EC November 2010

ec@lists.wvsierraclub.org

8 participants
20 discussions

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: CA GOP Recovery Plan
by James Kotcon 26 Nov '10

26 Nov '10

This is from my father-in-law in California. I wonder if we could find some WV Republicans who might get on board? JBK >>> "Bob Elliott" <rdelliott(a)socal.rr.com> 11/26/2010 2:16 PM >>> latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-trounstine-california-republica201 01126,0,2900700.story latimes.com Op-Ed A California GOP recovery program Its trouncing in the Nov. 2 election shows that the state's voters aren't interested in 'tea party' stances; Republicans should pursue a more centrist approach. By Phil Trounstine and Jerry Roberts November 26, 2010 In the wake of the disastrous showing by Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina and the rest of the California Republican Party ticket, the leaders of the Golden State GOP should recalibrate their politics and policies to become relevant once again. The state's Republicans are now so trapped in their ideological hall of mirrors that they have become a distorted caricature of themselves. The midterm election demonstrated that they utterly fail to reflect the impulses of the vast majority of California voters, who tend toward fiscal conservatism and social moderation. Many Republican values have a wide following: smaller government, lower taxes, reduced regulation, economic growth, individual freedom and law and order, to name a few. The California GOP should fight for these ideals. But it needs to incorporate them into a platform that begins with a realistic growth agenda. Investment in roads, bridges, dams and/or levees, ports, water projects, redevelopment projects and schools and universities - all of these things and more are wholly consistent with their philosophical worldview. The party's fixation on opposing everything the Democrats propose is hurting Republicans more than it is their opponents. The GOP should take the lead in advocating an economic rebound strategy that relies on Silicon Valley innovation, green jobs and high-tech research and development. The party could integrate this with increased exports for a growing agricultural sector and a healthy and expanding service economy. Republicans don't have to continually serve the interests of the wealthiest 2% of California families; they can focus also on the struggling middle class. And they need to remember that California is not Kentucky or Alaska or any other state where the so-called tea party is a big deal. In California, tea party ideology has little appeal to the vast majority of voters. It's time for leaders of the California Republican Party to rethink their general strategy and agenda. Here are some ideas it should consider: .A change of position on providing a path to citizenship. The party should strongly favor securing the borders against illegal immigration; that's a matter of defending our national sovereignty and integrity. But that position doesn't need to be in conflict with extending eventual citizenship to some of those who are currently living here illegally. Just as the Republican Party was the Northern standard-bearer for the abolition of slavery in the 1850s and 1860s, so the California Republican Party could advocate for citizenship for honest working men and women who have come to the U.S. to make better lives for themselves and their families. According to the Los Angeles Times/USC postelection survey, about 8 in 10 Latinos, half the independents and even 4 in 10 Republicans support a path to citizenship. Even greater percentages support other ideas for integrating illegal immigrants. Republicans are driving away Latinos - nearly a quarter of the voters - with their anti-immigrant policies and rhetoric. .Getting on board with green jobs and environmental conservation. By arguing that people must pick between the environment and economic development, Republicans are creating a false choice. And voters know it. California Republicans have made fighting environmental regulation a cause. But plenty of people, including George Shultz and the late David Packard, have demonstrated that you can be a rock-ribbed Republican and also favor preserving and enhancing the environment. Of course, environmentalism has to be balanced against other competing interests, such as healthy agriculture, water supplies for cities and reasonable growth in and around urban areas. But pragmatic environmentalism could win the party votes. .Developing a bench. The party should start grooming young, bright, articulate Republicans throughout the state. It should teach them about practical politics, polling and other insider skills. It should train them in how to talk to reporters and how to think on their feet and answer questions without betraying their ignorance. It should teach them how to talk to ordinary people without sounding as if they're preaching or reciting talking points. In other words, the GOP should do what big-time college athletic programs do: recruit. .Changing the party's stance on abortion. There's a way to move to the center on this issue. The party could support a woman's right to choose in line with Roe vs. Wade without endorsing or even supporting abortion. The idea that abortion is a moral choice is not incompatible with the idea that this moral choice must be made by individuals, not the state. The party could also focus on reducing the number of abortions by supporting rather than opposing family planning. Barry Goldwater did. The party's goal should be to build a coalition based on an overarching goal of reducing the number of abortions rather than wasting breath yammering about abstinence and opposing sex education for teens. .Sounding sensible, not strident. The problem with the tea party rhetoric is that it sounds like the ravings of a crazy old uncle who really ought to be locked in the attic. The vast majority of California voters are moderate, independent-minded, practical people. They don't much care if an idea comes from a Democrat or a Republican. They care if it works. They're not against government; they want just enough of it to handle the important things. They're not opposed to all taxes; they're opposed to taxes that seem unfair, onerous or overly broad. They want to control the borders, but they also want to be fair to people who have worked hard to make a living, no matter where they come from. They're not pro-abortion, but they want women and their doctors - not Assembly members and state senators - to make choices about the life and death of fetuses. California voters are tired of people running for office who sound as if they think they know everything and whose answers are purely ideological. The Republicans need to have a hard head. But they also need to demonstrate a soft heart. And maybe a touch of humility. Phil Trounstine and Jerry Roberts write regularly about politics at their website, calbuzz.com. This article was adapted from one of their posts. Copyright C 2010, Los Angeles Times <http://www.latimes.com/> http://secure-us.imrworldwide.com/cgi-bin/m?ci=us-400338h&cg=0&cc=1&ts=noscr ipt

1 0

Nissan Leaf Commercial
by James Kotcon 24 Nov '10

24 Nov '10

This is also pretty cool. Maybe I missed it as it apparently has been out for a while, but it is worth watching. This is how we should be doing our messaging. JBK http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNeEVkhTutY

2 1

Fwd: electric vehicle charging stations w "solar trees"
by James Kotcon 24 Nov '10

24 Nov '10

>>> Paula Carrell <Paula.Carrell(a)sierraclub.org> 11/23/2010 7:32 PM >>> OK, this is seriously cool . . . http://sierraclub.typepad.com/compass/2010/11/envision-solar.html and an interesting way to counter the fear that EVs will end up increasing (coal-fired) power plant demand not necessarily . . . I want a "solar tree" at home pc

2 1

Fwd: WVNS story: Massey's Violations Hurting its Bottom Line?
by Paul Wilson 22 Nov '10

22 Nov '10

Massey CEO was also subject of a Morning Edition piece on Saturday morning NPR. fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Public News Service <wvns(a)newsservice.org> Date: Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 4:44 AM Subject: WVNS story: Massey's Violations Hurting its Bottom Line? To: PaulWilson <pjgrunt(a)gmail.com> Public News Service-WV November 22, 2010 Massey's Violations Hurting its Bottom Line? CHARLESTON, W.Va. - The coal-mining company Massey Energy is apparently up for sale, and shareholders may not be thankful for the company's record of violations of law and regulations. The company confirms it is now seriously considering takeover offers, and a number of stock watchers say privately that Massey's environmental and mine safety problems have cost it. Rob McGarrah, who follows stocks for the huge *AFL-CIO* pension funds, says accidents and environmental violations cause down-time and run up huge legal fees. "Contesting every single violation, questioning the legality of the enforcement efforts on the part of federal and state officials: None of this is good for productivity. It's not good for the overall health of the company." No one at Massey returned a call requesting comment. The company has fought with the unions before, but McGarrah says Massey could be a better neighbor and more profitable if it were less combative. Speaking to investors last week, company CEO Don Blankenship claimed that their finances have been hurt by regulations that he says target Massey. "Practices that we've employed at Massey successfully for years, that improve health and safety, are now being discarded; that's as well as the fact that environmental regulations have reached the point that they're fully unreasonable." According to McGarrah, other large coal operators seem to have fewer of these problems. "Other companies, and we are invested in them, do not have anywhere near the same troubles with federal investigations or federal mine safety enforcement." Over the last ten years shares in such mining companies as Consol, Peabody and Arch Coal have shown a tremendous rise. But even before the accident at its Upper Big Branch mine last April which focused national attention on the firm and its record, Massey Energy's share price was about where it had been a decade before. Click here to view this story on the Public News Service RSS site and access an audio version of this and other stories: http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/17060-1<http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/17060-1> --- To be removed from this list please send an e-mail to remove(a)publicnewsservice.org <remove(a)publicnewsservice.org?subject=remove>and put the word "remove" in the subject line. -- 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: [fom] Fwd: [NoCoal] Wind in the heart of King Coal
by Frank Young 21 Nov '10

21 Nov '10

----- Original Message ----- From: Frank Young To: Daniel Chiotos ; FOM Cc: ec(a)osenergy.org Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010 5:51 PM Subject: Re: [fom] Fwd: [NoCoal] Wind in the heart of King Coal Danny, When a potential electrical power developer- whether wind, solar or coal powered- gets to looking into a specific generating facility location, one of the first things the developer does is to apply to regional grid operator (known as PJM in this 13 state region) for a technical analysis of how much power could be put on the power grid from that location utilizing the existing transmission line infrastructure. This is done far in advance of applying for any permits. I know of some potential wind power locations that had this PJM grid connection analysis done nearly ten years ago- Rich Mountain in Randolph County, for example- yet no permits applications have even been filed for this location. Sometimes these power grid analyses show that significant megawatts of electricity can be put on the grid with little or no additional transmission line construction. This was the case at the Mt. Storm Shell-Nedpower wind farm in Tucker County. That facility was built such that it crossed directly under an existing 500 KV transmission line. All that was needed was construction of a power substation that was tied directly into the existing transmission line there. On the other hand, at the Beech Ridge wind farm facility in Greenbrier County, Invenergy had to construct almost 20 miles of its own transmission line to connect with an existing APCo transmission line near Nettie in Nicholas County. And some perhaps otherwise good wind locations are so far from transmission lines that it would be costs prohibitive to develop that site and costructuct and maintain the additional transmission lines necessary to connect to the existing power grid. My main point is that just because a potential power developer asks PJM for a technical analysis of grid capacity in the area, it does not mean that construction nor even a permit application is imminent. Although PJM keeps these transmission access technically analyzed locations on its website indefinitely, it does not mean that the sites will ever be developed. Some will sooner, some will later, and some will probably never be developed for technical, financial or other reasons. Frank Young, member Beech Ridge Wind Technical Advisory Committee for WV Sierra Club ----- Original Message ----- From: Daniel Chiotos To: FOM Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010 3:01 PM Subject: [fom] Fwd: [NoCoal] Wind in the heart of King Coal can anyone ID the renewable energy projects that this map shows & the current state of them? This map looks like way more wind than I've heard of - so I'm wondering whether it is tracking wind that is in every state of the permit? Check out the map, pretty interesting...I wonder how many jobs would be developed if all of these renewable energy projects came to be... link is below 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 DARE TO BE ONE TOO, CALL 304-542-1134 OR 304-205-0920." - Larry Gibson ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ted Nace <ted(a)tednace.com> Date: Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 2:55 PM Subject: [NoCoal] Wind in the heart of King Coal To: nonewcoalplants(a)energyjustice.net The PJM regional transmission organization is tracking 39,000 MW of proposed wind (more than all other proposed renewable and nonrenewable generation sources combined) in Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia and the District of Columbia. See this interactive map for details. _______________________________________________ No New Coal Plants! (nonewcoalplants(a)energyjustice.net) Energy Justice Network http://www.energyjustice.net Un/Subscribe, change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nonewcoalplants_energyjustice.net

1 0

Fwd: [WVaPATH] Zoning exception denied in MD for PATH substation
by James Kotcon 20 Nov '10

20 Nov '10

In case you have not heard. JBK >>> Bill Howley <billhowley(a)hughes.net> 11/19/2010 7:13 AM >>> Last night, the Frederick County, MD Board of Zoning Appeals _denied_ a special zoning exception that would have allowed the construction of the huge Kemptown Substation at the eastern end of PATH. This is a serious setback for PATH. Allegheny will no doubt go to state court to fight this. The MD PSC has already claimed sole authority to site the substation in Frederick County, although state law may not let them do that. There will clearly be a major court fight pitting the Frederick County Commission against AEP/Allegheny and the MD PSC. This will cause serious problems for PATH in MD.

2 1

W.Va. board temporarily blocks ICG mine water permit
by Frank Young 18 Nov '10

18 Nov '10

This will be of interest to Jim Kotcon and perhaps others of you. This action springs directly from a Sierra Club legal appeal. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: Cindy Rank To: WVHCBOARD(a)yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 5:37 PM Subject: [WVHCBOARD] ICG Patriot Mining Mine in northern WV --- using coal ash in backfill;;; http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/ W.Va. board temporarily blocks ICG mine November 18, 2010 by Ken Ward Jr. Word is just coming in that West Virginia’s Environmental Quality Board has temporarily blocked a water pollution permit for International Coal Group subsidiary Patriot Mining Company’s New Hill West Mine up in Monongalia County. I’ve posted a copy of the board’s order here, a copy of a motion for stay here and International Coal Group’s response to that motion here. Sierra Club lawyers sought the temporary stay because the company had planned to begin blasting tomorrow, and a hearing on the group’s appear of the water pollution permit was not scheduled to begin until mid-December. The water permit in question already covers discharges from five previously approved surface mining permits, and now Patriot Mining wants to add another 225-acre operation that would discharge into Scotts Run of the Monongahela River drainage. If you take a minute and read the original notice of appeal filed by the Sierra Club, you’ll see that this case has the potential to be pretty darned interesting. The appeal cites, among other things, what the Sierra Club says it the mine’s inability to meet the new water quality standards outlined in EPA’s major guidance document on conductivity. __._,_.___ Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1) Recent Activity: Visit Your Group Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use. __,_._,___

1 0

Fwd: [wvec-board] Officials Seek Stronger Drilling Rules
by James Kotcon 14 Nov '10

14 Nov '10

See attached news item from Don Garvin regarding legislation. Now is a good time for some letters to the editor saying that these rules are very reasonable and are easily achievable by the industry, but that they will of course claim that the sky is falling and that this is the end of their industry. JBK

1 0

coal to gas news
by Jim Sconyers 14 Nov '10

14 Nov '10

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Vivian Stockman <vivian(a)ohvec.org> To: fom(a)lists.riseup.net Sent: Sun, November 14, 2010 5:38:11 AM Subject: Developments casts doubt on Baard project Developments casts doubt on Baard project

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC November 2010