EC

ec@lists.wvsierraclub.org

2254 discussions

Buckle your seat belt.......
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 05 Oct '10

05 Oct '10

[image: The New York Times] <http://www.nytimes.com/> ------------------------------ October 4, 2010 U.S. Military Orders Less Dependence on Fossil Fuels By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/r/elisabeth_rose…> With insurgents increasingly attacking the American fuel supply convoys<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/world/asia/04pstan.html>that lumber across the Khyber Pass into Afghanistan<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/af…>, the military is pushing aggressively to develop, test and deploy renewable energy to decrease its need to transport fossil fuels. Last week, a Marine company from California arrived in the rugged outback of Helmand Province bearing novel equipment: portable solar panels that fold up into boxes; energy-conserving lights; solar tent shields that provide shade and electricity; solar chargers for computers and communications equipment. The 150 Marines<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/m/us_mari…>of Company I, Third Battalion, Fifth Marines, will be the first to take renewable technology into a battle zone, where the new equipment will replace diesel and kerosene-based fuels that would ordinarily generate power to run their encampment. Even as Congress has struggled unsuccessfully to pass an energy bill and many states have put renewable energy on hold because of the recession, the military this year has pushed rapidly forward. After a decade of waging wars in remote corners of the globe where fuel is not readily available, senior commanders have come to see overdependence on fossil fuel as a big liability, and renewable technologies — which have become more reliable and less expensive over the past few years — as providing a potential answer. These new types of renewable energy now account for only a small percentage of the power used by the armed forces, but military leaders plan to rapidly expand their use over the next decade. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the huge truck convoys that haul fuel to bases have been sitting ducks for enemy fighters — in the latest attack<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/world/asia/05pstan.html>, oil tankers carrying fuel for NATO<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/n/north_a…>troops in Afghanistan were set on fire in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, early Monday. In Iraq and Afghanistan, one Army study found<http://www.aepi.army.mil/docs/whatsnew/SMP_Casualty_Cost_Factors_Final1-09.…>, for every 24 fuel convoys that set out, one soldier or civilian engaged in fuel transport was killed. In the past three months, six Marines have been wounded guarding fuel runs in Afghanistan. “There are a lot of profound reasons for doing this, but for us at the core it’s practical,” said Ray Mabus, the Navy secretary<http://www.navy.mil/navydata/bios/navybio.asp?bioID=505Militarybiography>and a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, who has said he wants 50 percent of the power for the Navy and Marines to come from renewable energy sources by 2020. That figure includes energy for bases as well as fuel for cars and ships. “Fossil fuel is the No. 1 thing we import to Afghanistan,” Mr. Mabus said, “and guarding that fuel is keeping the troops from doing what they were sent there to do, to fight or engage local people.” He and other experts also said that greater reliance on renewable energy improved national security, because fossil fuels often came from unstable regions and scarce supplies were a potential source of international conflict. Fossil fuel accounts for 30 to 80 percent of the load in convoys into Afghanistan, bringing costs as well as risk. While the military buys gas for just over $1 a gallon, getting that gallon to some forward operating bases costs $400. “We had a couple of tenuous supply lines across Pakistan that are costing us a heck of a lot, and they’re very dangerous,” said Gen. James T. Conway<http://www.defense.gov/bios/biographydetail.aspx?biographyid=114>, the commandant of the Marine Corps. Col. Robert Charette Jr., director of the Marine Corps Expeditionary Energy Office, said he was “cautiously optimistic” that Company I’s equipment would prove reliable and durable enough for military use, and that other Marine companies would be adopting renewable technology in the coming months, although there would probably always be a need to import fuel for some purposes. While setting national energy policy requires Congressional debates, military leaders can simply order the adoption of renewable energy. And the military has the buying power to create products and markets. That, in turn, may make renewable energy more practical and affordable for everyday uses, experts say<http://www.cna.org/research/2010/powering-americas-economy-energy-innovation>. Last year, the Navy introduced its first hybrid vessel, a Wasp class amphibious assault ship called the U.S.S. Makin Island<http://www.public.navy.mil/surfor/lhd8/Pages/default.aspx>, which at speeds under 10 knots runs on electricity rather than on fossil fuel, a shift resulting in greater efficiency that saved 900,000 gallons of fuel on its maiden voyage from Mississippi to San Diego, compared with a conventional ship its size, the Navy said. The Air Force will have its entire fleet certified to fly on biofuels<http://www.nytimes.com/info/biofuels/?inline=nyt-classifier>by 2011 and has already flown test flights using a 50-50 mix of plant-based biofuel and jet fuel; the Navy took its first delivery of fuel made from algae this summer. Biofuels can in theory be produced wherever the raw materials, like plants, are available, and could ultimately be made near battlefields. Concerns about the military’s dependence on fossil fuels in far-flung battlefields began in 2006 in Iraq, where Richard Zilmer, then a major general and the top American commander in western Iraq, sent an urgent cable to Washington suggesting that renewable technology could prevent loss of life. That request catalyzed new research<http://eti.c4ads.org/sites/default/files/DoD_Seeks_Alternative_Fuels.pdf>, but the pressure for immediate results magnified as the military shifted its focus to Afghanistan, a country with little available native fossil fuel and scarce electricity outside cities. Fuel destined for American troops in landlocked Afghanistan is shipped to Karachi, Pakistan, where it is loaded on convoys of 50 to 70 vehicles for transport to central bases. Smaller convoys branch out to the forward lines. The Marines’ new goal is to make the more peripheral sites sustain themselves with the kind of renewable technology carried by Company I, since solar electricity can be generated right on the battlefield. There are similar tactical advantages to using renewable fuel for planes and building hybrid ships. “Every time you cut a ship away from the need to visit an oiler — a fuel supply ship — you create an advantage,” said Mr. Mabus, noting that the Navy had pioneered previous energy transformations in the United States, from sail power to coal power in the 19th century, as well as from coal to oil and oil to nuclear power in the 20th century. The cost calculation is also favorable. The renewable technology that will power Company I costs about $50,000 to $70,000; a single diesel generator costs several thousand dollars. But when it costs hundreds of dollars to get each gallon of traditional fuel to base camps in Afghanistan, the investment is quickly defrayed. Because the military has moved into renewable energy so rapidly, much of the technology currently being used is commercially available or has been adapted for the battlefield from readily available civilian models. This spring, the military invited commercial manufacturers to demonstrate products that might be useful on the battlefield. A small number were selected for further testing. The goal was to see, for example, if cooling systems could handle the 120 degree temperatures often seen in current war zones or if embedded solar panels would make tents more visible to enemy radar. This summer, renewable technologies proved capable of powering computers, residences and most equipment for more than a week at a test base in the Mojave Desert — though not enough to operate the most sophisticated surveillance systems. Much more is in the testing stages: one experimental cooling system uses a pipe burrowed into the cool earth eight feet underground that vents into tents; a solar fan on the tent roof evacuates the hot air and draws cool air from underground. The Marines are exploring solar-powered water purification systems and looking into the possibility of building a small-scale, truck-based biofuel plant that could transform local crops — like illegal poppies — into fuel. “If the Navy comes knocking, they will build it,” Mr. Mabus said. “The price will come down and the infrastructure will be created.”

1 0

(no subject)
by Duane330＠aol.com 04 Oct '10

04 Oct '10

UPPER MONONGAHELA RIVER ASSOCIATION WV/PA MONONGAHELA AREA WATERSHEDS COMPACT Date: October 4, 2010 Governor Joe Manchin III State of West Virginia 1900 Kanawha Boulevard, E. Charleston, WV 25305 RE: Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts of Marcellus Shale Gas Development Urgent action is needed to protect the watersheds of West Virginia. A similar situation as severe exists in southwestern and northeastern Pennsylvania. Hundreds of thousands of acres in these States are in various stages of exploration and development in the Marcellus shale for natural gas extraction. The attention that this overall situation has received, or is planned to receive, by State governments is inadequate in the view of more than twenty watershed groups and conservation organizations. And, the program review in the Office of Oil and Gas as well as the Panel recently selected by WV-DEP to study the situation are not an adequate response given the magnitude of the problems at issue. The Morgantown Dominion Post newspaper was quick to see the substantive bias in affiliations of the Panel members (6 of 9 represent the gas industry under review), as described in the enclosed Editorial. There may well be some changes in State laws needed by the industry; however, the issues faced by the common citizens are extensive and severe and not appropriately represented by the panel. Nor are these issues being adequately addressed by the two State governments, given current practices or plans. The Editorial states “the fox has been put in charge of the hen house.” Watershed and conservation groups are explicitly and conspicuously absent from the Panel. The WV/PA Monongahela Area Watersheds Compact was formed on August 17, 2010, with a second meeting taking place in Morgantown on September 22nd. This new Watershed Compact includes the Upper Monongahela River Association (UMRA) and other groups that have operated for many years. UMRA has coordinated monthly meetings on these gas well drilling issues for two years with interested and affected parties including industry and government representatives. Some eight Resolutions have been approved by this Compact to date, four at each meeting. These eight Resolutions are attached to this letter for your use. We believe these represent an essential response, in part, to the current issues involving Marcellus shale development and extraction in West Virginia. We seek the implementation of remedies for the current problems in the Monongahela River watershed, the current problems in Wetzel and Marshall counties, and the projected problems on the horizon for our State and for Pennsylvania relative to natural gas exploration, development, production and transmission particularly in the Marcellus shale. We are convinced that the long-term condition of our Region is at significant risk at this time, so remedies are needed as soon as they can possibly be put into effect. We seek (1) a meeting with you, (2) a review and adjustment of the composition of the Marcellus Panel recently appointed, and (3) positions for conservation groups such as ours on the various Advisory Committees within State government that deal with the diverse aspects of water resources, water quality, sediment prevention and erosion control. Further, we request that our Compact or some of its members be represented on the new Panel and on the appropriate Advisory Committees. We also feel it is reasonable to ask for a response from your Office regarding the eight resolutions attached. Otherwise, the input and participation of the public including our diverse watershed groups and conservation organizations will not be fairly and appropriately served and citizens of our region will be further harmed and under represented. Respectfully submitted, Duane G. Nichols, Compact Co-Chair Barry G. Pallay, Compact Co-Chair and President of CLEAR and Vice President of UMRA WV/PA Monongahela Area Watersheds Compact Upper Monongahela River Association 330 Dream Catcher Circle 109 Broad Street, P. O. Box 519 Morgantown, WV 26508 Granville WV 26534-0519 cc: WV/PA Watershed Groups, US-EPA, US-ACE, USGS, WV-DEP, Gov. Rendell, PA-DEP. Attachments (2). Editorial and Resolutions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ATTACHEMENT 1 Morgantown Dominion Post, Page 10-A, Monday, September 27, 2010: EDITORIAL: “Task force far too up to its task” “Lopsided appointments of gas industry reps cause for concern about drilling” Talk about putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. And in this case, it’ s a hungry fox to boot. At least that’s the perception we got from last week’s appointment of six natural gas company representatives to a new nine-member task force to help the state better regulate the industry. We realize that this panel, appointed by the state’s director of the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), will not actually be writing the regulations and legislation on how to regulate this industry. Or at least that’s what we are being led to believe. The DEP’s staff will be charged with that task, while this panel will attempt to reach a consensus on the issues. That might not be too hard to do, considering the only real differences of opinion will come from the lone representative of the West Virginia Environmental Council and an advocate for landowner’s rights. The ninth member of the panel is a coal industry lawyer, who represents the West Virginia Coal Association. No one should overestimate the scope and authority of this task force, however, we can assure the DEP and this group that we’ll be watching. Clearly, the state needs to determine how to better regulate our booming natural gas industry. We also understand the logic of considering a dual regulatory system — one for conventional gas drilling and another for the burgeoning Marcellus shale drilling. And no one is questioning why there should be industry representatives on this task force. However, the number of appointments of executives and lawyers for this industry is weighed far too heavily in the industry’s favor. With all due respect to these industry appointees, some who have served in public regulatory roles, too, these appointments raise eyebrows. Yes, they bring diverse outlooks, technical knowledge and pragmatic advice to the table, but they also bring their industry’s primary goal to the head of the well: Their profit margin. No one here is opposed to that, but regulation of this industry must balance a return on investment with reasonable regulation and oversight. Otherwise, these drilling operations may pose dangerous risks to our state’ s aquifer, our waterways, our roads, our landscape and landowners’ rights. This panel’s lopsided make-up leads us to believe there’s reason to fear all of that. We urge the DEP to review the composition of this panel and even appoint someone who isn’t a stakeholder to this task force before the chickens come home to roost. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RESOLUTIONS [ADOPTED AUGUST 17TH AND SEPTEMBER 22ND 2010] WV/PA MONONGAHELA AREA WATERSHEDS COMPACT We recognize the value of mineral extraction, including coal, oil, gas and water, in the Monongahela basin and adjoining areas, when conducted responsibly. But, the current and projected levels of Marcellus shale drilling for natural gas production and the manner in which it is being conducted poses very serious problems for most all of West Virginia and Pennsylvania. RESOLUTIONS, FIRST WV-PA WATERSHED MEETING, AUGUST 17, 2010 1. The West Virginia and Pennsylvania DEPs must enact commensurate and enforceable standards and rules/regulations and adequate penalties to protect regional water resources from potential hazards caused by mineral extraction and oil and gas drilling, including but not limited to sedimentation, water withdrawal, organic and inorganic chemicals and thermal effects. 2. The West Virginia and Pennsylvania DEPs must hire an additional and adequate number of inspectors and other staff to effectively monitor and enforce regulations governing mining and the oil and gas well industries. 3. The Upper Monongahela watershed groups advocate that closed-loop systems for containment of blowback water be required at all new construction gas well drilling sites rather than the open pit system of containment. 4. If open pits exist or are absolutely necessary, these should provide sufficient natural or geosynthetic protection to both contain the blowback water and to prevent its percolation into the soil or groundwater beneath the pit should the containment liner become ruptured. Further, we advocate the usage of regulations typically found in state dam safety statutes in order to ensure that blowback pits are properly sited and constructed, and that emergency contact/notification procedures are implemented when an accident involving the release of blowback water occurs. RESOLUTIONS, SECOND WV/PA MONONGAHELA AREA WATERSHEDS COMPACT 5.West Virginia and Pennsylvania rivers and streams frequently experience very low flows because of reduced rainfall. At these critically low flows, water withdrawals for Marcellus Shale gas well activities threaten aquatic life in many streams. And, more generally, the waters of both States must be shared among the diverse uses from agriculture to industry to recreation to domestic use. This includes both surface and sub-surface water resources. Therefore, the withdrawal of water from any source for high volume applications as Marcellus Shale drilling, fracking or other operations must be regulated and require permits from an appropriate State agency. 6. The Program Review in the Office of Oil and Gas of the WV DEP is clearly useful with a projected Final Report date of December 2010. However, this Review of oil and gas exploration and production activities in West Virginia is inadequate in and of itself. The issues and problems of this industry sector are huge and diverse and they directly involve many other agencies of State government; and, these problems are interrelated to the other extractive industries. A state-wide review is urgently needed, one that is directed from the Office of the Governor. And, a Special Session of the WV Legislature would appear to be called for to address these problems and issues that include the protection of our water, air and land as well as our roads, our scenic values and quality of life. Each extractive activity should be responsible for the cost of all the environmental and socio-economic impacts resulting from its activities, taking into account both short and long-term impacts. 7. The issues and problems affecting WV and PA as a result of the current and projected levels of activity for coal mining and natural gas production are of an inter-state or national character. Here in northern WV and southwestern PA we have many such operations that cross state lines. One major issue is the drinking water for approximately one million people in southwestern Pennsylvania that comes from the Monongahela River, which drains most of northcentral WV. This and the other streams will likely increase in their total loads of pollutants. Therefore, the US Environmental Protection Agency in conjunction with the US Army Corps of Engineers, the US Geological Survey and other federal agencies should prepare a “guidance document” and respond quickly to the water and aqueous waste problems of the extractive industries now affecting New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and other States. 8. An Interagency Task Force study within the United States government is needed to examine the existing problems posed by the extractive industries in the United States. This would aim to establish a viable long range Planning Office that can anticipate many of the problems such as those posed by Marcellus Shale gas exploration and production. The focus would be on environment impacts and socio-economic dislocations such as public infrastructure damages and domestic disturbance problems. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOTE: The above Resolutions were adopted by consensus at the First and Second WV-PA Watershed Group Meetings on August 17, 2010 and September 22, 2010 at the Morgantown Airport. These meetings were organized and conducted by the representatives of various watershed and conservation groups in cooperation with the Upper Monongahela River Association (_www.uppermon.org_ (http://www.uppermon.org) ). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

1 0

IMPORTANT - [MVCAC] GASLAND movie screenings: Oct 3, 11 & 12
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 04 Oct '10

04 Oct '10

Kitty, You are right, I am MVCAC's list manager, however, thanks to you I just looked at the most recent messages, so thanks! :) I am copying the WVSC on this great news. *GASLAND - Tuesday, October 12th, College of Law, WVU, off University Ave., Morgantown, WV. Time: 6:30 pm. "Green Tables" for information distribution. [Questions: justpeace(a)yahoo.com <mailto:justpeace@yahoo.com> ]* WVSC & LWV: We need to get the message out to all our members via email or phone calls, also mention it to them at Candidate Forums: http://www.lwvwv.org/category/league-of-women-votes-of-wv/candidate-forums/ WVSC: Alert via HELEN? -Jonathan On 10/1/2010 2:21 PM, Kitty Lozier wrote: > jonathan, i am guessing you know about this. how shall we work this > into our league? > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *John Lozier* <j.lozier(a)mondems.com <mailto:j.lozier@mondems.com>> > Date: Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 1:13 PM > Subject: Fwd: [MVCAC] GASLAND movie screenings: Oct 3, 11 & 12 > To: Kitty Lozier <clozier(a)gmail.com <mailto:clozier@gmail.com>>, > Catherine Tall <cvtall(a)gmail.com <mailto:cvtall@gmail.com>> > > > fyi > > Begin forwarded message: > >> *From: *"Barbara Howe" <bhowe(a)wvu.edu <mailto:bhowe@wvu.edu>> >> *Date: *October 1, 2010 11:35:26 AM EDT >> *To: *"John Lozier" <j.lozier(a)mondems.com <mailto:j.lozier@mondems.com>> >> *Subject: **Fwd: [MVCAC] GASLAND movie screenings: Oct 3, 11 & 12* >> >> Hi, John, >> Could you share this with Kitty? I don't have her email - I had >> heard the League of Women Voters was thinking about bringing GASLAND >> to Morgantown and wanted her to know that it is coming on the 12th. >> Thanks, >> Barb >> >> *From: *Duane330(a)aol.com <mailto:Duane330@aol.com> >> *Date: *September 30, 2010 7:51:43 PM EDT >> *To: *CLEAR(a)cheat.org <mailto:CLEAR@cheat.org>, mvcac(a)cheat.org >> <mailto:mvcac@cheat.org> >> *Subject: **[MVCAC] GASLAND movie screenings: Oct 3, 11 & 12* >> >> >> *_GASLAND Movie Showings: No admission charges at any of the three >> locations below._* >> *Sunday, October 3rd, Uniontown State Theater, 37 East Main Street, >> Uniontown, PA. * >> *Two showings: 1 pm and 3 pm.* >> *Monday, October 11th, Ohio County Public Library, 5 16th St, >> Wheeling, WV 26003. >> (304) 232-0244. One Showing: Noon.* >> *Tuesday, October 12th, College of Law, WVU, off University Ave., >> Morgantown, WV. Time: 6:30 pm. "Green Tables" for information >> distribution. [Questions: justpeace(a)yahoo.com >> <mailto:justpeace@yahoo.com> ]* >> *>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>* >> *For Background Information See: http://gaslandthemovie.com/* >> *>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>* >> >> GasLands-- The Documentary. 1 hour and 43 minutes. >> >> GasLand Exposes The Dangers Of Natural Gas Drilling Called Hydraulic >> Fracturing - The largest domestic natural gas drilling boom in >> history has swept across the United States. The Halliburton-developed >> drilling technology of “fracking” or hydraulic fracturing has >> unlocked a “Saudia Arabia of natural gas” just beneath us. But is >> fracking safe? When filmmaker Josh Fox is asked to lease his land for >> drilling, he embarks on a cross-country odyssey uncovering a trail of >> secrets, lies and contamination. A recently drilled nearby >> Pennsylvania town reports that residents are able to light their >> drinking water on fire. This is just one of the many absurd and >> astonishing revelations of a new country called GASLAND. Part verite >> travelogue, part expose, part mystery, part bluegrass banjo meltdown, >> part showdown. >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> NOTE: While not every detail reported in the movie is portrayed >> accurately, the issues covered and >> >> the information presented are much more than thought provoking and >> challenging. And, in my opinion, >> >> the alternative explanations that have been offered for some details >> also represent problems for our >> >> region, that is for the exploration, development, production and >> transmission of natural gas from the >> >> Marcellus shale formation. >> >> Duane G. Nichols, Co-Chair, WV/PA Monongahela Area >> Watersheds Compact. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> MVCAC mailing list >> MVCAC(a)cheat.org <mailto:MVCAC@cheat.org> >> http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac >> > > Organizing for America > */WVFirstCongressionalOFA/* > http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/WVFirstCongressionalOFA > John Lozier > Monongalia County Democratic Executive Committee District 2 - > Precincts 10, 13 and 16 > 345 Virginia Avenue - phone home: 304-599-8233 cell 304 276 5141 > */ > /* > > > > > > > >

6 5

Fwd: [MVCAC] FW: National Solar Tour in Morgantown!
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 01 Oct '10

01 Oct '10

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [MVCAC] FW: National Solar Tour in Morgantown! Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 08:15:13 -0400 From: Wonderlin, William <wwonderlin(a)hsc.wvu.edu> To: mvcac(a)cheat.org <mvcac(a)cheat.org> (from Megan Nedzinski) Please see the follow message regarding an event this weekend that might be of potential interest. Hope to see you there! American Solar Energy Society (ASES) National Solar Tour nationalsolartour.org<http://nationalsolartour.org/ is coming to Morgantown! Saturday, October 2nd from 12 until 4pm. (and it's FREE!) Saturday, October 2, 2010, will be Morgantown’s second participation in the national solar tour. Any people interested can find out more information at www.morgantowngreenteam.org/iebg.html,<http://www.morgantowngreenteam.org/iebg.html,> www.eco-mod-structure.com<http://www.eco-mod-structure.com/>, or by calling John Garlow at 304-276-3655. Most locations will be open from noon until 4 pm, but look for yard signs that say OPEN HOUSE for the Solar Tour. Please help us spread the word by sharing this notice with potentially interested parties (please forward responsibly). Or by posting the attached flyer and informational brochure at your workplace, on community bulletin boards, or at other places to encourage interest and participation. A version appropriate for web posting is also attached for your use with web postings. Thanks so much and we look forward to seeing you Saturday! -- Megan M. Nedzinski, Architect, LEED AP NEDZINSKI DESIGN COLLABORATIVE, LLC collaborative | responsible | appropriate | DESIGN megannedzinski.com Sometimes you have to act as if acting will make a difference, even when you can't prove that it will. -Michael Pollan

1 0

Banks and MTR
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 01 Oct '10

01 Oct '10

Throwing Debris at the Coal Industry Mountaintop Mining Gets Heated Ken Silverstein <http://www.energybiz.com/author/blog/ken-silverstein> | Sep 27, 2010 [image: Share/Save]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.energybiz.com%2Fart….> <http://www.energybiz.com/article/10/09/throwing-debris-coal-industry##> The coal industry is the target of a lot of debris. While most of it is being tossed by environmental organizations, the rubble is now coming from the investment banking industry - those that finance the operations of coal mining companies. At issue is mountaintop mining practices in Appalachia, which sheer off the tops of hillsides to get at the underlying coal seam. Besides the scarring of the landscape, the rock and dirt that is removed ends up in the streams below and affects local water quality. So, some of the big banks have limited their involvement with the coal companies. It's all part of a greater push by the green groups to curb coal consumption in this country. The focus now is on the mountaintop mining practices in Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia - one that is supported in part by the current Environmental Protection Agency that has placed limits on the mining technique. <http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/e77fdd4f5afd88a3852576b3005a604f/4…> That movement is gaining strength now that Bank of America, Citi, Credit Suisse, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo have set formal policies that will minimize their relationships with coal operators performing mountaintop removal. "Money talks - and it is saying loud and clear that mountaintop removal coal mining is a bad investment," says Rebecca Tarbotton, executive director of the Rainforest Network<http://ran.org/content/wall-street-backs-away-mountaintop-removal-coal-mini…>. "With the move away from mountaintop removal coal mining, our country's top banks are showing that they know they can do well while doing good for our environment and our public health." The organization, which first approached Bank of America three years ago on this issue, says that banks are no longer financing Massey Energy, which is the biggest coal operator in Appalachia involved with mountaintop removal. Specifically, it says that JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Wells Fargo all underwrote bonds and provided loans for the company but they no longer do. But such a view may turn out to be sanctimonious and one that will cost them business as other financial institutions step in and take their business. Indeed, PNC and UBS are more than willing to bankroll such operations. While coal companies will have tighter regulatory controls, they will not disappear as too much of the national economy - not to mention local jobs in Appalachia - are dependent on their product. *Balancing Act* The coal industry, in fact, has already marched on Washington to illustrate the role it now plays and what it is doing to repair the land and water. Beyond the political steps, it is also in the process of suing to regain some earlier mountaintop mining rights that have been lost since an adverse April ruling by the EPA. At stake: Appalachia is responsible for a third of the nation's coal and two-thirds of those jobs, it says. The Energy Information Administration estimates that coal reserves in Appalachia are 55.2 billion tons while coal production tied to mountaintop mining in West Virginia alone is 52 million tons annually, which is more than the production of underground mining operations. "We plan to highlight the critically important role of the American coal miner and to call on lawmakers and administration officials to stop efforts to regulate the coal industry - and the thousands of jobs it provides - out of business," says Chris Hamilton, senior vice president of the West Virginia Coal Association. "West Virginia's congressional delegation understands the importance of coal to our local economies and national energy plan, but many federal legislators and bureaucrats do not." Hamilton points to a recent study by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee's Minority Staff that highlights the economic effect of the EPA's limits on coal mining permits in Central Appalachia. According to the study, nearly 18,000 new and existing jobs and more than 80 small businesses are being jeopardized. He says that about 190 permits are still awaiting action. Mountaintop mining gained prevalence in the 1990s, largely because about 90 percent of the resources that lay beneath those peaks were available for production. After the area is mined for coal, it must be "reclaimed" and turned into something useful such as schools, shopping malls and recreational sites. It's a lot more troublesome than that, say environmentalists and other critics. Roughly 6,700 permits were issued between 1985 and 2001 and all to unload debris from the mining process to the areas below. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, about 2,000 miles of streams have been buried while at least 380,000 acres of local forestry have been devastated. "We will continue to work with all stakeholders to find a way forward that follows the science and the law," says Lisa Jackson, EPA Administrator. "Getting this right is important to Americans who rely on affordable coal to power homes and businesses, as well as coal communities that count on jobs and a livable environment, both during mining and after coal companies move to other sites." Adding financial pressures to the current regulatory ones in effect will likely result in better mining practices - not an outright ban on mountaintop removal. In a country that is dependent on coal, that's acceptable. So what do you think? Please share your thoughts by posting a quick comment below, or by sending me a longer reply to energybizinsider(a)energycentral.com . EnergyBiz Insider is nominated for Best Online Column by Media Industry News follow ken at www.twitter.com/freehand1200

1 0

Fw: [WVFirstCongressionalOFA] WV Water Conference
by Jim Sconyers 30 Sep '10

30 Sep '10

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Denise Binion <dbinion(a)gmail.com> To: WVFirstCongressionalOFA <WVFirstCongressionalOFA(a)groups.barackobama.com> Sent: Thu, September 30, 2010 10:48:16 AM Subject: [WVFirstCongressionalOFA] WV Water Conference http://www.wvwaterconference.org/agenda.cfm ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email was sent to 17 members of WVFirstCongressionalOFA This email was sent from Denise Binion dbinion(a)gmail.com Listserv email address: WVFirstCongressionalOFA(a)groups.barackobama.com Your reply will be sent to: WVFirstCongressionalOFA(a)groups.barackobama.com Unsubscribe or change your email settings: http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/WVFirstCongressionalOFA/listserv-unsub -------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Both WV Senators say coal ash is okay
by Frank Young 24 Sep '10

24 Sep '10

This would be funny, were these guys (Rockeekller & Goodwin) not so serious about it. The paragraph about recycling coal ash into home building materials and other consumer products reflects an incredible mindset of pandering to King Coal. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Vernon Haltom <vernoncrmw(a)gmail.com> To: "FOM, List" <fom(a)lists.riseup.net>; "MJSlist, MJSlist" <mountainjusticesummer(a)lists.riseup.net>; Justice <Justice(a)lists.citizenscoalcouncil.org>; Alliance for Appalachia <the-alliance-for-appalachia(a)googlegroups.com> Sent: Fri, September 24, 2010 11:43:54 AM Subject: [Justice] Fwd: Rockefeller says coal ash is okay What Rockefeller sent below. Here's my response: You are completely wrong in asking the EPA to regulate coal ash as non-hazardous waste. It is hazardous waste and presents a clear and present danger to citizens of West Virginia, and should be regulated as hazardous waste under Subtitle C. It becomes more and more clear that you work for the likes of Don Blankenship and other coal barons, with no regard for the citizens whom you were elected to represent. Shame on you. _________________ ------------ Forwarded message ------------ From: senator(a)rockefeller.senate.gov Date: Sep 24, 2010 Subject: Letter from Senator Jay Rockefeller To: clrank(a)hughes.net Dear Cindy, Thank you for contacting me regarding ash and other types of coal combustion waste (CCW). I always enjoy hearing from a fellow West Virginian, and I welcome the opportunity to be in touch on this important issue. In 2008 the American Coal Ash Association estimated that coal fired power plants generated upwards of 136 million tons of CCW, making it the second largest source of waste in the United States, behind only household garbage. On December 22, 2008, a breach occurred at a coal waste impoundment pond located at the Tennessee Valley Authority's Kingston plant, releasing 1.1 billion gallons of coal ash into the surrounding community. The discharge ended up covering more than 300 acres of homes and property resulting in significant damage. This tragedy has raised serious questions about the health and safety impacts of coal storage to the surrounding communities. Waste management is regulated under provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976. Subtitle C of RCRA created a hazardous waste management program that required the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop criteria for identifying the characteristics of hazardous waste and to develop waste management criteria applicable to such waste. Subtitle D established state and local governments as the primary planning, regulating, and implementing entities for the management of non-hazardous solid waste. In 1980, in response to proposed amendments to RCRA, the EPA excluded the regulation of fossil fuel combustion waste, such as CCW, from its final hazardous waste regulations, deferring that responsibility to state and local governments. In May 2000, the EPA reaffirmed that CCW did not warrant regulation under federal hazardous waste requirements but rather that national regulations for solid waste management requirements should be implemented for CCW when disposed in landfills or surface impoundments. In the wake of the Kingston disaster, the EPA announced its intent to move forward with new CCW regulations addressing the management of coal combustion residuals and surface impoundments in 2010. In May 2010, the EPA released a study outlining national rules to ensure the safe disposal of coal ash from coal-fired power plants. The agency proposal would allow state and federal officials to enforce coal ash, phase out the use of new surface impoundments, and promote legal action should citizens be exposed to the contents of coal impoundments. The proposal would also require companies to place liners beneath all coal ash impoundments to reduce the risk of soil and ground water contamination. On June 21, 2010, the EPA proposed two regulatory rule options applicable to the management of CCW. Under the first option, EPA would draw on its existing authority to identify a waste as hazardous and regulate it under the hazardous waste management standards established under Subtitle C of the RCRA. The second option would establish criteria applicable to landfills and surface impoundments accepting CCW under RCRA's Subtitle D solid waste management requirements. Under Subtitle D, the EPA does not have the authority to enforce its proposed requirements and, instead, would rely solely on states or citizen suits to enforce the standards. On July 29, 2010, I sent a letter to the EPA regarding the agency's efforts to establish national criteria to improve the protection of public health and the environment under RCRA. I have included a copy of that letter for your review. I believe that the best approach for doing this is under Subtitle D and that the EPA should work closely with state regulators in addressing the enforcement of new regulations. The EPA should work with the states and seek coal ash disposal practices under RCRA's Subtitle D that address structural stability of impoundments, protects public health, and promotes the recycling and beneficial reuse of coal ash. I will continue to carefully monitor this issue as the EPA moves forward in its rule-making process and will continue to support efforts designed both improve the safety of coal ash impoundments and protect West Virginia jobs. As always, I wish you the best. With Warm Regards, Jay Rockefeller

1 0

Fwd: TransGas CTL plant update --Order on summary judgment
by James Kotcon 23 Sep '10

23 Sep '10

This is mostly good news (could have been a lot worse). Who could come to Charleston on Oct. 27 or 28? JBK >>> Elena Saxonhouse <Elena.Saxonhouse(a)sierraclub.org> 9/23/2010 6:24 PM >>> Hi all, I received the Order from the Air Quality Board today denying all motions for summary judgment -- meaning that we will move forward to a hearing on all the issues that we decided to pursue. It looks like the Board is particularly intrigued by our argument that DAQ failed to include potential air emissions from wastewater treatment: "the Board considers Appellants' arguments on segmentation to be valid and considers this an area where more evidence is needed prior to making a summary decision." One unfortunate part of the Order is that the Board adopted TransGas's language in describing the issues remaining, which unfairly narrows or mischaracterizes some of them (e.g., our argument about storage tanks). We will get this clarified before the hearing. The hearing is October 27-28 in Charleston. I don't think a big rally or anything is necessary, but it would be great to have some citizens there to show support and public interest, and I encourage the Chapter to think about a media plan. -Elena Elena Saxonhouse Staff Attorney Sierra Club Environmental Law Program 85 Second St., 2nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 (415) 977-5765 (415) 977-5793 (fax)

1 0

Fwd: Stories on New Hill Mine permit appeal
by James Kotcon 23 Sep '10

23 Sep '10

A couple news items lately on the appeal, and a story on our fight against gas drilling in state parks. I also had an interview with the local television station, which ran Tuesday night and Wednesday morning (at least) but I did not see either of them. Jim Kotcon ********* Permit for New Hill mine delayed: Sierra Club files appeal with DEP BY DAVID BEARD The Dominion Post Although Patriot Mining Co.'s permit application to expand its New Hill surface mine, near Cassville, has reached its last milestone, the story isn't over. Sierra Club has filed with the state Environmental Quality Board to appeal the mine's water discharge permit - the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. And the surface mine permit itself has not been issued yet, a Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) official said. The surface mining application seeks to expand the New Hill mine by 225 acres. The state DEP milestone chart for the application shows that all the milestones have been achieved and the permit was printed Sept. 2. But DEP spokeswoman Kathy Cosco said the agency wants some additional information and Patriot cannot disturb the land covered by the permit. Sierra Club West Virginia Chapter spokesman Jim Kotcon said the NPDES permit lacks limits for potential pollutants - heavy metals and other toxins contained in mine runoff and fly ash. The appeal seeks to have the permit rescinded or modified to include limits. Patriot applies fly ash - a coal combustion byproduct trucked in from the Morgantown Energy Associates power plant - to mined areas to prevent acid mine drainage. Sierra Club said fly ash contains potential pollutants - arsenic, lead, mercury, selenium and others - that could leach into a tributary of Scotts Run, Scotts Run itself and then into the Monongahela River. New information from the U.S. Environmental Protect Agency indicates fly ash may be more dangerous than originally believed, he said, but the DEP did not include toxin limits in the permit. "West Virginia DEP is still using outdated testing procedures to evaluate the toxicity of coal ash," Kotcon said in a release. The club wants the Environmental Quality Board - a division of the DEP - to require the DEP to comply with NPDES permitting requirements and set limits for pollutants. The DEP previously said it has adequate data for its decisions, the EPA had no issues with the surface mining permit, and Patriot will be required to perform regular testing of surface and groundwater locations. An evidentiary hearing is set for Nov. 18. Board spokeswoman Jackie Shultz said the appeal process could take months, depending on a number of variables. Patriot's attorney in the appeal said he was just familiarizing himself with the case and couldn't comment on it. Patriot did not respond to requests for comment. THE STATE JOURNAL Thursday 23 September 2010: Sierra Club Files Appeal with DEP Over Proposed Cassville Surface Mine Posted Tuesday, September 21, 2010 ; 11:06 PM Updated Wednesday, September 22, 2010; 07:23 AM The Sierra Club says its concerned about water quality issues for the New Hill West mine. By Mike Krafcik MORGANTOWN -- The Sierra Club has filed an appeal to challenge the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection's water permit for the New Hill West mine in Cassville. The notice was filed with the West Virginia Environmental Quality Control Board. The permit was issued to the Patriot Mining Company for the 225-acre strip mine. The Sierra Club said the permit does not adequately control the water pollution that comes from this site. Patriot Mining officials have indicated they would intend dump 1,000-10,000 tons of coal combustion waste per acre of mined area. The club said the DEP standards fail to include any limits for toxic heavy metals that come from fly-ash and coal combustion bi-products. The Sierra Club said the DEP is using out-dated testing procedures that will undermine the risks to ground water and streams from the ash disposal at mine sites. "The DEP needs to have a pollution prevention plan in this permit that assures that any discharges from the mine will meet any water quality standards, they have not done that," said Jim Kotcon, of the Sierra Club West Virginia. The Sierra Club's appeal will be heard as part of a evidentiary hearing before the Environmental Quality Board scheduled for November. Charleston Gazette Thursday 23 September 2010: September 22, 2010 Court urged to block state park drilling By Ken Ward Jr. The Charleston Gazette CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- West Virginia regulators and state environmental groups on Wednesday urged the state Supreme Court to uphold a Department of Environmental Protection decision to block new oil and gas drilling at Chief Logan State Park. The Sierra Club, the West Virginia Highlands Conservancy and Friends of Blackwater joined the DEP and the state Division of Natural Resources in asking justices to overturn a lower court ruling to allow the drilling by Cabot Oil and Gas joined DEP lawyers. In December 2007, then-DEP Secretary Stephanie Timmermeyer rejected Cabot's permit requests, citing a section of state park law that prohibits mineral extraction. Logan Circuit Judge Roger Perry overturned the DEP decision and the Manchin administration appealed. "We believe that we're not allowed to allow drilling on state park surface," DEP lawyer Kristen Boggs told justices during an argument Wednesday. Justice Menis Ketchum repeatedly asked lawyers on all sides if the DEP permit denial amounted to a "taking" of private property that would require the state to compensate Cabot and the Lawson Heirs, a family company that owned the park land 50 years ago and much more recently leased the gas reserves to Cabot. Cabot lawyer Timothy Miller and Lawson Heirs attorney Larry George agreed, as did Perry in the lower court ruling. DNR lawyer Tom Smith told justices the underlying issues in the case are important and could involve drilling and mining in parks across the state. "You can smell the money in this case," Smith said. But Smith said the case before the court is really much more narrow, and involves only the question of whether the DEP can invoke a section of parks law -- which technically involves DNR -- in rejecting a drilling permit. And Tom Rodd, a lawyer for citizen groups that intervened in the case, said that any issue involving whether the drilling ban is a "taking" must be resolved in a separate suit brought by Cabot or the Lawson Heirs, not in an appeal of DEP's permit denial decision. Reach Ken Ward Jr. at kw...(a)wvgazette.com or 304-348-1702.

1 0

Fw: NASA Gives Kids Their Own Guide to Climate Change
by Jim Sconyers 22 Sep '10

22 Sep '10

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: "Leon, Nancy J (1722)" <nancy.j.leon(a)jpl.nasa.gov> To: "jim_scon(a)yahoo.com" <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com>; "celliot2(a)comcast.net" <celliot2(a)comcast.net> Cc: "pjgrunt(a)gmail.com" <pjgrunt(a)gmail.com> Sent: Wed, September 22, 2010 1:52:30 PM Subject: NASA Gives Kids Their Own Guide to Climate Change Jim It was a pleasure to talk to you today. As we discussed, we have developed a new site which explores the timely topic of climate change -- but targeting upper elementary school age kids. We are hoping that this site can be a resource to your members who are parents and teachers. I am attaching a short announcement about the new site. I am hoping that you can include the announcement about the site in your organization's newsletter, and perhaps put in a link to our site from yours. We also have a little logo for the site in case you want it for the graphic link. (Attached) Thanks very much, Nancy Leon Manager, NASA Kids Climate Change Program ____________________________ NASA Gives Kids Their Own Guide to Climate Change A blinking red-eyed tree frog and flitting butterfly greet visitors to the new NASA Climate Kids website. Targeting grades 4 6, this kid-friendly guide de-mystifies one of the most important science issues of our time. The site answers the ³Big Questions² about global climate change using simple illustrations, humor, interactivity, and age-appropriate language. For example, one interactive feature is the Climate Time Machine, which reveals how global changes have affected or will affect our planet over time. ³Climate Tales² has animal cartoon characters coping< more or less good humoredly<with the effects humans are having on their habitats. A collection of Earth-science-related games offers such experiences as ³Wild Weather Adventure² and ³Missions to Planet Earth.² A Green Careers section profiles real people doing jobs that help slow climate change. Visit Climate Kids at climate.nasa.gov/kids.

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC