EC March 2010

ec@lists.wvsierraclub.org

12 participants
36 discussions

Fwd: Amazing op-ed: "From coal to clean energy: an Iraq war veteran's next fight"
by Paul Wilson 09 Mar '10

09 Mar '10

you guys seen this? Any chance we can get permission to reprint it somewhere? paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- I have to pass along this amazing op-ed in the Christian Science Monitor by a WV veteran - connects the dots between climate, mountaintop removal, and national security better than anything else I have seen. Extremely compelling. Mary Anne --- * ** http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2010/0301/From-coal-to-clean-en… *<http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2010/0301/From-coal-to-clean-en…> Christian Science Monitor * >From coal to clean energy: an Iraq war veteran's next fight* Coal mining is scarring West Virginia. Climate change is intensifying the national security threat. One Iraq war vet explains why US energy policy must change. ------------------------------ By *Jon Gensler*<http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/print/About/Contact-Us-Feedback> posted March 1, 2010 at 10:49 am EST Cambridge, Mass. — As a captain in the Army, I was used to seeing the blasted, wasted landscapes of unfamiliar countries. From the window of a plane or the door of a helicopter, they were a familiar sight, the last high-level view before descending into a nasty fight. I expected such images of destruction in Iraq and Afghanistan. But not in West Virginia. Yet the ugly reality of mountaintop removal coal mining is what greeted me on my return home after a year-long tour in Iraq. Seeing the land I fought to protect being abused in such reckless fashion hit me in the gut, hard. It took years to recover my motivation to continue to fight for what I believe in back home. Appalachian families are facing serious decisions about their future, and these decisions are intimately linked with America’s future. Our energy policy is limiting our global competitiveness, hurting our national security, and destroying our heritage of wild, natural beauty. We need comprehensive energy and climate legislation to ensure our way of life this century. These national priorities are acute in my home state. Demand for southern West Virginian coal is expected to drop by half over the next decade, yet our political and business leadership refuse to take a serious look at how we can replace the jobs that will be lost. To maintain a relevant position in the energy economy, West Virginia must look beyond our short horizon of trying to fill up the next train load, and think about what will happen if we don’t push harder for economic diversification. The 30-plus years of decline we have experienced will merely accelerate. As the world moves on to cleaner energy sources, we will be left behind with a wounded land, a wounded people, and wounded pride, battle scars from a lost war. I came home to an America full of cars with “Support our Troops” bumper stickers. Real support would entail sacrifices, because so long as we’re addicted to foreign fossil fuels, our soldiers will be called on to safeguard supply routes. Additionally, the oil money we send to foreign dictators every day is directly funding the terrorists we are fighting against. All of this means more brave men and women losing life and limb overseas. Climate change is intensifying the national security threat. The Central Intelligence Agency and the Defense and State Departments agree that climate change presents risks that must be dealt with. The Pentagon’s just-released Quadrennial Defense Review for the first time ever recognizes climate change for the destabilizing force that it is. With increased droughts, famines, and migrations, we should remember that it is our soldiers who will be called upon to help these people in their need, and to respond with force to the terrorist havens that often arise in the wake of failed states. The burden will fall on America – and disproportionately on West Virginia. This fight is not new. It has raged through our mountains for decades. In the Mine Wars of the early 20th century, workers organized and took a stand against the coal companies whose only goal was to expand their bottom lines at the expense of the people of our state. Hundreds of miners, soldiers, and corporate thugs lost their lives in a struggle over a worker’s right to an honest day’s wage for an honest day’s labor. Today’s fight is similar: King Coal would have us believe that as coal goes, so goes West Virginia; that our worth as a people is to be measured by what we can rip from the ground and sell to the highest bidder; that we are indeed a 21st-century Company State, bought and paid for with our destroyed heritage. This is wrong. Setting the right course is worth fighting for. We need a price on carbon to eliminate the financial uncertainty that is preventing investment in clean-energy technologies. Such investments are crucial to drive future growth in today’s fledgling industries. Additionally, we should call for an aggressive national renewable portfolio standard to create demand in the short term, which is the best option to drive down energy costs for consumers. Now is the time to honor the sacrifices of our miner heritage. We are at a tremendous crossroads, and taking these steps is the right thing to do to honor our past, and the right thing to do for tomorrow. Let’s work for a better future that gives West Virginians – and all Americans – the freedom to thrive in a new energy economy rather than slowly dying with the old. I believe in you, West Virginia. Strap on your boots and fight with me. * * * Jon Gensler, a former Army captain who served in the Iraq war, is studying for master’s degrees at Harvard Kennedy School and MIT Sloan School of Management.* -- Mary Anne Hitt Deputy Director, Beyond Coal Campaign Sierra Club 304-876-7064 (w) 540-239-0073 (c)* **maryanne.hitt(a)sierraclub.org* <maryanne.hitt(a)sierraclub.org>* **www.sierraclub.org/coal* <http://www.sierraclub.org/coal> -- 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

Fwd: Fw: Upcoming Webinars from Concrete Products University - Potential Impacts of Fly Ash Regulation (this Wednesday), Changes to ASTM, & Energy-Efficiency as a Selling Point for Concrete Masonry
by Paul Wilson 08 Mar '10

08 Mar '10

fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: lynn welsh <welsharch(a)yahoo.com> Date: Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 1:05 PM Subject: Fw: Upcoming Webinars from Concrete Products University - Potential Impacts of Fly Ash Regulation (this Wednesday), Changes to ASTM, & Energy-Efficiency as a Selling Point for Concrete Masonry To: Paul Wilson <pjgrunt(a)gmail.com> HI Paul, I got this for continuing education, but I thought you or somebody from Sierra Club might be interested to participate & see what the coal people are saying about flyash legislation. Lynn --- On *Mon, 3/8/10, National Concrete Masonry Association <info(a)ncma.org>*wrote: From: National Concrete Masonry Association <info(a)ncma.org> Subject: Upcoming Webinars from Concrete Products University - Potential Impacts of Fly Ash Regulation (this Wednesday), Changes to ASTM, & Energy-Efficiency as a Selling Point for Concrete Masonry To: welsharch(a)yahoo.com Date: Monday, March 8, 2010, 11:10 AM To view this email as a web page, go here.<http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe4d1d7174630c7a7d1d&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…> *Dear Rosalind,* *As a reminder, the Concrete Products UniversitySM (CPUSM) webinar on the Potential Impacts of Fly Ash Regulation on the Concrete Products Industry<http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe551d7174630c7a7c14&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…> is this Wednesday! ** You can register for any CPU Webinar at: https://ncmameetings.webex.com<http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe541d7174630c7a7c15&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…> * ** *This week's webinar is:* *Potential Impacts of Fly Ash Regulation on the Concrete Products Industry<http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe531d7174630c7a7c16&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…> * *Wednesday, 10 March 2010 ** 1:00 - 4:00 PM Eastern Time** ** Description: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is developing proposed regulations that will address the management of coal combustion byproducts (CCBs). The scope of those regulations will likely have a significant impact on the concrete masonry and hardscape industry, because fly ash is the CCB with the greatest utilization rate and is used primarily in concrete to enhance its strength and resistance to the elements. Last year the U.S. produced about 70 million tons of fly ash, of which nearly 45 percent was recycled. The regulation of CCBs as hazardous waste would have a devastating impact on the continued use of CCBs, threatening an environmentally protective and valuable industry. Please join us for this timely, relevant, and informative session led by Jim Roewer (Edison Electric Institute), who heads the Coal Combustion Byproducts Coalition, of which NCMA is a member. The first two hours of this webinar will consist of the presentation, followed by up to one hour of an interactive Q&A session. Instructor: Jim Roewer, Edison Electric Institute & Coal Combustion Byproducts Coalition Registration Fee: $150 per nonmember login / $75 per NCMA Member login (NCMA Members, email me at drozsa(a)ncma.org<http://us.mc522.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=drozsa@ncma.org>to get your Member discount coupon code). * ***Register by clicking on the following link: * https://ncmameetings.webex.com/ncmameetings/k2/j.php?ED=118996447&UID=10602…<http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe521d7174630c7a7c17&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…> ** *Once you register, you will receive a confirmation email with instructions for joining the webinar. * ** *Upcoming CPU Webinars* *1) **Changes to ASTM and How They Impact Your Business <http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe511d7174630c7a7c10&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…>- Wednesday, 24 March 2010, 1:00 - 3:00 PM Eastern Time - $150 nonmembers / $75 NCMA Members. ASTM standards are used for specifying concrete products, providing standard test procedures, and guidelines on use. The standards are constantly being updated and improved, and it is important to understand recent changes and how they may affect the requirements for concrete products and how they are tested. This webinar will cover significant changes to ASTM standards for concrete masonry and hardscape products over the past two years. The first hour of this webinar will consist of the presentation, followed by up to one hour of an interactive Q&A session. Register by clicking on this sentence<http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe501d7174630c7a7c11&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…> .* *2) Is Energy Efficiency a Selling Point for Concrete Masonry? <http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe4f1d7174630c7a7c12&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…>- Wednesday, 7 April 2010, 1:00 - 3:00 PM Eastern Time - $150 nonmembers / $75 NCMA Members. The sustainability movement is fully upon us, and the economic climate is causing building owners and design professionals to look for ways to minimize operational costs. Join us for this webinar and learn how concrete masonry can meet evolving energy-efficiency design requirements. The first hour of this webinar will consist of the presentation, followed by up to one hour of an interactive Q&A session. Register by clicking on this sentence<http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe4e1d7174630c7a7c13&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…> .* * **For more information about these webinars or other NCMA educational programs, please email me at **drozsa(a)ncma.org*<http://us.mc522.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=drozsa@ncma.org> *.* * * Sincerely, J. David M. Rozsa, CAE, ACA Manager of Education and Certification National Concrete Masonry Association drozsa(a)ncma.org<http://us.mc522.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=drozsa@ncma.org> 13750 Sunrise Valley Drive Herndon, Virginia 20171 703-713-1900 (Telephone) 703-713-1910 (FAX) "Concrete Products University," "CPU," "Certified Consultant of Concrete Masonry," "C3M," the C3M logo, and the Concrete Products University logo are trademarks or service marks of the National Concrete Masonry Association. All rights reserved. This email was sent to: *welsharch(a)yahoo.com* This email was sent by: National Concrete Masonry Association 13750 Sunrise Valley Drive Herndon, VA 20171-4662 USA We respect your right to privacy - view our policy<http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe4d1d7174630c7a7c1c&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…> <http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe4c1d7174630c7a7c1d&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…> Manage Subscriptions<http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe5d1d7174630c757514&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…>| Update Profile<http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe5c1d7174630c757515&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…>| One-Click Unsubscribe<http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe5b1d7174630c757516&ls=fdf8107677620478761c7276&m=f…> -- 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

The Globe is Warming
by Duane330＠aol.com 07 Mar '10

07 Mar '10

Proof of Man-Made Global Warming Grows 'Stronger' LONDON (March 5) -- Climate scientists have hit back at skeptics with the publication of a new paper that says the case for man-made global warming is now "stronger than ever." An international team of scientists led by Britain's Met Office -- the country's national weather service -- has spent the past year reviewing 110 studies published since 2007 that tracked changes in the earth's climate. Their paper, _published in the journal Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change_ (http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123310513/abstract) , concluded that the possibility the world is warming because of natural variations in climate (such as increased volcanic or solar activity) is "increasingly remote." Instead, they firmly pin the blame on man's burning of fossil fuels. "The science reveals a consistent picture of global change that clearly bears the fingerprint of man-made greenhouse gas emissions," said Peter Stott, head of climate monitoring at the Met Office Hadley Centre for climate research. "Our climate is changing now, and it's very likely human activity is to blame." Public confidence in climate science has been knocked by a succession of scandals over the past six months. Revelations that the 2007 report from the _U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change_ (http://www.aolnews.com/science/article/un-admits-error-in-overstating-himal…) contained several unverifiable claims, and that the influential climate unit at the University of East Anglia apparently withheld data from skeptics, have led many people to doubt the theory of man-made climate change. Stott says the new Met Office report isn't an attempt to counter this growing wave of skepticism, as the team started work a year ago, long before those so-called Climategate scandals broke. But it is an unashamed attempt to refocus the public debate on the actual science of climate change, rather than claims made about individual scientists in the media. "I hope people will look at that evidence and make up their minds informed by the scientific evidence," _he told the Guardian_ (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/05/met-office-analysis-clima…) . His team put together the new set of evidence by comparing computer models of possible causes of climate change, both human and natural, to actual measured changes in air and sea temperature, Arctic sea ice cover, global rainfall patterns and other factors. This forensic technique, known as "optimal detection," reveals how much an observation can be explained by natural changes, such as volcanoes or El Niño, and how much it's attributable to atmospheric increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The study found that the climate system had changed in ways that closely followed the pattern of man-made climate change predicted by computer models. Human activity, it states, is almost certainly the only explanation for climatic variations recorded across the world -- such as the increase of rain in the northern countries and the decrease in the south, or the retreat of Arctic sea ice. Stott dismissed a popular idea put forward by many skeptics that changes in the solar radiation (or "global brightening") could be behind the shifts. "There hasn't been an increase in solar output for the last 50 years," he said, "and solar output would not have caused cooling of the higher atmosphere and the warming of the lower atmosphere that we have seen." _http://www.aolnews.com/world/article/evidence-of-man-made-global-warming-gr ows-stronger/19384663?icid=main|htmlws-main-n|dl2|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aol news.com%2Fworld%2Farticle%2Fevidence-of-man-made-global-warming-grows-stron ger%2F19384663_ (http://www.aolnews.com/world/article/evidence-of-man-made-global-warming-gr… ://www.aolnews.com/world/article/evidence-of-man-made-global-warming-grows-s tronger/19384663)

1 0

Re: [EC] Net Metering- WV PSC proposes new rules- DEADLINE FORPUBLIC COMMENTS
by John Christensen 07 Mar '10

07 Mar '10

attached is my fact sheet on our net metering bill which failed to be taken up in house judic this year John Christensen WV Environmental Council Lobby Team Member 410-499-4873 cell www.wvecouncil.org ----- Original Message ----- From: kevin fooce To: jbc329(a)earthlink.net;Frank Young;ec@osenergy.org;wvec-board@yahoogroups.com;matt@getpimby.com;Jonathon Rosenbaum;allantweddle@msn.com;wyro@appalight.com;info@westvirginiasolar.com;grabiner1@aol.com;deniseap@earthlink.net;Donald Garvin;Jim Kotcon;jatkins@opd.state.md.us;alexanderlaw@lawyer.com;blackb23@gmail.com;pjgrunt@lycos.com;garyz@wvcag.org;robin@wvcag.org;Bill DePaulo Sent: 3/5/2010 10:50:17 PM Subject: RE: [EC] Net Metering- WV PSC proposes new rules- DEADLINE FORPUBLIC COMMENTS Increase the 1% limit Increase the size of residential units Automatic transfer of permit Allow more small systems over larger systems one 1 megawatt system makes forty 25 kilowatt systems which may limit the amount of customers, reliability of grid, and also allows for a increase waste energy through line losses. Am I correct in the reading that the utilities will pay for excess en energy at the avoided cost at the end of the yearly period? Just a few thoughts but looks like a good bill otherwise. We do need to make our thoughts known. Kevin Fooce fooce(a)hotmail.com 304-675-6687 EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD Join me From: jbc329(a)earthlink.net To: fyoung(a)mountain.net; ec(a)osenergy.org; wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com; matt(a)getpimby.com; freesource(a)cheat.org; allantweddle(a)msn.com; wyro(a)appalight.com; info(a)westvirginiasolar.com; grabiner1(a)aol.com; deniseap(a)earthlink.net; dsgjr(a)aol.com; fyoung(a)mountain.net; jkotcon(a)wvu.edu; JAtkins(a)opd.state.md.us; alexanderlaw(a)lawyer.com; blackb23(a)gmail.com; pjgrunt(a)lycos.com; garyz(a)wvcag.org; robin(a)wvcag.org; william.depaulo(a)gmail.com Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 14:59:18 -0500 Subject: Re: [EC] Net Metering- WV PSC proposes new rules- DEADLINE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS I suspect the reason that net metering rules have not been addressed by the power companies is the high probability that these rules were written by them in the first place. When I approached the power company lobbyists about working together on a net metering bill a week or so ago they never even mentioned the comment period going on here. JB John Christensen WV Environmental Council Lobby Team Member 410-499-4873 cell www.wvecouncil.org ----- Original Message ----- From: Frank Young To: ec@osenergy.org;wvec-board@yahoogroups.com;Matt Sherald;Jonathon Rosenbaum;Allan Tweddle;Chuck Wyrostok;Dan Bowes;Dana Grabiner;Denise Poole;Don Garvin;Frank Young;Jim Kotcon;Joseph Atkins;Matthew Alexander;Michael Blackburn;Paul Wilson;Gary Zuckett;Robin Wilson;John Christensen;Bill DePaulo Sent: 3/4/2010 1:46:39 PM Subject: Net Metering- WV PSC proposes new rules- DEADLINE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS I learned only today that in early February the WV Public Service Commission opened a new proceeding related to the adoption of proposed new rules for Net Metering and Interconnection for Distributed Generation. This is a very important matter for those of US who are interested in "net metering" issues in West Virginia. I have not yet read the Commission's proposed new rules. The order which includes the proposed new rules is available at: http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityI…'WebDocket' Procedurally, almost nothing has happened on this case since it was opened a month ago. No public comments have been submitted- not even from the power companies. Public comments will be accepted until April 4th. Then, reply comments will be accepted until May 5th. When the Commission first developed Net Metering rules in 2006, the PSC's staff went to great effort to bring the various interveners together to a "compromise" set of rules- and which the Commission adopted without change. I believe that could well happen again- IF the parties are amenable to this process. So far this is not a proceeding involving formal "interveners". It is a "public comment" type case in which the Commission would presumably weigh the public comments before issuing a final set of rules in this matter. But if there are sufficient requests, the Commission could (but would not have to) re-group and have a more formal proceeding with actual intervening parties. This might or might not be in the best interest of our respective interests in this case / proceeding. One advantage to this NOT being a case with formal interveners is that groups like WV Environmental Council and WV Citizen Action would need not have an attorney to participate as they would if this became a more formal case with legally recognized interveners. Anyway, I wanted to let you know what is happening on this, and we can go from here. I realize that several of you who may be interested in this are currently busy with legislative work. But that should be mostly over by mid-March. Too, since this proceeding was instituted in the midst of the regular legislative session, I suspect that the Commission might honor requests to extend the public comment period. But until we have read the proposed new Net Metering rules, it is probably premature to request the Commission to change the procedural schedule for this matter. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: Ellars, Jim To: 'fyoung(a)mountain.net' Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 8:57 AM Subject: Net Metering and Interconnection for Distributed Generation Mr. Young, I am contacting you because I know you were an intervener in the Commission's last case in 2006 regarding net metering and interconnection rules. In case you didn't know, the Commission initiated a proceeding on 2/2/10 (General Order 258) which is a rulemaking proceeding which includes net metering and interconnection issues. The Commission published proposed rules in its Order, and comments to those rules are due to be filed no later than 4/4/10. I know there are many folks in WV who are very interested in the state's rules regarding net metering and interconnection, so if you know of any parties who may want to file comments and/or participate in this proceeding please pass the word. We have about a month left before comments are due. I would be happy to discuss this with you if you have any questions. Feel free to call me at the number below. Jim James W. Ellars, P.E. Senior Engineer Public Service Commission of West Virginia 304-340-0331 jellars(a)psc.state.wv.us

2 1

Re: [EC] Net Metering- WV PSC proposes new rules- DEADLINE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS
by John Christensen 05 Mar '10

05 Mar '10

I suspect the reason that net metering rules have not been addressed by the power companies is the high probability that these rules were written by them in the first place. When I approached the power company lobbyists about working together on a net metering bill a week or so ago they never even mentioned the comment period going on here. JB John Christensen WV Environmental Council Lobby Team Member 410-499-4873 cell www.wvecouncil.org ----- Original Message ----- From: Frank Young To: ec@osenergy.org;wvec-board@yahoogroups.com;Matt Sherald;Jonathon Rosenbaum;Allan Tweddle;Chuck Wyrostok;Dan Bowes;Dana Grabiner;Denise Poole;Don Garvin;Frank Young;Jim Kotcon;Joseph Atkins;Matthew Alexander;Michael Blackburn;Paul Wilson;Gary Zuckett;Robin Wilson;John Christensen;Bill DePaulo Sent: 3/4/2010 1:46:39 PM Subject: Net Metering- WV PSC proposes new rules- DEADLINE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS I learned only today that in early February the WV Public Service Commission opened a new proceeding related to the adoption of proposed new rules for Net Metering and Interconnection for Distributed Generation. This is a very important matter for those of US who are interested in "net metering" issues in West Virginia. I have not yet read the Commission's proposed new rules. The order which includes the proposed new rules is available at: http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityI…'WebDocket' Procedurally, almost nothing has happened on this case since it was opened a month ago. No public comments have been submitted- not even from the power companies. Public comments will be accepted until April 4th. Then, reply comments will be accepted until May 5th. When the Commission first developed Net Metering rules in 2006, the PSC's staff went to great effort to bring the various interveners together to a "compromise" set of rules- and which the Commission adopted without change. I believe that could well happen again- IF the parties are amenable to this process. So far this is not a proceeding involving formal "interveners". It is a "public comment" type case in which the Commission would presumably weigh the public comments before issuing a final set of rules in this matter. But if there are sufficient requests, the Commission could (but would not have to) re-group and have a more formal proceeding with actual intervening parties. This might or might not be in the best interest of our respective interests in this case / proceeding. One advantage to this NOT being a case with formal interveners is that groups like WV Environmental Council and WV Citizen Action would need not have an attorney to participate as they would if this became a more formal case with legally recognized interveners. Anyway, I wanted to let you know what is happening on this, and we can go from here. I realize that several of you who may be interested in this are currently busy with legislative work. But that should be mostly over by mid-March. Too, since this proceeding was instituted in the midst of the regular legislative session, I suspect that the Commission might honor requests to extend the public comment period. But until we have read the proposed new Net Metering rules, it is probably premature to request the Commission to change the procedural schedule for this matter. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: Ellars, Jim To: 'fyoung(a)mountain.net' Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 8:57 AM Subject: Net Metering and Interconnection for Distributed Generation Mr. Young, I am contacting you because I know you were an intervener in the Commission's last case in 2006 regarding net metering and interconnection rules. In case you didn't know, the Commission initiated a proceeding on 2/2/10 (General Order 258) which is a rulemaking proceeding which includes net metering and interconnection issues. The Commission published proposed rules in its Order, and comments to those rules are due to be filed no later than 4/4/10. I know there are many folks in WV who are very interested in the state's rules regarding net metering and interconnection, so if you know of any parties who may want to file comments and/or participate in this proceeding please pass the word. We have about a month left before comments are due. I would be happy to discuss this with you if you have any questions. Feel free to call me at the number below. Jim James W. Ellars, P.E. Senior Engineer Public Service Commission of West Virginia 304-340-0331 jellars(a)psc.state.wv.us

2 1

Fw: MTR and Avatar
by Jim Sconyers 04 Mar '10

04 Mar '10

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. --- On Thu, 3/4/10, Aaron Isherwood <aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org> wrote: From: Aaron Isherwood <aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org> Subject: MTR and Avatar To: "Jim Sconyers" <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com>, "Regina Hendrix" <reginahendrix999(a)gmail.com>, "William DePaulo" <william.depaulo(a)gmail.com>, "Axel C Ringe" <onyxfarm(a)bellsouth.net>, "Gary Bowers" <gb1nature(a)aol.com>, "Gloria Griffith" <gla4797(a)embarqmail.com>, "Katherine Pendleton" <Katibug1959(a)aol.com>, "Mary Mastin" <marymastin(a)twlakes.net> Date: Thursday, March 4, 2010, 12:31 PM A new Sierra Club ad: Aaron Isherwood Senior Staff Attorney Sierra Club Environmental Law Program 85 Second Street, 2d Floor San Francisco, CA 94105-3441 Phone: (415) 977-5680 Fax: (415) 977-5793 CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL COMMUNICATION/WORK PRODUCT This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential attorney-client communications and/or attorney work product. If you receive this e-mail inadvertently, please reply to the sender and delete all versions on your system. Thank you.

1 0

Net Metering- WV PSC proposes new rules- DEADLINE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS
by Frank Young 04 Mar '10

04 Mar '10

Friends, I learned only today that in early February the WV Public Service Commission opened a new proceeding related to the adoption of proposed new rules for Net Metering and Interconnection for Distributed Generation. This is a very important matter for those of us who are interested in "net metering" issues in West Virginia. I have not yet read the Commission's proposed new rules. The order which includes the proposed new rules is available at: http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityI…'WebDocket' Procedurally, almost nothing has happened on this case since it was opened a month ago. No public comments have been submitted- not even from the power companies. Public comments will be accepted until April 4th. Then, reply comments will be accepted until May 5th. Comments submitted must include reference to Case Number GO258. When the Commission first developed Net Metering rules in 2006, the PSC's staff went to great effort to bring the various interveners together to a "compromise" set of rules- and which the Commission adopted without change. I believe that could well happen again- IF the parties are amenable to this process. So far this is not a proceeding involving formal "interveners". It is a "public comment" type case in which the Commission would presumably weigh the public comments before issuing a final set of rules in this matter. But if there are sufficient requests, the Commission could (but would not have to) re-group and have a more formal proceeding with actual intervening parties. This might or might not be in the best interest of our respective interests in this case / proceeding. One advantage to this NOT being a case with formal interveners is that groups like WV Environmental Council and WV Citizen Action would need not have an attorney to participate as they would if this became a more formal case with legally recognized interveners. Anyway, I wanted to let you know what is happening on this, and we can go from here. I realize that several of you who may be interested in this are currently busy with legislative work. But that should be mostly over by mid-March. Too, since this proceeding was instituted in the midst of the regular legislative session, I suspect that the Commission might honor requests to extend the public comment period. But until we have read the proposed new Net Metering rules, it is probably premature to request the Commission to change the procedural schedule for this matter. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: Ellars, Jim To: 'fyoung(a)mountain.net' Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 8:57 AM Subject: Net Metering and Interconnection for Distributed Generation Mr. Young, I am contacting you because I know you were an intervener in the Commission's last case in 2006 regarding net metering and interconnection rules. In case you didn't know, the Commission initiated a proceeding on 2/2/10 (General Order 258) which is a rulemaking proceeding which includes net metering and interconnection issues. The Commission published proposed rules in its Order, and comments to those rules are due to be filed no later than 4/4/10. I know there are many folks in WV who are very interested in the state's rules regarding net metering and interconnection, so if you know of any parties who may want to file comments and/or participate in this proceeding please pass the word. We have about a month left before comments are due. I would be happy to discuss this with you if you have any questions. Feel free to call me at the number below. Jim James W. Ellars, P.E. Senior Engineer Public Service Commission of West Virginia 304-340-0331 jellars(a)psc.state.wv.us

1 0

Net Metering- WV PSC proposes new rules- DEADLINE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS
by Frank Young 04 Mar '10

04 Mar '10

I learned only today that in early February the WV Public Service Commission opened a new proceeding related to the adoption of proposed new rules for Net Metering and Interconnection for Distributed Generation. This is a very important matter for those of US who are interested in "net metering" issues in West Virginia. I have not yet read the Commission's proposed new rules. The order which includes the proposed new rules is available at: http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityI…'WebDocket' Procedurally, almost nothing has happened on this case since it was opened a month ago. No public comments have been submitted- not even from the power companies. Public comments will be accepted until April 4th. Then, reply comments will be accepted until May 5th. When the Commission first developed Net Metering rules in 2006, the PSC's staff went to great effort to bring the various interveners together to a "compromise" set of rules- and which the Commission adopted without change. I believe that could well happen again- IF the parties are amenable to this process. So far this is not a proceeding involving formal "interveners". It is a "public comment" type case in which the Commission would presumably weigh the public comments before issuing a final set of rules in this matter. But if there are sufficient requests, the Commission could (but would not have to) re-group and have a more formal proceeding with actual intervening parties. This might or might not be in the best interest of our respective interests in this case / proceeding. One advantage to this NOT being a case with formal interveners is that groups like WV Environmental Council and WV Citizen Action would need not have an attorney to participate as they would if this became a more formal case with legally recognized interveners. Anyway, I wanted to let you know what is happening on this, and we can go from here. I realize that several of you who may be interested in this are currently busy with legislative work. But that should be mostly over by mid-March. Too, since this proceeding was instituted in the midst of the regular legislative session, I suspect that the Commission might honor requests to extend the public comment period. But until we have read the proposed new Net Metering rules, it is probably premature to request the Commission to change the procedural schedule for this matter. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: Ellars, Jim To: 'fyoung(a)mountain.net' Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 8:57 AM Subject: Net Metering and Interconnection for Distributed Generation Mr. Young, I am contacting you because I know you were an intervener in the Commission's last case in 2006 regarding net metering and interconnection rules. In case you didn't know, the Commission initiated a proceeding on 2/2/10 (General Order 258) which is a rulemaking proceeding which includes net metering and interconnection issues. The Commission published proposed rules in its Order, and comments to those rules are due to be filed no later than 4/4/10. I know there are many folks in WV who are very interested in the state's rules regarding net metering and interconnection, so if you know of any parties who may want to file comments and/or participate in this proceeding please pass the word. We have about a month left before comments are due. I would be happy to discuss this with you if you have any questions. Feel free to call me at the number below. Jim James W. Ellars, P.E. Senior Engineer Public Service Commission of West Virginia 304-340-0331 jellars(a)psc.state.wv.us

1 0

Fw: [fom] WVDEP says EPA lies
by Frank Young 04 Mar '10

04 Mar '10

Anywhere else this would be amazingly unbelievable- that the Director of the state's primary environmental protection agency does not realize that water quality is affected by virtually everything that happens on and under the natural surfaces of the land- whether MTR mining, oil and gas well drilling, road construction, or other industrial activities. DEP Director Randy Huffman must have gotten his environmental degree through a Sears catalog, April fool's day edition. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: Vernon Haltom To: FOM, List Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 10:43 AM Subject: [fom] WVDEP says EPA lies Of course the WV DEP is left out. They're completely useless at best, corrupt at worst. http://www.register-herald.com/todaysfrontpage/x1765871159/DEP-secretary-te… March 3, 2010 DEP secretary tells senators EPA is ignoring state By Mannix Porterfield Register-Herald Reporter CHARLESTON — West Virginia’s environmental troubleshooter says the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is using the Clean Water Act to go after coal production and other industrial works. Environmental Protection Secretary Randy Huffman complained Wednesday that the EPA has moved the debate from mountaintop removal to clean water, a tactic that could affect all resource industries. “This debate is not any longer about mountaintop mining,” he told the Senate Energy, Industry and Mining Committee. “It’s about water quality. It does relate to surface mining, but it relates to underground mining, other types of mining and other types of industrial activity. The driver is water quality and it affects everything we do.” Huffman pointed out the EPA’s letter opposing the Buffalo Mining plan — one that affects the King Coal Highway — was sent on President Obama’s inauguration day of Jan. 20 of last year. Huffman said an EPA leader “told me with a straight face the timing was purely coincidental.” “I did not believe him,” he said, emphasizing the key role the mining permit plays as a connector between King Coal and Corridor G. “Losing that piece would be a significant loss to the state,” Huffman said. The letter detailed issues that had never been raised to the DEP, the secretary said. “But all of a sudden, it became a crisis as of Jan. 20, 2009,” he said. A year ago, mountaintop mining was the target, but that debate has since disappeared, he said. Rather, the focus is now on clean water, and in all the discussions that ensued, Huffman said, the DEP has been left out of the loop. “When they talked to us, they still have not asked for our opinion on how this water quality definition is to be formulated,” he said. “That’s troubling, but not surprising.” Consequently, he said, the “sudden change of direction” at the federal level has stalled a number of mining applications. While the state is being ignored in the process, Huffman said, legislators and others need to keep in mind that 80 percent of the permitting for every lump of coal is performed at the state level. What’s more, he said, even the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is being omitted from the process. Huffman pointed to the Spruce Knob permit approved in January 2007 as “the most scrutinized surface mining permit in Appalachian history.” Two years after the permit was approved, the EPA raised objections and has intentions of quashing it, he said. “In the 40-year history of the Clean Water Act, the EPA has only vetoed a dozen 404 (valley fill) permits nationwide,” Huffman said. “We have dozens of permits that are hanging under the threat of veto right now if significant changes are not made by the companies.” In four to six weeks, Huffman said he hopes the DEP can produce a narrative standard to comply with the federal law. “Our biggest mistake we have made and it’s the hook EPA has in our back as a state is we do not have a protocol for enforcing the narrative water quality standard,” he said. “We’re going to do that. I know enough about what the problem is, what the real impacts are.”— E-mail: mannix(a)register-herald.com -- Vernon Haltom Co-Director, Coal River Mountain Watch 304-854-2182 www.crmw.net For a Clean, Just, and Sustainable Appalachia

1 0

Fwd: USEPA Region 4 letter to GAEPD on supporting yardwaste bans
by James Kotcon 04 Mar '10

04 Mar '10

To: Energy Committee: I am circulating this in the hopes you will all be better informed and able to refute the landfill methane arguments. West Virginia has a "ban" on yard waste in landfills, but it is so littered with exemptions, extensions, and loopholes that there is no practical limit. Nevertheless, efforts by some garbage haulers to repeal similar bans are making their way around the various states. Haulers argue that the yard waste could turn the landfill into an energy source via methane. The attached EPA letter debunks that myth. As you may recall, the Club adopted policy changes last year to oppose landfill methane due to the high potential for methane leakage to the atmosphere. Landfills managed for methane production are kept in a wet anaerobic state to maximize methane production, rather than capped and sealed as a "dry cell". Thus, managing landfills for methane production actually can increase the atmospheric emissions of methane. JBK P.S. This letter suggests that 60-90 % of methane is captured from landfills, but the data from the Club policy statement suggests that as much as 80 % of the methane escapes into the atmosphere. Who is correct? >>> Mark Woodall markwoodall(a)windstream.net> 3/4/2010 8:54 AM >> ( mailto:markwoodall@windstream.net> ) Fredsters: As some of you probably know, the greedy scum garbage companies are working hard around the country to repeal the 23 state bans on putting yard trimmings in lined landfills. Yard trimmings in Georgia amount to some 1.5 million tons a year which is close to 25% of the waste stream by weight and 40% by volume. Repeal is being pushing by the garbage giants in Georgia, Florida, North Carolina, Michigan, and Iowa that I am aware of. In 2006, the garbage thugs said we needed repeal due to high gas prices. They have a new lie now: repeal is good for the environment as the waste added will make methane gas for green energy. As one of the industries getting the energy said, that's the stupidest thing we ever heard. Region 4 of the EPA has written a letter to refute the green scam of the repeal. Please find the letter attached. I also have a similar letter from Region 5 in Chicago. The new Sierra Club policy concerning landfill gas to energy may be helpful as well. Somone in Michigan wrote an article on the numbers of more waste and how little methane is produced years later. I can forward to anyone interested in that. In Georgia, we call HB 1059, the repeal bill, the more landfills and out of state waste for Georgia bill. More effective may be the job killer label as1059 will wipe out all the small business guys doing the grinding, composting, mulching, etc. Thanks, Mark Woodall markwoodall(a)windstream.net Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 3:27 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: USEPA Region 4 letter to GAEPD on supporting yardwaste bans Dear State Colleagues -- Attached is a letter that Alan Farmer, USEPA Region 4 RCRA Director, signed out last week in support of a request from Allen Barnes, GAEPD Director -- the letter provides an overview of EPA's policy as it relates to recycling over disposal for energy recovery and the Region's support for continuation of state yard waste bans. As this was sent out yesterday knowing is quickly making its way through the various networks and advocacy groups in the region, I wanted to make sure you had it in case the issue or questions arise that require your attention. I know this is also an issue in the Florida legislative session this year so I suspect there are interested parties that will likely contact FDEP for a similar response. It is a positive step overall -- is similar in many ways to an earlier letter from USEPA Region 5 (Chicago) to the State of Michigan. Please call me if you have any questions. Jay (See attached file: Ga Yardwaste Ban support Ltr -- farmer.PDF) Jay V. Bassett Chief, Materials Management USEPA Region 4 404.562.8559 (w) 404.754.8906 (m) bassett.jay(a)epa.gov ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To get off this list, send email to: LISTSERV(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Make the message text (not the Subject): SIGNOFF CONS-FRED

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC March 2010