Important reading for Sierra Club, WVEC and others who support the laudable efforts of WVEC lobby team ---
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://blogs.wvgazette.com/watchdog/
W.Va. leaders ignored previous audits that warned of the state’s need for more gas drilling inspectors
November 16, 2011 by Ken Ward Jr.
UPDATED: The legislative committee on Marcellus Shale has approved the bill and asked for a special session to consider the measure.
Long-time West Virginia political leaders like Sen. Joe Manchin (above) were making much earlier this week (see here and here) about how the state needs time to get a handle on the Marcellus Shale issue and put a proper regulatory system into place, making it clear they want federal officials to pretty much mind their own business.
But on at least one crucial issue — whether the state Department of Environmental Protection has enough inspectors and other staff to do the job — West Virginia has had nearly 20 years to remedy the problem, and so far as done next to nothing. That’s the bottom line in a story we posted online last night. Headlined, State ignored previous warnings about drilling inspector shortage, the story explains:
Long before most West Virginians had ever heard the words “Marcellus Shale,” outside auditors were warning that the state’s oil and gas regulatory agency was greatly underfunded and severely understaffed.
In December 1993, a review by the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission warned that lack of funding and a shortage of inspectors were among the chronic problems facing the state Department of Environmental Protection’s Office of Oil and Gas.
“The OOG does not have enough inspectors or funding to fully meet its statutory mandate,” said the 98-page review report, written by a team of regulators from other states, industry officials and environmental group representatives.
A decade later, another outside examination found that little had changed. The state oil and gas office still “does not have enough inspectors or funding to fully meet its statutory mandate,” said a 110-page report issued in January 2003.
Don Garvin, lead lobbyist for the West Virginia Environmental Council, commented at Sen. Manchin’s Senate committee field hearing, held in Charleston on Monday:
The best written rule is no good if you don’t have enforcement, if you don’t have inspectors in the field overseeing the operations.
You can read the 1993 review of West Virginia’s oil and gas regulatory program here and the follow-up review done in 2003 here.
__._,_.___
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
MARKETPLACE
Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use.
__,_._,___
Subject: U.S. Government Confirms Link Between Earthquakes And Shale Gas
Extr..
If you think the only problems with fracking are water and air pollution,
take a look at this article. you may want to pass this on to the
> Subject: U.S. Government Confirms Link Between Earthquakes And Shale
Gas Extraction | Commodities | Minyanville.com INTERESTING--Mike
>
>
http://www.minyanville.com/businessmarkets/articles/earthquake-natural-gas-…
=
--
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
fyi, paul
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: ScienceDaily: Top Environment News <newsletters(a)sciencedaily.com>
Date: Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 5:21 AM
Subject: ScienceDaily: Top Environment News
To: pjgrunt(a)gmail.com
**
ScienceDaily: Top Environment
News<http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/top_news/top_environment/>
<http://fusion.google.com/add?source=atgs&feedurl=http://feeds.feedburner.co…>
------------------------------
- Climate policies can help resolve energy security and air pollution
challenges <#133a1980156321db_1>
- Rising air pollution worsens drought, flooding, new study
finds<#133a1980156321db_2>
-
Climate policies can help resolve energy security and air pollution
challenges<http://feedproxy.google.com/%7Er/sciencedaily/top_news/top_environment/%7E3…>
Posted: 13 Nov 2011 11:27 AM PST
Policies to protect the global climate and limit global temperature rise
offer the most effective entry point for achieving energy sustainability,
reducing air pollution, and improving energy security, according to a new
article. By adopting an integrated perspective on energy and climate
policy, one that simultaneously addresses three of the key objectives for
energy sustainability, major synergies and cost co-benefits can be realized.
Rising air pollution worsens drought, flooding, new study
finds<http://feedproxy.google.com/%7Er/sciencedaily/top_news/top_environment/%7E3…>
Posted: 13 Nov 2011 11:13 AM PST
Increases in air pollution and other particulate matter in the atmosphere
can strongly affect cloud development in ways that reduce precipitation in
dry regions or seasons, while increasing rain, snowfall and the intensity
of severe storms in wet regions or seasons, says a new study. The research
provides the first clear evidence of how aerosols can affect weather and
climate, with important economic and water resource implications.
You are subscribed to email updates from ScienceDaily: Top Environment
News <http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/top_news/top_environment/>
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe
now<http://feedburner.google.com/fb/a/mailunsubscribe?k=FnE73EUgOOJXsfXjfcr0UhL…>
. Email delivery powered by Google Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL
USA 60610
--
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
Use the link below to get to this 22 page report. fyi, paul
---------- Forwarded message ----------
*From: *Nadine Lymn <Nadine(a)ESA.ORG>
*Date: *November 10, 2011 4:47:22 PM EST
*To: *ECOLOG-L(a)LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
>
The Ecological Society of America has just published another edition of its
Issues in Ecology series.
Air pollution is changing our environment and undermining many benefits we
rely on from wild lands, threatening water purity, food production, and
climate stability, according to a team of scientists writing in the 14th
edition of the Ecological Society of America's Issues in Ecology. In
"Setting Limits: Using Air Pollution Thresholds to Protect and Restore U.S.
Ecosystems," lead author Mark Fenn (USDA Forest Service) and nine
colleagues review current pollution evaluation criteria. The authors
propose science-based strategies to set new limits and put the brakes on
acid rain, algal blooms, and accumulation of toxic mercury in plants and
animals.
Issues in Ecology #14 is available for free as a pdf on ESA's website:
http://esa.org/science_resources/issues/FileEnglish/issuesinecology14.pdf
Nadine Lymn
Director of Public Affairs
Ecological Society of America
1990 M Street, NW
Suite 700
Washington DC 20036
202.833.8773 ext. 205
202.833.8775 Fax
----------------------------------------------
www.facebook.com/esa.org: "Like" the new ESA Facebook page, ask
friends/colleagues to do the same.
http://twitter.com/#!/esa_org: "Follow" ESA on Twitter.
ESA eStore: Now available: "An Ecologist's Guidebook to Policy Engagement."
--
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
--
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
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Fran Hunt <fran.hunt(a)sierraclub.org>
Date: Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 2:34 PM
Subject: NYT on Fracking in Pennsylvania gamelands
To: CONS-AWL-RESILIENT-HABITATS(a)lists.sierraclub.org
[image: image.png] Gas Drillers Invade Hunters’ Pennsylvania Paradise
[image: image.png]
·
Ruth Fremson/The New York Times
By KATHARINE Q.
SEELYE<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/katharine_q_se…>
Published: November 11, 2011
STATE GAME LAND 59, Pa. — For those who have ever stalked deer, turkey and
bear here in “God’s Country” in north central Pennsylvania, this hunting
season is like no other. For one thing, it is louder. The soundtrack of
birds chirping, thorns scraping against a hunter’s brush pants and twigs
crunching underfoot is now accompanied by the dull roar of compressor
stations and the chugging of big trucks up these hills.
Some of this state’s most prized game lands lie atop the Marcellus Shale, a
vast reserve of natural gas. And now more and more drills are piercing the
hunting grounds. Nine wells have cropped up on this one game land of
roughly 7,000 wooded acres in Potter County, and permits have been issued
for 19 more.
An old dirt road that meanders up a ridge here has been widened and
fortified. Acres of aspen, maple and cherry trees have been cut. In their
place is an industrial encampment of rigs, pipes and water-storage ponds,
all to support the extraction of natural gas through hydraulic fracturing,
a process known as fracking.
“Who wants to go into their deer stand in the predawn darkness and listen
to a compressor station?” lamented Bob Volkmar, 63, an environmental
scientist who went grouse hunting the other day through these noisy
autumnal woods. “It kind of ruins the experience.”
Like many hunters, Mr. Volkmar is upset that the State Game
Commission<http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/pgc/9106>
is giving over more public land to the gas companies, which does not
exactly fulfill the agency’s mission to enhance the hunting experience. The
game lands, as he points out, were bought with the proceeds from licenses
and fees paid by hunters and trappers.
Carl Roe, the Game Commission’s executive director, acknowledges that
drilling “does look ugly” but said that on most well sites, the agency had
no control over drilling-related activities. Although the agency owns 1.4
million acres of game lands, it does not always own the mineral rights
beneath them, so private owners can lease them out to the gas companies, as
is the case with Game Land 59 here. Where the agency owns the mineral
rights, it can and does restrict drilling and construction on certain days
during hunting season.
Mr. Roe also said the agency offsets the losses, which are temporary, by
using money from the gas leases to purchase more game lands; it just bought
a major tract of more than 9,000 acres.
“In the long run,” he said, “this will be a net gain for hunters, not a net
loss.”
Still, the commission had to warn hunters in September to scout their
favorite spots in part because a “dramatic increase in drilling” because of
interest in the Marcellus Shale had disrupted traditional hunting and
trapping areas.
In 2008, the Game Commission received $556,000 in lease payments for
Marcellus wells on game lands; by the end of this year, it expects to have
received more than $18 million. About 50 Marcellus wells have been drilled
on game lands across the state, with permits issued for 148 more.
All this activity has put hunters and drillers in potential conflict.
The Pennsylvania
Independent Oil and Gas
Association<http://www.pioga.org/events/pioga-conference-and-trade-show/>,
representing the industry, and the Unified Sportsmen of
Pennsylvania<http://www.unifiedsportsmenpa.org/>,
which supports the drilling, plan to issue their own advisory.
“We don’t want hunters to use our tanks for target practice or to sit on
top of them,” said Louis D’Amico, president and executive director of the
gas association, which issued a similar statement last year. “We want them
to be especially careful during bear and deer season, because of the long
reach of their rifles.”
Sportsmen are just as divided as others over fracking; they are also
divided over whether it should be allowed on game lands.
Tony Winters, 59, a former conservation officer who had joined Mr. Volkmar
on the grouse hunt, shrugged off the drilling here, saying that these lands
had been cleared before by lumber companies and that clearing them now for
wells will improve the hunting.
Mr. Winters pointed out that clear-cutting of trees leads to forest
regeneration. It also creates more “edge,” the open borders around the
woods. Generally more edge attracts more animals like deer.
As a compressor station hummed in the background, Mr. Winters said that he
was not bothered by the noise and that animals would not perceive it as a
threat. He said there was enough land to accommodate both hunters and
drillers.
Margaret Brittingham, a professor of wildlife resources at Penn State, said
that the full effects of the wells on the flora and fauna were not yet
clear and that she was beginning to study them.
Dr. Brittingham expects that some wildlife populations, like deer, are
expected to increase after the drillers leave, but that songbirds,
salamanders and frogs and other amphibians that help maintain a forest’s
ecological balance are likely to decline.
“You can see these changes on a really local level now,” she said. “But it
will take time to see changes in the larger populations.”
She said she was skeptical that this new “edge” would be helpful, saying,
“it’s more like a parking lot.” But she said such problems could be
minimized if the lands were properly reseeded and reclaimed.
Still, she said, “all the truck traffic is bad for wildlife.”
Human traffic can be a problem, too. During hunting season, the commission
has banned seismic surveying (a labor-intensive process that uses waves to
find the right place to drill).
“They have several crews going in several different directions, so a hunter
can’t get out of the way,” said Michael DiMatteo, chief of environmental
planning and habitat protection for the commission.
Mr. Volkmar and Mr. Winters are also fishermen and members of Trout
Unlimited, which started a coalition last year of a dozen outdoor
recreation and wildlife groups called theSportsmen Alliance for Marcellus
Conservation <http://sportsmenalliance.org/>. It is not opposed to drilling
but seeks better regulations, including erosion-control measures and
setback requirements.
They take samples regularly from local streams to monitor water quality.
They both say that
fracking<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/02/us/02gas.html?_r=1&n=Top%2fReference%2fTi…>,
which involves injecting millions of gallons of water, sand and treated
chemicals deep into the gas bed, could lead to water pollution and fish
kills.
So far, no one has found water problems in this immediate area. But others
have detected contamination, including fish kills, elsewhere in the state.
The industry says that fracking itself is safe and that any problems have
been caused by spills or leaks.
The Environmental Protection
Agency<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/e/environ…>
is set to begin a federal
investigation<http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class2/hydraulicfracturing/upload…>
into whether fracking is spoiling the drinking water in various drilling
states, including Pennsylvania.
As for spoiling the land, Bill Ragosta, a wildlife conservation officer for
the Game Commission on Game Land 59, said that the amount of surface
disturbance here was not typical.
“Fortunately most of our game lands are not being bombarded like this,” Mr.
Ragosta said. But even here, he promised, the drilling would soon end, and
reseeding with alfalfa, chicory and clover would bring more deer.
“It seems counterintuitive, especially to people who are opposed to
drilling,” he said. “I don’t know if it’s better or worse for wildlife in
the long run, but it’s not fair to say it’s all black or all white.”
A version of this article appeared in print on November 12, 2011, on page
A12 of the New York edition with the headline: Gas Drillers Invade Hunters’
Pennsylvania Paradise.
--
*Frances A. Hunt*
Director, Resilient Habitats Campaign
Sierra Club
50 F Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
fran.hunt(a)sierraclub.org
202-675-2386
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To
unsubscribe from the CONS-AWL-RESILIENT-HABITATS list, send any message to:
CONS-AWL-RESILIENT-HABITATS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out
our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp To view the Sierra Club List Terms
& Conditions, see: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp
--
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
<I can't do it on Nov. 28, but probably can on Nov. 29. Can you help?>
I just signed up to be a part of a visit to an Obama 2012 office on
November 28th, when people in all 50 states will be visiting campaign
offices to ask President Obama to reject Keystone XL.
Keystone XL is an environmental disaster waiting to happen: it will carry
800,000 barrels a day of the world's dirtiest oil 1500 miles across the
Ogallala aquifer and countless other irreplaceable natural resources. Not
only that, it's the fuse to the largest carbon bomb in North America, the
Alberta tar sands, which if developed could mean 'game over' for the
climate according to NASA scientist James Hansen.
President Obama alone has the authority to block the pipeline - Congress
plays no role. We're asking him to stop this disaster before it happens,
and help us "be the generation that finally frees America from the tyranny
of oil," as he declared when he began his run for president way back in
2008.
By taking one day to visit offices in all 50 states, we'll show the
President that there is a huge amount of support for him to stand up for
his campaign promises and reject this pipeline. Click here to sign up:
http://www.tarsandsaction.org/sign-up
Hoping you can be there with us - we don't have much time to convince the
President to reject the pipeline, and this day will be crucial to do it.
Hope to see you there.
--
Jim Sconyers
jimscon(a)gmail.com
304.698.9628
Remember, Mother Nature bats last.
Have not seen this on any Club emails as yet. fyi, paul
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:11 PM
Subject: Fw: Earth Policy Release -- U.S. Carbon Emissions Down 7 Percent
in Four Years
To:
**
[image: Earth Policy Institute]
<http://www.earth-policy.org>
[image: Bookmark and
Share]<http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&pubid=ra-4d6d74824d18a36a&url=htt…>
*
U.S. CARBON EMISSIONS DOWN 7 PERCENT
IN FOUR YEARS:
Even Bigger Drops Coming *
Lester R. Brown
www.earth-policy.org/plan_b_updates/2011/update101
Earth Policy Release
Plan B Update
November 2 , 2011
EMBARGO 12 NOON EDT
Between 2007 and 2011, carbon emissions from coal use in the United States
dropped 10 percent. During the same period, emissions from oil use dropped
11 percent. In contrast, carbon emissions from natural gas use increased by
6 percent. The net effect of these trends was that U.S. carbon emissions
dropped 7 percent in four years. And this is only the beginning.
[image: Graph on U.S. Energy-Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 1950-2010,
with Projection for 2011]
The initial fall in coal and oil use was triggered by the economic
downturn, but now powerful new forces are reducing the use of both. For
coal, the dominant force is the Beyond Coal campaign, an impressive
national effort coordinated by the Sierra Club involving hundreds of local
groups that oppose coal because of its effects on human health.
In the first phase, the campaign actively opposed the building of new
coal-fired power plants. This hugely successful initiative, which led to a
near de facto moratorium on new coal plants, was powered by Americans’
dislike of coal. An Opinion Research Corporation poll found only 3 percent
preferred coal as their electricity source -- which is no surprise. Coal
plant emissions are a leading cause of respiratory illnesses (such as
asthma in children) and mercury contamination. Coal burning causes 13,200
American deaths each year, a loss of life that exceeds U.S. combat losses
in 10 years of war in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The campaign’s second phase is dedicated to closing existing coal plants.
Of the U.S. total of 492 coal-fired power plants, 68 are already slated to
close. With current and forthcoming U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
air quality regulations on emissions of mercury, sulfur, and ozone
precursors requiring costly retrofits, many more of the older, dirtier
plants will be closed.
In August, the *American Economic Review* -- the country’s most prestigious
economics journal --
published<http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.101.5.1649>an
article that can only be described as an epitaph for the coal
industry.
The authors conclude that the economic damage caused by air pollutants from
coal burning exceeds the value of the electricity produced by coal-fired
power plants. Coal fails the cost-benefit analysis even before the costs of
climate change are tallied.
In July 2011, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg
announced<http://www.mikebloomberg.com/index.cfm?objectid=4D1722F5-C29C-7CA2-FCB63853…>a
grant of $50 million to the Beyond Coal campaign. It is one thing when
Michael Brune, head of the Sierra Club, says that coal has to go, but quite
another when Michael Bloomberg, one of the most successful businessmen of
his generation, says so.
The move to close coal plants comes at a time when electricity use for
lighting will be falling fast as old-fashioned incandescent light bulbs are
phased out. In compliance with the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007, by January 2012 there will be no 100-watt incandescent light bulbs on
store shelves. By January 2014, the 75-watt, 60-watt, and 40-watt
incandescents will also disappear from shelves. As inefficient
incandescents are replaced by compact fluorescents and LEDs, electricity
use for lighting can drop by 80 percent. And much of the switch will occur
within a few years.
The U.S. Department of Energy projects that residential electricity use per
person will drop by 5 percent during this decade as light bulbs are
replaced and as more-efficient refrigerators, water heaters, television
sets, and other household appliances come to market.
Even as coal plants are closing, the use of wind, solar, and geothermally
generated electricity is growing fast. Over the last four years, more than
400 wind farms -- with a total generating capacity of 27,000 megawatts --
have come online, enough to supply 8 million homes with electricity. (See
data at www.earth-policy.org.) Nearly 300,000 megawatts of proposed wind
projects are in the pipeline awaiting access to the grid.
[image: Graph on Cumulative Installed Wind Power Capacity in the United
States, 1980-2011*]
Texas, long the leading oil-producing state, is now the leading generator
of electricity from wind. When the transmission lines linking the rich wind
resources of west Texas and the Texas panhandle to the large cities in
central and eastern Texas are completed, wind electric generation in the
state will jump dramatically.
In installed wind-generating capacity, Texas is followed by Iowa,
California, Minnesota, and Illinois. In the share of electricity generation
in the state coming from wind, Iowa leads at 20 percent.
With electricity generated by solar panels, the United States has some
22,000 megawatts of utility-scale projects in the pipeline. And this does
not include residential installations.
Closing coal plants also cuts oil use. With coal use falling, the near 40
percent of freight rail diesel fuel that is used to move coal from mines to
power plants will also drop.
In fact, oil use has fallen fast in the United States over the last four
years, thus reversing another long-term trend of rising consumption. The
reasons for this include a shrinkage in the size of the national fleet, the
rising fuel efficiency of new cars, and a reduction in the miles driven per
vehicle.
Fleet size peaked at 250 million cars in 2008 just as the number of cars
being scrapped eclipsed sales of new cars. Aside from economic conditions,
car sales are down because many young people today are much less
automobile-oriented than their parents.
In addition, the fuel efficiency of new cars, already rising, will soon
increase sharply. The most recent efficiency standards mandate that new
cars sold in 2025 use only half as much fuel as those sold in 2010. Thus
with each passing year, the U.S. car fleet becomes more fuel-efficient,
using less gasoline.
Miles driven per car are declining because of higher gasoline prices, the
continuing recession, and the shift to public transit and bicycles.
Bicycles are replacing cars as cities create cycling infrastructure by
building bike paths, creating dedicated bike lanes, and installing sidewalk
parking racks. Many U.S. cities, including Washington, D.C., Chicago, and
New York, are introducing bike-sharing programs.
Furthermore, when people retire and no longer commute, miles driven drop by
a third to a half. With so many baby boomers now retiring, this too will
lower gasoline use.
As plug-in hybrid and all-electric cars come to market, electricity will
replace gasoline. An
analysis<http://harvardmagazine.com/2011/07/time-to-electrify>by
Professor Michael McElroy of Harvard indicates that running a car on
wind-generated electricity could cost the equivalent of 80-cent-a-gallon
gasoline.
With emissions from coal burning heading for a free fall as plants are
closed, and those from oil use also falling fast -- both are falling faster
than emissions from natural gas are ramping up -- U.S. carbon emissions are
falling.
We are now looking at a situation where the 7 percent decline in carbon
emissions since the 2007 peak could expand to 20 percent by 2020, and
possibly even to 30 percent. If so, the United States could become a world
leader in cutting carbon emissions and stabilizing climate.
# # #
Data and additional resources available at www.earth-policy.org.
Lester R. Brown is president of the Earth Policy Institute and author of *World
on the Edge <http://www.earth-policy.org/books/wote>*.
*Feel free to pass this information along to friends, family members, and
colleagues!*
*Follow us on:*
[image: EPI Fan Page] <http://www.facebook.com/EarthPolicyInstitute> [image:
EPI on Twitter] <http://www.twitter.com/EarthPolicy> [image: EPI
RSS]<http://earth-policy.org/press_room/C87>
[image: EPI Youtube Channel] <http://www.youtube.com/earthpolicy>
*Media Contact:
*Reah Janise Kauffman
(202) 496-9290 ext. 12
rjk(a)earthpolicy.org
*Research Contact:
*Matt Roney
(202) 496-9290 ext. 17
jmroney(a)earthpolicy.org
*Earth Policy Institute*
1350 Connecticut Avenue NW,
Suite 403
Washington, DC 20036
---
You are currently subscribed to public as: newviv(a)roadrunner.com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
leave-public-6031842Q(a)lists.earth-policy.org
--
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
fyi, renewables are winning 55% to whatever oil is getting! vote away,
paul
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dan Ritzman <dan.ritzman(a)sierraclub.org>
Date: Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 4:47 PM
Subject: Arctic Refuge FW: It's up-- Vote away
To: #arctic(a)sierraclub.org, #Conservation-Habitats(a)sierraclub.org
I have no idea where usnews got that picture at the top of the article but
it certainly isn’t the Refuge. Alas, still worth voting!****
** **
*From:* Virginia Cramer [mailto:virginia.cramer@sierraclub.org]
*Sent:* Thursday, November 03, 2011 1:13 PM
*To:* #Land; Dan Ritzman
*Subject:* It's up-- Vote away****
** **
The US News & World Report "debate" is on-- Please go vote for Dan's
response and spread this around.
****
http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/is-it-time-to-drill-in-the-arctic-refuge**
**
** **
- ginny****
** **
Is It Time to Drill in the Arctic Refuge?****
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, commonly known as ANWR, is a
19-million acre national wildlife preserve in northeast Alaska. The United
States Geological Survey estimates that there could be anywhere between 7.7
and 11.8 billion gallons of technically recoverable oil underneath the
surface of the refuge.****
The drilling controversy in ANWR centers on a specific, 1.5 million acre
area on the northern coastal plain known as the 10-02 area. While this area
comprises a relatively small part of the whole refuge, it contains an
important calving ground for Porcupine caribou, which have been a
significant part of the lives of native Alaskans in the area for thousands
of years.****
In 1977, the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System was completed, and
conservationists began a campaign to keep oil prospecting out of ANWR.
Three years later, President Jimmy Carter signed the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act, which designated 104 million acres in
Alaska as national parks and wildlife refuge. The act allowed for drilling
in ANWR, but not without Congress’s approval first. The Exxon-Valdez spill
temporarily derailed potential drilling in ANWR in 1989, but seven years
later the Republican-majority House and Senate voted to allow drilling in
the refuge. President Clinton vetoed the bill, but the battle over ANWR
raged on in Congress throughout the next decade with President George W.
Bush pushing to perform exploratory drilling in the area.****
Rapidly rising energy costs and a weak economy have caused Congress to
again investigate the possibility of drilling in ANWR. Is it time to
starting drilling in the Arctic Refuge? Here is the Debate Club’s take:****
** **
--
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
Coal's Woes Run Deeper than EPA Regs Competitive, Labor Issues Hurt
Production
Ken Silverstein <http://www.energybiz.com/author/ken-silverstein> | Sep 28,
2011
[image: Share/Save]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.energybiz.com%2Fart…>
<http://www.energybiz.com/article/11/09/coals-woes-run-deeper-epa-regs&utm_m…>
In Central Appalachia, coal’s potential troubles are running much deeper
than the proposed environmental regulations. Both public and private
reviews note a reduction in production, citing not just pending federal
rules but also increased competition and the depletion of the most
recoverable deposits.
The coal companies concur, saying that development could migrate to regions
with more accessible reserves and a lower cost of production. And while the
easy target is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that wants to cut
toxic emissions, all are acknowledging that the process is more labor
intensive and therefore less profitable. That’s because the coal there is
much harder dig out, leaving surface mining as the only other possibility
-- an even more controversial technique.
“Based on historical trend, most of the supply reduction is likely to be
permanent,” says Arch
Coal<http://www.faqs.org/sec-filings/100222/ARCH-COAL-INC_8-K/c56417exv99w1.htm>in
a quarterly assessment. “The 2008-2010 drop is shaping up to be the
largest fall-off in production yet,” in reference to Central Appalachia.
That production is shifting westward, it says, citing statistics that
Central Appalachia annual coal development could fall from around 200
million tons today to 99 million tons by 2035; a decade ago it was 300
million tons.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration
<http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/MT_coal.cfm>agrees, saying that Central
Appalachian coal has “higher cost reserves” that have already been
“extensively mined.” That will result in more production from western
states, and potentially 1 percent more a year between 2015-2035.
In this country, most of the coal comes from Wyoming, West Virginia and
Kentucky. Wyoming provides about 41 percent of U.S. coal production, which
is an increase from 18 percent two decades earlier. Today, the roughly 443
million tons of coal mined from the Wyoming
Powder<http://205.254.135.24/energy_in_brief/role_coal_us.cfm>River
Basin is shipped to 34 states, including those in the east. With an
expanding rail transportation network, coal emanating from that area could
flourish. It’s also easier to mine.
Underground mining is one issue. Surface mining, or mountaintop mining, is
another that comes with regulatory impediments. Specifically, proposed EPA
rules would restrict the ability of mining companies to toss aside debris
by setting tougher water quality standards. It would require buffer zones
around the streams while requesting mining enterprises to move in phases so
that they can better monitor their environmental footprints.
Economic Diversification
What to do? U.S. senators from coal-producing states are trying to stop the
EPA in its tracks, saying that the livelihoods of the affected citizens
would be harmed. But perhaps the longer range view would be the diversification
of the economies
t<http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ap-enterprise-drastic-declines-ahead…>here,
and for them to become net exporters of other fuels.
In fact, the Marcellus Region
<http://www.marcellusfacts.com/pdf/homegrownenergy.pdgoo>that stretches
down the east coast is estimated to hold as much as 500 trillion cubic feet
of shale gas. Penn State University says that such assets would create
200,000 jobs and the American Chemical Council says that 12,000
chemical-related jobs would be formed in West Virginia alone.
By comparison, the coal mining industry in all of Appalachia employs 31,000
people, says the National Mining Association <http://www.nma.org/>. As
production falls there and as EPA regs kick in, that number will decline.
“The increased competition from other sources of coal and energy has
negatively impacted production in Central Appalachia, illustrating that the
existence of coal reserves does not guarantee that the coal will be
economical to produce or competitive with other regions,” says a
report by Downstream
Strategies<http://www.downstreamstrategies.com/documents/reports_publication/Downstrea…>.
“The declining competitiveness is due in large part to the increased cost
of producing coal in Central Appalachia, for both surface and underground
mining.”
The Morgantown, WV-based consulting firm goes on to say that if West
Virginia and other Central Appalachian states are to cope with a perpetual
decline in coal production, policy makers will need to ensure that new jobs
and fresh sources of tax revenue become available.
It is cautioning against an over-reliance on shale gas, noting the
associated water quality issues surrounding it as well as a history of
volatile natural gas prices. The firm is therefore concluding that the
region needs to promote renewable energy. It is suggesting a renewable
portfolio standard whereby utilities would have to supply a quarter of
their power from green sources by 2025.
Blaming coal’s woes on the proposed environmental regulations tells only a
fraction of the story. The rest can be explained by competition from other
coal states as well as from cheaper and cleaner fuels. That makes the
labor-intensive pursuit for coal in Central Appalachia a tougher sell and
the need for fuel diversity there more essential than ever.
EnergyBiz Insider has been been nominated in 2010 and 2011 for Best Online
Column by Media Industry News, MIN. Ken Silverstein has also been named one
of the Top Economics Journalists by Wall Street Economists.
Follow Ken on www.twitter.com/ken_silverstein
energybizinsider(a)energycentral.com
--
William V. DePaulo, Esq.
179 Summers Street, Suite 232
Charleston, WV 25301-2163
Tel 304-342-5588
Fax 304-342-5505
william.depaulo(a)gmail.com
www.passeggiata.com
And Congress doesn't want the EPA to regulate this stuff.
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Bill Price <bill.price(a)sierraclub.org> wrote:
http://www.jsonline.com/multimedia/photos/132962423.html#id_58603378
Bill Price, Organizing Representative
Sierra Club
Environmental Justice Program
Beyond Coal to Clean Energy Campaign
Phone: 304-389-8822 (Cell)
Email: bill.price(a)sierraclub.org
--
Vernon Haltom
Executive Director, Coal River Mountain Watch
304-854-2182
www.crmw.net