EC October 2011

ec@lists.wvsierraclub.org

9 participants
22 discussions

Fwd: Solar Power 2011 - Solar PV Breaks Records in 2010
by Jim Sconyers 30 Oct '11

30 Oct '11

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Edward Mainland <emainland(a)comcast.net> Date: Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 6:28 PM Subject: Solar Power 2011 - Solar PV Breaks Records in 2010 To: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS(a)lists.sierraclub.org * Solar Power 2011 - Solar PV Breaks Records in 2010 * J. Matthew Roney *www.earth-policy.org/indicators/C47/solar_power_2011*<http://www.earth-policy.org/indicators/C47/solar_power_2011> Earth Policy Release Eco-Economy Indicator October 27, 2011 Solar photovoltaic (PV) companies manufactured a record 24,000 megawatts of PV cells worldwide in 2010, more than doubling their 2009 output. Annual PV production has grown nearly 100-fold since 2000, when just 277 megawatts of cells were made. Newly installed PV also set a record in 2010, as 16,600 megawatts were installed in more than 100 countries. This brought the total worldwide capacity of solar PV to nearly 40,000 megawatts—enough to power 14 million European homes. Made of semiconductor materials, PV cells convert solar radiation directly into electricity. Rectangular panels consisting of numerous PV cells can be linked into arrays of various sizes and power output capabilities—from rooftop systems measured in kilowatts to ground-mounted arrays of hundreds or even thousands of megawatts. (One megawatt equals 1,000 kilowatts.) There are two main types of PV—traditional crystalline silicon and newer thin-film PV. In 2010, crystalline silicon production was more than double the output of 2009, accounting for over 80 percent of all PV produced. While thin-film production did not keep pace, it still grew by more than 60 percent. First Solar, a U.S. firm, maintained its leadership role in thin-film production, accounting for over 40 percent of world output, most of it produced in Malaysia. Data provided to Earth Policy Institute by GTM Research show that Chinese manufacturers again dominated the global industry in 2010, with close to 11,000 megawatts of PV cell production. (See data at *www.earth-policy.org*<http://www.earth-policy.org/>.) This was the seventh consecutive year in which China at least doubled its PV output. Taiwan was a distant second with 3,600 megawatts produced, followed by Japan with 2,200 megawatts, Germany with 2,000 megawatts, and the United States with 1,100. The top five countries thus accounted for 82 percent of total world PV production. While Germany ranks fourth in solar cell manufacturing, it towers above all other countries in terms of actual electricity generation from solar panels. Germany has widened its lead in this category each year since overtaking Japan in 2004 and, after adding 7,400 megawatts in 2010, now boasts 17,200 megawatts of installed PV. This is more than 40 percent of global capacity and over four times the 3,800 megawatts in Spain, the number two country. PV in Germany now generates enough electricity to meet the power demand of some 3.4 million German homes. Japan installed close to 1,000 megawatts of new PV capacity in 2010. It is the third-ranked country in installed PV, with a total of 3,600 megawatts. As solar adoption accelerates in Japan, its national target of 28,000 megawatts by 2020 may be easily surpassed, especially as the country weighs energy alternatives following the March 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster. By nearly doubling its total PV power capacity in 2010, Italy vaulted past the United States to claim the fourth position in the world solar rankings, with 3,500 megawatts. With an expected 8,000 megawatts of new PV in 2011, likely overtaking Germany in new installations, Italy will have already exceeded its official 2020 goal of 8,000 megawatts. Enel, Italy's leading utility, sees the country reaching 30,000 megawatts by 2020—enough to satisfy half of its current residential electricity needs. PV capacity in the United States also saw strong growth in 2010, increasing by more than 50 percent to reach 2,500 total megawatts. California, which now has more than 1,000 megawatts connected to the grid, again led all states in new PV installations. But a number of other states, including New Jersey, Nevada, and Arizona, are ramping up their solar capacity as well, driven by programs and incentives at the state and federal levels. Until very recently, China's status as PV manufacturing powerhouse had not translated into much solar generation at home, as panels were seen as too expensive in the domestic market. While the vast majority of Chinese-made PV is sent abroad, a growing government commitment to increasing solar power as part of the energy mix is now catalyzing substantial PV capacity gains. Total installed PV in China grew 140 percent to nearly 900 megawatts in 2010. This was the first full year for the national Golden Sun program, which covers half the investment and grid connection costs of a solar project. It is expected to result in at least 1,000 megawatts of new installations each year after 2012. Furthermore, in August 2011 China's main economic planning agency announced it was implementing a national PV feed-in tariff. This policy tool, now used by more than 60 countries, is behind most of the PV already installed worldwide. A feed-in tariff typically guarantees generators of renewable electricity a long-term purchase price for each kilowatt-hour they produce and "feed into" the grid, providing a powerful incentive for installing such systems. Together the Golden Sun program and the new feed-in tariff are likely to push China's PV capacity to at least double again in 2011—and may help explain why the country's solar power targets for 2015 and 2020 have reportedly risen to 10,000 and 50,000 megawatts, respectively. Although the cost of PV has fallen substantially over the decades, solar-generated electricity is not yet widely price-competitive with electricity generated by heavily subsidized fossil fuels. If the full cost of burning fossil fuels, including health effects and the costs of climate change, were incorporated into the price of electricity, PV would quickly be revealed as one of the least expensive sources of power. As system costs continue to drop, the PV landscape is evolving to include not only traditional small-scale PV installations but also utility-scale parks of tens, hundreds, or even thousands of megawatts. An 80-megawatt PV park completed in Canada in 2010 was the world's largest until September 2011, when a newly-expanded PV complex of close to 150 megawatts in northeastern Germany claimed the title. As of late 2011, the United States had 48 PV projects of 100 megawatts or more in the pipeline, including a 5,000-megawatt park to be sited on degraded farmland in California's San Joaquin Valley. At peak generation, this solar facility's electricity output would rival that of five large nuclear power plants. Multi-megawatt projects are also under development in India as part of the National Solar Mission that was announced in late 2009. Though the country had just 100 megawatts of installed PV capacity at the end of 2010, the goal is for some 22,000 megawatts of solar power—half PV and half concentrating solar power—to be installed by 2022. The western state of Gujarat alone plans to have 3,000 megawatts installed by 2015. Part of the National Solar Mission's PV expansion is destined for rural areas where millions lack access to electricity. As is the case in many other developing countries, there is vast potential in India for PV to provide power in places without an electric grid. Installing small solar systems on homes is often much less expensive than building a central power plant, with the added benefit of greatly reducing indoor air pollution from kerosene lamps. Industry analysts forecast that some 21,000 megawatts of PV will be installed globally in 2011. This would be a marked slowdown from the doubling of the market in 2010, but the pool of countries with rising demand for PV still continues to grow. New markets such as Slovakia and the United Kingdom are among the 20 countries expected to add 100 megawatts or more in 2011, up from 13 countries in 2010. As PV costs drop, as concerns about climate change grow, and as countries look to replace finite fossil fuels with energy sources that can never run out, the growth in solar power should continue. The potential is practically without limit: a *2011 article published in **Energy Policy*<http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/JDEnPolicyPt1.pdf>shows that solar PV deployed in suitable locations could generate 30 times the electricity currently produced worldwide. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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 -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

Fwd: Economists estimate comprehensive cost of greenhouse gas emissions
by Paul Wilson 30 Oct '11

30 Oct '11

Below is a link to the PDF report (30 pages) on the cost of carbon. Looks useful...... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Tim Guilfoile <tim.guilfoile(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 12:54 PM Subject: Economists estimate comprehensive cost of greenhouse gas emissions To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)lists.sierraclub.org [image: image.png] http://www.e3network.org/papers/Climate_Risks_and_Carbon_Prices_executive_s… -- Tim Guilfoile Deputy Director Sierra Club Water Sentinels 3078 Elmwood Dr. Edgewood, KY 41017 (859) 426-1978 tim.guilfoile(a)sierraclub.org ><(((*>~~><(((*> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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 -- 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

Watch live symposium webcast
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 28 Oct '11

28 Oct '11

If you can't get to the symposium in person, you can watch it via webcast: http://energy.law.wvu.edu/events/drilling_down/webcast -Jonathan

1 0

Wheeling Intelligencer supports Senate Ash Bill
by James Kotcon 27 Oct '11

27 Oct '11

EDITORIAL: Push Hard on Coal Ash Bill in Senate October 27, 2011 By The Intelligencer , The Intelligencer / Wheeling News-Register Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid probably will view a newly introduced bill as one more opportunity to stymie conservatives. Reid, D-Nev., probably hopes the Democrat Party discipline on which he usually is able to count will stop the bill. But the measure - the Senate version of a bill passed overwhelmingly by the House of Representatives - is too important to be viewed as a matter of Democrats vs. Republicans. Sens. Joe Manchin and Jay Rockefeller, both D-W.Va., view it that way. They understand the bill, introduced in the House by Rep. David McKinley, R-W.Va., is necessary to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from killing more jobs and driving up electricity prices even more. McKinley's bill calls for reasonable regulations on coal ash created at many power plants. The EPA wants much harsher new rules. Three other Democrat senators joined Manchin and Rockefeller in sponsoring the Senate version of the bill. Both Mountain State lawmakers view it as a bipartisan effort. Still, they will have to work hard to overcome opposition almost certain to come from Reid and liberals in the Senate. We urge them to make the bill a top priority so it passes with a majority strong enough to overcome the veto President Barack Obama has threatened.

2 1

Fwd: Got Kids? Grandkids? Listen up!
by James Kotcon 26 Oct '11

26 Oct '11

Perhaps this could be used for letters to McKinley, Manchin, etc. on the coal ash bill. Go through a half dozen EPA rules like the ash rule, the power plant mercury rule, etc., and come up with the employment estimates in the Federal Register notices. Then do an op/ed on "Jobs McKinley is trying to Kill" Whaddya Tink? JBK >>> Betty Wiley <betty.w304(a)gmail.com> 10/23/2011 9:17 PM >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Robert Donnan <redchief7(a)verizon.net> Date: Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 7:56 AM Subject: Got Kids? Grandkids? Listen up! To: Robert Donnan <redchief7(a)verizon.net> ** These critical issues probably affect our Pittsburgh region more than any other area in the United States. It's hard to believe that anyone would consider unraveling all the progress we have made over the past 40 years. Bob latimes.com Op-Ed 'Too dirty to fail'? House Republicans' assault on our environmental laws must be stopped. By Lisa P. Jackson Administrator of the U.S. EPA October 21, 2011 Americans must once again stand up for their right to clean air and clean water. Since the beginning of this year, Republicans in the House have averaged roughly a vote every day the chamber has been in session to undermine the Environmental Protection Agency and our nation's environmental laws. They have picked up the pace recently — just last week they voted to stop the EPA's efforts to limit mercury and other hazardous pollutants from cement plants, boilers and incinerators — and it appears their campaign will continue for the foreseeable future. Using the economy as cover, and repeating unfounded claims that "regulations kill jobs," they have pushed through an unprecedented rollback of the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and our nation's waste-disposal laws, all of which have successfully protected our families for decades. We all remember "too big to fail"; this pseudo jobs plan to protect polluters might well be called "too dirty to fail." The House has voted on provisions that, if they became law, would give big polluters a pass in complying with the standards that more than half of the power plants across the country already meet. The measures would indefinitely delay sensible upgrades to reduce air pollution from industrial boilers located in highly populated areas. And they would remove vital federal water protections, exposing treasured resources such as the Gulf of Mexico, Lake Erie, the Chesapeake Bay and the Los Angeles River to pollution. How we respond to this assault on our environmental and public health protections will mean the difference between sickness and health — in some cases, life and death — for hundreds of thousands of citizens. This is not hyperbole. The link between health issues and pollution is irrefutable. Mercury is a neurotoxin that affects brain development in unborn children and young people. Lead has similar effects in our bodies. Soot, composed of particles smaller across than a human hair, is formed when fuels are burned and is a direct cause of premature death. Nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds contribute to the ozone alert days when seniors, asthmatics and others with respiratory problems are at serious risk if they do nothing more dangerous than step outside and breathe the air. "Too dirty to fail" tries to convince Americans that they must choose between their health and the economy, a choice that's been proved wrong for the four decades that the EPA has been in existence. No credible economist links our current economic crisis — or any economic crisis — to tough clean-air and clean-water standards. A better approach is the president's call for federal agencies to ensure that regulations don't overburden American businesses. The EPA has already put that into effect by repealing or revising several unnecessary rules, while ensuring that essential health protections remain intact. We can put Americans to work retrofitting outdated, dirty plants with updated pollution control technology. There are about 1,100 coal-fired units at about 500 power plants in this country. About half of these units are more than 40 years old, and about three-quarters of them are more than 30 years old. Of these 1,100 units, 44% do not use pollution controls such as scrubbers or catalysts to limit emissions, and they pour unlimited amounts of mercury, lead, arsenic and acid gases into our air. Despite requirements in the bipartisan 1990 Clean Air Act amendments, these facilities have largely refused to control their emissions — creating an uneven playing field for companies who play by the rules and gaming the system at the expense of our health. If these plants continue to operate without pollution limits, as a legislative wish list from House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) would allow, there will be more cases of asthma, respiratory illness and premature deaths — with no clear path to new jobs. By contrast, the nation's first-ever standards for mercury and other air toxic pollutants which the EPA will finalize this fall — and which the Republican leadership aims to block — are estimated to create 31,000 short-term construction jobs and 9,000 long-term jobs in the utility sector through modernizing power plants. And the savings in health benefits are estimated to be up to $140 billion per year by 2016. Contrary to industry lobbying, this overhaul can be accomplished without affecting the reliability of our power grid. Our country has a long tradition of treating environmental and public health protections as nonpartisan matters. It was the case when President Nixon created the EPA and signed into law the historic Clean Air Act, when President Ford signed into law the Safe Drinking Water Act and when President George H.W. Bush oversaw important improvements to the Clean Air Act and enacted the trading program that dramatically reduced acid rain pollution. Our environment affects red states and blue states alike. It is time for House Republicans to stop politicizing our air and water. Let's end "too dirty to fail." *Lisa P. Jackson is the administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. *

2 1

WVU Faculty Senate viewpoint meeting
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 25 Oct '11

25 Oct '11

Heh all, Right before the exciting City Council COW meeting this Tuesday at 7:00 p.m. where the future of the ban will be discussed informally, http://morgantown.com/agendas/2011/10-25-11-COW.pdf (Note: Bill Bryne will be in another country :) .. Forum on Marcellus Shale Drilling Tuesday,*October 25, 2011*, at 5:30 p.m., 126 Ming Hsieh Hall,WVUDowntown Campus A Discussion of Important Issues From Various Viewpoints. Presented by Pi Sigma Sigma Public Policy Honorary andWVUPolitical Science Department. Seeflyer <http://facultysenate.wvu.edu/r/download/110848>for more information. Note the interesting line-up: John King - WVDEP Environmental Advocate (Remember Pam Nixon at the SierraFest?) Don Spencer - Ex-City Council, the biggest supporter for strong legislation .. resolutions, ban, etc. WV4MOM - No idea who will be talking, I suspect that it may be Professor Tauger from political science Dr. Carr - Interim director of WVU's marcellus initiative, self-describe industry advocate, and the worst choice imaginable by WVU's president. A new page to watch, http://facultysenate.wvu.edu/marcellus. You may be able to catch both events concurrently. -Jonathan

3 2

Fwd: E&E: Ash bill attracts Senate Democrats
by Jim Sconyers 21 Oct '11

21 Oct '11

This is the Senate duplicate of Congressman McKinley's horrible ash bill. Joe Manchin continues to be an embarrassment and to show utter disregard for the health and safety of our citizens. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Alex Taurel <Alex_Taurel(a)lcv.org> Date: Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 9:06 AM Subject: E&E: Ash bill attracts Senate Democrats To: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE(a)lists.sierraclub.org ** ** Ash bill attracts Senate Democrats **** Manuel Quinones, E&E reporter**** Published: Friday, October 21, 2011 **** Senate Democrats Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Ben Nelson of Nebraska are hoping to convince their chamber's leadership to support legislation to block U.S. EPA from regulating coal ash as a hazardous substance.**** Yesterday they joined Republicans John Hoeven of North Dakota, Mike Enzi of Wyoming, Rob Portman of Ohio and John Boozman of Arkansas in introducing the Senate companion to H.R. 2273<http://eenews.net/bills/112/House/191011114254.pdf>, which passed in the House last week. The measures take a "states-first" approach, meaning they give states broad regulatory authority over the disposal of power plant combustion waste.**** "It ensures good environmental stewardship, while helping to preserve jobs and ensure that a beneficial product is made available for worthy uses," Hoeven said in a statement. "Just as importantly, it ensures that Congress and the states hold the reins of environmental policy."**** Bill supporters say a hazardous designation would have a damaging effect to coal ash recycling efforts. They say the prospect of one is already stigmatizing the material, often used in roads and other construction. During a speech on the Senate floor, Hoeven touted major projects back home that included coal ash.**** The legislation is a top industry priority, faced with tougher EPA oversight. Lawmakers carrying the torch in the Senate hail from major coal producing or consuming states. Hoeven and Conrad, the main sponsors, come from a state where nearly all the electricity is produced by coal-fired power plants, according to the Energy Information Administration.**** "Years of research have shown that coal ash should not be regulated as a hazardous waste," Conrad said in a statement. "Doing so would only force unworkable requirements on our state's utilities, resulting in serious economic consequences and the loss of good-paying jobs."**** Environmental advocates and Senate liberals have been trying to turn the jobs argument on its head, saying strong regulation is an economic booster. They are vowing to fight the bill saying it lacks enough strength to prevent water contamination and potential disaster, like an ash dump break in eastern Tennessee in 2008. The White House has also expressed opposition to the bill but fell short of issuing a veto threat.**** State regulators generally support keeping oversight of coal ash and are pressing for passage of legislation to effectively set aside EPA rulemaking. Environmentalists, however, have released reports saying states like North Dakota have been lax in regulating coal ash, leading to numerous cases of contamination (*E&ENews PM<http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2011/08/17/archive/4> *, Aug. 17).**** Earthjustice attorney Lisa Evans, who has been fighting the legislation, pointed out newly released inspection data from EPA showing that three North Dakota coal ash ponds garnered poor ratings. EPA has been conducting integrity tests at sites across the country.**** "It is beyond irresponsible for the senators to offer a bill that fails to cure the safety problems facing their own state," Evans said in a statement. "And it is with great disregard of their civic responsibility that they support a bill that places the citizens of other states at great peril."**** Senators who introduced the legislation say it will give industry regulatory certainty and states clarity in the regulatory process through minimum federal benchmarks.**** "This bill paves the way for states to manage coal ash in a safe, effective manner," Enzi said in a statement. "It is a serious legislative effort that takes a unique approach to fixing a problem that industry and the states want to address."**** Click here <http://www.eenews.net/assets/2011/10/21/document_daily_01.pdf>to read the new Senate bill.**** http://www.eenews.net/EEDaily/print/2011/10/21/7**** ** ** ** ** Alex Taurel**** Legislative Representative**** League of Conservation Voters**** (o) 202-454-4606**** (c) 202-669-1199**** *alex_taurel(a)lcv.org* *twitter.com/LCVPolicy* ** ** - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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 -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

Fwd: FW: BIPARTISAN GROUP OF SENATORS INTRODUCE COAL ASH RECYCLING LEGISLATION
by Jim Sconyers 20 Oct '11

20 Oct '11

For shame. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Scott Stapf <sstapf(a)hastingsgroup.com> Date: Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 3:46 PM Subject: FW: BIPARTISAN GROUP OF SENATORS INTRODUCE COAL ASH RECYCLING LEGISLATION To: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE(a)lists.sierraclub.org **** ** ** **** *For Immediate Release: *October 20, 2011**** **** *Contacts:***** Don Canton (Hoeven) (202) 224-8469**** Sean Neary (Conrad) (202) 224-2043**** Ron Eckstein (Nelson) (202) 224-5326**** Jeff Sadosky (Portman) (202) 224-5190**** Emily Bittner (Manchin) (202) 224-3954**** Sara Lasure (Boozman) (202) 224-4843**** Daniel Head (Enzi) (202) 224-3424**** **** *BIPARTISAN GROUP OF SENATORS INTRODUCE COAL ASH RECYCLING LEGISLATION***** Measure Will Save Jobs, Hold Down Energy Costs, Protect Local Oversight**** **** WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senators John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Michael Enzi (R-Wyo.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), and John Boozman (R-Ark.) introduced the Coal Residuals Reuse and Management Act of 2011, legislation that will ensure the safe and effective disposal of coal combustion residuals, a byproduct of coal-fired electricity generation that is also recycled as a valuable building material. **** **** This effort was prompted by the EPA’s proposal to regulate coal ash as hazardous waste. Coal ash is a byproduct that has been safely used for buildings, roads, bridges and other infrastructure for years under state regulations. The agency’s new rule would add additional costs to recycling companies and power plants, thereby increasing the cost of electricity to consumers.**** **** Under this legislation, states could set up their own permitting program for the management and disposal of coal ash that is based on existing EPA regulations to protect human health and the environment. States will know where they stand under this bill, since the benchmarks for what constitutes a successful state program will be set in statute. This is a states-first approach that provides regulatory certainty.**** **** The bill would set up a state permitting program for coal ash under a section of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act that would ensure sites have the adequate groundwater monitoring, protective lining, and properly engineered structures needed to protect communities. **** **** Hoeven outlined the new legislation on the floor of the U.S. Senate today, illustrating his comments with photos of Bismarck State University’s National Center of Energy Excellence and a rendering of the new North Dakota Heritage Center expansion, both of which incorporate recycled coal residuals in their construction.**** **** “North Dakota is a good example of how states can manage the disposal of coal residuals with good environmental stewardship, and at the same time, allow for beneficial uses like building roads, bridges and buildings that are stronger and less expensive,” *Senator John Hoeven* said. “Just as importantly, this legislation helps to preserve valuable jobs at a time when the nation so very much needs them.”**** **** “Years of research have shown that coal ash should not be regulated as a hazardous waste. Doing so would only force unworkable requirements on our state's utilities, resulting in serious economic consequences and the loss of good-paying jobs,” *Senator Kent Conrad* said. “While coal ash must be handled properly, there are less burdensome regulatory options that still protect public health and the environment and can be administered by state programs.” **** **** Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska pointed out that his state has 100 percent public power, meaning every utility customer in Nebraska purchases electricity from a public power, rural electric or municipal utility. **** **** “This legislation will help control rates for every Nebraskan who pays for electricity,” *Senator Ben Nelson* said. “It will prevent the implementation of new repetitive, burdensome, and potentially expensive EPA regulations, keeping the regulation of coal ash at the state level. Local control helps Nebraska’s publicly-owned utilities and municipalities manage their coal ash byproducts in a way that is cost-effective while ensuring the continued protection of human health and the environment.” **** **** “This bipartisan legislation will prevent serious government overreach that would negatively impact utility consumers, workers and our economy,” said *Senator Rob Portman* of Ohio. “It’s just another example of an out of control regulatory regime that has created uncertainty and threatened job growth in everything from farming to manufacturing and mining. By some estimates, the regulations EPA are proposing for coal combustion byproducts would eliminate 316,000 jobs over the next 20 years and cost hundreds of billions of dollars. Ohio’s economy, which is already struggling, would be heavily burdened by these regulations. This legislation, supported by a broad coalition of job creators, will provide a common sense framework that balances our economic, environmental, public health and energy security needs.”**** **** “This bill paves the way for states to manage coal ash in a safe, effective manner,” said *Senator Michael Enzi* of Wyoming. “It is a serious legislative effort that takes a unique approach to fixing a problem that industry and the states want to address.”**** **** “The bipartisan support for this commonsense legislation is so strong, and has been building for a long time because overregulation of coal ash by the EPA would threaten vital industries, as well as needlessly cost West Virginia and the nation more jobs - neither of which we can afford," *Senator Joe Manchin* of West Virginia said. “This legislation gives us a commonsense fix: let each state use existing EPA health and environment regulations to set up their own permitting program that allows them to recycle and reuse coal ash. This approach will protect jobs and our economy, and give families and businesses the certainty they need to help restore confidence.”**** **** “This is a commonsense approach to protecting jobs for hardworking Americans by empowering states to both protect our environment and keep electricity affordable,” said *Senator John Boozman* of Arkansas.**** **** The legislation was prompted by the EPA’s proposal to regulate coal ash as hazardous waste. Coal ash is a byproduct that has been safely used for buildings, roads, bridges and other infrastructure for years under state regulations. The agency’s new rule would add additional costs to recycling companies and power plants, thereby increasing the cost of electricity to consumers.**** **** The bill will set up a state permitting program for coal ash under a section of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act that would ensure sites have the adequate groundwater monitoring, protective lining, and properly engineered structures needed to protect communities. **** **** “This legislation represents a reasonable new approach to environmental law – a states-first approach,” Hoeven said. “It ensures good environmental stewardship, while helping to preserve jobs and ensure that a beneficial product is made available for worthy uses. Just as importantly, it ensures that Congress and the states hold the reins of environmental policy.”**** **** *-###-***** **** **** **** ** ** - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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 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/ -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

1 1

Fwd: WVU 2 day Oct 27th and 28th Marcellus info from WVU news (clarified)
by Jim Sconyers 20 Oct '11

20 Oct '11

You can skip the gag-me speech by Joe Manchin Thursday, and go to all the sessions Friday free (sans meals) if you follow the registration contact for nonprofits. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <WVABooks(a)aol.com> Date: Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:04 PM Subject: WVU 2 day Oct 27th and 28th Marcellus info from WVU news (clarified) To: jimscon(a)gmail.com ** WVU College of Law to present two-day exploration of Marcellus Shale issues (Clarifies registration fees for the event)**** WVU's College of Law leaders have rounded up an array of experts from the public and private sector for an information-based two-day exploration of economic and regulatory issues surrounding one of the most significant energy developments in the history of Appalachia – Marcellus Shale natural gas recovery.**** Marcellus Shale drilling – its economic potential and the regulatory conundrums faced by state lawmakers in protecting the economy and the environment – is the subject of Drilling Down on Regulatory Challenges: Balancing Preservation and Profitability in the Development of Shale Gas Resources set for Oct. 27 and 28 on the WVU campus.**** There will be a reception and banquet featuring keynote speaker Sen. Joe Manchin at 6 p.m. Thursday, Oct, 27 at the WVU Erickson Alumni Center. Speakers and panel discussions will be held at the Marlyn E. Lugar Courtroom (room 165) at the Law Center from 8:15 a.m. to 5 p.m. Friday, Oct. 28. The panel discussions on the 28th are free and open to the public. There is a fee of $150 for those registering to attend the reception and the banquet on the 27th; included in the that fee is a continental breakfast and lunch on the 28th. There is a fee of $25 for those wishing to register for the continental breakfast and lunch on the 28th only.**** More online: http://wvutoday.wvu.edu/n/2011/10/12/wvu-college-of-law-to-present-two-day-… **** -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

2 1

Coresco hearing format editorial
by James Kotcon 19 Oct '11

19 Oct '11

Today's Dominion Post editorial. More local news attached. Jim Kotcon >>>>> DOMINION POST Wednesday 19 October 2011: EDITORIAL Public comment was not a wrap State DEP needs to put this experiment in its tape recorder and listen to it The public paid a call on the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) on Monday. The DEP’s representative said the session was just an experiment — an informal conference, not a public hearing. So, who were the 25 audience members to argue? They were the public, that’s who. And judging from their reaction, the DEP might want to think long and hard about experimenting on the public in Monongalia County again. Whether or not the meeting was an informal conference or a public hearing was really never in dispute. It was just the protocol the DEP used for conducting this meeting. Instead of letting members of the crowd address their peers and the DEP’s experts on a permit to renew and expand a coal ash refuse facility, they were ushered to an isolated table to address a recorder while videotaped. Though the DEP’s Division of Mining Reclamation permitting supervisor was on the other side of the table, the public was effectively prevented from hearing the “public” comments. For the more intrepid members of the crowd, who wished to address the crowd and the DEP, their remarks went unheard by all except the recorder and the lone official. The DEP said the meeting’s format was experimental. The idea was to not let members of the public address each other and to provide an outlet for shy members of the crowd. Instead, members of the crowd just raised its voice. For now, we’ll just call it a failed experiment. Perhaps this format has merit in taking testimony in judicial matters. But as it applies to any kind of public comment, it’s contrary to the notion of transparency that’s the cornerstone of our government. We realize that public forums are often marked by one or more speakers who may try to dominate the proceedings. And occasionally some comments are mere rants rather than reasoned pros and cons. But that’s open government — democracy. It’s more often than not messy ... and noisy. The issues before this “informal conference” were environmentally sensitive and could potentially have a major impact on residents, nearby property owners and others. We are not going to take sides on this permit — for now — to double the size of this refuse dump near tributaries of the Monongahela River. However, the DEP has another thing coming if it thinks it can mute public opinion or quietly channel it into its recorders at a public session. Though a measure of decorum and control to allow everyone to say their piece is vital at such meetings, public sessions cannot be reduced to virtual voice mail. The state DEP is a public agency, and it still answers directly to the public. UPDATE

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC October 2011