EC October 2014

ec@lists.wvsierraclub.org

5 participants
10 discussions

Fw: Recent coal asset sales in Appalachia show fire sale mentality gripping market
by James Kotcon 31 Oct '14

31 Oct '14

Wow! Check out the story below. Some of you may recall aspects of the Climate Math presentations at SierraFest and WVEC Convention when we talked about what Al Gore called the "Carbon Asset Bubble", I.e., that coal stocks are dramatically over-priced in a global warming world. Is this the first symptom? Does this provide a justification for the coal divestment projects at WVU and elsewhere? How can we use this information? JBK ? ________________________________ From: Adam Beitman, Sierra Club <adam.beitman(a)sierraclub.org> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 8:13 PM To: mtr-list(a)sierraclub.org Cc: Jim Sconyers; Alice Howell; Sean Sarah; Mary Anne Hitt; James Kotcon Subject: SNL: Recent coal asset sales in Appalachia show fire sale mentality gripping market https://www.snl.com/InteractiveX/article.aspx?ID=29592255&KPLT=4 Selected: "Coal mines in hard-hit Appalachia are being sold for pennies on the dollar compared to just a few years ago, recent transactions show, demonstrating the massive collapse in asset value since a peak in coal pricing in 2011. An SNL Energy analysis of several recent publicly announced transactions finds coal reserves in Appalachia are being purchased on average at less than 40 cents per ton, down dramatically from a few years when reserves in the region were commanding prices eight times as high." "Other deals<https://www.snl.com/InteractiveX/article.aspx?ID=27627743> have occurred at even cheaper prices. In August, Corsa Coal Corp.<https://www.snl.com/InteractiveX/snapshot.aspx?ID=4247981> closed<https://www.snl.com/InteractiveX/article.aspx?ID=28958144> its acquisition of PBS Coals Corp.<https://www.snl.com/InteractiveX/snapshot.aspx?ID=4100818>, which owns several surface and underground mines in Pennsylvania, at a cost of approximately $140 million. The reserves are roughly split between met and thermal coal. The deal included $60 million in cash and $60 million in assumed liabilities of which $20 million in cash bonding will be paid by PBS. Corsa consultants estimated<https://www.snl.com/InteractiveX/article.aspx?ID=29505355> PBS' recoverable, proven and probable coal reserves at 37 million, which would value the deal at roughly 37 cents per ton of reserves. Seth Schwartz, president of consulting firm Energy Ventures Analysis, said that when you consider what some companies initially paid for their coal assets years ago, the valuations have fallen even further. "These assets are going for under 10 cents on the dollar from what they were at the peak of the market in 2011," he said." -- Adam Beitman Associate Press Secretary Sierra Club 50 F Street, NW, Eighth Floor Washington, DC 20001 Office: (202) 675-2385<tel:%28202%29%20675-2385> Cell: (202) 670-5585<tel:%28202%29%20670-5585> adam.beitman(a)sierraclub.org<mailto:adam.beitman@sierraclub.org> Tweets @adbeitman Represented by John Muir Local 100

1 0

Fwd: Fracking and toxic air
by Paul Wilson 31 Oct '14

31 Oct '14

Not sure How i get this stuff, but in came in on another gmail address I have. This may be a group we can work with or get some support through. Does seen like a logical and direct connect with WV due to our lousy air quality standards. fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Paul Wilson Date: Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 11:28 AM Subject: Fwd: Fracking and toxic air To: Paul Wilson <pjgrunt(a)gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dominique Browning, Moms Clean Air Force < dominique(a)momscleanairforce.org> Date: Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 12:52 PM Subject: Fracking and toxic air To: pjpaulgrunt(a)gmail.com [image: A message from your friends at Moms Clean Air Force] <http://www.momscleanairforce.org> Dear Paul, A new study, published today in the journal Environmental Health, identifies potentially hazardous concentrations of air pollutants near some oil and gas operations in five states. The research shines a light on what some communities face as US oil and gas development accelerates. The United States is now the leading natural gas producer in the world. The number of natural gas wells in our country has increased by more than 80% since 1990. *There are now half a million natural gas wells in the US*. Countless communities are living side by side with well pads, compressor stations, and pipelines--some for the very first time. *TELL EPA: We need protection from methane pollution. <http://www.e-activist.com/ea-action/broadcast.record.message.click.do?ea.ur…>* In a years-long collaborative project, residents in Arkansas, Colorado, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wyoming were trained to take air samples, which were lab-tested for dozens of volatile organic chemicals. Why did these community members walk fields, farms, and country roads in five states, sniffing for telltale signs of pollution? *Because no one else would.* Many of these community members have told heartbreaking stories about the air pollution they breathe each day. They have watched their rural communities become industrial sites, complete with chemical mixing facilities, increased truck traffic, compressor stations, injection wells, and pipeline spills. They have wondered whether their nosebleeds, hair loss, skin rashes, headaches, and other health complaints could be related to the oil and gas operations near their homes, schools, farms, and ranches. But when they asked their local officials to help them figure out what was in their air? *Nothing happened.* No health studies conducted, no air monitors installed. Meanwhile, the people kept on breathing. Day in and day out. So they sucked air into special Kevlar sampling bags when they smelled, saw, or felt something funny. They took air pollution monitoring into their own hands, and showed the profound limits of our government's current approach to safeguarding the air near oil and gas operations. *They found that concentrations of benzene, hydrogen sulfide, and other volatiles exceeded health-based standards* in 16 of the 35 grab samples collected in 5 states. Formaldehyde levels, sampled with a different method, were detected in 14 of 41 samples. They detected toluene, xylene, and other toxic compounds as well. *Please click here to tell EPA to protect us from methane pollution. <http://www.e-activist.com/ea-action/broadcast.record.message.click.do?ea.ur…>* These community members, and the scientists with whom they co-authored their study, understand that this research does not prove that their health problems were caused by the toxics in the samples; nor does it prove that all gas wells emit toxic chemicals. They don't have the decades to undertake those kinds of studies--nor do they have the money to do highly sophisticated air samplings and tests. What they have is the desire to get officials to pay attention. Many other studies across the country have pointed out exactly the same thing: some well development sends toxins into the air. But this is one of the first studies published in a peer-reviewed journal to have empowered community members to sample their own air, because they are concerned about what they are breathing, and have had no other way to get the ball rolling on finding out what is going on in their communities. And their data signals a problem: We've got a rapidly expanding extractive industry with no monitoring requirements, no disclosure requirements, and inadequate federal air quality regulations. The substance being extracted--methane--is far more powerful a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, and it appears to be leaking by mistake into the atmosphere at climate-wrecking speed. The same wasteful leaks that spew methane into the air also emit harmful pollutants, such as benzene and hydrogen sulfide. In many places, dangerous, unhealthy chemicals are in the air. *Right now EPA is in the process of deciding whether to act on methane pollution from the oil and gas industry. Please click here to join with MCAF to tell the EPA that they must do so. <http://www.e-activist.com/ea-action/broadcast.record.message.click.do?ea.ur…> Cleaning up methane leaking from oil and gas infrastructure will benefit local air quality and our climate.* Here's to walking fields, farms, and country roads without having to sniff for signs of pollution. For clean air, *Molly Rauch* Public Health Policy and Outreach Manager, Moms Clean Air Force *Dominique Browning* Co-Founder and Senior Director, Moms Clean Air Force *PS: You can find a link to the study at our website. <http://www.e-activist.com/ea-action/broadcast.record.message.click.do?ea.ur…>* <http://www.e-activist.com/ea-action/broadcast.record.message.click.do?ea.ur…> <http://www.e-activist.com/ea-action/broadcast.record.message.click.do?ea.ur…> momscleanairforce.org <http://www.momscleanairforce.org> | About Us <http://www.momscleanairforce.org/about-us/> | Unsubscribe <http://www.e-activist.com/ea-campaign/action.handleOptOut.do?ea.question.id…> © Moms Clean Air Force 2014 [image: Follow Us on Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/momscleanairforce>[image: Follow Us on Twitter] <http://twitter.com/cleanairmoms>[image: Follow Us on http://pinterest.com/momscaf/] <http://pinterest.com/momscaf/>[image: Follow Us on Google+] <https://plus.google.com/u/0/112792743232393419060>[image: Follow Us on Flickr] <http://www.flickr.com/photos/momscleanairforce/>[image: Follow Us on RSS] <http://feeds.feedburner.com/MomsCleanAirForce>[image: Follow Us on Instagram] <http://instagram.com/cleanairmoms> -- Paul Wilson WV Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414 (H) 304-725-4360 -- 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: [Coal Volunteers List] Mary Anne Hitt's latest: Mountaintop removal coal mining continues to poison Appalachia
by Paul Wilson 31 Oct '14

31 Oct '14

Great article by Maryann. Bill Price is mentioned as well. cheers. pau ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Heather Moyer <heather.moyer(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 9:54 AM Subject: [Coal Volunteers List] Mary Anne Hitt's latest: Mountaintop removal coal mining continues to poison Appalachia To: #Coal <coal-list(a)sierraclub.org>, #Coal-Volunteers < coal-volunteers-list(a)sierraclub.org>, #Media <media-list(a)sierraclub.org> Hi folks- Mary Anne's column this week focuses on all the news out about mountaintop-removal coal mining in the past few weeks. Please share it far and wide! It's only up on EcoWatch this week: http://ecowatch.com/2014/10/31/mountaintop-removal-poisons-appalachia/ *Possible tweets:* Mountaintop-removal #coal mining continues to poison Appalachia: http://sc.org/13oWe9r (by @maryannehitt) #StopMTR Falsified water tests, linked to lung cancer, & destroying ecosystems - mountaintop removal #coal mining must stop: http://sc.org/13oWe9r Thanks! --- Heather Moyer Senior Content Producer 202-675-6276 Sierra Club 50 F Street, 8th Floor Washington, DC 20001 -- To access the Beyond Coal Campaign Resource Portal, go to: https://sites.google.com/a/sierraclub.org/beyond-coal-resource-portal/ To sign up for this list, email neha.mathew(a)sierraclub.org with the subject and message "SUBSCRIBE #coal-volunteer" --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "#Coal-Volunteers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to coal-volunteers-list+unsubscribe(a)sierraclub.org. To post to this group, send email to coal-volunteers-list(a)sierraclub.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

1 0

Fwd: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Fwd: Efficiency Benefits - Getting it right!
by James Kotcon 28 Oct '14

28 Oct '14

You may find this information useful as you study up on Energy Efficiency programs, especially as we discuss legislation for January. Ohio's EERS was put on hold earlier this year by the Ohio Legislature, at the behest of lobbying by FirstEnergy, so Ohio's ranking slipped to "middle of the pack". But wouldn't it be great if WV's EE ranking could get up that high! JBK ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ned Ford <Ned.Ford(a)fuse.net> Date: Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 5:53 PM Subject: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Fwd: Efficiency Benefits - Getting it right! To: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS(a)lists.sierraclub.org The following message is one I sent to a list which is dedicated to Ohio utility issues. The attached Excel sheet contains the cover memo, and all the data which is used to generate the statements below. I thought it would be good to share with the people on these lists because some of you may be very interested to know what efficiency does, and some of you may be interested in how I produce the statistics. Some of you may be interested in how well efficiency pays for renewables. Ohio ranked 18th for utility efficiency programs in the ACEEE's last ranking, but we have slid backwards since then, and are probably slightly below the middle of the pack for the entire five years covered here. We need a lot more attention to efficiency, and especially to bringing all states up to the level of the best five or six states. Recognize that the best states for efficiency are also the most healthy economies, and the larger states in terms of electricity consumption. - Ned Ned Ford 513-600-4200 Hi Folks, It is now seven months before we will have 2014 EE program costs and first year energy savings in the official filings by the utilities. I hope we can avoid the use of incorrect cost and savings data which occurred last year, by getting this out in time for everyone to consider, discuss and agree on what we need to use. If anyone on this list is inclined to think that another account might be more accurate, please bring it to my attention (offlist, preferably) so we can discuss the different methodologies and reach an agreement on what is what. The numbers which I use are those which the utilities actually filed. Other estimates have not used these numbers. If they had, they would have reached the same values that I did. We have two objectives here, both served by the same information: first, to reconcile the actual cost of efficiency with numbers which the PUCO has provided to the legislature (and can be counted on to reiterate in the future) ($1 billion to $1.1 billion in total costs through 2013), and second, to provide evidence of the tremendous value which SB 221 provides to Ohio, and which FirstEnergy customers are going to lose as a result of SB 310. The attached spreadsheet provides details of Ohio’s efficiency spending and saved energy from 2009 through 2013. Total spending through the end of 2013 has been $667 million. An additional $300 million or so has been recovered by the four Ohio Electric Distribution Companies (AEP, DP&L, Duke and FirstEnergy) to compensate for Distribution lost revenues and Shared Savings. This is a reasonable amount, but the PUCO has not accounted for this recovery in any public forum, so the precise amount is not known yet. The PUCO does not require lifetime savings calculations, although all the utilities do them, and some of them report these savings. The PUCO does require first year savings to be reported, and we have made a conservative but reasonable projection of the savings to reach the conclusions as follows: Retail rate savings realize by the end of 2013 were $1.4 billion Lifetime retail savings to be realized by the installed hardware will be $3.9 billion This does not consider the increased savings which will result from increased rates due to other reasons. (Although it was stated during hearings that "energy" prices in Ohio have gone down due to fracking, electricity prices have risen (see Background and Discussion tab on the attached spreadsheet). Efficiency savings to date are large enough to cover the entire cost of the efficiency programs to date, plus the shared savings, plus the lost revenues and in addition, cover the cost of Ohio’s renewables standard, which was reported by the PUCO as: 2011 $44.7 million (1%)* 2012 $52.4 million (1.5%)* The PUCO has not reported the cost of the renewable standard in other years, but given the rapidly falling price of renewable energy credits, the 2014 cost is likely to be only $2 million more than 2012, even though the standard has increased to 2.5% (a 66% increase over 2012). Efficiency savings already realized will continue to save more money than combined program costs, lost revenues, shared savings and renewables, unless efficiency programs are cut. In addition to the direct savings from efficiency, there are real savings due to avoided new power plants and transmission and distribution systems. A conservative estimate of these savings as of year-end 2013 is over $1 billion. This represents more than 500 MW’s of avoided new generation technology and the transmission and distribution equipment that is also avoided. * The calculation of renewable program costs given above is done from PUCO reports. The calculations are not on this spreadsheet. Contact me at Ned Ford 513-600-4200 or Ned.Ford(a)fuse.net - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

1 0

Union of Concerned Scientists report: Solar power – clean, reliable, and increasingly affordable – is experiencing remarkable growth across the U.S.
by Paul Wilson 22 Oct '14

22 Oct '14

Solar Power on the Rise: The Technologies and Policies behind a Booming Energy Sector (2014) August 2014 Solar power – clean, reliable, and increasingly affordable – is experiencing remarkable growth across the U.S. DOWNLOAD Full report <http://ucs-prod.beaconfire.us/sites/default/files/attach/2014/08/Solar-Powe…> Solar power generates electricity with no global warming pollution, no fuel costs, and no risks of fuel price spikes, and has the potential to help move the country toward cleaner, reliable, and affordable sources of electricity. Small-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) systems, typically on rooftops, account for the majority of solar installations, while large-scale PV systems and concentrating solar power (CSP) systems constitute the majority of solar's overall electricity-generating capacity. All three are undergoing rapid growth. Given the abundance of sunshine across the country, solar power has the potential to supply a significant amount of electricity that is both environmentally and economically attractive. Solar power is increasingly affordable Photo: Wayne National Forest - Prices for rooftop PV systems have declined markedly in recent years, dropping 29 percent from 2010 to 2013. [image: Falling price of solar PV chart] <http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/images/2014/09/energy-graphic-cha…> CHART: The Falling Price of Solar PV by U.S. Sector <http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/images/2014/09/energy-graphic-cha…> - Their increasing cost-effectiveness is largely a result of reductions in technology prices, innovative financing, and growing networks of solar installers and financial partners. - Tax credits, rebates, and other support in leading states can cut the total costs of a rooftop system to under $10,000, though many solar customers are paying little or nothing up front by utilizing solar leases or power purchase agreements, which provide electricity from the system over a long period at attractive fixed rates. - Costs for large-scale PV projects have dropped more than household systems, to an average 60 percent lower than those for residential solar on a per-watt basis. - CSP systems have not experienced the same cost reductions, but offer the important advantage of being able to store the sun's energy as heat, and to use it to make electricity when the sun is no longer shining. Solar power is viable throughout the United States -- 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

2 1

Fw: [wvec board & supporters] FW: WVNS story: Utilities Look to Add Charges for Home Solar
by James Kotcon 20 Oct '14

20 Oct '14

? ________________________________ From: wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com <wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com> on behalf of 'Gary Zuckett' garyz(a)wvcag.org [wvec-board] <wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 9:04 AM To: wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com Cc: Emmett Pepper; Julie Archer; Karan Ireland; Norm Steenstra Subject: [wvec board & supporters] FW: WVNS story: Utilities Look to Add Charges for Home Solar This was mentioned at the Conference. It now in play in Virginia - we'll have to watch out for it here too.... From: Public News Service [mailto:newsservice@newsservicemail.org] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 3:08 AM To: GaryZuckett Subject: WVNS story: Utilities Look to Add Charges for Home Solar Utilities Look to Add Charges for Home Solar<http://www.publicnewsservice.org/2014-10-20/energy-policy/utilities-look-to… %20-charges-for-home-solar/a42370-1> [Share this page]<http://www.sharethis.com/share?url=%5bhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.publicnewsservice.or…>[http://www.publicnewsservice.org/images/newbody/printicon_s.jpg]<http://www.publicnewsservice.org/print.php?key=42370-1> October 20, 2014 - Dan Heyman, Public News Service (WV) Play Audio in Browser Window<http://www.publicnewsservice.org/mp3.php?f=rss-42370-1.mp3> [PHOTO: Rooftop solar has become a significant enough issue for utility companies to seek new fees from homeowners who install it. Photo by Alfred Twu.]<http://www.newsservice.org/getimage.php?p=c2dpZD00MjM3MCZzaWQ9MQ==> PHOTO: Rooftop solar has become a significant enough issue for utility companies to seek new fees from homeowners who install it. Photo by Alfred Twu. CHARLESTON, [http://www.publicnewsservice.org/articlepx.gif?key=42370-1] W.Va. - Utilities in several states are turning to new charges to make up for revenue they're losing to homes with solar power. The price of solar panels has fallen dramatically, and more people are installing them. In response, industry groups are urging states to let power companies add charges or credit homeowners less for the excess electricity they generate. Gabe Elsner, executive director of the Energy and Policy Institute, said home solar had been considered too small to worry about - but no longer. "The pro blem for the utility company is that they make money by generating power and selling it to customers," he said. "So when you decide to create your own power, suddenly they just lost a customer." Elsner said the push for the new fees started with the industry trade group Edison Electric Institute and was promoted by the American Legislative Exchange Council. EEI declined to comment, but a report called "Disruptive Challenges"<http://www.eei.org/ourissues/finance/documents/disruptivechallenges.pdf> that was done for the group talked about the issue. It said that if too many homeowners generate their own power, utilities could be stuck for the cost of maintaining the grid. However, Elsner said studies, including a recent one in Utah, have shown that home solar systems are good for the grid. "They ease congestion on transmission lines," he said, "They create clean power locally, so it's more effic ient, instead of building more, big power plants." Elsner said a power company in Arizona is willing to pay homeowners for the right to put utility-owned solar panels on their roofs, while at the same time wanting to charge folks who do it for themselves. He said the industry is coming to recognize that distributed power generation has great potential. "The fact that our grid is so centralized actually leaves us vulnerable," he said, "Solar power creates a more distributed electricity system that's more secure and more resilient." Appalachian Power has asked the state of Virginia for permission to add a fee to the bills of homeowners in that state with the capacity to generate from 10 to 20 kilowatts. The company points out that almost all homes with solar panels or other generating systems would fall below 10 kilowatts. The company has customers in West Virginia, although it has not requested the fee here. The EEI report is online at eei.org<http://www.eei.org/ourissues/finance/documents/disruptivechallenges.pdf>. __._,_.___ ________________________________ Posted by: "Gary Zuckett" <garyz(a)wvcag.org> ________________________________ Reply via web post<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/wvec-board/conversations/messages/4584;…> * Reply to sender <mailto:garyz@wvcag.org?subject=Re%3A%20FW%3A%20WVNS%20story%3A%20Utilities%20Look%20to%20Add%20Charges%20for%20Home%20Solar> * Reply to group <mailto:wvec-board@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20FW%3A%20WVNS%20story%3A%20Utilities%20Look%20to%20Add%20Charges%20for%20Home%20Solar> * Start a New Topic<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/wvec-board/conversations/newtopic;_ylc=…> * Messages in this topic<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/wvec-board/conversations/topics/4584;_y…> (1) Visit Your Group<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/wvec-board/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaWhwNTBhBF…> [Yahoo! Groups]<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlbmdlMGZ0BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkA…> * Privacy<https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> * Unsubscribe<mailto:wvec-board-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> * Terms of Use<https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> . __,_._,___

1 0

from ScienceDaily e-newsletter:Low-carbon energy future is clean, feasible
by Paul Wilson 14 Oct '14

14 Oct '14

Low-carbon energy future is clean, feasible <http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/sciencedaily/top_news/top_environment/~3/WXj…> Posted: 06 Oct 2014 12:21 PM PDT A future where electricity comes mostly from low-carbon sources is not only feasible in terms of material demand, but will significantly reduce air pollution, a study says. <http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/sciencedaily/top_news/top_environment?a=WXj…> <http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/sciencedaily/top_news/top_environment?a=WXj…> <http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/sciencedaily/top_news/top_environment?a=WXj…> <http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/sciencedaily/top_news/top_environment?a=WXj…> <http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/sciencedaily/top_news/top_environment?a=WXj…> -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle

1 0

Fw: Water samples faked
by James Kotcon 10 Oct '14

10 Oct '14

This is something we need to know about and be public about. JBK ________________________________ From: Bill Price <bill.price(a)sierraclub.org> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2014 8:53 AM To: James Kotcon; Liz Wiles; Mark Kresowik; David Muhly; Gary Nelson; Adam Beitman Subject: Water samples faked Is it any wonder people don't trust what's in the water! http://www.wvgazette.com/article/20141009/GZ01/141009217/1419 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<mailto:bill.price@sierraclub.org> "If there's no struggle, there's no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet renounce controversy are people who want crops without plowing the ground..." Frederick Douglass 1817-1895

1 0

Fwd: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Excellent Article On CA Regulator Shows Utterly Incestuous Relationship Between Utility Industry, Regulator, & Governor Brown
by James Kotcon 09 Oct '14

09 Oct '14

This may be relevant to our own PSC efforts? JBK ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Eric Brooks <brookse32(a)earthlink.net> Date: Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 3:29 AM Subject: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Excellent Article On CA Regulator Shows Utterly Incestuous Relationship Between Utility Industry, Regulator, & Governor Brown To: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS(a)lists.sierraclub.org Excellent Article On California PUC President Peevey Shows Utterly Incestuous Relationship Between PG&E, Peevey, & Governor Brown's Administration (two of the most powerful members of which are former PG&E executives). http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2014/oct/08/citylights1-peevey-yuck Could Brown reappoint unpopular Peevey? By Don Bauder <http://www.sandiegoreader.com/staff/don-bauder/>, Oct. 8, 2014 <http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2014/Oct/08> <http://media.sdreader.com/img/photos/2014/10/07/citylights_Edmund_G_Brown_J…> Jerry Brown <http://media.sdreader.com/img/photos/2014/10/07/citylights_MichaelPeevey_lg…> Michael Peevey <http://media.sdreader.com/img/photos/2014/10/07/citylights_car_t670.jpg?b3f…> Image by Chris Woo Peevey is suspected of backing SDG&E in their attempt to make San Diego ratepayers pick up the tab. <http://media.sdreader.com/img/photos/2014/10/07/citylights_Pipe-from-Sanbru…> Pacific Gas & Electric’s penalties for the 2010 San Bruno pipeline explosion were less than suggested. Shortly after his almost certain reelection in November, Governor Jerry Brown must decide whether to reappoint Michael Peevey as president of the California Public Utilities Commission. Peevey’s term runs out at the end of the year. In mid-August, Brown voiced strong support for Peevey in an interview with editors of the *San Jose Mercury News*. A month earlier, that newspaper had editorialized, “If Gov. Jerry Brown persists in backing his outrageously unethical appointee [Peevey], he might as well change the name to the Pro Utility Commission.” Around the same time, the *San Francisco Chronicle* called for Brown to oust Peevey. The *Modesto Bee*, citing Peevey’s “overseas junkets” paid for by utilities, said it was time for Peevey to go because he “regards utility company executives as peers and partners.” The Southern California press has also been hard on the commission’s president. Peevey is suspected of pulling strings in such matters as San Diego Gas & Electric’s attempt to make ratepayers pick up the tab for uninsured expenses of the 2007 fires, caused by the utility. Recently, emails between commission and Pacific Gas & Electric officials have shown that the company said it didn’t want administrative law judges who would recommend tough penalties for the company’s role in the 2010 San Bruno pipeline explosion. The commission complied, and the recommended penalties were much less than the staff had suggested. Indignant Bay Area politicians want the attorney general to investigate the commission for its pro-utility behavior. The governor and Peevey (both in their mid-70s) are old friends, dating back to the years in which Peevey was active with organized labor and the Democratic Party. After getting two degrees in economics at the University of California/Berkeley, he worked for the federal government in labor economics and then became chief economist for the American Federation of Labor/Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). In 1984, he joined Southern California Edison. He was a senior vice president and chief lobbyist for the company in Sacramento. Edison’s chief executive, Howard Allen, himself a former lobbyist, had a fondness for executives with political connections. <http://media.sdreader.com/img/photos/2014/10/07/citylights_John_Bryson_t670…> John Bryson <http://media.sdreader.com/img/photos/2014/10/07/citylights_carl-wood_t670.j…> Carl Wood Peevey shortly became an executive vice president. Another executive vice president was John Bryson, who also had political connections. He was a former president of the California Public Utilities Commission, a graduate of Stanford with a law degree from Yale, and smooth and oily — like politicians. “Howard Allen played the two against each other,” says Carl Wood, a former commissioner, now director of regulatory affairs for the Utility Workers Union of America. “Peevey is not Bryson’s kind of guy, or the other way around. Bryson is Ivy League–looking and educated, suave, friendly, sophisticated. Peevey is crude but intelligent,” says a former commission executive. Says a former Edison executive, “They were oil and water.” As executive vice president, Peevey in the late 1980s was put in charge of Edison’s attempted hostile takeover of San Diego Gas & Electric. To many in San Diego, Peevey did not appear so intelligent in his speeches and radio and TV appearances. Edison lost big. San Diegans were surprised when, in 1990, Peevey was named president of Southern California Edison. He also served as president of the parent, Edison International. But — and it’s a big but — Peevey was *not* chief executive officer. That job went to his foe, Bryson. Peevey lasted less than three years. In 1993, barely in his mid-50s, he “retired” from Edison and walked out with a bundle of stock and possibly severance pay, too; my sources disagree on the latter point. There is agreement on one point, as described by a former Edison executive: “He didn’t want to work for Bryson,” and Bryson didn’t want Peevey around, either. Peevey, not permitted to compete with Edison for two years, went with a public relations/lobbying firm, then began taking equity interests in smaller energy firms. After he raked in a $10 million capital gain from selling one firm, he and his wife Carol Liu, now a state senator, lined up a kinky tax shelter. He was told he would pay almost no taxes using the scheme but would pay $3.5 million if he played it straight. The government went after the tax shelter — and Peevey and his wife took the accounting firm to court for giving them bad advice. Peevey championed competition in the energy business. Unabashedly, he favored deregulation, although he said it had to be tweaked in California. He told others that he had made a bundle of money trading energy contracts. Oh, yes. He also had stock in Enron, the corporate hoax that fleeced California in the 2000–2001 energy crisis before collapsing. Peevey dumped his Enron stock. <http://media.sdreader.com/img/photos/2014/10/07/citylights_Loretta-Lynch_t6…> Loretta Lynch Despite these black marks against him, in March of 2002, Peevey was named a commissioner of the California Public Utilities Commission. Consumer groups howled that a former Edison president and deregulation yahoo would be named to the commission. At the time, Loretta Lynch was president of the commission and was tough on the utilities and a champion of re-regulation. Carl Wood, then a commissioner, was her steady ally in demanding responsibility of the utilities. “We were unpopular with big business, which had a venomous hatred for Lynch,” recalls Wood. “To mollify the corporations,” then-governor Gray Davis named Peevey as president of the commission at the end of 2002, even though he had been there only about eight months. Pro-consumer groups howled again. Peevey’s supporters pointed to his longtime association with labor unions. Insiders knew better. “The only time Peevey is pro-labor is…when he is using labor to maximize revenue for the utilities,” says a former commission official. “He is a corporate liberal. He is not responsive to consumer interests,” says Wood. Brown and Peevey are buddies “because Peevey does what Brown tells him to do,” says Lynch. “Peevey has always been close to PG&E and [Southern California Edison]. So has Brown.” <http://media.sdreader.com/img/photos/2014/10/07/citylights_nancy-mcfadden_t…> Nancy McFadden Indeed, Brown’s executive secretary is Nancy McFadden, who joined the governor after serving as senior vice president to the chief executive officer of Pacific Gas & Electric. In essence, she is Brown’s chief of staff without the title. In 2011, Brown hired Dana Williamson, Pacific Gas & Electric’s director of public affairs, as senior advisor for cabinet and external affairs. Two years later, she was named cabinet secretary — the person to whom other agency secretaries report. It’s often considered the second-most-powerful post in the gubernatorial administration. When Lynch was deposed, Peevey threw a party, to which he invited utility executives. Lynch wasn’t invited. Asked what another Peevey term as head of the California Public Utilities Commission would be like, Lynch had one word: “Yuck.” - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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 To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp

1 0

Fwd: State Polling Memo for August & September
by James Kotcon 06 Oct '14

06 Oct '14

The monthly polling memo has some interesting insights on energy efficiency and climate change. The Ohio data (attached) suggest that 3 out of 4 would reject AEP's proposed rate hike, and more than 2 of 3 would prefer investments in EE and renewables, instead of bailing out dirty coal plants. It may be useful to use that "bailout" language in some of our political work. JBK ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Caitlin Pixley <caitlin.pixley(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:01 PM Subject: State Polling Memo for August & September To: CONS-FRED(a)lists.sierraclub.org --------------------------- cc:Mail Users----------------------------- ** Remember to DELETE the 'Sender: ...' lines above before REPLYing ** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi All - Find attached the polling memo for both August and September from Grace McRae. The memo includes new polling from the following states: CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, NY, OH, OR, TN, UT, VA, WY Best, Caitlin -- Caitlin Pixley Conservation Associate Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter 353 Hamilton Street Albany, NY 12210 (518)426-9144 caitlin.pixley(a)sierraclub.org Like us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/SierraClubAtlanticChapter *Be a part of the climate solution!* Join the Sierra Club TODAY <http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=9sMC9c6kiZ0&offerid=343370.100…> . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-FRED list, send any message to: CONS-FRED-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC October 2014