October 2010 - EC - lists.bikelover.org

Wyoming's fed-bucking approach to environmental policy
by Paul Wilson 07 Dec '10

07 Dec '10

Info Frack forward Wyoming's fed-bucking approach to environmental policy News - From the October 01, 2010 issue of High Country News<http://www.hcn.org/issues/42.17> by Cally Carswell Document Actions <http://www.hcn.org/issues/42.17/frack-forward/image_viewer> On Sept. 15, Wyoming activated new rules requiring energy companies to identify the chemicals they inject underground to break up rocks in order to free trapped oil and gas. Critics suspect that the process -- known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking -- can contaminate groundwater. Evidence has been elusive, though, in part because drilling companies have been allowed to keep their chemical recipes largely secret. The new rules -- the nation's strictest -- were a surprisingly easy sell in Wyoming, where extractive industries almost single-handedly keep state coffers plump and exercise proportional political clout. At Democratic Gov. Dave Freudenthal's behest, the state's Oil and Gas Conservation Commission unanimously signed off on them in June. Though Halliburton protested some, most in the industry seemed unfazed. At the end of this month, the Associated Press reported that drillers even seemed "eager to comply." Anticipating similar moves by President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency, which recently increased its scrutiny of fracking, Wyoming wrote the rules as a message to the feds: Your help is not needed here. Federal "meddling" has always irked Wyoming's leaders. But under Freudenthal, the state has favored a curious strategy for fending off federal regulators: Beat them to the punch with its own cutting-edge environmental policies. In 2007, with a lawsuit pending over the U.S. Fish and Wildlife's decision not to list the greater sage grouse as endangered, Freudenthal ordered state officials, conservationists and industry reps to map the bird's vital habitat. Within those "core areas," the state has tightly restricted oil, gas and wind development, all thought to disrupt grouse breeding -- a significant improvement over the Bureau of Land Management's style of developing first and dealing with impacts later. It's not a perfect plan -- core areas are strategically penciled to exclude the best gas patches, say critics, making places like the Powder River Basin sacrifice zones. And Freudenthal has called the grouse "one of the ugliest, stupidest birds I ever knew." Still, he's willing to defend it to protect Wyoming's natural gas industry. His office estimates that a listing would subject 83 percent of gas producers to new regulations. "What we live on in this state is mineral revenues," said Freudenthal energy advisor Aaron Clark in 2009, "and we would be subjecting a lot of that to the vagaries of the Endangered Species Act." For now, the plan has kept federal regulation at bay. When the Interior Department this year again declined to protect the grouse, officials commended Wyoming's efforts. And Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has encouraged other states with sagebrush habitat to adopt the core-area model. Wyoming hopes the feds will be similarly seduced by its new fracking law, as well as pioneering rules developed over the last two years for future carbon capture and sequestration projects. Shannon Anderson, a lawyer for the Powder River Basin Resource Council, a local environmental group, calls the latter "generally good rules." But they're less cautious than similar rules drafted by the EPA, which aim to protect drinking water by considering only deep, briny aquifers as potential carbon storage sites. Wyoming's rules could allow injections in shallow geologic formations, potentially even those that overlie drinking water sources. "They were designed to beat EPA and hopefully get them to follow, rather than dictate, Wyoming's approach," Anderson says. It's encouraging to see Wyoming advance environmental regulation instead of relax it, as the previous governor did to ease coalbed methane development, and as the Bush-Cheney administration did with fracking. But local environmentalists caution that the new policies aren't necessarily evidence that Wyoming's gone green. "All these rules are baby steps in terms of what we really need to accomplish to address the impacts we have in the state," Anderson says, adding that Wyoming is in "an already compromised position." Between 2001 and 2005, sage grouse populations near coalbed methane development in the Powder River Basin declined by 82 percent. Freudenthal refuses to moderate Wyoming's anti-wolf stance, jeopardizing the state's chances to manage the animals. And requiring frackers to disclose their chemicals won't protect groundwater if drillers remain exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act. "The idea is to get these rules in place and stop Congress from passing (comprehensive legislation), which would actually protect public health and safety," Anderson says. Imperfect as it may be, Wyoming's breakaway approach to environmental regulation is gaining favor among some surprising constituencies. Last month, Cathy Woollums, an executive of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., a coal-reliant utility behemoth, came to the Wyoming Legislature with an unexpected request: Regulate greenhouse gases. Congressional inaction is creating too much uncertainty in the utility business, she said. And, in any case, MidAmerican would rather answer to Wyoming than the EPA. -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle

3 2

Fwd: State energy efficiency rankings
by James Kotcon 02 Nov '10

02 Nov '10

West Virginia ranks 43rd in energy efficiency among the states, dropping from 35th place in the first scorecard in 2006. Lossing points for building codes was one contributor. JBK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To get off this list, send email to: LISTSERV(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Make the message text (not the Subject): SIGNOFF CONS-FRED The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) has released <http://www.aceee.org/sector/state-policy/scorecard> a new report ranking states by the strength of their energy efficiency policies. Has your chapter won substantial victories to improve energy efficiency in your state? If so, be sure to let us know by filling out our victory reporting form <http://tinyurl.com/y8fn9an> . In the meantime, if you're looking for some good news, check out these recent victories won by Sierra Club activists throughout the country: Scott Elkins, Director for Chapter Coordination Sierra Club 612-659-9124

2 1

Re: [EC] Fwd: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Environmental Regs Cause Nat Gas to Replace Coal for Electric Generation
by Jim Sconyers 30 Oct '10

30 Oct '10

SC and the Wetzel folks are trying to drag EPA in on the air pollution aspect of Marcellus. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ________________________________ From: Beth Little <blittle(a)citynet.net> To: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu>; ec(a)osenergy.org Sent: Sat, October 30, 2010 7:32:35 PM Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Environmental Regs Cause Nat Gas to Replace Coal for Electric Generation I've really been wrestling with this, because I want to see ALL coal phased out, and I don't want the amount of gas drilling it would take to replace it. I also don't want any stupid developments like coal to liquid, windmills on every forested ridge in WV, biomass plants burning up all the trees, power lines through WV taking (supposed) renewable energy from the midwest to the east coast. So what's left. My answer is efficiency, but I don't see it happening, because of the influence of the fossil fuel industry on our government (both legislators and regulators), the influence of the fossil fuel industry on voters through misleading advertising and public relations, and the natural resistance of people to change, especially giving up their wasteful habits. What I'm left with is working like hell for regulations to minimize impacts and suing whenever possible to slow the destruction down. Maybe we can slow it down enough to cause some blackouts. That's probably the only thing that will bring any real change. If EPA regulations are going to be the reason for retiring lots of coal, maybe that is the place to go for regulating gas drilling. ________________________________ From: ec-bounces(a)osenergy.org [mailto:ec-bounces@osenergy.org] On Behalf Of James Kotcon Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2010 6:36 PM To: ec(a)osenergy.org Subject: [EC] Fwd: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Environmental Regs Cause Nat Gas to Replace Coal for Electric Generation This investment newsletter predicts phasing out 20-25 % of coal capacity by 2020, due solely to mercury, NOx and SO2 regulations. Natural gas (and some renewables) will be taking up the slack. How do we get ready for this? JBK ________________________________ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1153 / Virus Database: 424/3228 - Release Date: 10/30/10 _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

1 0

Fwd: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Environmental Regs Cause Nat Gas to Replace Coal for Electric Generation
by James Kotcon 30 Oct '10

30 Oct '10

This investment newsletter predicts phasing out 20-25 % of coal capacity by 2020, due solely to mercury, NOx and SO2 regulations. Natural gas (and some renewables) will be taking up the slack. How do we get ready for this? JBK

3 3

TransGas hearing results
by James Kotcon 29 Oct '10

29 Oct '10

The hearing before the WV Air Quality Board over our appeal of the air permit for the TransGas Coal-To-Liquids plant was held Wed & Thursday. I just got off a conference call with some folks over the results. The comment below reflect my understanding of what happened, so someone please correct me if I get it wrong. Basically, the AQB listened carefully to our arguments, and appeared to grasp some key points made by our wonderful attorney, Elena Saxonhouse. One of our major issues is the claim by DEP & TransGas that the facility is a "Minor Source" rather than a "Major Source". Major Sources have significantly more stringent requirements for an air permit, including requirements that the facility model pollutant dispersion, and that they determine the "Best Available Control Technology" (BACT). TransGas did not include certain emissions in their application, which kept them under the threshold for Major Source. DEP approved the permit as submitted by TransGas, arguing that any emissions not included in the permit would be violations of the permit. Our concern is that, once the plant is built, these emissions could be added to the permit as a minor modification and they would continue operating as a major source without meeting the intent of the Clean Air Act. One major source of emissions is a "flare" used to burn off waste gases. Unfortunately, flares are inherently hard to monitor, and DEP simply assumed that the emissions would be small and therefore the facility as a whole would meet the Minor Source limit. The Air Quality Board seemed receptive to our argument that, to be adequately protective, the air permit had to either measure the emissions to show they were under the limit, or they would have to assume that they could be larger than DEP assumed. Another major source is that Transgas never included emissions from a wastewater treatment plant. They argued that the plant has not been designed yet, and that they may ship the water off site to another facility, and therefore the emissions should not be included in their air permit. We argued that simply omitting the emissions from a required step in the process was not permitted under the Clean Air Act, as it would allow any major source to avoid major source requirements simply by segmenting the facility into tiny little parts, when the whole facility was still a major source. While the Air Quality Board listened carefully to two full days of testimony, and we have good legal arguments, we should not assume that the AQB is a friendly body. Closing briefs will be filed over the next few weeks, so we do not expect a decision for a couple months. On a related note, I hope you all saw the announcement this week by Gov. Manchin that TransGas had settled on an "engineering and procurement contractor". In addition, they had reached an agreement with the Affiliated Construction Trades union to assure that the plant would be built by union labor. We remain very skeptical that this plant would ever get financing, and it was not clear that the EPC contractor or anyone else has actually committed to building anything. The facility's air permit is under challenge (by us), none of the other needed permit applications have even been submitted, and many key features still do not have a final design (e.g., waste water treatment). So even if the air permit were approved, they are still a long way from ever getting anything built. We should not assume we have already lost, but neither should we take for granted that such a crazy idea will be easily rejected. Endless pressure, endlessly applied! Jim Kotcon 304-2903-8822 (office) 304-594-3322 (home)

1 1

Fwd: WV Governor, TransGas Development Systems Announce Coal to Gasoline Project
by Paul Wilson 29 Oct '10

29 Oct '10

fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: DAVID E ORTMAN <deortman(a)msn.com> Date: Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 12:16 AM Subject: RE: WV Governor, TransGas Development Systems Announce Coal to Gasoline Project To: pjgrunt(a)gmail.com, coal-campaign-alerts(a)lists.sierraclub.org FR: David E. Ortman, Seattle, WA Regarding coal to gasoline, Scientific American was not impressed in 2007. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=worse-than-gasoline Apparently some are proposing to use nuclear energy to power the damn conversion process! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 20:59:37 -0400 From: pjgrunt(a)GMAIL.COM Subject: Fwd: WV Governor, TransGas Development Systems Announce Coal to Gasoline Project To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: *Frank Young* <fyoung(a)mountain.net> Date: Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 4:21 PM Subject: [EC] Fw: Governor, TransGas Development Systems Announce Coal to Gasoline Project To: ec(a)osenergy.org, wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com, WVHCBOARD(a)yahoogroups.com In Mingo County, coal to liquids- long awaited announcement .................... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: **<governor(a)wv.gov> Date: Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 2:35 PM Subject: Governor, TransGas Development Systems Announce Coal to Gasoline Project To: trouserdude(a)gmail.com Oct. 28, 2010 *GOVERNOR, TRANSGAS DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS ANNOUNCE COAL TO GASOLINE PROJECT **TransGas president says that coal to gasoline project will be first in the nation and a model for the country to regain its energy independence and put Americans to work* Contact: Melvin Smith, 304-558-2000 or Adam Victor, 917-816-3700 or adamvictor(a)transgasdevelopment.com CHARLESTON, W.Va. – After four years of continuous effort, Gov. Joe Manchin and TransGas Development Systems President Adam Victor, along with several state and local representatives, today announced that the company has selected its Engineering Procurement Contractor (EPC) and technology provider for its coal to gasoline facility that will be built in Mingo County, West Virginia. This facility will be the nation’s first and largest of its kind in the world. Representatives from the state Building and Construction Trades Council, along with representatives from the EPC contractor and the project technology provider were also present for today’s announcement. The project will be built by SK Engineering & Construction and will utilize the technology of Uhde GmbH, one of the world’s largest construction companies, using premier coal gasification technology. The governor commended the efforts of TransGas Development Systems, SK Engineering and Uhde GmbH for their partnership with the state of West Virginia. “This project indicates how serious we are about matching our abundant coal resources with the technology available to produce clean energy. West Virginia is fully committed to being a leader in energy self-sufficiency and this development shows that we are dedicated to using our coal resources as prudently as possible. This project’s success will truly be far-reaching for the coal industry,” said the governor. During today’s meeting, Victor reminded officials that four years ago, he was on the verge of relocating his operations overseas after facing years of challenges while trying to convince officials across the Northeast to make the tough decision to support necessary energy infrastructure development. Only after Mr. Victor met Governor Manchin did he realize that West Virginia could be a place where energy infrastructure could be built and supported by state and local officials. “Four years ago, TransGas found, in Governor Joe Manchin, a leader who understood the importance of coal as the primary asset to developing America’s future energy independence. Moreover, he understood the need to forcefully address the many fallacies that have arisen surrounding the environmental effects of mining and using coal. “Governor Joe Manchin also understood that a fleet of coal to liquid plants would form the cornerstone of a resurgence of American industrial might – built by skilled American unionized construction tradesmen, working in close concert with project owners. Simply put, if not for the governor, we would not have invested the time, nor effort into this project and this project would not exist today,” said TransGas president, Adam Victor. Victor praised the governor for bringing the construction trades union together with his chosen contractor and technology provider to ensure that this project will be built by skilled West Virginia workers, on time and under budget. This project will convert regional coal into 756,000 gallons of premium grade ultraclean gasoline a day. Put in proper perspective, less than fifty of these Coal to Gasoline facilities nationwide would eliminate 100 percent of America’s need to import foreign gasoline; create nearly 150,000 jobs and make the United States a net exporter of gasoline. SK E&C (www.skec.com) is an arm of SK group (www.sk.com), Korea's third largest corporation and one of the leading business organizations in the world. SK is made up of 40 companies including seven that are listed on the Korea Stock Exchange. SK has a presence on six continents and 25,000 employees. SK E&C is one of the world’s most qualified engineering, procurement, construction, and maintenance services organizations. Their experience includes Korea’s largest oil refinery, the Cadereyta and Madero Refinery upgrades in Mexico, full-scale refinery projects in Kuwait, Brazil and Ghana. Udhe GmbH is one of Germany's ThyssenKrupp AG's 670 companies who employ almost 200,000 employees worldwide. In addition to a 50-year history of developing gasification technologies, Udhe is one of the world's leading engineering groups specializing in the design of chemical, refining and other industrial plants in all four corners of the globe with more than 2,000 plants to its credit. More information on TransGas Development Systems LLC is available at http://www.transgasdevelopment.com/ . Contact: Adam Victor, 917-816-3700 or adamvictor(a)transgasdevelopment.com # # # Cheers, Daniel Chiotos Keeper of the Mountains Foundation Operations Director http://www.mountainkeeper.org 179 Summers St, Suite 234 Charleston, WV, 25301 (304)886-3389 - cell (304)205-0920 - office* <http://appalachiarising.org/> "WE ARE THE KEEPERS OF THE MOUNTAINS, LOVE THEM OR LEAVE THEM, JUST DON'T DESTROY THEM. IF YOU CARE TO BE ONE TOO, CALL 304-542-1134 OR 304-205-0920."* - Larry Gibson _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS list, send any message to: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/ -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle

1 0

Fw: Governor, TransGas Development Systems Announce Coal to Gasoline Project
by Frank Young 28 Oct '10

28 Oct '10

In Mingo County, coal to liquids- long awaited announcement .................... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <governor(a)wv.gov> Date: Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 2:35 PM Subject: Governor, TransGas Development Systems Announce Coal to Gasoline Project To: trouserdude(a)gmail.com Oct. 28, 2010 GOVERNOR, TRANSGAS DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS ANNOUNCE COAL TO GASOLINE PROJECT TransGas president says that coal to gasoline project will be first in the nation and a model for the country to regain its energy independence and put Americans to work Contact: Melvin Smith, 304-558-2000 or Adam Victor, 917-816-3700 or adamvictor(a)transgasdevelopment.com CHARLESTON, W.Va. – After four years of continuous effort, Gov. Joe Manchin and TransGas Development Systems President Adam Victor, along with several state and local representatives, today announced that the company has selected its Engineering Procurement Contractor (EPC) and technology provider for its coal to gasoline facility that will be built in Mingo County, West Virginia. This facility will be the nation’s first and largest of its kind in the world. Representatives from the state Building and Construction Trades Council, along with representatives from the EPC contractor and the project technology provider were also present for today’s announcement. The project will be built by SK Engineering & Construction and will utilize the technology of Uhde GmbH, one of the world’s largest construction companies, using premier coal gasification technology. The governor commended the efforts of TransGas Development Systems, SK Engineering and Uhde GmbH for their partnership with the state of West Virginia. “This project indicates how serious we are about matching our abundant coal resources with the technology available to produce clean energy. West Virginia is fully committed to being a leader in energy self-sufficiency and this development shows that we are dedicated to using our coal resources as prudently as possible. This project’s success will truly be far-reaching for the coal industry,” said the governor. During today’s meeting, Victor reminded officials that four years ago, he was on the verge of relocating his operations overseas after facing years of challenges while trying to convince officials across the Northeast to make the tough decision to support necessary energy infrastructure development. Only after Mr. Victor met Governor Manchin did he realize that West Virginia could be a place where energy infrastructure could be built and supported by state and local officials. “Four years ago, TransGas found, in Governor Joe Manchin, a leader who understood the importance of coal as the primary asset to developing America’s future energy independence. Moreover, he understood the need to forcefully address the many fallacies that have arisen surrounding the environmental effects of mining and using coal. “Governor Joe Manchin also understood that a fleet of coal to liquid plants would form the cornerstone of a resurgence of American industrial might – built by skilled American unionized construction tradesmen, working in close concert with project owners. Simply put, if not for the governor, we would not have invested the time, nor effort into this project and this project would not exist today,” said TransGas president, Adam Victor. Victor praised the governor for bringing the construction trades union together with his chosen contractor and technology provider to ensure that this project will be built by skilled West Virginia workers, on time and under budget. This project will convert regional coal into 756,000 gallons of premium grade ultraclean gasoline a day. Put in proper perspective, less than fifty of these Coal to Gasoline facilities nationwide would eliminate 100 percent of America’s need to import foreign gasoline; create nearly 150,000 jobs and make the United States a net exporter of gasoline. SK E&C (www.skec.com) is an arm of SK group (www.sk.com), Korea's third largest corporation and one of the leading business organizations in the world. SK is made up of 40 companies including seven that are listed on the Korea Stock Exchange. SK has a presence on six continents and 25,000 employees. SK E&C is one of the world’s most qualified engineering, procurement, construction, and maintenance services organizations. Their experience includes Korea’s largest oil refinery, the Cadereyta and Madero Refinery upgrades in Mexico, full-scale refinery projects in Kuwait, Brazil and Ghana. Udhe GmbH is one of Germany's ThyssenKrupp AG's 670 companies who employ almost 200,000 employees worldwide. In addition to a 50-year history of developing gasification technologies, Udhe is one of the world's leading engineering groups specializing in the design of chemical, refining and other industrial plants in all four corners of the globe with more than 2,000 plants to its credit. More information on TransGas Development Systems LLC is available at http://www.transgasdevelopment.com/ . Contact: Adam Victor, 917-816-3700 or adamvictor(a)transgasdevelopment.com # # # Cheers, Daniel Chiotos Keeper of the Mountains Foundation Operations Director http://www.mountainkeeper.org 179 Summers St, Suite 234 Charleston, WV, 25301 (304)886-3389 - cell (304)205-0920 - office "WE ARE THE KEEPERS OF THE MOUNTAINS, LOVE THEM OR LEAVE THEM, JUST DON'T DESTROY THEM. IF YOU CARE TO BE ONE TOO, CALL 304-542-1134 OR 304-205-0920." - Larry Gibson

1 0

Fwd: ENEWS: Climate Change and the Future of Coal
by James Kotcon 26 Oct '10

26 Oct '10

Climate Change and the Future of Coal: A Legal Perspective presented at WVU College of LawMichaelB. Gerrard the Andrew Sabin Professor of Professional Practice atColumbia Law School, will present "Climate Change and the Future ofCoal, " at 11 a.m., Monday, Nov. 1 in the Marlyn E. Lugar Courtroom atthe WVU Law Center. For full release, see: http://wvutoday.wvu.edu/n/2010/10/26/climate-change-and-the-future-of-coal-… RESEARCH

1 0

Re: [EC] Fwd: Article - Patriot Coal reports $46M third-quarter loss
by Jim Sconyers 25 Oct '10

25 Oct '10

Can't make money mining coal in WV - who'd a thunk it! And our recent hammering them on selenium will ramp up the cost of mining considerably. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ________________________________ From: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> To: ehansen(a)downstreamstrategies.com; pbjmwood(a)gmail.com; jim_scon(a)yahoo.com Sent: Mon, October 25, 2010 10:03:05 AM Subject: Fwd: Article - Patriot Coal reports $46M third-quarter loss Note: Forwarded message is attached. The attached news article may suggest why Patriot is a little desperate. JBK

1 0

shutting coal-fired plants in Colorado
by Jim Sconyers 22 Oct '10

22 Oct '10

http://www.wvgazette.com/ap/ApTopStories/201010210966 Shutting down coal plants on Colorado. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

climate change deniers at the highest levels - scary
by Jim Sconyers 21 Oct '10

21 Oct '10

FYI Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: John Blair <Ecoserve1(a)AOL.COM> To: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Sent: Thu, October 21, 2010 3:44:40 PM Subject: Fwd: [air-mail] Coal waste Thanks again to environmental consultant extraordinaire, Alex Sagady for his sharp eye on these things. Check out the Valley Watch website at: http://valleywatch.net John Blair "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Mahatma Gandhi 800 Adams Avenue Evansville, IN 47713 812-464-5663 In accordance with title 17 U. S. Code, Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior general interest in receiving similar information for research and educational purposes. Begin forwarded message: From: ajs(a)sagady.com > >Date: October 21, 2010 11:28:33 AM CDT > >To: air-mail(a)yahoogroups.com > >Subject: [air-mail] Coal waste > > > > >In FR Today: >Coal Combustion Residual Surface Impoundments; Data Availability, >64974-64976 >http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-26657.htm > > > > > > > >__._,_.___ > > >Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional >Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) >Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully >Featured >Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe > > >__,_._,___ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE list, send any message to: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp

1 0

Fw: Coal ash in water worries officials
by Jim Sconyers 20 Oct '10

20 Oct '10

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Midge Sweet <sweetmidge(a)GMAIL.COM> To: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Sent: Wed, October 20, 2010 10:23:01 AM Subject: Re: Coal ash in water worries officials Dear Friend – Since taking office, President Obama has directed his Administration to craft policies to create a clean energy economy and protect our environment and public spaces. There is no better example of the achievements made towards those goals and the harmony between them than in the Southwest. For example, just two weeks ago, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced the first ever Solar Energy projects on public lands, the first projects in a series to be built on public lands after complete environmental analyses by the Department of Interior. We would like to invite you to join a conference call Thursday, October 21st at 5:00 PM ET to have a conversation with Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and other Administration officials about clean energy and the environment in the Southwest. We would like to tell you about some of the initiatives this Administration has started, and then we would like to take your questions and hear your ideas and stories. Please feel free send this invitation out widely to your networks. You can also RSVP by sending an email torfee(a)who.eop.gov. We are looking forward to it. Call-in Information: Date: Thursday, October 21th, 2010 Time: 5:00 PM EDT Number: (800) 762-6085 Name: Southwest Energy and Environmental Call This call is for information purposes only, and not for press or attribution. Thank you. Greg Nelson, Deputy Director, White House Office of Public Engagement ________________________________ Dear Friend – Since taking office, President Obama and his Administration have made environmental protection a top priority and have authorized new initiatives to protect our natural resources and great outdoors. In the Midwest, actions such as the EPA’s Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, Clean Air and Water Initiatives, and the America’s Great Outdoors Initiative all show the commitment the President and his Administration have made to protecting the environment and air and water conservation. This president also recognized the power of actively engaged citizens to contribute new ideas and has committed his Administration to engaging communities to hear their ideas on issues important to them. As part of that commitment, we would like to invite you to a conference call this Friday, October 22nd at 3:30pm to have a conversation with Administrator Lisa Jackson and other Administration officials about environmental protection and the Midwest. We would like to share with you some of the initiatives this Administration has started, and take your questions and hear your ideas and stories. Please feel free send this invitation out widely to your networks. You can also RSVP by sending an email torfee(a)who.eop.gov. We are looking forward to it. Call-in Information: Date: Friday, October 22, 2010 Time: 3:30 PM EST Number: (800) 230-1092 Name: Midwest Environmental Call This call is for information purposes only, and not for press or attribution. On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Lisa Evans <levans(a)earthjustice.org> wrote: More contamination from Duke Plants in NC: > >Coal ash in water worries officials > >Mecklenburg urges state to get stricter on Duke discharge at Mountain Island. > >By Bruce Henderson >bhenderson(a)charlotteobserver.com >Posted: Tuesday, Oct. 19, 2010 > >Coal ash is showing in settling ponds next to Duke Energy's Riverbend Steam >Station at Mountain Island Lake. The discharge is laden with heavy metals that >can be toxic at high levels. 2008 OBSERVER FILE PHOTO - JEFF WILHELM > > >Charlotte-Mecklenburg says state regulators should enforce stricter standards >over what a coal-fired Duke Energy power plant is putting into Charlotte's main >water supply. > >Twice this year, including this month, county staff have detected arsenic above >state standards in Mountain Island Lake near an ash pond discharge pipe from the >Riverbend plant. In May, at the same place, staff members found zinc at nearly >four times the standard. > >Arsenic and zinc are among the metals found in coal ash. The metals could cause >cancer and other diseases if they're swallowed in high doses. > >Duke's discharges into Mountain Island, Lake Wylie and Lake Norman are under >scrutiny as its state permits come up for renewal. A public hearing on permits >for the Riverbend, Allen and Marshall plants, which pipe an average of 23 >million gallons a day from their ash basins into the Catawba, will be held >tonight in Mooresville. > >The N.C. Division of Water Quality has proposed permits that require Duke to >monitor several metals, but doesn't set limits on how much is too much. A state >official says limits are applied only when samples show a "reasonable potential" >to break water standards. > >"The absence of limits in the permit does not mean (the plant) will be allowed >to violate water-quality standards," said Sergei Chernikov, a state >environmental engineer. > >Duke, too, says limits aren't needed because the state already scrutinizes its >discharge. > >"Test after test, sample after sample, shows that Mountain Island Lake has very >good water quality and is protected by current regulations," said Dave Mitchell, >Duke's environmental managing director. "Adding limits just for limits' sake >doesn't protect the lake any more" than current procedures. > >But David Caldwell, an environmental supervisor for Charlotte-Mecklenburg Storm >Water Services, said the state is counting on the size of 2,914-acre Mountain >Island to dilute Duke's wastes. > >"That stuff is sitting on the lake bottom in sediment," he said. "It's got to go >somewhere." > >One of those places is in fish, which take in metals that accumulate up the food >chain. Samples taken nearly a decade ago found high levels of mercury, a toxic >metal also found in coal ash, in Mountain Island fish. > >The county has asked the state to set limits for 14 metals in Riverbend's >discharge, take samples more frequently and monitor water upstream and >downstream of the plant. Mecklenburg also wants the state to analyze fish tissue >once a year. > >"It just seems to make good, common sense to be monitoring this," Caldwell said. > >Duke says Riverbend, which dates to 1929, is scheduled to be closed by 2015. > >Charlotte-Mecklenburg made a similar request for the Allen plant, which >discharges into Lake Wylie. The county cited Duke's own sampling that found high >levels of copper, arsenic and selenium, an element that can be toxic to >wildlife, in its discharge water. > >Duke says it regularly samples water upstream and downstream of its plants and >analyzes fish, as the county asked, reporting their findings to the state. The >utility says it would be redundant to add those requirements to its discharge >permits. > >Chernikov, the state engineer, said the water-quality division does a >statistical analysis of previous water samples to learn whether limits should be >placed on pollutants. The analysis is prescribed by state and federal rules, he >said, and assumes worst-case conditions to err on the side of protecting >environmental health. > >Under their proposed permits, Riverbend, Allen and Marshall would have metals >limits only for copper and iron. > >The permit for the Marshall plant proposes new discharge limits for selenium >beginning in mid-2012. The delay is intended to let Duke prepare for the >stricter regulation, Chernikov said. > >Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utilities, whose Mountain Island water intake is >downstream from the Riverbend plant, won't be filing comments to the state, a >spokesman said. The lake supplies drinking water for about 700,000 people in >Mecklenburg County, Mount Holly and Gastonia. > >"This is our primary water source," said Catawba Riverkeeper David Merryman, who >has also called for limits on metals. "There's not really a fallback." > >Merryman's own tests earlier this year also found high levels of arsenic near >the Riverbend discharge. Tests of fish tissue found no metals above state >guidelines. > >Duke's new permits contain one major change that pleases environmental advocates >like Merryman. For the first time, Duke will be required to monitor the >groundwater around its ash basins and fix any contamination it finds. > >Duke has already found contamination in wells it voluntarily sank close to its >ash ponds at all three plants. Naturally-occurring iron and manganese accounts >for much of the contamination. > >The difference now is that Duke will be under state orders to fix groundwater >violations it finds in a new, outer ring of wells around the ponds. The utility >could face fines if it doesn't comply. > >The water-quality division directed Duke and Raleigh's Progress Energy last >December to install the wells at their 14 coal-fired plants by the end of this >year. Groundwater monitoring will be added to the plants' discharge permits as >they're renewed. > >The Environmental Protection Agency is also mulling tougher rules on ash. > > > >Read more: >http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/10/19/1771891/coal-ash-in-water-worri… > > > >Lisa Evans >Senior Administrative Counsel >Earthjustice >21 Ocean Ave. >Marblehead, MA 01945 >T: (781) 631-4119 >F: (212) 918-1556 >www.earthjustice.org > >*please consider the environment before printing > >The information contained in this email message may be privileged, confidential >and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any >dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you think that >you have received this email message in error, please notify the sender by reply >email and delete the message and any attachments. > >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >To unsubscribe from the COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE list, send any message to: >COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG > >Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: >http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp > -- Midge Sweet Georgians for Smart Energy Coalition 404-688-5430/w • 404-667-4476/cell www.georgiansforsmartenergy.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE list, send any message to: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

1 0

Untapped Wealth: Offshore Wind Can Deliver Cleaner, More Affordable Energy and More Jobs Than Offshore Oil
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 20 Oct '10

20 Oct '10

*The attached report, generally supportive of Google's proposed offshore wind farm, was prepared by oceana.org who describe themselves as follows: **Oceana, founded in 2001, is the largest international organization focused solely on ocean conservation. Our offices in North America, Central America, South America and Europe work together on a limited number of strategic, directed campaigns to achieve measurable outcomes<http://na.oceana.org/en/about-us/our-victories>that will help return our oceans to former levels of abundance. We believe in the importance of science in identifying problems and solutions. Our scientists work closely with our teams of economists, lawyers and advocates to achieve tangible results for the oceans.* * http://na.oceana.org/ FROM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Offshore Wind Potential* 1. A small fraction of U.S. renewable energy resources1 is enough to power the country several times over. This could be done in a cost-effective way that minimizes carbon dioxide emissions which drive climate change and threaten our oceans. 2. A modest investment in offshore wind could supply almost half the current electricity generation on the East Coast. 3. Delaware, Massachusetts and North Carolina could generate enough electricity from offshore wind to equal current electricity generation, entirely eliminating the need for fossil fuel based electric generation. n New Jersey, Virginia and South Carolina could supply 92%, 83% and 64% of their current electricity generation with offshore wind, respectively. In all these states, wind could provide more energy than the states currently get from fossil fuels. 4. Offshore wind power offers more environmental benefits and fewer impacts than traditional fuels such as nuclear power, natural gas, coal and oil. *GENERAL FINDINGS* 1. Offshore wind power is located near population centers where electricity demand is highest. Coastal states account for more than three-quarters of U.S. electricity consumption. Other renewable energy is further from these high-demand areas. 2. Offshore wind power is less expensive than many alternatives. In some cases, offshore wind could actually lower electric bills. 3. Offshore wind creates more jobs than offshore drilling. Long-term jobs would be created to support offshore wind development for skilled workers and scientists, including electricians, meteorologists, welders, and turbine operators just to name a few. 4. Offshore wind technology can help build the U.S. economy. While the U.S. has not yet installed any offshore wind farms, Europe has been doing so for 20 years and has become the leading supplier of offshore wind turbines. Building our own domestic manufacturing base would strengthen our economy, allow U.S. expenditures to remain here at home, and allow the U.S. to become an offshore wind technology exporter. n Offshore wind projects should be designed to minimize environmental impacts by using new techniques and technology in the construction, operation and decommissioning process, and by protecting the environment in the siting process. 5. Choosing wind instead of oil and gas, rather than taking an “all-of-the-above” approach, will increase efficiency and lower costs for power production overall.

1 0

Re: [EC] Fwd: How VA is Losing the Competition for Clean Energy Jobs : Virginia Chapter Sierra Club
by kevin fooce 20 Oct '10

20 Oct '10

PA has solar, MD has solar ands biomass OH has been working on this for years and has a Green Energy Ohio group. Kevin Fooce fooce(a)hotmail.com 304-751-1448 work 304-675-6687 home 304-593-2875 cell Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:49:01 -0700 From: jim_scon(a)yahoo.com Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: How VA is Losing the Competition for Clean Energy Jobs : Virginia Chapter Sierra Club To: fmoose39(a)hotmail.com; jkotcon(a)wvu.edu; ec(a)osenergy.org; wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com and are there good sites in other adjoining states besides OH? PA wind turbine plant, . . . Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. From: kevin fooce <fmoose39(a)hotmail.com> To: Jim Sconyers <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com>; Jim Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu>; ec(a)osenergy.org; wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, October 19, 2010 1:24:52 PM Subject: RE: [EC] Fwd: How VA is Losing the Competition for Clean Energy Jobs : Virginia Chapter Sierra Club I can put a list of projects, organizations, and politicians that are pushing this agenda. Might need someone to for a good write-up though. Can ask my wife, she is a excellent writer. Would take sometime though. I believe this is a good idea that needs published on a wide format so everyone in our state can see the problems we have on clean energy and energy efficiency. The big question is how far do we want to go? Do we want the schools listed? Some of the schools such as OU have positive aspects along with the fact they are now creating a composting facility for the whole city, to Oberlin being one of the top schools in the country for sustainability. Or maybe even list the LEED platinum facility that Hocking tech now host along with being a leader worldwide on fuel cell technologies and other programs they offer. Or would we want to look just at the solar sector and the fact that Ohio now host a 12 megawatt farm with another solar farm to come which will be one of the largest in the nation. Ohio also plays host to First Solar located in Toledo now employing 1500 people and sales about 80% of it's products to China. Or maybe we want to look at the Burger plant that burns a mixture of biomass and coal and will soon be all biomass. Or maybe the fact that Ohio has programs for the farmers to turn the manure into electricity, fertilizer, and Jiffy peat pots. The list is large, what do we want to focus on? Kevin Fooce fooce(a)hotmail.com 304-751-1448 work 304-675-6687 home 304-593-2875 cell Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 16:50:15 -0700 From: jim_scon(a)yahoo.com To: jkotcon(a)wvu.edu; ec(a)osenergy.org; wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: How VA is Losing the Competition for Clean Energy Jobs : Virginia Chapter Sierra Club I'd love to see us put together a message that highlights all the clean energy projects and jobs in, say Ohio, and asking why not us? Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. From: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> To: ec(a)osenergy.org; wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com Sent: Mon, October 18, 2010 1:27:31 PM Subject: [EC] Fwd: How VA is Losing the Competition for Clean Energy Jobs : Virginia Chapter Sierra Club Here is a fascinating approach to attracting attention to Green Energy. Why not West Virginia too? JBK >>> Paula Carrell <Paula.Carrell(a)sierraclub.org> 10/18/2010 1:09 PM >>> You all might want to take a look at how the VA Chapter is garnering attention for their take on (unrealized) clean energy opportunities in Virginia. http://vasierraclub.org/2010/10/power-failure-how-virginia-is-losing-the-co… _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

3 2

FW: [ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS] Sierra Club's Fracking Regulatory Action Center (FRAC) is now on line an
by James Kotcon 19 Oct '10

19 Oct '10

You might find this interesting. JBK _____ From: National Hydrofracking Team [mailto:ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG] On Behalf Of Bruce Hamilton Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 2:58 PM To: ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Subject: [ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS] Sierra Club's Fracking Regulatory Action Center (FRAC) is now on line and available to help your work Colleagues, As part of the Sierra Club's efforts to enact strong standards for the natural gas drilling industry, we're pleased to introduce a new tool, the Fracking Regulatory Action Center (FRAC). This online resource http://sierraclub.org/naturalgas/rulemaking/ is a regularly-updated collection of natural gas rulemaking efforts across the country. FRAC will help connect activists with policy experts, allowing everyone to share what we know and to build on each other's research to secure strong rules for the gas industry. States, municipalities and the federal government are all working on regulatory efforts. FRAC's goal is to track all of these actions and to make it easy for activists to engage with them. The Action Center contains links to key technical documents, records, deadlines and hearing locations, and it points activists toward grassroots groups working on each rulemaking. Action Center users can also find technical comments and reports prepared for rules across the country. You can access the Action Center by visiting http://www.sierraclub.org/naturalgas and clicking on the "Fracking Regulatory Action Center" link. While you're there, check out the rest of the page to learn about the Club's efforts to clean up the natural gas industry. Special thanks to Lane Boldman, Adrian Cotter, Jessica Helm, Craig Segall, Joanne Spalding and Alison Vicks for their work on this. This database will grow and deepen as the activist community uses it. For questions or comments about FRAC, or to add regulatory information, please contact Alison.Vicks(a)sierraclub.org We welcome your feedback on how to improve this tool. Bruce Hamilton - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS list, send any message to: ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/

1 0

Fwd: ENEWS: WVU's Law School Lecture
by James Kotcon 19 Oct '10

19 Oct '10

>>> ENEWS ENEWS <ENEWS(a)mail.wvu.edu> 10/19/2010 2:38 PM >>> MOUNTAINEER E-NEWS Tuesday, Oct. 19, 2010 TOP OF THE NEWS LECTURES/PRESENTATIONS 1) Marcellus Shale development to be discussed at College of Law Daniel J. Soeder, a researcher and scientist at the U.S. Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory in Morgantown will discuss environmental implications from Marcellus Shale natural gas drilling and production at 5 p.m. Wednesday, Oct. 20 in room 157 at the WVU Law Center. The event includes a reception before the presentation at 4 p.m. in the WVU Law Center Lobby.

1 0

Fwd: How VA is Losing the Competition for Clean Energy Jobs : Virginia Chapter Sierra Club
by James Kotcon 19 Oct '10

19 Oct '10

Here is a fascinating approach to attracting attention to Green Energy. Why not West Virginia too? JBK >>> Paula Carrell <Paula.Carrell(a)sierraclub.org> 10/18/2010 1:09 PM >>> You all might want to take a look at how the VA Chapter is garnering attention for their take on (unrealized) clean energy opportunities in Virginia. http://vasierraclub.org/2010/10/power-failure-how-virginia-is-losing-the-co…

3 4

Fwd: FracTracker Training Invitation for Oct 25th Meeting in Morgantown, WV
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 18 Oct '10

18 Oct '10

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: FracTracker Training Invitation for Oct 25th Meeting in Morgantown, WV Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 17:24:01 -0400 From: Malone, Samantha Lynn <slm75(a)pitt.edu> To: Malone, Samantha Lynn <slm75(a)pitt.edu> Dear Colleagues, On behalf of Dr. Conrad Dan Volz at the Center for Healthy Environments and Communities (CHEC <http://www.chec.pitt.edu/>) of the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health and the Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds, I would like to invite you or another representative within your group to attend a training on Monday, October 25, 2010 of key personnel who are working to address Marcellus Shale gas extraction's (MSGE) impact on the environment and public health in West Virginia. During this training, CHEC will introduce participants to FracTracker, a combination of an interactive blog (http://fractracker.org) and data tool (http://data.fractracker.org), that is serving as a vital data-sharing tool in the Marcellus Shale play and beyond. The training is also an open forum for participants to discuss current and anticipated environmental and public health concerns such as emergency preparedness and response to blow outs or spills, degrading road infrastructure, and surface and drinking water contamination. Because the issues we are facing span across many fields, meeting invitees include representatives from diverse groups. This is one of many trainings we are hosting throughout PA, WV, and NY, OH, and MD. Click here to learn more about CHEC and this project: http://www.fractracker.org/p/about-us.html. *Meeting Details:* October 25, 2010 -- 1pm -- 4pm 317 Percival Hall, West Virginia Evansdale Campus, Morgantown, WV 26506 Contact phone # on day of event: 724-554-0989. Free to attend. Parking is free. Permits will be provided upon arrival. An agenda and additional meeting specifics will be sent to registered attendees prior to the training. Important -- In order to work with FracTracker's data tool (http://data.fractracker.org) during the training, you must be registered with the data tool. It is free to register, but please do this online as soon as possible. If you run into problems registering for the tool please contact: support(a)rhizalabs.com <mailto:support@rhizalabs.com>. In addition to registering for the data tool online, please also accept or decline this invitation in a return email to me at slm75(a)pitt.edu <mailto:slm75@pitt.edu> as soon as possible. In that email, please let me know whether CHEC can distribute your contact information to all attendees of the training for networking purposes. Once we receive your RSVP we will send you a confirmation email with more details about the training. Best, Samantha -Samantha Malone, MPH, CPH- Communications Specialist & Doctoral Student Center for Healthy Environments & Communities University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health Office: 412-624-9379 100 Technology Dr. Suite 553 BRIDG Pittsburgh, PA 15219-3130 slm75(a)pitt.edu <mailto:slm75@pitt.edu> | samanthamalone119(a)gmail.com <mailto:samanthamalone119@gmail.com> | www.chec.pitt.edu

1 0

Fwd: News Data Highlights Role of Forests in Fight Against Climate Change
by James Kotcon 18 Oct '10

18 Oct '10

See attached report on carbon storage in National Forests. JBK

1 0

80-PAGE EPA DECISION ON SPRUCE NO. 1 - PROPOSING TO BLOCK 2200+ ACRE MOUNTAIN TOP REMOVAL PROJECT IN LOGAN COUNTY
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 17 Oct '10

17 Oct '10

For any who have not yet had access to the lengthy EPA decision document, it is attached. It is certain to be the subject of important litigation in the US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

1 0

Fwd: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] National Solar Jobs Census 2010
by James Kotcon 14 Oct '10

14 Oct '10

WOW!!!! Can we get copies of this report to our legislators? JBK >>> Edward Mainland <emainland(a)COMCAST.NET> 10/14/2010 3:07 PM >>> National Solar Jobs Census 2010 This is the most thorough, up-to-date job survey on the US solar industry, with data for every state. Nationally, solar energy provides 93,000 jobs in 2010 and is expected to grow another 24,000 jobs by August 2011. By comparison, coal mining employed 86,859 workers in 2008, a nearly 10-fold job reduction since 1920, even though we use far more coal today than in 1920. Coal supplies nearly half the nation’s electricity while solar energy provides much less than 1% of electric power and hot water. Employment in the California solar industry is forecast to grow about 4500 new jobs over the next year, increasing from 17,352 to 21,804. By comparison, fossil-fuel power generation is expected to grow only 210 new jobs in California, from 13,854 to 14,055. Fossil fuel is used to generate 60% the state’s electric power, while solar energy provides less than 1% of electricity and hot water. Link to download report: http://www.greenlmi.com/resources/ Final+TSF+National+Solar+Jobs+Census+2010+Web+Version.pdf+2.zip - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

1 0

GOOGLE OFFSHORE WIND PROJECT COULD OBVIATE NEED FOR BOTH TRAIL AND PATH
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 12 Oct '10

12 Oct '10

[image: The New York Times] <http://www.nytimes.com/> ------------------------------ October 12, 2010 Offshore Wind Power Line Wins Praise, and Backing By MATTHEW L. WALD<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/matthew_l_wald…> WASHINGTON — Google<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/google_inc/index.html…>and a New York financial firm have each agreed to invest heavily in a proposed $5 billion transmission backbone for future offshore wind farms<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/w/wind_power/i…>along the Atlantic Seaboard that could ultimately transform the region’s electrical map. The 350-mile underwater spine, which could remove some critical obstacles to wind power development, has stirred excitement among investors, government officials and environmentalists who have been briefed on it. Google and Good Energies <http://www.goodenergies.com/>, an investment firm specializing in renewable energy, have each agreed to take 37.5 percent of the equity portion of the project. They are likely to bring in additional investors, which would reduce their stakes. If they hold on to their stakes, that would come to an initial investment of about $200 million apiece in the first phase of construction alone, said Robert L. Mitchell, the chief executive of Trans-Elect<http://www.trans-elect.com/contact.htm>, the Maryland-based transmission-line company that proposed the venture. Marubeni <http://www.marubeni.com/company/data.html>, a Japanese trading company, has taken a 10 percent stake. Trans-Elect said it hoped to begin construction in 2013. Several government officials praised the idea underlying the project as ingenious, while cautioning that they could not prejudge the specifics. “Conceptually it looks to me to be one of the most interesting transmission projects that I’ve ever seen walk through the door,” said Jon Wellinghoff, the chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission<http://www.ferc.gov/>, which oversees interstate electricity transmission. “It provides a gathering point for offshore wind for multiple projects up and down the coast.” Industry experts called the plan promising, but warned that as a first-of-a-kind effort, it was bound to face bureaucratic delays and could run into unforeseen challenges, from technology problems to cost overruns. While several undersea electrical cables exist off the Atlantic Coast already, none has ever picked up power from generators along the way. The system’s backbone cable, with a capacity of 6,000 megawatts, equal to the output of five large nuclear reactors, would run in shallow trenches on the seabed in federal waters 15 to 20 miles offshore, from northern New Jersey to Norfolk, Va. The notion would be to harvest energy from turbines in an area where the wind is strong but the hulking towers would barely be visible. Trans-Elect estimated that construction would cost $5 billion, plus financing and permit fees. The $1.8 billion first phase, a 150-mile stretch from northern New Jersey to Rehoboth Beach, Del., could go into service by early 2016, it said. The rest would not be completed until 2021 at the earliest. Richard L. Needham, the director of Google’s green business operations group, called the plan “innovative and audacious.” “It is an opportunity to kick-start this industry and, long term, provide a way for the mid-Atlantic states to meet their renewable energy goals,” he said. Yet even before any wind farms were built, the cable would channel existing supplies of electricity from southern Virginia, where it is cheap, to northern New Jersey, where it is costly, bypassing one of the most congested parts of the North American electric grid while lowering energy costs for northern customers. Generating electricity from offshore wind is far more expensive than relying on coal<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/coal/index.h…>, natural gas <http://www.nytimes.com/info/natural-gas/?inline=nyt-classifier>or even onshore wind. But energy experts anticipate a growing demand for the offshore turbines to meet state requirements for greater reliance on local renewable energy as a clean alternative to fossil fuels. Four connection points — in southern Virginia, Delaware, southern New Jersey and northern New Jersey — would simplify the job of bringing the energy onshore, involving fewer permit hurdles. In contrast to transmission lines on land, where a builder may have to deal with hundreds of property owners, this project would have to deal with a maximum of just four, and fewer than that in its first phase. Ultimately the system, known as the Atlantic Wind Connection, could make building a wind farm offshore far simpler and cheaper than it looks today, experts said. Environmentalists who have been briefed on the plan were enthusiastic. Melinda Pierce, the deputy director for national campaigns at the Sierra Club <http://www.sierraclub.org/>, said she had campaigned against proposed transmission lines that would carry coal-fired energy around the country, but would favor this one, with its promise of tapping the potential of offshore wind. “These kinds of audacious ideas might just be what we need to break through the wretched logjam,” she said. Projects like Cape Wind<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/science/earth/29wind.html>, proposed for shallow waters just off Cape Cod in Massachusetts, met with fierce objections from residents who felt it would mar the ocean vista. But sponsors of the Trans-Elect project insist that the mid-Atlantic turbines would have less of a visual impact. The hurdles facing the project have more to do with administrative procedures than with engineering problems or its economic merit, several experts said. By the time the Interior Department<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/i/interio…>could issue permits for such a line, for example, the federal subsidy program for wind will have expired in 2012, said Willett M. Kempton<http://www.ceoe.udel.edu/people/profile.aspx?willett>, a professor at the School of Marine Science and Policy at the University of Delaware<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/u/univers…>and the author of several papers on offshore wind. Another is that PJM Interconnection <http://www.pjm.com/home.aspx>, the regional electricity group that would have to approve the project and assess its member utilities for the cost, has no integrated procedure for calculating the value of all three tasks the line would accomplish — hooking up new power generation, reducing congestion on the grid and improving reliability. And elected officials in Virginia have in the past opposed transmission proposals that would tend to average out pricing across the mid-Atlantic states, possibly raising their constituents’ costs. But the lure of Atlantic wind is very strong. The Atlantic Ocean is relatively shallow even tens of miles from shore, unlike the Pacific, where the sea floor drops away steeply. Construction is also difficult on the Great Lakes because their waters are deep and they freeze, raising the prospect of moving ice sheets that could damage a tower. Nearly all of the East Coast governors, Republican and Democratic, have spoken enthusiastically about coastal wind and have fought proposals for transmission lines from the other likely wind source, the Great Plains. “From Massachusetts down to Virginia, the governors have signed appeals to the Senate not to do anything that would lead to a high-voltage grid that would blanket the country and bring in wind from the Dakotas,” said James J. Hoecker <http://www.huschblackwell.com/james-hoecker/>, a former chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/federal…>, who now is part of a nonprofit group that represents transmission owners. He described an Atlantic transmission backbone as “a necessary piece of what the Eastern governors have been talking about in terms of taking advantage of offshore wind.” So far only one offshore wind project, Bluewater Wind off Delaware, has sought permission to build in federal waters. The company is seeking federal loan guarantees to build 293 to 450 megawatts of capacity, but the timing of construction remains uncertain. Executives with that project said the Atlantic backbone was an interesting idea, in part because it would foster development of a supply chain for the specialized parts needed for offshore wind. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/ken_salazar/in…>, whose agency would have to sign off on the project, has spoken approvingly of wind energy and talked about the possibility of an offshore “backbone.” In a speech this month, he emphasized that the federal waters were “controlled by the secretary,” meaning him. Within three miles of the shore, control is wielded by the state. Nonetheless, if the offshore wind farms are built on a vast scale, the project’s sponsors say, a backbone with just four connection points could expedite the approval process. In fact, if successful, the transmission spine would reduce the regulatory burden on subsequent projects, said Mr. Mitchell, the Trans-Elect chief executive. Mr. Kempton of the University of Delaware and Mr. Wellinghoff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said the backbone would offer another plus: reducing one of wind power’s big problems, variability of output. “Along the U.S. Atlantic seaboard, we tend to have storm tracks that move along the coast and somewhat offshore,” Mr. Kempton said. If storm winds were blowing on Friday off Virginia, they might be off Delaware by Saturday and off New Jersey by Sunday, he noted. Yet the long spine would ensure that the amount of energy coming ashore held roughly constant. Wind energy becomes more valuable when it is more predictable; if predictable enough, it could replace some land-based generation altogether, Mr. Kempton said. But the economics remain uncertain, he warned, For now, he said, the biggest impediment may be that the market price of offshore wind energy is about 50 percent higher than that of energy generated on land. With a change in market conditions — an increase in the price of natural gas, for example, or the adoption of a tax on emissions of carbon dioxide from coal- or gas-generated electricity — that could change, he said.

2 1

Geothermal power in WV!
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 12 Oct '10

12 Oct '10

This is an interesting story: http://wboy.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=87518 <http://wboy.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=87518> "If a geothermal well were to be drilled in West Virginia, it would use the same drilling rigs for drilling on Marcellus shale, as well," Anderson said. "In W.Va., the main difference is is it would be deeper to access higher temperatures. -Jonathan

1 1

Fwd: Sierra Club nominating petition
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 11 Oct '10

11 Oct '10

What do people think about this? I know that #1, #2, #4 are true. Does anyone know if #3 is true? http://connect.sierraclub.org/post/Groups/Welcome_Michael_Brune/blog/watch_… -Jonathan -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Sierra Club nominating petition Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2010 22:58:48 -0400 From: Robert Jereski <mutualaid(a)earthlink.net> October 10, 2010 Dear Fellow Sierrans I have learned that an acquaintance of mine, the dedicated environmentalist and long-time member of the Sierra Club, Frank Morris, is running as a petition candidate for the national Sierra Club Board of Directors for 2011. I am delighted as I know that Frank would add much needed energy and vision to the work of the BoD. He is running as a petition candidate for the national board, because he is concerned with the direction of the national Sierra Club, including the following facts: 1. Sierra Club’s former leader Carl Pope has publicly supported the “Picken’s Plan”. T Boone Pickens is an oil and natural gas billionaire, who in 2004 undermined the Sierra Club’s endorsed Presidential candidate John Kerry by funding the Swift Boat Campaign. The Picken’s Plan is a pro-gas (fossil fuel) plan. 2. In one of his first public acts as new Sierra Club director, Michael Brune was on Cramer’s Mad Money advocating the purchase of natural gas stocks. Exxon Mobil recently purchased leading natural gas provider XTO energy. Does Mr. Brune now advocate owning Exxon Mobil as an environmental investment? 3. National Sierra Club Staffers and national board members, clearly and definitively, “advised “ NYS Sierrans against legislatively advocating for a ban on “Fracking” for natural gas in NYS. Fracking is a process, presently absolved from multiple federal environmental statutes including the Clean Air and Clean Water acts, where in chemically infused sand and water is used to “frack” or break, shale stone and release natural gas. 4. Sierra Club is now in the products endorsement business, and has sold its endorsement to Clorox and Coca Cola to support their “green” products. Frank Morris believes that innovative financing like PACE bonds, and a truly renewable energy infrastructure based on sun, wind, wave, efficiency, conservation, smart grid, back up battery power, and geothermal are available now, but these breakthroughs are being obfuscated by the club’s decision to support natural gas as an open ended “transition” fuel. Morris needs to collect 250 signatures from active Sierrans (petition attached). While the national board is always elected by the membership, there is a nominating committee that nominates members that play nice… That’s why Morris has to petition to allow members a real choice when elections are held early next year. There are 3 ways for Sierrans to complete this petition: Print, Sign, and snail mail to Frank Morris, 40 Exchange Place Suite 2010 NY NY 10005 Sign, scan, and email to fm(a)ecologicadvisors.us <mailto:fm@ecologicadvisors.us> Sign, print and fax to 1 206 984 4328 Frank is presently a member of the NYS (Atlantic Chapter) Sierra Club Executive Committee, and former Chairperson of Long Island Sierra Club 2007-2009. Please forward to other Sierrans that may be interested in supporting a grassroots, petition candidate beholden only to the interests of the club membership. Robert Jereski New York City Sierra Club member

4 4

Stimulating promotional "white paper" from manufacturer of smart grid equip - the pitch: avoid capital cost of new generation and transmission by efficiency.
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 11 Oct '10

11 Oct '10

EXCERPT FROM INTRO, COMPLETE PAPER ATTACHED. The world has a huge appetite for electric energy, consuming thousands of billions of kilowatt-hours (kWh) annually, a figure that continues to climb as more countries become industrialized. The world’s electric consumption has increased by about 3.1 percent annually between 1980 and 20061), and is expected to grow to 33,300 billion kWh by 2030). The world’s electricity consumption for 2008 was 16,790 billion kWh so by 2030 the world demand for electricity is expected to have almost doubled. Currently a significant amount (about 10 percent) of electric energy produced by power plants is lost during transmission and distribution to consumers. About 40 percent of this total loss occurs on the distribution network. In 2006 alone, the total energy losses and distribution losses were about 1,638 billion and 655 billion kWh, respectively. *A modest 10 percent reduction in distribution losses would, therefore, save about 65 billion kWh of electricity. That’s more electricity than Switzerland’s 7.5 million people consumed in 2008 and equates to 39 million metric tons of CO2 emissions from coal-fired power generation .* As the demand for electricity grows, new power plants will have to be built to meet the highest peak demand with additional capacity to cover unforeseen events. The peak demand in a system usually lasts less than 5 percent of the time (i.e, just a few hundred hours a year). This means that some power plants are only needed during the peak load hours and their potential is utilized relatively infrequently. By active demand management on the distribution system, through demand response and VVO, the peak demand on the whole electric grid can be reduced. This eliminates the need for expensive capital expenditure on the distribution, transmission, and the generation systems. Even very modest reductions in peak demand would yield huge economic savings. For the United States in 2008, for example, the non-coincidental peak demand (i.e, the separate peak demands made on the electrical system recorded at different times of the day) was about 790 GW. *With every 1 percent reduction in the peak demand there would be a reduced need to build a 7,900 MW power plant.*

1 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC October 2010