EC

ec@lists.wvsierraclub.org

2254 discussions

Start a nNew thread

Some Republicans champion Solar
by Beth Little 03 Dec '13

03 Dec '13

http://cleantechnica.com/2013/11/27/solar-power-war/

1 0

Fwd: 93% support govt actions to regulate gas development to avoid damaging forest and streams important for hunting, fishing and hiking
by Paul Wilson 02 Dec '13

02 Dec '13

fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Angie Rosser <arosser(a)wvrivers.org> Date: Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:09 AM Subject: 93% support govt actions to regulate gas development to avoid damaging forest and streams important for hunting, fishing and hiking To: "birthplaceofrivers(a)tws.org" <birthplaceofrivers(a)tws.org> Gas drillers should minimize impact on nature, poll says<http://www.post-gazette.com/local/marcellusshale/2013/12/02/Gas-drillers-sh…> December 1, 2013 10:42 PM By Don Hopey / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Results of a poll by The Nature Conservancy in the six-state Marcellus Shale gas region of the Appalachians indicate strong support for better regional planning to minimize impacts on forest and water resources, as well as tougher environmental safeguards. The poll, scheduled for release at noon today, also shows that a majority of those polled -- 54 percent -- say conservation of natural habitats and water resources should be a higher priority than shale gas development, even if that would produce higher energy costs. Forty-two percent of those polled say creation of new natural gas industry jobs should be a higher priority. "Clearly people value forests and rivers and natural habitats, and they don't want to see natural gas development come at the expense of those areas," said Nels Johnson, the oil and gas lead for the conservancy's North America Energy Program. Asked about government actions to regulate shale gas development, overwhelming majorities said they support requiring drilling companies to: avoid damaging forests and streams important for hunting, fishing and hiking (93 percent); follow regional plans for location of wells and pipelines to minimize wildlife habitat impacts (93 percent); mitigate adverse impacts to forests and water quality (92 percent); and base well locations on sound science (91 percent). Majorities above 80 percent said they favored requiring drillers to take measures to prevent methane releases during drilling, performing regional studies to determine how much water fracking will use and where it will come from, and establishing a state commission to set gas drilling standards. Mr. Johnson said he was surprised by the strong public support for regional planning for locating shale gas development sites. "There's been a lot of polling on fracking and a lot of attention paid to economic issues, but not much focus by policymakers on natural habitat issues," he said. "But this [poll] shows that even though the policymakers aren't focused on valuable habitat, the public is." The Nature Conservancy poll release is the first part of a multistage program aimed at minimizing the shale gas development impacts on natural habitat and water resources. The conservancy also is working with drilling companies to develop new tools to guide the industry's siting of well pads, pipelines and other shale gas infrastructure to minimize damage to natural habitats. Travis Windle, a spokesman for the Marcellus Shale Coalition, a gas industry lobbying organization, said he wasn't aware of any coalition member companies working with the conservancy. Mr. Windle declined to comment on the poll results because he hadn't had a chance to review them, but said a Robert Morris University poll released in November demonstrated "strong public support" for the shale gas industry. "It's a false choice to suggest that we can have affordable and reliable energy and job growth or we can protect our environment," he said, "and our industry continues to work collaboratively with a broad base of stakeholders to make certain that we continue to achieve these shared goals." Of the 1,002 people nationwide polled by Robert Morris, 42 percent support fracking, 33 percent oppose it and 25 percent were unsure. Three out of 4 said fracking will make the nation more energy independent. The poll's margin of error was plus or minus 3 percentage points. The Nature Conservancy poll -- based on August telephone interviews with 1,250 voters in the shale gas regions of Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky and Maryland -- has a sampling error margin of plus or minus 2.8 percentage points. Don Hopey: dhopey(a)post-gazette.com or 412-263-1983. Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/local/marcellusshale/2013/12/02/Gas-drillers-sh… ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com ______________________________________________________________________ -- 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

Some facts about outdoor lighting
by Beth Little 29 Nov '13

29 Nov '13

http://www.darksky.org/assets/2013/WorldwideEnergyWaste.jpg?utm_source=Nov.+ 27+eNews <http://www.darksky.org/assets/2013/WorldwideEnergyWaste.jpg?utm_source=Nov. +27+eNews&utm_campaign=Nov.+26+eNews&utm_medium=email> &utm_campaign=Nov.+26+eNews&utm_medium=email

1 0

A Greener way to frack for natural gas??
by Paul Wilson 26 Nov '13

26 Nov '13

This showed up on the E-magazines latest email issue. http://www.emagazine.com/earth-talk/greener-ways-to-frack-for-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

2 1

from ScienceDaily e-newsletter: 2 stories on carbon emissions
by Paul Wilson 20 Nov '13

20 Nov '13

Coal continues to dominate global carbon emissions<http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/sciencedaily/top_news/top_environment/~3/QEY…> Posted: 18 Nov 2013 04:31 PM PST Despite explosive growth in renewable energy consumption, continued strong growth in coal consumption has further consolidated coal as the dominate source of carbon dioxide emissions. Global carbon emissions set to reach record 36 billion tons in 2013<http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/sciencedaily/top_news/top_environment/~3/IVJ…> Posted: 18 Nov 2013 04:31 PM PST Global emissions of carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels are set to rise again in 2013, reaching a record high of 36 billion tons - according to new figures from the Global Carbon Project. The biggest contributors to fossil fuel emissions in 2012 were China (27 per cent), the United States (14 per cent), the European Union (10 per cent), and India (6 per cent). The projected rise for 2013 comes after a similar rise of 2.2 per cent in 2012. -- 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

from ScienceDaily e-newsletter: Two for one in solar power: New process could revolutionize solar energy harvesting
by Paul Wilson 18 Nov '13

18 Nov '13

Two for one in solar power: New process could revolutionize solar energy harvesting<http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/sciencedaily/top_news/top_environment/~3/V82…> Posted: 17 Nov 2013 12:57 PM PST A process that could revolutionize solar energy harvesting has been efficiently demonstrated in solution for the first time. -- 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

Fwd: NEWS: EPA Weakens Key Water Protections In Kentucky
by Jim Sconyers 15 Nov '13

15 Nov '13

Wow! This is awful. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sean Sarah <sean.sarah(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:15 PM Subject: NEWS: EPA Weakens Key Water Protections In Kentucky To: Sean Sarah <sean.sarah(a)sierraclub.org> *Link to release: * https://content.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2013/11/epa-approves-weakenin… *Link to EPA Decision: * https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4xljUDF_SgsTzdLYzlLdVo3VjQ/edit?usp=shari… *For Immediate Release: *November 15, 2013 *Contact: *Sean Sarah, Sierra Club, 330 338-3740 sean.sarah(a)sierraclub.org *EPA Approves Weakening of Water Protections in Kentucky * *Washington, DC – *Today, the Environmental Protection Agency allowed the Kentucky Department of Environmental Protection to change how toxic selenium pollution from mountaintop removal mines is measured for the purposes of determining compliance with the Clean Water Act. Selenium, which causes significant biological damage to fish native to the waters of Appalachia, is a toxic pollutant discharged from valley fills into rivers and streams below mountaintop removal sites. The EPA-backed changes to how Kentucky measures selenium pollution allow the state to rely on an impractical and complicated test of tissue samples from fish rather than the current practice of directly sampling the water discharged below mountaintop removal mines and other selenium sources. EPA’s capitulation gives a free pass to industry and will allow unacceptably high levels of selenium pollution to continue flow into Kentucky’s waterways. *In response Bruce Nilles, Senior Director of the Beyond Coal Campaign at Sierra Club, issued the following statement:* “We are deeply disappointed that the EPA approved Kentucky's request to weaken protections against water pollution from mountaintop removal mines. A straightforward approach has been replaced with a highly complicated system that will be hard to enforce, and could allow mountaintop removal companies to mine without accountability for the environmental destruction they force on the communities of Appalachia. In addition to being impractical to enforce, Kentucky’s fish-tissue standard is weaker than a Bush-era proposal that the scientific community emphatically rejected because it would not protect sensitive fish and other wildlife. Mountaintop removal mining is one of the most destructive forms of resource extraction; polluting hundreds of miles of streams and actively destroying our mountain heritage. It is critical that community groups, environmentalists and the people of Appalachia do everything we can to stop attempts by mountaintop removal companies and their political friends to roll back the inadequate standards currently in place. Today, the EPA failed in their commitment to protect our natural spaces and clean water. They’ve allowed Kentucky to change the rules of the game and stack the deck against communities across the region. The EPA has let the people of Appalachia down, allowing an even more aggressive assault on our clean water protections, in a region where coal pollution has already devastated water quality and endangered public health. It’s time to enact real reform that puts a halt to this most devastating form of mining.” *###* -- Cheers, Sean Sarah Regional Communications Manager (NE, SE) Sierra Club, Beyond Coal Campaign O: 202 548-4589 C: 330 338-3740 -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

Fwd: Sierra Club co-signed a letter in opposition to federal tax subsidies for biomass power facilities that burn trees
by James Kotcon 09 Nov '13

09 Nov '13

This may be on interest to energy activists in WV. WV Public Radio this morning interviewed Carl Irwin (he is with WVU's National Research Center for Coal and Energy) on an energy conference being held in Morgantown this week to promote renewable energy, and he talked extensively about co-firing wood with coal in power plants. Is that something we are for or against? JBK ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Joshua Ruschhaupt <joshua.ruschhaupt(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 9:12 PM Subject: Re: Sierra Club co-signed a letter in opposition to federal tax subsidies for biomass power facilities that burn trees To: CONS-FRED(a)lists.sierraclub.org --------------------------- cc:Mail Users----------------------------- ** Remember to DELETE the 'Sender: ...' lines above before REPLYing ** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nice letter! Please tell me you sent a copy of this to Senator Udall, who is a major supporter of biomass. The letter didn't specify which Senator it was addressing. Let me know what the distribution of this letter was. I will keep and use this letter during the legislative session here in CO when the inevitable biomass bill comes. Warm regards, Joshua Ruschhaupt Sierra Club Rocky Mountain Chapter Director USPS: 1536 Wynkoop St., 4B, Denver, CO 80202 UPS/FedEx/other: 620 16th St., Ste 300, Denver, CO 80202 Physical address through early Jan. 2014: 620 16th St., Ste 300, Denver, CO 80202 303.454.3362 www.rmc.sierraclub.org www.facebook.com/sierraclubrmc P.S. Get your Winter Gala<http://action.sierraclub.org/site/Calendar?view=Detail&id=170321> tickets before they sell out! On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Doris Cellarius <doris(a)cellarius.org>wrote: > --------------------------- cc:Mail Users----------------------------- > ** Remember to DELETE the 'Sender: ...' lines above before REPLYing ** > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I apologize if you have already seen this but it is relevant to the issue > of burning trees for energy that Joshua has asked about. > > > > Hi all, > > > > Here is another resource for forest protection work, and it is also > relevant for climate activism. The Sierra Club and thirteen other > environmental organizations (incl. Center for Biological Diversity, > Greenpeace, and NRDC) have co-signed a letter in opposition to federal tax > subsidies for biomass power facilities that burn trees or other forest > material. The letter has some very useful information in it, so I > recommend it as a resource for Club activists working on forest and climate > issues. In addition to highlighting the dangers to forests, the letter > discusses the carbon emissions from biomass facilities, and also notes that > subsidies for biomass pull limited federal funds away from supporting less > environmentally damaging energy alternatives. The letter can be viewed at: > > > http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/debunking_the_biomass_myth/pdf… > > > > Best, > > Douglas Bevington, Chair > > National Forest Team > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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

5 6

Fwd: [Coal Volunteers List] from High Country News; Pro-coal arguments win the day at Denver EPA hearing on CO2 regulations
by James Kotcon 08 Nov '13

08 Nov '13

The last of EPA's originally scheduled listening session on the proposed carbon standards is today in Philadelphia, but I suspect that a few additional ones will be scheduled closer to home. JBK ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Frank Zaski <frankzas(a)aol.com> Date: Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 1:22 PM Subject: Re: [Coal Volunteers List] from High Country News; Pro-coal arguments win the day at Denver EPA hearing on CO2 regulations To: verena_owen(a)prodigy.net, pjgrunt(a)gmail.com, coal-volunteers-list(a)sierraclub.org Here are a few more talking points: *Surveys** find more citizens are concerned about global warming and want government and business action to address it.* Examples: *Americans*' Concerns About Global Warming on the Rise http://www.gallup.com/poll/161645/americans-concerns-global-warming-rise.as… More than half of people in *Columbus* say that more should be done about global warming at all levels of government http://environment.yale.edu/climate-communication/filtered/?action=add_filt… Poll Shows *Latinos* Overwhelmingly Support Obama Call For Action on Industrial Carbon Pollution http://www.nrdc.org/media/2013/131017.asp *Michigan*: 63% opposed the government shutdown that would interfere with the EPA developing standards to reduce the carbon pollution from the nation's power plants. http://www.usclimatenetwork.org/hot-topics/climate-polling (There is a lot of other climate research in this site.) *Negative climate change impacts on the Midwest* ANN ARBOR—Climate change will lead to more frequent and more intense Midwest heat waves while degrading air and water quality and threatening public health. Intense rainstorms and floods will become more common, and existing risks to the Great Lakes will be exacerbated. http://ns.umich.edu/new/releases/21105-climate-change- to-profoundly-affect-the-midwest-new-report-says More climate change impacts on the Midwest from the draft National Climate Assessment report: Decreasing agricultural productivity, habitats for many tree species driven northward, disruptions to forest ecosystems, .. degraded air quality, .. change in the range and distribution of important commercial and recreational fish species,.. increased invasive species, declining beach health, .. harmful blooms of algae, to name a few more. http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/download/NCAJan11-2013-publicreviewdraft-cha… *Global warming impact allergies*. Dr. Weber predicts that Michigan will see *more ragweed* in the fall because we don't get a killing freeze as early as we used: http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/21809196/could-global-warming-impact-alle… Higher levels of CO2 benefits the growth of *poison ivy* whose growth and potency has doubled since the 1960s<http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/health/climate-change-is-making-po…>, With CO2 rates expected to rise from 400 parts per million to 560 ppm in the next 30 to 50 years, it could double again. The enhanced poison ivy won't just threaten humans; it could also kill trees at a faster pace. http://www.weather.com/home-garden/garden/poison-ivy-growing-out-control-th… *Moose die off* because climate change allows the survival of many more parasites. Moose are the upper Midwest equivalent of polar bears. http://greatlakesecho.org/2013/10/22/fears-rise-about-possible-moose-die-of… *Methane: *Also mention to the EPA that more needs to be done to reduce methane emissions. The International Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) latest report finds that methane is *34 times* stronger a heat-trapping gas than CO2 over a 100-year time scale and *86 times* more than CO2 over 20 years. http://americanenergycoalition.com/2013-news/natural-gas-is-more-harmful-th… -----Original Message----- From: Verena Owen <verena_owen(a)prodigy.net> To: pjgrunt <pjgrunt(a)gmail.com>; Coal Alerts < coal-volunteers-list(a)sierraclub.org> Sent: Wed, Nov 6, 2013 11:04 am Subject: Re: [Coal Volunteers List] from High Country News; Pro-coal arguments win the day at Denver EPA hearing on CO2 regulations The good news is that there is still time to go to one of the listening sessions EPA is holding: DC, Dallas and Seattle tomorrow and Chicago and Philadelphia on Friday! Let's show up and tell EPA we want strong and just carbon standards and why we need them. Verena I know that the sessions in Lenexa,KS and San Francisco were great: RESIDENTS CALL FOR STRONG CARBON POLLUTION LIMITS FROM EXISTING POWER PLANTS Clean air advocates testify at regional EPA office in Lenexa Monday, November 4, 2013 Contact: Alison Flowers, 303-246-6297, alison.flowers(a)sierraclub.org Glen Hooks, (501) 744-2674, glen.hooks(a)sierraclub.org *Lenexa, KS* -- Today residents from Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska and Iowa testified at the regional Environmental Protection Agency office in Lenexa, calling on officials to enact the strongest possible limits on pollution levels of the carbon pollution that disrupts our climate, threatens our communities and that is linked to life-threatening air pollution like the smog that triggers asthma attacks. Traveling hundreds of miles, clean air advocates, including health professionals, community leaders and residents, attended the Environmental Protection Agency's public listening session for its upcoming proposal of carbon pollution protections from coal and gas-fired power plants. “Hundreds of people like me took time off of work and brought their friends and families to speak out in favor of strong protections against climate pollution today,” said *Larry Lazar, a former climate change denier turned climate action leader from Eureka, Mo., who attended the listening session. *“The things we love most about the Midwest are at risk. It's time to wake up and put these life-saving safeguards in place.” Coal and gas-fired power plants emit more than 2.3 metric tons per year of carbon pollution, approximately 40% of total U.S. energy-related carbon pollution. Carbon pollution is the main contributor to climate disruption, which costs Americans both economically and environmentally. Last year alone, Americans spent over $140 billion as a result of devastating droughts, raging wildfires, tragic floods, record heat and powerful storms - $1,110 per American. “If the clean air protections are strong enough, then rich fossil fuel companies will no longer get a free pass to pollute,” said *Glen Hooks, senior campaign representative for the Sierra Club Beyond Coal campaign.* “They won't be able to dump unlimited amounts of climate pollution into our air anymore.” "The need for action by EPA has never been more urgent," said *Andy Knott, campaign representative for the Sierra Club Beyond Coal campaign in Missouri.* "From droughts to floods to violent storms here in the Midwest, the evidence of climate disruption and its impacts on people, the economy and public budgets is undeniable. In 2011 and 2012, Missouri ranked 7th in the nation in federal disaster recovery spending at $2.5 billion. Missouri also has a long way to go to reduce its contribution to climate disruption, as 80% of its electricity comes from coal. We call on EPA to adopt strong safeguards that reduce power plant carbon pollution.” The proposed safeguards would also protect families from dangerous air pollution like toxic mercury and dirty soot. EPA listening session includes stroller parade of concerned parents Tuesday, November 5, 2013 Contact: Nathan.Landers(a)sierraclub.org SAN FRANCISCO, CA - The Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 office in San Francisco was full to capacity today as the agency hosted an official listening session to hear from Bay Area residents on a nationwide proposal to limit carbon pollution from power plants. Coal and natural gas power plants are the country's biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions causing storms, droughts and wildfires, and other climate problems that have affected millions of Americans. These plants currently have no legal limit on the amount of carbon pollution they can emit into the air. The event began with a “stroller parade” of determined moms and dads with kids in tow demanding stronger carbon pollution protections, and it included a press conference with representatives from the Sierra Club, Climate Parents, the California Wind Energy Association, Union of Concerned Scientists, San Francisco Board of Supervisors, and the San Francisco Department of the Environment. *Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune issued the following statement:* "The Environmental Protection Agency must propose strong and just standards that can curb this dangerous carbon pollution and put us on a path toward cleaner and more stable sources of energy. We cannot afford weakened or watered-down protections. "Power plants are responsible for 40 percent of total U.S. energy-related carbon pollution, which fuels the increased frequency of extreme weather. My hometown in New Jersey was caught in the path of superstorm Sandy, and my family is not alone in suffering the pain of an unraveling climate—these storms, wildfires, droughts, and record heat waves are affecting the lives of millions of people across the country. Carbon pollution is also linked to dangerous air pollution like the smog that triggers asthma attacks. The EPA has a moral and legal imperative to limit these unchecked emissions as a threat to public health. "These new standards should be a call to action for U.S. innovation in clean energy. Solar and wind technology have grown by leaps and bounds in just a few short years, and these clean energy technologies are ready to provide inexpensive power and create jobs across America. We have the potential to build a clean energy economy here at home that will clear our air and water and provide more equitable economic opportunities for thousands of U.S. families." Background: The EPA’s listening sessions are the first public effort to get input from key stakeholders across the country, including here in San Francisco. This proposal for cleaning up existing coal and natural gas power plants follows September’s announcement of a carbon pollution standard for new power plants. The San Francisco listening session is one of 11 scheduled nationwide to ensure input from all Americans. Power plants are responsible for 40 percent of the carbon pollution in the U.S. that causes climate disruption. Coal plants alone are responsible for one-third of U.S. emissions. ------------------------------ *From:* Paul Wilson <pjgrunt(a)gmail.com> *To:* Coal Alerts <coal-volunteers-list(a)sierraclub.org> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 6, 2013 9:37 AM *Subject:* [Coal Volunteers List] from High Country News; Pro-coal arguments win the day at Denver EPA hearing on CO2 regulations Got this issue yesterday from the HCN email list. fyi, paul Pro-coal arguments win the day at Denver EPA hearing on CO2 regulations Document Actions - Share this: - Like<http://www.facebook.com/share.php?u=http://www.hcn.org/blogs/goat/pro-coal-…> - Tweet<http://twitter.com/home?source=highcountrynews&status=Pro-coal+arguments+wi…> - Tip Jar<http://www.hcn.org/blogs/goat/pro-coal-arguments-win-the-day-at-denver-epa-…> - Email<http://www.hcn.org/blogs/goat/pro-coal-arguments-win-the-day-at-denver-epa-…> - Print this Emily Guerin<http://www.hcn.org/@@search?portal_type%3Alist=Blog+Post&Creator=eguerin&so…> | Nov 04, 2013 11:12 AM <http://www.hcn.org/@@search?portal_type%3Alist=Blog+Post&Creator=eguerin&so…> At 5 a.m. on Oct. 30, coal miners and residents of Moffat County, Colorado, gathered at a McDonald’s in Craig<http://www.craigdailypress.com/news/2013/oct/25/moffat-county-residents-wil…> for a pancake breakfast before boarding buses to Denver chartered by Peabody Coal. They were headed to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s listening tour,<http://www2.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards/public-listening-sessions> in which the agency travels around the country seeking input on its new regulations for existing coal-fired power plants, which it plans to release next June. The EPA already debuted its proposal for new power plants<http://www2.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards/2013-proposed-carbon-polluti…> in September, and has since turned its attention to drafting rules for existing plants, which could have a much more profound effect on the coal industry, and on emissions, given that few new coal plants are being built anymore.<http://www.hcn.org/blogs/goat/dispatch-from-a-colorado-coal-confab-where-ne…> Craig’s economy is highly dependent on coal – there are three near-by mines and a large coal plant – so naturally, people wanted to tell EPA Region Eight Administrator Shaun McGrath, EPA Region Eight Air Program Director Carl Daly and other officials how carbon dioxide regulations would affect them. They were joined in Denver by boilermakers, coal company executives, trade groups and politicians from other coal-dependent areas around the West, many of whom took the EPA to task for scheduling its listening sessions far from areas like Wyoming and West Virginia where coal is mined and burned. [image: EPA co2 hearing map]<http://www2.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards/public-listening-sessions> Jessica Unruh, a North Dakota state senator who works in the lignite coal industry, told the EPA that its choice of meeting locations “disenfranchises from the process people whose livelihoods will be directly affected.” And House Republicans went so far as to accuse the EPA of selective listening. “EPA conspicuously failed to schedule any listening sessions in states where electricity price increases may be the highest as a result of the agency’s (new regulations),” reads a blog post from the House Energy and Commerce Committee website.<http://energycommerce.house.gov/blog/obama-administration-shuns-communities…> But, as political news website *The Hill*notes<http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/energyenvironment/327589-gop-epas-regulat…>, the tour does include “states that produce large amounts of coal. The tour includes dates in Illinois, Texas and Pennsylvania – which all ranked in the top ten <http://www.nma.org/pdf/c_production_state_rank.pdf> as recently as 2011, according to National Mining Association figures.” The distance didn’t seem to stop many coal industry employees from making the long trip to Denver last week, with speakers hailing from Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota and Minnesota. Over the course of the day-long session, a few themes emerged: *Local economic impacts* A number of retirees from Wyoming and Montana, some of whom had worked in the coal industry, said they were worried about the price of electricity rising if the EPA further regulates coal plants. Regulations “usually cost the consumer in the end,” said Carl Dickerson, a coal miner from Wyoming who said he spoke up at the Denver listening session “for his family.” Many others were concerned about the loss of jobs in coal and related industries if plants shut down rather than install the expensive carbon capture technology that would allow them to continue operating. Some workers worried they wouldn’t be able to transition to jobs in natural gas if coal power is regulated out of existence. “If natural gas replaces coal, we’ll experience tens of thousands of lost jobs in maintenance workers like myself,” said Jason Small, a union boilermaker from East Helena, Mont. (As *HCN* has reported before<http://www.hcn.org/issues/44.19/economics-not-environmental-regs-are-batter…>, low natural gas prices are a major contributor to that fuel’s popularity, not just the EPA’s regulation of coal emissions). *Asset stranding* Utility and trade group representatives worried new carbon dioxide regulations would force the closure of plants that had just spent lots of money to comply with previous EPA regulations on mercury, nitrous oxide and sulfur dioxide. (For more on asset stranding, read “Will stricter emissions limits mean stranded assets for investors?”<http://www.hcn.org/blogs/goat/stranded-assets-and-climate-deniers>) Wade Boeshans, who traveled from North Dakota to represent the Lignite Energy Council, told the EPA his members “have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in improved technology that is at risk of being stranded if your regulations are not flexible or appropriate.” And because so many of North Dakota’s power plants are mine-mouth, meaning they are fed by a single coal mine that has no other buyer, a power plant shut down would also strand investments in coal mines. *Singling out coal* A number of speakers who supported carbon dioxide regulations criticized the EPA for targeting coal-fired power plants for their contributions to climate change while giving natural gas a free pass. Kathleen Bailey, who described herself as “a concerned citizen,” asked EPA not to “be a natural gas promoter,” citing the many ways in which natural gas and oil extraction pollutes ground and surface water. “I am very concerned that you will be promoting the conversion from coal plants to natural gas plants rather than helping clean coal,” she said. *“A drop in the bucket”* Many coal supporters worried any reduction in U.S. carbon dioxide emissions will be insignificant because China and other countries will still be burning lots of fossil fuels. But Denver resident Josh Phillips refuted those claims, arguing that “the U.S., and specifically Colorado, has a chance to lead here in reducing carbon emissions.” That pioneering sprit, he said, is what “made our country great.” Listening to their comments, the arguments of the pro-coal types seemed to carry the day. They definitely won the epic travel award, coming in from much further than the majority of the pro-regulation speakers. They also were not just interested citizens; they represented companies, utilities and industry groups. Environmental and renewable energy groups made a somewhat poor showing, leaving self-identified private and concerned citizens from Denver to make their arguments. Or perhaps they’re just waiting for the EPA to visit San Francisco or Seattle next week, when they’re much more likely to be the majority in the room. *Emily Guerin is a correspondent for* High Country News. *She Tweets* *@guerinemily*. -- 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 -- 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 becki.clayborn(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. -- 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 becki.clayborn(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. -- 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 becki.clayborn(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.

1 0

FW: Election Night! Clean Sweep for the Climate. Hell YES!!!
by James Kotcon 07 Nov '13

07 Nov '13

FYI, Some good news from around the country. JBK ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: jeff tittel <jeff.tittel(a)sierraclub.org<mailto:jeff.tittel@sierraclub.org>> Date: Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 9:56 AM Subject: RE: Election Night! Clean Sweep for the Climate. Hell YES!!! To: Michael Bosse <michael.bosse(a)sierraclub.org<mailto:michael.bosse@sierraclub.org>>, Bruce Nilles <bruce.nilles(a)sierraclub.org<mailto:bruce.nilles@sierraclub.org>> Cc: #Coal <coal-list(a)sierraclub.org<mailto:coal-list@sierraclub.org>>, Cathy Duvall <cathy.duvall(a)sierraclub.org<mailto:cathy.duvall@sierraclub.org>>, Melissa Williams <Melissa.Williams(a)sierraclub.org<mailto:Melissa.Williams@sierraclub.org>>, GAS-LEADERSHIP-TEAM(a)lists.sierraclub.org<mailto:GAS-LEADERSHIP-TEAM@lists.sierraclub.org>, Eric Huber <eric.huber(a)sierraclub.org<mailto:eric.huber@sierraclub.org>> In New Jersey all incumbent Democratic Senators Won ,Christie went hard after 4 of our Champions all won close races .Democrats maintain 24-16 lead and one of our strongest envronmetally assembly person was elevated to the Senate .In the Assembly Dems will lost 1 seat and he was bad on the environment , there are 2 races that are too close to call -they are strong enviro's that currently trailing but could still win based on provisional ballots. Assembly worse case 45 - 35 democrat.We passed a minimum wage ballot question 60%- 40 % and local open space referendums passed.On the governors race Christie Big win is not as big as media plays it about 500,000 democrats stayed home. Christie got only 5% more votes the 4 years ago and about the same number of votes as Corzine when he won in 2005 or McGreevey in 2001.He won mostly because , you have paid off the democratic bosses/ construction unions to support you and you have week incompetent candidate that you outspend 20 to 1 not including $25 million in TV ads paid by government promoting you. Jeff Tittel, Director NJ Sierra Club 145 W Hanover St Trenton, NJ 08618 609-656-7612<tel:609-656-7612>: phone 609-656-7618<tel:609-656-7618>: fax ________________________________ From: Michael Bosse [mailto:michael.bosse@sierraclub.org<mailto:michael.bosse@sierraclub.org>] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 11:57 PM To: Bruce Nilles Cc: #Coal; Cathy Duvall; Melissa Williams; GAS-LEADERSHIP-TEAM(a)lists.sierraclub.org<mailto:GAS-LEADERSHIP-TEAM@lists.sierraclub.org>; Eric Huber Subject: Re: Election Night! Clean Sweep for the Climate. Hell YES!!! A solid assist from Gas in Colorado's Front range where we also invested and won 3 out of 4 fracking ballot initiatives. Fort Collins and Boulder passed extensions to their fracking morotoriums, Lafayette Colorado amended its charter to ban fracking. In Bloomfield (small suburban area between Denver and Boulder) we are currently behind 49% to 51%.? We were outspent in these races by about 90 to 1.? http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_24460947/900-000-spent-four-color… On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Bruce Nilles <bruce.nilles(a)sierraclub.org<mailto:bruce.nilles@sierraclub.org>> wrote: We won the VA Gov's race against a climate denier, we won against Xcel who tried a ballot initiative to stop Boulder from seizing the grid so they could provide 100% clean energy, and we won all four county races in Whatcom County, the site of the massive coal export facility in NW Washington. ?Coal took a drubbing from coast to coast. ?So delicious. "We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender...." -- Bruce Nilles Sierra Club 415-977-5640<tel:415-977-5640> (o) 608-712-9725<tel:608-712-9725> (c) www.beyondcoal.org<http://www.beyondcoal.org> twitter: @brucenilles -- ___________________ Michael Bosse Deputy National Program Director Sierra Club (415) 977 5681<tel:%28415%29%20977%205681> -- Scott Elkins Director of Grassroots Effectiveness Sierra Club Minneapolis, MN NEW 612-259-2442<tel:612-259-2442> (w) 612-720-0793<tel:612-720-0793> (c) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-FRED list, send any message to: CONS-FRED-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG<mailto:CONS-FRED-signoff-request@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG> Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC