter said. It's clear that power is no longer a local issue. Planning occurs on a regional level and ,perhaps, the best evidence for its necessity came in August 2003, when a downed tree near Cleveland resulted in a widespread blackout from New York to Canada. "The grid is like a net," Mr. Dotter said. "It pulls everything together." Mr. Dotter said that, while PJM can't force companies to build power plants, it can and does order new transmission lines built to serve power needs wherever necessary. The company has no stake in who builds the lines or how it's accomplished, only that the job gets done. "Whether the line gets built or not, we don't make money. We don't make money, period," Mr. Dotter said. "Our goal is to keep the lights on. We have to look at the needs and make that determination." ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

CLEAR Bird Walk
by Duane330＠aol.com 17 May '07

17 May '07

Title: Bird Walk at Cheat Lake. There will be a bird walk on the Cheat Lake Park and Trail. Saturday, May 19, 2007, starting at 8:30 a.m. Leader: Ann Chester of CLEAR. Meet at the Guard House, below the main parking area, at the end of Morgan Run Road. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Submitted by Duane Nichols, CLEAR President 330 Dream Catcher Circle Morgantown, WV 26508 _duane330(a)aol.com_ (mailto:duane330@aol.com) 304-599-8040 ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

AE TrAIL power line, et al.
by Duane330＠aol.com 05 May '07

05 May '07

Upcoming meetings that you should consider attending, as action is needed on these: 1. AE TrAIL power-line meeting – Tomorrow, Sunday, May 6th, at the Triune-Halleck Fire Hall, on Halleck Road off WV 73 South (Smithtown Road). Start time: 2 pm. Host: Halleck Community Association. 2. MonValley Clean Air Coalition -- Monday, May 7th, at the home of Martha and Larry Schwab, 3333 Collins Ferry Road, Morgantown. Start time: 7 pm. Info: Duane Nichols, 599-8040. Topics include: Longview power plant, Ft. Martin scrubbers, and AE TrAIL power line. 3. Sierra Club -- Thursday, May 10th, at the WVU Mountainlair, 7 pm. Matt Keller "WV Wilderness Coalition". Info: Jim Kotcon, 594-3322. 4. AE TrAIL power-line meeing – Wednesday, May 16th, at the Monongalia County Courthouse, Court Room #1. Start time: 7 pm. Host: Mon. County Commission. The WV Consumer Advocate (Public Service Commission) Billy Jack Gregg to participate. 5. Mon. County Farmland Preservation Board – Thursday, May 17th, Mon. County Courthouse, Room 202 (Second Floor). The meeting is open to the public. For information on the proposed 500,000 volt transmission line, see the following: _www.stopthetowers.org_ (http://www.stopthetowers.org) _www.laurelrunwatershed.org_ (http://www.laurelrunwatershed.org) _www.alleghenypower.com/TrAIL/TrAIL.asp_ (http://www.alleghenypower.com/TrAIL/TrAIL.asp) ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

← Newer
1
...
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
...
67
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

CLEAR