- MVCAC - lists.bikelover.org

Duane Nichols passing
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 15 Jun '24

15 Jun '24

Sadly, I was contacted by the daughter of Duane Nichols that he passed away Friday morning (June 14, 2024). Here is information about his funeral this Wednesday: Furbee Williams Funeral home Alma WV on Wednesday June 19: 1-2 pm viewing 2 pm memorial service Immediately followed by a burial at Beechwood Cemetary There is an obituary on the Furbee website and likely soon in the Morgantown Paper. Those attending the services are encouraged to wear something orange to honor Duane and his favorite color. Thank you, Tracy Hancock Duane's daughter Obit: https://www.furbeefuneralhome.com/obituary/duane-nichols

1 0

Allegheny Front ~ How to Share our Concerns About the Climate Crisis
by Duane Nichols 23 Dec '23

23 Dec '23

1 0

COP28 Has Ended BUT The Climate Reality Project Continues!
by Duane Nichols 21 Dec '23

21 Dec '23

1 0

Storing Carbon Dioxide Underground in Large Quantities for Centuries is Irrational & Risky
by Duane Nichols 18 Dec '23

18 Dec '23

1 0

CNX Steps Up to Monitor for Methane @ Drilling & Fracking Pads
by Duane Nichols 17 Dec '23

17 Dec '23

1 0

ALERT: 99th H2S Exceedance at Liberty Monitor Noted & Still NOTHING from Allegheny County Health Department
by Duane Nichols 14 Dec '23

14 Dec '23

1 0

RSVP for RALLY A.S.A.P. on NET METERING OPTION @ State Capitol
by Duane Nichols 14 Dec '23

14 Dec '23

1 0

The 2023 State of the Climate Report: Entering Uncharted Territory
by Duane Nichols 02 Nov '23

02 Nov '23

1 0

Deadline for Comment November 3: Proposed bridge to the Morgantown Industrial Park
by Duane Nichols 02 Nov '23

02 Nov '23

NOTE: The Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition (MVCAC) is concerned about any of the alternatives involving a bridge over the Mon River. Because there are hundreds of diesel trucks per day to travel in and out of the Morgantown Industrial Park, this will add significantly to air pollution in the Valley. The terrain is steep so pollution can be retained. The Harmony Grove Interchange will provide adequate access, shorter access in most cases, and very much cheaper access. Bridge construction will also facilitate landslides and exposed soils, resulting in erosion and sediment into the Mon River. A short email from you could make a lot of difference in these options. The Governor wants to build both a new Interchange AND a new bridge. $80 million of public funds could be better spent on other projects in West Virginia than a bridge to basically serve one private company in a private industrial park. Duane Nichols From: Ella Belling <ellabelling(a)gmail.com> > Date: October 30, 2023 at 6:01:57 PM EDT > To: ellabelling <ellabelling(a)gmail.com> > Subject: Deadline for Comment November 3: Proposed bridge to the Morgantown Industrial Park > > Hi Neighbors and Friends > The deadline for public comment on the proposed bridge over the Mon River to the Morgantown Industrial Park is November 3 (this Friday). I personally am opposed to this bridge as a resident of First Ward and someone who cares deeply about the Mon River Rail-Trails and the Monongahela River. I hope all of you will submit comments to the DOH, and ask others for comment. If you already have, thank you. Ella > > https://transportation.wv.gov/highways/engineering/comment/Pages/MORGANTOWN… > > There are several ways to submit comment found in the link above- > Email for Travis Long is- Travis.E.Long(a)wv.gov > > News articles > https://www.theintelligencer.net/news/top-headlines/2023/10/gov-jim-justice… > > MUB Concerns > https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/yez2i3o7dyovayjzkaf6l/Mub-support-for-bridge… > > Reasons I am opposed (in no particular order) > > 1) bridge estimated to cost $70-$82 million will be redundant once the Harmony Grove Interchange (estimate is $42 million) is built. It would provide no more positive impact than the Harmony Grove Interchange currently being built and will come at great expense. > > 2) Alternative 1 would construct the span between the Morgantown Dam and the BFS gas station at 305 Don Knotts Boulevard.- it will add truck traffic noise and air pollution to the Mon Valley and most directly impact the adjacent First Ward and Wharf District neighborhoods and businesses. > > 3) The preferred route (from MPO and local government) near Scott Avenue (Alternative 3), would cross the Mon River close to, and upstream from, the primary drinking water intake for MUB. It creates a risk of water contamination, especially if it will be used to truck inputs to the chemical plant or finished products from the chemical plant. > > More from MUB article on October 22, 2023 > The preferred location of the project, presented by the DOH as “Alternative 3,” would connect to U.S. 119 near Scott Avenue, include a multi-span bridge across the river and tie into an improved Rail Street, which is part of the industrial park’s existing street network. That would put the bridge about 7,500 feet, or roughly 1.5 miles, from MUB’s primary drinking water intake. > > MUB General Manager Mike McNulty addressed that issue in an Oct. 10 letter to the DOH. > “We are concerned that construction activities will cause significant sediment disturbances which could negatively impact the 10+ million gallons of source water our treatment plant processes on a daily basis,” McNulty explained, noting “significant care” must be taken during construction to prevent river contamination. > > The new bridge will also bring with it increased truck traffic hauling potential contaminants to and from the industrial park. > “A spill event on or near the proposed bridge poses a significant risk of contaminating the public’s drinking water supply given the proximity and quick travel time to our intake,” McNulty wrote. > > In terms of source water protection, any potential contaminant within five hours flow time of MUB’s intake — be it along the Monongahela River or one of its tributaries — is considered inside the “zone of critical concern.” McNulty said the location preferred for the new bridge is “mere minutes” from MUB’s water treatment plant. > > 4) The Alternative 3 option at Scott Avenue is in an area prone to landslides. Landslides impacting the rail-trail have cost tens of thousands to clean up. Increasing stormwater issues by changing drainage in this area will likely add to existing problems on Smithtown Road (Route 73) and the Mon River Rail-Trail. > > 5) We have seen other bridge construction in the state close the rail-trail in the construction zone for years while it is being built, example Wellsburg Bridge and the Brooke Pioneer Rail-Trail now closed 5 years and counting. > > > > > >

1 0

FYI: (COUNTY EXECUTIVE) Fitzgerald Announces Launch of Emission Inventory Dashboard
by Duane Nichols 01 Nov '23

01 Nov '23

1 0

TODAY @ 2:00 PM ~ The Fracking Science Compendium 9.0 – Network Discussion
by Duane Nichols 01 Nov '23

01 Nov '23

1 0

US EPA raises concerns with Ohio EPA on environmental justice in - WFMJ.com
by Duane Nichols 21 Oct '23

21 Oct '23

1 0

Natural Gas is Mostly Methane [CH4] That Must Be Controlled Says I.E.A.
by Duane Nichols 12 Oct '23

12 Oct '23

1 0

Time to act: air pollution is damaging our brains as well as our lungs
by Duane Nichols 09 Oct '23

09 Oct '23

1 0

Fwd: information about Fairmont Brine Processing Plant radioactive waste
by Duane Nichols 09 Oct '23

09 Oct '23

From: Sandra Fallon <sfallon3(a)comcast.net> > Date: October 9, 2023 at 10:27:25 AM EDT > To: governor(a)wv.gov > Subject: Re: information about Fairmont Brine Processing Plant radioactive waste > > Hello Rachel, > > Thanks again for your help. As a follow up to my first email to you on Oct. 5, I want to let you know about the Fairmont Times West Virginian newspaper article published on Saturday, 10/7/23, about the Fairmont Brine Processing Plant situation: > > "Why hasn't toxic Fairmont Brine site been fenced off, residents wonder" > https://www.timeswv.com/news/local_news/why-hasnt-toxic-fairmont-brine-site… > > Please share this article with Jason Williams, Director of Constituent Services, in the Governor's Office. > > We urge immediate action to secure the Fairmont Brine site. > > We hope to hear back from you or Mr. Williams about how the Governor's Office can help address the situation. > > Thank you for your attention to this matter. > > Sandra Fallon > Morgantown WV > 304-692-3084 > Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition >> On 10/05/2023 1:21 PM EDT Sandra Fallon <sfallon3(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> >> >> Hello Rachel. >> >> Thanks for your help >> >> The situation is that the defunct and unsecured Fairmont Brine Processing Plant, in Fairmont, WV, which used to process fracking wastewater, currently has radioactive waste on site and there is evidence of teenagers and others partying or spending time there and unknowingly being exposed to radioactive waste. >> >> Please see the attached Truthdig article and the US EPA Pollution Report. EPA Region 3 knows about the problem and is working to address it, although the process is taking too long, especially making sure the site is secured along with notifying the public. >> >> I represent the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition. Our scientists say there is no threshold for nuclear radiation below which it does damage. The high energy gamma radiation causes impacts to surroundings at every level. >> >> We urge immediate action to secure the site and notify the public. >> >> Thank you for your assistance. >> >> Sandra Fallon >> Morgantown WV >> 304-692-3084 >> Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition >>

1 0

Why hasn't toxic Fairmont Brine site been fenced off, residents wonder | Local News | timeswv.com
by Duane Nichols 07 Oct '23

07 Oct '23

1 0

M. V. P. PRESS CONFERENCE SET @ 1 PM on TUESDAY in D. C. (10/10/23)
by Duane Nichols 07 Oct '23

07 Oct '23

1 0

Information about Fairmont Brine Processing Plant radioactive waste
by DUANE NICHOLS 05 Oct '23

05 Oct '23

From: Sandra Fallon <sfallon3(a)comcast.net> > Date: October 5, 2023 at 1:21:11 PM EDT > To: governor(a)wv.gov > Subject: information about Fairmont Brine Processing Plant radioactive waste > > Hello Rachel. > > Thanks for your help > > The situation is that the defunct and unsecured Fairmont Brine Processing Plant, in Fairmont, WV, which used to process fracking wastewater, currently has radioactive waste on site and there is evidence of teenagers and others partying or spending time there and unknowingly being exposed to radioactive waste. > > Please see the attached Truthdig article and the US EPA Pollution Report. EPA Region 3 knows about the problem and is working to address it, although the process is taking too long, especially making sure the site is secured along with notifying the public. > > I represent the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition. Our scientists say there is no threshold for nuclear radiation below which it does not do damage. The high energy gamma radiation causes impacts to surroundings at every level. > > We urge immediate action to secure the site and notify the public. > > Thank you for your assistance. > > Sandra Fallon > Morgantown WV > 304-692-3084 > Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition >

1 0

WE NOW NEED TO EXAMINE OUR DIET ~ NUTRITION FACTS SHOULD CHANGE YOUR LIFE AND MINE
by Duane Nichols 24 Sep '23

24 Sep '23

1 0

ALERT ~ Underground Injection Well (UIC) Proposed in Fayette Co. PA for Fracking Brine Water
by Duane Nichols 02 Jul '23

02 Jul '23

1 0

Largest well owner in Appalachia charts path to “net zero” by looking for leaks - Farm and Dairy, June 27, 2023
by Duane Nichols 28 Jun '23

28 Jun '23

1 0

Two Legal Challenges to Blanket Approval of Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP)
by Duane Nichols 28 Jun '23

28 Jun '23

1 0

June 29 Webinar on New Federal Pipeline Air Pollution Standards
by Duane Nichols 27 Jun '23

27 Jun '23

1 0

Carbon Dioxide Storage Underground Raises Many Questions [Expensive]
by Duane Nichols 22 Jun '23

22 Jun '23

1 0

Federal Register :: New Source Performance Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From New, Modified, and Reconstructed Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units; Emission Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Existing Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units; and Repeal of the Affordable Clean Energy Rule
by Duane Nichols 20 Jun '23

20 Jun '23

Federal Register :: New Source Performance Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From New, Modified, and Reconstructed Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units; Emission Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Existing Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units; and Repeal of the Affordable Clean Energy Rule SUMMARY: In this document, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing five separate actions under section 111 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) addressing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from fossil fuel-fired electric generating units (EGUs). The EPA is proposing revised new source performance standards (NSPS), first for GHG emissions from new fossil fuel-fired stationary combustion turbine EGUs and second for GHG emissions from fossil fuel-fired steam generating units that undertake a large modification, based upon the 8-year review required by the CAA. Third, the EPA is proposing emission guidelines for GHG emissions from existing fossil fuel-fired steam generating EGUs, which include both coal-fired and oil/gas-fired steam generating EGUs. Fourth, the EPA is proposing emission guidelines for GHG emissions from the largest, most frequently operated existing stationary combustion turbines and is soliciting comment on approaches for emission guidelines for GHG emissions for the remainder of the existing combustion turbine category. Finally, the EPA is proposing to repeal the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) Rule. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/05/23/2023-10141/new-source-…

1 0

Air Pollution in Western Pennsylvania (& Regionally) Needs Attention ASAP
by Duane Nichols 19 Jun '23

19 Jun '23

1 0

Natural Gas Well Leakage Affects Human Health
by Duane Nichols 09 Jun '23

09 Jun '23

1 0

Hannibal Site (Ohio) is Becoming a Hydrogen Technology Center — Directly West of Morgantown in Ohio Valley
by Duane Nichols 07 Jun '23

07 Jun '23

1 0

WV Environmental Council Calls for Action Now, Ahead of 2024
by Duane Nichols 03 Jun '23

03 Jun '23

1 0

ACTION ALERT ~ The Mountain Valley Pipeline “Dirty Deal” is Back in Spades!
by Duane Nichols 29 May '23

29 May '23

1 0

Drilling & Fracking of Horizontal Gas Wells in Monongalia County, WV
by Duane Nichols 23 May '23

23 May '23

1 0

SPEAK UP NOW! ~ The Mountain Valley Pipeline is Dangerous & Unnecessary
by Duane Nichols 16 May '23

16 May '23

1 0

Full Disclosure of Fracking Chemicals is Long Overdue ~ Legislation Needed
by Duane Nichols 01 May '23

01 May '23

1 0

Our Methane Opportunity and Our Responsibility ~ Control Natural Gas ASAP — Part 1
by Duane Nichols 25 Apr '23

25 Apr '23

1 0

DEP Seeks Public Comment On Hardy County Log Fumigation Facility - West Virginia Public Broadcasting : West Virginia Public Broadcasting
by Duane Nichols 20 Apr '23

20 Apr '23

1 0

WVU's Jamie Van Nostrand appointed to post with Massachusetts state government
by Duane Nichols 22 Mar '23

22 Mar '23

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/wvus-jamie-van-nostrand-appointed-023500991… WVU's Jamie Van Nostrand appointed to post with Massachusetts state government From the Article by David Beard (Dominion Post), Yahoo! News, March 20, 2023 Mar. 20—MORGANTOWN — WVU professor Jamie Van Nostrand has been appointed to the chair of the Massachusetts Commonwealth Utilities Commission, which oversees the Department of Public Utilities. DPU oversees investor-owned electric power, natural gas, and water companies in Massachusetts ; regulates the safety of bus companies, moving companies and transportation network companies ; and oversees the safety of natural gas pipelines. The commission has three members, appointed by the Secretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, with approval by the governor. Two are appointed for a term coterminous with the governor and one for a term of four years. One commissioner is designated as chair for a term of two years. Secretary Rebecca L. Tepper appointed Jamie Van Nostrand to the chair. "I am honored and excited to be joining the Healey-Driscoll Administration at such a pivotal time in the clean energy transition, " Van Nostrand said in the release announcing his appointment. "I look forward to working with Secretary Tepper and the other energy and environmental agencies to meet Governor [Maura ] Healey's clean energy objectives, while maintaining affordable energy and designing clean energy programs that benefit all communities." Van Nostrand holds the Charles M. Love, Jr. Endowed Professorship at WVU's College of Law, is director of WVU's Center for Energy and Sustainable Development, and is the author of The Coal Trap: How West Virginia Was Left Behind in the Clean Energy Revolution ; Cambridge University Press, 2022. He told The Dominion Post his start date in Boston is May 1 and he will finish up his teaching responsibilities for the spring semester before then. He said he has asked for an unpaid leave of absence beginning May 1, as the term of a commissioner is four years and his term as chair is two years. There is a chance that he would want to come back to his tenured professor of law position once his appointment expires, and pending possible re-appointment. He is awaiting response from WVU administration. Law school dean Amelia Rinehart said, "This is an exciting opportunity for Jamie, and we wish him well in his new position. Meanwhile, we are working through the logistics and next steps of the transition for our College of Law community." Van Nostrand said on Monday, "It will be quite a different environment promoting clean energy policies in Massachusetts compared to the work I have done in West Virginia over the past 12 years. My advocacy is very much aligned with the objectives of Gov. Healey, in contrast to the resistance I have faced in West Virginia. "At the same time, " he said, "one consistency is affordability, and promoting regulatory policies that protect ratepayers from unnecessary rate increases. In Massachusetts, I will have the opportunity to actually implement the policies that I have advocated in West Virginia to keep energy prices affordable for consumers." Healey also appointed Staci Rubin, vice president of Environmental Justice at the Conservation Law Foundation, to the commission. Rubin previously served in the DPU as senior counsel and hearing officer. Current Commissioner Cecile Fraser remains as the third member. They are charged with carrying out the directive of creating a "21st Century DPU." A Boston Globe article said Healey has regarded the DPU as ineffectual and too cozy with natural gas interests. The two new appointments are part of her overhaul. Healey, who was previously state attorney general, said in the announcement release, "For the past eight years, our team in the attorney general's office, including Secretary Tepper and Chief Hoffer, served as the ratepayer advocate by standing up for Massachusetts residents struggling to pay their utility bills. We know how critical it is that the DPU leadership understands that the transition to a clean energy economy is a pocketbook issue and will be thoughtful in how we evolve our grid and economy for the future. I have full faith in Jamie Van Nostrand, Staci Rubin, and Cecile Fraser to uphold those values." Tepper said, "With Jamie, Staci, and Cecile at the helm, the next era of the Department of Utilities will be marked by a commitment to transparency, equity, and innovation. Our goal is to build a 21st century DPU rooted in these values. Jamie is a longtime advocate for the clean energy resources and will help lead the Commonwealth's transition at this pivotal time." The commissioners will be encouraged to evaluate structural and cultural changes to advance the following goals: — Operate as a partner in achieving climate goals, including through facilitating rapid renewable energy growth, building a modern grid, and promoting resiliency. — Open its doors to the public through modernized communications tools and meaningful community engagement in its proceedings. — Integrate equity into its decision-making and respond to concerns from environmental justice populations and low-income ratepayers. — Build agency expertise to ensure DPU independence and meet its mission, which includes prioritizing affordability, consumer protection, emissions reductions, transportation safety, and more. Several experts commented on Van Nostrand's appointment. Karan May, senior campaign representative for the Sierra Club in Central Appalachia, said, "Jamie Van Nostrand has been a strong advocate on behalf of West Virginia ratepayers since coming to the state in 2011. His deep familiarity with the rate-making process enables him to be a frequent and effective critic of the pro-coal policies of West Virginia's PSC, and a voice for ratepayers in promoting clean energy policies that would result in lower electricity prices. His departure from West Virginia is a huge loss for us, but Massachusetts will be gaining an effective and knowledgeable expert as its chief utility regulator." Dale Bryk, director of State & Regional Policy at the Harvard Environmental & Energy Law Program, said, "Jamie Van Nostrand brings unparalleled technical expertise, a pragmatic approach and a deep commitment to equity that will enable him to lead a just and orderly transition to a clean energy economy in Massachusetts. There has never been a more-important time to have strong leadership at the DPU, whose decisions can leverage new federal resources and drive investments that will maximize benefits for all customers." ###

1 0

Upgrade Fort Martin? Buy Pleasants? Either Way, It's Expensive - West Virginia Public Broadcasting : West Virginia Public Broadcasting
by Duane Nichols 19 Mar '23

19 Mar '23

Upgrade Fort Martin? Buy Pleasants? Either Way, It's Expensive - West Virginia Public Broadcasting : West Virginia Public Broadcasting https://wvpublic.org/upgrade-fort-martin-buy-pleasants-either-way-its-expen…

1 0

Medical waste plant not coming to Follansbee | WTOV
by Duane Nichols 14 Mar '23

14 Mar '23

1 0

Updated: WVDEP coordinating with state and local agencies to investigate dust issue in the Eastern Panhandle
by Duane Nichols 02 Mar '23

02 Mar '23

1 0

Made in the shade: Growing crops at solar farms yields efficiency | Cornell Chronicle
by Duane Nichols 02 Mar '23

02 Mar '23

1 0

Groundhog Day Webinar: WV Rivers Discusses the Mountain Valley Pipeline
by Duane Nichols 02 Feb '23

02 Feb '23

1 0

Message from Appalachian Voices, POWHR, Indian Creek Watershed Association, Preserve Monroe, POWHR and all those fighting the DIRTY DEAL.
by Duane Nichols 19 Dec '22

19 Dec '22

1 0

Burning Waste is a Bad Idea, Conservation Law Foundation, 9/10/19
by Duane Nichols 07 Dec '22

07 Dec '22

NOTE: The Follansbee City Council claims they did not know there would be emissions from the proposed “Empire Green” facility. Further, there is great uncertainty about what is the actual makeup of the feed material. And, there have been problems with the web-site where some relevant documents should be accessible. It would be wise to withdraw the application, or withdraw the approval by city council at this time. Let’s avoid so much confusion in West Virginia. I hope that other citizens will contact the WV DEP “environmental advocate” [depadvovate(a)wv.gov] and discuss this ‘unacceptable’ proposal. The proximity to other States is also a major concern since they have not been apprised of this threat to them. DGN. See the Weirton Times story here: https://www.weirtondailytimes.com/news/local-news/2022/12/opposition-to-med…. P.S. Here we go again, City Council and the various State agencies are closing their eyes and ears to the “Elephant in the Room” in the form of CO2 and VOCs as GHGs! Burning Waste is a Bad Idea. So Why is (Rhode Island)Taking Time to Study It? By Kevin Budris, Conservation Law Foundation, September10, 2019 New commission is tasked with studying feasibility of high-heat incinerator but burning any kind of trash is dangerous and shortsighted Burning waste of any kind is hazardous to our health and the environment and undermines real solutions to our trash crisis. Photo: Shutterstock Rhode Island – and all of New England – has a trash problem. There’s simply too much of it, and the ways we dispose of it hurt our health and environment. What’s more, plastic pollution is damaging our communities and putting wildlife on land and in the sea at risk. Rhode Island had the chance to ban single-use plastics this past legislative session. Yet, the General Assembly failed to take bold action against single-use plastic straws and bags. Moreover, legislators seriously considered two bills (H5448 and S408 ) that would have allowed the state to burn waste, including plastic, through dangerous processes known as gasification and pyrolysis. By law, Rhode Island cannot use incineration as a way to manage its waste. However, the proposed bills aimed to weaken the law and exempt the burning of plastics from this restriction. Thanks to efforts by CLF and several other environmental organizations, both bills failed to become law. However, the Senate did pass a resolution authorizing a commission to “study the merits and feasibility of developing a pyrolysis or gasification facility in the state.” The reality is, these facilities hold no merit and are not financially feasible. Any burning of waste endangers our health, our climate, and our environment. CLF will track the Rhode Island commission’s progress and will oppose any proposal to allow such a facility here or in any New England state. Gasification and Pyrolysis: Incineration by Different Names Gasification and pyrolysis are both forms of waste incineration . Where conventional incineration burns trash from cities and towns in oxygen-rich environments, gasification and pyrolysis have limited oxygen, heating waste to temperatures as high as 2,800° Fahrenheit. With limited oxygen and high heat, these facilities generate synthetic gases and oils, along with ash, char, and air pollution. They are dangerous to our health and to our environment. No Matter What You Call It, Burning Trash Creates Harmful Pollution Contrary to claims made by gasification and pyrolysis supporters, these are not “clean” technologies. The air emissions from these facilities are similar to conventional trash incinerators. They spew a number of cancer-causing compounds described as the most toxic chemicals known to humankind . Moreover, the ash “byproduct” of these processes is contaminated with dioxins, mercury, and other heavy metals, all of which leaches into our groundwater, rivers, and lakes. But the pollution doesn’t end there. The synthetic fuel produced at gasification and pyrolysis facilities is later burned to generate energy. Just like with any other oil or gas, this burning expels climate-damaging emissions, plus heavy metals and dioxins. Burning Trash is Expensive, Inefficient, and Unreliable Even if burning waste didn’t create air and carbon pollution, gasification and pyrolysis are unsound investments that create expensive fuel and little to no financial return. Studies have shown that these facilities use as much as 87 times more energy than they produce. Such massive energy consumption, along with high building and operating costs, make it difficult for gasification plants to be financially viable . This also makes them a more expensive option than composting, recycling, and even landfilling. Originally, gasification and pyrolysis technologies were designed to burn fuel sources such as wood chips or coal. Modern trash, however, is comprised mostly of food waste, yard trimmings, plastics, glass, metal, paper, cardboard, electronics, and hazardous waste. Because our trash varies in composition and moisture content, it’s difficult for facilities to maintain stable temperatures in thermal reaction vessels. This can cause operating conditions to become problematic and facilities to potentially break down, decreasing efficiency and increasing operating costs. Because of these environmental and financial obstacles, many attempts at large-scale waste gasification have failed: A plant in Dargavel, Scotland, opened in 2009 and closed in 2012 after the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency revoked its permit due to the facility’s failure to comply with pollution limits or efficiently recover energy. A gasifier in Karlsruhe, Germany, closed in 2002 after operating at a net energy loss for several years. In 2004, a gasifier in Wollongong, Australia, closed after three years of consistent operational problems and emissions violations. These are not anomalies – environmental and financial failure are the norm for gasification and pyrolysis facilities. Burning Trash Undermines Composting and Recycling Programs Gasification and pyrolysis facilities rely on burning organic waste that could otherwise be composted, as well as paper, glass, and plastic that could be recycled. Compared to incineration, the recycling and composting options cost towns and cities less money and generate three to four times as many local jobs . It makes little sense to use inefficient, expensive, and polluting processes to turn these materials into toxic fuel when we can save money and protect our communities and climate by adopting zero waste alternatives . CLF will be monitoring the upcoming Rhode Island study commission to make sure our government officials understand the many problems with burning our trash. And we will be making sure that the unreasonable notion of burning our way out of our trash problem doesn’t catch fire in other New England states. Source: https://www.clf.org/blog/burning-waste-bad-idea/ #######. #######. #######. #######. Duane G. NIchols, Ph.D. Chemical Engineer, Coordinator, Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition, 330 Dream Catcher Circle, Morgantown, WV 26508

1 0

Shared solar launches in Virginia but still faces an uphill battle - Virginia Mercury
by Duane Nichols 30 Nov '22

30 Nov '22

“Shared solar launches in Virginia but still faces an uphill battle” - Ivy Main, Virginia Mercury, November 29, 2022 After years of wrangling, Virginia finally allows certain customers of Dominion Energy Virginia to buy solar energy from independent providers of shared solar, also known as community solar. Don’t applaud yet, though. Dominion has used the rulemaking process and its control over project interconnection to create hurdles for shared solar that lawmakers never anticipated. High minimum bills, prolonged interconnection study requirements and expensive equipment demands are stalling projects and could drive away all but the most tenacious developers. The blow that received the most attention came during the rulemaking process. The State Corporation Commission decided Dominion could impose a minimum bill averaging $55 per month on most customers. The minimum bill is added to the cost of the electricity itself, making shared solar so expensive that the program simply won’t be offered to the general public. However, lawmakers had included a provision exempting low- to moderate-income (LMI) participants from the minimum bill requirement. In effect, then, the SCC’s order turned the shared solar program into a program just for LMI residents. Indeed, the first shared solar project for LMI Virginians launched on Nov. 9 in Dumfries as a partnership between community solar developer Dimension Renewable Energy and low-income housing provider Community Housing Partners. Subscribers are told to expect savings of 10% on their electricity bills. The partners are signing up participants now but have not broken ground on a solar facility to serve them. ..... much more in this article ....... https://www.virginiamercury.com/2022/11/29/shared-solar-launches-in-virgini…

1 0

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PROJECT of the Marcellus Region (SW PA, EAST OH, NW WV)
by Duane Nichols 29 Nov '22

29 Nov '22

https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2022/11/29/public-health-issues-in-the-marcell… Public Health Issues in the Marcellus & Utica Regions of WV & OH & PA Drilling, fracking and flaring have public health impacts ... ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH PROJECT of the Marcellus Region (SW PA, EAST OH, NW WV) Clean air is necessary for health, but clean air isn’t always a guarantee near shale gas sites. Many residents experience the threat of poor air quality firsthand. They can’t leave windows open for fear that pollution will harm them or their families. Poor air quality is one reason why many families who live near shale gas facilities reach out for help. For more than 10 years, EHP’s public health experts and data scientists have assisted residents and collected exposure data on air quality to pinpoint concerns, recommend steps that can limit exposure to harmful pollution, and provide tools to demand action from elected officials and government agencies. Families shouldn’t have to worry whether they’re breathing polluted air, but your support can give them peace of mind. Donate this Giving Tuesday to help families impacted by pollution get the safe, clean air they deserve.  EHP defends public health in the face of shale gas development. We provide frontline communities with timely monitoring, interpretation, and guidance. We engage diverse stakeholders: health professionals, researchers, community organizers, public servants, and others. Because knowledge protects health. Environmental Health Project, 2001 Waterdam Plaza Drive, Suite 201, McMurray, PA 15317 >>>>>>++++++######=====#####+++++>>>> CLEAN AIR COUNCIL with offices in Pittsburgh & Philadelphia Clean Air Council and its supporters have worked for years to urge the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reduce air pollution from new and existing oil and gas facilities. The gas industry emits large quantities of climate-changing methane as well as smog-causing and health-harming volatile organic compounds (VOC), including known carcinogens like benzene. Earlier this month, the EPA proposed pollution standards for gas wells and compressor stations that will better protect public health and help address the climate crisis by reducing 36 million tons of methane, 9.7 millions tons of VOCs, and 390,000 tons of air toxics from 2023 to 2035. This rule requires air pollution inspections at all oil and gas extraction facilities regardless of size and includes significant updates to required pollution control technologies. While the US EPA has taken great steps to reduce air pollution from the gas industry, we need them to improve this rule by eliminating the unnecessary flaring of fracked gas. Comments will be accepted until February 13th and there will be two virtual public hearings January 10th and 11th. Click here to urge EPA to adopt stronger pollution standards. PHILADELPHIA OFFICE, 135 S. 19TH STREET, SUITE 300, PHILADELPHIA, PA, 19103 PITTSBURGH OFFICE, 200 FIRST AVE, SUITE 101, PITTSBURGH, PA 15222 >>>>>>++++++######=====#####+++++>>>> FRACKING COMPENDIUM ~ 8th Edition Now Available, April 28, 2022 “Compendium of Scientific, Medical, and Media Findings Demonstrating Risks and Harms of Fracking and Associated Gas and Oil Infrastructure,” 8th Edition, April 28, 2022 The Eighth Edition of the Fracking Compendium ~~~~ Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) is proud to co-release the eighth edition of the fracking “Compendium,” a collection of some 2,000 abstracts of and links to medical, scientific and investigative reports about the consequences of oil and gas drilling, fracking, and infrastructure. This unique resource presents evidence that fracking-related activities harm public health, the environment, and the climate; links provide easy access to the source material. The 2022 edition includes reports on liquefied natural gas (LNG), which the U.S. proposes to export in massive quantities to Western Europe, thus prolonging dependence on this potent climate-damaging fossil fuel. PSR co-produces the Compendium with Concerned Health Professionals of New York. Read the press release here.

1 0

Pennsylvania boosts carbon capture research with investment in state geological survey | StateImpact Pennsylvania
by Duane Nichols 24 Nov '22

24 Nov '22

https://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2022/11/22/pennsylvania-boosts-car… Pennsylvania boosts carbon capture research with investment in state geological survey Rachel McDevit, State Impact Penna., November 22, 2022 Core samples at the Pennsylvania Geological Survey. Pennsylvania is trying to position itself as a potential hub for carbon capture and storage, a technology that has been billed as a way to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel use. The Pennsylvania Geological Survey got $6 million in this year’s budget for a new building to house its growing library of core samples. The samples are big cylinders of rock taken from deep underground, usually by fossil fuel companies looking for the best place to drill or mine. Right now, boxes of core samples from the last century are stacked floor to ceiling in the basement of the Survey’s headquarters in Middletown. Boxes of core samples in storage at the Pennsylvania Geological Survey. State Geologist Gale Blackmer said the new building will give greater access to people who want to study the cores. “The conditions for viewing and maybe doing some on-the-spot analyzing is not really ideal here,” Blackmer said. The site of the new building hasn’t been chosen. The core samples have a lot of value for researchers now looking for the best places to inject carbon dioxide, so it can’t reach the atmosphere. But carbon capture technology has so far been very expensive, and untested at the scale needed to avoid dangerous warming. Geologists estimate rock formations in western and northern Pennsylvania could store billions of metric tons of CO2. But Assistant State Geologist Kris Carter said there will be limitations, such as cost and access. “Not every place that may have storage or prospective storage beneath it is necessarily going to be used for that because there might be competing uses or land use management constraints above ground,” she said. Carter said companies will also need to consider pressure constraints in the rock and whether any old gas wells in the area could compromise storage. Marcellus Shale core samples from Greene County at the Pennsylvania Geological Survey. Gov. Tom Wolf recently approved $1 billion in new tax credits meant to make the state more attractive to companies making “clean hydrogen.” Hydrogen has been touted as a fuel that could help clean up emissions from hard-to-decarbonize sectors like airlines. When burned, hydrogen’s only byproduct is water. But how clean hydrogen is depends on how it’s made. It’s considered “green” if it’s made using renewable energy. Companies planning to make hydrogen from natural gas would need to find a way to capture and store the resulting carbon dioxide for the hydrogen to be considered clean.

1 0

USFS: Mountain Valley Pipeline Notice of Intent Pre-notification
by Duane Nichols 16 Nov '22

16 Nov '22

Subject: USFS: Mountain Valley Pipeline Notice of Intent Pre-notification > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Timm, Joby -FS <joby.timm(a)usda.gov> > Date: Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 12:24 PM > Subject: Mountain Valley Pipeline Notice of Intent Pre-notification > > Good Afternoon, > > I am reaching out to key partners of the George Washington & Jefferson National Forests to advise you of the next steps in the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) project. > > The MVP project crosses 3.5 miles of the Jefferson National Forest in Giles and Montgomery Counties, Virginia, and Monroe County, West Virginia.  Results of litigation in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in 2018 and 2022 vacated previous Forest Service decisions related to the project.  > > This summer, MVP submitted a right-of-way application and Plan of Development to the Bureau of Land Management, the federal agency responsible for permitting the pipeline right-of-way.  The BLM forwarded these to the Forest Service for processing. > > As we work to address specific concerns identified by the Court, the Forest Service will prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS). This process begins with an announcement in the Federal Register known as the “Notice of Intent,” which we anticipate being published tomorrow. > > We anticipate the SEIS process will take about a year to complete.  The Draft SEIS, too, will be announced in the Federal Register, and the public will have the opportunity to comment. > > For more information on this project, please visit the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests website. > > If you receive inquiries about this effort, please forward them to SM.FS.GWJNF-PA(a)usda.gov or request the inquirer leave a message at 1-888-603-0261. > > Thank you. -JOB > > > > > > Joby P. Timm > Forest Supervisor > > Forest Service > > George Washington and Jefferson National Forest > > p: 540-265-5118 > > c: 540-339-2523 > f: 540-265-5110 > joby.timm(a)usda.gov > > Supervisors Office > > 5162 Valleypointe Parkway > Roanoke, VA 24019 > > www.fs.fed.us > > > Caring for the land and serving people > >

1 0

LWV PA ... Nov. 16, 2022
by Duane Nichols 16 Nov '22

16 Nov '22

Program agenda by day: https://bit.ly/shalehealth2022agenda Presenter bios: https://bit.ly/shalehealth2022bios Evaluation survey (after your final session): https://www.shalepalwv.org/conference-evaluation-form/ Link to latest Resource Guide - PDF and ordering info: https://www.shalepalwv.org/2021-shale-public-health-conference/ Conference Zoom link for both days https://tinyurl.com/shalehealth2022 Dan Bain co-author/edited a book on the “Environmental Impacts from the Development of Unconventional Oil and Gas Reserves”. It has chapters on global reserves, fracking in Appalachia, governance, air, water, radioactivity, seismic, isotopes, microbiology, and case studies. Here’s the link www.cambridge.org/9781108489195 Use the checkout code EIDUOGR22 for a 20% discount. Here is a link to the Body Burden story by Kristina Marusic: https://www.ehn.org/fractured-series-on-fracking-pollution-2650624600.html Bob says ~ https://bobscaping.com/2022/10/31/pa-study-microplastics-in-100-of-exceptio… https://bobscaping.com/2022/11/07/landmark-lawsuit-latkanich-v-chevron-eqt-… https://bobscaping.com/2022/09/06/childhood-cancer-study-near-fracking-in-s…

1 0

West Virginia officials expected to announce new natural gas power plant for Doddridge County | WV News | wvnews.com
by Duane Nichols 16 Sep '22

16 Sep '22

https://www.wvnews.com/news/wvnews/west-virginia-officials-expected-to-anno… CHARLESTON, W.Va. (WV News) — A multibillion-dollar economic development project will be announced Friday in Charleston, and sources have indicated it will be a natural-gas-fired power plant in Doddridge County. A press advisory sent Thursday afternoon fueled speculation, especially when sources indicated to WV News that the project was said to be a power plant in North Central West Virginia. The advisory came from a private public relations firm but listed Sen. Joe Manchin, Gov. Jim Justice and state Economic Development Secretary Mitch Carmichael as the officials expected to be on hand for the announcement. Several sources indicated the project will cost around $3 billion. WOWK-TV out of Charleston-Huntington reported that sources told it there could be several thousand construction jobs and eventually 200 full-time jobs once the plant is operating. WOWK-TV also was the first to report that the plant will be operated by CPV Shay, a Silver Spring, Maryland-based energy company. A check with the Secretary of State’s Office shows that CPV Shay is registered to conduct business in the Mountain State, having registered in 2019. The company’s website says it is “dedicated to increasing America’s energy sustainability by providing safe, reliable, cost-effective and environmentally responsible electric power. To achieve our goal, we focus on optimizing existing resources ….” CPV Shay’s website shows nine current projects in operation, construction or planning. It does not list a site in West Virginia, but the company has facilities in Pennsylvania, Maryland, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Illinois. Six of the projects appear to be gas- or steam-fired turbines, while two are solar and one is wind-powered. If CPV Shay is developing the West Virginia project in the cost range of $3 billion, it appears it would be the company’s largest undertaking. If Doddridge County is the site, it is a logical selection. Doddridge has been either the top gas-producing county or one of the top five since the natural gas industry focused on the Marcellus Shale Appalachian basin.

1 0

DW (German) Documentary, Nov 2, 2021
by Duane Nichols 14 Sep '22

14 Sep '22

Is green hydrogen the answer to the climate crisis? >>> DW (German) Documentary, Nov 2, 2021 Green hydrogen produces zero emissions and many believe it holds the key to limiting global warming. So is it the big hope for the future or a multi-billion euro mistake? Many believe green hydrogen could provide a miracle solution for countries around the world seeking to decarbonize their economies. But the technology is still in its infancy. Generating sufficient quantities of green hydrogen would require a lot more renewable energy than is currently available. Right now, almost all hydrogen is produced using natural gas in a process that generates large amounts of carbon dioxide. Green hydrogen, by contrast, is climate neutral. It’s derived using renewable energy. The principle itself is not new but has, at yet, only found limited usage. Engineers at the German Aerospace Center are now working with the world’s largest artificial sun to try to produce hydrogen without any electricity at all, using only light. If they can succeed, it would allow large-scale production of this valuable gas in countries that receive a lot of sunshine. Hydrogen is already being used as a fuel for buses, trains and cars, with hydrogen-powered planes due to follow shortly. Hydrogen is even the fuel of choice for space rockets, and German submarines glide along almost in silence thanks to hydrogen fuel cells. Manufacturers of airplanes, trucks, and even steel are investing millions in the technology, hoping that hydrogen will be the go-to fuel of a climate-neutral future. But critics warn of major challenges ahead, saying billions stand to be wasted. See this Video here ..... https://youtu.be/4sn0ecqZgog

1 0

It Costs Nothing to Leave Our Trees as They Are - The New York Times
by Duane Nichols 27 Aug '22

27 Aug '22

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/25/opinion/carole-king-logging-biden.html It Costs Nothing to Leave Our Trees as They Are By Carole King, Opinion Editorial, New York Times, August 25, 2022 Ms. King is a singer, songwriter, author and environmental advocate. My career as a songwriter began in Manhattan, not far from where I was born. When I moved to Los Angeles in 1968, I became part of the singer-songwriter community that coalesced around Laurel Canyon. I thought California would be wild in the sense of nature. It turned out to be wild in the sense of drugs and parties. I wanted to live close to the kind of wild nature that must exist somewhere on a large scale. Somewhere turned out to be Idaho. In 1977 I moved to a mobile home on Robie Creek, a 40-minute drive from Boise. For the next three years, I lived in the backcountry northeast of McCall in a cabin with no running water or electricity. After that I lived adjacent to the Salmon River for 38 years, with a national forest as my nearest neighbor. The future of America’s national forests is being shaped now. The Biden administration is developing a system to inventory old-growth and mature forests on federal land that the president wants to be completed by next April. But given the immediate threats facing many of these forests and their importance to slowing climate change, bold action is required immediately to preserve not just old-growth and mature trees but entire national forest ecosystems comprising thousands of interdependent species. President Biden should issue an executive order immediately directing his secretaries of the interior and agriculture to take all steps available to them to stop commercial logging on public land. We can’t wait a year. One of the best technologies to store carbon is an unlogged forest with minimal human intrusion. Forests sequester vast amounts of carbon in the trunks, leaves and roots of trees of all ages and sizes and the soil beneath them. Trees absorb carbon dioxide and water from the air and ground and through the process of photosynthesis release oxygen into the air. It costs nothing to leave them as they are. Allowing commercial logging to continue in our national forests would also be a catastrophe for the biodiversity they contain. The order I propose would bring about a significant reduction in atmospheric carbon dioxide. And it will help the United States meet the requirements of the Paris agreement, which Mr. Biden rejoined on the first day of his presidency. Even with the climate provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act, he will fall short of his promise to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 50 to 52 percent from 2005 levels by 2030. Cutting more forests isn’t going to help hit that mark. Last fall, over 200 climate scientists from around the country sent Mr. Biden a letter underscoring the consequences if timber harvesting continues in the national forests. They wrote that “greenhouse gas emissions from logging in U.S. forests are now comparable to the annual” carbon dioxide “emissions from U.S. coal burning.” Protecting federal forestlands from logging, on the other hand, would remove 84 million tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere every year, they wrote. My experience in Idaho led me to become involved as a volunteer in the ongoing effort to protect a bioregion of 23 million acres of nationally owned public land in Idaho, Montana, Washington, Oregon and Wyoming by means of the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act. That legislation would designate corridors for the safe passage of wildlife between existing wilderness and roadless areas on federal forestland. It was proposed by scientists in the late 1980s who understood that protecting and connecting large-scale forest ecosystems is necessary for species to thrive. Despite the legislation receiving some bipartisan support in past years, it has not been enacted in the nearly 30 years since it was introduced. Forest preservation is a climate solution. That’s why we need action to safeguard the forests on the public lands we all share. Federal law requires that most public lands be managed for multiple uses, such as recreation, gas and oil development, mining and logging. But this longstanding policy is running headlong into efforts to slow the warming of our planet. Forests on federally owned land are being destroyed at breakneck speed by heavy equipment that can saw through a tree, strip its branches and set that tree on a pile of logs in the time it took me to type this sentence. The effects of the climate crisis are undeniable. People are suffering, and the scale of the problem sometimes makes us feel helpless. But the public can do something right now by asking Mr. Biden — in numbers too big to ignore — to use all of his powers to stop the logging of the nation’s mature and old-growth forests. In 1970, my collaborator Toni Stern wrote the lyrics to my most popular song, “It’s Too Late.” That title should not refer to the climate. That’s why, at age 80, I’m using my voice to call on Mr. Biden to stop commercial logging in our national forests. Please add your voice to mine. A version of this article appears in print on Aug. 26, 2022, Section A, Page 18 of the New York edition with the headline: Leave Forests Alone, Before It’s Too Late.

1 0

VIRTUAL TECHNICAL SEMINAR ~ Green Chemical Design & Development
by Duane Nichols 23 Aug '22

23 Aug '22

https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2022/08/23/virtual-technical-seminar-green-che… VIRTUAL TECHNICAL SEMINAR ~ Green Chemical Design & Development Green & Sustainable Chemicals Needed to Replace Toxic Substances § Boost Green and Sustainable Chemical Development with AI § Presented by Craig Rowlands, Senior Toxicologist and Distinguished Member of the Technical Staff at UL Solutions FROM: Virtual Local Section, American Institute of Chemical Engineers, August 22, 2022 Public concerns about the health and environmental safety of chemicals are driving the development of more sustainable, ‘‘greener’’ chemicals and products. Intrinsic chemical hazards are a function of many factors including physicochemical properties, chemical structure, and sub-structures. Using these properties to predict chemical hazards provides chemical R&D programs with a fast and increasingly reliable technology for new green chemical designs. Artificial Intelligence prediction software is well suited for this purpose and can be applied to all stages of the value chain when developing new green and sustainable chemicals. Dr. Rowlands is a Senior Toxicologist and Distinguished Member of the Technical Staff at UL Solutions providing leadership in the innovation of products and services for chemical safety assessments of consumer products. He has spent over 20 years applying conventional and new toxicology approaches including non-animal and computational predictive toxicology in chemical safety evaluations. His current research is developing approaches to using artificial intelligence models to aid in the development of green and sustainable chemicals. This meeting is free and open to all, not just to Virtual Local Section members. ====================== THREE MEETING OPTIONS ====================== PRIMARY MEETING (LIVE PRESENTATION/LIVE CHAT) 9:00 PM ET Wednesday, August 24, 2022 Register in advance for this meeting: https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZUoduquqD0qE9O4BwlDfAWGetzB2vbblo… ALTERNATE 1 (RECORDED PRESENTATION/LIVE CHAT) 7:00 AM ET Thursday, August 25, 2022 Register in advance for this meeting: https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZIpdeCvqDkuG9J2hMp2EO3-JrZgJOITg6… ALTERNATE 2 (RECORDED PRESENTATION/LIVE CHAT) 1:00 PM ET Thursday August 25, 2022 Register in advance for this meeting: https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZUtf-2rpz4qGNWEHVt7Pj4ypXKK2kyLvf… After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing instructions for joining the meeting. #######+++++++#######+++++++######## EPA Calls for Nominations for 2023 Green Chemistry Challenge Awards From the EPA Press Office, Washington, DC, August 18, 2022 WASHINGTON – Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced it is now accepting nominations for the 2023 Green Chemistry Challenge Awards from companies or institutions that have developed a new green chemistry process or product that helps protect human health and the environment. EPA is again including an award category to recognize technology that reduces or eliminates greenhouse gas emissions, in support of the Biden-Harris Administration’s efforts to combat the climate crisis. Additionally, EPA is announcing a webinar to be held on Wednesday, September 28, 2022, from 2 p.m.– 3:30 p.m. EDT, to educate stakeholders on the Green Chemistry Challenge Awards and the nomination process. “Green Chemistry Challenge Award winners are leaders in their field and their technologies demonstrate how this revolutionary discipline can be used to prevent pollution at its source,” said EPA Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention Deputy Assistant Administrator for Pollution Prevention Jennie Romer. “Green chemistry is also a tool in the fight against climate change, and by encouraging the use of greener products, it can advance environmental justice in underserved and overburdened communities where industrial sites are disproportionately located.” Sent from my iPad

1 0

West Virginia city on list of worst year-round particle pollution | WOWK
by Duane Nichols 22 Aug '22

22 Aug '22

https://www.wowktv.com/news/west-virginia/west-virginia-city-on-list-of-wor… West Virginia city on list of worst year-round particle pollution by: Alix Martichoux, Nexstar Media Wire Posted: Apr 10, 2022 Updated: Apr 10, 2022 (NEXSTAR) – The World Health Organization announced this week that 99% of the world’s population breathes poor-quality air, that when inhaled over time can cause cardiovascular and respiratory disease. While cities in the developing world have the worst air quality, according to the WHO, pollution is still a problem in American cities. There are chronic sources of air pollution, like vehicle traffic on busy highways, as well as seasonal issues, like smoke from wildfires. The American Lung Association tracks air pollution in U.S. cities. Its annual report uses data from the Environmental Protection Agency on the presence of two types of pollutants: ozone (or smog) and particulate matter. Particulate matter has many sources, such as transportation, power plants, agriculture, fires and industry – as well as from natural sources like desert dust. Using the EPA data, the report ranks the most and least polluted metro areas. The cities with the highest amount of ozone pollution (or smog) are: Los Angeles-Long Beach, California Bakersfield, California Visalia, California Fresno-Madera-Hanford, California Phoenix-Mesa, Arizona Sacramento-Roseville, California San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, California Denver-Aurora, Colorado Salt Lake City-Provo-Orem, Utah San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, California The cities with the worst year-round particle pollution are: Bakersfield, California Fresno-Madera-Hanford, California Visalia, California Los Angeles-Long Beach, California Medford-Grants Pass, Oregon Fairbanks, Alaska San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, California Phoenix-Mesa, Arizona Pittsburgh-New Castle-Weirton, Pennsylvania/Ohio/West Virginia El Centro, California “Particulate matter, especially PM2.5, is capable of penetrating deep into the lungs and entering the bloodstream, causing cardiovascular, cerebrovascular (stroke) and respiratory impacts,” WHO said. “There is emerging evidence that particulate matter impacts other organs and causes other diseases as well.” The American Lung Association also keeps track of which cities have the least air pollution. The ten cities with the cleanest air, free of particle pollution are: Urban Honolulu, Hawaii Kahului-Wailuku-Lahaina, Hawaii Cheyenne, Wyoming Wilmington, North Carolina Casper, Wyoming St. George, Utah Bellingham, Washington Elmira-Corning, New York Sioux Falls, South Dakota Duluth, Minnesota/Wisconsin There are many cities that also scored well for smog-free air, but because they all had similar readings, the ALA did not rank them. You can see the full list of clean air cities in the American Lung Association’s report.

1 0

Children Living Close to Fracking Sites Have Two to Three Times Higher Risk of Leukemia - DeSmog
by Duane Nichols 19 Aug '22

19 Aug '22

https://www.desmog.com/2022/08/17/children-fracking-sites-higher-risk-cance… Children Living Close to Fracking Sites Have Two to Three Times Higher Risk of Leukemia From an Article by Nick Cunningham, DeSmog Blog, August 17, 2022 Children living close to fracking sites in Pennsylvania are two to three times more likely to be diagnosed with leukemia, and contamination of drinking water is suspected as an avenue of exposure, according to a new study. “Unconventional oil and gas development can both use and release chemicals that have been linked to cancer, so the potential for children living near UOG to be exposed to these chemical carcinogens is a major public health concern,” the study’s senior author, Nicole Deziel, associate professor of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, said in a statement. Unconventional oil and gas development, more commonly referred to as fracking, exploded over the past two decades, with a particularly frenzied period of drilling in Pennsylvania in the early 2010s. Fracking results in a range of toxic chemicals and pollutants being discharged into the air and waterways, including heavy metals, radioactive material, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds. For example, benzene, a known carcinogen, is routinely emitted into air and water during the drilling and fracking process. Published on August 17 in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, the study looked at almost 2,500 children in Pennsylvania, including 405 who have been diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, a type of blood cancer. The researchers compared children 2 to 7 years old living within close proximity of fracking sites since birth against others living further away, while controlling for a variety of confounding factors, including other environmental exposures. “Our results indicate that exposure to [unconventional oil and gas] may be an important risk factor for [acute lymphoblastic leukemia], particularly for children exposed in utero,” Cassandra Clark, one of the study’s authors and a postdoctoral associate at the Yale Cancer Center, told DeSmog in an email. The researchers looked at oil and gas wells in Pennsylvania that fell within the same watershed as the children in the study, and used an exposure metric that takes into account topography, hydrology, and proximity to gas wells. They found that children living within two kilometers (roughly 1.2 miles) of a drill site were two to three times more likely to develop acute lymphoblastic leukemia, the most common form of childhood cancer. The results suggest drinking water may be impacted by fracking operations nearby. Other studies have shown that oil and gas drilling uses or emits 55 chemicals that are known or probable human carcinogens. This new study adds more evidence that not only does proximity to fracking contribute to heightened risk of childhood leukemia, but also that water contamination could be one of the sources. The study adds to the enormous body of research that shows negative health impacts for people living close to oil and gas operations. DeSmog has reported on some earlier findings, including the health risks of people living in close proximity to flaring, and the increased risk for pregnant women who live close to drilling developing gestational hypertension and eclampsia. But there is a dearth of research on the links with childhood cancer, and the Yale study adds stronger evidence of the dangers for children living close to fracking operations. “While there have been around 50 epidemiologic studies of [unconventional oil and gas] exposure and a variety of health outcomes to date, only two studies focused on childhood cancer,” Clark said. “This is the largest study of unconventional oil and gas development and childhood cancer to date, and the first to incorporate an exposure metric that focuses on the drinking water pathway.” “This new study connects a lot of dots,” biologist Sandra Steingraber, co-founder Concerned Health Professionals of New York, who was not involved in the study, told DeSmog. “As such, this study is a kind of terrifying voila,” Steingraber said, adding that the methodology in the study is “really robust.” For years, the Concerned Health Professionals of New York has compiled and published a compendium of scientific and medical findings of the human health impacts from fracking. Steingraber noted that the latest study also builds on other research demonstrating the harms of fracking in Pennsylvania. One study linked higher numbers of gas wells with higher rates of pediatric asthma hospitalizations. Another found benzene in the bodies of people living near fracking. A third found links between fracking and the risk of heart attack. “These findings from this case-control study both corroborate and extend a rapidly growing body of evidence — now documented in more than 100 studies — showing that fracking is a public health crisis,” Steingraber said. “All together, these studies, new and old, show us that fracking in Pennsylvania is not safe for Pennsylvanians — even those living a mile or more away. In fact, it’s a moral obscenity.” Southwest Pennsylvania has also seen a cluster of Ewing’s sarcoma in teens, a rare form of bone cancer, and many residents suspect fracking as the culprit. The state has approved millions of dollars in funding to study the possible links. One consistent takeaway from so many health studies related to fracking is that proximity is key. In many states, there are no federal setback requirements and drillers are allowed to encroach on local populations, setting up rigs within a few hundred feet of homes and businesses. “The allowable setback in Pennsylvania, where our study was conducted, is 500 feet,” Clark said. “Our findings of increased risk of [acute lymphoblastic leukemia] at distances of two kilometers (about 6560 ft) or more from [drilling] operations, in conjunction with evidence from numerous other studies, suggest that existing setback distances are insufficiently protective of children’s health.”

1 0

Action Alert! Mountain Valley Pipeline Requests FERC Extension - Act by July 14
by Duane Nichols 15 Jul '22

15 Jul '22

Action Alert! Mountain Valley Pipeline Requests FERC Extension - Act by July 29 https://wvrivers.salsalabs.org/mvpferc2022_copy1?wvpId=1484761a-9d09-4d6b-9…

1 0

Mountain Valley Pipeline asks for another four years to complete the project | Local News | roanoke.com
by Duane Nichols 07 Jul '22

07 Jul '22

https://roanoke.com/news/local/mountain-valley-pipeline-asks-for-another-fo… Mountain Valley Pipeline asks for another four years to complete the project Article by Laurence Hammack, Roanoke Times, June 24, 2022 Unused sections of the Mountain Valley Pipeline lay on Brush Mountain land in Montgomery County in February. Construction of the 303-mile natural gas delivery project has been delayed while environmental permits have been challenged in court. MATT GENTRY, The Roanoke Times Having already spent $5.5 billion and more than four years building a natural gas pipeline through Southwest Virginia, the developers are now asking for another four years to finish the job. In a letter Friday to federal regulators, Mountain Valley Pipeline requested that it be given until Oct. 13, 2026, to complete a 303-mile pipeline that has encountered fierce opposition at every turn since it was first proposed in 2014. Court rulings striking down government-issued permits for the pipeline, prompted by lawsuits from environmentalists, made it clear that construction would not be completed by this Oct. 13, a deadline set two years ago by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. “Due to the ongoing litigation,” Mountain Valley wrote in a letter to FERC, it is requesting an extension to allow it to “work cooperatively with all affected stakeholders and permit agencies to complete construction and achieve final restoration.” “Despite a continual barrage of attacks from Project opponents, Mountain Valley remains committed to completing this critical infrastructure project,” Matthew Eggerding, assistant general counsel for the company, wrote in the letter to FERC secretary Kimberly Bose. Although Mountain Valley is seeking another four years, spokeswomen Natalie Cox said that the joint venture of five energy companies still hopes the pipeline will be in service by late next year. Opponents say time has already run out on a flawed concept. Construction of the buried 42-inch diameter pipe has marred scenic landscapes and clogged pristine streams with muddy runoff, they say, and its environmental footprint will only deepen when it begins to deliver natural gas that will help fuel a climate change crisis. “This project is a dinosaur and should go extinct in 2022,” said David Sligh, conservation director of Wild Virginia. When plans were first announced for the pipeline — which will run from northern West Virginia through the New River and Roanoke valleys to connect with an existing pipeline near the North Carolina line — the goal was to have it completed by the winter of 2018, at a cost of $3.7 billon. The projected cost has now grown to $6.6 billon, and the expected completion date has been pushed back more than a half-dozen times. With key permits thrown out by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, construction is currently stalled, with the exception of erosion control and stabilization of the pipeline’s 125-foot wide right of way. Mountain Valley is in the process of seeking renewed authorizations from several government agencies. Despite the mounting problems, Mountain Valley indicated in its letter to FERC that it still has the support of its partners and investors. A deadline extension from FERC would “provide necessary clarity and certainty to stakeholders” and benefit “the landowners, the environment, project shippers and end-users of natural gas,” the letter stated. “In addition, the project remains fully subscribed under binding long-term agreements.” FERC first approved the pipeline in 2017, finding there was a public need for the 2 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas that it would transport at high pressure. Mountain Valley was given a three-year certificate, which expired Oct. 13, 2020. After lawsuits began to slow construction, the company was given another two years, which runs out in October. It asked FERC to rule on its second request to extend the deadline another four years by Aug 8. Similar delays have been approved for other natural gas projects, it said. “Mountain Valley stands ready to complete the remaining construction as soon as practicable,” it said in the letter. The company says construction is 94% complete, although opponents dispute that figure and contend that an overly optimistic picture is being painted for regulators and investors. “Mountain Valley Pipeline does not deserve another pass to harm the communities and water resources of Appalachia,” said Jessica Sims, Virginia field coordinator for Appalachian Voices, which has joined Wild Virginia and other groups in legal challenges. “MVP’s request for a 4-year certificate extension runs counter to May 2022 statements from a major equity holder in the project, Equitrans, which touted project completion in 2023,” Sims said in a statement. “No matter how much time MVP asks for, it does not change the likelihood that the project can be built legally or safely, so FERC should deny this extension request.” Mountain Valley counters that geo-political forces such as the war in Ukraine have only increased an existing demand for natural gas. “As our nation transitions to a lower-carbon future, natural gas infrastructure will continue to play a critical role in transporting our abundant supply of domestically produced energy, supporting our current energy needs, and helping to solidify America’s energy independence,” Cox wrote in an email. ###

1 0

Tell the EPA to Write the Strongest Methane Rule Possible
by Duane Nichols 27 Jun '22

27 Jun '22

To All Citizens Concerned About Air Pollution And Climate Change And The Public Health From: Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition, June 27, 2022 Later this year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will be proposing the full version of its much anticipated rule limiting climate-changing methane, asthma-causing volatile organic compounds (VOC), and the known carcinogen benzene from new and existing oil and gas facilities. We need the EPA to propose the strongest rule possible in order to avoid the worst effects of climate change. Methane pollution has 87 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide over a 20-year time period. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has predicted an “above average” hurricane season for the 7th consecutive year. Please click here to tell the EPA to propose the strongest methane standard for oil and gas facilities possible. https://cleanaircouncil.salsalabs.org/gasdrilling_copy1_copy1_copy1_copy1_c…

1 0

PSC To Hold 4 Public Hearings On Appalachian Power's Rate Request | WVPB
by Duane Nichols 18 Jun '22

18 Jun '22

https://www.wvpublic.org/energy-environment/2022-06-06/psc-to-hold-4-public… See also .... FrackCheckWV.net

1 0

NOW MORE THAN EVER ~ Economic Development REALLY SHOULD Account for Environmental Impacts
by Duane Nichols 22 May '22

22 May '22

https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2022/05/22/now-more-than-ever-economic-develop… NOW MORE THAN EVER ~ Economic Development REALLY SHOULD Account for Environmental Impacts Scientists, engineers, economists and political leaders have a responsibility ... When will ‘economic growth’ account for environmental costs? From the Article by David Shearman, The Hill ~ Energy & Environment, May 12, 2022 Human health and the natural environment are indivisible. A recent article in the journal The Lancet reminds us that “economic decisions on the environment have major impacts on human health, and health and wellness depend on a flourishing environment.” Those living in vast cities may find this statement difficult to grasp and many economists certainly do, for the words “natural environment” have now to be changed to “natural capital” for their understanding. We live in a world where economic thinking rules our lives, whereas many believe it should be our servant in delivering an equitable and secure future. When leaders of most Western nations continue to puff out their chests to announce their latest increase in Gross Domestic Product (GDP), or rate of growth, they expose their impotence to manage a nation’s future by failing to recognize environmental costs. Or as written more politely by Stephen Posner and Lydia Olander, in The Hill, “While congressional leaders debate trillions of dollars of federal spending, they have a critical blind spot” for they are “not informed by a complete accounting of the nation’s assets, leaving out many critical services that nature provides.” After nearly 70 years of GDP in economic ideology and practice, the World Bank is having second thoughts about GDP as a measure of “growth” for it takes no account of natural and human capital used to achieve it. Indeed the bank’s “The Changing Wealth of Nations 2021 Managing Assets for the Future” report now seriously questions the use of GDP in its present form and may at long last provide a glimmer of hope for the world to have a sustainable future. On “natural capital,” the report states “mismanagement of nature and failure to consider the longer-term impacts of our actions can carry severe consequences, even if they might not be immediately evident. We therefore need an expanded economic toolkit, including broader measures of economic progress, to secure our collective prosperity and even sustain our existence as a species.” The report notes that “in countries where today’s GDP is achieved by consuming or degrading assets over time, for example by overfishing or soil degradation, total wealth is declining. This can happen even as GDP rises, but it undermines future prosperity.” In Australia with an election due on May 21, the government has proudly announced a current GDP of 4 percent, yet it may well be minus 4 percent if the loss on natural capital is accounted for, due to prodigious land clearing, urban expansion and extensive environmental damage from mining. This may also be the case in the U.S. but there has been little attempt to measure it. The issue is of pressing importance because world food supply is threatened by war, harvest failures from climate change extreme events and by supply problems. This is a threat to one of our life support systems, the living soil, the ecology of which together with the surrounding services from biodiversity provide our food. The research of many scientists defining these threats should galvanize action. The World Bank 2021 report may have been influenced by the report “The Economics of Biodiversity,” by eminent economist Professor Partha Dasgupta, which was cited in a previous article in The Hill. Dasgupta pointed out that GDP does not include “depreciation of assets” as such as the degradation of the biosphere. Economic progress has been based on the extraction of resources from nature and the dumping of waste back into it. When extraction and dumping exceed nature’s capacity to repair itself, natural capital shrinks as do biodiversity and the essential environmental services they provide. A basic tenet of any policy or practice is that it should be able to measure its effect accurately so it is now vital to establish environmental accounting to place a value on natural capital as explained in an article from the Harvard Kennedy School. Indeed, one has to ask why the U.S. has been tardy to adopt the UN System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA) which commenced in 2012, when about 90 countries have already done so. The answer may be that the U.S. favors of a free-market system that embodies deregulation and is the leading instrument in disregard for the consumption of natural capital. Indeed, even recent articles from eminent business schools fail to mention the environment as it related to the U.S. economy. It is also important to reflect that for too long we have failed to acknowledge and use the inherent knowledge of many indigenous peoples on land management. The free-market system has moved Western civilizations far from such understanding. Reform must be initiated by a fundamental change in the thinking of economists and by politicians of both persuasions. Bipartisan reforms will become all the more necessary when climate-driven conflict emerge, and reforms could offer security, especially to rural constituencies who understand food production. Given the unprecedented impact we’ve had on land, the recent sobering UN land report is essential reading for all members of Congress as they consider economic policies — not just climate action. A vital step in developing the World Bank’s “expanded economic toolkit” should be to educate the public and business on reform of GDP to put a value on nature so providing an incentive for government to protect it. Currently, “Real GDP” denotes GDP adjusted for inflation. Let us have “true GDP,” which encompasses environmental loss. But we must realize that reform of GDP is only one piece of a thousand others needed to complete this jigsaw puzzle in the next few decades, if the planet is to remain viable for human life. The other pieces — including climate change, pollutions, toxic chemicals, water security, sea and land ecology, population growth, consumption, conflict — must all fit together as they are interrelated. Only in fitting together the puzzle can we ensure out survival. >>> David Shearman (AM, Ph.D., FRACP, FRCPE) is a professor of medicine at the University of Adelaide, South Australia and co-founder of Doctors for the Environment Australia. He is co-author of “The Climate Change Challenge and the Failure of Democracy” (2007) commissioned by the Pell Centre for International Relations and Public Policy. #######+++++++#######+++++++####### See Also: Americans Largely Favor U.S. Taking Steps To Become Carbon Neutral by 2050, Alec Tyson, et al., March 1, 2022 Majorities of Americans say the United States should prioritize the development of renewable energy sources and take steps toward the country becoming carbon neutral by the year 2050. But just 31% want to phase out fossil fuels completely, and many foresee unexpected problems in a major transition to renewable energy. Tagged as: economics, excess deaths, fossil fuels, GHG, impacts, NEPA, waste disposal, World Bank Sent from my iPad

1 0

From the National Stop Crypto Group on 5/19/22
by Duane Nichols 20 May '22

20 May '22

FROM the National Stop Crypto Group on 5/19/22 > > Here are links to share: > NBC News clip explains crypto mining https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yMsDUEnOw8c > Articles on Cherokee County NC crypto mining: > Washington Post article by Kevin Williams https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/03/18/bitcoin-mining-noise-pol… > Daily Beast article by Simon Spichak https://www.thedailybeast.com/a-crypto-mine-is-making-life-a-daily-hell-for… > CitizenTimes (USA Today) article by Brian Gordon https://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/2021/12/13/nc-cryptocurrency-minin… > Sierra Club of WNC > Crypto mining talking points (attached pdf) > Blog post https://www.sierraclub.org/north-carolina/blog/2022/04/cryptocurrency-comes… > Cherokee County Citizens Against Crypto Mining (CCCACM) petition https://www.change.org/CryptoMiningPetition

1 0

FYI ~ Health Department Seeks Comment on Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan
by Duane Nichols 10 May '22

10 May '22

Note ~ Air Toxics Ambient Monitoring | US EPA https://www.epa.gov › amtic › air-toxics-ambient-monit... The goal of ambient air toxics monitoring is to support the reduction of public exposure to air toxics, also known as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). Air toxics, also known as toxic air pollutants or hazardous air pollutants, are those pollutants that cause or may cause cancer or other serious health effects, such as reproductive effects or birth defects, or adverse environmental and ecological effects. This is really a broad category and could hardly be comprehensive, rather would be limited by definitions. From: Allegheny News <AlleghenyNEWS(a)alleghenycounty.us> > Date: May 10, 2022 at 2:08:31 PM EDT > Subject: Health Department Seeks Comment on Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan > > > > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > May 10, 2022 > Contact: > Neil Ruhland > Public Health Information Officer > 412-578-8312 (office) > 412-339-7995 (cell) > Neil.Ruhland(a)AlleghenyCounty.us > > > Health Department Seeks Comment on Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan > > PITTSBURGH – The Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) is requesting written public comment on its draft 2023 Air Monitoring Network Plan, an annual report which provides a detailed description of how and where air pollution is monitored in Allegheny County. > > Air Monitoring Network Plans are required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The plan provides the specific location of each monitoring station, siting criteria, monitoring methods and objectives, frequency of sampling, pollutants measured at each station and aerial photographs showing their physical location. > > The 2023 plan is substantially similar to the 2022 Air Monitoring Network Plan except for the proposed move to the air monitoring station from the Clack Campus to Fulton Street. A summary of all proposed changes may be found in the Executive Summary of the draft plan, beginning on page six. > > The county’s air monitoring network includes nine locations within the county: Avalon, Clairton, Flag Plaza, Glassport, Harrison, Lawrenceville, Liberty, North Braddock, Parkway East (Wilkinsburg) and South Fayette. One or more of the following pollutants is measured at each site: sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, total reactive nitrogen, ozone, PM10, PM2.5, and air toxics. > > Comments will be accepted until 4:30 p.m. on June 9, 2022, and may be submitted via e-mail to david.good(a)alleghenycounty.us or by mail to: > > Allegheny County Health Department > Attention: David D. Good > Air Quality Program > 301 39th Street > Pittsburgh, PA 15201 > > All correspondence must include first and last name and a complete mailing address. > > For more information regarding the department’s air quality efforts, visit the Air Quality page of the Health Department website. > > # # # > > Debra L. Bogen, MD, Director > Allegheny County Health Department – Public Information Office > 542 Fourth Avenue │ Pittsburgh, PA 15219 > Phone: 412-687-ACHD (2243) │ Fax: 412-578-8325 > www.alleghenycounty.us/healthdepartment >

1 0

How climate scientists keep hope alive as damage worsens | AP News
by Duane Nichols 10 May '22

10 May '22

https://apnews.com/article/climate-scientists-optimism-d1f2de75f853af68fef4… Sent from my iPad

1 0

Air pollution warning in effect for Mon Valley - CBS Pittsburgh
by Duane Nichols 24 Apr '22

24 Apr '22

https://www.cbsnews.com/pittsburgh/news/air-pollution-warning-in-effect-for… Air pollution warning in effect for Mon Valley Updated on: April 24, 2022 / 11:59 AM By Amanda Andrews MON VALLEY (KDKA) -- The Allegheny County Health Department has issued an air pollution warning for the Mon Valley area. The warning started late this morning and continues through tomorrow. Health officials warn that individuals with health conditions such as asthma, bronchitis and emphysema should be careful during this time. The department also stated that "companies most significantly contributing to particulate pollution ... are required to temporarily reduce particulate emissions." First published on April 24, 2022 / 12:01 PM Allegheny County Health Department @HealthAllegheny An Air Pollution Warning has been issued for the Mon Valley for the remainder of today and into tomorrow. The 24-hour PM2.5 standard for the Mon Valley has been exceeded at an official monitoring station in the Mon Valley and is likely to continue. Sent from my iPad

1 0

No Surprise: U.S. Steel Appeals Allegheny County Health Department $1.8M Enforcement Order Over H2S Exceedances | Group Against Smog and Pollution
by Duane Nichols 22 Apr '22

22 Apr '22

https://gasp-pgh.org/2022/04/18/no-surprise-u-s-steel-appeals-allegheny-cou… No Surprise: U.S. Steel Appeals Allegheny County Health Department $1.8M Enforcement Order Over H2S Exceedances As expected, the infamously-litigious U.S. Steel Corp. has appealed a March 7 Allegheny County Health Department enforcement order for illegal hydrogen sulfide emissions from its Clairton Coke Works. In the 23-page appeal filed April 5 and posted to the ACHD website this weekend, the company asks an Allegheny County hearing officer to vacate the order and the $1.8 million fine that came along with it. U.S. Steel used the usual appeal argument: That ACHD “abused its discretion and acted unreasonably, arbitrarily, capriciously, contrary in fact and law, and in a manner not supported by evidence.” You can read the entire brief here, but be sure to get some popcorn first because things got dramatic quick, with U.S. Steel invoking the Russia-Ukraine conflict and homeland security. “It’s disappointing but not at all surprising that U.S. Steel has doubled down and taken zero responsibility for the all-too-often sky-high concentrations of hydrogen sulfide in the Mon Valley even though the company’s own data shows the Clairton Coke Works is the greatest H2S emitter in the county,” GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell said. “U.S. Steel has repeatedly said how much it cares about its Pittsburgh area ‘family’ but then invests in green tech elsewhere while dragging regulators through the courts when they try to make it clean up its act and it’s cringeworthy.” GASP staff is reviewing the documents, remains deeply concerned about our area’s hydrogen sulfide issue, and will continue to keep you posted.

1 0

New book looks at the big decisions small communities had to make when fracking came to town - The Allegheny Front
by Duane Nichols 21 Apr '22

21 Apr '22

New book looks at the big decisions small communities had to make when fracking came to town - The Allegheny Front https://www.alleghenyfront.org/new-book-looks-at-the-big-decisions-small-co… NEW BOOK LOOKS AT THE BIG DECISIONS SMALL COMMUNITIES HAD TO MAKE WHEN FRACKING CAME TO TOWN KARA HOLSOPPLEAPRIL 18, 2022 ECONOMYENERGYPOLITICS Since the industry came to Pennsylvania almost 15 years ago, fracking has been looked at from a lot of angles — economic, environmental, and even geopolitical. But Sabina Deitrick, an associate professor at the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh, and her colleague, Ilia Murtazashvili, noticed a hole. Sabina Deitrick “We were finding there wasn’t a lot for planners in our municipalities, for supervisors,” Deitrick said. “Volunteers were making decisions on things that had to do with fracking – not pro-fracking or anti-fracking – but what was happening in their town or their township or their borough. We were finding that there wasn’t a lot of advice and a lot of information from the state.” So they put out a call to colleagues for a workshop on the impacts of fracking from the perspective of local government. It became the basis for the book: When Fracking Comes to Town: Governance, Planning, and Economic Impacts of the US Shale Boom. The Allegheny Front’s Kara Holsopple spoke with Deitrick about some of the themes in the book.

1 0

Sparks fly in Morgantown ....
by Duane Nichols 19 Apr '22

19 Apr '22

Katie Fallon April 15 at 10:53 AM · Morgantown, WV · Here’s how the Three Sisters Architecture & Engineering Firm got started. Katie Fallon at SPARK Imagination and Science Center, Mountaineer Mall & Professional Plaza, 5000 Green Bag Road G-12, Morgantown, WV 26501 Hours: Closes soon ⋅ 1PM ⋅ Opens 10AM Thu Phone: (304) 292-4646

1 0

FYI ~ Greetings and WELCOME to a National Discussion About Cryptocurrency Mining
by Duane Nichols 18 Apr '22

18 Apr '22

From: Yvonne Taylor <gasfreesenecagirl(a)gmail.com> > Date: April 18, 2022 at 3:22:43 PM EDT > To: National Stop Crypto Group <national-stop-crypto-group(a)googlegroups.com> > Subject: Greetings and WELCOME to a National Discussion About Cryptocurrency Mining > > Dear All, Please allow me to take this opportunity to say hello and welcome you all to a group we've created to discuss our experiences with cryptocurrency mining, its impacts on our communities, and ways that we can connect/ support one another. > > Joseph Campbell and I spent some time last week visiting our friends in Spartanburg, South Carolina and Morgantown West Virginia, and we realized that we are now connected to folks across the country and think it would be useful to schedule a meeting once per month to check in with one another. > > We're also interested in working on a broader national media campaign to include your voices. > > If for any reason you wish to be removed from this list, please let me know. Otherwise, please complete the enclosed Doodle Poll to indicate when a once-monthly meeting day/ time (Eastern Standard) would work best for you. https://doodle.com/meeting/participate/id/e73nVO8e > > Together we can work on solutions and make gains, and we look forward to interacting with you all more consistently as we face this industry. > > Warmly, Yvonne Taylor, Vice President, Seneca Lake Guardian > > https://doodle.com/meeting/participate/id/e73nVO8e >

1 0

How Joe Manchin Aided Coal, and Earned Millions - The New York Times
by Duane Nichols 15 Apr '22

15 Apr '22

How Joe Manchin Aided Coal, and Earned Millions New York Times, March 27, 2022 At every step of his political career, Joe Manchin helped a West Virginia power plant that is the sole customer of his private coal business. Along the way, he blocked ambitious climate action. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/27/climate/manchin-coal-climate-conflicts.h…

1 0

Protesters ask West Virginia Sen. Manchin to vote for clean energy policy, help for those in poverty | Local News | timeswv.com
by Duane Nichols 10 Apr '22

10 Apr '22

https://www.timeswv.com/news/local_news/protesters-ask-west-virginia-sen-ma… Protesters ask West Virginia Sen. Manchin to vote for clean energy policy, help for those in poverty From an Article by Eric Cravey, Times West Virginian, April 9, 2022 GRANT TOWN, W.Va. — At least 16 activists were arrested Saturday on trespassing charges during a protest outside the front gate of the coal-fired Grant Town Power Plant. About 200 protesters from different states carried signs with slogans such as "WV Rising for Good Jobs," "In my father's house, there is no room for this Manchin" and "Solidarity With All Coal Miners Just Transition." The protest, which was organized by the Morgantown-based group WV Rising, was meant to get the attention of U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., in hopes he would abandon his support for fossil fuels and instead support green energy legislation. Protesters also want Manchin to vote for legislation such as the failed Build Back Better to lift up families living in poverty. Manchin's family business, Enersystems, sells waste coal to the power plant – which, in turn, sells the power to First Energy Corp. "I am here because I know the effects that coal has and it's not positive anymore, it's just not," said Rylee Haught, of Morgantown. "It's a dying industry. It's hurting West Virginia, it's hurting all of America and the rest of the world at this point with global warming increasing rapidly, so I would just try to level with him." Haught, who acted as an unofficial media spokeswoman for the group Saturday, said she became involved in social justice when she was a student at Fairmont State University when she took Dr. Paul Edwards' global warming class. That led her to take part in the March For Our Lives in Washington, D.C. The Parkersburg, W.Va., native said she just wants to see her state thrive and not continue to wither. Currently studying psychology and addiction at West Virginia University, Haught said, she would like Manchin to work to improve the state's addiction and mental health system to improve the quality of life for West Virginians. "I just want (Manchin) to really hear out the young people who are considering leaving because we don't have new industries and we don't have new opportunities that we deserve," she said as protesters sang songs reminiscent of the suffrage and civil rights movements. Haught said the main message protesters wanted to convey was that Enersystems is profiting from the coal industry, while Manchin serves as chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. "That is a huge conflict of interest and it absolutely should not be allowed to happen," Haught said. Kathy Ferguson drove from her home in Institute, W.Va., to take part in the protest. She said she wants Manchin to use his influence in the Senate to lift up West Virginia families who face poverty and drug addiction. "West Virginia is a state that suffers with poor education, poor health outcomes – there's a lot of opioid use here," Ferguson said. "There's just so many issues that we're struggling with and Build Back Better has so many components and pieces that will elevate the quality of lives and the economy." Ferguson said the senator needs to serve the people of his state better. "I believe he's like many politicians who actually have the ability to make personal gains from legislation that does not ... help a lot of folks," Ferguson said. Environmental attorney Lisa Johnson, of Pittsburgh, was one of at least two attorneys on site. Donning a cap bearing the words National Lawyers Guild, Johnson said she was there out of personal interest. "I'm Switzerland," she said. "I am very interested in making sure that when people protest, they are able to under the confines of the (U.S.) Constitution, of course, so to be able to just observe and document what is happening without being actively engaged in order to make sure the process remains intact." Johnson stood across Highway 17 from the chainlink fence of the power plant and snapped photos and documented some of the arrests by dictating voice memos to her smartphone.

1 0

West Virginians Gear Up for "Coal Baron Blockade" at Joe Manchin's Coal Plant
by Duane Nichols 08 Apr '22

08 Apr '22

West Virginians Gear Up for "Coal Baron Blockade" at Joe Manchin's Coal Plant Since Sen. Joe Manchin has blockaded Democrats’ landmark Build Back Better climate and jobs legislation, at least 400 West Virginians and allied activists say they are planning to return the gesture in kind by blockading Senator Manchin’s family business at the Grant Town Power Plant on Saturday, April 9. Dozens of activists, working in coalition under the banner West Virginia Rising and with support from organizations like Rising Tide North America, are planning to risk arrest by blocking traffic to the 80-megawatt, coal-fired plant in Grant Town, West Virginia. Senator Manchin makes nearly $500,000 per year from his family business Enersystems, Inc., which sells coal gob to the Grant Town Power Plant. Senator Manchin’s son, Joseph Manchin IV, runs the company. Manchin founded Enersystems, a Fairmont, West Virginia-based coal brokerage firm, in 1988. He reported making $5.6 million off company stock from 2010 to 2020 — all while working to protect the coal industry and gut critical environmental laws to increase his own revenues as part of the powerful Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which he has chaired since February 3, 2021. https://truthout.org/articles/west-virginians-gear-up-for-coal-baron-blocka…

1 0

EDITORIAL ~ M.I.P. Mystery Continues. Appeal Period Ends April 6th
by Duane Nichols 04 Apr '22

04 Apr '22

EDITORIAL: Secretive 'Science Facility' Seems Like An Unwelcome Polluter The Dominion Post, Morgantown, W.Va. January 13, 2022 Usually, when a new business or industry makes its home around Morgantown, local politicians and business advocates are positively abuzz, talking to anyone who will listen and promoting the area's newest addition. But that's not the case with the mysterious "science facility /data processing center " coming to the Morgantown Industrial Park. So far, the only thing we know is that Marion Energy Partners applied to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection for a permit for its 10, 000-square-foot facility. The center's four natural gas-fired engines—operating 24 /7 /365—would pull natural gas from a nearby Northeast Natural Energy well pad. (Northeast Natural Energy appears to be Marion Energy Partners' parent company.) Nothing else is really known, though it's suspected the new facility will be a cryptocurrency mining operation. As we reported Wednesday, cryptocurrency mining uses banks of specialized computers to validate blockchain transactions for a specific cryptocurrency (such as Bitcoin) in order to receive percentages of said currency in return. The process is extremely energy intensive and has come under fire for its massive carbon footprint. Essentially, what Monongalia County is looking at is a carbon-and air pollution-spewing factory that creates few, if any, jobs or economic opportunity. It's immensely concerning that a major polluter could be setting up shop in our backyard and no one knows anything about it. Neither company will respond to requests for comment, and even the Monongalia County Commission is being tight-lipped about the project. Mon County residents are well within their rights to demand more information. Air pollution is never confined to the area where it is emitted, and we'd want to a see a plan from Northeast Natural Energy and /or Marion Energy Partners that details how they would protect the community from any toxins or chemicals the facility ejects. We'd also like to see the companies' proposals for offsetting the center's carbon emissions. In a consumer-driven economy, some trade-offs are to be expected. For example: Accepting some pollution in exchange for well-paying jobs and a measurable boost to the local economy. That's why coal mines are still welcomed in most of West Virginia. However, there isn't enough information about the center publicly available to make a list of pros and cons. At the moment, the proposed facility seems to offer no jobs, no tangible product and little-to-no benefit to taxpayers. Because of concerns about the secretive center, contact the WV DEP Environmental Advocate and ask that his Office appeal the Air Pollution Permit or ask that the permit be re-examined after the final report on the MSEEL project is issued. Include "Marion Energy Partners LLC" in the subject line. This request can be emailed to depadvocate(a)wv.gov You can write to Mike John, the CEO of Northeast Natural Energy, here in Morgantown. His company owns the Marcellus wells in the MIP as well as the responsibility for the so-called Science Facility project. His address is MIke John, CEO, Northeast Natural Energy, Marina Tower, STE 601, 48 Donley Street, Morgantown, WV 26501

1 0

Empire Diversified Energy expansion plans concern some Follansbee residents | WTOV
by Duane Nichols 03 Apr '22

03 Apr '22

https://wtov9.com/news/local/empire-diversified-energy-expansion-plans-conc… Empire Diversified Energy expansion plans concern some Follansbee residents From an Article by Tyler Madden, WTOV News 9, April 1, 2022 FOLLANSBEE, W.Va. — Empire Diversified Energy is continuing its work at the Port of West Virginia, including the development of a medical waste energy system. The company acquired the former Coppers [actually Koppers] Chemical plant and is continuing its expansion in that area. "We've cleaned up that site and on the theme of renewable energy we started with this recycling program for medical waste,” Empire Diversified Energy President Scott Ewusiak said. "That feedstock is sent through a chipper/shredder to get it into smaller pieces like you chewing food,” Bernard Brown, chief technology officer for the company, explained. “You're breaking it down, then it goes into the system." RELATED: Port of West Virginia shows legislators what it has to offer The system is operated at 1,200 degrees Fahrenheit. Brown said it's not incineration because oxygen is absent from the process. The West Virginia legislature recently passed House Bill 4084 that approves this kind of process within the state. "This system has been approved by the state of California also that has some of the toughest air emissions,” Brown said. Developers said it's a closed system. Gases are fed back into it and there are no emissions. The group said this expansion will create 30 jobs. [Quite an invention if gases are produced and then disappear inside? Perhaps the gases are fed to the combustion chamber to be burned with natural gas? DGN] Follansbee Mayor David Velogol said he’s heard concerned from some residents about the emissions. “I have heard those concerns and I can see where people are rightly concerned,” Velegol said. “I'm the mayor and I'm also a chemical engineer and I work with oil refineries and chemical plants, and I know the strictness of the EPA when they go through and examine these." The Port of West Virginia hosted a day-long tour of their development earlier this week. "We're trying to make a clean logistics terminal,” Ewusiak said. “There's nothing like that in our area where we could bring in different agricultural things, fertilizer to shipping containers like you see on the sea." "I live in this community,” Velegol said. “I don't live in Cincinnati or Pittsburgh and same with Scottie. We live in this community, and we have to breathe this same air and it's really important to us that we have clear technology and clean air in this area." The company currently is in the permitting process to build this processor. xxx

1 0

Mon Balks at Shale Laws - Morgantown Dominion Post - 9 June 2011
by Duane Nichols 24 Mar '22

24 Mar '22

http://www.uppermon.org/news/dominion%20post/DP-Mon_Balks_at_Shale_Laws-9Ju… Mon Balks at Shale Laws County promises legal action if ordinances pass Morgantown Dominion Post 9 June 2011 By Tracy Eddy Municipalities — such as Morgantown and Westover — do not have the authority to extend their jurisdictions up to one mile outside of their city limits, the Monongalia County Commission said Wednesday. “It’s unconstitutional,” Commissioner Eldon Callen said. But Morgantown Mayor Bill Byrne and Westover Mayor Dave Johnson beg to differ, saying a state code gives cities that power. Morgantown City Council approved Tuesday the first reading of a law to ban horizontal drilling and fracturing — or fracking — in the city limits and up to one mile beyond Morgantown’s borders. Westover City Council is considering a law that would require potential drillers in its one-mile buffer to prove — with data — the drilling would be safe to Westover residents. Commissioners said the county would take legal action to prevent the cities from enforcing those laws, if they are passed. Commission President Asel Kennedy said the same goes for any other municipalities that would impose restrictions on property owners living in the county. Callen said the issue is not about Marcellus shale — it’s about the cities trying to use their authority outside their limits. “We as a county commission have a responsibility to all the people in the county,” he said. “The people inside municipalities and the people outside them.” During its Wednesday meeting, the county commission voted unanimously to send letters to Morgantown and Westover city officials, requesting a work session to discuss the proposed city laws. Morgantown drafted its law using W.Va. Code 8-12-19, Byrne said, which allows cities to extend their powers up to one mile outside their corporate limits if it is necessary to efficiently exercise those powers. Byrne said the city didn’t discuss the law with the county prior to drafting it because the city was trying to move as quickly as possible to protect its water supply and its residents. “We had a responsibility and a legal right to do this,” he said. Callen said that particular section of code has never been tested in court. The city hasn’t said what specific power it is trying to exercise by passing the law, he said. He also said the one-mile figure was “arbitrary.” “You can’t just draw a one-mile circle around the town,” he said. Kennedy said he understands Morgantown is concerned about the water supply and its proximity to the two Marcellus wells being drilled, but, “a mile outside the city is a long way.” He said areas such as Point Marion Road and Grafton Road fall into the one-mile buffer but aren’t near the water supply. If people living outside the city limits wanted to sell the mineral rights to their property, the city law could stop them, if it were passed. “We, as a commission, need to intercede [if the law is passed] so that hundreds of others don’t have to use their time and money to do so,” Kennedy said. The two Marcellus wells being drilled at the Morgantown Industrial Park are about 3,000 feet from the Morgantown Utility Board’s water intake. If any fluid discharged from the site enters the Monongahela River, it will do so 1,500 feet from the water intake. Commissioner Bill Bartolo said this situation exists because the governor and the state Legislature failed to develop new regulations for the Marcellus shale permitting and drilling process. The County Commission sent a letter to the governor last week, urging him to call a special session so the Legislature could come up with regulations to better control the drilling statewide. Bartolo said the issue should be addressed at the state level, not at the city level. He does support cooperation between the county and the cities, he said. “We need to do the right thing,” he said. “Whatever it is.” Byrne said the city would be willing to meet with county officials. Johnson said Westover would be willing to listen to the county as well, but he doesn’t think the one-mile buffer is unconstitutional because it’s allowed by the state code. Westover is taking a more conservative approach to its law than Morgantown is, Johnson said. “Westover is going to be very careful about how we do this,” he said. “We’re not trying to shut [the drilling industry] down completely, but we want to make sure it’s going to be safe.” W.VA. CODE 8-12-19 Wherever the powers and authority granted in this chapter cannot be reasonably and efficiently exercised by confining the exercise thereof within the corporate limits of the municipality, the powers and authority of the municipality shall extend beyond the corporate limits to the extent necessary to the reasonably efficient exercise of such powers and authority within the corporate limits. Such powers and authority, unless other wise provided in this code or elsewhere in the law, shall not, however extend more than one mile beyond the corporate limits, and such powers and authority shall not extend into the corporate limits of another municipality without the consent of the governing body thereof. Sent from my iPad

1 0

LOCAL WEBINAR ON POLAR ICE CAPS ~ Heating & Melting are Underway BigTime on EARTH (3/23/22 @ 7 PM)
by Duane Nichols 21 Mar '22

21 Mar '22

https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2022/03/21/local-webinar-on-polar-ice-caps-hea… LOCAL WEBINAR ON POLAR ICE CAPS ~ Heating & Melting are Underway BigTime on EARTH (3/23/22 @ 7 PM) Jacob Fourier in France understood the “greenhouse effect” in 1824. “What Are The Poles (North and South) Telling Us About Earth’s Climate Future?” From Tom Rodd, Executive Director, WV Center on Climate Change, March 21, 2022 Here’s our final reminder about the upcoming Wednesday, March 23 @ 7 PM live climate science program from Morgantown, WV — featuring a great speaker, Dr. Julie Brigham-Grette. §§§ — Details and registration are here. Julie Brigham-Grette is a world-renowned scientist who studies the polar regions. She is tremendously alarmed at the ongoing environmental collapse of these areas that are so vital to our planetary well-being. See her recent article on this topic here. Dr. Brigham-Grette will be speaking and answering questions about how the polar climate has already changed, what we can expect as global climate change continues, and why we urgently need to address the climate crisis to protect humanity’s future. Dr. Brigham-Grette will be joined by two West Virginia University Professors, Dr. Amy Weislogel, Associate Professor of Sedimentary Geology, and Dr. Christopher J. Russoniello, Assistant Professor of Geology. More information on all of these speakers is here at the registration page. Wednesday, March 23rd @ 7 PM — The in-person venue will be a “smart conference room” at the WVU Media Innovation Center, in the Evansdale Crossing Building, 62 Morrill Way, Morgantown WV 26506. There will be audience seating, cameras and microphones for online participation, and a large screen displaying online speakers and audience questions. Doors open at 6:30 PM USET, and the online program will go from 7:00 to 8:00 PM USET. Reservations are not required. WVU COVID protocols currently require masking. Don’t miss this unique chance to engage with these outstanding scientists who are joining this program to discuss the most important challenge of our time. The stakes could not be higher — let’s make them welcome! We have more than 130 registrants so far – and for anyone in the Morgantown area, this will be a special gathering with other climate-concerned folks! Please share this invitation with your friends, and I hope to see you, in-person or online! >>> Tom Rodd, Director, West Virginia Center on Climate Change ### ~ To attend and participate in this program — either online or in person — register here. For more information, email info(a)wvclimate.org. Thanks for your climate concerns! P.S. Please share this message with others who might be interested! They will appreciate it! Tagged as: CH4, CO2, fossil fuels, frack gas, GHG, global warming, polar ice caps, sea level rise, WV Center on Climate Change Sent from my iPad

1 0

“Science Facility” in Charleston Gazette by Mike Tony, 3/9/22
by Duane Nichols 14 Mar '22

14 Mar '22

DEP approves air quality permit for proposed data processing facility in Morgantown despite limited information on facility plans Charleston Gazette article by Mike Tony, March 9, 2022 West Virginia environmental regulators have approved a key permit for a data processing facility in Morgantown despite having admitted they know little about what the applicant’s plans are for the facility. The state Department of Environmental Protection approved an air quality permit for a data processing facility proposed by Morgantown-based Marion Energy Partners LLC. Marion Energy Partners applied in August for an air quality permit to construct and operate a 10,000-square-foot data processing facility at 5900 Morgantown Industrial Park. The facility would include four natural gas-fired engines to generate its own electricity around the clock. In its final determination issued Monday, the DEP’s Division of Air Quality said it has “no explicit authority” to disclose the function of the proposed data center. The facility’s name is listed as “Science Facility” in a filing with the DEP. But when Morgantown residents and elected officials asked Division of Air Quality engineer Edward Andrews for more information about the nature of planned operations at the facility during a January public hearing on the permit application, Andrews had little to offer. “The best we know from the application is that it’s going to be a data center,” Andrews said. The permit application was submitted on Marion Energy Partners’ behalf by Charleston-based SLR Consulting. Representatives of Northeast Natural Energy, a Charleston-headquartered oil and gas exploration company, were copied on email correspondence with environmental regulators. A July notice of Marion Energy Partners’ air quality permit application lists the same address for the company as that of Northeast Natural Energy’s Morgantown office — 48 Donley St., Suite 601, Morgantown, WV 26501. Brett Loflin, who joined Northeast Natural Energy as vice president of regulatory affairs in 2010, declined to comment on plans for the facility in January and did not respond to a request for comment this week. The permit application also lists Loflin as vice president of regulatory affairs at Marion Energy Partners. The Division of Air Quality acknowledged in its final determination that the majority of comments it received about the permit application opposed it. But the division said a state legislative rule limited regulators’ scope of review to whether the proposed engines would violate emission standards. “The DAQ has no explicit authority to request the applicant to disclose the function of the ‘data center’,” the division said in its final determination. In response to comments it received opposing the application, the Division of Air Quality said it had no authority to require Marion Energy Partners to analyze the “best available control technology” to control air pollution or reevaluate its process to reduce facility emissions because the facility is not a “major source.” The federal Clean Air Act requires best available control technology for major sources, which have actual or potential emissions above thresholds of 100 tons per year for any air pollutant. The permit application says the facility will share its location with a natural gas production pad that will supply gas to the generator engines to help power the facility. The fuel gas would be supplied by area wells equivalent to pipeline-quality gas at a volume of 97% methane, according to the permit application. SLR Consulting principal engineer Jesse Hanshaw told Andrews in an August email that gas from a local gathering pipeline would provide an uninterrupted supply of fuel to the data center, according to DEP documents. The site is believed to be designed to provide electricity for cryptocurrency mining, a process of creating new units of digital currency that requires large amounts of energy for computing. Opponents of the permit application have feared the facility could contribute significant noise pollution, as bitcoin mining facilities have prompted complaints about fan noise from power generated for facility computers. Bitcoin is a digital currency that users can buy, sell or exchange directly without government or bank oversight. The Division of Air Quality noted in its response to comments on the application that excessive noise is not an issue under its jurisdiction. DEP spokesman Terry Fletcher said in January that the state has permitted what he called similar sources in West Virginia: a computing center for the U.S. Department of the Treasury in Berkeley County, the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Clarksburg site, and a military training facility for the West Virginia National Guard in Preston County. “The WVDEP cannot speculate as to the nature of operations at these facilities, nor are the permittees required to disclose that information,” Fletcher said in an email. “DAQ’s jurisdiction over these sites begins and ends with the emission sources.” Monongalia County Democratic delegates Evan Hansen, Barbara Fleischauer, Danielle Walker and John Williams were joined by John Doyle, D-Jefferson, in sponsoring a bill during this legislative session that would have required DEP permit applicants to disclose the purpose of their planned activity “with sufficient specificity” at the permit location. But the House Energy and Manufacturing Committee never took up the bill, House Bill 4640. Morgantown residents and city officials expressed concern over potential greenhouse gas and noise emissions from the facility during the January public hearing, also doubting the facility would result in any economic benefit to the community. Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition coordinator and Morgantown resident Duane Nichols said the Division of Air Quality should not have granted the permit and expressed frustration at the DEP’s strict interpretation of the regulations involved. “[O]ur state government should not approve pollution permits for facilities that only insult the public interest,” Nichols said in an email. He also said the proposed site’s close proximity to schools and residential areas would have justified withholding the permit from Marion Energy Partners. “[The DEP] has failed to fully account for the greenhouse gas emissions and associated facilities at this site,” Jim Kotcon, conservation committee chairman of the Sierra Club’s West Virginia chapter, said in an email. The nearest residential dwelling is about 1,128 feet away from the center of the site, with some businesses roughly half that amount away, according to state environmental regulators, who found the site is appropriate for the proposed emission units. The permit sets emissions limits of 16.69 tons per year of nitrogen oxides and 8.42 tons per year of carbon monoxide for each engine. The engines are to be equipped with an oxidation catalyst air pollution control device, according to the permit. Marion Energy Partners was required to obtain a permit in part because the four proposed engines’ potential emissions exceed 6 pounds per hour and 10 tons per year for nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and volatile organic compounds. >>> Mike Tony covers energy and the environment. He can be reached at 304-348-1236 or mtony(a)hdmediallc.com. Follow @Mike__Tony on Twitter.

1 0

Marion Energy Partners LLC; Science Facility (“data center”) ~ Permit No. R13-3533
by Duane Nichols 07 Mar '22

07 Mar '22

https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2022/03/07/marion-energy-partners-llc-science-… Marion Energy Partners LLC; Science Facility (“data center”) ~ Permit No. R13-3533 Land is available for lease in the Morgantown Industrial Park WV Air Quality Final Determination & Response to Comments – Science Facility for Morgantown Industrial Park From the Division of Air Quality, WV Department of Environmental Protection, March 7, 2022 Pursuant to 45 CSR §13-8.8, the Division of Air Quality presents the FINAL DETERMINATION for the Construction Permit for Marion Energy Partners LLC —Science Facility, located near Morgantown, Monongalia County, West Virginia ~ Permit Application Number: R13-3533, Facility Identification Number 061-00262, Date: March 7, 2022. {‘Promoting a healthy environment.’} Marion Energy Partners, the same individuals at the same locations as Northeast Natural Energy, has proposed to construct a frack gas fired facility to generate electricity, with some unrevealed purpose that would use the power to run a Science Facility as a “data center” operating 24 x 365. Four G3520H Caterpillar engines rated at 3457 horsepower each would have individual stacks 20 feet tall, not very high in the valley. The frack gas, similar to natural gas, would contain numerous contaminants in low concentrations. Consideration of Dehydration Unit ~ The DAQ agrees with the commenters that the dehydration unit at the MIP Measurement & Recording (M&R) station adjacent to the Science Facility should be included in the air pollution analysis because of plant functionality (e.g., engines need the field gas dehydrated) and is owned and operated by Northeast Natural Energy. The combined emissions, of Marion Energy Partners and the MIP M&R station would still be classified as a non-major facility under the major source construction (PSD) and operating permit (Title V) programs and as an area source of hazardous air pollutants. Combined emissions of the two sites in tons per year are as follows: Particulate Matter (PM) 3.89, Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) 67.4, Carbon Monoxide (CO) 34.22, Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 40.34, Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) 14.41, and Formaldehyde (HCHO) 6.68. [Some 55,000 tons per year of Carbon Dioxide will also be emitted.] Oxidation Catalyst Monitoring ~ “The permittee shall monitor the temperature at the inlet of the catalyst in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications; a high temperature alarm shall shut off the engine before thermal deactivation of the catalyst occurs. If the engine shuts off due to high temperature alarm, the permittee shall follow the maintenance plan and the engine and oxidation catalyst manufacturer’s operating and maintenance procedures to determine the cause of the alarm and corrective action. If thermal deactivation of the oxidation catalyst is suspected, then the permittee shall also check for thermal deactivation of the oxidation catalyst in accordance with the oxidation catalyst manufacture’s written procedures and corrective action to restore catalyst performance (if necessary) before normal operations are resumed.” Final Determination ~ “After consideration of all comments received, all available information indicates Marion Energy Partners LLC’s proposed construction of the Science Facility near Morgantown, Monongalia County, WV, should meet all applicable requirements of State Rules and Federal Regulations and permit R13-3533 should be issued, subject to applicable state and federal air quality management rules and standards.” >>> The Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition and others have raised a number of issues and maintain that the Morgantown Industrial Park is not an appropriate location for this pollution. Other industrial facilities are quite close; and numerous schools, residential areas, churches, and critical health care facilities are in this same Monongahela River valley. >>> It has been recommended that the City of Morgantown appeal this Permit to the WV Air Quality Board. xxx

1 0

Preparing for Petrochemicals: Virtual Community Meeting - 12/8/21
by Duane Nichols 23 Feb '22

23 Feb '22

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rCZxEa4KHY >>>. Full event video. Event took place on December 8, 2021. A virtual community meeting to discuss issues and concerns as the Shell petrochemical plant nears start-up operations. The evening was facilitated by Sr. Kari Pohl, Coordinator of Justice and Peace Ministry for the Sisters of St. Joseph of Baden. Topics and Speakers include: • Shell Plant Overview - Dr. Clifford Lau, Duquesne University and Beaver County Marcellus Awareness Community (BCMAC) (featuring photography by Ted Auch/FracTracker Alliance) • Final Permitting and Fenceline Monitoring - Adam Kron, Earthjustice and Karl Koerner, Clean Air Council • Petrochemical Health Impacts - Dr. Ned Ketyer, Physicians for Social Responsibility PA and Environmental Health Project • Air Pollution Monitoring - Ana Hoffman, CMU CREATE Lab, Mark Dixon, BlueLens • Water, Noise, Light and other Pollution - Terrie Baumgardner, Clean Air Council, Beaver County Clean Air Outreach Coordinator and BCMAC • Emergency Response System - Mr. Eric Brewer, Beaver County Emergency Management • Texas Experiences - Yvette Arellano, Fenceline Watch, Houston, Texas >>> Q & A Event partners: Beaver County Marcellus Awareness, Community (BCMAC), Blue Lens, LLC, Breathe Project, Clean Air Council, CMU CREATE Lab, Communities First Sewickley, EarthJustice, Environmental Health Project, Environmental Integrity Project, Fractracker Alliance, League of Women Voters of PA, Physicians for Social Responsibility PA

1 0

PLASTICS Problems Can Actually Get Worse ....
by Duane Nichols 22 Feb '22

22 Feb '22

Trend Study Chemical Recycling (“extract”) — Technologies, key players, plants & projects and status of the plastic waste treatment as a business, February 2022 https://www.ecoprog.com/fileadmin/user_upload/extract_Trend_Study_Chemical_…

1 0

Sierra Club and Partners File Brief in High Stakes West Va v. EPA Case o
by Duane Nichols 13 Feb '22

13 Feb '22

https://www.sierraclub.org/articles/2022/01/sierra-club-and-partners-file-b… Sierra Club and Partners File Brief in High Stakes West Va v. EPA Case By Andres Restrepo and Joanne Spalding, Sierra Club USA, January 19, 2022 The Sierra Club, together with a coalition of environmental organizations, public health advocacy groups, and others, filed a brief yesterday with the U.S. Supreme Court in the case West Virginia v. EPA. The brief forcefully opposes an attack on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Clean Air Act authority launched by right-wing politicians and coal industry executives allied with them. With the support of polluter-backed special interest groups and other far-right extremists, the petitioners in this case are asserting a legal theory invented by the Trump Administration that would gut EPA’s ability to rein in climate-disrupting carbon dioxide pollution from existing fossil fuel-burning power plants under section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. One year ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected those arguments and ruled in favor of Sierra Club and its allies; the case is now before the Supreme Court. The Court’s decision in this case could severely undercut EPA’s power to protect public health and welfare by combatting the climate crisis. As our brief makes clear, EPA has not only the authority, but the duty to issue meaningful safeguards against carbon pollution from power plants, despite the Trump Administration’s previous efforts to read that authority out of the law. More to the point, our brief demonstrates that the Court should promptly dismiss this case without addressing the legal merits: the Court has no jurisdiction over this case since no EPA regulations currently exist that implicate these legal questions. Unfortunately, the coal companies and politicians litigating this case are not content to focus on the narrow question of statutory interpretation at hand. Instead, they are seizing this case as an opportunity to strike a body blow against EPA’s authority to carry out vital Congressional directives. The petitioners’ briefs to the Court focus largely on what is known as the “major questions doctrine,” a legal principle concerning the interpretation of laws and their implementation by federal agencies. In certain prior cases, the Supreme Court has held that when a federal agency interprets a Congressional statute in a way that would have “vast economic and political significance,” a court will look for a “clear Congressional authorization” in the governing law, rather than interpret statutory silence or ambiguity as permitting the agency’s interpretation. In this case, the petitioners – coal companies and their political allies – are trying to use the major questions doctrine to strip EPA of its authority to consider any emission reduction techniques under section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act except those that can be implemented within the walls of each individual plant. Their theory would permit EPA to adopt only exceedingly weak measures that would shield power companies from the obligation to pay anything other than minimal costs for the dangerous pollution their plants emit. However, they ignore the fact that the Supreme Court already held in AEP vs. Connecticut that “Congress delegated to EPA the decision whether and how to regulate carbon-dioxide emissions from powerplants,” and that section 111(d) “speaks directly” to EPA’s authority in this regard. The petitioners’ legal theory, and their understanding of the major questions doctrine, would decimate EPA’s authority to take meaningful action to reduce power plants’ dangerous carbon dioxide emissions. But the damage wouldn’t end there. They are directly targeting federal agencies’ authority in general to develop policies and take action to protect the public’s health, welfare, and safety. Indeed, just yesterday, the politician leading the attack on EPA’s regulatory authority–West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrissey–told the press that the petitioners’ legal theory in this case is “not only about our coal-fired power plants,” but also “deals with consumer-related matters” and raises “fundamental questions about the size and scope of government.” Here’s what that really means: Morrissey and his allies want to use this case to torpedo the ability of public servants at government agencies to do their Congressionally-mandated duty to enforce laws and safeguard our air and water, ensure that businesses from agriculture to telecommunications to transportation treat consumers fairly, and protect the health of our families and communities. A ruling in their favor could send us back to the period of American government that preceded the Great Depression, commonly known as the “Lochner era,” when corporate power went largely unchecked and federal agencies had little authority to protect the public. The sweeping ruling these politicians and coal companies are pushing for would undermine the will of the people, a century of laws, and decades of legal precedent. We are confident that each of their claims lacks merit, and our brief explains exactly why. In response to this blatant and dangerous overreach, the key points of the brief are as follows: First, there is no standing for this attack. This case should be dismissed because the petitioners lack standing to pursue their claims. Their arguments focus on the implementation of the Obama-era Clean Power Plan–a policy that never went into effect, and whose emission targets were already reached a decade ahead of schedule due to industry trends, even without that regulation in place. Instead, EPA plans to issue a new rule on a blank slate to limit power plants’ carbon dioxide emissions, and the petitioners’ preemptive attacks against those standards are entirely speculative. Rather than raise their legal claims in the abstract, the petitioners must await the result of EPA’s new rulemaking, which will both define the issues for judicial review and avoid entangling the court in an unnecessary advisory exercise over regulations that never went into effect. Second, even if this were a live issue instead of speculation, the petitioners’ arguments would fail because the Clean Air Act gives the EPA clear authority to act. Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act simply does not include the restrictions on EPA authority that the petitioners claim it does. Just as the Trump Administration did, the petitioners contort the plain meaning of the statute and read into it words that Congress did not include. This is the only way they can support their interpretation of section 111(d), which would severely and unjustifiably restrict EPA’s authority to limit carbon dioxide pollution from existing power plants. Third, the “major questions” issue does not apply in this case. Precedent makes clear that the major questions doctrine is relevant when the policy in question would have “vast economic or political significance.” Yet the Clean Power Plan never even took effect, and market-driven trends in the electric power sector have rendered its emission-reduction targets immaterial. The Supreme Court has never applied major questions principles to an agency rule that is defunct, not under review, and that would have no meaningful impact even if it were reinstated. In any event, Congress included clear instructions in section 111(d) for EPA to follow in regulating air pollution; those instructions do not include the limits that the petitioners claim, and that is all the specificity that the law requires. As our brief makes clear, the extreme positions of the petitioners are out of line with the Clean Air Act and with the governing legal precedent. The case should therefore be dismissed; otherwise, the Supreme Court should uphold the D.C. Circuit’s decision rejecting the legal theory that the petitioners use to attack EPA’s Clean Air Act authority. As we look ahead to oral arguments before the Supreme Court, which will occur on February 28, Sierra Club and its partners will continue to beat the drum in support of our position in this case. More broadly, we will continue to use all of our tools of advocacy to ensure that we defeat the vision for our climate, our country, and our world held by the coal industry and its political allies, like Patrick Morrissey. And we will not stop in our work to secure a just and prosperous future that provides 100% clean and renewable energy for all. >>>>> You can help, see ..... FrackCheckWV.net

1 0

Justice Dept. Seizes $3.6 Billion in Bitcoin and Arrests Married Couple - The New York Times, February 8, 2022
by Duane Nichols 09 Feb '22

09 Feb '22

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/08/us/politics/ilya-lichtenstein-heather-mo… Justice Dept. Seizes $3.6 Billion in Bitcoin and Arrests Married Couple The couple were accused of conspiring to launder Bitcoin that had been stolen in 2016 from Hong Kong-based Bitfinex, one of the world’s largest virtual currency exchanges. From an Article by Katie Bender, New York Times, Feb. 8, 2022 WASHINGTON — The Justice Department said on Tuesday that it had seized over $3.6 billion worth of stolen Bitcoin and arrested a married couple accused of laundering the cryptocurrency that hackers had stolen six years ago. The couple, Ilya Lichtenstein, 34, and Heather Morgan, 31, were accused in a criminal complaint of conspiring to launder 119,754 Bitcoin that had been stolen in 2016 from Hong Kong-based Bitfinex, one of the world’s largest virtual currency exchanges. The value of the currency at the time of its seizure last week makes it the department’s largest financial seizure ever, officials said. The breach in 2016 was among a spate of hackings into currency exchanges that have allowed for the theft of large amounts of digital currency. After the hacking of Bitfinex, one of the largest exchanges in the history of the cryptocurrency market, the value of Bitcoin initially plunged about 20 percent. Mr. Lichtenstein and Ms. Morgan appeared in a federal court in Manhattan on Tuesday afternoon. A judge ordered them released on bond: $5 million in Mr. Lichtenstein’s case and $3 million in Ms. Morgan’s. A lawyer representing them did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Mr. Lichtenstein, who goes by the nickname Dutch, has both American and Russian citizenship and has described himself as a tech entrepreneur, according to the complaint. Ms. Morgan describes herself on her LinkedIn page as “a serial entrepreneur” and an “irreverent comedic rapper.” The complaint, which also accuses the couple of conspiracy to defraud the United States, suggests Ms. Morgan also goes by the alias Razzlekhan. The deputy attorney general, Lisa O. Monaco, said in a statement that the arrests “show that cryptocurrency is not a safe haven for criminals.” According to court documents, the hacker who breached Bitfinex’s systems initiated 2,000 transactions to send 119,754 stolen Bitcoin to a digital wallet that was under Mr. Lichtenstein’s control. The investigators traced the movement of the Bitcoin on the blockchain, the permanent fixed electronic ledger that records each time a Bitcoin moves to a new digital wallet. And some of those funds were eventually deposited into financial accounts controlled by Mr. Lichtenstein and Ms. Morgan, who used some of the money to buy items such as gold, nonfungible tokens and a Walmart gift card, according to the complaint. Law enforcement officials gained access to Mr. Lichtenstein’s wallet on Jan. 31, after they obtained a search warrant that gave them entry to encrypted files in Mr. Lichtenstein’s cloud storage account. The next day, investigators seized the 94,636 Bitcoin that remained in that wallet, which were worth more than $3.6 billion, according to court papers. The total 119,754 Bitcoin that were stolen, worth about $71 million when Bitfinex was hacked in 2016, are now worth more than $4.5 billion, according to the Justice Department. The arrest shows that “we will not allow cryptocurrency to be a safe haven for money laundering or a zone of lawlessness within our financial system,” Kenneth A. Polite Jr., the head of the Justice Department’s criminal division, said in a statement. With more Americans buying and selling cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, regulators have brought some large exchanges in the United States under official oversight. But cryptocurrencies move through decentralized computer networks that are not under the control of any single government or company, so most trading occurs on largely unregulated exchanges like Bitfinex, which give consumers little information about their operations. The lack of regulation has led to a host of problems in the world of virtual currency exchanges, threatening to impair consumer confidence in cryptocurrencies and to slow widespread adoption. The first Bitcoin exchange, Mt. Gox, collapsed in 2014 after hackers breached its security systems and siphoned away $500 million in customer money.

1 0

Federal pipeline agency shifts focus to cut methane - E&E News
by Duane Nichols 05 Feb '22

05 Feb '22

Federal pipeline agency shifts focus to cut methane - Mike Soraghan, E&E News, January 18, 2022 https://www.eenews.net/articles/federal-pipeline-agency-shifts-focus-to-cut… The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) was given a broad new responsibility by Congress to limit greenhouse gas emissions, and the "thousands" of inquiries it’s planning to make to companies about their methane emissions this year will be some of the earliest tangible signs of that mandate. "Congress was very clear that we must not just reduce these emissions, but we must do all we can to minimize these emissions," Tristan Brown, PHMSA’s deputy administrator, said in a speech late last year. In late 2020, Congress ordered pipeline companies to update their inspections and maintenance plans to find ways to reduce methane emissions. It ordered PHMSA to check those plans with inspections. Meanwhile, the agency is also writing rules on methane, requiring companies to find and fix leaks. It says it’s aiming to have a proposed rule published in the Federal Register by May.

1 0

Allegheny County Health Dept. to U.S. Steel: Air quality mitigation plans unacceptable - resubmit or face possible $25K-a-day fines
by Duane Nichols 03 Feb '22

03 Feb '22

From: GASP, Group Against Smog and Pollution <amanda(a)gasp-pgh.org> > Date: February 3, 2022 at 3:09:02 PM EST > Subject: Allegheny County Health Dept. to U.S. Steel: Air quality mitigation plans unacceptable - resubmit or face possible $25K-a-day fines > > > > Join GASP > > > > > > > > > > > GASP on Wednesday was the first to report that the Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) notified U.S. Steel and other major source polluters that emissions mitigation plans submitted to comply with Mon Valley Air Pollution Episode Rules are “unacceptable,” and ordered them to modify and resubmit paperwork or face possible fines. > > > > You can read all about that Mon Valley Episode Rule here. > > > > In a Jan. 31 Order of Disapproval and Order for Compliance, ACHD notified U.S. Steel that the mitigation plan submitted for its Clairton Coke Works facility was insufficient for myriad reasons. Chief among them: that the 3 percent estimated plantwide reductions in particulate pollution (both PM 10 and PM 2.5) were not great enough. > > “Source is required to resubmit a plan that will reflect a greater reduction of its actual emissions from (30 listed processes) such that said reductions will have an appreciable effect on air quality…during any air pollution episode,” the order noted. > > > > ACHD issued a similar order to the company over mitigation plans submitted for its Edgar Thomson facility in North Braddock – noting among other things that U.S. Steel’s proposed 4 percent reduction in PM10 and PM2.5 are “insufficient.” > > > > Orders were also issued to: > > Clairton Slag in West Elizabeth Township > ELG Metals in McKeesport > TMS (USX Edgar Thomson) > TMS (West Mifflin) > > The companies have a period of 30 days to either resubmit their plans or appeal the ACHD’s decision. Noncompliance could result in fines of up to $25,000 a day. The orders indicate that the current mitigation plans are to remain in effect until the modified documents are submitted. > > While GASP appreciates that ACHD appears to be carefully reviewing the mitigation plans and pushing for greater emissions reductions that better protect ambient air quality and public health, we remain disappointed by the lack of transparency. > > “These mitigation plans are a necessary tool for protecting the public’s health, we don’t see any reason why the health department cannot and should not make these mitigation plans available for public review,” GASP Executive Director Patrick Campbell said. “We encourage the health department to post these plans on its website for transparency’s – and accountability’s – sake.” > > Rest assured that GASP will continue to press ACHD on this issue and report back to you what we find out. > > Editor's Note: ACHD on Thursday issued a news release related to the Mon Valley AIr Pollution Episode mitigation plans. You can read more about that on our blog. > Announcement: Allegheny County's Air Pollution Advisory Committee meets Monday. CLICK HERE to get details on that & other upcoming events. > Together, we can make a difference in our region's environment. We won't trade or sell your email address with other organizations or inundate you with messages. Visit our website at gasp-pgh.org or call us at (412) 924-0604 for more information or to become a member today. We can't do this without you! > > > Our mailing address is: > Group Against Smog and Pollution > 1133 South Braddock Avenue > Suite 1A > Edgewood, PA 15218 > > >

1 0

Air Quality Approves Ten Mon Valley Episode Rule Plans, Rejects Six
by Duane Nichols 03 Feb '22

03 Feb '22

From: Allegheny News <AlleghenyNEWS(a)alleghenycounty.us> > Date: February 3, 2022 at 9:17:58 AM EST > Subject: Air Quality Approves Ten Mon Valley Episode Rule Plans, Rejects Six > > > > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > February 3, 2021 > Contact: > Chris Togneri > Public Health Information Officer > 412-578-8312 (office) > Christopher.Togneri(a)AlleghenyCounty.us > > > Air Quality Approves Ten Mon Valley Episode Rule Plans, Rejects Six > > PITTSBURGH –The Allegheny County Health Department has reviewed air emissions mitigation plans for 16 sources that are required to submit such plans under the Mon Valley Air Pollution Episode Rule; 10 were approved, and six were rejected. > > Enforcement orders identifying deficiencies in the six sources were issued January 31 after the Air Quality Program determined that the submitted plans were inadequate. Sources were instructed to resubmit plans with more information and/or pollution reductions. > > “The Mon Valley Episode Rule is an important and innovative enforcement tool designed to protect people in an area that has long suffered from poor air quality,” Health Department Director Dr. Debra Bogen said. “Everyone has the right to clean air, and our Air Quality program staff will ensure cooperation and compliance from all sources, for the health and wellbeing of everyone in the Mon Valley.” > > Letters of approval and enforcement orders rejecting plans can be found here. > > The Mon Valley Episode Rule, an addition to Article XXI - Air Pollution Control Regulations, was signed into law in September 2021 by Allegheny County Executive Rich Fitzgerald to develop and implement a system to respond to weather-related inversions in the Mon Valley, which can result in episodes of high levels of particulate matter pollution (PM2.5). > > Under the rule, Air Quality staff monitors pollution forecasts for conditions that could lead to an episode. When conditions are likely to exceed acceptable levels for the Mon Valley, sources are required to follow approved mitigation plans to reduce their emissions. Under the direction of the Health Department Director, an Air Pollution Watch is issued when weather conditions are forecast to cause a high concentration of particulates in the Mon Valley, and an Air Pollution Warning is issued when the exceedance occurs and is expected to continue for 24 hours. > > The rule applies to sources within or near the following municipalities: Braddock, Braddock Hills, Chalfant, Clairton, Dravosburg, Duquesne, East McKeesport, East Pittsburgh, Elizabeth Borough, Elizabeth Township, Forest Hills, Forward, Glassport, Jefferson Hills, Liberty, Lincoln, McKeesport, Munhall, North Braddock, North Versailles, Port Vue, Rankin, Swissvale, Turtle Creek, Versailles, Wall, West Elizabeth, West Mifflin, White Oak, Wilkins, Wilmerding and Whitaker. > > Notifications and alerts will be sent out using Allegheny Alerts. To sign up, go here. Notifications can be sent to you via email, text, and/or phone call. A free subscription is required. > > More information on the Episode Rule can be found here. > > # # # > > > Debra L. Bogen, MD, Director > Allegheny County Health Department – Public Information Office > 542 Fourth Avenue │ Pittsburgh, PA 15219 > Phone: 412-687-ACHD (2243) │ Fax: 412-578-8325 > www.alleghenycounty.us/healthdepartment > > Follow us: allegheny alerts | facebook | instagram | linkedin | twitter | youtube

1 0

Tuscarawas Bargain Hunter | We can all make a difference in the world
by Duane Nichols 25 Jan '22

25 Jan '22

https://tuscarawasbargainhunter.bluefoot.dev/news/columnists/we-can-all-mak… We can all make a difference in the world Published 7:07 am Jan 19, 2022 Seven years ago this month, I started writing columns for the Bargain Hunter. My very first column was about the chemicals in foods. For the past seven years I’ve tried to make each column an informative fact-based piece with topics that are important to readers. It often takes several days to get a column ready. I access peer reviewed data and seek out sources and quotes for most of the columns. As a scientist, I deal in facts, not fluff. During these many years I have had positive feedback from readers and have made many new friends. As much as I have educated my audience, you have educated me. I remember getting two phone calls from readers about the use of leg-hold traps for bobcats. After investigating, I wrote about the issue and testified at the public hearing in Columbus. The hearing was heavily attended and thankfully the use of these horrendous traps was denied. As a former teacher, the column became a way for me to educate readers about issues that are very significant in their lives. My students have often told me my knack of simplifying complex scientific topics was my best asset. I am a nerd, I love science. Sadly, I see our nation becoming less and less science literate, and I worry how the next generation will deal with complex issues that require science literacy. Some of the many topics discussed during the years include: the value of hemp, the dangers of PFAS (Teflon component), the risks of sun exposure, my trip to see the total eclipse, renewable energy, the benefits of forests, organic farming, and the health benefits of berries. I have tackled other topics, some local and some national, many that involve legislation. I find the lack of public participation in the political realm of our nation disturbing. By discussing some of these laws, especially those targeting science-related topics, I hoped to encourage more public participation. I’ve been an environmentalist most of my life. From the time I first read "Silent Spring" and saw the Cuyahoga River catch fire, I knew this was my path in life. I make no apologies for my columns. I continue to believe the climate crisis is the most crucial issue of our lives. Afterall, it we don’t have a livable planet what does it matter if we have a designer handbag or a new SUV? But the human race is good at lying. We lie to ourselves that humans aren’t the problem. We lie to ourselves that we don’t really need to change our unsustainable lifestyles to save the planet. We lie to ourselves that technology will save us. We lie to ourselves that we’d do anything for our kids; anything except address the climate crisis. And of course, our media lies to us all by omission. Avoiding the topic of climate change will not make the carbon dioxide levels drop. However, an email statement forwarded to me this week, written by senior management of the Bargain Hunter said, “Our management and advertising partners would like to see our publications avoid politics (especially state/national), environmental commentary, abortion, and other hot topics – which in the end doesn’t translate well to Randi’s typical content.” In essence, the very topic that is by far the most important in the history of the planet, the topic that we can no longer afford to ignore, is now to be “avoided.” Why is climate change a disturbing topic for the “management and advertising”? I am not a fan of censorship, so sadly this will be my last column. I will continue to speak truth to power on other platforms of social media. I will miss the opportunity to reach out to my readers and share the research on these timely topics. Remember, we can all make a difference in the world, don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. As Margaret Mead said, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed individuals can change the world. In fact, it’s the only thing that ever has.”

1 0

FYI ~ The ‘Science Center’ needs an air quality permit. All else I know is adverse to this facility ...DGN
by Duane Nichols 14 Jan '22

14 Jan '22

1. The information below indicates why ‘Marion Energy’ needs an Air Permit. JK 2. Northeast Natural Energy and Marion Energy Partners kept this plan secret even from the managers of the Morgantown Industrial Park and the Mon County Commission, both of whom are involving with spending public funds to sustain and improve the Park. Even the fact of a secret project was not disclosed to these local entities! DGN 3. I have been told in writing that this project is for “gas combustion research.” My reply was, “this does not hold water.” I can understand why they don’t want publicity about cryptocurrency and the unnecessary polluting of the Mon River valley. I cannot conceive of any logical purpose that fits the facts as we know them. DGN 4. They also told me they had made no final plans to proceed. I would call this an understatement, because even the information that has been released is not well defined. That doesn’t mean that our air quality is protected. DGN 5. There is information part of the multi-year “Marcellus Shale Energy & Environment Laboratory” project that is relevant to siting, raw gas supply, facility construction, ancillary equipment specifications, and sustained operating conditions. Some of this information is not now available, but will become public later this year. This includes information to design and operate the oxidation catalyst units effectively. Does the WV-DEP want all the information? DGN 6. Noise and other possible nuisances are relevant issues, but will receive secondary (if any) consideration. There are bit-coin mining facilities In other states where there are significant noise complaints. DGN 7. I have heard no descriptors that indicate this is not a bit-coin mining operation. To the contrary, at some other locations, bit-coin mining facilities are called ‘data centers’ and attempt to operate 365/24. Bit-coin mining is now a hot topic internationally and, yes, elsewhere in West Virginia (Parkersburg, Marion-Mercer-McDowell counties) because the potential payouts look huge. DGN 8. The proposed facility does need an air quality permit. They may need to modify this draft and/or get a different permit if they choose an evaporation - cooling system. They do not need to go before the Public Service Commission. JK NOTE. 45-CSR-13 section 2.24 defines a "Stationary Source" as a facility that discharges more than 10 Tons Per Year (TPY) of any regulated air pollutant, or more than 5 TPY of Hazardous Air Pollutants. 45-CSR-13 section 5.1 specifies that no person may construct a "Stationary Source" without a permit. This is also confirmed in section 2.3 of the draft permit. Table 3 of the Engineering Evaluation for R13-3533 indicates that these thresholds are exceeded for NOx (66 TPY), CO (33 TPY) and VOCs (33 TPY), as well as total HAPs 14.4 TPY and formaldehyde (6.68 TPY). When these emission rates are compared on the basis of pounds per MMBTU, the levels of NOx authorized exceed those allowed under the Operating permit for the Longview coal-fired power plant (R30-06100134-2018) by a factor of approximately 2.6. The VOC levels proposed for the Marion Energy facility exceed those of Longview by 21 times. JK Duane Nichols & Jim Kotcon

1 0

Charleston Gazette ~ Proposed ‘Science Facility’ in Morgantown Industrial Park
by Duane Nichols 13 Jan '22

13 Jan '22

Morgantown residents, elected officials demand more information about proposed data processing facility seeking air permit >>> From an Article by Mike Tony, Charleston Gazette, January 12, 2022 West Virginia environmental regulators’ meeting to take public input on and explain an air quality permit application for a data processing facility in Morgantown yielded more questions than answers Tuesday night. An engineer with the state Department of Environmental Protection’s Division of Air Quality struggled to answer questions about what Marion Energy Partners LLC intends to do at the facility during the virtual meeting, saying that regulators were limited in what information they could require from the company. Morgantown-based Marion Energy Partners applied in August for an air quality permit to construct and operate a data processing facility which consists of four natural gas-fired engines so that the facility can generate its own electricity around the clock. The facility’s name is listed as “Science Facility” in a filing with the Department of Environmental Protection. But when Morgantown residents and elected officials asked Division of Air Quality engineer Edward S. Andrews for more information about the nature of planned operations at the facility, Andrews had little to offer. “The best we know from the application is that it’s going to be a data center,” Andrews said. The Division of Air Quality's jurisdiction only encompasses emission sources, and unless they are powering a secondary source, the division has no authority to factor what that source is being used for into its permitting process, Department of Environmental Protection acting spokesman Terry Fletcher said in an email Wednesday. Marion Energy Partners could not be reached for comment. Brett Loflin, who joined Northeast Natural Energy as vice president of regulatory affairs in 2010, declined to comment on plans for the facility in an email Wednesday. “As this potential project is in its infancy with detailed plans still being developed, we don’t have anything to add to the story today,” Loflin said. The permit application was submitted on Marion Energy Partners’ behalf by Charleston-based SLR Consulting, with representatives of Northeast Natural Energy, a Charleston-headquartered oil and gas exploration company, copied on email correspondence with environmental regulators. Representatives of SLR Consulting did not respond to a request for comment. The site is believed to be designed to provide electricity for cryptocurrency mining, a process of creating new units of digital currency that requires large amounts of energy for computing. The virtual meeting attracted more than 40 attendees and lasted two hours. Commenters demanded more information about the project and urged the DEP not to grant the permit. “Morgantown and the Monongalia community is being treated like a mushroom,” said Bill Reger-Nash, a retired public health professor West Virginia University and former state delegate. “That is, we’re kept in the dark and we’re surrounded with horse manure.” Fletcher said that the state has permitted what he called similar sources in West Virginia: a computing center for the U.S. Department of the Treasury in Berkeley County, the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Clarksburg site and a military training facility for the West Virginia National Guard in Preston County. “The WVDEP cannot speculate as to the nature of operations at these facilities, nor are the permittees required to disclose that information,” Fletcher said. “DAQ's jurisdiction over these sites begins and ends with the emission sources.” But Delegate Evan Hansen, D-Monongalia, said Wednesday that he will draft legislation to address permit applicants not specifying planned operations when seeking environmental permits. Hansen, an environmental consultant, said that Marion Energy Partners’ application was the first he had seen where the purpose of the facility was not stated. “For public transparency, and to allow the permitting agency to properly vet the permit, every application should clearly state the facility’s purpose,” Hansen said. Delegate Barbara Evans Fleischauer, D-Monongalia, said Northeast Energy should be given an opportunity to “demonstrate that they want to be good neighbors” by meeting with people who will be affected by the facility and their representatives. “Those who are nearby this project deserve to have a more straight-forward explanation about the pros and cons of the project,” Fleischauer said in an email Wednesday. Morgantown city officials joined Hansen and Fleischauer in raising concerns about the permit application during Tuesday night’s meeting. Morgantown Mayor Jenny Selin lamented that the WV-DEP was not requiring more specificity about plans for the facility, while Morgantown City Council member Bill Kawecki expressed doubt that the facility would offer any economic benefit to the community. “[I]n the absence of any other information, this project is unacceptable,” Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition coordinator and Morgantown resident Duane Nichols said. No emission units, natural gas production equipment or preconstruction activities were observed at the site during an October Division of Air Quality inspection. The nearest residential dwelling is about 1,128 feet away from the center of the site, with some businesses roughly half that amount away, according to state environmental regulators, who found that the site is appropriate for the proposed emission units. The draft permit sets emissions limits for each engine of 16.69 tons per year of nitrogen oxides and 33.68 tons per year of carbon monoxide. Each engine is to be equipped with an oxidation catalyst air pollution control device, according to the permit. Marion Energy Partners is required to obtain a permit in part because the four proposed engines’ potential emissions exceed 6 pounds per hour and 10 tons per year for nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and volatile organic compounds. SLR Consulting principal engineer Jesse Hanshaw told Andrews in an August email that gas from a local gathering pipeline would provide an uninterrupted supply of fuel to the data center, according to DEP documents. Hanshaw indicated in another August email that gas from Northeast Natural Energy would be entering the pipeline. “One of my biggest concerns is that there are no apparent local benefits,” Hansen said. “ … No jobs, economic benefits, or community benefits. But what the community does get is increased air emissions and noise pollution. Plus greenhouse gas emissions.” Air quality-related comments on the draft permit must be received by 5 p.m. Thursday, Jan. 13, and can be emailed to Andrews at Edward.S.Andrews(a)wv.gov with “Marion Energy Partners LLC” in the subject line. Comments not related to air quality may be emailed to depadvocate(a)wv.gov with “Marion Energy Partners LLC” in the subject line. Documents can be accessed at https://dep.wv.gov/daq/permitting/Pages/NSR-Permit-Applications.aspx. Source: https://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/energy_and_environment/morgantown-reside… Sent from my iPad

1 0

Concerns About Pollution from ‘Secret Center’ in Morgantown Industrial Park
by Duane Nichols 13 Jan '22

13 Jan '22

https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2022/01/13/concerns-about-pollution-from-%e2%8… Concerns About Pollution from “Data Center” in Morgantown Industrial Park The Morgantown Industrial Park is across the Monongahela River from the City of Morgantown, and it is across River Road from the Skyview Elementary and Westwood Middle Schools at Westover, WV Secretive ‘science facility’ seems like a major polluter From the Opinion Editor, The Dominion Post, Morgantown, WV, January 13, 2022 Usually, when a new business or industry makes its home around Morgantown, local politicians and business advocates are positively abuzz, talking to anyone who will listen and promoting the area’s newest addition. But that’s not the case with the mysterious “science facility/data processing center” coming to the Morgantown Industrial Park. So far, the only thing we know is that Marion Energy Partners applied to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection for a permit for its 10,000-square-foot facility. The center’s four natural gas-fired engines — operating 24/7/365 — would pull natural gas from a nearby Northeast Natural Energy well pad. (Northeast Natural Energy appears to be Marion Energy Partners’ parent company.) Nothing else is really known, though it’s suspected the new facility will be a cryptocurrency mining operation. As we reported Wednesday, cryptocurrency mining uses banks of specialized computers to validate blockchain transactions for a specific cryptocurrency (such as Bitcoin) in order to receive percentages of said currency in return. The process is extremely energy intensive and has come under fire for its massive carbon footprint. Essentially, what Monongalia County is looking at is a carbon- and air pollution-spewing factory that creates few, if any, jobs or economic opportunity. It’s immensely concerning that a major polluter could be setting up shop in our backyard and no one knows anything about it. Neither company will respond to requests for comment, and even the Monongalia County Commission is being tight-lipped about the project. (Despite its name, the Morgantown Industrial Park is outside city limits.) Mon County residents are well within their rights to demand more information. Air pollution is never confined to the area where it is emitted, and we’d want to a see a plan from Northeast Natural Energy and/or Marion Energy Partners that details how they would protect the community from any toxins or chemicals the facility ejects. We’d also like to see the companies’ proposals for offsetting the center’s carbon emissions. In a consumer-driven economy, some trade-offs are to be expected. For example: Accepting some pollution in exchange for well-paying jobs and a measurable boost to the local economy. That’s why coal mines are still welcomed in most of West Virginia. However, there isn’t enough information about the center publicly available to make a list of pros and cons. At the moment, the proposed facility seems to offer no jobs, no tangible product and little-to-no benefit to taxpayers. If you, too have concerns about the secretive center, contact the WV-DEP by 5 p.m. today, January 13th. Send air quality-related comments to: edward.s.andrews(a)wv.gov. Include “Marion Energy Partners LLC” in the subject line. Non-air quality related comments can be emailed to depadvocate(a)wv.gov. And after you’ve emailed the WV-DEP, please contact our commissioners and let them know the community would like more information on this “science facility.” You can call 304-291-7257. (Please be polite to whomever answers the phone.) You can also send letters to 243 High St., Room 202, Courthouse, Morgantown, WV, 26505. The commission meets every Wednesday at 10 a.m. at the address listed above, if you would like to convey your concerns in person. (Five minutes per person). URL: https://www.dominionpost.com/2022/01/12/secretive-science-facility-seems-li…

1 0

Proposed ‘Data Center’ in Morgantown Industrial Park ~ More Questions
by Duane Nichols 12 Jan '22

12 Jan '22

https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2022/01/11/proposed-%e2%80%98data-center%e2%80… Proposed ‘Data Center’ in Morgantown Industrial Park ~ More Questions The Morgantown Industrial Park already has 20 or so businesses QUESTIONS for W. V. Department of Environmental Protection about a ‘Science Facility’ 1/11/22 RE: Proposed Permit R13-3533, ‘Science Facility’ ~ Marion Energy Partners, LLC 1. Why locate the ‘Science Facility’ along side an existing gas well where there are hazards and dangers of toxic fumes, explosive leaks or future space needs to plug or otherwise service the well. Can cigarette butts, static electricity, or random lightning bolts perform an ignition on a leaking stream from casing cracks or faulty gaskets or valves? 2. Where is the “gathering line” that will supply the Facility? Will a feeder pipeline system be installed? Will it involve traps or filters, dehumidifiers, pressure regulators and/or metering hardware? What monitoring will be provided for leaks? 3. How can operating personnel or people nearby detect feed system leaks or gas well leaks if no odorant is present in the raw natural gas being piped into the Facility thru the aforesaid equipment? Mercaptans or other sulfur containing compounds are needed for safety? 4. Since raw feeder gas will contain a variety of trace components, how will deactivation of the oxidation catalyst by impurities in the gas be monitored in real time and catalyst regeneration and/or replacement be performed in a timely manner? 5. Inefficient operation of this Facility and/or poor oxidation catalyst performance can transform the emissions into the “major source” category. How will WV-DEP plan to prevent such occurrences? The operations plan is therefore faulty? 6. Given the WV Code § 22-1-1, b-10, viz. “ To promote pollution prevention by encouraging reduction or elimination of pollutants at the source through process modification, material substitutions, in-process recycling, reduction of raw material use or other source reduction opportunities.” What has WV-DEP done, or can still do, to satisfy this responsibility? It would appear that the carbon dioxide pollution is massive and is uncontrolled? 7. Reduction of pollution and of raw material use is feasible. The electrical power to serve a GIS graphics computer workstation, a large screen video display, a data logger and a color printer plotter would be advised, and sufficient for a science center and data center. These can be powered from conventional 120 volt AC circuits, thus eliminating the need for any natural gas fired engines. Can the site here be served with utility supplied electricity? 8. Will the tail pipe option be present on the natural gas engines? Will exhaust pipes connect to an exhaust header and then connected to one 200 foot stack, or will four stacks be installed? 9. Reworking or expansion of local existing wells may be needed to supply the Facility, if so should not the emissions therefrom, due to diesel engines and truck exhausts, be considered as episodes at this location, as part of normal operations which are 24/7 by 365 for the Facility? This consideration would in any case advise against the construction of any such Facility as that proposed in a populated area? 10. Should this permit application be considered premature since the results of the multi-year study entitled “Marcellus Shale Energy & Environment Laboratory” have not run to fruition, because the results which influence this site and feed gas are not known to the site owners, to the WV-DEP, or to the general public (all of whom are to be served by these very studies)? Not every application, including this one, deserves to be approved? Duane Nichols, Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition Morgantown, WV 26508 >>>>>>………………>>>>>>………………>>>>>> SEE ALSO: Draft Permit R13-3533 for Marion Energy Partners, LLC, “Science Center” (‘data center’) for Morgantown Industrial Park TO LISTEN IN OR PARTICIPATE IN THE PUBLIC MEETING ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 11th at 6:00 PM, REPLY TO THE FOLLOWING LINK ~ https://forms.gle/vZvJirkUKayGee1W7 >>>>>>………………>>>>>>………………>>>>>> Details on how to download the Draft Permit R13-3533, the application and other materials regarding the permit decision are available at: https://dep.wv.gov/daq/permitting/Pages/NSR-Permit-Applications.aspx The Division of Air Quality will accept written comments until 5 p.m. Jan. 13, by email to: Edward.S.Andrews(a)wv.gov with “Marion Energy Partners Comments” in the subject line, or by regular mail to Edward Andrews, WV Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th St. SE, Charleston, WV 25304. xxx See also: www.FrackCheckWV.net Sent from my iPad

1 0

Proposed “Science Facility” (aka “data center”) in Morgantown Industrial Park
by Duane Nichols 02 Jan '22

02 Jan '22

Letter to the Editor, Morgantown Dominion Post, Published January 2, 2022 Mysterious operation could be big polluter A presumed cryptocurrency mining operation appears to be headed for the Morgantown Industrial Park — adjacent to Skyview Elementary and Westwood Middle schools, as well as numerous residences and businesses, and located just across the Mon River from Morgantown. It has the potential to affect air quality, noise and other aspects of our quality of life. Marion Energy Partners LLC, a company having the same address and contact person as Northeast Natural Gas, recently obtained a draft air-quality permit from the state for a “Science Facility.” The facility will run 24/7/365 with power generated via untreated natural gas from a nearby Northeast Natural Gas well. The draft permit has no Best Available Control Technology analysis, has relatively high greenhouse gas emissions allowances and does not consider aggregation of emissions, despite the well pad and the facility having the same ultimate owner. It has no noise limits and no restriction on the quantity of electronic waste it will produce. The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality is holding a virtual public meeting at 6 p.m. Jan. 11, where you can find out more. Register before 5 p.m. Jan. 11 at: https://forms.gle/vZvJirkUKayGee1W7 and you’ll receive an e-mail on how to join the public meeting. If you prefer to participate by phone, please call the DEP-DAQ at 304-926-0475 before Jan. 11. Details on how to download the draft permit, the application and other materials regarding the permit decision are available at: https://dep.wv.gov/daq/permitting/Pages/NSR-Permit-Applications.aspx (Permit Application R13-3533). The Division of Air Quality will accept written comments until 5 p.m. Jan. 13, by email to Edward.S.Andrews(a)wv.gov with “Marion Energy Partners Comments” in the subject line, or by regular mail to Edward Andrews, WV Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th St. SE, Charleston, WV 25304. Paula Hunt, Morgantown

1 0

Proposed Science Center in Mgtn. Industrial Park
by DUANE NICHOLS 16 Dec '21

16 Dec '21

Sean. Please let me know anytime you can what is proposed for a Science Center. It sure sounds fishy to me, as I’ve been doing science since 1953. I started a Physics Department at a small college and was head of the Department for five years. I also served as Director of the Nuclear Radiation Laboratory after training by the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission. Then, years later in my last full time job, I supervised data acquisition and processing for CONSOL R & D; this included on-site work inside coal fired electric generating stations. I can tell you more about digital computers, computation algorithms, on-line data transfer, and output modes, as time allows. Your work on expanding internet access will be beneficial to many of our residents. The bandwidth or data rate should not be compromised by facilities not in the public interest. And, at some point in time, our county needs to take climate change seriously? There could even be foreign companies behind some of the confidential financing that goes into West Virginia, certainly out-of-state ones. If it is a Bitcoin Mining Center, or other gaming scheme, our organization wants to oppose it. If we don’t find out something soon, I would assume that it is not in the public interest? Thank you for all you do in the public interest. Duane Nichols, Coordinator Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition

1 0

Joe Manchin's blind trust does not include his family's coal company, contradicting his claims as he votes on climate bills - The Washington Post
by DUANE NICHOLS 13 Dec '21

13 Dec '21

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/12/13/manchin-blind-trust-ener… Manchin cites a blind trust to justify climate votes. But much income from his family’s coal company isn’t covered. Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) with reporters after a vote on Capitol Hill on Oct. 21 in Washington. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post) In Sen. Joe Manchin III’s hilly West Virginia home county, his family’s business has made millions by taking waste coal from long-abandoned mines and selling it to a power plant that emits air pollution at a higher rate than any other plant in the state. That enterprise could have taken a hit under a key part of President Biden’s climate agenda, a $150 billion plan to push coal plants toward cleaner energy. One lawmaker, though, played a central role in killing that proposal: Manchin, who has earned hundreds of thousands of dollars annually from the family coal company while using his role as a Democratic swing vote in a 50-50 Senate to dictate Biden’s policies. When pressed about whether he has a conflict of interest, Manchin bristles. “I have been in a blind trust for 20 years. I have no idea what they’re doing,” the senator told reporters in September, referring to his family’s coal firm. “You got a problem?” But contrary to his public statements, documents filed by the senator show the blind trust is much too small to account for all his reported earnings from the coal company, as of his latest financial disclosure report, which covers 2020 and was filed in May. Manchin’s latest financial disclosure report says that the West Virginia family coal business that he helped found and run, Enersystems, paid him $492,000 in interest, dividends and other income in 2020, and that his share of the firm is worth between $1 million and $5 million. He signed a sworn statement saying he is aware of these earnings, underscoring that he is not blind to them. Excerpts from Manchin's financial disclosure reports. By contrast, Manchin set up a blind trust with $350,000 in cash in 2012. In his latest financial disclosure report, the senator reported that the Joseph Manchin III Qualified Blind Trust earned no more than $15,000 last year and is worth between $500,000 and $1 million. By design, it is not possible to know precisely what’s in the blind trust. But the financial disclosure records show that it doesn’t include all of Manchin’s income from Enersystems. If Manchin’s coal interests are not in a blind trust, ethics experts said, it calls into question the impartiality of a senator who in October forced Biden to drop the plan in his Build Back Better bill to phase out the same kinds of coal plants that are key to his family company’s profitability. The senator’s effort to dismiss questions about his coal interests by declaring he has a blind trust is “misleading and at worst it’s just not true,” said Don Fox, a former general counsel and acting director of the Office of Government Ethics in the Obama administration, who examined Manchin’s financial records at The Washington Post’s request. He cited the vast difference between Manchin’s reported income from the trust and his family’s coal business. “The question I would ask him would be, when he says it’s in a blind trust, ‘Well, your public financial disclosure report that you sign and swear is true does not have Enersystems in the blind trust,’ ” Fox said. “And if the blind trust is truly blind, how do you know what’s in it?” Manchin declined an interview request. The Post sent his spokeswoman, Sam Runyon, a list of detailed questions and a copy of the document establishing the blind trust. She did not directly respond to queries about the blind trust and conflict of interest. Instead, she emailed a statement that said in full: “Senator Manchin is in full compliance with Senate ethics and financial disclosure rules. He continues to work to find a path forward on important climate legislation that maintains American leadership in energy innovation and critical energy reliability, as exemplified by the many provisions to address climate change in the Energy Act of 2020 and the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.” It is legal for Manchin to make millions of dollars from his coal interests even as he chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and legislates on matters affecting the industry. That is because members of Congress are not required to divest their assets to avoid a potential industry conflict. Senate rules prohibit members from using their position to pass legislation in which “the principal purpose” is to benefit themselves or family members. There is no evidence Manchin has taken action solely to benefit himself or the family company, though critics say that by killing the clean electricity provision in Biden’s agenda, he is helping all coal-related companies — potentially including Enersystems. Congressional rules are more lenient than, for example, those governing many top executive branch officials, whose assets would be reviewed by the Office of Government Ethics for potential conflicts of interest, making them subject to a requirement to divest, recuse or seek a waiver. Craig Holman, an ethics expert at Public Citizen, said that regardless of the congressional rules, Manchin’s declaration in the trust that he wants to “avoid any conflict of interest, or any appearance of such a conflict” is undercut by his simultaneous earnings from a coal business and his work against climate policies. “It is a very blatant conflict of interest,” Holman said, citing the senator’s financial disclosures. “Manchin is not only very wealthy, but most of his assets and wealth are invested in a single industry, coal.” Holman said Manchin’s financial position is one of the most conflicted of any member of Congress he has studied because so much of the senator’s financial stake is in the coal industry while he is playing a key role on climate policies. Nonetheless, he said, “what Manchin is doing is not illegal. The conflict of interest code for Congress is just way too weak.” Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minn.), who sought for months to convince Manchin to support the plan to transition power companies to cleaner forms of energy, said the West Virginia senator ultimately balked. Manchin’s opposition effectively killed one of the most far-reaching climate policies in the bill, outraging environmentalists and leading to an increased focus on his family’s coal business and his own earnings. “After working on the Clean Electricity Performance Program, which I think is the strongest and best way of getting the utility sector to net-zero emissions as quickly as possible, Sen. Manchin ultimately said he just couldn’t get there,” Smith said in an interview. “And I think that was a mistake — I think the [program] would have been a powerful tool to get the emissions reductions we need, while keeping utility rates low.” She stressed that she is still having “good conversations” with Manchin and is negotiating on other parts of the bill affecting climate change, but she has “no expectation that any kind of clean electricity plan will be included.” Manchin could further scale back Biden’s climate change efforts. The senator has also objected to a measure in the Build Back Better bill designed to reduce emissions of methane, the main component of natural gas, and a tax credit for electric cars. He has not yet announced his support for the Democrats’ spending bill. A view of East Fairmont and downtown Fairmont in West Virginia. (Kristian Thacker for The Washington Post) Questions about a conflict between Manchin’s coal interests and his government service go back decades, a review by The Post found. Manchin helped found and became president of Enersystems, a coal brokerage firm, in 1988. One of its customers since 1993 has been a power plant in Grant Town, W.Va., that uses waste coal to produce energy. In the mid-1990s, when Manchin was a state senator, he backed legislation that gave plants such as the one in Grant Town a property tax break. When a group of local citizens complained that Manchin had a conflict of interest, he responded that he had avoided any ethical problem by giving the break to all similar projects. Had the bill only benefited the Grant Town plant, Manchin said at the time, “I would have excused myself from voting,” according to a contemporaneous account in the Charleston Gazette. But by backing a broad measure, Manchin said ethics officials told him it was allowed, notwithstanding the benefit for Grant Town. After Manchin was elected West Virginia’s secretary of state in 2000, he gave control of Enersystems to his son Joseph Manchin IV, who still runs it. The younger Manchin did not respond to a request for comment. After Manchin was elected governor in 2005, he said he put his company shares in a blind trust. He reported receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars from his coal business on a state financial disclosure form in 2009 and 2010, and told the news service Greenwire in 2011 that his holdings had “absolutely not” affected his policies, adding, “I have been in a blind trust for a long time.” In his successful 2010 bid for the U.S. Senate, Manchin ran an ad that showed him shooting at President Barack Obama’s proposed legislation to address climate change “because it’s bad for West Virginia.” Between 2011 and 2020, Manchin earned $4.8 million from Enersystems, according to a tally by the Center for Responsive Politics. His net worth as of 2020 was between $4.4 million and $12.8 million, the center said. Enersystems is a private company based in Fairmont, W.Va., near Manchin’s hometown of Farmington. Public records show that the business is among those that benefit from federal programs to clean up long-shuttered coal mines, where mountains of mining debris, known as waste coal, have been piled and abandoned. The company sells the waste coal to the only power plant in the state that still burns it: the Grant Town Power Plant, an 80-megawatt electricity-generating facility in Manchin’s home county of Marion. Compared with ordinary coal plants, power plants that burn waste coal, or what the industry calls “gob,” are dirtier and don’t generate as much electricity. The Grant Town plant emits more greenhouse gases and the main components of acid rain — nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide — into the air per megawatt-hour of electricity produced than any other power plant in West Virginia, according to the Environmental Protection Agency’s most recent data. Only a handful of waste-coal-burning plants still operate nationally. They are such heavy polluters that the Trump administration created a separate category for them, weakening the air pollution standards they had to meet. “Burning waste coal, like burning trash, turns pollution on the ground into pollution in the air,” said Eric Schaeffer, executive director of the Environmental Integrity Project, a nonprofit founded by former EPA officials. The environmental benefits of clearing waste coal from mining sites are questionable, he added. Although removing the piles of gob can reduce acid runoff, the process of burning it creates an enormous amount of ash that can release toxins into streams or groundwater. The Manchin family doesn’t own or operate the Grant Town plant, which is run by American Bituminous Power Partners, a limited partnership registered in Delaware. But records of coal transactions from last year suggest the power plant is Enersystems’ primary customer. It is the only publicly recorded buyer of Enersystems’ waste coal. In response to written questions from The Post, American Bituminous Power Partners Executive Director Ken Niemann said the Grant Town plant “is in full compliance with all its state and federal air emissions controls and limitations.” As the economics of burning coal have become less favorable, the Grant Town plant has come close to shutting down at least twice. In 2006, when Manchin was governor, the state’s Public Service Commission rescued the plant by approving rate increases, which the utility passed on to customers. The commission’s chair at the time was a Manchin appointee. Those higher prices were supposed to be temporary until 2017. But by 2015, the power plant’s owners were back before the commission, claiming financial difficulties. The commissioners sided with the plant, and the higher rates became permanent. The Grant Town plant faced a new threat this year: Democrats’ plans to rapidly shift the electricity sector away from coal and toward cleaner sources of energy. The clean electricity program would have rewarded utilities for purchasing more electricity from wind, solar and other emissions-free sources — and penalized those that did not. If the program had become law, the power company that buys electricity from the Grant Town plant would have faced growing financial pressure to shift away from coal power, increasing the odds that Grant Town would eventually close, said James Van Nostrand, director of West Virginia University law school’s Center for Energy and Sustainable Development. The clean electricity program “would have helped us out a lot,” Van Nostrand said. West Virginia’s embrace of coal power over less expensive alternatives like gas, wind and solar has contributed to a decade of rising electricity bills. According to Van Nostrand’s analysis, between 2010 and 2019 West Virginians’ electricity costs increased about five times more than the national average. “By definition, if the federal government is going to help us transition to cheaper, cleaner electricity, then our electricity bills would either go down or wouldn’t go up as fast as they are now,” he said. Manchin during a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing in Washington on Oct. 19. (Stefani Reynolds for The Washington Post) In 2019, Manchin co-authored an op-ed with Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) in The Post that said: “There is no question that climate change is real or that human activities are driving much of it. We are seeing the impacts in our home states.” They said they were working to find “pragmatic policies that can draw strong and enduring support” and pinned much of their hope on what they called “the next scientific breakthrough” for “game-changing technology.” They opposed what they called “drastic, unattainable measures to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.” Manchin’s role as the potentially decisive vote in the Senate and his opposition to efforts at abandoning the filibuster have given him outsize power, which he’s used in part to reduce the Build Back Better bill from more than $3 trillion to $1.75 trillion. Manchin has argued that the clean electricity plan he insisted on removing from the bill is unnecessary because coal companies are already moving toward other energy sources. “The only thing they want us to do is pay $150 billion for what’s already happening,” Manchin told reporters in October in explaining his opposition to the measure. “We’ve transitioned.” The legislation that passed the House last month still contains $555 billion in tax credits, grants and other efforts to lower planet-warming greenhouse gases, which would be the largest clean energy investment in U.S. history. The bill’s tax incentives would make it easier to install solar panels, build wind turbines and retrofit buildings with energy-saving upgrades. Electric vehicles would become less expensive, reducing a barrier that has prevented many Americans from purchasing them. Around the time Manchin helped kill the clean electricity provision, he was asked during a walk with reporters on Capitol Hill about whether he has a conflict of interest and was pressed on the fact that his son runs the family coal company. Manchin responded, “I’m very proud of my son. He does a good job. You’d do best to change the subject now.” Manchin’s critics said that while the senator was not violating any law, he is violating the premise of his promise to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest. Dylan Hedtler-Gaudette, manager of government affairs at the Project on Government Oversight, said the best way to prevent such a conflict of interest would be to require members of Congress to divest most investments. If such a policy were adopted, Manchin would be required to liquidate his shares in the coal company and put the assets in a blind trust, and authorize a trustee to invest the money in any way deemed appropriate, and without his knowledge. “Under the current framework, you are not required to divest anything,” he said. “I think there should be someone in Congress who introduces a bill that says, ‘Look, if you become a member of Congress, you have to divest basically everything except for a widely diversified mutual fund.’ ” But Hedtler-Gaudette said he has not found a single member of Congress willing to sponsor such legislation. As a result, he hopes Manchin’s case will prompt legislators to consider requiring divestment of any asset — not just publicly traded stock — that could be perceived as a conflict of interest. “If you don’t like it, that’s fine,” Hedtler-Gaudette said. “There isn’t anyone who requires you to be a member of Congress.” xxx

1 0

Researchers developing wearable pollution-measuring technology | The University Record
by DUANE NICHOLS 23 Nov '21

23 Nov '21

Here we have a pipe dream worthy of pursuit! dgn https://record.umich.edu/articles/researchers-developing-wearable-pollution… Researchers developing wearable pollution-measuring technology By Nardy Baeza Bickel, University of Michigan News, November 18, 2021 A walk in the park could soon include getting real-time measurements of pollutants in the air and updated walking routes to avoid the most toxic ones, all while wearing a gadget the size of a smartwatch. With the support of a $2.78 million grant from the National Institutes of Health, researchers at the University of Michigan, Michigan State University and Oakland University are teaming up to develop wearable technology able to identify particulate matter pollution such as soot and toxic metals generated by cars, trucks and industrial sources. “When we look at the global burden of disease, particulate matter is by far the biggest driver of premature deaths from exposure to air pollution,” said Tim Dvonch, associate professor of environmental health sciences at U-M’s School of Public Health. Until now, most research required big and expensive outdoor monitors or several-pound devices workers use in occupational settings, he said. “Some of the most vulnerable people to adverse effects from air pollution exposure happen to be children, pregnant women and women of childbearing age,” he said. “Having an easily wearable device would help monitor the air they’re exposed to, and hopefully provide healthier alternatives in near real time.” Dvonch said the team first started working in wearable technology in 2013 to detect pollutant gases but are now focusing on particulate matter, given that it’s responsible for an estimated 7 million premature deaths every year, according to new air quality guidelines published in September by the World Health Organization. That’s roughly one in nine deaths globally. “Air pollution and, specifically, airborne particulate matter has a huge impact on health, on respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses, and it’s also associated with a number of other adverse health outcomes,” Dvonch said. “Vulnerable populations include prenatal exposures, young children and the elderly, and we know it also disproportionately affects communities of lower socioeconomic status and communities of color who may live near air pollution sources like motor vehicle traffic, incinerators, refineries or power plants.” Within the team, Andrew Mason, a professor at MSU’s College of Engineering, focuses on developing the microscale sampling device, while Xiangqun Zeng, professor of chemistry at Oakland University, is developing the chemical sensor technology. Once the device is developed, Dvonch and the U-M team will oversee field-testing it in communities in metro Detroit, measuring it against existing monitors for accuracy and designing walking maps throughout neighborhoods that are known to have variable levels of air quality, to further evaluate the device. Many of the pollutants that affect hearts, lungs and brains are invisible to human eyes. And many of the current technologies used to monitor air pollution take days or weeks to collect and process data. “That’s helpful for epidemiological studies, but it doesn’t tell you what’s going on today,” Mason said. Adding a network of wearable devices would provide unprecedented data about air quality over space and time, helping inform policies and interventions to help protect the most vulnerable, the researchers said. But developing those devices is no small feat. The research team will need to build technology that can count particles, characterize what each particle is made of, and also determine particle size down to nanometer scale. On top of all that, the team has challenged itself to become the first to fit such technology into something the size of a wristwatch. “Currently, there is no personal monitoring device available because of the complexity,” Zeng said. “The most exciting aspect of this project is its significance and innovation.” Dvonch said it will be a challenge to accomplish all of the project goals, but “the project team is very organized and efficient, and I expect this will allow us to overcome the challenges we may face.” “Not only will the developed monitoring devices from our project be applicable to assessing air pollution exposures across many parts of the globe, importantly, our project will be able to test, evaluate and begin to address these particulate matter exposure issues right here in Michigan communities,” he said. Tags: National Institutes of Health pollution School of Public Health wearable technology Sent from my iPad

1 0

Coal-fired power plants, including two in Pa., to close after new wastewater rule | StateImpact Pennsylvania
by DUANE NICHOLS 23 Nov '21

23 Nov '21

https://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2021/11/22/coal-fired-power-plants… Coal-fired power plants, including two in Penna., due to new wastewater rule From an Article by Michael Rubinkam (Associated Press), State-Impact Penna., November 22, 2021 [AP] Climate change isn’t what’s driving some U.S. coal-fired power plants to shut down. It’s the expense of stricter pollution controls on their wastewater. Dozens of plants nationwide plan to stop burning coal this decade to comply with more stringent federal wastewater guidelines, according to state regulatory filings, as the industry continues moving away from the planet-warming fossil fuel to make electricity. The new wastewater rule requires power plants to clean coal ash and toxic heavy metals such as mercury, arsenic and selenium from plant wastewater before it is dumped into streams and rivers. The rule is expected to affect 75 coal-fired power plants nationwide, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Those plants had an October deadline to tell their state regulators how they planned to comply, with options that included upgrading their pollution-control equipment or retiring their coal-fired generating units by 2028. The national impact of the wastewater rule is still coming into focus, but at least 26 plants in 14 states said they will stop burning coal, according to the Sierra Club, which has been tracking state regulatory filings. Twenty-one of the plants intend to shut down, and five indicated they may switch to natural gas, the environmental group said. “The free ride these plants have been getting is ending in a lot of ways,” said Zack Fabish, a Sierra Club lawyer. “And them choosing to retire by 2028 probably reflects the reality that a lot of the subsidies they have been getting in terms of being able to dump their wastewater into the commons, they are not going to be able to do that in the future.” The rule will reduce the discharge of pollutants into the nation’s waterways by about 386 million pounds annually, according to EPA estimates. It’s expected to cost plant operators, collectively, nearly $200 million per year to implement. Those that intend to close include two of Pennsylvania’s largest coal-fired power plants, Keystone and Conemaugh outside Pittsburgh, which said they will stop using coal and retire all of their generating units by Dec. 31, 2028, according to regulatory notices obtained separately by The Associated Press. The plants opened more than 50 years ago and together employ about 320 full-time workers and 170 contractors. They generate enough power for perhaps 1.5 million homes, according to industry averages for coal plants of their size. In addition to Pennsylvania, states with power plants that plan to stop using coal by 2028 are Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and West Virginia, the Sierra Club data shows. Power producers that say they will shutter coal-fired units as a result of the new rule include Atlanta-based Southern Co. and Houston-based NRG. Southern, which operates electric utilities in Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi, said it will shutter two-thirds of its coal fleet, including units at the nation’s two largest coal-fired power plants, Scherer and Bowen, both in Georgia. NRG said it plans to stop burning coal at its domestic plants outside Texas, and install new pollution controls at its two Texas plants. The electric power sector has spent years transitioning from coal to cheaper, cleaner-burning natural gas and renewables like wind and solar. Nationwide, about 30% of generating capacity at coal plants has been retired since 2010, according to the Energy Information Administration. (Coal use at power plants is expected to surge more than 20% this year because of sharply higher natural gas prices — the first such increase since 2014 — but the energy agency said it expects that trend to be temporary.) The long-term move away from coal has been pronounced in Pennsylvania, the nation’s No. 3 coal-producing state after Wyoming and West Virginia. Coal’s share of electrical power generation in the state declined from nearly half in 2010 to 10% last year, with operators taking advantage of a statewide boom in natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale, the nation’s largest gas field. Seventeen Pennsylvania coal plants have been retired since 2009. “The smallest, oldest (coal) plants were generally the ones the economics killed first. They were too expensive and too small to be retrofitted to meet new EPA standards,” said Jean Reaves Rollins, president of The C Three Group, a market research firm focused on energy infrastructure and utilities. She said coal plants in competitive electricity markets like Pennsylvania’s have also come under pressure. “It is clear in the case of the two Pennsylvania plants, the cost of compliance will put them out of the economic running,” she said. Pennsylvania and neighboring Ohio have accounted for 20% of all coal-fueled power plant shutdowns in the U.S. in recent years, according to federal data. The Keystone and Conemaugh plants are owned by a consortium of private investors, with Texas-based power producer Talen Energy also holding a stake. Talen referred questions to the plants’ chief operating officer, who did not return phone calls and emails. Industry officials contend the mothballing of so many coal plants carries consequences for the nation’s electric grid. Michelle Bloodworth, president and CEO of America’s Power, a trade organization that advocates on behalf of coal-fueled electricity, cited recent blackouts in Texas and elsewhere as examples of “what happens when you go too far too fast.” “We are monitoring the situation currently but we do remain concerned that overly aggressive policies that lead to the premature retirement of dispatchable generation like the coal fleet will jeopardize the reliability and resilience of the electricity grid,” Bloodworth said. Experts have pointed out that in the case of last winter’s massive Texas blackout, most of the megawatts that went offline were generated by gas, coal and nuclear plants. In Pennsylvania, the planned retirements of Keystone and Conemaugh come as building trade unions, industry groups and coal communities fight the state’s planned entry into the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a multi-state consortium that imposes a price on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants that use coal, gas and oil. Pennsylvania would be the first major fossil fuel state to adopt such a carbon pricing policy. David Masur, executive director of PennEnvironment, an environmental group, said the closures show that “with or without policies to reduce carbon pollution, the companies who own these antiquated power plants intend to shut them down or convert many of them anyway.” The planned shutdowns could leave Homer City Generating Station as the last large, traditional coal-fired power plant in the state still operating by decade’s end. Homer City, which is east of Pittsburgh and is the largest coal plant in Pennsylvania, has told state regulators it plans to keep operating and abide by the new wastewater limits. Owners of shuttering plants are responsible for environmental cleanup, according to the EPA. StateImpact Pennsylvania is a collaboration among WITF, WHYY, and the Allegheny Front.

1 0

Getting Joe Manchin's vote on BBB could come down to one of the weirdest situations of the century
by DUANE NICHOLS 22 Nov '21

22 Nov '21

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/11/20/2065377/-Getting-Joe-Manchin-s-… Getting Joe Manchin's vote on BBB could come down to one of the weirdest situations of the century Stitch that all together, and you get a Politico report on how the Grant Town power plant near Morgantown, West Virginia has put forward a proposal to turn itself into a giant, coal-powered, cryptocurrency “mine.” If that proposal moves forward, it could ensure that the lone contract that defines Manchin’s “coal brokerage firm” will continue to hand him over $500,000 a year for doing very close to nothing. Then maybe we can all have nice things. Or, if the crypto-plant proposal fails, Manchin could still hold the entire bill hostage to his personal interest in fossil fuels. Cryptocurrency is a still a phenomenon that leaves many people scratching their heads. Whether it’s a Bitcoin or a Sol, cryptocurrency doesn’t exist as a block of gold in a vault, a physical coin in a drawer, or a promissory note backed by a government. It’s a series of numbers embedded in a blockchain, which is itself a kind of storage system for these numbers that makes it very difficult to falsify or alter information. The numbers can’t be guessed, and don’t follow a regular pattern. They can only be calculated using a laborious set of equations that can discover the next sequence in a process popularly called “mining.” Through mining, new “blocks” of verified transactions are added to the blockchain. Those blocks are owned by the miners. In the early days, discovering these sequences was relatively easy and could even be done on generic desktop computers. But finding new crypto “coins” rapidly becomes more difficult, and the equations aren’t really optimized to work on the kind of generic microprocessors at the heart of most laptops and desktops. Systems expanded to allow many computers to work together in discovering a block. Then computer gamers and graphic artists found that the dedicated graphics cards they needed were simply unavailable, because cryptocurrency miners had discovered that the type of processors on these cards was much better suited to digging up that next coin. That’s still true today to some extent, but in large part, crypto mining has moved on to even more specialized hardware, designed expressly to deal with the particular equations involved in uncovering a new transaction. This dedicated hardware has taken crypto mining well beyond the limits of what many early adherents of Bitcoin or other currencies thought to be practical. Over time, the real cost of mining a new block has become defined by one thing: power. Anyone trying to mine a Bitcoin at home these days is almost certain to spend more money on the power it costs to mine that coin than the coin is actually worth. At the other end of the mining spectrum, rooms full of specialized mining machines, all digging away at the blockchain, consume a lot of energy, but the cost of the power is still lower than the profit that can be returned—especially when the crypto market is surging. Rather than the cost of power, the availability of power has become a constraint on these high-end mining operations. There are systems out there that need more power than a mid-sized town to handle their ongoing search for that next transaction. So where do they get it? They buy a power plant. There are some rather ingenious alternatives being put forward—including solar-powered EV charging stations that would use all solar power to mine for cryptocurrency using any excess energy—but all too often, the easiest form of power for the crypto-hungry to find can be defined in one word: coal. Across the nation and in many parts of the world, coal power plants are closing for the simplest reason: They cost too much. The cost of operating a coal-powered plant is now so far above adding new power in the form of solar or wind, that systems are finding it cheaper to overbuild renewables and close down the aging coal plants. Some plants are being converted to burn natural gas instead. Others are just being shuttered. A plant that’s about to be written off and remaindered is a great target for a crypto operation. Using that dedicated hardware, they can afford the higher cost of the coal-based power. That’s led to crypto miners buying up multiple plants in Pennsylvania and in New York. That New York plant had been used as a “peaker” plant, filling in when there was high demand on the grid. Its continuous use in powering crypto mining has reportedly made a nearby glacial lake used to cool the plant “feel like a bathtub.” In the case of the Grant Town plant in West Virginia, operating it for power no longer makes any sense. It’s a relatively small power plant, only 80 megawatts. It’s also the only plant in the state that still burns “waste coal.” Coal mines often generate a spoil pile of mostly non-coal material that is picked off the conveyor belt, often by hand, and pitched aside. Before the coal is sent to the power plant, it is often sent through a “prep plant,” where the coal is crushed to a more uniform size and sent through a series of chemical baths in which the lighter coal floats, while heavier minerals—especially those rich in sulfur—sink. This leaves behind a second spoil pile of waste material. Producing waste coal requires going back through the spoil piles for coal that was missed the first time. That coal is worse in almost every way than what was produced on the first pass. It contains more non-coal material, lowering the energy output and increasing the amount of ash. It also contains more sulfur and heavy metals, creating toxins that either go up the smokestack or into the coal slurry at the plant. All coal is dirty, but waste coal is the dirtiest form of coal. Waste coal is what Joe Manchin sells. Using waste coal made a tiny amount of sense in 2008, when the coal market was at its peak and supply was having a hard time keeping up with demand. It makes no sense now, when a majority of mines have been idled and there is still enormous overcapacity. But Manchin has a contract, and that contract has netted him over $5 million in the last decade. The result of all this is that Grant Town isn’t just the dirtiest plant using the dirtiest fuel, it’s also the most expensive plant in the state, in terms of dollars per megawatt. That plant has lost $117 million in just the last five years while paying Manchin $500,000 a year—not even for the waste coal itself, but just to manage the contract that delivers the waste coal. Joe Manchin is almost singularly responsible for removing $1.8 trillion in funding from the Build Back Better legislation. Thanks to Sen. Manchin’s refusal to support the bill as it was originally proposed, dozens of major programs have already been reduced in scope or eliminated completely. Some of the things that were removed—including two years of free community college—seemed like complete no-brainers which would have not only decreased the debt students now face upon emerging from college, but given the U.S. a competitive advantage by creating a more educated work force. The funds for climate change included in the legislation that just passed the House are much smaller than those included in the original proposal that came from the White House. However, they do include over $500 billion in funds dedicated to expanding the use of renewable energy and electric vehicles. Funds for the creation of the Civilian Climate Corps are also still in there, which would create jobs dedicated to restoring and maintaining lost areas of forest and wetland. Also still included is a program that will give utilities a bonus for the switching production to renewable power. As Popular Science explains, that program could be a massive game-changer when it comes to transitioning not just coal plants, but also natural gas-powered plants, to solar or wind. Manchin has specifically opposed that program, saying, “Why pay the utilities for something they're going to do anyway, because we're transitioning?” This is why. Because the program supporting those increased payments is expected to speed the transition by 4% a year. And that adds up. A 4 percent yearly increase would get the energy mix to about 70 to 80 percent in 2030, whereas business as usual would put Americans around 48 percent by the same date. If the U.S. is even going to come close to meeting the goals that must be met to ward off the worst of the climate crisis, it needs Manchin to vote for inclusions of the Clean Energy Performance Program as part of Build Back Better. And getting that vote may depend on whether or not the Grant Town plant gets turned into a dedicated crypto mining plant … all so that Joe Manchin can continue to sell the dirtiest coal, to the dirtiest plant, to line his pocket with the dirtiest money. Sent from my iPad

1 0

Weirton residents are against a potential construction of a gas well pad to be built in their neighborhood | WTRF
by DUANE NICHOLS 18 Nov '21

18 Nov '21

https://www.wtrf.com/video/weirton-residents-are-against-a-potential-constr… Weirton residents are against a potential construction of a gas well pad to be built in their neighborhood Rebecca Little, WTRF News 7, Wheeling, WV, November 18, 2021 UPDATE: Southwestern Energy provided the following statement regarding the gas well pad in Weirton. “Protecting the health and safety of our workers, community and the environment are core Southwestern values that guide our ongoing and future operations. We welcome constructive input and feedback from local residents as this important economic development project moves forward, and we are committed to responsibly developing natural gas in the region, as well as being a good neighbor and steward of the environment.” Southwestern Energy WEIRTON, W.Va.- (WTRF) One by one Weirton residents are starting to stand up to the potential construction of a gas well pad that is supposed to be built off of Park Drive. It is proposed to be built on a 300-acre piece of property and on Wednesday night the small crowd showed up at the Weirton Milsop Community Center for a town hall meeting in hopes of putting a stop to the Southwestern Energy project from ever happening. The meeting was spearheaded by former Weirton City Manager and Attorney Joe DiBartolomeo encouraged residents, who live in the area of Three Springs Drive, to write to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection detailing their grievances. 14 residents have already written to the director of permitting for gas wells to voice their opposition to the proposed site that is within the city limits. Among the concerns, according to residents, the close proximity of the gas well pad site to their homes, churches, schools, restaurants and hotels, not to mention the noise plus the danger of a potential accident at the site. “I am concerned what it might do to the city aquifers as far as water contamination. There’s no question that there will be noise problems with all these heavy trucks. I am sure there will be accidents the damages to the road. There are all sorts of issues and the property values are going to go down and we’re trying to attract people to the city of Weirton. That isn’t going to get it done.” Joe DiBartolomeo, Concerned Resident DiBartolomeo says the Weirton Zoning Board voted twice against granting Southwestern Energy the permit to build the gas well pad. He says the energy company is appealing that decision along with another appeal in the Brooke County Circuit Court. Sent from my iPad

1 0

The life-or-death race to improve carbon capture
by DUANE NICHOLS 12 Nov '21

12 Nov '21

NOTE ~ Here is the best technical review of Carbon Capture technology that is currently available, dated July 18, 2021. It’s from an official publication of the American Chemical Society, the most trusted organization of chemistry & chemical engineering. Even so, this article is biased toward an optimistic view of current R&D as well as industrial development projects. We all know that R&D and development projects cannot in and of themselves be relied upon to be successful! Notice one of the leading sentences, “Carbon capture isn’t about saving Earth.” [Rather, radical changes in our collective life-styles must take place! Governmental actions are required to make this happen! DGN] >>> Duane G. Nichols, Ph.D., Chemical Engineer, October 5, 2021. https://cen.acs.org/environment/greenhouse-gases/capture-flue-gas-co2-emiss… The life-or-death race to improve carbon capture Chemical & Engineering News, American Chemical Society, July 18, 2021 The technology works, but we’ll need better chemistry and engineering to reach the scale required to avoid a climate disaster Carbon capture isn’t about saving Earth. Earth is a wet rock floating through space; it doesn’t care if we drown our coastal cities or turn our farmland into desert. Rather, carbon capture is one of the technologies we will need if we want Earth to continue to be a tolerable place for humans to live. In brief The carbon-capture chemistry we have today is too expensive. It works, and it makes economic sense in a few settings. But to meet the global-consensus goal of net-zero carbon dioxide emissions by 2050 and dodge the worst consequences of climate change, we need to deploy more than 150 times as much carbon-capture capacity as we have now. That means reducing costs and making more options available for a wide range of CO2 emission sources. Read on about the growing number of businesses, government labs, nonprofits, and academic researchers racing to bring the next generation of carbon-capture technology up to scale and into the market. In 2020, we sent 40 billion metric tons (t) of carbon dioxide into Earth’s atmosphere. We need to cut that number to 0 by 2050 if we are to avoid the worst consequences of climate change, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). If we don’t, the natural systems that keep Earth’s climate relatively peaceful and comfortable will start to tip. The shift will be chaotic, and the new normal might not be conducive to life as we know it. To reach net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050, we need an all-of-the-above approach. Efficiency improvements can reduce our energy needs, and renewable and nuclear power may eventually be able to supply enough electricity for our homes, offices, and cars. But nuclear power is expensive and lacks public support, and renewables are struggling to find the land they need to be deployed at scale. On top of that, activities such as aviation and iron smelting are currently impossible to carry out commercially without releasing CO2. That’s where carbon capture comes in. Removing carbon dioxide from point sources such as the flue gas of power plants and locking it away underground can be a big part of the path to net zero. Related technologies known as direct air capture can remove CO2 that is already in the ambient air. But all of it depends on carbon capture getting a lot bigger, cheaper, and more efficient — and doing so quickly. Slow start Capturing the CO2 from power plants’ flue gas is where most of the action is. “Decarbonization of the power sector becomes the backbone that the decarbonization of the rest of the economy happens on,” says John Northington, director of the National Carbon Capture Center, a research facility near Birmingham, Alabama. What’s your gas stream? Different emission sources require different carbon-capture methods. Ammonia, ethanol, natural gas processing: Emit gas streams with more than 80% CO2. The CO2 is captured with compression and dehydration, membranes, or physical solvents. Chemical plants, iron, steel and paper mills: Emit gas streams with 15–80% CO2. The CO2 can be captured with physical solvents, solid sorbents, or membranes. Coal and natural gas power plants and boilers: Emit gas streams with less than 15% CO2. The CO2 can be captured with chemical solvents. Ambient air: Has a CO2 concentration around 0.041%. The CO2 can be captured with metal-organic frameworks or chemical systems. Sources: Global CCS Institute, National Petroleum Council. But just one commercial power plant has carbon capture: the coal-fired Boundary Dam Power Station in Saskatchewan, which captures 1 million t of CO2 per year on one of its four generators. Carbon capture elsewhere on other industrial processes, such as natural gas production, adds another 27 plants and gathers 25 million t per year. Not nearly enough. The people developing the technology that will make capturing carbon practical have gained unlikely allies in the past couple of years: the oil and gas companies responsible for the lion’s share of CO2 emissions. Though these firms have had their eyes on carbon capture for some time, Northington says, they’re investing serious money in it now. Data from the patent research firm Patent Seekers bear that notion out. Oil companies have gotten the largest number of carbon-capture patents in recent years, followed by government agencies and research institutes, universities, and engineering and technology companies. Klaus Lackner, an engineering professor working on direct air capture at Arizona State University, says the change in attitude is a result of pressure from two directions: competition from cheap renewable energy and public demand for low-carbon options. Major changes are coming to the energy market, Lackner says. “The question isn’t ‘Will we have a transition?’ We will. The Exxons and Shells and other companies have to figure out how to make it through that transition. Their business model falls apart if you can’t have liquid fuels.” Lackner says he’s been pushing fossil fuel companies on this point for years, telling them, “Your societal license to dump CO2 into the air will go away. You need to figure out how to operate without needing that license.” Matt Steyn, a senior adviser with the advocacy wing of the Global CCS Institute (GCCSI), a carbon-capture-and-storage think tank, says the change is also driven by the scientific consensus expressed by the IPCC and the International Energy Agency. “The target has been set; the timeline has been set,” he says. The conversation has shifted from “What do we do?” to “How do we do it?” As we deploy more plants, costs will come down, just as they have done in every other sector. Steve Oldham, CEO, Carbon Engineering Carbon capture of all types is a gas-separation problem. The goal is pure CO2, ideally at high pressure so it can go into a pipeline and be injected safely underground. For some industrial processes, the capture technology available today works fine. In ammonia and corn ethanol plants, for example, the gas exiting exhaust pipes is 80% or more CO2 and just needs to be dried and compressed for transport. As the CO2 in emissions gets more dilute, the energy required to extract it rises. The emissions coming from steel plants and many chemical processes tend to be between 15 and 80% CO2. The flue gas from fossil fuel combustion in air, such as in coal or natural gas–fired power plants, is generally less than 15% CO2. Capture with solvents Carbon dioxide–rich flue gas flows up a contact tower and mixes with a solvent that is trickling down (left). Reduced-CO₂ gas vents from the top, while CO₂-rich solvent exits at the bottom and flows to the top of a stripping tower. There, the solvent is heated, usually by steam, as it trickles down. The heat forces the CO₂ out of solution and up to a collection system. The refreshed solvent heads back to the contact tower to start again. Credit: Adapted from CO2CRC Ironically, oil companies are some of the biggest practitioners of carbon capture today because they use solvents, membranes, and other technologies to remove CO2 from natural gas deposits found in locations such as Russia and west Texas. When they use or sell that CO2 instead of venting it, that counts as carbon capture. That’s why ExxonMobil can claim to capture more CO2 than any other company, even if it uses most of that to push more oil out of the ground. Amine-based extraction systems developed for natural gas processing have been adapted for other CO2 sources, such as the power plant in Saskatchewan, but the energy cost of using such systems on more dilute streams is crushingly high. Second-generation solvent systems are poised to come to market next, followed by membranes and solid sorbents. And numerous innovative and experimental approaches are racing to catch up. Syrie Crouch, vice president for carbon capture and storage at Shell, which built the Saskatchewan plant, says deploying capture where it’s simple is an important start. US ethanol makers, for example, capture only 3 million t of the 43 million t of CO2 their plants produce each year. “The key is to capture that lowest-hanging fruit first and then work on down the cost curve,” she says. Incumbent amines The most mature carbon-capture technologies today use solvents. These systems pump emissions through a solution that absorbs CO2 but lets through other gases, such as nitrogen. The CO2-rich solvent then flows into a boiler, where heat drives the pure CO2 back out of solution. That stripping step is the energy hog. Though the terminology is harsh to a chemist’s ears, carbon-capture solvents are considered either chemical or physical. Chemical solvents, mostly amines such as the industry standard 30% monoethanolamine in water, get a CO2-solubility boost through reversible chemical reactions with water and CO2 that form carbonates, bicarbonates, and carbamates. Physical solvents such as methanol rely on intermolecular interactions to dissolve CO2. Companies including Linde, Air Products, and UOP offer such systems commercially. They use less energy than chemical solvents but require high pressures and low temperatures. They’re not suitable for combustion flue gas but have been used for many years to remove CO2 from natural gas. Almost like a filter Membranes separate gas mixtures on the basis of size or chemical properties. Some molecules can pass through, and others cannot. Credit: Adapted from CO2CRC Amine solvents have the advantage of being mature technology. The systems are well understood, with well-characterized economics and risk profiles that investors know how to analyze. Dow, Shell, Fluor, and others offer monoethanolamine solutions for carbon capture. Boundary Dam Unit 3 uses amines, as did NRG Energy’s Petra Nova plant in Texas, which captured more than 1 million t of CO2 per year from 2017 until NRG shut it down in 2020. BASF, Linde, General Electric, and the start-up Carbon Clean are among those working on advanced amines. These systems use chemicals such as piperazine alongside or instead of monoethanolamine to get better stability, kinetics, and thermodynamics. The US Department of Energy recently awarded Linde and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign $47 million to build a 200 t per day pilot facility using an advanced amine solvent from BASF at a coal-fired power plant near Springfield, Illinois. But capturing CO2 with amines comes at a steep cost. Fitted onto a power plant’s systems, they consume 30–50% of the plant’s energy output. Most experts, including Shell’s Crouch, expect that amine systems can get only 10–20% more efficient. At the same time, amines can seem like a safe bet compared with a next-generation technology. “If you’re making your first investment in carbon capture and storage, you don’t necessarily want to be taking massive risks on something new and untested,” the GCCSI’s Steyn says. The next generation At the National Carbon Capture Center (NCCC) and the Wyoming Integrated Test Center (ITC), two next-generation carbon-capture technologies that look promising are solid sorbents and membranes. CO2 Solutions, now part of Saipem, engineered carbonic anhydrase to fit the demands of carbon capture. The NCCC and ITC sites are essentially coal-fired power plants that can pipe their flue gas into a series of testing bays. The NCCC tests systems at scales from less than 1 t per day up to about 25 t per day; tests at the ITC run between 25 and 450 t per day. The sites, which use a combination of public and private financing, serve as technology development bridges between lab-scale carbon-capture concepts and pilot-scale tests on commercial power plants. The NCCC’s Northington says the incumbent amine systems can capture carbon at a cost of $60–$65 per metric ton. Advanced amines and other second-generation solvents are about $40 per metric ton. A handful of commercial installations that will use advanced amines are in early-stage engineering now, he says. Solid sorbents, membranes, and other transformational technologies will reach $30 or less per metric ton, he predicts. “We want choice in the marketplace,” says William Morris, technical director of the ITC. “People are really trying to figure out what works for them, not only in their industry but in their specific circumstance.” Solid sorbents include zeolites, metal-organic frameworks (MOFs), activated carbon, and porous silica particles. They’re often functionalized with amine groups to increase their activity and make them more selective for CO2. Merry-go-round In Svante's solid-sorbent capture system, flue gas first flows down (left) through a rotating disk loaded with a sorbent material that removes the carbon dioxide. At the next station (right), steam flows through the sorbent, stripping the now-pure CO2 out for collection. A third station (rear) refreshes the sorbent on the way back around to the flue gas station. Generally, solid sorbents have faster absorption kinetics than amines and require less energy to release the CO2 again. They can also hold more CO2 per unit volume than most solvents. That means that solid-sorbent systems can be smaller, reducing capital costs, and can be stripped of their CO2 using vacuum or modest heat. The start-up Svante forms solid sorbents into large, nanoporous disks divided into slices like a pizza. On a giant turntable, the disk slowly rotates each slice through a flue gas stream, a CO2-stripping module, and one or two sorbent preparation stations. The firm has a 10,000 t per year demonstration plant on a natural gas–fired boiler in Canada. It raised $75 million in February to advance a design for cement plants. In addition to Svante, ExxonMobil, Kawasaki Heavy Industries, TDA Research, and others are testing solid-sorbent systems for flue gas capture. Shell, which is shifting its R&D to solid sorbents, tested a system that uses amine-functionalized solid sorbents on a wood-burning power plant in Austria; it is now readying a scaled-up test at a manure-to-power plant in the Netherlands. After these trials, Crouch says, Shell will offer the technology on the open market. Membranes are even further along than solid sorbents, Morris says. Membrane systems use selectively permeable materials that exploit the small chemical and physical differences between CO2 and the rest of a gas mixture to achieve separation. Like amines, membranes are already being used in natural gas processing and other areas where CO2 pressure and content are high. “The next technology outside of amines that will deploy will be membranes,” Morris predicts. He says membranes are coming fast for capturing CO2 from flue gas at power plants. And Northington expects membranes will play a big role in carbon capture for the chemical industry and heavy manufacturing, which have moderate to high CO2 concentrations. Getting any new carbon capture technology to market won’t be cheap. Morris says getting a robust set of data from testing at the ITC can cost seven figures. One membrane maker, Membrane Technology and Research (MTR), won $52 million in funding in May from the US Department of Energy to do just that. MTR ran a 20 t per day version of its system for 1,400 h at the NCCC in 2015 and will use the funds to scale it up to 150 t per day in Wyoming. The company expects to demonstrate capture at less than $40 per metric ton. MTR’s membrane polymers are isoporous, meaning their pores are uniform in size and arranged geometrically, unlike the randomly arranged, multisize pores in most gas-separation membranes. The regular pore pattern lets molecules flow more smoothly through the material, lowering the amount of pressure needed relative to conventional membranes. And a tighter distribution of pore sizes increases selectivity for CO2. Another membrane maker, Compact Membrane Systems (CMS), also seeks to decrease costs by reducing pressure. CMS uses facilitated transport membranes, which are specialized fluoropolymers coated onto a porous substrate. CEO Erica Nemser likens the mechanism to Tarzan swinging through the jungle on vines. The CO2 is Tarzan, and fluoropolymers decorated with activating groups act as the vines, passing CO2 along, with minimal pressure needed. The firm’s systems are already being used to separate olefins from paraffins and to remove water and dissolved gases from solvents, oils, and lubricants. The system that will capture CO2 in flue gas will be a modification of one that’s in field trials now for removing CO2 from biomethane. Chemical changes to the fluoropolymer make the membrane selective toward different chemical species, Nemser says. CMS’s units are built around membrane cartridges about twice the size of a can of spray paint—hence the “compact” in the company’s name. The bigger the gas stream to be treated, the more cartridges the system uses. Chief Technology Officer Hannah Murnen says such modular systems will make carbon capture accessible for a wide range of CO2 point sources. In contrast, the towers needed to mix amine solvents with a gas stream and strip the CO2 out later make economic sense only at enormous scales, she says. CMS says it will be able to deliver carbon capture for as little as $20 per metric ton. “It’s time for membranes. It’s membranes’ day in the sun,” Murnen says. Tomorrow’s tech Amines may dominate carbon capture today, and membranes and solid sorbents may be right on their heels, but a need this serious—and a market this big—is attracting plenty of other contenders. And a good-enough concept could leap ahead if the people behind it can show it works and is scalable. Saipem and Chart Industries both hope to adapt technology and equipment already in use in other chemical processes. In January 2020, Saipem, an energy technology and engineering firm, acquired CO2 Solutions, a start-up that is using enzymes to boost the carbon-capture kinetics of aqueous potassium carbonate. K2CO3 reacts with CO2 and water to form potassium bicarbonate, KHCO3. The bicarbonate solution releases its CO2 at relatively low temperatures—around 75 °C under reduced pressure—meaning it can tap low-grade heat that most industrial processes would waste. That chemistry has been used to scrub CO2 from the air in submarines and other closed environments and in some high-CO2-concentration settings. The trouble is that the absorption kinetics are too slow for it to work well at flue gas concentrations and pressures; the contact towers would have to be even bigger than those used with amines. To solve that problem, Saipem catalyzes the reaction with the enzyme carbonic anhydrase. Natural carbonic anhydrase is already one of the fastest enzymes, speeding up the formation of HCO3– by a factor of 107. The team at CO2 Solutions modified the enzyme to make it even faster and keep it active at higher temperatures. “The first time I saw carbon capture with the enzyme, my jaw just dropped, because the catalyst is magic,” says Richard Surprenant, who came to Saipem from CO2 Solutions and is now commercial manager for carbon-capture technologies. Any industrial or postcombustion application is fair game for the firm’s technology, Surprenant says, and anywhere with low-grade waste or geothermal heat is an opportunity, because it doesn’t need the high-grade heat, a resource many plants already use in other ways. The firm is in the midst of restarting CO2 Solutions’ first commercial plant, a 30 t per day facility in Quebec that extracts CO2 from a paper mill and sells it to a nearby greenhouse. Chart Industries, an energy and industrial gas equipment firm, is also moving into carbon capture through acquisition and investment. In late 2020, Chart acquired Sustainable Energy Solutions, a start-up making cryogenic carbon-capture systems for combustion flue gas. In June of this year, it invested in Earthly Labs, which uses cryogenics to capture CO2 from breweries. Credit: Mosaic Materials Mosaic Materials' carbon-capturing metal-organic frameworks. In the simplest terms, both cryogenic systems chill their target gas streams until the CO2 condenses into a solid or liquid. Nitrogen, still a gas at those temperatures, is pumped off. The basic process, often called cryogenic distillation, is already used to purify other industrial gases, such as oxygen and nitrogen. The challenge for flue gas is in the engineering, not the chemistry, according to Chart CEO Jill Evanko. If water and CO2 freeze in the wrong places, they can clog pipes and block heat exchangers. But with clever heat management, system design, and integration with the rest of the equipment, Chart and its partners can deliver carbon capture of flue gas at half the cost of conventional amines, Evanko says, and make brewery carbon capture profitable enough to pay off the equipment in 18 months. Several other technologies are in early-stage development. Solvents that use less water or no water at all, including organic solvents and ionic liquids, could reduce the amount of mass that needs to be heated to release the purified CO2. Allam cycle power plants burn hydrocarbons in a mix of O2 and CO2, sidestepping the need to separate CO2 from nitrogen. And FuelCell Energy is commercializing its molten carbonate fuel cell, which can capture flue gas carbon while generating additional electricity from natural gas. It’s an exciting time for technology development, the ITC’s Morris says. “Decarbonization is going to be very, very difficult, and it’s probably not going to be possible without technologies that are currently in the development stage.” State of play Carbon capture is in its early days, especially for combustion flue gas, such as the emissions of a coal-fired power plant. Researchers are working on each of the technologies below to make them cheaper and more efficient and to get them to work on a wider variety of gas streams. A single commercial-scale installation could let a new technology pass its competitors or even take the lead. Sources: Global CCS Institute, National Petroleum Council, International Energy Agency, C&EN reporting. Direct air capture Point-source carbon capture won’t be enough. The technology still lets 2–10% of the carbon through. And it’s hard to deploy on sources with diffuse or mobile emissions, such as airplanes, sprawling petrochemical plants, and wide-open wastewater treatment facilities. Besides, the atmosphere has too much carbon already. The goal of net-zero CO2 emissions will require methods to remove carbon from the air. This direct air capture, or DAC, works on chemical principles similar to those for point-source capture. The big difference is that our ambient air, although overloaded, is still only 410 ppm, or 0.041%, CO2, much lower than even the most dilute industrial point sources. And that changes a lot about the devices and their economics. Because flue gas and other point sources are releasing new carbon into the atmosphere, the goal is to capture as much of it as possible—90% is a common target. In DAC, the amount of carbon left behind isn’t important; it’s all about how much CO2 can be removed per dollar spent. “My goal is not to make CO2-free air. My goal is to take CO2 out of the air, and I can choose where the optimal efficiency is,” says Lackner, the Arizona State engineer, who is also developing DAC technology. But however you look at it, DAC is expensive. Carbon capture at an ethanol plant can cost as little as $10 per metric ton. At a coal-fired power plant, the cost is around $60. DAC companies don’t like to talk about their costs, but industry insiders estimate they are around $500 per metric ton. Lackner and other experts generally peg $100 as the point at which DAC will become cost competitive with other decarbonization methods. Oxy Low Carbon Ventures, a carbon-reduction subsidiary of Occidental Petroleum, thinks it can reach that level in partnership with the start-up Carbon Engineering. The firms plan to build in the southwestern US what they say will be the world’s first commercial-scale DAC plant. It will capture 1 million t of CO2 per year, to be used mainly to boost production in Occidental’s oil wells in the region. The largest existing DAC plant captures a mere 2,000 t per year, according to Ryan Edwards, low-carbon policy adviser for Oxy Low Carbon. Carbon Engineering uses chemical looping to capture carbon from the air. In its process, intended to run on renewable energy, giant fans blow air over plastic surfaces that have aqueous potassium hydroxide flowing over it. The KOH reacts with CO2 to form potassium carbonate, K2CO3, which then flows into a pellet reactor containing aqueous calcium hydroxide, Ca(OH)2. The calcium and potassium switch places to form CaCO3, which precipitates out as solid pellets, as well as KOH, which is ready to cycle back to the plastic surfaces. The pellets then pass into a calciner, a heater that decomposes the CaCO3 into solid CaO and pure CO2. The CO2 is cooled and pressurized, and the CaO heads back to the pellet reactor, where it mixes with water and re-forms Ca(OH)2. The system sounds complicated, but it’s built mostly out of reactions and equipment already in use in industry. The pellet reactor is adapted from papermaking. Calciners running the same chemical reaction are central to cement production, and other versions come into play in glass, uranium, petroleum coke, and gypsum processing. The Dry Fork power station in Wyoming sends some of its flue gas to the Wyoming Integrated Test Center, where users test new carbon-capture technologies. Carbon Engineering published its process in 2018, projecting costs between $94 and $232 per metric ton (Joule, DOI: 10.1016/j.joule.2018.05.006). CEO Steve Oldham says the firm is “extremely confident” its costs will be in that range and expects that second and third generations will ensure a cost of $100 or less. “As we deploy more plants, costs will come down, just as they have done in every other sector,” Oldham says. Mosaic Materials, a developer of MOFs and one of C&EN’s 10 Start-Ups to Watch in 2019, pivoted to DAC from point-source capture 2 years ago, according to CEO Thomas McDonald. In the past 3 months, McDonald says, he’s seen a sharp increase in interest in DAC. The firm’s MOFs use a flavor of CO2-amine chemistry that McDonald calls cooperative binding, in which the CO2 inserts itself between a magnesium ion and an amine ligand. The mechanism gives the material high capacity and fast kinetics, and it reverses at relatively low temperatures to release the CO2, according to McDonald. MOFs are more expensive than other solid sorbents such as silica or activated carbon. Mosaic researchers are working to improve the materials’ capacity and stability to reduce operating costs, McDonald says. But the firm is focused more on lowering manufacturing costs and optimizing complete systems around its materials. Mosaic worked with ExxonMobil on flue gas capture in 2017 and 2018 and has some ongoing work in that area, along with collaborations with NASA and the US Navy on life-support systems, McDonald says. But he sees DAC as the best way to build his company. “We see the fastest, least-capital-intensive, least-risky path is by achieving early scale on projects through direct air capture.” We will require something roughly the size of the current oil and gas industry, but with the molecules going in reverse. Syrie Crouch, vice president for carbon capture and storage, Shell Lackner says DAC is a good fit with renewable energy. If a natural gas power plant is off because of low demand, so is any point-source carbon-capture device attached to it. DAC, on the other hand, can run on renewable energy and stabilize electricity prices by being a customer of last resort. In addition to his academic work, Lackner is working to commercialize his own DAC concept, which he calls MechanicalTrees. The “trees” eliminate the cost of running fans by relying on wind to move air across sorbents loaded onto disks arranged in a tower. When saturated with CO2, the towers drop into a chamber where heat and vacuum remove the CO2 at roughly 95% concentration. Paying for it All cool ideas, but who’s putting up the cash? A provision of the US tax code called 45Q offers tax credits for capturing carbon. When the provision is fully in place in 2026, carbon that is captured and sequestered will be worth $50 per metric ton. CO2 used to extract more hydrocarbons, a widespread and controversial practice called enhanced oil recovery, gets $35. That $35 credit plus the $40 per metric ton that enhanced oil recovery operators pay for CO2 on average make that market the most profitable for non-food-grade CO2, even with the lower credit (Front. Clim. 2019, DOI: 10.3389/fclim.2019.00005). That makes the economic rationale for carbon-capture products dependent on the price of oil. That dynamic is what doomed the Petra Nova carbon-capture facility when the price of oil got too low during the pandemic. Still, Oxy Low Carbon executives are prepared to depend on enhanced oil recovery for their southwestern US DAC project. Despite such bumps, carbon capture offers a way to decarbonize combustion and other CO2-emitting processes so they can remain part of a net-zero world. That’s both a selling point and a point of criticism. Critics such as Greenpeace say carbon capture diverts resources away from renewables and keeps polluters in business. Your societal license to dump CO2 into the air will go away. You need to figure out how to operate without needing that license. Klaus Lackner, engineer, Arizona State University Critics also point out that almost all the CO2 captured to date has been used in enhanced oil recovery. In the best cases, enough CO2 stays permanently in the ground after such oil extraction that the resulting fuel has net-negative CO2 emissions. But many enhanced oil recovery projects don’t meet that goal (Energies 2019, DOI: 10.3390/en12030448). “To put it very brutally, in the beginning, I don’t care” where the captured CO2 goes, Lackner says. The technology needs to start scaling up now. He points to a recent report from the International Energy Agency detailing a path to net zero by 2050. In that scenario, point-source capture has to scale up from about 40 million t per year today to 6.6 billion t in 2050, and DAC has to grow from a few thousand metric tons per year to almost 1 billion t in 2050. If enhanced oil recovery operators are willing to be early adopters that get carbon capture down to a cost that the market will bear, Lackner says, that’ll have to do. “The only way you get there is by learning. Most industries gain 10–20% in cost reduction for every doubling of cumulative output,” he says. “If we follow normal learning curves, I’m allowed to be optimistic. If it turns out we derail from that, the sooner we know, the better off we are.” Shell’s Crouch agrees that industry needs to start deploying carbon capture now to reach the necessary scale. “We will require something roughly the size of the current oil and gas industry, but with the molecules going in reverse,” she says. Building all those plants will cost $655 billion to $1,280 billion over the next 3 decades, according to a recent analysis by the GCCSI. That’s a lot of money, but Brad Page, CEO of the GCCSI, points out in a press release that “investing around one trillion dollars over almost 30 years is well within the capacity of the private sector which invested almost two trillion dollars in the energy sector in 2018 alone. Government decisions hold the key to enabling the requisite private sector capital being allocated for [carbon capture and storage] deployment.” One proposal the US Congress is considering now would add a higher credit for carbon captured from the air. The idea has broad bipartisan support, according to Oxy Low Carbon’s Edwards. At a recent panel discussion hosted by the nonprofit OurEnergyPolicy, he expressed confidence that enhanced incentives, R&D and deployment support, and funding for infrastructure for CO2 transport and storage could all become law in the current session of Congress. Jeremy Harrell, the managing director for policy at the energy-transition nonprofit ClearPath and another OurEnergyPolicy panelist, said he expects the Biden administration to launch a 50:50 cost-sharing initiative to deploy a first wave of carbon-capture facilities. “We think that sends a really important market signal to the private sector as they look to invest in these technologies,” he said at the event. “The politics here are going to play out well over the next 18 months, and people should stay tuned.” The administration’s proposed budget for the next fiscal year includes a 61% increase in spending at the Department of Energy on carbon capture, use, and storage, though the $368 million total is far short of what many climate activists would like to see. Edwards says 45Q has opened the door to commercial-scale carbon-capture projects. Since Congress extended 45Q in 2018 and removed the cap on the number of credits available, 30 to 40 new projects have been publicly proposed, he says, which would more than double the global number. Between projects that are being kept quiet for now and new ones that will be unlocked if Congress expands 45Q, that increase is “just the tip of the iceberg,” Edwards says. It’ll need to be. Right now, 28 point-source capture and DAC plants are active, including at Boundary Dam and nonpower installations, according to the GCCSI. The world will need 2,000 large facilities by 2050, along with transportation and storage infrastructure, to reach net zero by then. “The reality is, we’ve only got a certain amount of time left,” the GCCSI’s Steyn says. “We’re now pushing against the clock.” Considering how long it takes to finance, engineer, and build a trillion dollars of industrial equipment, he says, “If you’re going to actually make inroads toward net-zero 2050, it’s got to happen this decade. This is the make-or-break decade.” Chemical & Engineering News, ISSN 0009-2347 Copyright © 2021 American Chemical Society

3 2

Scars from the Mountain Valley Pipeline by Autumn Crowe – WV Rivers
by DUANE NICHOLS 10 Nov '21

10 Nov '21

https://wvrivers.org/2021/11/mvpscars/?fbclid=IwAR3T-UgEIcdAwxG4gXzlzwy4HEK… Scars from the Mountain Valley Pipeline As we rumble down the runway, my heart beats with anticipation as the plane picks up enough speed and the wheels lift off the ground to get that feeling of floating, airborne! I glance back at Jenny Harnish, our videographer who films and edits our pipeline video series, smiles plastered on our faces. We look down as our familiar little town of Lewisburg passes by underneath our wings and we head toward the Greenbrier River Valley. Our first waypoint is near Pence Springs, where MVP proposes to drill under the Greenbrier River. But the river valley is still fogged in so we continue north. Out of the fog appears a large swath denuded of trees going straight up the mountainside. Little trucks and heavy equipment can be seen moving dirt around below. The scar continues along the ridgeline until it cuts down into the valley and stream below. The pilot slows the plane and does a few circles so Jenny can point her video camera out the window to attempt to capture the rugged terrain and steepness of the slopes. Seeing the construction from the air brings a different perspective. The pipeline scar continues along ridgetops as far as the eye can see in either direction dropping down into the valley and then appearing again on the next ridge. Seeing the land from a plane really conveys the incredible impact humans have on the landscape. When flying in Alaska, there were great distances where I couldn’t see any human impact, so much of the landscape was wild and untouched. But flying over this region of WV, I was hard-pressed to find a spot that didn’t have an imprint of Man. At one point near Quinwood, we were seeing pipeline construction, coal mining, timbering and windmills all in the same viewshed.

1 0

Mon County Coal Communities Workgroup Listening Session - Nov 10
by DUANE NICHOLS 08 Nov '21

08 Nov '21

From: Hansen for House <hansenforwv(a)hansenforhouse.emailnb.com> > Date: November 8, 2021 at 8:48:07 AM EST > To: Duane Nichols <Duane330(a)aol.com> > Subject: Mon County Coal Communities Workgroup Listening Session - Nov 10 > > > > Duane -- > > The Mon County Coal Communities Workgroup Listening Session is this Wednesday, November 10. I hope you can join us! We kicked things off in Logan and Beckley recently, and the sessions went very well, with high attendance and lots of constructive ideas. Here's some news coverage in the Gazette-Mail and Metro News. > > The Workgroup's goal is to develop policy recommendations to help revitalize West Virginia’s coal communities. We're talking with local residents, as well as community and business leaders, to find out what our coal communities need to succeed and what tools are already available that we can build on. We aim to facilitate the flow of federal, state, and private foundation resources into communities to diversify economies. > > Everyone with ideas on how to make our community better is encouraged to attend. > > Monongalia County Coal Communities Workgroup Listening Session > Wednesday, November 10, 6:30 pm > The Shack, 537 Blue Horizon Dr, Pursglove, WV 26546 > > If the Shack parking lot is full, then you can park along the road or across the road at the post office. > > Hope to see you there! > > Evan > Hansen for House > http://www.hansenforwv.com/ > > Hansen for House · PO Box 139, Morgantown, WV 26507, United States > > >

1 0

ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS — Public Hearing(s) on “Mountain Valley Pipeline”
by DUANE NICHOLS 01 Nov '21

01 Nov '21

https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2021/11/01/army-corps-of-engineers-%e2%80%94-p… ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS — Public Hearing(s) on “Mountain Valley Pipeline” MOUNTAIN VALLEY PIPELINE in WV & VA NOTICE OF VIRTUAL PUBLIC HEARINGS — Mountain Valley Pipeline in WV & VA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that virtual public hearings will be conducted by the United States (U.S.) Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to solicit the views of interested persons regarding the permit application submitted by Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP), LLC. The Corps is reviewing the application under the authority of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. SUBJECT: The applicant has requested a Department of the Army (DA) permit from the Huntington District, the Pittsburgh District and the Norfolk District for the permanent discharge of dredged and/or fill material into 1,179 linear feet of streams (0.2527 acre) and 0.485 acre of wetlands, the temporary discharge of dredged and/or fill material into 38,083 linear feet of streams (8.0757 acres) and 17.57 acres of wetlands, and work in five (5) navigable waters of the U.S. (the Elk, Gauley and Greenbrier Rivers in West Virginia and the Roanoke and Blackwater Rivers in Virginia) associated with construction of the project known as the MVP Project[1]. The proposed pipeline project would be approximately 304 miles in length and begin at the existing Equitrans, L.P. transmission system near the Mobley processing facility in Wetzel County, West Virginia and end at the Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC’s (Transco) Zone 5 Compressor Station 165 in Transco Village, Pittsylvania County, Virginia. The proposed project is contained within the states of West Virginia and Virginia. The proposed project crosses three (3) Corps Regulatory District boundaries including Huntington and Pittsburgh Districts in West Virginia and Norfolk District in Virginia. Details of the proposed project can be found at: https://www.lrh.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/Public-Notices/Article/2… Public Notice Nos. LRH-2015-00592-GBR, LRP-2015-798 and NAO-2015-0898 issued by the Corps on March 29, 2021 advertised the applicant’s proposal. The public notice comment period was subsequently extended for an additional 30 days. The public notice version of the DA permit application and appendices are available under the IP Applications tab for public download at: http://www.mountainvalleypipeline.info/news-info/ PURPOSE: The purpose of the public hearings is to acquire information which will be considered in evaluating the permit application and to afford the public an opportunity to present their views, opinions, and information on the proposed permit action. Given the broad geographic scope of the proposed project and the extent of expressed public interest in the proposed project, it has been determined that two (2) public hearings, one (1) in West Virginia and one (1) in Virginia, will be held to better accommodate public participation. The Corps will hold these public hearings in the evening hours in order to accommodate maximum participation. Recognizing the health and safety concerns associated with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and the Health Protection Conditions that the limit occupancy of District office facilities in the permitting Districts, it has been determined that the public hearings will be held on the WebEx virtual platform. Participants may participate either by telephone and/or computer. The public hearings will be held in accordance with the procedures in 33 CFR Part 327. Public Notice Attachment: LRH-2015-00592-GBR, LRP-2015-798, NAO-2015-0898 — Public Hearing Attendance Information §— November 1: West Virginia Hearing Information — Attendee Instructions The conference begins at 6:00 PM Eastern Time on November 01, 2021; you may join the conference 10 minutes prior. To join the conference, click: https://ems8.intellor.com/login/840973 Join the Webex event and follow the prompts to connect audio by computer or telephone. Need to join via phone only? 888-251-2949 or 215-861-0694 – Need an international number? Access Code: 8624273# . § — November 4: Virginia Hearing Information — Attendee Instructions The conference begins at 6:00 PM Eastern Time on November 04, 2021; you may join the conference 10 minutes prior. To join the conference, click: https://ems8.intellor.com/login/840982 Join the Webex event and follow the prompts to connect audio by computer or telephone. Need to join via phone only? 888-251-2949 or 215-861-0694 – Need an international number? Access Code: 3683150# . § — November 9: Alternate Date Information (Only to be held in the event of technical issues with the primary hearing dates) Attendee Instructions — The conference begins at 6:00 PM Eastern Time on November 09, 2021; you may join the conference 10 minutes prior. To join the conference, click: https://ems8.intellor.com/login/840995 Join the Webex event and follow the prompts to connect audio by computer or telephone. Need to join via phone only? 888-251-2949 or 215-861-0694 – Need an international number? Access Code: 9003633# . Participants are encouraged to log in several minutes early. For additional assistance please contact Webex Support: 888-793-6118. For additional information, including information related to attending on a mobile device, please visit: https://help.webex.com/en-US/article/8l0y08/Join-a-Webinar-in-Webex-Events- (New)#Cisco_Generic_Topic.dita_fc78570c-5cf7-403a-a1a1-993a4fd36eb3 >>>>>……………>>>>>……………>>>>> RSVP — If you wish to provide oral comments on the proposed project you are strongly encouraged to RSVP with your intent to speak at the public hearing to CELRP-MVP(a)usace.army.mil with the statement “RSVP to Speak at West Virginia Public Hearing” or “RSVP to Speak at Virginia Public Hearing” as appropriate and include your full name, email address, and contact phone number with area code. You may also request an advance copy of any visual presentation material by e-mail to CELRP-MVP(a)usace.army.mil. If time allows, unscheduled speakers may be allowed to provide oral public comments by following the directions of the moderator. AGENDA: The public will be able to submit electronic statements through the webinar application beginning at 6 p.m. on the date of each scheduled hearing respectively. The audio and visual portions of the hearing will also begin at 6 p.m. Attendees may join the conference 10 minutes prior to the scheduled meeting time. Introduction by Corps, Overview of Regulatory Program, Project Description, Oral Public Comments >>>>>>>…………………>>>>>>>…………………>>>>>>> CLOSE OF COMMENT PERIOD: The Huntington District has been designated as the lead Corps District, thus all written comments should be submitted electronically by email at CELRP-MVP(a)usace.army.mil by midnight Eastern Standard Time on November 19, 2021. If you are unable to submit comments via email, they may be sent by the United States Postal Service and postmarked on or no later than November 19, 2021 to the following address: United States Army Corps of Engineers, Huntington District, ATTN: CELRH-RD-E Public Notice: LRH-2015-00592-GBR, LRP-2015-798, NAO-2015-0898 502 Eighth Street, Huntington, West Virginia 25701-2070. Sent from my iPad

1 0

Mountain State Clean Energy Comments
by DUANE NICHOLS 01 Nov '21

01 Nov '21

From: Bill Reger-Nash <billregernash(a)gmail.com> > Date: November 1, 2021 at 1:36:35 PM EDT > To: edward.s.andrews(a)wv.gov > Cc: "Innes, Karen" <kinnes(a)hsc.wvu.edu>, Ken Hilsbos <info(a)hilsbosfamilycare.com> > Subject: Mountain State Clean Energy Comments > > Dear Mr. Andrews: > > Following is an October 31 Charleston Gazette Mail Op Ed submitted by my colleagues Drs. Ken Hilsbos, Kim Innes, and me. This is most relevant to the Mountain State Clean Energy proposal: > > WV-FOSSIL FUELS-HEALTH-31OctY2K21 > CHARLESTON GAZETTE 31 OCTOBER 2021 > Hilsbos, Innes, Nash: Fossil fuels costing West Virginians their health > • By Ken Hilsbos, Kim Innes, Bill Reger-Nash > > Recently, there has been an alarming uptick in the number of patients we see who suffer heart attacks, strokes, lung disease, neurological problems and other serious health conditions. With continuing poor air quality, we see more and more children and adults with poorly-controlled asthma. We who love the outdoors are more likely to get the dreaded Lyme disease, a tick-borne infection that has recently changed from rare to common in our state. Climate change and pollution from fossil fuels threaten not only our health, but our lives and livelihoods. Fossil fuels lead to hundreds of premature deaths every year in our state. In 2016, flooding killed 23 West Virginians and destroyed thousands of homes. > Floods are increasing due to climate change, with heavy rainfall increasing 55% from 2005 to 2016. A new report puts West Virginia among the four states in greatest danger of flooding. We see areas that are not even in the flood plain flooding now. About 60,000 West Virginians are particularly vulnerable to extreme heat, which kills more people each year than any other natural disaster. By 2050, days with extreme heat are expected to increase tenfold in West Virginia unless we act. As health professionals dedicated to protecting the health of West Virginians, we are frightened that— without a rapid transition to clean renewable energy—our grandchildren will inherit a world with safety, security and good health unattainable for many. We cannot afford to allow inaction to keep worsening the climate crisis, fossil fuel pollution and related health damage. As West Virginians, we have proudly powered our nation. But we have borne very high costs – to our air and water, our forests and mountains, and our health and well-being. West Virginians no longer need to pay this high price. The continuing decline in coal jobs provides an opening to innovate using clean energy technology. Let’s urge Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., to seize this moment— this unique opportunity to continue our legacy as an energy leader. Transitioning to a clean energy economy promises the bright future that West Virginia so richly deserves. The Build Back Better Act and Clean Electricity Payment Program will provide essential support for this transition, enable us to continue powering the country in a way that benefits all, and ultimately position us as a global leader in renewable energy. Good health requires well-paying jobs. > As Chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, Manchin can ensure that coal miners and their communities transition smoothly to a clean energy economy. The Build Back Better Act will bring us outsized benefits, including billions of investment dollars to improve our infrastructure and add thousands of permanent, good-paying jobs. Solar energy and wind turbines will save money on energy bills and boost tax revenues, allowing us to maintain roads and keep rural schools open and services running. These investments will reduce air and water pollution, revive our cherished communities, restore our beautiful natural environment where we hunt and fish, and promote growth of our tourism and other industries. This clean energy transition will save lives and improve our health. A 2020 study found that the closure of coal-fired power plants between 2005 and 2016 saved an estimated 26,610 lives due to reduction in air pollution, with 5,300 lives saved in the Ohio Valley alone. Nationwide, a clean energy transition would save at least 100,000 lives annually and provide $700 billion per year in reduced health care costs and improved productivity. These health benefits will more than pay for the cost of transition. Climate change is the greatest public health threat of our lifetime. The transition to clean energy is one of the greatest health opportunities of our lifetime. Nowhere is this truer than in West Virginia. Manchin should support the Clean Energy Payment Plan and Build Back Better Act so every West Virginian has the opportunity for a healthy and prosperous future. > Recently, there has been an alarming uptick in the number of patients we see who suffer heart attacks, strokes, lung disease, neurological problems and other serious health conditions. > With continuing poor air quality, we see more and more children and adults with poorly-controlled asthma. We who love the outdoors are more likely to get the dreaded Lyme disease, a tick-borne infection that has recently changed from rare to common in our state. > Climate change and pollution from fossil fuels threaten not only our health, but our lives and livelihoods. Fossil fuels lead to hundreds of premature deaths every year in our state. In 2016, flooding killed 23 West Virginians and destroyed thousands of homes. Floods are increasing due to climate change, with heavy rainfall increasing 55% from 2005 to 2016. A new report puts West Virginia among the four states in greatest danger of flooding. We see areas that are not even in the flood plain flooding now. > About 60,000 West Virginians are particularly vulnerable to extreme heat, which kills more people each year than any other natural disaster. By 2050, days with extreme heat are expected to increase tenfold in West Virginia unless we act. > As health professionals dedicated to protecting the health of West Virginians, we are frightened that — without a rapid transition to clean renewable energy — our grandchildren will inherit a world with safety, security and good health unattainable for many. We cannot afford to allow inaction to keep worsening the climate crisis, fossil fuel pollution and related health damage. > As West Virginians, we have proudly powered our nation. But we have borne very high costs – to our air and water, our forests and mountains, and our health and well-being. West Virginians no longer need to pay this high price. The continuing decline in coal jobs provides an opening to innovate using clean energy technology. > Let’s urge Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., to seize this moment— this unique opportunity to continue our legacy as an energy leader. Transitioning to a clean energy economy promises the bright future that West Virginia so richly deserves. The Build Back Better Act and Clean Electricity Payment Program will provide essential support for this transition, enable us to continue powering the country in a way that benefits all, and ultimately position us as a global leader in renewable energy. > Good health requires well-paying jobs. As Chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, Manchin can ensure that coal miners and their communities transition smoothly to a clean energy economy. The Build Back Better Act will bring us outsized benefits, including billions of investment dollars to improve our infrastructure and add thousands of permanent, good-paying jobs. Solar energy and wind turbines will save money on energy bills and boost tax revenues, allowing us to maintain roads and keep rural schools open and services running. > These investments will reduce air and water pollution, revive our cherished communities, restore our beautiful natural environment where we hunt and fish, and promote growth of our tourism and other industries. > This clean energy transition will save lives and improve our health. A 2020 study found that the closure of coal-fired power plants between 2005 and 2016 saved an estimated 26,610 lives due to reduction in air pollution, with 5,300 lives saved in the Ohio Valley alone. Nationwide, a clean energy transition would save at least 100,000 lives annually and provide $700 billion per year in reduced health care costs and improved productivity. These health benefits will more than pay for the cost of transition. > Climate change is the greatest public health threat of our lifetime. The transition to clean energy is one of the greatest health opportunities of our lifetime. Nowhere is this truer than in West Virginia. > Manchin should support the Clean Energy Payment Plan and Build Back Better Act so every West Virginian has the opportunity for a healthy and prosperous future. > Dr. Ken Hilsbos is a long-standing Family Practice physician in Fairmont. > Dr. Kim Innes is an internationally recognized epidemiologist and Emeritus Professor at the West Virginia University School of Public Health. > Dr. Bill Reger-Nash is a nationally renowned expert in health and wellness, Emeritus Professor at the West Virginia University School of Public Health and a former West Virginia legislator. > . > URL:https://www.wvgazettemail.com/opinion/op_ed_commentaries/hilsbos-innes-… > > -- > Bill Reger-Nash > > billregernash(a)gmail.com > cell 304 685 6740 > > Walk 30 to 60 minutes daily > Out The Door For 30 Or More! >

1 0

Katharine Hayhoe – “Our future is still in our hands” | The On Being Project, NPR
by DUANE NICHOLS 25 Oct '21

25 Oct '21

“Our future is still in our hands” — ‘On Being Program’ — National Public Radio, October 15, 2021 Saving Us: A Climate Scientist's Case for Hope and Healing in a Divided World Author: Katharine Hayhoe, Professor @ Texas Tech University https://onbeing.org/programs/katharine-hayhoe-our-future-is-still-in-our-ha…

1 0

EJSCREEN: Environmental Justice Screening and Mapping Tool | US EPA
by DUANE NICHOLS 22 Oct '21

22 Oct '21

I want to encourage the WV DEP to use the EJSCREEN on the Longview I and II (and other) projects. It is unacceptable to place three large power plant in Monongalia County. The people of the Ft. Martin community are the most vulnerable plus all of Maidsville. The people on Bakers Ridge are in direct line for air impacts as with my Forks of Cheat Forest, the new Summit expansive development, etc. University High School is VERY close. Realize we have elder care facilities all over this region, not to mention Heritage Point. People are coming to Morgantown from all over West Virginia for their last and best medical treatment, yet our air is already degraded and could get worse. In the typical summer camping season, the Emma Camp has over 300 young campers from all over the east coast participating in active recreation and educational programs. The role of fine particulates in combination with all the other hazardous compounds is still being investigated, but we already know that through the lungs these affect the heart and brain. Free radical chemistry is hardly known to the public or legislators or regulators, but its role is significant where we have these large coal-fired units, given the complexity of the “coal molecule.” Our residents already qualify for environmental justice relief even without another power plant. What are they thinking, those out of state developers & investors? The 300 coal trucks laboring up the Ft. Martin hill every day after day, with diesel exhausts, road damages, aggravating noises — maybe that’s why Longview thinks they have found “clean energy” ....? On Labor Day, one Ft. Martin family decided to sit out on the front porch, but were driving back inside by the diesel truck noise! Even our Monongalia County Commission looks at Ft. Martin as a mined out sacrifice zone. See the EPA EJ Screen here: https://www.epa.gov/ejscreen >>>>>>>>……………………>>>>>>>>……………………>>>>>>> LONGVIEW-HEARING- CHARLESTON GAZETTE 22 OCTOBER 2021 Job hopes, environmental fears highlighted at DEP public comment hearing on air quality permit for Mon County gas-fired plant • By Mike Tony mtony(a)hdmediallc.com Feedback was divided between welcoming potential economic benefits and decrying feared environmental perils at a public comment meeting on a proposed air quality permit for a natural gas-fired power plant in Monongalia County. The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection held the meeting virtually Tuesday evening on the permit requested by Longview Power’s Mountain State Clean Energy LLC for the facility planned to be located immediately north of the Longview coal-fired plant in Maidsville. The project is slated to be a gas-fired, combined-cycle plant that will supply electricity to the power grid, linking to it via an interconnection used by the coal-fired plant. The West Virginia Division of Air Quality’s preliminary evaluation found that the project as proposed will meet all applicable state rules and federal regulations, prompting the division’s preliminary determination to approve the air quality application. Area union officials pushed state environmental regulators to keep leaning in that direction. They argue that constructing the plant would create critical jobs for their members. “[T]he job opportunities [are] huge. I would like to add that the jobs created will be good-paying jobs, with important retirement and health care benefits,” said Natalie Stone, representative of the Morgantown-based North Central West Virginia Building Trades Council. The proposed gas-fired plant is projected to emit 5.13 million tons of greenhouse gases, 321 tons of nitrogen oxide, 276 tons of carbon monoxide and 210 tons of particulate matter per year, according to a permit application prepared for the DEP by Ambient Air Quality Services Inc., a Pennsylvania-based air quality consulting firm. Opponents of the project objected to what they said were troubling discrepancies and inadequate air quality protection measures in the proposed permit as well as the project’s proposed greenhouse climate emissions that would contribute to the climate crisis. The International Energy Agency, an intergovernmental organization consisting of 30 member countries, said in May that investors should not fund any new coal, oil or natural gas projects if the world is to reach net zero carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. Earth must meet the mid-century deadline to limit the rise in global temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius and avert the worst effects of climate change, the agency reiterated in a road map for the global energy sector that included the new recommendation to end all new fossil fuel projects. James Kotcon, chairman of the West Virginia chapter of the Sierra Club’s conservation committee, observed that a draft permit for the facility lists the facility’s total electrical generating capacity as 1,300 megawatts, while a DEP preliminary determination and fact sheet for the facility notes that the facility’s electricity generation capability is 1,200 megawatts. DEP spokesman Terry Fletcher indicated after the meeting that the figure was an approximate value, adding that the output will vary based on power efficiencies and operating conditions. A PowerPoint presentation that Division of Air Quality engineer Edward Andrews showed describing the project indicated that the plant would be a 1,200-megawatt facility. Area resident Duane Nichols argued that it would be environmentally unjust for the plant to be located near West Virginia University medical facilities, health centers and other sites of importance. Two facilities Nichols mentioned, the WVU Eye Institute and Mountaineer Field, are roughly 10 miles away from the proposed facility location. “You can’t find a worse location in the entire state of West Virginia,” Nichols contended. Those anticipated emission levels are all well above federal significance levels, subjecting the plant to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Prevention of Significant Deterioration regulations. That designation requires installation of emissions-limitation technology, air quality analysis, an additional impacts analysis assessing the effects of air, ground and water pollution, as well as public comment on permits and citizen enforcement actions against sources not complying with their permits. Project opponents questioned the “clean energy” part of Mountain State Clean Energy’s name during the meeting. “When I see a company that calls themselves Mountain State Clean Energy and then ask for 5 million tons of greenhouse gas [emissions], who do they think they’re fooling?” Kotcon asked. Mountain State Clean Energy will need to apply for a water pollution permit for the site or modify an existing one to include the new gas-fired turbine, Fletcher said. Located 3,000 feet west of the Monongahela River, the site is slated to operate two pipeline-gas compressor units. The application indicates that no greenhouse gas emissions will be associated with starting up, shutting down or operating the units. The proposed start-up date for the facility is Jan. 1, 2025, according to the DEP. Mountain State Clean Energy LLC formally changed its name from Longview Power II LLC in November. That name change came seven months after the West Virginia Public Service Commission issued a certificate to the company to construct and operate the gas-fired facility and a 70-megawatt utility-scale solar facility — 20 megawatts to be located in West Virginia and 50 megawatts in Pennsylvania. The commission also approved construction and installation of a 500-kilovolt electric transmission line extending approximately three quarters of a mile north from the gas-fired facility. Longview Power II LLC and Longview Renewable Power LLC, a separate company granted the solar siting certificate that subsequently changed its name to Mountain State Renewables LLC, estimated that the cost to construct the gas-fired facility would be $1.1 billion, according to the Public Service Commission. The Monongalia County Commission approved a 30-year, $58 million payment-in-lieu-of-taxes agreement with the Longview parties in December 2020. The Division of Air Quality will take public comments until Mon., Nov. 1 at 5 p.m. and subsequently take final action on the application. Written comments may be emailed to Edward.S.Andrews(a)wv.gov, with “Mountain State Clean Energy Comments” in the subject line, or mailed to Edward Andrews, WV Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street, SE, Charleston, WV 25304. Additional information on the project proposal can be found at https://dep.wv.gov/daq/permitting/Pages/NSR-Permit-Applications.aspx. Mike Tony covers energy and the environment. He can be reached at 304-348-1236 or mtony@hdmediallc .com. Follow @Mike__Tony on Twitter. URL:https://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/energy_and_environment/job-hopes-env…

1 0

The Real Cost Of Joe Manchin’s Opposition To More Aggressive Climate Action
by DUANE NICHOLS 21 Oct '21

21 Oct '21

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2021/10/20/the-real-cost-of-joe… The Real Cost Of Joe Manchin’s Opposition To More Aggressive Climate Action From an Article by Ken Silverstein, Forbes Magazine, October 20, 2021 Just about a year ago, a company that builds natural gas plants wanted to construct a 920-megawatt merchant facility in West Virginia. But it scrapped the project that sells its output on the open market and not at prices determined by utility regulators. That’s because it was up against coal, which controls the state capitol and which does not want competing energy forms displacing coal units. In the end, Energy Solutions Consortium said it would not pursue a previously authorized $5.6-million loan guarantee from the West Virginia Economic Development Authority. Make no mistake: not even natural gas can seep into the veins of West Virginia politicians like coal can — even though the state is sitting on top of the rich Marcellus Shale basin. Sure, coal companies are fine with permitting new natural gas pipelines that feed out-of-state facilities. But they are not Okay with building more efficient combined-cycle natural gas plants in the state. This example underscores the mindset of Senator Joe Manchin, D-WV, who is the chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee — one of two senators holding up President Biden’s economic agenda that has a climate focus. Simply, the senator says that the transition to cleaner-burning fuels is already happening and that artificially facilitating that evolution is expensive and unnecessary. But West Virginia is also the nation’s second-largest producer of coal behind Wyoming. “Thanks to Joe, this is where we are,” says Jamie Van Nostrand, the director of the Center for Energy & Sustainable Development at West Virginia University’s College of Law as well as a lawyer appearing before utility regulators. “This is not just hurting West Virginia,” he told this writer. “It is sinking the whole climate agreement and our ability to reduce CO2 emissions. He’s trapped by a handful of coal-burning utilities and it has global implications. It is shameful.” The energy center analyzed President Biden’s Build Back Better program in the context of its potential effect on the West Virginia economy. If the state generated 80% of its electricity from sustainable fuels such as wind and solar, it would save customers a ton of money: $855 million through 2040. And it would increase employment by 3,500 jobs while growing earnings by $172 million annually. And billions would be invested in newer and cleaner power plants that would increase the state’s gross domestic product by $322 million annually. Meantime, air quality would improve while modern businesses would find the state’s natural environment enticing. The Least-Cost Path Coal generates 89% of West Virginia’s electricity. Natural gas makes up 2% of the state’s energy mix. Director Van Nostrand studied the state’s electricity rates from 2008 through 2018. He found that they rose at five-times the nationalHe points specifically to a recent West Virginia Public Service Commission ruling that allows American Electric Power’s three existing coal-fired units to keep operating through 2040. It’s not only dirtier than replacing them. It’s also more expensive — an option that will cost the utility $448 million in mandatory federal upgrades. That means utility customers will be paying 3.3% more in 2022. If the plants are retired in 2028, AEP says it would save ratepayers $28 million a year. So why not build natural gas units in their place? Or wind and solar plants? Or retrofit buildings to become more energy efficient? Coal now employs 13,000 miners — a far cry from the 100,000 it once did in 1950. Yes, market forces have displaced part of the workforce. But mechanization and automation have done the heavy lifting. With just 3% of the state’s employment tied to coal, why the outsized influence? Coal companies still pay property taxes and remain a vital part of the state’s tax base. “The key message is that a clean energy path produces more jobs, lower electricity prices, and obviously a cleaner environment for West Virginians,” says Van Nostrand. “But we are on a coal path. And we are getting pounded because of it. Our utilities have not diversified into natural gas or renewables. Let’s take advantage of the huge drop in prices for solar and wind. There is a least-cost path and there is a coal path — one that has quintupled in price.” Coal’s real costs are “externalized” and not reflected in the price of electricity. That is, there are environmental and medical costs borne by taxpayers. Abandoned mines, for example, will cost billions to repair — if they are cleaned up at all. The University of California at Berkeley says that, nationally, shedding coal would prevent $1.7 trillion in health and environmental damages through 2050. It also says that the United States can generate 80% of its power from renewables in 2030 without causing electricity prices to rise. That is because the price of wind and solar power is dropping precipitously — not to mention the cost of battery storage technologies. The Burial What is the clean energy standard that the Biden Administration wants to enact? It loosely defines clean energy as anything that either produces no CO2 or that can capture carbon and bury it. Electric utilities would need to produce a set amount of emissions-free power. Power companies that hit certain milestones would be given a payment — an incentive to increase their wind and solar production. The goal is to generate 80% clean electricity by 2030 and 100% by 2035. To get Manchin on board, this standard would be eliminated from the package. However, his Democratic colleagues would toss in billions to accelerate this country’s carbon capture and sequestration technologies. Is that smart? It depends on one’s point of view. On the one hand, coal is still expected to make up at least 30% of the global energy pie going forward, says the World Coal Association. And it does make sense to try and capture and bury CO2. On the other hand, Southern Company just destroyed its much-touted 582-megawatt Kemper plant in Mississippi that cost $7.5 billion. (It was originally forecast to cost $2.9 billion in 2006.) Even American Electric Power ditched its plans to build a carbon capture and sequestration facility in West Virginia while the FutureGen 2 was halted in Illinois in 2015 because of high costs and technological hoops. But does the recent spike in natural gas prices show that there is a place for coal? Coal use is expected to rise over the next year because of that volatility. “No one will build a coal plant based on current natural gas prices,” says Van Nostrand. “The price increase is likely to be temporary and it is predicated on supply chain issues and a rise in demand because of the pandemic. Moreover, they keep saying that carbon capture and sequestration is always on the edge of a breakthrough. That is BS. Not even close. Coal is already out of the money. Then add on the cost of underground pipelines and the cost to sequester CO2.” Consider the latest data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration: Between 2019 and 2020, coal-fired power fell by 20%. Meanwhile, renewables, including small-scale solar, increased by 9%. Wind, which it says is the most prevalent source of renewable electricity in the United States, grew 14% between 2019 and 2020. Nearly 40,000 megawatts of new capacity is expected to come online in 2021, adds S&P Global Platts. About 80% of that will be renewables. New Perspective What’s next? In an ideal world, the best way to minimize carbon emissions is to tax them. Companies would naturally migrate to lower-carbon alternatives. And if CO2 releases could be captured, investors would take a chance on it. But we all know that, politically, a carbon tax is even harder to enact than a clean energy standard — something that can be done through the budgetary process and that requires just 50 yes votes. And it won’t win Senator Manchin’s vote, whose most recent filings show that fossil fuel interests are filling his campaign chest. Still, there is an array of hope — at least within the state legislature: it has eased the path to more solar energy deployment and development, which could become viable enterprises in formerly coal-occupied areas. “There has to be a sense of urgency,” says Van Nostrand. “Utilities are not doing this fast enough. They are making the clean energy transition — just not fast enough, which undercuts Manchin’s argument that the free market is working. Biden needs to go to COP26 in Glasgow with something that is a law — a statute that can’t be reversed if another Trump-like figure emerges.” The preponderance of global citizens favors climate action. And so do most Americans. The effects of global warming are being felt today — even in West Virginia where flash floods ravaged parts of the state in 2016. Moreover, businesses are demanding action: it is not just tech companies like Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon that won’t locate to places without clean energy access. It’s also Proctor & Gamble, Target, and Toyota that are active in the fight. Joe Manchin is in his 70s. He needs to look past the next election cycle and into the future of his grandchildren. He needs to re-evaluate his positions and whether he is preventing both West Virginia and the country-at-large from getting ahead. Xxx

1 0

Longview II Power Plant (aka Mountain State Clean Energy, no kidding?)
by DUANE NICHOLS 19 Oct '21

19 Oct '21

Public hearing scheduled for Longview gas-fired expansion POSTED BY MIKENOLTING ON OCTOBER 19, 2021 IN LOCAL NEWS MAIDSVILLE, W.Va. – The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection will hold a virtual meeting tonight at 6 to accept public comment on an air quality permit for a natural gas-fired power plant in Monongalia County. The proposed gas-fired plant is projected to emit 5.13 million tons of greenhouse gases, 321 tons of nitrogen oxide, 276 tons of carbon monoxide and 210 tons of particulate matter per year, according to a permit application prepared for the DEP by Ambient Air Quality Services Inc., a Pennsylvania-based air quality consulting firm. Those anticipated emission levels are all well above federal significance levels, subjecting the plant to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Prevention of Significant Deterioration regulations. That designation requires installation of emissions-limitation technology, air quality analysis to assess the effects of air, ground and water pollution. The two pipeline-gas compressor units would be located 3,000 feet west of the Monongahela River. The application indicates that no greenhouse gas emissions will be associated with starting up, shutting down or operating the units. The proposed start-up date for the facility is Jan. 1, 2025, according to the DEP. The estimated cost of the project is $1.1 billion, according to the Public Service Commission. The Monongalia County Commission approved a 30-year, $58 million payment in lieu of taxes agreement with the Longview parties in December 2020. The agency said written comments on the proposal must be received by Nov. 1. Written comments may be emailed to Edward.S.Andrews(a)wv.gov, with “Mountain State Clean Energy Comments” in the subject line, or mailed to Edward Andrews, WV Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street, SE, Charleston, WV 25304. For more information click below. (NOTE: The GHG and vapor plumes are excessive.) https://dep.wv.gov/daq/permitting/Documents/Longview%20PSD/Public%20Meeting…

1 0

West Virginia PSC Approves Continued Operation of Three AEP Coal Power Plants Through 2040
by DUANE NICHOLS 15 Oct '21

15 Oct '21

https://www.powermag.com/west-virginia-psc-approves-continued-operation-of-… West Virginia PSC Approves Continued Operation of Three AEP Coal Power Plants Through 2040 From an Article by Aaron Larson, Power Magazine, October 14, 2021 The Public Service Commission of West Virginia (PSC) approved Appalachian Power Co. (APCo) and Wheeling Power Co.’s (WPCo’s) request to keep the 2,930-MW Amos, 1,320-MW Mountaineer, and 780-MW Mitchell coal-fired power plants operational until at least 2040. APCo and WPCo are electric power subsidiaries of American Electric Power Co. (AEP), which is one of the largest generators of electricity in the U.S., owning or operating about 30 GW of generating capacity. AEP is headquartered in Columbus, Ohio, while the principal offices for APCo and WPCo are in Charleston, West Virginia. The three plants are all located in West Virginia. The Amos plant is on the Kanawha River in Putnam County about 15 miles northwest of Charleston; the Mountaineer plant is on the Ohio River in Mason County about 12 miles northeast of Point Pleasant; and the Mitchell plant is on the Ohio River in Marshall County about 12 miles south of Moundsville. The PSC order stems from a filing the companies made in December 2020. APCo requested to obtain the regulatory approvals necessary to implement coal combustion residuals (CCR) and effluent limitation guidelines (ELG) compliance plans, and seek recovery of the estimated $240 million investment for the Amos and Mountaineer plants. Likewise, WPCo requested to obtain the regulatory approvals necessary to implement CCR and ELG compliance plans, and seek recovery of the estimated $132 million investment for the Mitchell Plant. Upgrades Required According to the PSC filing, the bottom ash ponds at each facility are unlined, and would have been required to initiate closure by April 11, 2021, unless an extension was granted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In AEP’s most recent financial statements, the company reported filing applications for additional time to develop alternative disposal capacity at the Amos, Mountaineer, and Mitchell plants, among others. The PSC filing also says, “the Mountaineer Plant will be required to address groundwater impacts related to the plant’s existing bottom ash pond. This is currently addressed in accordance with requirements defined in the CCR Rule, known as ‘corrective measures,’ which may entail active treatment of the groundwater.” At the time of the filing, the corrective measures evaluation and selection process was underway, but a final solution had not yet been identified. To continue operating the plants beyond 2028, the companies will be required to close the bottom ash ponds at the Amos, Mountaineer, and Mitchell plants to achieve compliance with the CCR Rule. The schedules for pond closure and developing alternative management options for bottom ash and other wastewaters are site-specific and are subject to approval by the EPA, the filing says. To operate post-2028, the companies will also be required to convert all steam generating units at the Amos, Mountaineer, and Mitchell plants to dry bottom ash handling systems, as well as to install bioreactors for treatment of flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater streams at the Amos and Mitchell plants to comply with the ELG rule. The Mountaineer plant reportedly has a bioreactor in place, which would require only minor upgrades to meet the requirements of the ELG rule. The ELG rule requires that discharge limits be achieved as soon as possible before Dec. 31, 2025, pursuant to a schedule that will be included in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for each facility. To expedite compliance, the filing says the companies have developed coordinated compliance activities that would be necessary to address the bottom ash transport water requirements of the ELG rule and the CCR rule. New bioreactors would bring Amos to full ELG compliance by the end of 2022, and Mitchell by April 2025. The upgraded bioreactor at Mountaineer would also bring it into ELG compliance by the end of 2022. Costs and Recovery The PSC said original estimates suggested the impact to residential customers (using 1,000 kWh per month) once the CCR and ELG revenue requirements are totally phased-in upon completion of construction of all the required upgrades would be approximately $2.64 per month. The PSC issued an order on Aug. 4, 2021, that increased the monthly bill of a residential customer using 1,000 kWh per month by approximately $0.38. That rate increment was the first-year phase-in of the impact of the multi-year construction program. The Oct. 13 PSC order will not immediately affect the power bills of West Virginia customers. The rate impact of the full phase-in upon completion of construction, including any additional amount that results from yesterday’s order will require the companies to file a further proceeding to recover the costs of implementing the upgrades, the PSC said. In justifying its decision, the PSC said the estimated cost to West Virginia customers of prematurely retiring the three power plants and replacing their collective generation capacity would be between $1.9 billion and $2.3 billion. Whereas, it said, the estimated total cost to bring all three plants into federal environmental compliance is about $448.3 million. The PSC also said the benefits of the plants’ continued operation to the state’s economy “are considerable,” including direct employment at the plants; use of West Virginia coal; state, county, and local taxes related to operating generation plants; and related employment in businesses supporting the plants and the coal industry. The reliability of fuel-secure baseload generation capacity was also considered by the commissioners in making the decision. Neighboring States Not as Accommodating On Aug. 23, the Virginia State Corporation Commission (SCC) partly denied cost recovery for expenses requested by APCo to comply with the federal ELG rule at the Amos and Mountaineer plants. In that decision, the SCC approved a $27.44 million Virginia revenue requirement for the first year of an environmental rate adjustment clause, which is a rider that recovers expenses from APCo’s Virginia customers associated with federal rules regulating the disposal of coal ash at the two West Virginia plants. However, while the commission moved to approve the recovery of costs related to the CCR rule, it denied about $4.2 million in expenses proposed for projects that would help the plants comply with the ELG rule. Meanwhile, the Kentucky Public Service Commission, in a July 15 order addressing WPCo and Kentucky Power Co.’s (another AEP electric utility subsidiary and co-owner of the Mitchell plant) cost recovery request in that state for the Mitchell plant, likewise approved construction projects to comply with the CCR rule but denied construction projects to comply with ELG requirements. In a statement issued on Wednesday, the PSC of West Virginia said that if Virginia and Kentucky would not share the cost of the upgrades, the two states would not be permitted to use the capacity and energy produced by the plants. For additional background, and more detail on the Kentucky and Virginia filings, see “Regulators Rattle AEP’s Plans to Operate 4.2-GW of Coal Power Through 2040.” —Aaron Larson is POWER’s executive editor (@AaronL_Power, @POWERmagazine).

1 0

proposed “Mountain State Clean Energy” (aka Longview II) natural gas plant,
by DUANE NICHOLS 12 Oct '21

12 Oct '21

Longview is moving forward with plans to construct another (3rd) fossil fueled electric generating station in the Ft. Martin community, about 3 miles from where we live here in the Forks of Cheat Forest. I believe three is too many especially since this so called clean energy plant will emit into the air 321 tons per year of nitrogen oxides (NOx), 210 tons per year of particulate solids, about 25 tons per year of hazardous air pollutants like benzene, toluene, cadmium, chromium, etc., and huge steam plumes continuously. The greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the plant will be over 5 million tons per year. The U.S. EPA regards anything over 100,000 tons per year as “significant” as an industrial source. (The truck traffic on Ft. Martin Road is already an extreme challenge for the local residents.) The steam plumes from these plants which we readily see in the sky are primarily water vapor, but these small water droplets absorb acid gases and fine particulate matter emitted from the combustion boilers of all the power plants. These clouds also obscure the sunlight and increase rainout over our area. The finest particles (PM 2.5) are the greatest concern. Also, some chemists have studied free radicals as active chemical species in such environments, too complex for practical resolution. I believe that having three large fossil fuel power plants together here raises air pollution and environment justice issues for the Ft. Martin community, the Bakers Ridge area, University High School, the WVU Medical Center, the Forks of Cheat Forest, and the entire region. The original Ft. Martin plant generates 1100 megawatts of electricity, the Longview coal-fired plant generates 700 MW, and the proposed “clean energy” plant is rated at 1200 MW. So the steam plumes and GHG will be very significant. The concern is for both long term exposures, as some of us are exposed for decades and for short term events such as weather inversions where naturally occurring temperature profiles trap pollutants for hours in specific areas, particularly the valleys. The WV Department of Environmental Protection has published a proposed Air Quality Permit, in the Morgantown Dominion Post on October 1st. I am considering the preparation of a petition for signatures of those who have concerns after reviewing the above information and/or draft Air Quality Permit (Internet link below). See also: https://dep.wv.gov/daq/permitting/Documents/Longview%20PSD/061-00134_APPL_R… >>>>> Duane Nichols, Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition, 304-216-5535 >>>>>> The DAQ has scheduled a public meeting for 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 19, 2021. The public meeting will be held virtually to prevent the spread of COVID-19. Instructions for providing written comments and for providing oral comments at the virtual public meeting are provided below. >>>>>> >>>>>> The purpose of the public review process is to accept public comments on air quality issues relevant to this determination. Only written comments or comments presented orally at the scheduled public meeting will be considered prior to final action on the permit. All such comments will become part of the public record. >>>>>> >>>>>> Written comments must be received by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, November 1, 2021: >>>>>> >>>>>> · Email written comments to Edward.S.Andrews(a)wv.gov with “Mountain State >>>>>> Clean Energy Comments” in the subject line, or >>>>>> >>>>>> · Mail hard copy comments to Edward Andrews, WV Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street, SE, Charleston, WV 25304. >>>>>> >>>>>> Public meeting participation: >>>>>> >>>>>> · To participate online or by telephone, registration is required by 5:00 >>>>>> p.m. on Tuesday, October 19, 2021. To register, please complete the registration >>>>>> form at: https://forms.gle/Cwev9iQPtieG8cU46 >>>>>> >>>>>> To register to speak, please indicate “yes” you want to provide oral comments on the record when you register. A confirmation e-mail will be sent with information on how to join the public meeting. If you do not have internet access and want to register to participate via telephone, please contact Sandie Adkins or Stephanie Hammonds at (304) 926-0475. Registration for the online meeting is required to fulfill the state’s obligation under federal air quality regulations to include a list of >>>>>> participants. Oral comments are limited to 5 minutes. If participating virtually, >>>>>> video demonstrations and screen sharing by commenters is not permitted. >>>>>> >>>>>> Additional information, including copies of the draft permit, application, and all >>>>>> other supporting materials relevant to the permit decision may be obtained by >>>>>> contacting the engineer listed below or downloaded at: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://dep.wv.gov/daq/permitting/Pages/NSR-Permit-Applications.aspx

2 1

Touted as clean, ‘blue’ hydrogen may be worse than gas or coal | Cornell Chronicle
by DUANE NICHOLS 07 Oct '21

07 Oct '21

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2021/08/touted-clean-blue-hydrogen-may-be-… Touted as clean, ‘blue’ hydrogen may be worse than gas or coal By Blaine Friedlander | August 12, 2021 “Blue” hydrogen – an energy source that involves a process for making hydrogen by using methane in natural gas – is being lauded by many as a clean, green energy to help reduce global warming. But Cornell and Stanford University researchers believe it may harm the climate more than burning fossil fuel. The carbon footprint to create blue hydrogen is more than 20% greater than using either natural gas or coal directly for heat, or about 60% greater than using diesel oil for heat, according to new research published Aug. 12 in Energy Science & Engineering.

1 0

Why Is the Reconciliation Bill Essential for Climate? | Evergreen Action
by DUANE NICHOLS 04 Oct '21

04 Oct '21

Why Is the Reconciliation Bill Essential for Climate? From an Article of the Evergreen Action Blog, September 01, 2021 https://evergreenaction.com/blog/why-is-the-reconciliation-bill-essential-f…

1 0

LIVE on Wednesday evening (tonight)
by DUANE NICHOLS 29 Sep '21

29 Sep '21

LIVE from New York Public Library, Treasures: Climate Change: The Case for Hope and Healing with Katharine Hayhoe and Tia Nelson Date and Time — Wednesday, September 29, 2021, 6:30 – 7:30 PM End times are approximate. Events may end early or late. Location — Online. Registrants will receive an email reminder about one hour before the program begins. § – REGISTER HERE – §

1 0

West Virginia Needs More Good Stuff and Less Bad Stuff, But Who Knows Which is Which?
by DUANE NICHOLS 24 Sep '21

24 Sep '21

http://www.frackcheckwv.net/2021/09/24/west-virginia-needs-more-good-stuff-… West Virginia Needs More Good Stuff and Less Bad Stuff, But Who Knows Which is Which? Greenhouse Gases GHG are very bad stuff in the air West Virginia needs to capture value-added activity for natural gas Editorial from the Huntington Herald Dispatch, September 5, 2021 How much has natural gas production in Appalachia increased since drillers began fracking in 2008? Consider this from the federal Energy Information Administration last week: “On its own, the Appalachian Basin would have been the third-largest natural gas producer in the world the first half of 2021, behind Russia and the rest of the United States.” That’s why we see fewer coal trains moving through the area and why almost no coal barges come out of the Big Sandy River nowadays. Gas has taken much of coal’s market in the domestic power industry. The Marcellus and Utica shale formations in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia accounted for 34% of all U.S. dry natural gas production in the first half of 2021, according to the EIA. In the first six months of this year, production in the region averaged 31.9 billion cubic feet per day, the highest average for a six-month period since production began in 2008, the agency said. Northern West Virginia has benefited from development of Marcellus shale, as landowners have collected royalties and construction workers have built pipelines and gas processing plants such as those in Doddridge and Wetzel counties. Development of the shale field has had its problems, especially in the early days. In the Legislature, questions about property owners’ rights continue. Fracking — shorthand for horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing — isn’t going away. Neither is the demand for natural gas in the chemical and electricity-generating industries. The thing is that West Virginia has lagged in taking full advantage of the gas industry. There should be growth potential in natural gas liquids, such as ethane, which are found in some gas fields. About eight years ago, a Brazilian company announced plans to build a chemical plant in Wood County to take advantage of natural gas liquids that are abundant in West Virginia, but those plans were dropped soon after. A multibillion-dollar ethane processing plant has been built at Monaca, Pennsylvania, near West Virginia’s Northern Panhandle, and people in the Moundsville area keep waiting for a company in Thailand to decide whether to build a similar plant across the Ohio River from them. The window to build such plants may have closed temporarily. Pipelines carry West Virginia gas out of state, and people in those other states receive most of the benefits of it. It’s easy to say West Virginia should do more to become competitive in industries that use natural gas. Answering the question “How?” is not so easy, but a viable answer could help give the state’s economy the boost it needs. >>>>>>………………>>>>>>………………>>>>>> COMMENTS ~~~ 1. Mary Wildfire, Roane County, WV ~~ All true in this Editorial but a few tiny things are left out. Like the horrendous toll on the environment and health from fracking, the civilization-ending threat of climate change, the glutted markets for both gas and plastic, the anti-plastics movement ramping up globally as people discover the horrifying effects of plastic pollution — it’s high time we stopped clinging to yesterday’s technologies. 2. Duane Nichols, Monongalia County, WV ~~ Drilling and fracking and pipelining offers jobs to young workers willing to move around frequently and work irregular hours. But, those jobs are fleeting and gone after a few months. The truck noises, truck pollution, truck accidents are all a detriment and perhaps a small penalty compared to the road damages and road congestion. Natural gas is a precious commodity except for the climate change impacts known as greenhouse gases, GHG. Joseph Fourier understood the earth’s greenhouse effect in 1822, Savante Arrhenius extended the understanding in 1896, and the newspapers in New Zealand were writing about it in 1912, so how long will it take the man on the street to believe it and take it seriously? Sent from my iPad

1 0

UPDATED: Allegheny County Council Votes Unanimously to Approve Mon Valley Air Pollution Episodic Regulations | Group Against Smog and Pollution
by DUANE NICHOLS 23 Sep '21

23 Sep '21

https://gasp-pgh.org/2021/09/13/allegheny-county-council-votes-yes-on-mon-v… UPDATED: Allegheny County Council Votes Unanimously to Approve Mon Valley Air Pollution Episodic Regulations, Fitzgerald’s Signature Makes Them Official Note: This story was updated at 6:16 p.m. Sept. 14 to reflect information from Allegheny County Council’s meeting and again on Sept. 23 to reflect that the new rules have been signed into law by Allegheny County Chief Executive Rich Fitzgerald. Allegheny County Council on Tuesday voted unanimously to approve a long-sought Mon Valley Air Pollution Episode rules. The vote came after Council’s Health and Human Service committee affirmatively recommended the episodic weather regulation Sept 8. The regulations were signed into law by Allegheny County Chief Executive Rich Fitzgerald on Sept. 15. The aim of the new regulations? To reduce particulate matter in the Mon Valley during periods of stagnant weather patterns, which are often a driver of subpar air quality and exceedances of state and federal standards. For those who might not be familiar: The proposed reg will require facilities in the defined Mon Valley area that produce more than 6.5 tons of pm2.5 annually and/or more than 10 tons of pm10 annually to create and submit to ACHD “Mitigation Plans” for periods when poor air quality is forecast. ACHD anticipates the new regulation affecting 18 facilities in 32 municipalities. Here’s what you need to know: During the “Watch” phase, facilities such as U.S. Steel’s Clairton Coke Works must conduct basic checks to ensure equipment is in good working order but also ensure they have adequate staff to take actions required under the “Warning” phase. Once a “Warning” is issued, facilities must undertake the actions listed in the mitigation plans they filed with ACHD. The particular actions will be specific to each facility and approved on a case-by-case basis. The proposed change will also ban all wood-burning activities when a Mon Valley Air Pollution Watch or Warning has been issued in the defined municipalities. GASP thanks council for its yes vote. “As we’ve said: No, it’s not everything that we had hoped for but it’s progress and we thank council for greenlighting the regulation,” GASP Executive Director Rachel Filippini said. Editor’s Note: GASP submitted public comments in support of the regs.

1 0

WEBINAR From MARCH FOR SCIENCE on Upcoming COP26 Meeting in Glasgow, Scotland
by DUANE NICHOLS 19 Sep '21

19 Sep '21

http://www.frackcheckwv.net/2021/09/19/webinar-from-march-for-science-on-up… WEBINAR From MARCH FOR SCIENCE on Upcoming COP26 Meeting in Glasgow, Scotland March for Science on to COP26 in November What You Need To Know About Congress of the Parties # 26 (COP26) Message to Our Friends and Concerned Citizens, This November, the United Nations will convene for its annual climate change conference in Glasgow. Known as COP26, the conference will provide world leaders the opportunity to revise their national climate goals under the Paris Agreement. Who participates in these discussions? How are these goals defined? Are they ambitious enough? Join experts and activists TOMORROW, Monday, September 20 at 7pm ET to talk through what’s happening and what you can do to fight for global climate action. RSVP For The Link Here. MARCH FOR SCIENCE March for Science is Supporting the Upcoming COP26

1 0

UUFM — ORDER OF SERVICE & ZOOM Link for September 19, 2021
by DUANE NICHOLS 19 Sep '21

19 Sep '21

Subject: UUFM — ORDER OF SERVICE & ZOOM Link for September 19, 2021 > > UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST FELLOWSHIP OF MORGANTOWN > >> 10:45 AM. 🌈 Welcome to the UUFM. We Are A Welcoming Congregation 🌅 >> >> Greeting on Sunday Morning, Welcome to Warm and Humid Weather >> >> 11:00 AM. The UUFM Uses the Principles & Sources of the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) > > ANNOUNCEMENTS and JOYS & CONCERNS for EVERYONE >> >> Today we focus on the multiple issues of climate change as described by Al Gore and Dr. James Hansen > > READING — Science Note of August 14, 1912: “Coal Consumption Affecting Climate” >> >> VIDEO #1 — “Sing For the Climate,” Marblehead Unitarian Universalist Church Choir > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WHIW1820aI >> >> >> Brief Description of the Life of James Hansen, Columbia University > > VIDEO #2 — Climate Change Interview with Dr. James Hansen @ UN University, 2010 > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Si9x7WwfRU >> >> Brief Description of the Life of Al Gore, Vice President (1992 to 2000) > > VIDEO #3 — Al Gore - The Climate Reality Project and “24 Hours of Reality” (2018) > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q50vDMpq0c > >> > VIDEO #4 — The Three Pillars of the West Virginia Climate Alliance (2021) > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkEwM5c5EMA > > VIDEO # 5 — Children’s Climate Change Song (The Time is Now) > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3yL_1L85Mk > > CLOSING WORDS — Update and Closing Covenant > > >>>>>>>>>>…………………>>>>>>>>>>…………………>>>>>>>>>> > > UUFM is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting. > > Topic: Al Gore & James Hansen Describe Climate Change > Time: Sep 19, 2021 10:45 Opening, 11:00 AM Service > > Join Zoom Meeting > https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83226703958 > Future Sunday Services > September 26: From a Tucker County Lumber Camp to the Cleveland Polka Scene with Frankie Yankovic, 11:00 a.m. Zoom Session with the UUFM Congregation here in Morgantown. Polka Music has evolved in the United States and is alive and well in the mid-western states. ACCESS — Zoom link to be provided. > > See also: UUFMWV.org > > > > >

2 1

Q & A — Longview II Permit Application for CCGT Plan in Monongalia County, WV
by DUANE NICHOLS 13 Sep '21

13 Sep '21

From: "Andrews, Edward S" <Edward.S.Andrews(a)wv.gov> > Date: September 13, 2021 at 3:04:10 PM EDT > To: Duane Nichols <Duane330(a)aol.com> > Subject: Longview II Permit Application for CCGT Plan in Monongalia County, WV > > Mr. Nichols: > > This email is a follow-up response to your comments made on January 13, 2020 regarding Longview Power II, which is now Mountain State Clean Energy LLC (MSCE), proposed construction of two natural gas fired combined cycle combustion turbines next to the existing Longview Power Plant near Maidsville. The following is the agency's response to your comments, which is in blue text. > > Comment 1. 1. Inadequate notice and confusing advertisements plague this project. The WV-DEP should hold a public hearing and advertise it widely (WV, PA, MD) as it affects many communities in multiple states. > > Response: The notices that MSCE had published in The Dominion Post on December 12, 2019, and on March 12, 2021 meet the required criteria in 45 CSR 13 & 45 CSR 14. > > Also, the DAQ had notified the appropriate Federal Land Managers over the nearest Class I Areas to the project (Doddy Sods, James River Face, Otter Creek Wilderness Areas & Shenandoah National Park on February 14, 2020 and April 14, 2021. > > Once a preliminary determination regarding this project has been made by the agency, the agency will publish a Class I advertisement in the local newspaper (The Dominion Post ) as required by our permitting rules. Also, the agency is required to provide notice to local governing (e.g. County Commission of Monongalia County) and planning bodies (e.g. Morgantown Monongalia Metropolitan Planning Organization) that has jurisdiction over the location that project will be located within. EPA Regional Administrator and appropriate officials with the PA DEP are required to be notified by the agency once the DAQ has made a preliminary determination regarding this application. The agency takes your suggestion for a public meeting under consideration. > > Comment 2. The single advertisement that we have seen was in the Morgantown Dominion Post on December 18th. It is dated in the upper right corner as “Dec. 8” and near the bottom appears this line “Dated this the 13th day of December, 2019.” Hence, this is confusion and unclear what the deadlines are for public comment. > > Response: MSCE revised their revised application on March 12, 2021 and published a class I legal ad in The Dominion Post, which should have cleared up any confusion you may have had with the December notice. > > Section 8 - Public Review Procedures of 45 CSR 13 (Rule 13) and Section 17 - Public Review Procedures of 45 CSR 14 will be followed for this permit application (Rule 14). Section 8.2. of Rule 13 requires the DAQ to continue accepting comments as long as the application is on our list. NSR Permit Applications (wv.gov) > > The ad you notice in the December 12, 2019 edition of the Dominion Post and the ad in the March 12, 2021 edition of the Dominion Post are requirements of Notice level A of Section 8.3. of Rule 13 and Section 17.1 of Rule 14. Once the DAQ makes a preliminary determination on this application, the DAQ will publish a legal ad allowing the public to make comments on our finding and recommendations (e.g., preliminary determination and draft permit) for 30 day comment period in accordance with Section 8.4. of Rule 13 and Section 17.4. of Rule 14. > > Comment 3. There are nine (9) PSD pollutants listed, making this a major polluter to add to the existing large scale power plants right here in northern Monongalia County. > > Response: Applicants seeking to obtain an air permit from this office must disclose the pollutants and amounts to be released from the facility in their notice to the public. MSCE satisfied this requirement in our rule. > > Comment 4. The estimated Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPS) at 9.96 tons per year are almost certainly underestimated, given start-ups, excursions and other upsets. Over two (2) tons of toluene per year is excessive. This will add to the high level of HAPS from the exhausts of coal trucks on the Ft. Martin Hill (300 trucks per day). > > Response: Excursions or upsets are not permitted in our permits. MSCE did account for start-ups and shutdowns in their emission estimates. In the revised March 2021 application, the potential to emit HAPs from the project is 23.3 tons per year. The project site is located next to Longview Power and under common control. Thus, the HAPs from both sites are required to be aggregated for applicability purposes to determine if the site is a major source of HAPs. The HAP potential from Longview Power is 15.87 tpy, which makes the total of both sites a potential to emit 39.19 tons per year of HAPs. Therefore, the project is classified as a Major Source of HAPs. > > Comment 5. The emissions given must be considered when added to the existing emissions in that area as we are already overwhelmed with coal fired power plant associated pollutants from the Longview I and the Ft. Martin power plants. Longview is already paying annual assessments for polluting the atmosphere. > > Response: In this application, MSCE has been required to conduct cumulative analysis for NOx and PM to ensure that the proposed emission units don't cause or contribute to a predicted exceedance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAAS) and PSD increment levels for Class II areas (e.g., Monongalia County). A list of these background sources (off site inventory) can be found in Table 7-6 of the application, which includes the emission units at Longview Power and Fort Martin Power Stations. > > Comment 6. The heat rejected and air emissions from three (3) power plants creates unacceptable conditions for the Ft. Martin community as well as Maidsville, Star City, Bakers Ridge, Stewartstown (all in WV) plus Pt. Marion, Bobtown, Garards Fort, and Greensboro (in PA). Clouds of vapors, pockets of pollution and streams of emissions are present, some seen and some unseen. Less than 40 % of the heat energy going into these plants becomes electricity, so over 60% is rejected to become atmospheric heat or water vapor. Condensation results in the raining down of pollutants which collect in yards, on homes and in the air for residents to breathe. > > Response: MSCE has proposed that the DAQ consider two different manufacturers of the combustion turbine in this application (General Electric and Mitsubishi Hitachi Power Systems). Of the proposed model units in this application, both of these manufacturers claim that their units have an efficiency of greater than 64% a net combined-cycle bases. 64% of the energy consumed by the units is transferred into electricity and transmitted to the power lines leaving the plant. https://www.ge.com/gas-power/products/gas-turbines/7ha > https://power.mhi.com/products/gasturbines/lineup/m501j > > Comment 7. The deep valleys of the Monongahela River, Dunkard Creek and Cheat River are the primary danger areas were pollutants accumulate, and during inversions become concentrated and highly dangerous to the residents. Modeling will demonstrate this for steady state conditions, but these conditions will be extreme during power plant start-ups, excursions and other upsets. > > Response: MSCE has modeled emissions from cold, hot and warm startup event and shutdown events as continuously events over a five year ( 2014 through 2018) period as a demonstration to the DAQ that start-up and shutdown events from their proposed units do not pose a issue with the air quality in the local area (Monongalia County) with regards to maintaining the attainment status for the NAAQS and PSD increment levels. > > Comment 8. Continuous or intermittent emission monitoring on a frequent basis is highly needed if this plant is to go forward, not just for this plant but monitoring with alarms to detected emissions from any and all three of these plants, including the emission from the road(s) and coal handling operations in the area. > > Response: MSCE is required in this application to demonstrate an analysis of the ambient air quality in the local area of the pollutants that the proposed source could affect. If not enough data is available then the source is required to collect additional data to adequately complete this analysis of the ambient air in the local area. Our permitting rule does not require additional monitoring once a satisfactory analysis of the ambient air quality has been made by the applicant. > > Actual NOx emissions from the combustion turbines are required to be monitored on a continuous basis by the source. > > The WV DEP and PA DEP operate, record and report ambient concentrations of pollutants such as ozone, SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 from four monitoring sites within 30 km of the proposed site. EPA uses this data to forecast and report Air Quality (Air Quality Index - AQI). Air Quality Index (AQI) | AirNow.gov Changes to any of our monitoring site locations would require EPA approval. The selection of a monitoring site is not an activity that falls under the roll permitting section of the DAQ. > > Comment 9. The carbon dioxide and methane emission will be excessive and the State of West Virginia is oblivious to these. Have you no sense of right and wrong, considering that you are being paid as public servants. The facts that the Governor and the Director of DEP as political actors are only concerned about serving industry, does not relieve the staff and technical employees from performing rational and complete duties to protect the people of WV, PA, MD and the US from hazards, unhealthy conditions, and global threats. > > Response: Under 45 CSR 14, MSCE application represents a significant increase and net increase of one or more NSR pollutants ( CO, NOx, VOC, Ozone, PM, PM10, PM2.5) and a significant increase in one of the six greenhouse gases (CO2). Thus, MSCE is required to prepare and submit a Best Available Control Technology analysis for CO2 emissions from the facility. > > Thank-you for your remarks that pertain to Permit Application R14-0038. Should you have any additional questions about this application, please contact me. > > Sincerely, Edward Andrews, P.E., Engineer > WVDEP/Division of Air Quality > 304-926-0499 Ext 41244 > 601 57th Street, SE > Charleston, WV 20304 > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:02 AM Andrews, Edward S <Edward.S.Andrews(a)wv.gov> wrote: >> Mr. Nichols, >> >> Thank-you for your comments. The DAQ will response to your comments once the application is deem complete. Currently, the status of this application is incomplete. >> >> Should you have any questions, please contact me. >> >> Edward S. Andrews, P.E. >> >> Engineer >> >> West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection >> >> Division of Air Quality >> >> 601 57th Street, SE >> >> Charleston, WV 25304 >> >> 304.926.0499 ext. 1214 >> >> From: Duane Nichols <duane330(a)aol.com> >> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2020 3:48 PM >> To: Andrews, Edward S <Edward.S.Andrews(a)wv.gov> >> Subject: [External] Longview II Permit Application for CCGT Plan in Monongalia County, WV >> >> >> >> CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify sender. >> >> ATTN: Edward S. Andrews >> >> WV Dept. of Env. Protection >> >> Division of Air Quality >> >> 601 57th Street, SE >> >> Charleston, WV 25304 >> >> >> >> RE: Longview II Permit Application for CCGT 1200 MW, Maidsville, WV >> >> >> >> 1. Inadequate notice and confusing advertisements plague this project. The WV-DEP should hold a public hearing and advertise it widely (WV, PA, MD) as it affects many communities in multiple states. >> >> >> >> 2. The single advertisement that we have seen was in the Morgantown Dominion Post on December 18th. It is dated in the upper right corner as “Dec. 8” and near the bottom appears this line “Dated this the 13th day of December, 2019.” Hence, this is confusion and unclear what the deadlines are for public comment. >> >> >> >> 3. There are nine (9) PSD pollutants listed, making this a major polluter to add to the existing large scale power plants right here in northern Monongalia County. >> >> >> >> 4. The estimated Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPS) at 9.96 tons per year are almost certainly under estimated, given start-ups, excursions and other upsets. Over two (2) tons of toluene per year is excessive. This will add to the high level of HAPS from the exhausts of coal trucks on the Ft. Martin Hill (300 trucks per day). >> >> >> >> 5. The emissions given must be considered when added to the existing emissions in that area as we are already overwhelmed with coal fired power plant associated pollutants from the Longview I and the Ft. Martin power plants. Longview is already paying annual assessments for polluting the atmosphere. >> >> >> >> 6. The heat rejected and air emissions from three (3) power plants creates unacceptable conditions for the Ft. Martin community as well as Maidsville, Star City, Bakers Ridge, Stewartstown (all in WV) plus Pt. Marion, Bobtown, Garards Fort, and Greensboro (in PA). Clouds of vapors, pockets of pollution and streams of emissions are present, some seen and some unseen. Less than 40 % of the heat energy going into these plants becomes electricity, so over 60% is rejected to become atmospheric heat or water vapor. Condensation results in the raining down of pollutants which collect in yards, on homes and in the air for residents to breathe. >> >> >> >> 7. The deep valleys of the Monongahela River, Dunkard Creek and Cheat River are the primary danger areas were pollutants accumulate, and during inversions become concentrated and highly dangerous to the residents. Modeling will demonstrate this for steady state conditions, but these conditions will be extreme during power plant start-ups, excursions and other upsets. >> >> >> >> 8. Continuous or intermittent emission monitoring on a frequent basis is highly needed if this plant is to go forward, not just for this plant but monitoring with alarms to detected emissions from any and all three of these plants, including the emission from the road(s) and coal handling operations in the area. >> >> >> >> 9. The carbon dioxide and methane emission will be excessive and the State of West Virginia is oblivious to these. Have you no sense of right and wrong, considering that you are being paid as public servants. The facts that the Governor and the Director of DEP as political actors are only concerned about serving industry, does not relieve the staff and technical employees from performing rational and complete duties to protect the people of WV, PA, MD and the US from hazards, unhealthy conditions, and global threats. >> >> Duane Nichols, Coordinator >> >> Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition >> >> 330 Dream Catcher Circle >> >> Morgantown, WV 26508 >> >> 304-216-5535, Nichols330(a)gmail.com, duane330(a)aol.com >> >> >> > > >

1 0

"Excessive Smoke" Observed At A Major Shell Plant In Louisiana Following Hurricane Ida
by DUANE NICHOLS 03 Sep '21

03 Sep '21

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zahrahirji/shell-refinery-air-pollutio… One Of The Largest US Petrochemical Plants Is Spewing Excessive Smoke After Hurricane Ida Knocked Out Its Power Industrial sites often spew dirty gases into the air during emergency shutdowns and restarts, threatening nearby communities with smog and other pollution that can make it hard for people to breathe. Zahra HirjiSeptember 2, 2021, at 4:31 p.m. Zahra Hirji BuzzFeed News Reporter Last updated on September 2, 2021, at 4:31 p.m. ET Patrick T. Fallon / AFP via Getty Images Vehicles drive past the petrol chemical plant near Highway 61 in Norco, Louisiana, on Aug. 30, 2021, after Hurricane Ida made landfall. A massive Royal Dutch Shell manufacturing complex in Louisiana’s St. Charles Parish is releasing nonstop plumes of smoke into the air after Hurricane Ida knocked out its power. Local, state, and federal officials are monitoring the incident. The plumes of smoke at Shell’s Norco plant are just one of a growing number of sources of industrial pollution slowly coming into view across the Gulf Coast following the Category 4 hurricane’s devastating blow to the region. Ida washed out roads, flattened homes and businesses, felled trees, and knocked out power for roughly 1 million people, including the entire city of New Orleans. At least seven people died in the region due to the storm. At this point, Shell is not saying much about the problems plaguing the Norco facility, one of the largest petrochemical plants in the country. In response to questions from BuzzFeed News, an oil company spokesperson declined to say what gases are being released or what amount of emissions have already gone into the air. The company also did not share a timeline for when the plumes of black smoke would stop. “While the site remains safe and secure, we are experiencing elevated flaring,” Curtis Smith, a Shell spokesperson, told BuzzFeed News in an email. “We expect this to continue until power is restored.” When it’s up and running, Shell’s combined refinery and chemical plant in Norco processes about 250,000 barrels of crude oil and 170,000 barrels of gasoline a day, in addition to generating billions of pounds of ethylene, propylene, and other chemicals. Like other refineries and industrial sites along the Gulf Coast, Shell shut down the plant ahead of Ida’s landfall. Patrick T. Fallon / AFP via Getty Images Smoke from flaring operations a refinery in Norco, Louisiana, drifts on the horizon with clouds as homes stand in a neighborhood that experienced flooding in LaPlace, Louisiana, on Aug. 30, 2021, in the aftermath of Hurricane Ida. Industrial sites often spew dirty gases into the air during emergency shutdowns and restarts, threatening nearby communities with smog and other pollution that can make it hard for people to breathe. Back in 2017, Hurricane Harvey led to Texas chemical and petroleum plants releasing a year’s worth of pollution in a matter of days and weeks, according to a BuzzFeed News analysis. According to Shell’s Norco permit, some flaring in emergency situations is allowed, but it's unclear whether the current emission levels exceed what’s allowable under the permit. “Shell Norco is flaring,” Gregory Langley, press secretary of Louisiana’s Department of Environmental Quality, told BuzzFeed News in an email. “When there is an emergency condition, they are allowed to do this under their permit.” That being said, Langley added, “The flares at Shell Norco are large and produce some smoke.” Starting Thursday, Louisiana’s environmental officials will monitor Norco’s air quality using what’s called a Mobile Air Monitoring Laboratory. The Environmental Protection Agency is also sending a special plane to help monitor local air emissions in Norco, agency press secretary Nick Conger told BuzzFeed News in an email. EPA has received reports of the facility flaring four types of noxious gas: butadiene, benzene, hydrogen sulfide, and hydrogen, Conger added. “Excessive smoke seen in the community is a result of a lack of electricity” at the plant, EPA officials wrote in an incident summary posted online Wednesday afternoon. They noted that Shell is conducting its own air monitoring along the Norco fence line and in the surrounding community, reporting that information to emergency officials in St. Charles Parish, and company engineers “are looking at all options to try to reduce emissions to flare.” St. Charles Parish officials did not immediately respond to questions from BuzzFeed News. Shell also declined to provide information about its air monitoring results to BuzzFeed News. Norco residents say the current flaring levels aren’t normal. “This is bad,” Norco resident Peter Anderson told DeSmog. “I have never seen this many flares.” Beyond Norco, Shell is still assessing whether Ida damaged a chemical plant in Geismar, Louisiana, as well as any of the company’s floating platforms and other infrastructure used for extracting fossil fuels offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. Ongoing power outages, widespread storm debris, and impassable roads are complicating the ability of companies and government officials to quickly identify environmental impacts, such as emission releases and spills, triggered by the storm. At least 138 major industrial sites are located in parishes hit hard by Ida, according to the New York Times. As of Wednesday afternoon, the EPA had received 28 reports of possible spills and pollution events in places hit by Ida, including 17 possible air pollution incidents. None of them have so far required the EPA to do on-the-ground assessments. Meanwhile, the Associated Press reported on Wednesday that there’s a mileslong black slick of oil near an oil rig in Gulf waters. The spill was identified using aerial imagery. UPDATE This story has been updated to include a response from the Environmental Protection Agency, noting that officials have received reports detailing how four types of gases are being flared at the Norco plant and how the agency is deploying a plane to monitor local air emissions. Sent from my iPad

1 0

BIOdotEDU
by DUANE NICHOLS 12 Aug '21

12 Aug '21

Exploring Life at BIOdotEDU ..... Carbon Creation ... https://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/ahp/LAD/C4c/C4c_carbon_creation.html All the carbon atoms in the human body were created in the stars. Elementary particles, such as protons, were formed during the "big bang"; that amazing moment about 14 billion years ago in which the universe got it's start. But, as the newly created universe rapidly expanded it also cooled, and cooled too quickly to allow the formation of atoms as large and complex as carbon. Their creation had to come later in a dying star. Stars, like our own sun, generate all their vast quantities of radiation energy from simple hydrogen (a proton). At the unimaginable temperature of 100,000,000o K, protons are crushed together with such force that the fuse to form the element Helium. 41H --> 4He + 2 positrons (anti-electrons) + 2 gamma rays + 2 electron neutrinos (one of three "flavor" of these elusive elementary particles). + 26.7 MeV (Million electron volts of energy) (by comparison, a molecule on this planet has about 0.03 eV!) As most stars age their supply of hydrogen is used up and the outside of the star begins to cool, changes color, expands and the star becomes a red giant. (Note: in about 5 billion years our sun will become a red giant, expand and consume the plants Mercury and Venus!). The core of a red giant is compressed and compressed, until, at last, the forces are strong enough to begin fusing helium nuclei (called "alpha particles") together to form larger atoms such as carbon. This is called the triple alpha process and can only occur in the center of a very dense star where the temperature is at least 100,000,000o K. 4He + 4He --> 8Be 4He + 8Be --> 12C + 1 gamma ray + 7.275 MeV (Million electron volts of energy) (As a continuation of this fusion process, one more alpha particle can now be crushed together with one of the carbon atoms to form an atom of oxygen, another important atom in living organisms). All the carbon and oxygen in the human body, thus began in a dying star and are essentially the leftover ash from burning helium! BIOdotEDU © 2004, Professor John Blamire. (The nucleus of the helium atom, containing two protons and two neutrons, is also called an alpha particle, hence the name “alpha process” above.)

1 0

WV infrastructure upgrade advocates stress high stakes as senators reach bipartisan deal | Energy and Environment | wvgazettemail.com
by DUANE NICHOLS 29 Jul '21

29 Jul '21

WV infrastructure upgrade advocates stress high stakes as senators reach bipartisan deal Article by Mike Tony, Charleston Gazette Mail, July 28, 2021 https://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/energy_and_environment/wv-infrastructure… A bipartisan group of U.S. senators on Wednesday finally agreed on components of an infrastructure package that would green-light $550 billion in new spending. The agreement came as civil engineering experts and clean energy advocates earlier in the day urged an influx of federal money into West Virginia to help the state navigate its economic and topographic terrain. “We’re hopeful … that a bipartisan bill will be adopted and enacted,” American Society of Civil Engineers Executive Director Tom Smith said. “We think it’s important for West Virginia.” The bipartisan infrastructure deal would invest $110 billion in new funds for roads and bridges, including $40 billion for bridge repair and replacement, $55 billion in funding to replace lead service lines and address dangerous per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), $65 billion in broadband infrastructure deployment, and $73 billion in power infrastructure upgrades. The hefty price to upgrade the nation’s infrastructure reminded Dave Meadows of Culloden, regional governor for the American Society of Civil Engineers, of the price of gas the summer he spent working in a gas station after graduating from Hurricane High School in 1970. It was 29 cents. It’s skyrocketed since then — and so too will the costs of upgrading West Virginia’s infrastructure that state civil engineers gave an overall ‘D’ grade in the American Society of Civil Engineers 2020 report card for the state’s infrastructure, Meadows said. “It’s going to get more expensive to repair that bridge,” Meadows said. “It’s going to get more expensive to repair the roads as we continue to go farther if we don’t start putting more money towards our infrastructure. This is across the board. It’s not just roads, it’s water, wastewater, dams. It’s our energy. It’s broadband, certainly.” The proposed infrastructure bill would invest $7.5 billion to build a national network of electric vehicle chargers and $2.5 billion each in zero-emission buses, low-emission buses and ferries — spending the White House predicted upon announcing the bill’s framework Wednesday would drive demand for American-made batteries and vehicles, create jobs and reduce polluted air that children and bus drives breathe to and from school daily. Delegate Evan Hansen, D-Monongalia, Morgantown Mayor Jenny Selin and clean energy advocates with Moms Clean Air Force gathered in Morgantown Wednesday to call on Congress to transition to electric vehicles to protect public health and give an economic boost to West Virginia. “I would like to ask Sen. [Joe] Manchin [D-W.Va.] and all of our leaders, just like the leaders here in Morgantown, to fight for a clean energy future where kids get off electric buses feeling ready to run,” Moms Clean Air Force field organizer Liz Brandt said, contrasting electric buses with diesel buses that emit particulate matter damaging to children’s and bus drivers’ health. Manchin and 20 other bipartisan senators hailed the bipartisan infrastructure agreement in a statement Wednesday evening. “Reaching this agreement was no easy task — but our constituents expect us to put in the hard work and show that two parties can still work together to address the needs of the American people,” the senators said. The fate of the legislation, which does not include a clean electricity standard or other climate goals that Democrats have prioritized for inclusion in a $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation package, was still unsettled and the full bill yet to be released as of press time Wednesday. “We address it as a pace that’s kind of like, I’ll say, putting a Band-Aid on it,” Meadows said of infrastructure. “But you’re not even putting enough Band-Aids on it to heal it up. You’re putting a Band-Aid on it just to kick the can down the road. That’s what we’ve been doing, we’ve been kicking the can down the road and using these small Band-Aids. The longer we do it, the more it’s gonna cost.” XXX

1 0

We answer commonly asked questions about Colorado's air pollution
by DUANE NICHOLS 29 Jul '21

29 Jul '21

https://coloradosun.com/2021/07/29/colorado-air-pollution-faq/?mc_cid=17c04… Here’s what you need to know about Colorado air pollution — and what you can do about it A heat wave spikes ozone levels to “Unhealthy” on the Front Range, and Sun readers have questions. We sought some of the top air experts in the state for your answers. The state has issued an ozone health warning for Coloradans every day since July 5. We’ve already accumulated 37 state Ozone Action Alert Days for 2021 by the last week of July, with plenty of blazing August and September weeks left to go, after tallying 43 all of last year. State officials are all but certain we’ll blaze past the 2020 total. We asked for your questions about how bad the air pollution is in Colorado this summer, and what, if anything, you can do about it. We’ve got some of the answers, after checking in with experts from National Jewish Health, Boulder County Health, the chief air quality meteorologist for the state Air Pollution Control Division, the National Center for Atmospheric Research, the EPA, and more. There were so many reader questions from Facebook, Instagram, Reddit and direct emails, that we’ll be taking on more in coming weeks. None of these expert sources are sugarcoating what’s going on this summer in Colorado. Pollution and high heat are creating problems almost daily for those with respiratory issues, and even for healthy people who exercise at the worst part of the day. So let’s get to your biggest concerns. Q: How can I tell how bad the air is in Colorado on a given day? What is the Air Quality Index, and how can I better understand what it means? A: The Air Quality Index is meant to be public-friendly, a system set up by the federal EPA and endorsed by state and local governments to give you one easily understandable number to react to. The Index combines measures of a handful of pollutants, some of which are indeed a big problem in Colorado, some of which are big problems in other cities. One of the best explainers of the numbers is here. The local AQI draws data from a number of monitoring stations throughout the metro area and foothills, giving both real-time indicators and longer-term forecasts. You might want to bookmark colorado.gov/airquality, which in turn has many links to all kinds of useful real-time material and background information. Since ozone is the worry right now, look for the link to Ozone Action Day Alerts, and you can sign up there for emails when a new alert is issued. The EPA’s AirNow website is also a great bookmark. AirNow is also a free app available in all the smartphone app stores, and you can customize it with your ZIP code for the best information. The EPA’s AirNow dashboard late in the day on July 28, 2021, showed dangerously high levels of ozone for the Denver area, with more bad days ahead. (Screen capture, Environmental Protection Agency AirNow) Remember that many of the readings making up the AQI are for an 8-hour average. If you want more real-time information to help you make decisions — such as, “Should I go on a jog or fast walk today at 4 p.m.?” — EPA’s AirNow has a NowCast feature that looks at the last two to three hours, said Colorado Chief Air Quality Meteorologist Scott Landes. A basic rule is that at an AQI reading above 100, your local government puts air pollution warnings into the “unhealthy for sensitive groups” category, and it gets worse from there. Above 150 is just plain “unhealthy,” with two even worse categories beyond that. The components of the AQI include ozone, particulate pollution, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. Ozone is actually created when some of those other pollutants on the list combine and then get scorched under Colorado’s summer sun. Each of these pollutants can be attributed to various industries or causes (more about that below). The AQI is useful, but it’s not the whole story. We could be having a bad ozone day because it’s 98 degrees and sunny. The current AQI reports you see are usually drawing on the reading of the highest pollutant at that moment — again, recently in Colorado, that’s ozone. So if you see the AQI at 90 in Jefferson County on a hot afternoon, that likely means monitors are measuring 90 parts per billion of ozone, and that’s not good. While Colorado’s Front Range counties have slowly ratcheted down average measured ozone levels in recent years, our violations of EPA rules are actually getting worse. That’s because the EPA has moved even faster to lower the acceptable ceiling of ozone, in accordance with new science about lung and tissue damage. The EPA has since 2015 said that metro areas should not spike above 70 parts per billion (ppb) of ozone, while Colorado this summer has been hitting 80s and 90s on a regular basis. Credible scientists are pushing the EPA to lower the ceiling even further to 65 ppb, which would of course mean even more violation days in Colorado. That means the EPA keeps putting us into more serious categories of failure. Those failures eventually have consequences, such as requirements to change the vehicle fuel mix or clamp down harder on emissions from oil and gas producers. But it takes years for the bureaucracy to agree on new limitations and get them implemented, often against the opposition of industry and consumers. Q: What are the main health risks on high pollution days, and should I keep my kids indoors above a certain level on the AQI? A: The EPA’s ozone-explainer website puts it like this: “Children are at greatest risk from exposure to ozone because their lungs are still developing and they are more likely to be active outdoors when ozone levels are high, which increases their exposure. Children are also more likely than adults to have asthma.” Ozone and particulates both can irritate and inflame the airways. Inflammation causes swelling and other bodily reactions, and obviously, coughing and scratchy throats. They can irritate everyone, but it’s a common sense rule that they are even harder on people with predisposition to asthma or other chronic respiratory conditions. What to do with your kids is a dilemma many urban parents, and many urban school principals, must face nearly every day. A National Jewish study with Denver Public Schools found they could closely correlate bad air days with registered uses of asthma inhalers at school health clinics, where students store their medications. Principals have complained they don’t have strong guidance from their districts, and often make their own calls about go or no-go on outdoor recess and exercise on the worst days. The EPA and Colorado Air Quality Index starts issuing warnings when Front Range air gets above 100 on the AQI. Above 150, the AQI is considered unhealthy for just about everyone. (Screen capture, Environmental Protection Agency Air Now) The AQI numbers can be helpful here, argues the state’s Scott Landes. When the AQI is about 100, people who are already sensitive to air pollution risks need to start being more cautious. That includes young children, children with asthma problems, the elderly, and any adults with ongoing respiratory issues. Once the AQI nears 150 or above, the warning starts to cover everyone. People should save their most strenuous exercise or exertion for before noon or after 8 p.m., when ozone levels tend to cool off. That, of course, does not protect people who must work outdoors all day, which leads to some of the tougher economic and environmental questions facing the northern Front Range “non-attainment” areas that are out of compliance with federal pollution limits. Q: Do home air filters work, and if so, what should I look for in one? Yes, they do work on particulate pollution, but they can also be expensive for many families. A filter with enough fan power to cover a medium-to-large living room can be $200 to $300. Look for online reviews on noise levels, it makes a difference. Most mainstream air filters or purifiers do well on particulate pollution, the tiny woodsmoke, dust and chemical particles called PM2.5 or PM10 depending on their size. “I recommend going with the tried-and-true high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration units that can remove at least 99.97% of airborne particles, including dust, pollen, mold, bacteria and viruses,” said Bill Hayes, air quality program coordinator for Boulder County Health. “Units that also utilize activated carbon can have the added benefit of removing some odors and chemicals.” Make sure the filter you choose has the put-through power to clean the square footage of the room where you’ll be putting it, he noted. “I strongly advise against the use of ionizing air purifiers. Few of these devices have been proven effective at reducing airborne pollutants and may produce harmful ozone,” Hayes added. The recommended commercial air filters don’t work on ozone, but that’s OK. “The one good thing about ozone is that you can escape it by being inside,” Landes said. The chemical disintegrates on contact with most surfaces. There are very good answers about how to choose a home air filter starting on page 5 of this online EPA pamphlet. Q: What are the biggest causes of ozone and particulate pollution in Colorado? The biggest culprits right now are oil and gas production and refining, driving petroleum-fueled vehicles, emission from coal-fired power plants, industrial plants and wildfire smoke. But hear us out, it’s more complicated than that. Some of Colorado’s air pollution is direct. Oil and gas production, for example, causes a large amount of both the nitrogen dioxide pollution here, and the largest share of volatile organic compounds, or VOCs. Ground-level ozone is created when nitrogen dioxide mixes with the VOCs, and then that chemical casserole is baked by hot sunshine. That’s why ozone peaks in the afternoon. Lately scientists have learned afternoon ozone doesn’t dissipate as much as they’d assumed, because Colorado’s geography and weather patterns swirl the ozone deep into the foothills and then back onto metro areas at night. A comparison of the relative sizes of the pollution most Coloradans worry about. Note that anything PM2.5 or smaller can’t be seen with by the human eye. (Environmental Protection Agency guide to home air filters) Colorado industries have pointed to state research showing that up to 5 ppb of ozone growth measured in Colorado is the result of pollution drifting east from Chinese coal-fired power plants and California smog. “The Denver metro and northern Front Range area typically sees background levels of ozone between 40 and 50 parts per billion,” Hayes said. “The vast majority of this background ozone is from neighboring states (including California) . . . Only a very small amount is carried from offshore (China, etc.) The national standard for ozone is currently 70 ppb, so a significant amount of our ozone pollution is within our control.” As Hayes indicates, Colorado is now regularly violating the ozone limits by far more than that amount, and Gov. Jared Polis has directed his administration to not claim outside pollution as a reason to seek exemptions from EPA sanctions. So in the areas that state and local regulators could theoretically control, cleaning up oil and gas production and cutting miles driven by petroleum-powered vehicles hold the most hope for meaningful pollution cuts. The state has imposed tighter regulations requiring leak-proof oil and gas equipment; conservationists want more. Cutting miles driven is politically volatile — large employers objected strenuously to proposed rules this summer requiring cuts to the miles driven by commuting workers, and the state quickly backed off to make the program voluntary. Moving a majority of the Front Range driving fleet to electric power could make large pollution cuts, provided the electricity is generated cleanly by wind and solar plants. State leaders are pushing for rapid fleet electrification, but actual sales to the public of electric vehicles are about 6% of the total market. Gas-fueled vehicles are one of the primary sources of pollution on the Front Range and in the foothills that help cause ozone and greenhouse gases. (Olivia Sun, The Colorado Sun) Other industries also contribute greatly to the portion of ozone created by VOCs. Readers asked us, if it smells bad, is it pollution? The answer is usually “yes.” Suncor’s refinery is a prime example — emissions from cracking open oil into gasoline and other compounds creates a huge amount of VOCs and greenhouse gases. Other “smell” industries contribute, from paint makers to parts manufacturers to electroplating. Consumer products like hair spray, shampoos and more also add greatly to the VOC problem. Q: Is there evidence of long-term damage from exercising at high ozone or particulate periods? Put another way, “If I run 10k on a polluted evening, am I in better health or worse health than when I started?” The most immediate danger is for those already experiencing asthma or other respiratory and heart conditions, experts say. But with ozone levels spiking above 90 parts per billion, and even above 100 on some recent days, everyone should be aware of the conditions and adjust their habits. Remember that ozone and particulate pollution are irritants that cause lung tissue and respiratory areas to become inflamed. “Going for a single run during a period of high ozone pollution may not cause long-term health impacts for a healthy individual, but repeated exertion on high ozone days can cause permanent lung damage resulting in decreased respiratory capacity,” Hayes said. “Prolonged ozone exposure can also impact other organs and functions.” National Jewish Health professor and researcher Jim Crooks said evidence shows healthy adults benefiting overall even when exercising in relatively polluted areas. He notes that the American Heart Association released a statement in 2020 saying “the beneficial effects of increased activity easily offset the combined potential mortality risk of increased air pollution exposure and traffic accidents, in all but the most polluted cities in the world.” None of the most polluted cities in the world are in the U.S., he added. Crooks goes on to add some caveats. Only a few studies have tried to pinpoint “exactly where that trade-off occurs,” he said. The answer, of course, depends — on the overall health of the athlete, how bad the pollution is during those hours of exercise, the intensity of the workout, etc. And those studies focus on healthy adults, he adds, rather than on children or adults with chronic disease. In other words, if you have any conditions at all or are worried about your kids, talk to a doctor. Q: Can facemasks help outdoors when air pollution is high? Does it help with ozone? Yes, masks can help, if it’s a quality mask, and if you’re talking about particulate pollution. No, if you’re talking about ozone or an ill-fitting cloth mask left over from your pandemic avoidance. “While they have been shown to be highly effective at significantly reducing the spread of the coronavirus, the face coverings that we’ve all become accustomed to wearing during the pandemic do little to protect us from most air pollutants,” said Boulder’s Bill Hayes. “They do not provide a barrier to gases such as ozone (and oxygen for that matter) and are not up to the task of filtering fine PM 2.5 particles.” Colorado’s Landes put it bluntly: N95 masks will filter out wildfire smoke particulates. Our cloth masks for COVID-19 do not.The mask fit also makes a difference, Crooks said. “Wearing a tight-fitting mask that filters out certain air pollutants may be beneficial as well, though the evidence is modest. It should be noted that cloth or surgical masks typically used to prevent COVID-19 transmission may not be tight enough around the face or filter our air pollution effectively enough.” Hayes likes to add one last suggestion: taping a HEPA furnace filter to a window-insert fan on a hot day is just as dumb as it sounds — and yet people have done it, which is why he brings it up. It won’t really work, and the fan will overheat trying to push the air through the tight filter. Then you’ll have an electrical fire to deal with on top of all the wildfires. Stay safe, Colorado. The Colorado Sun has no paywall, meaning readers do not have to pay to access stories. We believe vital information needs to be seen by the people impacted, whether it’s a public health crisis, investigative reporting or keeping lawmakers accountable. This reporting depends on support from readers like you. For just $5/month, you can invest in an informed community. Sent from my iPad

1 0

Fossil Fuels & Health – C-CHANGE | Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
by DUANE NICHOLS 19 Jun '21

19 Jun '21

Fossil fuel production and combustion is a major driver of climate change, and can also directly affect our health, Harvard School of Public Health, Updated 2021 Why it Matters: From the electricity that lights your home to the car you drive to work, modern life has relied on fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas. But burning them creates climate change and releases pollutants that lead to early death, heart attacks, respiratory disorders, stroke, exacerbation of asthma, and absenteeism at school and work. It may even be related to autism spectrum disorder and Alzheimer’s disease. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/c-change/subtopics/fossil-fuels-health/

1 0

The Future of Our Energy & Environment in Hands of Elected Officials
by DUANE NICHOLS 17 Jun '21

17 Jun '21

The Future of Our Energy & Environment in Hands of Elected Officials by ADMIN on JUNE 17, 2021 Pennsylvania is Facing Extremely Important ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT Decisions in Near Term To Editor: Williamsport Sun-Gazette, June 15, 2021 The recent column by PA State Sens. Gene Yaw and Scott Martin on “Energy production important to Pennsylvania’s environmental future” shows that they do not appreciate the urgency of the global climate crisis. Pretending that the problem does not exist will not make it go away. Even the International Energy Agency, a conservative research institute that usually tilts strongly to the fossil fuel industry, said in a recently released report that “It is past time for governments to act, and act decisively to accelerate the clean energy transformation.” The IEA recommends no new fossil fuel investments for facilities that do not already have firm commitments, and a rapid transition to electric vehicles. Yaw and Martin claim that wind and solar energy is “more expensive than electricity generated from coal, nuclear, hydroelectric and natural gas.” But the Coal Crossover report … (https://energyinnovation.org/publication/the-coal-cost-crossover-2021/ ) shows that is not true, that renewables are already cheaper than operating most existing coal-fired power plants. Yaw and Martin also claim that “… other states … pick winners and losers by subsidizing energy resources”, but they ignore the indirect subsidy given to fossil fuels by failing to incorporate the cost of carbon. Accounting for the impacts of climate change, not to mention the public health impacts, dramatically exacerbates the already high cost of coal and gas. Renewable energy will undoubtedly produce environmental benefits and has great promise in achieving reducing costs. Renewables and energy efficiency create more jobs per dollar invested than do fossil fuels. We certainly owe it to fossil fuel workers and communities to invest in the needed transition, but those investments will not occur if we continue a futile attempt to sustain the status quo. By investing in a clean energy future, both current ratepayers and our children will be the beneficiaries. >> Duane Nichols, Coordinator, Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition >> Jim Kotcon, Conservation Chair, WV Sierra Club, Morgantown, WV ### http://www.frackcheckwv.net/2021/06/17/the-future-of-our-energy-environment…

1 0

It's Raining 'Forever Chemicals' Around the Great Lakes, Scientists Find - EcoWatch
by DUANE NICHOLS 13 Jun '21

13 Jun '21

To: Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition, PFAS pollution proliferates, 6/11/21 https://www.ecowatch.com/forever-chemicals-rain-great-lakes-2653326949.html It's Raining 'Forever Chemicals' Around the Great Lakes, Scientists Find Audrey NakagawaJun. 11, 2021 11:15AM ESTHEALTH + WELLNESS Eric Hansen / 500px / Getty Images In the Great Lakes region, it is quite literally raining toxic chemicals. "You can actually say it's raining PFAS at this point," said Marta Venier, an environmental chemist at Indiana University, according to Grist. A team of American and Canadian scientists found high levels of PFAS chemicals, also known as "forever chemicals," after studying the rainfall in six different sites across the Great Lakes region. The scientists collected samples of ambient air and rainwater from Cleveland, OH, Chicago, IL, Sturgeon Point, NY, Ontario, Canada, Sleeping Bear Dunes, MI, and Eagle Harbor in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, according to Cleveland.com. PFAS are per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. They were first used in the U.S. in the 1940s. The chemicals don't break down and can accumulate as time goes on — making exposure to them harmful to humans, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). At each testing site, there were more PFAS in the samples than other pollutants like polychlorinated biphenyls and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. This finding shows that PFAS are a major contaminant in the region and they're in snow and rain. The samples of rainwater contained PFAS levels of 100 to 400 parts per trillion (ppt). To put these statistics into perspective, the EPA's safe limit for drinking water is 70 ppt. In Cleveland, Ohio, two weeks of rainwater collected contained around 1,000 ppt of PFAS compounds, according to MLive. According to a peer review study conducted by scientists from the Environmental Working Group, PFAS contamination may be in drinking water that supplies 200 million Americans. The study also found that there are 2,337 locations in 49 states that have PFAS contamination. This new research in the Great Lakes area was conducted by the Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network, a program funded by the EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office, and is managed by Indiana University, according to Cleveland.com. PFAS are synonymous with certain man-made substances like fast food containers, microwave popcorn bags, non-stick cookware, cleaning products, and other grease-resistant products. Firefighting foam is another large source of PFAS. "All of these products that we use in our everyday life are treated with PFAS," Venier said in a report to Grist. "So every time we use them, there is either dust or air where these chemicals are released." The researchers will continue to analyze PFAS in rainwater in hopes of tracing them back to specific polluters, and they plan to also study the seasonal trends of PFAS concentration.

1 0

Carbon dioxide peaks near 420 parts per million at Mauna Loa observatory - Welcome to NOAA Research
by DUANE NICHOLS 08 Jun '21

08 Jun '21

https://research.noaa.gov/article/ArtMID/587/ArticleID/2764/Coronavirus-res… Carbon dioxide peaks near 420 parts per million at Mauna Loa observatory Theo Stein Monday, June 7, 2021 Atmospheric carbon dioxide measured at NOAA’s Mauna Loa Atmospheric Baseline Observatory peaked for 2021 in May at a monthly average of 419 parts per million (ppm), the highest level since accurate measurements began 63 years ago, scientists from NOAA and Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California San Diego announced today. Scripps’ scientist Charles David Keeling initiated on-site measurements of carbon dioxide, or CO2, at NOAA’s weather station on Mauna Loa in 1958. NOAA began measurements in 1974, and the two research institutions have made complementary, independent observations ever since. This graph depicts the upward trajectory of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as measured at the Mauna Loa Atmospheric Baseline Observatory by NOAA and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography. The annual fluctuation is known as the Keeling Curve. Credit: NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory In May, NOAA's measurements at the mountaintop observatory averaged 419.13 ppm. Scientists at Scripps calculated a monthly average of 418.92 ppm. The average in May 2020 was 417 ppm. Pieter Tans, a senior scientist with NOAA’s Global Monitoring Laboratory, noted that CO2 is by far the most abundant human-caused greenhouse gas, and persists in the atmosphere and oceans for thousands of years after it is emitted. “We are adding roughly 40 billion metric tons of CO2 pollution to the atmosphere per year,” said Tans. “That is a mountain of carbon that we dig up out of the Earth, burn, and release into the atmosphere as CO2 - year after year. If we want to avoid catastrophic climate change, the highest priority must be to reduce CO2 pollution to zero at the earliest possible date.” CO2 pollution is generated by emissions from carbon-based fossil fuels used for transportation and electrical generation, by cement manufacturing, deforestation, agriculture, and many other practices. Along with other greenhouse gases, CO2 traps outgoing heat from the planet’s surface that would otherwise escape into space, causing the planet’s atmosphere to warm steadily. While the year-to-year increase of 1.8 ppm in the May CO2 peak was slightly less than previous years, CO2 measurements at Mauna Loa for the first five months of 2021 showed a 2.3 ppm increase over the same five months of 2020, close to the average annual increase from 2010 to 2019. There was no discernible signal in the data from the global economic disruption caused by the coronavirus pandemic. What is the Keeling Curve? A plaque honoring Charles David Keeling, a Scripps Institution of Oceanography scientist, adorns the wall of NOAA's Mauna Loa Atmospheric Baseline Observatory. Keeling discovered the seasonal fluctuation of carbon dioxide in the global atmosphere after initiating measurements there in 1958. Credit: Susan Cobb, NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory The highest monthly mean CO2 value of the year occurs in May, just before plants in the northern hemisphere start to remove large amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere during the growing season. In the northern fall, winter, and early spring, plants and soils give off CO2, causing levels to rise through May. Charles David Keeling was the first to observe this seasonal rise and subsequent fall in CO2 levels every year, a dynamic which is now known as the Keeling Curve. Keeling was also the first to recognize that despite the seasonal fluctuation, CO2 levels were rising every year. In fact, every single year since the start of the measurements CO2 was higher than the preceding year. Keeling’s son, geochemist Ralph Keeling, runs the Scripps program at Mauna Loa. "The ultimate control knob on atmospheric CO2 is fossil-fuel emissions,” said Ralph Keeling. “But we still have a long way to go to halt the rise, as each year more CO2 piles up in the atmosphere. We ultimately need cuts that are much larger and sustained longer than the COVID-related shutdowns of 2020." Mauna Loa measurements take the pulse of Earth’s atmosphere Perched on a barren volcano in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, the Mauna Loa observatory is a benchmark sampling location for CO2. It’s ideally situated for sampling well-mixed air- undisturbed by the influence of local pollution sources or vegetation, producing measurements that represent the average state of the atmosphere in the northern hemisphere. The Mauna Loa data, together with measurements from sampling stations around the world, are incorporated into NOAA’s Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network, a foundational research dataset for international climate scientists and a benchmark for policymakers attempting to head off the impacts of climate change. The atmospheric burden of CO2 is now comparable to where it was during the Pliocene Climatic Optimum, between 4.1 and 4.5 million years ago, when CO2 was close to, or above 400 ppm. During that time, sea level was about 78 feet higher than today, the average temperature was 7 degrees Fahrenheit higher than in pre-industrial times, and studies indicate large forests occupied areas of the Arctic that are now tundra. In February, the United States officially rejoined the Paris Agreement on climate change, an international treaty signed by 196 countries that have committed to limiting global warming and avoiding its potentially destabilizing impacts. Yet, as the measurements from Mauna Loa show, despite decades of negotiation, the global community has been unable to meaningfully slow, let alone reverse, annual increases in atmospheric CO2 levels. “The solution is right before our eyes,”said Tans. “Solar energy and wind are already cheaper than fossil fuels and they work at the scales that are required. If we take real action soon, we might still be able to avoid catastrophic climate change.” For more information, contact Theo Stein, NOAA Communications, at theo.stein(a)noaa.gov.

1 0

U.S. Steel abandons clean tech plans in Pittsburgh region following damning health study - EHN
by DUANE NICHOLS 07 May '21

07 May '21

https://www.ehn.org/us-steel-pittsburgh-pollution-asthma-2652882219.html U.S. Steel abandons clean tech plans in Pittsburgh region following damning health study From an Article by Kristina Marusic, Environmental Health News, May 7, 2021 The company scraps planned Pennsylvania investments and will instead shut down three polluting batteries in 2023. The announcement comes a week after a study shows lower lung function in people living near its Pittsburgh-region facility. PITTSBURGH—A recent study found that people with asthma who live near a U.S. Steel facility experienced worsened symptoms following a 2018 fire that damaged pollution controls—and that even prior to the fire, a trend of lower lung function was observed in people living close to the plant. About a week after that study came out, U.S. Steel announced it would renege on its promise to invest $1.5 billion in equipment upgrades that would have substantially lowered harmful emissions at its Pittsburgh-area plants while providing the region with up to 1,000 additional union jobs. The project was announced to much fanfare in 2019, but in the fall of 2020 during a quarterly earnings call, U.S. Steel's CEO David Burritt said of the funds promised for the project, "The key word in all of this is really the optionality. We can decide to put it in Mon Valley. We can decide to put it somewhere else." U.S. Steel exercised that "optionality" to purchase a non-union steel making facility in Arkansas that already has better pollution controls in place. It has also promised to eventually shut down some of the most polluting portions of its Pittsburgh operations, which would result in lower emissions. A U.S. Steel spokesperson said reduced operations will take place over the next couple years to avoid job loss.* "We have invested approximately $400 million since 2018 to secure our future in the Steel City. As we set new horizons for our future, we remain honored that Pittsburgh is our home," a U.S Steel spokesperson wrote in a statement to EHN. "U. S. Steel began its journey making steel in Pittsburgh, and today we optimistically continue this journey with a bright vision for the next generation of sustainable steelmaking." Health advocates, however, say the new study and this shift in plans epitomize the company's history in the region, revealing an ongoing pattern of sickened residents, ongoing pollution, and broken promises. "U.S. Steel had the capital to do these projects and they chose to invest the money elsewhere despite making a promise to people in this region," Matt Mehalik, executive director of the Breathe Project, a coalition of more than 40 environmental advocacy groups in the region, told EHN. "They have a long history of making similar big promises to our communities and then not following through with them." Residents at risk and in the dark Christine Panaiia and her family. "It's mind blowing to me that a company of that size would choose not to care for the people in the immediate community living around its facilities." (Credit: Christine Panaiia) U.S. Steel's Clairton Coke Works plant, about 20 miles south of Pittsburgh, converts coal into coke (a key ingredient in steelmaking) by heating it to extremely high temperatures in large ovens called batteries. It's the largest such facility in the U.S. The company is frequently fined—and sued—for illegally high emissions from the site, which contain chemicals including formaldehyde, cadmium, arsenic, and sulfur dioxide, which often makes the region stink of rotten eggs. Exposure to coke oven emissions is linked to cancer, COPD, heart disease, and asthma. In lieu of the promised equipment upgrades, U.S. Steel announced that in 2023 it will shut down the three oldest, most polluting coke batteries at the Clairton Coke Works, stating in its "open letter to our Pittsburgh family" that the decision is aimed at reducing the company's carbon footprint. The shift will reduce coke production at the facility by about 17 percent, which will also lead to a reduction in emissions (though the extent of that reduction has not yet been quantified). "I'd look forward to the reduction in air pollution, but 2023 is another couple years down the road where they're continuing to allow toxics to enter into the environment and harm the people who live here," Christine Panaiia, who lives in Jefferson Hills, about four miles from the Clairton Coke Works, told EHN. Panaiia, a mother of two teenage girls who worked as a project manager for BNY Mellon for 22 years until COVID-19 hit, developed asthma as an adult—soon after moving to Jefferson Hills about 10 years ago. She signed up for an asthma registry through the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center's asthma clinic. Researchers from the University of Pittsburgh's Graduate School of Public Health used data from that registry for their recent study, published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, which determined that asthma patients living within 10 miles of Clairton Coke Works had an 80 percent increased risk of worsened symptoms following a fire on Christmas Eve in 2018 that damaged pollution controls and lead to illegally high levels of emissions for weeks afterwards. On Christmas Day, 2018, Panaiia was preparing to host 10 members of her extended family for Christmas dinner when she started feeling sick. "I was trying to get myself ready, get the house organized, and get the food ready, but as the day wore on I was having more and more difficulty breathing," she said. "I felt sluggish and winded and I had to turn to my rescue inhaler. I couldn't understand it—usually with my asthma it's more of a gradual buildup." She pushed through her discomfort to host her family for the holiday and waited until the next day to call her doctor, who prescribed her a round of steroids to get her asthma under control. It wasn't until several weeks later, when someone from the asthma registry contacted her about it, that she found out about the fire and the increased pollution. "I was extremely disappointed that I hadn't known about it sooner," Panaiia said. "I have friends in the area who are also asthma sufferers…I heard lots of similar stories from people who have asthma or have kids with asthma who were having trouble breathing right after the fire and had no idea why." Panaiia and her friends weren't alone. Of the people surveyed by University of Pittsburgh researchers, only 44 percent had heard about the fire. Smokestacks of US Steel's Clairton Coke Works are visible behind a row of homes in Clairton, PA, in 2018. (Credit: Connor Mulvaney for Environmental Health News) "Keep in mind that these were all people who were already part of the registry, so they likely have a heightened awareness about their disease and its triggers," Dr. Sally Wenzel, director of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center's Asthma and Environmental Lung Health Institute and co-author of the study, told EHN. "I'd guess if you just talked to people on the street, even fewer people in those communities would have been aware that there was a fire and that there was heightened air pollution that could be harmful to their health." Panaiia said she was frustrated by the news that U.S. Steel had canceled its plans to invest in better equipment at its Pittsburgh facilities. "It's mind blowing to me that a company of that size would choose not to care for the people in the immediate community living around its facilities," she said. "Assuming they've been following the study the Asthma Institute released, you'd think they'd want to do right by folks who lived and worked at that facility." The study conducted by Wenzel and her colleagues also found that prior to the fire, asthma patients who live closer to Clairton Coke Works generally had lower lung function than those who live further away. "If we looked at that group that lived within the 10 mile circle of the plant and those outside, we saw there was a significant decrease in their baseline lung function," James Fabisiak, another co-author of the study and director of the University of Pittsburgh's Center for Healthy Environments and Communities, told EHN. He noted that their sample size for this part of the research was small so further research is needed but added, "This implies that asthma severity may be worse for people who live in that particular area." This is not the first study linking Clairton Coke Works to increased or worsened asthma. In a 2018 study of 1,200 school children, researchers found the asthma rate for kids in Clairton was 18 percent. The national average is 8 percent. Emissions from U.S. Steel's facilities also contribute to the region's higher than average cancer rates. Several of the communities surrounding the Clairton Coke Works plant are considered environmental justice areas, which the state of Pennsylvania defines as census tracts where at least 20 percent of people live in poverty and/or at least 30 percent are people of color. Environmental and racial equity advocates in the region have cited the high levels of pollution experienced by these communities as an example of environmental injustice. Wenzel noted that their study doesn't include many of the residents in the region who are most at-risk. "We noticed that in general people who came into the clinic to be seen were more advantaged from a socioeconomic standpoint than people who just filled out the survey," she said. "I think we need to remember that the most vulnerable people out there probably don't have time to come into the ivory tower to get their lung function tested or enroll in health registries, and we know that the most vulnerable people in these communities have worse health outcomes and higher mortality rates." A history of broken promises U.S. Steel Clairton Coke Works. (Credit: Mark Dixon/flickr) About a week before announcing that it would nix plans to upgrade its Pittsburgh facilities, U.S. Steel announced plans to pursue a goal of carbon neutrality by the year 2050 and a 25 percent reduction of its carbon footprint by the year 2030. The Breathe Project said the plan is lacking, citing the fact that the announced plans don't follow Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) reporting standards, the lack of involvement from community stakeholders in the decision-making process, the company's ongoing air quality violations, and U.S. Steel's recent opposition to proposed tightening of coke oven emission regulations during a public comment period. They also pointed out that the industry has a long history of breaking its environmental promises. Since as early as 1965, the company has violated clean air laws while continuously promising that it was on the verge of cleaning up its act. In 1975, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency identified the steel industry as the top industry that was failing to comply with the recently-passed Federal Clean Air Act, specifically citing U.S. Steel as a "problem polluter." A New York Times story from 1975 details the company's battles with federal, state, and county governments over pollution from the Clairton Coke Works—and many of the same pollution issues identified in that article persist today. "They always identify an excuse. It might be a market downturn. This latest time it's blaming the health department for delays in permitting related to COVID-19 and blaming environmentalists for wanting to improve air quality," Mehalik said. "The reality is it's always been under their control because they decide where to invest their capital." Throughout the 1980s and 90s during the collapse of the steel industry, U.S. Steel often hinted at the possibility of re-investing in other former plants in the region, including Homestead Steel Works, Duquesne Works and McKeesport Tube Works before ultimately closing those facilities, leaving polluted brownfields in their wake. In 2008 U.S. Steel promised to invest a billion dollars to replace several coke batteries built in the 1950s, including batteries 1, 2, and 3—the same ones it's now promising to shut down in 2023—but in 2014 they backed away from those plans. In 2014, the company announced plans to build a new corporate headquarters in the Lower Hill District as part of an initiative to redevelop that region. Two years later they cancelled those plans, too. In response to questions about this history, U.S. Steel said, "the Mon Valley Works' low-cost operation makes it a vital part of our Best of Both strategy. The facility will continue supply to key customers in the appliance, construction, and service center markets." Mehalik said this is "not the behavior of an entity that values the community or its workers." "After 50 years of this, it's time for local leadership to look for a new direction," he said. "Our communities cannot succeed with this approach of misleading and broken promises for the future." Editor's note: This story has been updated to include U.S. Steel clarification on the timeline of the investments and announcement, and the plan to avoid job loss in the batteries' shutdown. Banner photo: Erica Butler of the Pediatric Alliance administers an asthma screening to Montaziyah Evans at Clairton Elementary School in Clairton, PA. (Credit: Connor Mulvaney for Environmental Health News) Sent from my iPad

1 0

MVP - Notice of Scoping comment Period ends tomorrow; ACP - Restoration plan comment period ends Friday
by Duane Nichols 14 Apr '21

14 Apr '21

From: Jessica Sims <jessica(a)appvoices.org> > Date: April 14, 2021 at 12:11:40 PM EDT > Subject: MVP - Notice of Scoping comment Period ends tomorrow; ACP - Restoration plan comment period ends Friday > > Just a reminder of some upcoming comment deadlines on MVP and ACP: > ____________________________________________ > > Mountain Valley Pipeline > The Notice of Scoping comment period for MVP's request to bore at 180+ waterbodies, FERC Docket CP21-57, closes tomorrow, April 15th at 4:59pm. > > If you want to weigh in, here are a couple options: > Public petition from App Voices, West Virginia Rivers Coalition, POWHR + CCAN (url to share: bit.ly/MVPscoping) > > CP21-57 Talking points > Sierra Club petition > Wild Virginia Guide > Submit a comment via ecomment directly into the docket > Need help navigating the site? > > ______________________________ > Atlantic Coast Pipeline > The ACP restoration plan comment period closes Friday, April 16th at 4:59pm. > Here is information from Friends of Nelson on how to weigh in. > Submit a comment via ecomment directly into the docket > > Thank you! > -- > Jessica Sims, Virginia Field Coordinator > Appalachian Voices, 812 E. High Street > Charlottesville, VA 22902 > (434) 226-0589 office > jessica(a)appvoices.org > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/stop-pipelines-wvvanc/CAFLrgVJ5%2BDEa0oCT….

1 0

How Can You Help Stop the Mountain Valley Pipeline? Free Tickets, Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 6:30 PM | Eventbrite
by Duane Nichols 14 Mar '21

14 Mar '21

How Can You Help Stop the Mountain Valley Pipeline? Free Tickets, Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 6:30 PM | Eventbrite https://www.eventbrite.com/e/how-can-you-help-stop-the-mountain-valley-pipe…

1 0

Fine particulate matter from wildfire smoke more harmful than pollution from other sources
by Duane Nichols 07 Mar '21

07 Mar '21

https://phys.org/news/2021-03-fine-particulate-wildfire-pollution-sources.h… Fine particulate matter from wildfire smoke more harmful than pollution from other sources by University of California - San Diego Credit: CC0 Public Domain Researchers at Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego examining 14 years of hospital admissions data conclude that the fine particles in wildfire smoke can be several times more harmful to human respiratory health than particulate matter from other sources such as car exhaust. While this distinction has been previously identified in laboratory experiments, the new study confirms it at the population level. This new research work, focused on Southern California, reveals the risks of tiny airborne particles with diameters of up to 2.5 microns, about one-twentieth that of a human hair. These particles—termed PM2.5—are the main component of wildfire smoke and can penetrate the human respiratory tract, enter the bloodstream and impair vital organs. The study appears March 5 in the journal Nature Communications by researchers from Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science at UC San Diego. It was funded by the University of California Office of the President, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Alzheimer's Disease Resource Center for Advancing Minority Aging Research at UC San Diego and theOffice of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. To isolate wildfire-produced PM2.5 from other sources of particulate pollution, the researchers defined exposure to wildfire PM2.5 as exposure to strong Santa Ana winds with fire upwind. A second measure of exposure involved smoke plume data from NOAA's Hazard Mapping System. A 10 microgram-per-cubic meter increase in PM2.5 attributed to sources other than wildfire smoke was estimated to increase respiratory hospital admissions by 1 percent. The same increase, when attributed to wildfire smoke, caused between a 1.3 to 10 percent increase in respiratory admissions. Corresponding author Rosana Aguilera said the research suggests that assuming all particles of a certain size are equally toxic may be inaccurate and that the effects of wildfires—even at a distance—represent a pressing human health concern. "There is a daily threshold for the amount of PM2.5 in the air that is considered acceptable by the county and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)," said Aguilera, a postdoctoral scholar at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. "The problem with this standard is that it doesn't account for different sources of emission of PM2.5." As of now, there is not a consensus as to why wildfire PM2.5 is more harmful to humans than other sources of particulate pollution. If PM2.5 from wildfires is more dangerous to human lungs than that of ambient air pollution, the threshold for what are considered safe levels of PM2.5 should reflect the source of the particles, especially during the expanding wildfire season. This is especially relevant in California and other regions where most PM2.5 is expected to come from wildfires. In Southern California, the Santa Ana winds drive the most severe wildfires and tend to blow wildfire smoke towards populated coastal regions. Climate change delays the start of the region's rainy season, which pushes wildfire season closer to the peak of the Santa Ana winds in early winter. Additionally, as populations grow in wildland urban interface areas, the risks of ignitions and impacts of wildfire and smoke increase for those who live inland and downwind. Coauthor Tom Corringham points to the implications for climate change: "As conditions in Southern California become hotter and drier, we expect to see increased wildfire activity. This study demonstrates that the harm due to wildfire smoke may be greater than previously thought, bolstering the argument for early wildfire detection systems and efforts to mitigate climate change." >>>>> Explore further.......... Wildfire smoke more dangerous than other air pollutants for asthma patients More information: Nature Communications (2021). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-21708-0

1 0

BREAKING! Almost no job growth in fracking counties as natural gas production boomed
by Duane Nichols 04 Mar '21

04 Mar '21

From: "Ryan Clover, Halt The Harm Network" <ryan(a)halttheharm.net> > Date: March 4, 2021 at 12:18:59 PM EST > Subject: BREAKING! Almost no job growth in fracking counties as natural gas production boomed > Tomorrow we're hosting another Coffee Break conversation – this time with Joanne Kilgour Esq., the executive director of the Ohio River Valley Institute. > > Meet Joanne, and learn more about an economic study they've released that shows almost no job growth in fracking counties, despite gas production boom. > > Sign-up for the conversation here. > > (Did you miss the last session on the EHN Fractured Report? You can check it out, and see all our events here.) > > And here's the link to the story, > > BREAKING! Almost no job growth in fracking counties as natural gas production boomed. See the new ORVI report and a video. > > JOHNSTOWN, Pennsylvania, – A new Ohio River Valley Institute report titled, “Appalachia’s Natural Gas Counties: Contributing more to the U.S. economy and getting less in return” quantifies the decade-long failure of the natural gas boom in the Marcellus and Utica fields to deliver growth in jobs, income, and population to the 22 Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia counties that produce more than 90% of the region’s natural gas. > If you'd like to meet Joanne Kilgour Esq. to discuss the study and get questions answered, please join us for tomorrow's coffee break on Halt the Harm Network! > > Register here for the 2:00 PM Eastern via Crowdcast. > > 🎉 This live stream is part of a weekly series for us to connect and discuss the latest news about fracking. > > > About Coffee Break discussions > > This is a weekly live stream via Crowdcast that I'm hosting along with friends Shannon Smith at FracTracker Alliance, talking about the harms of fracking and what we can do about it. > > See all of Halt the Harm Network events at https://www.crowdcast.io/halttheharm > > Sincerely, Ryan Clover, Halt the Harm Network > > Supporting Your Fight Against The Gas Industry > > Discover services – www.halttheharm.net > > Join the network – www.thecampaignnetwork.org > > > New to Halt the Harm Network? Set-up your profile in the Leader Directory > 5335 Wisconsin Ave NW Suite 440, Washington, District of Columbia 20015 >

1 0

First-in-the-nation rule to slash methane emissions from Colorado oil and gas operations relied on compromise
by Duane Nichols 19 Feb '21

19 Feb '21

https://coloradosun.com/2021/02/19/oil-gas-controllers-colorado-rule-methan… First-in-the-nation rule to slash methane emissions from Colorado oil and gas operations relied on compromise From an Article by Mark Jaffe, Colorado Sun, February 19, 2021 A rule clamping down on air pollution from key devices used by the oil and gas industry – which drew support from environmental groups and industry – was unanimously adopted by Colorado air quality regulators Thursday. The first-in-the-nation rule requires the installation of non-emitting controllers on all new oil and gas operations and the retrofitting of existing controllers – a major source of emissions in the industry. The environment groups and the industry worked out a compromise proposal that they jointly submitted to the Air Quality Control Commission. A wide range of local governments, including Weld County, the state’s top oil-producing county, also supported or did not oppose the proposal. ”There’s not a whole lot to talk about,” Commissioner Elise Jones said. “This is such an unusual situation with everybody agreeing.” The state Air Pollution Control Division had initially proposed a rule to the AQCC that would have required non-emitting controllers only at new facilities, but over the past few months negotiations among industry representatives, environmental groups and local governments broadened the rule to encompass existing operations. The regulation will lead to “a large portion of controllers in the state being non-emitting by May 1, 2023,” according to the Environmental Defense Fund, one of the groups involved in the compromise. Controllers manage temperatures, pressure and liquid levels at oil and gas facilities and drill pads. Most controllers run on natural gas from the well itself and every time they open and close a valve or other mechanism, they release a little bit of gas. The methane released is a powerful greenhouse gas that contributes to Front Range ozone pollution. While the amount of gas released is small — an average 2.8 standard cubic feet of methane an hour, according to one study — there were an estimated 100,000 controllers operating in Colorado in 2019. Nationally, controllers account for 29% of the oil industry air emissions, according to David McCabe, a senior scientist with the Boston-based Clean Air Task Force, a public health and environmental advocacy group. The new rule requires non-emitting controllers at all wells and production facilities constructed after May 1, 2021, or at existing facilities when new wells are drilled or wells are refracked to boost production. The regulation also applies to new natural gas compressor stations and existing compressor stations that swap out equipment to increase their horsepower. Operators are also obliged to systematically replace emitting controllers at existing facilities and they were given the flexibility to develop companywide plans to do it. The size of the required emissions cuts is also on a sliding scale – between 15% and 40% – with companies already using non-emitting controllers needing to make smaller reductions. “With the flexibility offered by the companywide plans, each operator would be able to make the retrofits that are most cost-effective,” according to EDF. The regulation also provides limited exemptions from the requirements for temporary or portable equipment, distant or offsite wells, as well as safety and production issues. The exemption would have to be approved by the state’s APCD. Older and smaller wells – known as stripper wells – that produce the equivalent of 15 barrels of oil or less per day would also be exempt, although their status is set to be reviewed in future negotiations. The compromise rule was supported by groups ranging from the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, an industry trade group, to Conservation Colorado. More than 60 local governments also backed the rule. “The stakeholder discussions surrounding pneumatic controllers have proven intensive and deeply substantive, but the collaborative and good-faith work across parties has led to a clear path forward for further emissions reductions in the state,” Lynn Granger, executive director of the trade group API-Colorado, said in a statement. The APCD also backed the compromise. “It’s unique rulemaking,” said Jeramy Murray, a division environmental specialist. “Compromise and collaboration are the Colorado way.” Commissioner Curtis Rueter said, “as a commission it is really nice for something to come forward with no outstanding issues.” Sent from my iPad

1 0

Mountain Valley Pipeline cited again for erosion and sedimentation violations
by Duane Nichols 07 Feb '21

07 Feb '21

https://roanoke.com/news/local/mountain-valley-pipeline-cited-again-for-ero… Mountain Valley Pipeline cited again for erosion and sedimentation violations From an Article by Laurence Hammack, Roanoke Times, February 5, 2021 The Mountain Valley Pipeline has sunk deeper into trouble with muddy water flowing unchecked from construction sites. A proposed consent order from the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection would require the company to pay a $303,706 fine for repeated violations of erosion and sediment control regulations. West Virginia had previously fined Mountain Valley $266,000 for similar violations along the first 198 miles of the natural gas pipeline. In Southwest Virginia, where the pipeline continues for another 105 miles, regulators have imposed more than $2 million in penalties on three separate occasions. But pipeline opponents say the fines are too small to deter future environmental damage from the $6 billion project. “Three hundred thousand dollars is a tiny percentage of the project’s overall cost, and does not even begin to adequately cover the damage that’s been done to our streams,” said Autumn Crowe, a staff scientist for the West Virginia Rivers Coalition. The most recent enforcement action was signed Jan. 11 by Robert Cooper, who is heading construction of Mountain Valley. The West Virginia DEP will accept written comments through March 13 before taking final action, according to spokesman Terry Fletcher. Included in the order are 29 notices of violation from February 2019 to September 2020. Most of the problems were related to maintenance of erosion and sedimentation controls, “all of which have been remediated with no additional corrective actions required,” Mountain Valley spokeswoman Natalie Cox wrote in an email Thursday. “In cooperation with the WVDEP, we have enhanced the level of environmental controls that were originally approved, and the measures in place today are substantially better than those initially installed,” the email stated. Since work began in February 2018, construction crews have struggled to prevent storm water from flowing off steep slopes that have been cleared of trees and graded so the 42-inch diameter pipe can be buried in trenches. According to the consent order, sediment-laden water was allowed to escape the 125-wide construction zones due to failures of silt fences, water bars and other erosion control devices. In some cases, water bars — earthen barriers built on steep slopes to divert stormwater — were improperly installed, allowing runoff to accumulate downhill in quantities that overwhelmed retention ponds. Mountain Valley also failed to adequately plant grass on denuded strips of land, which contributed to problems with runoff, the order stated. Inspectors often observed sediment in nearby streams, which can endanger fish and other aquatic life and cause problems with water quality farther downstream. There have also been slips, or a gradual movement of earth downhill that is akin to a slow-motion avalanche. Last April in Lewis County, West Virginia, slips caused a segment of the pipe that had already been buried to shift in at least three locations, according to an inspection report filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Had pressurized natural gas been flowing through the pipeline, any underground movement could have caused a rupture and explosion, pipeline opponents said. Cox said at the time that Mountain Valley would conduct an investigation as a precautionary measure, but added that the pipeline was designed to withstand minor ground shifting as it settles in the final stages of construction. Asked about the matter Thursday, Cox said the pipe was excavated, inspected and replaced, and the hillside was stabilized using a mechanically engineered geotechnical reinforcement method. “As an additional safety precaution, MVP crews surveyed and inspected pipe in other locations along the route to confirm that this was an isolated incident, which was the case,” her email stated. As for the erosion problems cited in the consent order, Cox noted that of the 29 notices of violation, only four were written in 2020 despite significant rainfall that year — evidence, she said, that Mountain Valley is working to make improvements. Although there were 29 notices issued, some of them contained multiple violations. A total number was not available Thursday. Mountain Valley says it is on target to finish the pipeline by the end of the year, despite multiple legal challenges to its permits that have caused delays and cost overruns. The joint venture of five energy companies plans to ship 2 billion cubic feet of natural gas a day to markets in the Mid-Atlantic and Southeast regions of the country. Environmental groups, however, say the project will scar the scenic landscape of Southwest Virginia, clog its streams with sediment and jeopardize endangered species of fish and bats. Last week, Appalachian Voices and six other organizations asked a federal appeals court to stay two recent orders from FERC — one lifting a stop-work order last October and the other giving Mountain Valley two more years to complete the project. “Seemingly endless environmental violations have further slowed construction while fouling waters and land along the pipeline’s route,” the coalition said in a filing with the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The court is currently considering two legal challenges to FERC’s actions, and a stay would put pipeline work on hold until a decision is reached. Five more lawsuits are pending against other federal agencies that reissued permits after the original ones were struck down. Mountain Valley has agreed to stop construction, with the exception of erosion and sedimentation control, until Feb. 22 — the date by which the D.C. Circuit was asked to rule on the request for a stay. 15 comments

1 0

Protecting Our Environment ~ Locally & Globally
by Duane Nichols 04 Feb '21

04 Feb '21

NOTE the important briefing at 3:00 PM today ....... Duane > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ACTION ALERT > PUBLIC NOTICE: Legislative Response to WVDEP Oil and Gas Budget/Layoffs > > PUBLIC BRIEFING ON LAYOFFS AT WV DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SET FOR THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 4th AT 3:00 PM VIA ZOOM > Online via Zoom Conference > > In summer 2020, the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) Office of Oil and Gas cut its staff from 40 to 25 positions due to recurring budget shortfalls. As a result, there is now only one inspector per every 5000 gas wells. Currently, the Office is funded solely through one-time fees on new permit applications. This funding structure is not only inconsistent with other WVDEP Offices, it is also insufficient for sustaining the office's responsibility for monitoring and regulating all actions related to the exploration, drilling, storage and production of oil and natural gas. > > We urge the West Virginia Legislature to immediately act on this issue. > > FULL INFORMATION HERE > > > > > > GREENBRIER.ORG > > > > > > > IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR DRINKING WATER > AVAILABILITY OF MONITORING DATA FOR UNREGULATED CONTAMINANTS FOR LEWISBURG, WV > > Our water system has sampled for a series of unregulated contaminants. Unregulated contaminants are those that do not yet have a drinking water standard set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The purpose of monitoring for these contaminants is to help EPA decide whether the contaminants should have a standard. As our customers, you have a right to know that this data is available. > > If you are interested in examining the results, > please contact Randy Johnson or Charlie Cooper at > (304)647-5585 > > You may also mail your request to: > LEWISBURG WATER PLANT > 2539 Stonehouse Rd > LEWISBURG, WV 24901 > > or email your request to: WaterPlant(a)Lewisburg-wv.com. > > Please share this information with all the other people who drink this water, especially those who may not have received the notice directly (for example, people in apartments, nursing homes, schools, and businesses). > > This Notice is being sent to you by LEWISBURG Water Plant > State Water System ID# WV3301307 January 21, 2020 > > > > > > Governor Justice Names New WV DEP Secretary > > Justice has appointed Harold Ward to take over leadership of the DEP effective January 18, 2021. Ward has served as the DEP's deputy secretary of operations and director of the Division of Mining and Reclamation, where he oversaw all operational components of the department in addition to the agency's mining regulatory program. "Harold Ward has been a superstar in the WVDEP for a long time and the work he's done during my administration, leading our Division of Mining and Reclamation, has been truly incredible," Justice said "I have all the confidence in the world that he will do a fantastic job." > > > > > > > > Reintroduction of the Roadless Area Conservation Act > > > > (West Virginians for Public Lands. February 2, 2021) Efforts are underway to codify a Forest Service rule that prohibits road construction for logging and mining in designated backcountry areas. > > Known as the "Roadless Rule," The Roadless Area Conservation Rule was first implemented by the Forest Service in 2001. Here in West Virginia, the Roadless Rule is important to the integrity of about 182,000 roadless acres throughout our three National Forests (Monongahela, Jefferson, and Washington). > > Codification of the Roadless Rule is a priority for public lands advocates due to its vulnerability. Last year, the Trump administration exempted the Tongass National Forest in Alaska from the Roadless Rule, which opened 9 million acres to extractive industries and logging, including 168,000 old growth acres. > > Learn more about the Roadless Area Conservation Act of 2021 which would make the Roadless Rule law. > > > > > > > * Earth Day ~ April 22 ~ Save the Date * > > > President Biden signs Executive Order > on January 27, 2021. The order reaffirms that the President will host a Leaders' Climate Summit on Earth Day, April 22, 2021 > > President Biden Takes Executive Actions to Tackle the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad, Create Jobs, and Restore Scientific Integrity Across Federal Government > > The order sets a goal of protecting 30% of the nation's lands and waters by 2030. These conservation measures are identified as critical to slowing the effects of climate change. > Land conservation helps to mitigate climate change by storing and removing carbon through a process known as "carbon sequestration." The more carbon that is stored and removed through natural processes, the less carbon dioxide will reach the atmosphere. This is considered a "natural solution" to climate change. Academic literature suggests natural solutions can provide over one-third of cost-effective climate change mitigation needed by 2030. The concept of protecting 30% of land and water by 2030 isn't a new idea, President Biden's executive order is based on the 30x30 Campaign for Nature, which is championed by the President's Department of the Interior Secretary nominee, > Congresswoman Deb Haaland (D-NM) > > > > > > FERC weighs tightening rules on pipeline eminent domain > February 1, 2021 > > The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is eyeing stricter rules to empower property owners affected by natural gas pipelines or export projects. The five-member panel, now led by President Biden's pick of Democratic Chairman Richard Glick, issued anorderlast week seeking input on potential changes to its eminent domain proceedings, among other topics."Glick is reopening the door for landowner rights," said Paul Patterson, a utility analyst with Glenrock Associates LLC. "You don't have to be a tremendous student to know he is not happy with the way FERC has been approaching gas pipelines."Republican Commissioner James Danly, who served as chair under former President Trump, issued a sharply worded dissent challenging the move on procedural grounds. > > FULL STORY HERE > > > > > If you appreciate the work we are doing, please consider a donation today. > > > > > > > > Contract Position Open > > The Greenbrier River Watershed Association is going to contract with a new coordinator. If you are interested in working about ten hours a week on projects with a goal of educating the public about our issues, please let us know and we will forward you the job description. > > Email leslee(a)mtnwaters.com > > > > > WV Flood Tool > http://www.mapwv.gov/flood/ > LINK TO STATEWIDE STREAM GAUGES > https://www.facebook.com/100005485393020/posts/962748470584657/ > > > > > > Greenbrier River Watershed Association, PO Box 1419, Lewisburg, WV 24901 > > > >

1 0

Living with natural gas pipelines: Appalachian landowners describe fear, anxiety and loss - The Edwardsville Intelligencer, Illinois
by Duane Nichols 03 Feb '21

03 Feb '21

https://www.theintelligencer.com/news/article/Living-with-natural-gas-pipel… Living with natural gas pipelines: Appalachian landowners describe fear, anxiety and loss Erin Brock Carlson, West Virginia University and Martina Angela Caretta, Lund University, Edwardsville Intelligencer, February 3, 2021 More than 2 million miles of natural gas pipelines run throughout the United States. In Appalachia, they spread like spaghetti across the region. Many of these lines were built in just the past five years to carry natural gas from the Marcellus Shale region of Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia, where hydraulic fracturing has boomed. West Virginia alone has seen a fourfold increase in natural gas production in the past decade. Such fast growth has also brought hundreds of safety and environmental violations, particularly under the Trump administration’s reduced oversight and streamlined approvals for pipeline projects. While energy companies promise economic benefits for depressed regions, pipeline projects are upending the lives of people in their paths. As a technical and professional communication scholar focused on how rural communities deal with complex problems and a geography scholar specializing in human-environment interactions, we teamed up to study the effects of pipeline development in rural Appalachia. In 2020, we surveyed and talked with dozens of people living close to pipelines in West Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania. What we found illuminates the stress and uncertainty that communities experience when natural gas pipelines change their landscape. Residents live with the fear of disasters, the noise of construction and the anxiety of having no control over their own land. ‘None of this is fair’ Appalachians are no strangers to environmental risk. The region has a long and complicated history with extractive industries, including coal and hydraulic fracturing. However, it’s rare to hear firsthand accounts of the long-term effects of industrial infrastructure development in rural communities, especially when it comes to pipelines, since they are the result of more recent energy-sector growth. For all of the people we talked to, the process of pipeline development was drawn out and often confusing. Some reported never hearing about a planned pipeline until a “land man” – a gas company representative – knocked on their door offering to buy a slice of their property; others said that they found out through newspaper articles or posts on social media. Every person we spoke with agreed that the burden ultimately fell on them to find out what was happening in their communities. One woman in West Virginia said that after finding out about plans for a pipeline feeding a petrochemical complex several miles from her home, she started doing her own research. “I thought to myself, how did this happen? We didn’t know anything about it,” she said. “It’s not fair. None of this is fair. … We are stuck with a polluting company.” ‘Lawyers ate us up’ If residents do not want pipelines on their land, they can pursue legal action against the energy company rather than taking a settlement. However, this can result in the use of eminent domain. Eminent domain is a right given by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to companies to access privately held property if the project is considered important for public need. Compensation is decided by the courts, based on assessed land value, not taking into consideration the intangibles tied to the loss of the land surrounding one’s home, such as loss of future income. Through this process, residents can be forced to accept a sum that doesn’t take into consideration all effects of pipeline construction on their land, such as the damage heavy equipment will do to surrounding land and access roads. One man we spoke with has lived on his family’s land for decades. In 2018, a company representative approached him for permission to install a new pipeline parallel to one that had been in place since 1962, far away from his house. However, crews ran into problems with the steep terrain and wanted to install it much closer to his home. Unhappy with the new placement, and seeing erosion from pipeline construction on the ridge behind his house causing washouts, he hired a lawyer. After several months of back and forth with the company, he said, “They gave me a choice: Either sign the contract or do the eminent domain. And my lawyer advised me that I didn’t want to do eminent domain.” There was a unanimous sense among the 31 people we interviewed that companies have seemingly endless financial and legal resources, making court battles virtually unwinnable. Nondisclosure agreements can effectively silence landowners. Furthermore, lawyers licensed to work in West Virginia who aren’t already working for gas companies can be difficult to find, and legal fees can become too much for residents to pay. One woman, the primary caretaker of land her family has farmed for 80 years, found herself facing significant legal fees after a dispute with a gas company. “We were the first and last ones to fight them, and then people saw what was going to happen to them, and they just didn’t have – it cost us money to get lawyers. Lawyers ate us up,” she said. The pipeline now runs through what were once hayfields. “We haven’t had any income off that hay since they took it out in 2016,” she said. “It’s nothing but a weed patch.” ‘I mean, who do you call?’ Twenty-six of the 45 survey respondents reported that they felt that their property value had decreased as a result of pipeline construction, citing the risks of water contamination, explosion and unusable land. Many of the 31 people we interviewed were worried about the same sort of long-term concerns, as well as gas leaks and air pollution. Hydraulic fracturing and other natural gas processes can affect drinking water resources, especially if there are spills or improper storage procedures. Additionally, methane, a potent greenhouse gas, and volatile organic compounds, which can pose health risks, are byproducts of the natural gas supply chain. “Forty years removed from this, are they going to be able to keep track and keep up with infrastructure? I mean, I can smell gas as I sit here now,” one man told us. His family had watched the natural gas industry move into their part of West Virginia in the mid-2010s. In addition to a 36-inch pipe on his property, there are several smaller wells and lines. “This year the company servicing the smaller lines has had nine leaks … that’s what really concerns me,” he said. The top concern mentioned by survey respondents was explosions. According to data from 2010 to 2018, a pipeline explosion occurred, on average, every 11 days in the U.S. While major pipeline explosions are relatively rare, when they do occur, they can be devastating. In 2012, a 20-inch transmission line exploded in Sissonville, West Virginia, damaging five homes and leaving four lanes of Interstate 77 looking “like a tar pit.” Amplifying these fears is the lack of consistent communication from corporations to residents living along pipelines. Approximately half the people we interviewed reported that they did not have a company contact to call directly in case of a pipeline emergency, such as a spill, leak or explosion. “I mean, who do you call?” one woman asked. ‘We just keep doing the same thing’ Several people interviewed described a fatalistic attitude toward energy development in their communities. Energy analysts expect gas production to increase this year after a slowdown in 2020. Pipeline companies expect to keep building. And while the Biden administration is likely to restore some regulations, the president has said he would notban fracking. “It’s just kind of sad because they think, once again, this will be West Virginia’s salvation,” one landowner said. “Harvesting the timber was, then digging the coal was our salvation. … And then here’s the third one. We just keep doing the same thing.” Note. This Article was originally in The Conversation. Edwardsville is in Illinois and Lund University is in Sweden. https://theconversation.com/living-with-natural-gas-pipelines-appalachian-l…

1 0

Re: QUESTION — Shall we join this protest? DivestMVP Campaign
by Duane Nichols 03 Feb '21

03 Feb '21

REPLY — Most serious utility plans for the future involve electricity via (a) conservation (demand reduction), (b) improved efficiency of operation including distributed generation (widely spaced sources), (c) wind turbines (mountain ridges and coastal off-shore locations) and (d) solar panels (small locals) & solar farms. Dominion Energy and others have already cancelled some proposed natural gas fired power stations in Virginia and continuing to phase out coal-fired plants. (The proposed Longview gas-fired plant is still active here, seeking financial backing. And, Pennsylvania and Ohio have a number of new gas-fired plants. These are more efficient and cleaner than coal plants, but will still be under pressure to limit GHG.) If the MVP can be stopped, it’s not likely that this will result in a slowdown in the rate of reduction of GHG in the eastern US, but the opposite. Duane Nichols, MVCAC > On Feb 3, 2021, at 4:37 PM, timothy nelms <timothynelms(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > I ask the question.... > maybe the answer is not known .....Will DivestMVP Campaign lead to a higher reliance on energy produced by higher carbon contributing oil and coal sources ? As far as I know natural gas scores better than those in our high priority goal to reduce emission of carbon. Thanks. > > From wild wonderful WV,with a smile..... > > > Tim > > On 3 Feb 2021, at 16:12, Barbara Howe <bhowe(a)wvu.edu> wrote: > >> It is fine with me to join. >> >> Barb >> >> From: paula_lists(a)paulahunt.com <paula_lists(a)paulahunt.com> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 4:05 PM >> To: 'Duane Nichols' <duane330(a)aol.com>; MVCAC(a)osenergy.org <MVCAC(a)osenergy.org> >> Cc: 'James Kotcon' <jkotcon(a)gmail.com>; troutguy13(a)gmail.com <troutguy13(a)gmail.com>; cobando(a)gmail.com <cobando(a)gmail.com>; jr(a)lwvwv.org <jr(a)lwvwv.org>; janregernash(a)gmail.com <janregernash(a)gmail.com>; Michael Mccawley <mamccawley(a)hsc.wvu.edu>; Barbara Howe <bhowe(a)wvu.edu>; 'Sue Miles' <milesnichols(a)aol.com>; bjaegerart(a)gmail.com <bjaegerart(a)gmail.com>; timothynelms(a)hotmail.com <timothynelms(a)hotmail.com>; stombond(a)lhfwv.com <stombond(a)lhfwv.com>; djgooding00(a)gmail.com <djgooding00(a)gmail.com>; 'John Cobb' <jcobbjr369(a)gmail.com> >> Subject: RE: QUESTION — Shall we join this protest? DivestMVP Campaign >> >> Hi MVCAC ers, >> >> I am in favor of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition (MVCAC) joining the Divest MVP Coalition. >> >> Paula Hunt >> >> From: Duane Nichols <duane330(a)aol.com> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 1:55 PM >> To: MVCAC(a)osenergy.org >> Cc: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)gmail.com>; troutguy13(a)gmail.com; cobando(a)gmail.com; jr(a)lwvwv.org; Paula Hunt <pjhunt(a)paulahunt.com>; janregernash(a)gmail.com; Michael McCawley <mamccawley(a)hsc.wvu.edu>; Barbara Howe <bhowe(a)wvu.edu>; Sue Miles <milesnichols(a)aol.com>; bjaegerart(a)gmail.com; timothynelms(a)hotmail.com; stombond(a)lhfwv.com; djgooding00(a)gmail.com; John Cobb <jcobbjr369(a)gmail.com> >> Subject: QUESTION — Shall we join this protest? DivestMVP Campaign >> >> To the Friends of our Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition (MVCAC) .... >> >> It is herewith proposed that we join DivestMVP so as to limit Greenhouse Gases >> and the impacts of Climate Change. Let me know if you have any reservations, questions or comments. Such can be held confidentially, if appropriate. >> >> Duane Nichols, MVCAC >> >> From: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)gmail.com> >> Date: February 3, 2021 at 11:30:22 AM EST >> Subject: DivestMVP Campaign >> >> Hello, >> I hope you are well. I’m reaching out to ask if your organization can join the DivestMVP Coalition that’s calling on the 10 major banks funding the fracked gas Mountain Valley Pipeline to stop funding the MVP. >> >> >> If you have been following the story, the Mountain Valley Pipeline is facing numerous hurdles, but still claims to be in service next year. We want to convince their major funders that MVP is a bad investment idea. >> >> So far, the DivestMVP coalition has made significant progress in educating the banking and investing community about the threat MVP poses to our communities, waters, lands and climate as well as the losing economics of this project that’s $3 Billion over budget and 3 years behind schedule. We currently have the support of nearly 100 investors representing $233 Billion of assets under management who are joining us in demanding banks stop funding the MVP. Already, hundreds of activists have sent letters to banks telling them to DivestMVP. >> >> Now we’re reaching out to our friends and allies like you to ask for your support by becoming a member of the DivestMVP Coalition via this google form, if possible by February 18. In particular, please indicate the number of members and supporters for your organization. >> >> >> Coalition members: >> - Will be listed as a member of the DivestMVP coalition on public facing materials such as, but not limited to, press releases, websites, and letters to banks and investors. >> -Will receive a community toolkit with guidance and materials for social and traditional media, a personal divestment guide and much more! >> -Commit to share with your members/supporters opportunities to speak out to banks such as action alerts, event invites. >> -Will be added to a list-serve to receive and share campaign updates, resources and successes! >> >> If you’re not quite ready to join the coalition, that’s OK! Register for free to join us on February 25 for a Virtual Rally to learn more about the coalition’s efforts and ways to get involved or reach out to Joan.Walker(a)sierraclub.org to get your questions answered. >> >> Thank you! Jim Kotcon, Conservation Chair, WV Chapter of Sierra Club >> >> >>>>>.....>>>>>.....>>>>>.....>>>>>.....>>>>> >> >> See also: Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) Fails to Gain Latest FERC Approval — >> >> >> http://www.frackcheckwv.net/2021/01/22/mountain-valley-pipeline-mvp-fails-t… >> >> >> >> >> >>

1 0

Re: QUESTION — Shall we join this protest? DivestMVP Campaign
by Barbara Howe 03 Feb '21

03 Feb '21

It is fine with me to join. Barb ________________________________ From: paula_lists(a)paulahunt.com <paula_lists(a)paulahunt.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 4:05 PM To: 'Duane Nichols' <duane330(a)aol.com>; MVCAC(a)osenergy.org <MVCAC(a)osenergy.org> Cc: 'James Kotcon' <jkotcon(a)gmail.com>; troutguy13(a)gmail.com <troutguy13(a)gmail.com>; cobando(a)gmail.com <cobando(a)gmail.com>; jr(a)lwvwv.org <jr(a)lwvwv.org>; janregernash(a)gmail.com <janregernash(a)gmail.com>; Michael Mccawley <mamccawley(a)hsc.wvu.edu>; Barbara Howe <bhowe(a)wvu.edu>; 'Sue Miles' <milesnichols(a)aol.com>; bjaegerart(a)gmail.com <bjaegerart(a)gmail.com>; timothynelms(a)hotmail.com <timothynelms(a)hotmail.com>; stombond(a)lhfwv.com <stombond(a)lhfwv.com>; djgooding00(a)gmail.com <djgooding00(a)gmail.com>; 'John Cobb' <jcobbjr369(a)gmail.com> Subject: RE: QUESTION — Shall we join this protest? DivestMVP Campaign Hi MVCAC ers, I am in favor of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition (MVCAC) joining the Divest MVP Coalition. * Paula Hunt From: Duane Nichols <duane330(a)aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 1:55 PM To: MVCAC(a)osenergy.org Cc: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)gmail.com>; troutguy13(a)gmail.com; cobando(a)gmail.com; jr(a)lwvwv.org; Paula Hunt <pjhunt(a)paulahunt.com>; janregernash(a)gmail.com; Michael McCawley <mamccawley(a)hsc.wvu.edu>; Barbara Howe <bhowe(a)wvu.edu>; Sue Miles <milesnichols(a)aol.com>; bjaegerart(a)gmail.com; timothynelms(a)hotmail.com; stombond(a)lhfwv.com; djgooding00(a)gmail.com; John Cobb <jcobbjr369(a)gmail.com> Subject: QUESTION — Shall we join this protest? DivestMVP Campaign To the Friends of our Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition (MVCAC) .... It is herewith proposed that we join DivestMVP so as to limit Greenhouse Gases and the impacts of Climate Change. Let me know if you have any reservations, questions or comments. Such can be held confidentially, if appropriate. Duane Nichols, MVCAC From: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)gmail.com<mailto:jkotcon@gmail.com>> Date: February 3, 2021 at 11:30:22 AM EST Subject: DivestMVP Campaign Hello, I hope you are well. I’m reaching out to ask if your organization can join the DivestMVP Coalition that’s calling on the 10 major banks funding the fracked gas Mountain Valley Pipeline to stop funding the MVP. If you have been following the story, the Mountain Valley Pipeline is facing numerous hurdles, but still claims to be in service next year. We want to convince their major funders that MVP is a bad investment idea. So far, the DivestMVP coalition has made significant progress in educating the banking and investing community about the threat MVP poses to our communities, waters, lands and climate as well as the losing economics of this project that’s $3 Billion over budget and 3 years behind schedule. We currently have the support of nearly 100 investors representing $233 Billion of assets under management who are joining us in demanding banks stop funding the MVP. Already, hundreds of activists have sent letters to banks telling them to DivestMVP. Now we’re reaching out to our friends and allies like you to ask for your support by becoming a member of the DivestMVP Coalition via this google form<https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeFsNWYfc_seOEsYwRBmVtBgaL-MCiy1z9…>, if possible by February 18. In particular, please indicate the number of members and supporters for your organization. Coalition members: - Will be listed as a member of the DivestMVP coalition on public facing materials such as, but not limited to, press releases, websites, and letters to banks and investors. -Will receive a community toolkit with guidance and materials for social and traditional media, a personal divestment guide and much more! -Commit to share with your members/supporters opportunities to speak out to banks such as action alerts, event invites. -Will be added to a list-serve to receive and share campaign updates, resources and successes! If you’re not quite ready to join the coalition, that’s OK! Register for free<http://rb.gy/jq8vmv> to join us on February 25 for a Virtual Rally to learn more about the coalition’s efforts and ways to get involved or reach out to Joan.Walker(a)sierraclub.org<mailto:Joan.Walker@sierraclub.org> to get your questions answered. Thank you! Jim Kotcon, Conservation Chair, WV Chapter of Sierra Club >>>>>.....>>>>>.....>>>>>.....>>>>>.....>>>>> See also: Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) Fails to Gain Latest FERC Approval — http://www.frackcheckwv.net/2021/01/22/mountain-valley-pipeline-mvp-fails-t…

1 0

QUESTION — Shall we join this protest? DivestMVP Campaign
by Duane Nichols 03 Feb '21

03 Feb '21

To the Friends of our Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition (MVCAC) .... It is herewith proposed that we join DivestMVP so as to limit Greenhouse Gases and the impacts of Climate Change. Let me know if you have any reservations, questions or comments. Such can be held confidentially, if appropriate. Duane Nichols, MVCAC > From: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)gmail.com> > Date: February 3, 2021 at 11:30:22 AM EST > Subject: DivestMVP Campaign > > Hello, > I hope you are well. I’m reaching out to ask if your organization can join the DivestMVP Coalition that’s calling on the 10 major banks funding the fracked gas Mountain Valley Pipeline to stop funding the MVP. > > If you have been following the story, the Mountain Valley Pipeline is facing numerous hurdles, but still claims to be in service next year. We want to convince their major funders that MVP is a bad investment idea. > > So far, the DivestMVP coalition has made significant progress in educating the banking and investing community about the threat MVP poses to our communities, waters, lands and climate as well as the losing economics of this project that’s $3 Billion over budget and 3 years behind schedule. We currently have the support of nearly 100 investors representing $233 Billion of assets under management who are joining us in demanding banks stop funding the MVP. Already, hundreds of activists have sent letters to banks telling them to DivestMVP. > > Now we’re reaching out to our friends and allies like you to ask for your support by becoming a member of the DivestMVP Coalition via this google form, if possible by February 18. In particular, please indicate the number of members and supporters for your organization. > > Coalition members: > - Will be listed as a member of the DivestMVP coalition on public facing materials such as, but not limited to, press releases, websites, and letters to banks and investors. > -Will receive a community toolkit with guidance and materials for social and traditional media, a personal divestment guide and much more! > -Commit to share with your members/supporters opportunities to speak out to banks such as action alerts, event invites. > -Will be added to a list-serve to receive and share campaign updates, resources and successes! > > If you’re not quite ready to join the coalition, that’s OK! Register for free to join us on February 25 for a Virtual Rally to learn more about the coalition’s efforts and ways to get involved or reach out to Joan.Walker(a)sierraclub.org to get your questions answered. > > Thank you! Jim Kotcon, Conservation Chair, WV Chapter of Sierra Club >>>>>.....>>>>>.....>>>>>.....>>>>>.....>>>>> See also: Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) Fails to Gain Latest FERC Approval — http://www.frackcheckwv.net/2021/01/22/mountain-valley-pipeline-mvp-fails-t… > > > > >

1 0

ONLINE PROGRAM ON FEB. 2nd FOR CLIMATE JOBS & CLIMATE JUSTICE
by Duane Nichols 01 Feb '21

01 Feb '21

http://www.frackcheckwv.net/2021/02/01/online-program-on-feb-2nd-for-climat… ONLINE PROGRAM ON FEB. 2nd FOR CLIMATE JOBS & CLIMATE JUSTICE Transform, Heal, and Renew by Investing in a Vibrant Economy (THRIVE) 100 Days for Climate, Jobs, and Justice: Winning the THRIVE Agenda TO: Friends & Interested Citizens, FROM: Center for Coalfield Justice, February 1, 2021 Amidst a confluence of devastating crises — the pandemic, racial injustice, economic devastation, and of course climate change — we have a historic opportunity to set our country on a different course in the next few months. But it will take all of us working together to make our voices heard and demand change. This Tuesday, February 2, at 7 p.m. Eastern / 4 p.m. Pacific, the Green New Deal Network will host a grassroots livestream: “100 Days for Climate, Jobs, and Justice: Winning the THRIVE Agenda.” We hope you can join. You can …. RSVP HERE! The THRIVE Agenda includes building a groundswell of support to Transform, Heal, and Renew by Investing in a Vibrant Economy (THRIVE) Agenda— a bold economic recovery plan to address the intersecting crises facing our nation. Sincerely, Kristen Locy, CCJ Outreach Coordinator SOME LEADING GROUPS — The Green New Deal Network is a 50-state campaign with a national table of 15 organizations: Center for Popular Democracy, Climate Justice Alliance, Grassroots Global Justice Alliance, Greenpeace, Indigenous Environmental Network, Indivisible, Movement for Black Lives, MoveOn, People’s Action, Right To The City Alliance, Service Employees International Union, Sierra Club, Sunrise Movement, US Climate Action Network, and the Working Families Party. Tagged as: climate change, fossil fuels, Green New Deal, THRIVE, urgent action

1 0

Special Issue of CEP, Thinking About Climate
by Duane Nichols 19 Jan '21

19 Jan '21

Thinking About Climate, Editorial, Chemical Engineering Progress, January 2021 Opens in modal lightbox Ithink about climate often. It’s hard not to — I doubt a day goes by that I don’t see an article, news report, or email that mentions climate. The most recent item to cross my desk is an article in Scientific American entitled "Second Scientists’ Warning: The Climate Emergency: 2020 in Review." It is a follow-up to "World Scientists’ Warning of a Climate Emergency," by William J. Ripple et al., which appeared in the January 2020 issue of BioScience. The authors begin their original article with this statement: "Scientists have a moral obligation to clearly warn humanity of any catastrophic threat and to ‘tell it like it is.’ On the basis of this obligation …, we declare, with more than 11,000 scientist signatories from around the world, clearly and unequivocally that planet Earth is facing a climate emergency." They then call for transformative change in six areas: energy, short-lived air pollutants, nature, food, economy, and population. The new article points out that while 2020 brought a few promising developments, we still "need a massive-scale mobilization to address the climate crisis." The authors say that "aggressive transformative change, if framed holistically and equitably, will accelerate broad-based restorative action and avert the worst of the climate emergency. The survival of our society as we know it depends upon this unprecedented change." Chemical engineers have an important role to play in achieving the necessary transformative change. Climate change is a complex, multidimensional problem that we are well equipped to understand. Our education in chemistry, physics, and math enables us to understand the science, and our knowledge of chemical engineering allows us to address the challenge in a practical and economical manner. But sorting through and keeping up with the climate change literature is a monumental task. A few years ago, I came up with the idea for a series of short, 1–3-page articles that would explore various chemical-engineering-related aspects of climate and climate change. I thought that breaking this complex subject into many small bits and focusing on chemical engineering concepts would make it easier to understand. I envisioned that the title of this series would be "Thinking About Climate." When I mentioned my idea to Mark Holtzapple, a professor of chemical engineering at Texas A&M Univ., he told me about his interest in climate and shared with me the slides of a lecture that he gives on the topic. He also helped me realize that we could not do justice to the topic 2,000 words at a time. He liked my idea of looking at climate through a chemical engineering lens, and he offered to write a series of articles that addressed observations, modeling, impacts, and solutions. This special issue of CEP is the fruit of our collaboration. It provides basic information about climate — including numerous figures and reference citations. It is not meant to be a definitive treatment of the subject. Rather, it is intended to provide an overview that helps you to think about climate without getting lost in the claims and counterclaims. In the interest of minimizing our environmental footprint, we present this as a digital-only issue. And because this topic is of such great importance to society, we are making the issue open access. Please share it widely. Cynthia F. Mascone, Editor-in-Chief Reference: CEP Special Issue on Climate | AIChE https://www.aiche.org/publications/cep/climate-issue

1 0

New West Virginia environmental coalition publishes 'A Citizen's Guide to Climate Change'
by Duane Nichols 16 Jan '21

16 Jan '21

https://www.mybuckhannon.com/new-west-virginia-environmental-coalition-publ… From MY BUCKHANNON, December 26, 2020 New West Virginia environmental coalition publishes ‘A Citizen’s Guide to Climate Change’ BUCKHANNON – A West Virginia field organizer for the Mom’s Clean Air Force recently shared information about a new alliance that has formed around climate action in West Virginia. Leah Barbor said the West Virginia Climate Alliance is an environmental, civil rights and faith-based coalition, and the mission of the young-adults organization is to work together to provide science-based education on climate change in West Virginia to the residents and policymakers. “We seek to advance climate solutions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions while assuring that all West Virginians, especially low-income and communities of color, have adequate resources to transition to a low-carbon economy,” Barbor said. She said a recently released publication called “A Citizen’s Guide to Climate Change,” authored by the West Virginia Climate Change Alliance, explains the science behind the causes of climate change and its impacts, as well as potential solutions. Barbor said the publication was written by West Virginians for West Virginians. “The Alliance is really growing, and it is exciting,” Barbor said. “It makes me feel excited for what this means for West Virginia.” Barbor said the alliance produced the publication to keep the conversation on climate change going. “Basically, the publication is a science-based public education tool for citizens and policy makers. One of the main purposes of the alliance is to seek to advance climate solutions that are reducing greenhouse gas emissions. What we laid out in the guide are causes and the local impacts as well as global issues resulting from those emissions,” she said. “It also has some potential solutions.” Barbor said the alliance is not endorsing anything particular. “But we have a shared vision for climate action,” she said. “What that contains is three pillars of reform that we want to see included in future policies in order to achieve what we believe will be meaningful climate action. Those are climate justice, a just transition and reduction in greenhouse gases.” Barbor said those pillars were a no-brainer for her. “These pillars align pretty seamlessly with our work at the Mom’s Clean Air Force,” Barbor said. “As parents, we care deeply about climate change and air pollution. One thing we really focus on is justice in every breath – recognizing the importance of equitable solutions in adjusting air pollution and climate change. We need to ensure the needs of low-income communities and communities of color are protected from further inequality as it relates to environmental health.” She said they want to make sure individuals in these communities have their environmental needs met, that they have a voice in how climate change is met, ensure they do not pay a disproportional cost for addressing climate change. “Here in West Virginia the ‘just transition piece’ is really important as we move to a low carbon community. We really want to see that no West Virginians are left behind as we move to a low-carbon community. We want to make sure there are quality job retraining opportunities, that people’s health insurance and pensions are secured because those matter to families,” Barbor said. Barbor said the West Virginia Climate Alliance is an informal collective of groups in West Virginia who have a shared vision for climate action. “We all recognize there is a need for climate justice, a just transition and a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. As an alliance, we are in favor of supporting policies and future legislation that include these three pillars and address them in a meaningful way.” The West Virginia Climate Alliance includes the American Friends Service Committee, the Center for Energy and Sustainable Development, Citizens Climate Lobby West Virginia, League of Women Voters of West Virginia, Christians for the Mountains, Mom’s Clean Air Force-West Virginia, Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, Sierra Club of West Virginia, West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy, West Virginia Citizen Action Education Fund, Wet Virginia Interfaith Power and Light and the West Virginia Rivers Coalition. People who would like to help or learn more about the West Virginia Climate Alliance can contact Perry Bryant at perrybryantwv(a)outlook.com. To view A Citizen’s Guide to Climate Change, go to wvrivers.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/wvclimate.pdf. >>> To be posted in ...... www.FrackCheckWV.net

1 0

Listen Up! Dr. James Hansen Has A Message For The Citizens Of Earth.
by Duane Nichols 30 Dec '20

30 Dec '20

Listen Up! Dr. James Hansen Has A Message For The Citizens Of Earth, Steve Hanley, Clean Technia, September 7, 2020 Dr. Hansen says there are three parameters to the global heating conundrum but only two receive regular attention — the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and average global surface temperatures. The third critical component is the Earth’s energy imbalance and it may be the most important of the three. “Stabilizing climate requires that humanity reduce the energy imbalance to approximately zero,” Hansen writes. https://cleantechnica.com/2020/09/07/listen-up-dr-james-hansen-has-a-messag…

1 0

A Love Letter From the Clean Energy Future | Sierra Club, Mary Anne Hitt, 2021
by Duane Nichols 29 Dec '20

29 Dec '20

https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2021-1-january-february/feature/love-lett… A Love Letter From the Clean Energy Future Article by Mary Anne Hitt, Sierra Magazine, Jan. - Feb. 2021 Here's a glimpse of how we can transition entirely to renewable energy sources Last fall, I gave a Zoom lecture to a class of undergraduate students at the University of Puget Sound about the path forward on energy and climate justice. I always go into these presentations with some trepidation, because I know that many young people are overwhelmed by despair about climate change, and I want to be clear about what's at stake without adding to their anxiety. After I finished, one of the students offered a simple appreciation that lifted a weight off my shoulders: "Honestly, this presentation has been a relief. I feel so much better. Thank you." I could relate to that student's desperate need for a ray of hope. After a grinding year of climate disasters, racial injustice, and relentless threats to our democracy, it has been easy to lose sight of the better world that we are still, even now, building. I'm full of hope because, against all odds, a just and sustainable energy future is being born. Yet I'm full of hope because, against all odds, a just and sustainable energy future is being born. We at the Sierra Club are in the middle of building that future. From stopping the fracked-gas Atlantic Coast Pipeline to reaching the milestone of having 60 percent of US coal-fired power plants on their way to retirement, the progress in 2020 has been remarkable. The United States is on track to get more electricity from renewable energy than from coal sometime in the next few years. But even as we make progress in hard times, we know that just covering the world with solar panels and electric vehicles isn't enough. So what would it look like, 10 years from now, if we did this energy transition right—if we prevented runaway climate change, created millions of jobs, and rectified the harms of decades of environmental injustice in communities of color? Imagine it is 2030 and we're looking back over a pivotal decade in human history. Allow me to paint a picture for you of the energy transformation that's possible. Think of it as a love letter from the future. >>>>>. >>>>>. >>>>>. >>>>>. >>>>>. >>>>>. My friends, It takes my breath away to write these words, but we did it. Rooted in our deep love for this planet and one another, we stepped back from the cliff of irreversible climate change. Families around the globe, including mine and yours, no longer face the specter of fleeing their homes because of ever-worsening climate-driven disasters. The fossil fuel industry no longer controls the levers of power to corrupt democracy. And we're building a world where everyone has clean air and clean water and access to nature. As we rolled up our sleeves to prevent a climate emergency, our solutions prioritized investments in those communities most harmed by fossil fuels and pollution and those long excluded from economic opportunity. We needed to build so much clean energy infrastructure to avoid a climate apocalypse, and we didn't just build it; we built it with family-sustaining jobs and with an eye toward restitution and reparations. Thanks to you, our kids will be raising their sons and daughters in vibrant, resilient communities full of opportunity. This is how we arrived here: First, we powered the country with 100 percent clean energy. An electric grid powered by clean energy was the foundation for turning the corner on climate, and the dirty power plants that were the worst contributors to environmental injustice were the first to go. Building on a decade of grassroots advocacy, President Biden introduced and Congress finally passed a national 100 percent clean energy standard that put us well on our way to phasing out coal and gas by 2035 while ensuring that vulnerable communities experienced the benefits of the transition. Big states such as California and New York then set even more aggressive goals, making it clear that a clean energy transition of speed and scale was possible. And since decisions about how we produce electricity are largely made by states, we continued our 50-state energy-transformation push for a decade. To support communities with economic ties to fossil fuels, Congress included a robust economic transition for fossil fuel workers and community-led economic development. Congress also passed innovative measures like a moratorium on utility shutoffs for households and support for energy-saving home improvements for families spending a high percentage of their income on electricity bills (known as a high energy burden). Renewable energy kept getting cheaper, and that allowed the Department of Energy to accelerate local clean energy solutions like microgrids—which are reliable during climate-driven extreme-weather events—in vulnerable and underserved places like the Navajo Nation and Puerto Rico. We finally harnessed the power of offshore wind along the Atlantic coast and solar across the Southeast and Southwest, while scaling up new energy-storage technologies to make clean energy available when it's needed most. Altogether, we made a quantum leap in the scale and scope of the energy transition, produced millions of jobs, and sparked the creation of thousands of new businesses. Second, we got well on our way toward electrifying everything. Here in 2030, one of the best parts of the energy transition is that it has made our lives healthier. After social media icons spread the word about how gas stoves create indoor air pollution linked to asthma in kids, families rushed to their local home-improvement stores to replace gas ranges with electric induction stovetops. Local governments passed thousands of ordinances calling for all-electric construction in new buildings, which created enough pressure for national standards. New businesses started popping up to help homeowners save money while pulling polluting gas appliances out of their homes. And the Department of Energy created programs to ensure that low-income families could make the switch affordably. Meanwhile, on the transportation front, states such as California and New Jersey set a 2035 target date for phasing out internal-combustion-engine cars, and national standards followed. States also put in place standards requiring that buses and large trucks go all-electric, which dramatically reduced air pollution in communities of color and big port and shipping centers including California's Inland Empire, New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles. After COVID-19 made Americans realize the importance of walkable cities and accessible public transportation, Congress included funding in infrastructure bills for clean and affordable public transit, biking, and walking options. The number of family-sustaining jobs skyrocketed as Americans were put to work building electric cars, trucks, and buses as well as transit and charging-station infrastructure. Third, we stopped attempts to expand drilling while we reclaimed abandoned wells, mines, and drilling sites. The oil and gas industry was in a precarious place as 2020 came to a close. It was struggling to compete with renewable energy, facing the wrath of communities angry about drilling and pipelines, and grappling with dwindling returns from fracking, which made the industry's finances look more like a pyramid scheme. Through on-the-ground organizing, we prevented the fossil fuel industry's last-gasp attempt to establish new markets for its products. We blocked the construction of more than a dozen proposed fracked-gas export terminals and halted the creation of a new "Cancer Alley" of chemical and plastics plants in the Ohio River valley. We forced the industry to stop drilling next to homes, schools, and communities. And we secured protection from drilling on Indigenous lands, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and Bears Ears National Monument. Meanwhile, we created jobs for thousands of oil, gas, and coal workers. We put 120,000 people to work plugging over 2 million abandoned oil and gas wells and addressing methane leaks that were roasting our planet. Congress also passed the RECLAIM (Revitalizing the Economy of Coal Communities by Leveraging Local Activities and Investing More) Act to fund reclamation projects and community-led economic development in Appalachia. Finally, we engaged millions of people in the work for climate justice. Let's be clear: None of this was easy. As we sit here in 2030, the clean and just energy future that we've built together has been the result of millions of people stepping up in their own states and communities. I know all this seemed impossible back in 2020, when it felt as if everything was falling apart and our climate might be doomed. But everything we did mattered. All of it. We now know that we're going to keep global temperature rise below the dangerous tipping points that climate scientists warned us about a decade ago. We can look our kids in the eye and tell them that we didn't let them down. Now we can watch their dreams unfold. As all our great spiritual traditions have taught us, new beginnings are often born during our most difficult days. We created something beautiful out of those hard days in 2020. Of course we have more work to do. But we're doing that work from a foundation we built together. I can't wait to see what we'll do next. This article appeared in the January/February edition with the headline "A Love Letter From the Clean Energy Future." Sent from my iPad

1 0

Wildfires fueled by climate change threaten toxic Superfund sites
by Duane Nichols 23 Dec '20

23 Dec '20

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wildfires-fueled-climate-change-threat… Wildfires fueled by climate change threaten toxic Superfund sites Blazes at the imperiled hazardous waste sites could release toxins ranging from acid mine drainage to radioactive smoke. Michael Kodas, Inside Climate NewsDavid Hasemyer, Inside Climate News Dec. 23, 2020, 5:00 AM EST By Michael Kodas, Inside Climate News and David Hasemyer, Inside Climate News This article was published in partnership with Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, independent news outlet that covers climate, energy and the environment, and The Texas Observer, a nonprofit investigative news outlet. This is part 4 of "Super Threats," a series on Superfund sites and climate change. For Jake Jeresek, a leader of the U.S. Forest Service’s firefighting operation in the Kootenai National Forest of northwest Montana, blazes in the woods 4 miles east of the town of Libby demand the most urgent response. But, before his crew can snuff any flames in those woods, they must recite a poem. “When the sunlight strikes raindrops in the air, they act like a tiny prism and form a rainbow,” crew members intone in turn. The poem is a test of the firefighters’ respirators — a piece of safety equipment required in no other forest in the nation. The verse’s vocalizations ensure the respirators are properly sealed to the firefighters’ faces. Contaminated by Libby amphibole, a highly toxic mixture of asbestos fibers unleashed by a former mine that has killed hundreds of area residents, this section of forest is an officially designated hazardous waste zone — Superfund Operable Unit 3 of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Libby Asbestos Site. With wildfires heightened by climate change threatening 234 Superfund sites across the country, according to the federal government, the OU3 Libby Asbestos Site presents a kind of worst-case scenario in which a wildfire could send asbestos-contaminated ash into nearby communities. Some firefighters worry a plume of smoke could carry the forest’s toxins hundreds of miles away. Firefighting helicopters respond to a fire near OU3 in Montana.U.S. Forest Service It’s one of the 945 Superfund sites that the Government Accountability Office last year found were vulnerable to hurricanes, flooding, sea level rise, increased precipitation or wildfires, all of which are intensifying as the planet warms. A yearlong investigation by Inside Climate News, NBC News and The Texas Observer, based on interviews with dozens of current and former EPA officials and firefighting authorities, found that the threat presented by wildfires is exceeding authorities’ ability to adequately prepare and respond, given recent steep increases in wildfires, particularly in the West. Blazes at such sites could release toxins ranging from acid mine drainage to radioactive smoke. Some firefighters and land managers fear that it is only a matter of time before megafires like those that exploded across Colorado and California this year burn over a toxic site with disastrous consequences. There have already been a number of extremely close calls. In 2010, the 109,000-acre Jefferson Fire spread across the Idaho National Laboratory, a nuclear energy research facility, where it burned over Superfund sites that had been cleaned of radioactive contamination over the previous 17 years. The lab reported that sampling of the area during the fire showed no release of radioactivity. In 2013, the Patch Springs Fire southwest of Salt Lake City burned within 10 miles of the Tooele Army Depot, a Superfund site with 902 ammunition storage bunkers along with soil and groundwater contaminated with hazardous chemicals, according to Wildfire Today. In 2018, the Carr Fire burned across 359 square miles of northern California and swept over the Iron Mountain Mine Superfund site, threatening to release corrosive chemicals into the watershed. The narrowly averted disaster spurred the EPA to reexamine the threat posed by wildfires to Superfund sites, especially old mines. Firefighters try to control the Carr Fire as it spreads near Redding, Calif., on July 31, 2018.Mark Ralston / AFP - Getty Images And in October, the Captain Jack Mill Superfund site, a closed mining operation in Boulder County, Colorado, was in the evacuation zone of the Lefthand Canyon and Calwood fires, but was spared when they burned away from the site. Over the last 20 years, Colorado, for which the GAO lists two fire-threatened Superfund sites, has seen one record wildfire after another, culminating this year in its three largest fires in the state’s history, each burning 140,000 to 200,000 acres. In California, with 18 threatened sites, fire season is now virtually year-round, with more than 25 million acres of the state’s wildlands facing very high or extreme fire threat, according to a report prepared for Gov. Gavin Newsom. The state saw more than 4 million acres burn this year, the most in its recorded history. In Montana, with five threatened sites, the temperature has warmed by 2.7 degrees over the past 70 years, substantially more than the nation as a whole, according to the 2017 Montana Climate Assessment. From 1970 to 2015, according to research published by Climate Central, that warming drove an at least tenfold increase in the number of wildfires larger than 1,000 acres in Montana, a greater percentage increase than in any other Western state. The Kootenai National Forest, which holds Libby’s asbestos-contaminated woods in the area known as OU3, endured its largest wildfire on record — the 25,000-acre Caribou Fire — in 2017. But that fire was some 50 miles away from the Superfund site. The following year OU3 faced a much closer blaze, the Highway 37 Fire, which firefighters held to just 71 acres. That fire burned just outside the boundary of the contaminated forest. “Climate change is driving increased severe, extensive fire behavior. We're seeing more and more large, dramatic, destructive fires,” said Don Whittemore, a fire incident commander from Colorado who helped the Forest Service, EPA, state and county leaders put together their plan for managing fires in OU3. “They've had a bunch of large fires on the Kootenai and in northwest Montana in the last couple years,” he said. “I can say it's a landscape primed for fire. It is set to burn. It's ideal to burn.” Visitors walk along the shore of Lake McDonald in Montana's Glacier National Park as the Howe Ridge Fire burns in the background on Aug. 12, 2018.National Park Service via AP Libby: A wakeup call The Highway 37 Fire outside Libby started July 19, 2018, along the highway, where sparks and hot engines often lead to wildfire. Nolan Buckingham’s Asbestos Wildland Fire crew donned their respirators in case the fire crossed the boundary into the contaminated forest and were on the blaze in less than 10 minutes. Given the extreme health hazards presented by a forest contaminated with highly toxic asbestos, there was no margin for error under extremely difficult conditions. “That fire really put people out of their comfort level, even if it wasn’t in OU3,” Buckingham said. As the fire roared uphill, the respirators made it hard for the firefighters to keep up. Luckily, a spot where the steep slope flattened out briefly a quarter mile up that hill gave them the break they needed. “We were able to catch it,” Buckingham said. Nolan Buckingham with members of the crew fighting the Highway 37 Fire near Libby, Mont.Nolan Buckingham For the next several days, aircraft bombed the fire with water constantly as Buckingham and his team set up hoses and sprinklers and, at one point, burned away vegetation before the fire could get to it. Contractors with heavy equipment helped them build a fire line around the blaze. The fire was finally declared contained July 31. “We learned a lot from the Highway 37 Fire,” Nate Gassmann, the district ranger for the Kootenai National Forest, said, including strategies for containing fires and quickly decontaminating the crew members after their shift. Nolan Buckingham, in red hat, stands with his crew on a spot overlooking the heart of the mine in August 2019.Courtesy Nolan Buckingham Still, when the contaminated forest’s fuel buildup and steep topography align with warm dry weather, Whittemore, the fire incident commander, said he worries the area could see far more than 70 acres burning. “Given the right alignment — 50,000 plus acres in a day,” said Whittemore, who has studied OU3 in detail and led large firefighting teams across the West. “It's got the fuels. It's got the topography. It just needs the weather alignment,” he said. “And if you're cognizant and aware and thinking about climate change on a global, national, landscape level, it'd be irresponsible not to think that that's a strong possibility. You have to plan for the worst-case scenario. Because more and more, we're not only seeing worst-case scenarios, we're seeing events that exceed worst-case scenarios.” Iron Mountain: A near disaster The Carr Fire began some 5 miles west of the Iron Mountain Superfund site in Redding, California, on July 23, 2018. It ultimately overran the site, crippling critical wastewater treatment infrastructure that captures as much as 168 million gallons of acid mine drainage each month. It took more than five weeks to contain. The Carr Fire burns on July 30, 2018, west of Redding, Calif.Terray Sylvester / Getty Images “There was this feeling of ‘My God. We ought to have better tracking of wildfires at Superfund locations,’” said Stephen Hoffman, a former senior environmental scientist at EPA who continues to consult with the agency on abandoned mine sites. “Before that, there wasn’t a lot of thought about climate change and fire. That has changed.” Iron Mountain is a mountainous, 4,400-acre site with steep slopes and deep, V-shaped valleys in California’s northern Shasta County where iron, silver, gold, copper, zinc and pyrite were mined from the 1860s until the 1960s. The former mine leaches water more corrosive than battery acid that also contains large amounts of zinc, copper and cadmium. Were it to flow untreated into surrounding streams, the toxic water would kill fish, including the endangered winter-run Chinook salmon, and destroy the habitat for area wildlife. The acid and poisons in the tainted water could eventually contaminate Spring Creek Reservoir, which holds mountain runoff before it enters the Sacramento River 8 miles above Redding, a city of 90,000 that depends on the river for its drinking water. For more of NBC News' in-depth reporting, download the NBC News app In anticipation of the fire burning power poles, site managers shut off electricity to the treatment facility that cleans the toxic acid drainage before it enters the watershed. Fire also crawled into the mine along hundreds of feet of polyethylene pipe, a fuse that could have ignited the combustible pyrite — fool’s gold — causing an explosion deep inside the cavern. After the treatment system shut down, an emergency collection reservoir and a million gallon holding tank captured the tainted water before it could reach nearby streams. Firefighters extinguished the flames creeping along the pipe inside the mine before they ignited the pyrite, preventing an explosive fire that could have released choking clouds of sulphur dioxide. The million gallon tank collected 395,000 gallons of acid mine water that was neutralized once electricity was restored to the treatment facility a few days after the fire. Plastic pipes that caught fire were replaced by stainless steel pipes. “Failure would have immediate, long-lived effects on the region’s drinking water supplies and fisheries,” Kate Burger a senior engineering geologist for the Central Valley Water Board, said. The close call prompted EPA officials to note the danger wildfire posed to the site, in a five-year review completed a month after the fire. Lily Tavassoli, the Iron Mountain project manager for the EPA during the Carr Fire, defended the agency’s readiness, saying the site had been prepared to handle wildfires on the scale of fires past. But the Carr Fire was “larger, faster moving and more intense than anything we had experienced before,” she said. The Carr Fire burns along Highway 299 near Whiskeytown, Calif., on July 27, 2018.Justin Sullivan / Getty Images Planning for the ‘potential impacts of climate change’ Two years before the Highway 37 Fire, Whittemore, the incident commander, read through the Libby Asbestos Response Plan and other documents that EPA had asked the Forest Service to prepare. He noticed little acknowledgement of what he’d been seeing in his decades fighting fires throughout the West — the warming climate was making fires larger and more resistant to suppression. Whittemore said small test burns and fires in laboratory settings that have been conducted by those agencies don’t reflect what would happen with the asbestos, smoke and ash if a large, intense fire sent a smoke column from OU3 high into the atmosphere. “The amount of organic material, period, that's liberated from a large fire is extraordinary,” he said. “Now, throw into that a cancer-causing material. To me, that's really, really scary.” That smoke could affect communities far from Libby, he said. The town of Libby in northwestern Montana.Rick Bowmer / AP “They didn't appreciate downwind impacts to places like Whitefish, to Glacier National Park, across the border into Waterton National Park or other parts of Canada,” Whittemore said of the plans. He said he hopes a final cleanup study now underway will consider those areas far from Libby. More than two years after the Highway 37 Fire, the EPA, the Forest Service and the Libby Asbestos Superfund site’s owner, W.R. Grace & Co., are still working on a feasibility study of cleanup options, which was expected next year but has been delayed until late 2022 or early 2023. Libby’s asbestos-filled forest surrounds the mine where, until 30 years ago, W.R. Grace mined vermiculite, a mineral valuable in insulation and lawn and garden products. The vermiculite was also filled with Libby amphibole and tons of that asbestos were released every day from Grace’s operation, coating the miners, the town and the forest. In 2008, Grace was ordered to pay $250 million for future cleanup costs. Several years earlier government prosecutors had brought criminal charges against company executives, who they claimed knew how deadly their operation was. The executives were acquitted and, in the years since, most of the Superfund operating units in and around Libby have been cleaned up. But Grace, the EPA and the Forest Service are still figuring out what to do with the asbestos-filled forest. Environmental cleanup specialists work at one of the last remaining residential asbestos cleanup sites in Libby in September 2018.Kurt Wilson / The Missoulian via AP While the EPA has not previously looked at the effects of a warming climate and increasing droughts on the threat posed by the contaminated forest, the agency will do so as part of the final cleanup study, Dania Zinner, the EPA’s remedial project manager for the Libby site, wrote in an emailed response to questions. “Ongoing discussions about potential impacts of climate change on the site, including fire behavior modeling, are continuing.” Caitlin E. Leopold, director of corporate communications for Grace, said the company was working with the EPA on the plan for the forest. "The Superfund framework does include climate change considerations as part of the process in accordance with the EPA,” Leopold said. “Grace is continuing to work through the feasibility process with the agencies.” Zinner said that the plan would consider the dangers posed to residents of Libby and beyond. “EPA and partners are considering any type of situation that could have an impact on human health risks at the site now and into the future,” she wrote. Recalculating the wildfire threat Entering this year’s fire season, officials in EPA Region 9, the region that includes California, Nevada and Arizona, updated fire contingency plans for remote Superfund sites, which are mostly abandoned mines. “We also have been monitoring — and will continue to monitor — fire behavior closely to track threats to Superfund sites, as well as other sensitive infrastructure,” Michael Alpern, a spokesman for the region, said. The Carr Fire remained a powerfully cautionary tale for many firefighters. Jim Woolford, a former director of EPA’s Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation, said the Carr Fire triggered increased scrutiny of the vulnerability of mines to fires. “That near miss led to our Superfund mining team to reevaluate the threat from wildfires,” he said. A spokeswoman for Shahid Mahmud, head of EPA’s National Mining Team, said that as a result of the more frequent and larger conflagrations, including the Carr Fire, cleanup plans for former mines are now designed with wildfires in mind. Emergency protocols addressing wildfire threats are reviewed every year, and have become more urgent recently, the spokeswoman said. Firefighters wearing respirators in the OU3 area in Montana.U.S. Forest Service But wildfire experts and climate scientists said that while it’s possible to reduce the threat, it’s not feasible to eliminate it. Mines will drain acid as long as their waters encounter sulphur-bearing minerals; radioactivity can persist deep in contaminated landscapes for thousands of years; and much of the asbestos in the contaminated forest outside Libby will remain there as long as the trees do. For sites where no polluter can be made to pay and the EPA lacks cleanup funds, the agency will need to design protections that shield the sites from wildfires as long as the contamination remains. And wildland firefighters and other emergency responders near Superfund sites in places like Libby will don their protective suits, hold fire lines and hope they can prevent almost unfathomable environmental catastrophe. Sent from my iPad

1 0

Longview at Mon County Commission this coming Wednesday
by Duane Nichols 14 Dec '20

14 Dec '20

Subject: Longview at Mon County Commission on Wednesday > > Tha agenda for the Mon County Commission lists: > > c) To consider for approval of documents related to Mountain State Clean Energy LLC & Mountain State Renewable LLC > > d) Consideration of a Collaboration Resolution between Monongalia County Commission and Monongalia County Board of Education > > We have learned that Longview has changed their name to Mountain State Clean Energy, LLC, so these are the PILOT agreements and related documents for the new 1200-MW gas-fired power plant. > > While the total amounts of payments are the same as originally proposed in Sept. 2019, the payment under the PILOT is much smaller, and most of the money will come to the Commission as a lease payment, as specified in a related document (Lease Agreement). This appears to be a mechanism to keep the State from reducing allocations to the school board, as happened with the PILOT for Longview I. > > Nothing in the documents addresses the greenhouse gas emissions or pollution from the new plant. Nothing protects workers at existing plants. Nothing adjusts the PILOT payments for the actual value of the plant, or addresses most of the other issues we have raised over the last two years. > > Please contact the County Commission and urge them to establish a 30-day comment period and to delay action on these agreements until the public has a chance to respond. Tell them you oppose giving tax breaks for fossil fuel plants that emit greenhouse gases. > > E-Mail letters to the Commissioners at: > > Tom Bloom <tbloom(a)moncommission.com> > Ed Hawkins <commissionerHawkins(a)moncommission.com> > Sean Sikora <ssikora(a)moncommission.com> > > Or file comments protesting the PILoT on line at: > https://www.monongaliacounty.gov/contact_us/index.php > (Comments at this page are limited to 300 characters. > > Contact me or the County Commission at > info(a)moncommission.com > if you want copies of these documents. > > Jim Kotcon, Sierra Club, > 304-594-3322 (home) > > > Virus-free. www.avast.com

1 0

Mon County Commission to Approve New PILOT Agreements for Longview Power on December 16th
by Duane Nichols 13 Dec '20

13 Dec '20

Mon County Commission to Approve New PILOT Agreements for Longview Power on December 16th Ignoring GHG & Climate Change is irresponsible TWO PROJECTS: Longview Gas-Fired Power Plant & Solar Field Given New Cryptic Names, AND Access to Information is Difficult Protest Letter from Duane Nichols, Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition, Dec. 13, 2020 Incomplete information from the Mon County Commission brings holiday fears to the northern areas of Monongalia County. There is apparently a proposed “tax-avoidance scheme” being cooked up as a holiday gift to an out-of-state corporation. Apparently, this scheme is ignoring the global climate change problems including its impact on the pandemic and other public health issues. Another fossil fueled power plant on top of two existing power plants is adding insult to injury. The Longview Power plant already has experienced two bankruptcies, brought 300 trucks per day to the roads of Ft. Martin, received millions of dollars in tax forgiveness, and polluted the area with fine particulates, acidic gases and shadowy vapor plumes. Now our County Commission is apparently encouraging additional abuse to our county. Our residents have not been informed. There has been a sketch in the local newspaper, inadequate to provide an understanding. But, no legal announcement, no public hearing, no comment period, and no proper explanation of the complex tax avoidance scheme. We all know that globally, now is the time for fossil fuels to at least pay-their-own-way. We already have two large power plants in the Ft. Martin community with multiple impacts to residents there and the nearby locations of Bakers Ridge, Star City, Osage, Stewartstown, including University High School, etc. These are all exposed to the stack gases and cooling tower plumes and even worse to the fine particulates and ultrafine particulates. These pollutants are now known to penetrate the lung tissue, enter the blood stream and affect the heart, brain, etc. Any proposed PILOT agreement for Longview Power Two, or whatever is its new name, needs to involve public hearings or at least a thirty-day comment period so that (1) the general public can be informed as to what is being proposed, (2) financial advisor consultants can understand the long range significance of these tax avoidance schemes, and (3) public health experts can advise on the impacts to students, residents and the elderly in the various health care facilities of our area. >>>>>. >>>>>. >>>>>>. >>>>>. >>>>>>. NOTE: As of November 10th, Longview Power Two & Three have been renamed Mountain State Clean Energy (natutal gas plant) and Mountain State Renewable Energy (solar plant), respectively. Using the word “Clean” is a misnomer for a plant that generates so many tons of acid gases, fine particulates, and greenhouse gases. http://www.frackcheckwv.net/2020/12/13/mon-county-commission-to-approve-new…

1 0

KOTCON-PILT-LONGVIEW-13DecY2K20.doc
by Duane Nichols 13 Dec '20

13 Dec '20

Longview PILOT Agreements on Agenda of MON COUNTY COMMISSION for this coming Meeting, on Wednesday, December 16th at 10 am. Up to 300 characters of protest can be submitted via email .... http://cms2.revize.com/revize/monongaliawv/contact_us/index.php

1 0

COMMENT sent to MON COUNTY COMMISSION, 300 character limit
by Duane Nichols 09 Dec '20

09 Dec '20

COMMENT for regular meeting today ... The new name for Longview Power TWO is unknown to the general public and inappropriate as “CLEAN ENERGY. This proposed power plant will pollute our air and have many other local impacts. Public review of PILOT AGREEMENTS is essential before adoption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Duane Nichols, Coordinator, Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition, December 9, 2020 NOTE — the new name is “Mountain State Clean Energy” as of November 10th.

1 0

The Swiss Cheese Model of Pandemic Defense - The New York Times
by Duane Nichols 06 Dec '20

06 Dec '20

The Swiss Cheese Model of Pandemic Defense - The New York Times, Dec. 5, 2020 The metaphor is easy enough to grasp: Multiple layers of protection, imagined as cheese slices, block the spread of the new coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19. No one layer is perfect; each has holes, and when the holes align, the risk of infection increases. But several layers combined — social distancing, plus masks, plus hand-washing, plus testing and tracing, plus ventilation, plus government messaging — significantly reduce the overall risk. Vaccination will add one more protective layer. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/05/health/coronavirus-swiss-cheese-infectio…

1 0

Energy storage is the 'Swiss army knife' of the renewables transition, but it's still evolving - Virginia Mercury
by Duane Nichols 04 Dec '20

04 Dec '20

https://www.virginiamercury.com/2020/12/03/energy-storage-is-the-swiss-army… Energy storage is the ‘Swiss army knife’ of the renewables transition, but it’s still evolving From the 4th Article In Series by Sarah Vogelsong, Virginia Mercury, December 3, 2020 Hang around any debate about clean energy and you’re bound to hear one question: What do you do when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing? The answer, at least in theory, is straightforward: energy storage. Storage can be thought of as the third leg of the stool Virginia will use to reach its clean energy goals. It’s what Virginia Advanced Energy Economy Executive Director Harry Godfrey calls “the Swiss army knife of the energy space,” a way to fill gaps by more intermittent renewable sources while also balancing out the push and pull of energy supply and demand that bedevils every electric grid. Every plan crafted by utilities for transitioning from fossil fuels to renewables relies on energy storage. But this keystone is also today the weakest link of most clean energy portfolios. Utilities and states see storage as a powerful way to balance out the intermittency of renewables like wind and solar; California, for example, is hoping storage coupled with wind and solar will help replace natural gas and coal plants now facing retirement. Batteries, though, remain hampered by limitations in how much energy they can store and how long it can be pumped onto the grid. Standard batteries today have a duration of four hours; extending that time span on a broad scale will take further research and investment. Nor is the technology very widespread yet: Recent estimates from the U.S. Energy Information Administration put battery capacity at under 1,000 megawatts. “If you look at all of the operational grid-scale batteries throughout the country, they store collectively less energy than our nuclear facilities in Virginia produce in just a couple of hours,” said Dominion Vice President of Public Policy and State Affairs Katharine Bond. Still, the technology may be approaching a turning point: global information and analytics firm IHS Markit in a white paper earlier this year forecast that “battery storage will continue to grow rapidly, with all trends pointing to a maturing battery industry that is well beyond the demonstration phase.” Energy storage “is the single most important technology and policy issue facing energy right now,” said Bill Murray, vice president of corporate affairs and communications at Dominion Energy. “Storage has gotten better, no question about it. We need it to get geometrically better.” Dominion already has several efforts underway. In February 2020, as the Virginia Clean Economy Act was still being hammered out at the General Assembly, regulators approved four Dominion pilots that aim to examine issues such as how batteries can be coupled with solar and how they can be used to avoid costly upgrades the utility would otherwise have to make to substations and distribution wires. The company has also been experimenting with electric school bus batteries as a potential storage solution. Appalachian Power’s interest in the technology has ramped up as well. In October, the utility announced a partnership with Dominion and economic development group InvestSWVA to advance energy storage development in the region. “Much of Appalachian Power’s service territory in Virginia is rural and storage could aid service reliability for customers,” wrote spokesperson Teresa Hall in an email. “The area is also well suited for overall storage development. Land is available and costs are reasonable, but developing Southwestern Virginia into a hub for storage has to be done responsibly.” How extensive the southwestern partnership will be remains to be seen. The VCEA set an energy storage target for Virginia of 3,100 megawatts, putting it among the most aggressive states in the U.S. when it comes to deploying the technology. As with most other VCEA targets, the bulk of that development will fall to Dominion, which is responsible for proposing 2,700 megawatts of storage compared to Appalachian’s 400 megawatts. For both utilities, there’s more than one persuasive argument for investing in storage. Like solar and wind, storage can act as a power generator that can add electricity to the grid when demand rises. But batteries in particular “can sort of play in all spaces,” said Southern Environmental Law Center attorney Will Cleveland. Unlike other renewables, storage can also play critical roles in a utility’s distribution and transmission systems — the complex and costly network of wires, substations and technology that ensure the grid functions smoothly and efficiently. “Storage can be used to improve distribution system reliability and also serve as a non-wires alternative for capacity upgrades,” said Hall. Other states have already reported savings with storage. The New York Public Service Commission reported earlier this year that electric utility Con Edison had successfully used a two megawatt battery as part of an effort to avoid paying $1.2 billion to upgrade a substation. Exactly how far storage solutions might stretch isn’t yet clear. “You want to use a battery every hour that it’s available when it’s not charging,” said Cleveland. “You want to use it in whatever the highest economic value is at any hour.” Determining that value will be a tricky proposition, though — one that’s likely to take years. Much of the responsibility will fall to a new Energy Storage Task Force that a 2020 law ordered the State Corporation Commission to create “to evaluate and analyze the regulatory, market and local barriers to the deployment” of storage solutions. That body hasn’t yet been formed, and its final report isn’t due until October 2021. “I don’t know that any state has fully gotten up to speed on those things,” said Cleveland, “but certainly Virginia has not.” Does pumped storage count as storage? First on the list of unresolved storage issues is what exactly falls under that umbrella. Everyone agrees that batteries do, and it’s advancements in that technology that are largely driving growth in storage around the world. More controversial is pumped hydropower, which today is the most common type of storage used worldwide, accounting for more than nine-tenths of all storage in the U.S.. A form of power generation that would have been familiar to our forebears, pumped storage systems create electricity when demand is high by channeling water from one reservoir into another, turning turbines as it flows. As demand drops, the water is then pumped back into the original reservoir. Virginia’s utilities have been using it for decades. Dominion touts its 3,000 megawatt Bath County Pumped Storage Station as the largest battery in the world, and Appalachian Power has operated its 636 megawatt Smith Mountain Lake facility since the 1960s. While tried and true, these systems aren’t accepted by all clean energy advocates as part of the path forward. Pumped storage is expensive to build and has a large footprint; furthermore, it requires external electricity to operate, so whether or not it’s “renewable” depends on what resources are supporting it. The Virginia Clean Economy Act’s wording also doesn’t make it clear whether or not pumped storage is part of the renewable energy future lawmakers are envisioning. The law explicitly states that “renewable energy” doesn’t include “electricity generated from pumped storage,” and it excludes energy from pumped storage from being counted toward utilities’ yearly targets for how much of their energy must come from renewables, a benchmark called the renewable portfolio standard. Crucially, though, the VCEA doesn’t explicitly exempt pumped storage from being counted toward the 2,700 and 400 megawatt storage development targets Dominion and Appalachian Power must meet by the end of 2035. Further complicating the picture is a 2017 law passed by the General Assembly nearly unanimously that declared one or more pumped hydro facilities in Virginia’s coalfield region that at least partially rely on renewables to be in the public interest. Dominion has already signaled it sees pumped hydro as part of its energy storage approach. Among the new capital projects the company listed in its 2020 Integrated Resource Plan, the first long-range plan to be filed in the wake of the VCEA, is a 300 megawatt pumped storage project in Tazewell — outside the utility’s territory — that would cost $2.9 billion. In 2017, three years before the VCEA’s passage, plans filed by the company with federal regulators indicated interest in a much larger facility capable of generating 870 megawatts. “In the energy storage space, we’ve got to take an all-of-the-above approach,” Bond told the Mercury this fall. “If it’s proven technology and it’s cost effective, we should deploy it as part of this clean energy transition and a carbon-free grid.” Not everyone agrees. Among renewable energy advocates, “there’s very much a divide” as to whether pumped storage should be seen as a clean energy solution or simply an economic development driver, said Cliona Robb, an energy attorney with Thompson McMullan who also chairs Virginia’s Solar Energy Development and Energy Storage Authority. One such opponent is Arlington-based utility-scale storage developer Delorean Power, which has strongly argued against the inclusion of pumped hydro on the grounds that it would “largely undermine” the VCEA’s “intent of creating storage targets in the first place.” Pumped hydro “is a proven, legacy technology and offers very little benefits for grid modernization, economic development and energy storage innovation in Virginia,” the company wrote in a State Corporation Commission filing this summer. Absent direction from the General Assembly, the decision seems likely to fall to the SCC — as will any approvals of Dominion’s Tazewell pumped storage facility that the utility submits to regulators. The VCEA “is an important public policy, but it’s also going to require significant investments and significant costs,” energy attorney Will Reisinger told regulators this October as part of a case against Dominion’s Tazewell plans. “That heightens the importance of the planning process, and it makes it more critical to ensure that Dominion only invests in reasonable projects that are required to comply with the Clean Economy Act or are required for the company to provide quality and reliable service.” How soon and how fast What qualifies as energy storage isn’t the only question facing regulators this fall. Also at issue is how quickly that storage ought to be rolled out. While the VCEA mandated the development of 3.1 gigawatts of storage by the beginning of 2035, it left the nuts and bolts of how that would occur to the State Corporation Commission, which was charged with crafting regulations for energy storage deployment and setting interim targets leading up to the Jan. 1, 2035 deadline. “These were the kind of things that we didn’t really have the bandwidth — I don’t think anyone had the bandwidth — to nail down,” said David Murray, executive director of the Maryland-Delaware-D.C.- Virginia chapter of the Solar Energy Industries Association. As they did with the shared solar rules, regulators have largely deferred to Dominion and Appalachian Power. Draft regulations hewed closely to the utilities’ proposal, including a set of interim targets that would delay the rollout of most energy storage until 2030. Dominion and Appalachian have justified the “back-loading” of targets on the grounds that waiting to fully deploy storage until closer to the 2035 deadline will let Virginia take advantage of technological advancements made elsewhere at a cheaper price. “We are expecting more renewables (solar and wind) to be connected to our grid towards the end of the 15-year period, creating the need for more storage to balance generation output,” wrote Dominion spokesperson Rayhan Daudani in an email. “We are also expecting energy storage cost reductions and technology improvements to materialize in the latter half of the 2020s and 2030s, which will drive value and additional benefits for ratepayers and the power grid.” Clean energy advocates and the storage industry are pushing for more aggressive targets, however. A group including MDV-SEIA and the Energy Storage Association complained that delays could cause Virginia to miss out on early cost savings and could “lock in other investments that may reduce the utility of storage in the future.” Delorean meanwhile argued for a more aggressive timeline on economic grounds, citing the ongoing financial constrictions due to the pandemic: “The Virginia legislature wanted to do something big for energy storage, and this was clearly articulated in the VCEA,” the company wrote in a commission filing. “The regulations adopted by the SCC need to send that same business-friendly message so that companies across the supply chain migrate to Virginia and the clean-energy industry can continue growing in earnest.” How big a role will non-utilities play? In Virginia, which has prized its identity as the U.S.’ top state for business, friendliness toward a growing industry might seem a given. The electric grid is a different story, however. Since the state re-regulated its electricity markets and handed monopolies back to Dominion and Appalachian Power in 2007, the utilities have carefully guarded their territory. Lawmakers too have frequently been cautious in allowing third-party companies to enter state markets and affect the monopolies’ customer bases. That could be changing. The last two big pieces of energy legislation to pass the General Assembly — the Grid Transformation and Security Act of 2018 and the VCEA of 2020 — have included mandatory carveouts for non-utility companies to take on certain capital projects. The State Corporation Commission has also increasingly shown favor toward utility proposals to buy power or other assets from non-utility developers in order to offload some of the financial risk that would otherwise be borne by Virginia residents and businesses. Among the VCEA carveouts was one requiring that 35 percent of the storage target be developed by third parties. (Another also carved out 35 percent of the solar and onshore wind goal.) “When we drafted the bills that authorized these new programs, we envisioned policies and program rules that will unleash a competitive clean energy market that creates (a) maximum number of local jobs and attract(s) millions of dollars in investment to the commonwealth,” six Democratic lawmakers, including VCEA sponsors Sen. Jennifer McClellan and Del. Richard “Rip” Sullivan, wrote to the State Corporation Commission in an early November letter. The letter, a four-page list of the legislators’ concerns with commission proposals for both energy storage and shared solar regulations, also issued a veiled rebuke of SCC’s approach: The bills, lawmakers asserted, “were intended to open competition for new entrants, and not simply make incremental changes that largely maintain the status quo.” Of particular concern to many industry players are the permitting requirements regulators have proposed for non-utility companies to build storage. An early recommendation by SCC staff that would have required any project larger than 100 kilowatts to undergo a rigorous permitting process led by the commission provoked a strong backlash. The Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy said the low threshold imposed “onerous” requirements on a wide swath of projects, while the Southern Environmental Law Center labeled it “a transparent attempt to ensure non-utility storage is never built in Virginia.” Dominion, for its part, said the 100 kilowatt threshold was reasonable and consistent with a threshold set by regional electric transmission organization PJM for projects to sell power into wholesale markets. This November, commission staff conceded the 100 kilowatt threshold might be too low and bumped their recommendation up to one megawatt — still far lower than what many advocates sought. But they held tight to many of the permitting requirements, stating that while “certain aspects may be perceived as burdensome, they are intended to ensure that developers seeking to operate within the commonwealth will operate safely, will not negatively impact the reliability of the electric power system and will be ethically responsible in their interactions with Virginia consumers.” That sense of caution is also evident elsewhere. The Rural Solar Development Coalition that convened last year in response to a flurry of solar applications in Southside and Tidewater Virginia is also beginning to eye storage as the “next wave” of the renewables transition, said Halifax County Administrator Scott Simpson. “We want to be sure that our localities are prepared and understand what storage means, and if any of us were to be proposed a storage facility, what questions are there,” he said. *** — Fourth in a five-part series on the commonwealth’s transition to a carbon-free electric grid. Tomorrow: energy efficiency — ***

1 0

Dr. Mark Wallace, Dr. Cathy Slemp, former West Virginia state health officer, and Dr. Nichole Quick honored by New York Times
by Duane Nichols 28 Nov '20

28 Nov '20

https://www.greeleytribune.com/2020/11/27/new-york-times-honors-mark-wallac… New York Times honors Dr. Mark Wallace for early work during pandemic Jadyn Watson-FisherNovember 27, 2020 Dr. Mark Wallace, former director of the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment New York Times opinion staffers created the “Fauci Awards” to honor public health officials for work they’ve done during COVID-19. Dr. Mark Wallace, former Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment director, was one of three doctors featured. Wallace received the Times’ recognition for his work to protect low wage workers, namely the employees at JBS. “It comes as a surprise for me,” Wallace said. “I certainly don’t do my job for recognition, but it certainly is nice to get recognition when people catch onto the work you do.” Early in the pandemic, Wallace used his position to investigate the meat processing plant after reports indicated safety protocols — including physical distancing and COVID testing — were not available. Wallace and state health director Jill Hunsacker Ryan ordered JBS to shut the plant down in April. It became a hot spot for the virus, and six workers died this year after contracting the disease. The former public health official worked with Weld County for 25 years before retiring in May. Emails obtained by the Greeley Tribune in May indicate that the Weld County Commissioners sought to alter language related to COVID-19, including softening language in a press release about the county’s first pandemic-related death. Wallace and his staff were also told that all social media posts, website updates and press releases needed to be cleared by Jennifer Finch, the county’s chief information officer. The Weld County commissioners replaced Wallace with deputy director Mark Lawley, former Mountain View Fire Protection District CEO and fire chief. The Times also honored Dr. Cathy Slemp, former West Virginia state health officer, and Dr. Nichole Quick, former Orange County health official. Both officials resigned earlier this year. The Times reports that more than 60 public health officials nationwide have resigned, retired or been fired since the start of the pandemic. More than 10 officials in Colorado have left their posts. “Sometimes the right decision isn’t the popular one. That’s why it takes guts to be a public health officer,” New York Times’ opinion writer Adam Westbrook said in the video. “It shouldn’t be this way. Our public health officials deserve our trust, support and recognition.” Wallace, now the chief clinical officer at Sunrise Community Health, encouraged Weld County residents to continue washing their hands, practicing physical distancing, wearing masks and avoiding large gatherings. He said health care workers aren’t frontline workers but are the last line of defense against the virus. Residents need to follow protocols to ensure health care workers can properly care for themselves and patients. “I see more and more people doing the right thing even though folks are tired, and we’re all wanting this to be over,” Wallace said. “I just want to thank those who keep doing the right thing to protect others…that helps so much.”

1 0

Shell Wants Biden to Reverse Methane Emissions Rollback
by Duane Nichols 17 Nov '20

17 Nov '20

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/shell-wants-biden-reverse-methane-210846030.… Shell Wants Biden to Reverse Methane Emissions Rollback From an Article by David Wethe, Bloomberg News on Yahoo! Finance, November 10, 2020 (Bloomberg) -- Royal Dutch Shell Plc will push for the reversal of President Donald Trump’s rollback of methane emissions rules and the introduction of carbon pricing when Joe Biden moves into the White House next year. “Some of the regulatory rollbacks that we’ve seen under the current administration haven’t actually benefited our industry,” Shell U.S. President Gretchen Watkins said Tuesday on a webcast hosted by the Greater Houston Partnership. The easing of direct regulation of methane emissions put the energy industry in a “backwards-facing position,” while the absence of carbon pricing makes it harder to incentivize new technologies like carbon capture, Watkins said. “Whoever is in the White House, we will work constructively with them and are actually very much looking forward to building that relationship with the new administration that’s coming in in January,” she added. The oil and gas industry, which has long been the target of environmental groups, faces increasing pressure from shareholders managing trillions of dollars to address greenhouse-gas emissions such as methane. Shell joined BP Plc in September in calling for Texas regulators to end the routine flaring of natural gas, a by-product of the oil boom in the shale patch.

1 0

ACP Large Diameter Natural Gas Pipe on Mon River @ Pt. Marion, PA
by Duane Nichols 12 Nov '20

12 Nov '20

River barges with 42 inch pipe passing the mouth of the Cheat River @ 9 AM on 11/12/20 headed toward Pittsburgh, PA

1 0

Are You Remembering to Breathe?
by Duane Nichols 06 Nov '20

06 Nov '20

https://wvrivers.salsalabs.org/breathe?wvpId=1484761a-9d09-4d6b-911f-c33d0a… Sent from my iPad

1 0

Nasal Spray Prevents Covid Infection in Ferrets, Study Finds
by Duane Nichols 06 Nov '20

06 Nov '20

NEW YORK TIMES 6 NOVEMBER 2020 Nasal Spray Prevents Covid Infection in Ferrets, Study Finds Scientists at Columbia University have developed a treatment that blocks the virus in the nose and lungs, is inexpensive and needs no refrigeration. Ferrets are used by scientists studying flu, SARS and other respiratory diseases because the animals can catch viruses through the nose much like humans do.Credit...Peter Kovalev\TASS, via Getty Images By Donald G. McNeil Jr., New York Times. • Nov. 5, 2020 • A nasal spray that blocks the absorption of the SARS-CoV-2 virus has completely protected ferrets it was tested on, according to a small study released on Thursday by an international team of scientists. The study, which was limited to animals and has not yet been peer-reviewed, was assessed by several health experts at the request of The New York Times. If the spray, which the scientists described as nontoxic and stable, is proved to work in humans, it could provide a new way of fighting the pandemic. A daily spritz up the nose would act like a vaccine. “Having something new that works against the coronavirus is exciting,” said Dr. Arturo Casadevall, the chairman of immunology at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, who was not involved in the study. “I could imagine this being part of the arsenal.” The work has been underway for months by scientists from Columbia University Medical Center in New York, Erasmus Medical Center in the Netherlands and Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y., The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Columbia University Medical Center. The team would require additional funding to pursue clinical trials in humans. Dr. Anne Moscona, a pediatrician and microbiologist at Columbia and co-author of the study, said they had applied for a patent on the product, and she hoped Columbia University would approach the federal government’s Operation Warp Speed or large pharmaceutical companies that are seeking new ways to combat the coronavirus. The spray attacks the virus directly. It contains a lipopeptide, a cholesterol particle linked to a chain of amino acids, the building blocks of proteins. This particular lipopeptide exactly matches a stretch of amino acids in the spike protein of the virus, which the pathogen uses to attach to a human airway or lung cell. Before a virus can inject its RNA into a cell, the spike must effectively unzip, exposing two chains of amino acids, in order to fuse to the cell wall. As the spike zips back up to complete the process, the lipopeptide in the spray inserts itself, latching on to one of the spike’s amino acid chains and preventing the virus from attaching. “It is like you are zipping a zipper but you put another zipper inside, so the two sides cannot meet,” said Matteo Porotto, a microbiologist at Columbia University and one of the paper’s authors. The work was described in a paper posted to the preprint server bioRxiv Thursday morning, and has been submitted to the journal Science for peer review. Dr. Peter J. Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, said the therapy looked “really promising.” “What I’d like to know now is how easy it is to scale production,” he said. In the study, the spray was given to six ferrets, which were then divided into pairs and placed in three cages. Into each cage also went two ferrets that had been given a placebo spray and one ferret that had been deliberately infected with SARS-CoV-2 a day or two earlier. Ferrets are used by scientists studying flu, SARS and other respiratory diseases because they can catch viruses through the nose much as humans do, although they also infect each other by contact with feces or by scratching and biting. After 24 hours together, none of the sprayed ferrets caught the disease; all the placebo-group ferrets did. “Virus replication was completely blocked,” the authors wrote. The protective spray attaches to cells in the nose and lungs and lasts about 24 hours, Dr. Moscona said. “If it works this well in humans, you could sleep in a bed with someone infected or be with your infected kids and still be safe,” she said. The amino acids come from a stretch of the spike protein in coronaviruses that rarely mutates. The scientists tested it against four different variants of the virus, including both the well-known “Wuhan” and “Italian” strains, and also against the coronaviruses that cause SARS and MERS. In cell cultures, it protected completely against all strains of the pandemic virus, fairly well against SARS and partially against MERS. The lipoprotein can be inexpensively produced as a freeze-dried white powder that does not need refrigeration, Dr. Moscona said. A doctor or pharmacist could mix the powder with sugar and water to produce a nasal spray. Other labs have designed antibodies and “mini-proteins” that also block the SARS-CoV-2 virus from entering cells, but these are chemically more complex and may need to be stored in cold temperatures. Dr. Moscona and Dr. Porotto have been collaborating on similar “fusion inhibitor” peptides for 15 years, they said in a conference call. They have developed some against measles, Nipah, parainfluenza and other viruses. But those products aroused little commercial interest, Dr. Porotto said, because an effective measles vaccine already exists and because the deadly Nipah virus only turns up occasionally in faraway places like Bangladesh and Malaysia. Monoclonal antibodies to the new coronavirus have been shown to prevent infection as well as treat it, but they are expensive to make, require refrigeration and must be injected. Australian scientists have tested a nasal spray against Covid-19 in ferrets, but it works by enhancing the immune system, not by targeting the virus directly. Because lipopeptides can be shipped as a dry powder, they could be used even in rural areas in poor countries that lack refrigeration, Dr. Moscona said. Dr. Moscona, a pediatrician who usually works on parainfluenza and other viruses that infect children, said she was most interested in getting the product to poor countries that may never have access to the monoclonal antibodies and mRNA vaccines that Americans may soon have. But she has little experience in that arena, she said. “I’ve always been a basic scientist,” she said. “I’ve never done drug development or taken anything to the F.D.A. or anything like that.” Donald G. McNeil Jr. is a science reporter covering epidemics and diseases of the world’s poor. He joined The Times in 1976, has reported from 60 countries and is a winner of the John Chancellor Award. A version of this article appears in print on Nov. 6, 2020, Section A, Page 4 of the New York edition with the headline: Nasal Spray Halts Covid in Ferrets, Study Finds. URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/05/health/coronavirus-ferrets-vaccine-spray…

1 0

Fwd: Making the Invisible Visible: What You Don’t See Can Hurt You
by Duane Nichols 05 Nov '20

05 Nov '20

From: "Concerned Ohio River Residents via ActionNetwork.org" <info(a)email.actionnetwork.org> > Date: November 5, 2020 at 4:05:20 PM EST > To: Duane330(a)aol.com > Subject: Making the Invisible Visible: What You Don’t See Can Hurt You > Reply-To: concernedohioriverresidents(a)yahoo.com > > > > In just a few hours, join the first session of Making the Invisible Visible, our webinar and Q&A on air pollution and inadequate regulation in the Ohio River Valley. Ohio regulatory agencies' inadequate monitoring and oversight of fracking-related air pollution in Belmont County endangers our health and livelihoods, especially if an ethane cracker plant is also built in the region. Join us this evening to learn more! > Register for our webinar and Q&A TONIGHT from 6:30pm to 8:00pm EST. > > If you can't make it tonight, we're hosting a second session of Making the Invisible Visible on Thursday, November 19th at 6:30pm. Save the date and register here. > > The Ohio River Valley is already endangered by the cumulative pollution caused by the fracking industry, including toxic chemicals and radioactive particulate matter. Learn more about how you can protect yourself by participating in a community monitoring program to establish baseline air quality data and advise residents of their exposures and associated health effects. > > See who’s attending our event on Facebook. > > What you’ll get from tonight's presentation: > > Information on the potential health risks posed by proximity to shale gas wells and other fracking-related facilities. > > An understanding of state regulatory agencies’ complicity in allowing petrochemical facilities to emit potentially dangerous levels of chemical pollutants into the air we breathe. > > The opportunity to discuss air pollution in Belmont County with scientists, air monitoring experts, public health professionals, and community advocates during a 30-minute Q&A session. > > This presentation was made possible with the help of the Freshwater Accountability Project, the American Geophysical Union’s Thriving Earth Exchange, Carnegie Mellon University’s CREATE Lab, FracTracker Alliance, Concerned Ohio River Residents, Halt the Harm Network, and the Southwestern Pennsylvania Environmental Health Project. > > Thanks for reading! We look forward to seeing you tonight, > > Ben Hunkler > > Organizer, Concerned Ohio River Residents > > > Sent via Action Network, a free online toolset anyone can use to organize. Click here to sign up and get started building an email list and creating online actions today. > Action Network is an open platform that empowers individuals and groups to organize for progressive causes. We encourage responsible activism, and do not support using the platform to take unlawful or other improper action. We do not control or endorse the conduct of users and make no representations of any kind about them. > You can unsubscribe or update your email address or change your name and address by changing your subscription preferences here. >

1 0

U.S. Now Officially Out of the Paris Climate Agreement - EcoWatch
by Duane Nichols 05 Nov '20

05 Nov '20

U.S. Now Officially Out of the Paris Climate Agreement - EcoWatch https://www.ecowatch.com/paris-agreement-us-withdrawal-2648618695.html From an Article by Olivia Rosane, EcoWatch.com, November 5, 2020 The U.S. has officially left the Paris climate agreement. However, the permanence of its departure hangs on the still-uncertain outcome of Tuesday's U.S. presidential election. While President Donald Trump made the decision to withdraw the U.S. from the agreement, his rival former Vice President Joe Biden has promised to rejoin "on day one," as NPR pointed out. Either way, the U.S. withdrawal has hurt trust in the country's ability to follow through on climate diplomacy initiated by one administration when another takes power. "Being out formally obviously hurts the US reputation," former Obama administration climate official Andrew Light told BBC News. "This will be the second time that the United States has been the primary force behind negotiating a new climate deal — with the Kyoto Protocol we never ratified it, in the case of the Paris Agreement, we left it. So, I think it's obviously a problem." The landmark 2015 agreement was designed to limit the global warming causing the climate crisis to well below two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, and ideally to limit it to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The U.S. is currently responsible for around 15 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, but it is historically the country that has contributed the most emissions to the atmosphere, NPR pointed out. Under the Paris agreement, the U.S. had pledged to reduce emissions around 25 percent by 2025 compared to 2005 levels, but it is now only on track to reduce them by 17 percent. This is partly due to Trump administration environmental policies like the rollback of Obama-era emissions controls on power plantsand vehicles. Emissions rose during the first two years of Trump's presidency but have declined in 2020 because of the economic downturn caused by the coronavirus pandemic. The U.S. withdrawal has also affected a global fund intended to help poorer countries on the frontlines of the climate crisis adapt to rising seas and temperatures. The U.S. had originally committed to supplying $3 billion, but the Trump administration withdrew two-thirds of that amount. "The U.S. was a major pledger to that first funding. When they never delivered, that certainly was an impact to us," Carlos Fuller, the lead climate negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States, told NPR. Trump first formally announced his intention to withdraw from the Paris agreement in 2017, arguing that it would harm U.S. jobs, The New York Times reported. His administration formally began the withdrawal process Nov. 4, 2019, the earliest date possible under UN rules. That process then took a year, which is why the U.S. is officially out today. If Biden wins and rejoins the agreement on Jan. 20, the reversal would be effective 30 days later. The U.S. is now the only country to withdraw from the accord. It has been signed by 195 countries and ratified by 189. In the absence of U.S. leadership, other major players have pressed forward. In the past month, the European Parliament has voted to reduce emissions 60 percent by 2030, while China has pledged to reach net-zero emissions by 2060 and Japan and South Korea have both promised to do the same by 2050. "There's momentum continuing to build even with the U.S. pulling out," Union of Concerned Scientists director Alden Meyer told The New York Times. "The question is, would it continue without the U.S. fully on board?"

1 0

Unusually mild weather is likely to linger for about a week
by Duane Nichols 04 Nov '20

04 Nov '20

WASHINGTON POST 4 NOVEMBER 2020 Unusual and enduring warmth to overspread central, eastern U.S. By Matthew Cappucci, Washington Post, November 3, 2020 Abnormally mild weather is en route to the central and eastern United States to carry us into mid-November. High temperatures some 10 to 15 degrees above average are likely for about a week’s time, overspreading regions from the Plains and Mississippi Valley all the way to the Atlantic coast. The predicted warmth is a dramatic turnaround from earlier this week, when a fall cold front swung through Sunday with howling winds, nippy temperatures and an insurgence of bone-dry air. Now, highs could hit 70 in places like Washington, D.C., New York City, Chicago and perhaps even Boston, the balmy temperature set to stick around through at least Veterans Day (Nov. 11). In these locations, it will feel more like early October than early November. High pressure in control The warmth is all thanks to a slow-moving dome of high pressure, bringing southerly winds and sunshine to much of the southern and eastern United States. It was anchored over the South and Gulf Coast on Tuesday, but will saunter east, the core of it slipping offshore toward the Canadian Maritimes late week. That ridge of high pressure will stall offshore, southerly winds on the western flank of its clockwise flow pumping warm, slightly more humid air up the Atlantic seaboard. All major weather systems will be diverted to the north and west, allowing about a week of tranquil, mild weather.That warm “blocking high” will probably begin to break down around Nov. 10 to 12. Temperatures begin to increase on Wednesday, when winds shift more from the south and southeast for the eastern United States. D.C. should make it into the mid-60s, along with Chicago, Atlanta and Charlotte. The onshore flow will entrench New England in lingering cool air, with highs on Wednesday only in the lower 50s. A temperature seesaw across the Lower 48 On Thursday, temperatures will really begin to spike, with highs some 25 degrees or more above normal in parts of the northern Plains and Intermountain West. Billings, Mont., and Casper, Wyo., could climb into the lower 70s. Both locations would ordinarily be in the upper 40s this time of year; Billings recorded 20 inches of snow in October. Denver will be in the 70s, too. By Friday, 70 degrees is pretty much the magic number across most of the central and eastern United States. Highs in the lower 70s are likely from the Four Corners region east through the Plains. Minneapolis, a city that saw its earliest heavy snowfall on record this season after nearly 8 inches fell on Oct. 20, could nick the 70 degree mark. D.C., Baltimore, Philadelphia and New York could also flirt with or exceed 70 degrees, while Boston will likely enjoy mid- to upper 60s. Meanwhile, a cold front will begin gathering over the West this weekend as a dip in the jet stream allows frigid air to descend south from Canada. Billings, which days before will have basked in springlike warmth, may not make it above freezing this weekend. In fact, the high on Sunday is predicted at 20 degrees. Casper, Bismarck, N.D., and Salt Lake City will all plummet into the upper 20s and lower to mid-30s by Sunday, with the cold reaching Denver and Minneapolis on Monday. Simultaneously, the nation’s temperature seesaw will continue to favor warmth in the East. The prolonged above-average temperatures along the East Coast could last into the start of winter, albeit punctuated with intermittent spurts of chill. The National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center calls for increased odds of above-average temperatures over the East Coast, Ohio Valley and Southeast through at least mid-November, with slightly above-average conditions likely over much of the Lower 48 through February. Matthew Cappucci Matthew Cappucci is a meteorologist for Capital Weather Gang. He earned a B.A. in atmospheric sciences from Harvard University in 2019, and has contributed to The Washington Post since he was 18. He is an avid storm chaser and adventurer, and covers all types of weather, climate science, and astronomy. URL: https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2020/11/03/eastern-us-warm-temperatu…

1 0

Longview Pilot.pdf
by Duane Nichols 01 Nov '20

01 Nov '20

For your information .... political fever brings out secret details ... DGN Sent from my iPad

1 0

Final call, Please register to speak against the Longview Greenhouse gas permit
by Duane Nichols 26 Oct '20

26 Oct '20

From: MON VALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION > Date: October 26, 2020 at 7:12:43 PM EDT > > Subject: Final call, Please register to speak against the Longview Greenhouse gas permit > > If you have not already done so, please click the link in the announcement below to register to speak at the "Virtual Hearing" on Longview I Greenhouse Gas Permit. > > I attach the draft permit, the DEP's Engineering Evaluation, and some comments from a Sierra Engineer who has examined the permit. > > But if you don't have time to read all this, One simple message to WV-DEP: > > "We must reduce greenhouse gas emissions, please do not allow Longview to increase them, as proposed in this draft permit." > > Thank you. > > Jim Kotcon, Sierra Club & MVCAC > > P.S. Invite a friend! > > =========================================================== > > Friday, October 9, 2020 @ 9:04 AM > > > AIR QUALITY PERMIT NOTICE AND PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULED > > Notice of Intent to Approve > > On June 1, 2020, Longview Power, LLC applied to the WV Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality (DAQ) for a permit to establish a carbon dioxide emission standard for an electricity generation facility located at 1375 Fort Martin Road, Maidsville, Monongalia County, WV, at 39.7090 latitude and -79.9589 longitude. A preliminary evaluation has determined that all State and Federal air quality requirements will be met by the proposed facility. The DAQ is providing notice to the public of its preliminary determination to issue the permit as R13-3495. > > This permitting action will establish a weighted carbon dioxide standard on a calendar year basis using the established load bin limits below and the hours of operation in each load bin during the year. > > Load Bin Load Bin Range > (MWh G) Normal Operation > Level 1 Limit* > (lb CO2/MWh Net) Impaired Operation > Level 2 Limit** > (lb CO2/MWh Net) > LB-0 0-313 9,864G N/A > LB-1 >313-407 2,230 2,453 > LB-2 >407-501 2,108 2,319 > LB-3 >501-595 2,050 2,255 > LB-4 >595-689 2,002 2,202 > LB-5 >689 1,958 2,154 > > G = Gross generation in terms of MWh gross electricity generation. > * = Normal Operations above the minimum stable load of the emission unit. > ** = Impaired Operations above the minimum stable load that has been approved by the Director for a specified duration of time. Impaired Operation means that the unit can operate below normal efficiency due to unavoidable equipment failure. > > After the initial compliance year, the above limits will be increase by 0.4% annually due to unit degradation with a recovery rate that decreases the limit by 0.7% once every five years. In the year 2046, these limits will be fixed thereafter at the following limits: > > Load Bin Load Bin Range > (MWh G) Normal Operation > Level 1 Limit* > (lb CO2/MWh Net) Impaired Operation > Level 2 Limit** > (lb CO2/MWh Net) > LB-0 0-313 10,523G N/A > LB-1 >313-407 2,379 2,617 > LB-2 >407-501 2,249 2,474 > LB-3 >501-595 2,187 2,406 > LB-4 >595-689 2,136 2,349 > LB-5 >689 2,089 2,298 > > > The DAQ has scheduled a public meeting for 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 27, 2020. The public meeting will be held virtually to prevent the spread of COVID- > 19 in accordance with the Governor’s Safer at Home Order and the WVDEP COVID-19 Policy. Instructions for providing written comments and for providing oral comments at the virtual public meeting are provided below. > > The purpose of the public review process is to accept public comments on air quality issues relevant to this determination. Only written comments or comments presented orally at the scheduled public meeting, will be considered prior to final action on the permit. All such comments will become part of the public record. > > Written comments must be received by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, November 9, 2020: > • Email written comments to Edward.S.Andrews(a)wv.gov with “Longview > Power Comments” in the subject line, or > • Mail hard copy comments to Edward Andrews, WV Department of > Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street, SE, Charleston, WV 25304. > > Public meeting participation: > • Members of the public can participate online or listen via > telephone. Participant pre-registration is required by 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 27, 2020. > > To register, please complete the participant registration form at https://apps.dep.wv.gov/daq-register/133495. > > A confirmation email will be sent with information on how to join the public meeting. If you do not have internet access and want to register, please contact Sandie Adkins (ext. 41243) or Stephanie Hammonds (ext. 41263) at (304) 926-0475 by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, October 26, 2020. > > Additional information, including copies of the draft permit, application and all other supporting materials relevant to the permit decision may be obtained by contacting the engineer listed below or downloaded at: > > https://dep.wv.gov/daq/permitting/Pages/NSR-Permit-Applications.aspx > > Edward Andrews > WV Department of Environmental Protection Division of Air Quality > 601 57th Street, SE > Charleston, WV 25304 > Telephone: 304/926-0499, ext. 41244 > edward.s.andrews(a)wv.gov > > =========================================================== > > >

1 0

TONIGHT, 6PM EDT - "Climate Generations" Global Webinar
by Duane Nichols 22 Oct '20

22 Oct '20

From: "Eve Marcum-Atkinson | WV Citizen Action Group" <eve(a)wvcag.org> > Date: October 22, 2020 at 2:51:17 PM EDT > > Subject: TONIGHT, 6PM EDT - "Climate Generations" Global Webinar > Reply-To: info(a)wvcag.org > > > > "What Do We Tell The Kids -- and What Are They Telling Us? > Generational Perspectives and the Climate Crisis." > > A Free Online Global Webinar > TONIGHT! > 6:00-8:00 PM US-EDT > > > > Dear Friend, > > > > Are you concerned about global warming and the climate crisis, and looking for solutions that involve people of all ages? > > If your answer is "YES," then TONIGHT please join others from around the world for a free, live, expert-led global webinar, originating from right here in WV, about how different generations can work together for climate solutions. > > Click this link to Register! > > Thank you for taking action for Earth! > > > Sincerely, > > Eve Marcum-Atkinson > Communications Coordinator, WV Citizen Action Group > > > > > West Virginia Citizen Action Group > a: 1500 Dixie St., Charleston WV 25311 > e: info(a)wvcag.org > > > DONATE > unsubscribe

1 0

Three Scenarios for the Future of Climate Change | The New Yorker, 10/5/20
by Duane Nichols 11 Oct '20

11 Oct '20

Three Scenarios for the Future of Climate Change, Elizabeth Kolbert, The New Yorker, October 5, 2020 Three Scenarios for the Future of Climate Change. What will the Earth look like thirty years from now? To a discomfiting extent, the future has already been written. There’s a great deal of inertia in the climate system; as a result, we’ve yet to experience the full effects of the CO2 that’s been emitted to date. No matter what happens during the next few decades, it’s pretty much guaranteed that glaciers and ice sheets will continue to melt, as temperatures and sea levels continue to rise. But to an extent that, depending on your perspective, is either heartening or horrifying, the future—and not just of the next several decades but of the next several millennia—hinges on actions that will be taken by the time today’s toddlers reach adulthood. What’s technically referred to as “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” and colloquially known as “catastrophe” is warming so dramatic that it’s apt to obliterate whole nations (such as the Marshall Islands and the Maldives) and destroy entire ecosystems (such as coral reefs). https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-a-warming-planet/three-scenarios-f…

1 0

Living on Earth: Beyond the Headlines
by Duane Nichols 10 Oct '20

10 Oct '20

https://loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=20-P13-00041&segmentID=5 Beyond the Headlines From LIVING ON EARTH, Air Date: Week of October 9, 2020 On this week's Beyond the Headlines, Environmental Health News Editor Peter Dykstra tells Host Bobby Bascomb about a plan to drill along the Atlantic that has fallen apart due to un-renewed seismic blasting permits. Then, the pair talk about how more K-12 schools are powering classrooms with solar energy. Finally, from the history books, the anniversary of a coal slurry spill that weakened the coal lobby's stranglehold on Appalachia. Transcript CURWOOD: It’s Living on Earth, I’m Steve Curwood. BASCOMB: And I’m Bobby Bascomb. It’s time for a trip now Beyond the Headlines with Peter Dykstra. Peter is an editor with Environmental Health News, that’s EHN dot org and Daily Climate dot org. DYKSTRA: Hi Bobby, there's a little bit of news that's flipped on the conventional wisdom, instead of people working to save whales, in at least one court case on the Atlantic coast, whales have helped save humans. BASCOMB: Oh, how's that? DYKSTRA: Well, there's some situation along the eastern coast of the US where the Trump administration had wanted to pursue seismic testing as the first step in the search for offshore oil. Seismic testing is contended to have done damage to whales and other marine mammals. Seismic testing is the firing of these huge compressed air cannons fired at the ocean floor and the feedback from those explosions helps determine whether or not there's oil and gas beneath the ocean floor. And because of court cases in South Carolina and elsewhere, the Trump administration appears poised to drop its efforts for permits for seismic testing, which means no offshore oil in the Atlantic. BASCOMB: Well, I know that the governors of these coastal states are opposed to drilling for oil off their shores and President Trump exempted Florida from offshore oil drilling but how have the oil companies themselves responded to this news? DYKSTRA: They haven't really responded much at all, possibly because oil drilling on the East Coast is something they never wanted in the first place. It's politically controversial. It involves risk of potentially catastrophic spill in some of our most beloved beach areas. And it's just not financially worth it. Any kind of offshore oil and gas recovery is expensive and this particular proposal comes at a time when oil is cheap. In other words, spending extra to get oil that is going to have a far lower profit margin and a much higher political expense. BASCOMB: All right, well, thank you to the whales, then. What else do you have for us this week? DYKSTRA: There's a little good news, according to a solar industry report, there's an 81% increase in K through 12 schools, kindergarten through high school that use solar power. That increase over the last five years, means 5.3 million kids and teens are going to school using solar energy. BASCOMB: Wow, that's amazing. I mean, it's very forward thinking, you know, and stands to reason for an organization that's inherently thinking about the future, you know, educating children, DYKSTRA: And a couple of practical concerns number one are schools are chronically underfunded, this may be another way to save energy costs. Schools just like a Walmart or a Target or a Costco have a lot of roof space and that roof space can be making energy and making money instead of being a neutral item on stretch school budgets. BASCOMB: Yeah, for sure. What do you have for us from the history books this week? DYKSTRA: October 11, 1980 fourty years ago, a coal company called Massey Energy saw its coal slurry dam fail, sending contaminated water through a couple of communities and into the Big Sandy River that's on the West Virginia Kentucky border, causing a tremendous water pollution problem. The Ohio River downstream is a major drinking water source for the region. That particular incident didn't bring with it a high death toll but almost exactly 30 years later in 2010, another Massey Energy project, a mine at Upper Big Branch in West Virginia caught fire, partly collapsed. Twenty-nine miners were killed and in an unprecedented legal move the flamboyant CEO of Massey Energy, Don Blankenship was sent to jail for a year for mine safety violations that killed those 29 miners. BASCOMB: Well, one year in prison for the death of 29 people I mean, doesn't sound like very much. DYKSTRA: It doesn't sound like very much but because it's set a precedent and began to shake the stranglehold that big coal had on Law and Justice in the environment in Appalachia. It was a significant move. Don Blankenship was also a major political player, going to jail for a year certainly brought him down a notch as well. BASCOMB: All right well, thank you Peter. Peter Dykstra is an editor with Environmental Health News that's ehn.org and dailyclimate.org. We'll talk to you again real soon. DYKSTRA: All right, Bobby, thanks a lot. Talk to you soon. BASCOMB: And there's more on these stories at the Living on Earth website that's loe.org. #. #. #. #. #. #. . #. #. #. #. #.

1 0

We're Going Live! Join Us for 24 Hours of Reality: Countdown to the Future
by Duane Nichols 10 Oct '20

10 Oct '20

Date: October 10, 2020 at 1:53:10 PM EDT > Subject: We're Going Live! Join Us for 24 Hours of Reality: Countdown to the Future > > > > Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition > Action Alert > Supporting Organized Voices and > Empowered Communities Since 1987 > > Oct 10, 2020 > > > > We're going live for 24 Hours of Reality: Countdown to the Future > Now is the time to ask ourselves one simple question: What is the future we want? > > From October 10-11, former Vice President Al Gore and The Climate Reality Project will do just that with 24 Hours of Reality: Countdown to the Future, a global conversation on the future we want and how we get there. > > For 24 straight hours, Climate Reality Leader activists across the planet will lead digital presentations and discussions exploring the historic conjunction of climate change, COVID-19, and structural racism that not only threatens our lives and deepest values, but opens the door to truly transformative change. > > Join us at today at 2 p.m. for a virtual presentation featuring Climate Reality Leader Dr. Randi Pokladnik as part of the worldwide two-day event. View the Facebook event to join on Zoom or watch the live presentation. > > Donate > > > The Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition > > PO Box 6753 > Huntington, WV 25773-6753 > United States > info(a)ohvec.org 304-522-0246 > >

1 0

Xiye Bastida: If you adults won't save the world, we will | TED Talk
by Duane Nichols 08 Oct '20

08 Oct '20

Xiye Bastida: If you adults won't save the world, we will | TED Talk https://www.ted.com/talks/xiye_bastida_if_you_adults_won_t_save_the_world_w… Xiye Bastida·TED2020 If you adults won't save the world, we will Details Transcript Reading List Comments (23) In a deeply moving letter to her grandmother, Xiye Bastida reflects on what led her to become a leading voice for global climate activism -- from mobilizing school climate strikes to speaking at the United Nations Climate Summit alongside Greta Thunberg -- and traces her resolve, resilience and profound love of the earth to the values passed down to her. "Thank you for inviting me to love the world since the moment I was born," she says.

1 0

Global Launch | Countdown: To a better future.
by Duane Nichols 08 Oct '20

08 Oct '20

https://countdown.ted.com/global-launch Global Launch | Countdown: To a better future. To make progress on climate action we need to collaborate on a global scale, and your community has an important role to play. On 10.10.2020, Countdown will launch globally with a virtual event, and we invite you to join us. Watch online at home with your family and friends, or sign up to host a TEDx Countdown event of your own with your community, in your language, for your time zone. Tune in on 10.10.2020 on TED's channel on YouTube. In the meantime, sign up to get updates and reminders. Program Live: 11am-5pm Eastern Standard Time / 5-11pm Central European Time More than 50 speakers feature in five curated sessions that combine TED's signature blend of actionable and research-backed ideas, cutting-edge science, and moments of wonder and inspiration. View the full program JOIN AN EVENT AROUND THE WORLD You can join an event near you or on the other side of the world. Search to find one that works for you. ACCESS: Countdown: To a better future https://countdown.ted.com/

1 0

CDC Acknowledges Coronavirus Can Spread Via Airborne Transmission
by Duane Nichols 06 Oct '20

06 Oct '20

From www.npr.org: CDC Acknowledges Coronavirus Can Spread Via Airborne Transmission, October 5, 2020 The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention now says the coronavirus can be spread through airborne particles that can linger in the air "for minutes or even hours" — even among people who are more than 6 feet apart. The CDC still says that SARS-COV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is most frequently spread among people in close contact with one another, through respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs, sneezes or talks. But in new guidance published Monday on its website, the agency also acknowledged that under certain circumstances, people have become infected by smaller particles that can linger in the air in enclosed spaces that are poorly ventilated. "Sometimes the infected person was breathing heavily, for example while singing or exercising," the CDC said. In such cases, the CDC said, there's evidence that the amount of smaller infectious droplets and particles that a contagious person produces "became concentrated enough to spread the virus to other people" – even if they were more than 6 feet away. In some cases, the CDC said, transmission occurred "shortly after the person with COVID-19 had left" the room. Many experts who study the airborne transmission of viruses have been warning that the coronavirus can spread through the air for months. Last month, many experts cheered when the CDC seemed to address the issue, posting an update that suggested that aerosols – tiny airborne particles expelled from a person's mouth when they speak, sing, sneeze or breathe — might be among the most common ways the coronavirus is spreading. But the agency took down that guidance a few days later, saying it was a draft proposal that was posted to its website in error. The CDC's latest guidance stops short of calling airborne transmission "common." "It's gratifying to see CDC acknowledge that there's a role for airborne transmission with this virus," said Donald Milton, an aerobiologist at the University of Maryland and coauthor of a letter published in the journal Science on Monday that calls for clearer public health guidance on how the coronavirus spreads through the air. However, the distinction between the CDC and Milton and his cosigners is how often airborne transmission happens. In a call with reporters Monday, Milton and his cosigners on the Science letter said the evidence suggests that airborne transmission is probably the dominant form of transmission – even in close-contact situations within 6 feet of an infected person. "Airborne transmission happens by inhalation of virus that's in the air," said Linsey Marr, professor of engineering at Virginia Tech and an expert in aerosol science. "And this is happening even more frequently when people are close to each other." So how does this affect how we should protect ourselves in practical terms? Marr and other experts said people should be wearing a mask whenever they are indoors with people outside of their household pod – even if they are standing more than 6 feet apart, or even in a situation where a plexiglass barrier is in place. Marr said masks are also a good idea outdoors if you are going to be in prolonged contact with people not in your household, even if you are more than 6 feet apart. "It's a grayish area where I think adopting the precautionary principle is best," Marr said. It also means that "ventilation really is just so important," said Kimberly Prather, an atmospheric chemist at Scripps Institution of Oceanography and lead author of the Science letter. She recommends opening doors and windows, moving gatherings outdoors whenever possible, and the use of standalone air filters in rooms. In addition to improving ventilation indoors, the CDC said people should stay at least 6 feet away from others whenever possible, avoid crowded indoors spaces and – as always – wash their hands regularly. ########################### According to worldometers.info there are now 35,698,654 reported cases worldwide so far with a total of 1,045,953 deaths to date. The USA leads with 7,679,644 cases with 215,032 deaths. India is in second place with 6,682,073 total cases and 103,600 deaths. California is first place in the US with 835,971 cases to date and 16,178 deaths. Texas is second with 809,560 total cases and 16,564 deaths. Florida is third with 717,874 total cases and 14,722 deaths. NY continues to remain fourth with 500,415 cases and 33, 318 deaths. According to the PA Health Dept, the number of reported cases are 164,207 cases so far, with 8,227 deaths. Locally, Allegheny 12,777 cases (up 46) total deaths 364. Fayette 831 (up 3) with 7 deaths, Greene 194 with 1 death, Somerset 238 with 3 deaths, Washington 1,449 ( up 15) with 30 deaths, Westmoreland 2,461 (up 45) with 567 (up 1) total deaths , Garrett County, Md 76 with 1 death, Monongalia, WV 2,108 (up 10) with 5 total deaths. All cases and deaths are totals to date.

1 0

Climate change guide released by coalition of WV environment, social justice groups | Energy and Environment | wvgazettemail.com
by Duane Nichols 22 Sep '20

22 Sep '20

Climate change guide released by coalition of WV environment, social justice groups Article from Staff Reports, Charleston Gazette Mail, September 22, 2020 A Citizens Guide to Climate Change, a 16-page report on the impending climate crisis and summaries of potential solutions proposed to counter it, has been released by the newly formed West Virginia Climate Alliance. "This guide is the beginning of a dialog with West Virginians," said Charleston's Perry Bryant, a member of the Alliance. "Regardless of who wins the election this November, climate change legislation is likely to be considered in 2021. West Virginians need to understand the range of options for addressing climate change and how these options will affect our state and its people." Strategies under consideration for mitigating the effects of climate change are covered in the guide, including carbon fees and taxes, cap-and-trade pricing for carbon, fuel economy standards and tax incentives for low-carbon technologies. Key components of the Green New Deal are also discussed. According to the guide's introduction, information used in its compilation is "scientifically valid," and relies heavily on research from government agencies. The guide was produced for "people who are concerned about climate change and want more information." "We're noticing more West Virginians seeking to have a better understanding of climate change," said Angie Rosser, director of the West Virginia Rivers Coalition, one of the groups that make up the West Virginia Climate Alliance. "It's a complex issue with many implications for our state, and this guide is a starting point for people to become more informed." In West Virginia, climate change may have played a role in deadly flooding in June 2016, caused by a downpour severe enough to be expected only once in 1,000 years, according to the guide, citing a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration report. Some of the hottest temperatures on record for September and October were recorded last year during those months, according to the guide. While West Virginia is located in the heart of coal country, "we believe people can help fight climate change and at the same time, treat coal miners with dignity and respect," Bryant said. The West Virginia Climate Alliance includes the American Friends Service Committee, Center for Energy and Sustainable Development, Citizens Climate Lobby West Virginia, League of Women Voters of West Virginia, Christians for the Mountains, Moms Clean Air Force-West Virginia, Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, Sierra Club of West Virginia, West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy, West Virginia Citizen Action Education Fund, West Virginia Interfaith Power and Light and the West Virginia Rivers Coalition. To view A Citizen’s Guide to Climate Change, go to wvrivers.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/wvclimate.pdf. For a printed copy of the guide, or to comment on its content, contact Bryant at perrybryantwv(a)outlook.com. SOURCE: https://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/energy_and_environment/climate-change-gu…

1 0

Global Climate Strike on Friday, September 25
by Duane Nichols 21 Sep '20

21 Sep '20

Greta Thunberg ·September 20, 2020 This is me at the age of 2. The picture was taken 2005 in France. Since then about one third of ALL the world’s fossil fuel CO2 emissions have occurred. Over half of our CO2 emissions have taken place since 1990. That sort of gives you an idea of how fast we’re racing in the wrong direction. Our annual emissions are now so high that every single year of Business As Usual will impact future living conditions for countless generations. Join us this Friday, September 25th for the global climate strike. #FridaysForFuture #facetheclimateemergency Sent from my iPad, DGN

1 0

What Climate Change Does to the Human Body - Scientific American
by Duane Nichols 15 Sep '20

15 Sep '20

What Climate Change Does to the Human Body An ENT physician sees the effects in her patients all the time By Neelu Tummala, Scientific American, August 29, 2020 https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-climate-change-does-to-the-…

1 0

'A Matter of Life and Death': After 175 Years, Scientific American Backs Biden With Magazine's First-Ever Endorsement | Common Dreams News
by Duane Nichols 15 Sep '20

15 Sep '20

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/09/15/matter-life-and-death-after-17… 'A Matter of Life and Death': After 175 Years, Scientific American Backs Biden With Magazine's First-Ever Endorsement The editors blast Trump's rejection of "evidence and science," especially "his dishonest and inept response to the Covid-19 pandemic." By Jessica Corbett, Common Dreams News, September 15, 2020 With unprecedented wildfires burning across western states, the Gulf Coast bracing for a hurricane, and the coronavirus pandemic still raging, Scientific American on Tuesday gave Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden its first-ever endorsement in the magazine's 175-year history. "The 2020 election is literally a matter of life and death. We urge you to vote for health, science, and Joe Biden for president." —Scientific American Although SciAm had refrained from supporting any political candidates up until now, "this year we are compelled to do so," the editors explain in an endorsement published online. "We do not do this lightly." "The evidence and the science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its people—because he rejects evidence and science," the editors charge, calling "his dishonest and inept response to the Covid-19 pandemic" just the "most devastating example." SciAm's editors note that in addition to his "catastrophic" handling of the ongoing public health crisis, Trump "has also attacked environmental protections, medical care, and the researchers and public science agencies that help this country prepare for its greatest challenges." "That is why we urge you to vote for Joe Biden, who is offering fact-based plans to protect our health, our economy and the environment," they write. "These and other proposals he has put forth can set the country back on course for a safer, more prosperous, and more equitable future." The magazine endorsement details how Trump's mismanagement and dishonesty regarding the pandemic, the Affordable Care Act, and climate change contrast with Biden, who "comes prepared with plans to control Covid-19, improve healthcare, reduce carbon emissions, and restore the role of legitimate science in policy making." The former vice president "solicits expertise and has turned that knowledge into solid policy proposals," the editors point out. Biden is getting advice on these public health issues from a group that includes David Kessler, epidemiologist, pediatrician, and former U.S. Food and Drug Administration chief; Rebecca Katz, immunologist and global health security specialist at Georgetown University; and Ezekiel Emanuel, bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania. It does not include physicians who believe in aliens and debunked virus therapies, one of whom Trump has called "very respected" and "spectacular." SciAm's editors also highlighted a $2 trillion proposal that Biden put forward in July that won praise from environmental and climate campaigners. As Common Dreams reported at the time, some progressive activists who had been critical of the candidate welcomed the plan as a major step forward while still emphasizing that Biden has more work to do and grassroots movements will keep pressuring him to deliver. That message was clear Monday in another endorsement of Biden. The Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund, in its endorsement announcement, compared the Democrat's potential with Trump's record of rolling back dozens of environmental and public health protections to appease corporate polluters. "Joe Biden must defeat Donald Trump in November or this planet and our democracy will suffer catastrophic and irreversible damage." —Kierán Suckling, president of the Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund "We cannot equivocate in this election. Joe Biden must defeat Donald Trump in November or this planet and our democracy will suffer catastrophic and irreversible damage," said Kierán Suckling, president of the Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund. "Donald Trump has been the most anti-environmental president in modern history." The current president "has put children in cages, elevated white supremacy, denigrated women, mocked the suffering of countless people, and divided our nation through the politics of hatred, fear, and ignorance," Suckling said. "Joe Biden can restore decency and give us a fighting chance to stop the environmental calamities we now face." "The nightmare of the Trump presidency must come to an end in November," he added. "After the election we'll push President Biden tirelessly to stop the wildlife extinction crisis, tackle the global climate emergency and protect people from polluters. First, though, we have to get Trump out of office. The future of our planet is at stake." The group's endorsement came as Trump visited fire-ravaged California and publicly denied climate science—telling one state official, "It'll start getting cooler, you just watch"—while Biden delivered a climate-focused speech in Delaware that was applauded by the youth-led Sunrise Movement and other advocacy groups. While Trump in recent weeks has come under fire for his silence and then lies about the current conditions on the West Coast, Biden has faced mounting pressure to prioritize the climate crisis—and especially how his proposed policies stack up against the Trump administration's anti-science agenda—on the campaign trail. "Here's the deal: hurricanes don't swerve to avoid Red States or Blue States. Wildfires don't skip towns that voted a certain way," Biden said in his Monday speech, which also touched on the pandemic. "The impacts of climate change don't pick and choose. That's because it's not a partisan phenomenon, it's science, and our response should be the same. Grounded in science." "We need a president who respects science, who understands that the damage from climate change is already here. And unless we take urgent action, it will soon be more catastrophic," he added. "A president who recognizes, understands, and cares that Americans are dying, which makes President Trump's climate denialism, his disdain for science and facts, all the more unconscionable."

1 0

Ohio Valley ReSource Newsletter 9/14
by Duane Nichols 15 Sep '20

15 Sep '20

From: Ohio Valley ReSource > Date: September 15, 2020 > Subject: Ohio Valley ReSource Newsletter 9/14 > > > > View this email in your browser > > The conversation around coal mining typically centers on the impact the practice has on the environment. This week, we'll be highlighting the stories of those closest to the controversial topic, the miners. Join us as we revisit those stories. > > > Managing Editor Jeff Young at Ohio Valley Resource is reporting on the black lung epidemic and the fallout it's had on coal miners, their families, and the industry itself. The ReSource Team has recently shared the culmination of their reporting on the topic in the new book, "Appalachian Fall". > > > Remembering Charles Wayne Stanley > The first voice in the ReSource book, "Appalachian Fall," is Virginia coal miner Charles Wayne Stanley, who asked that miners get the respect they deserve. Read more... > > > Canary in the Coal Mine > In 2018, a report from the National Academy of Sciences, linked silica and quartz dust from extracting coal to the deadly disease surging among coal miners. Read more... > > > As the Dust Settles > Miners who are fighting for their lives against progressive massive fibrosis (black lung), are also fighting new state laws blocking them from receiving benefits. Read more.. > > > > > > To learn more about the black lung epidemic from the OVR team, click here. > Ohio Valley ReSource is a regional journalism collaborative with public media partners in Kentucky, Ohio, and West Virginia. We’re supported by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and people like you! Please consider a donation to make work like this possible. > > > > > Our mailing address is: > Ohio Valley Resource > Louisville Public Media > 619 S 4th St > Louisville, KY 40202 > >

1 0

Allegheny County Board of Health Greenlights $340K Air Toxics Study, Additional H2S Monitoring | Group Against Smog and Pollution, 9/3/20
by Duane Nichols 03 Sep '20

03 Sep '20

Allegheny County Board of Health Greenlights $340K Air Toxics Study, Additional H2S Monitoring From the Group Against Smog and Pollution, September 3, 2020 The Allegheny County Board of Health on Wednesday approved several Clean Air Fund requests, including a $340,544 proposal for a comprehensive air toxics study in the Mon Valley that would assess health risks to the community. The request from the Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD) would include both passive and active air quality monitoring, as well as the addition of 10 portable hydrogen sulfide (H2S) monitors. Officials have said the mobile H2S monitors will allow the department to position them throughout the county as needed – allowing them to more effectively investigate odor complaints from community members. “This is a long time coming,” ACHD Deputy of Environmental Health Jim Kelly told the board. “It’s been number one on my wishlist for a long time.” Specifically, funding will cover the cost of analyzing airborne toxic metals in the form of particulate matter, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and several other pollutants of concern. The department said it plans to model its VOC monitoring around US Steel’s Clairton Coke and Edgar Thomson facilities after a program initiated in 2019 by the state Department of Environmental Protection to analyze benzene emissions from the now-defunct Erie Coke Corp. – something GASP this year petitioned officials to consider. GASP has long called on ACHD to conduct additional monitoring in the communities lying in the shadow of U.S. Steel’s Mon Valley Works facilities and applauds the approval of the study. “This is exactly the type of in-depth air toxics monitoring study we’ve been imploring the health department to undertake,” GASP Executive Director Rachel Filippini said. “We hope the investment in the mobile H2S monitors foreshadows a new era for ACHD – one where it prioritizes more robust, responsive monitoring and enforcement throughout the county.” She then called on ACHD to also make transparency a priority. “We hope the health department will work to ensure that the information garnered through this study is accessible to the public in a form that’s easy to digest,” Filippini said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SOURCE: https://gasp-pgh.org/2020/09/03/allegheny-county-board-of-health-greenlight…

1 0

Monongalia County Commission Sept. 2, 2020 - YouTube
by Duane Nichols 02 Sep '20

02 Sep '20

September 2nd Regular Meeting of Mon County Commission .... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5Mf_n5O63M Three minute presentation by Duane Nichols starts at 3:00 minute mark. REFERENCE — Continuing Public Health, Safety, and Environmental Threats from the Atlantic Coast Pipeline Pipe Coating, William Limpert, June 29, 2020 https://www.ncwarn.org/wp-content/uploads/Limpert-ACP-pipe-coating-6-29-20.…

1 0

LONGVIEW POWER EMERGES FROM BANKRUPTCY
by Duane Nichols 24 Aug '20

24 Aug '20

https://longviewpower.com/news/longview-power-emerges-from-bankruptcy LONGVIEW POWER EMERGES FROM BANKRUPTCY August 3, 2020 By Longview Power LLC. Maidsville, West Virginia. Longview Power (the “Company”) emerged from bankruptcy on July 30th strategically positioned to build on its record as a low cost, highly reliable and clean coal fired power plant by expanding into a multi-fuel “all of the above” power producer. The last regulatory approval required for Longview Power’s emergence was received from the Federal Regulatory Energy Commission in mid-July, less than 100 days after the Company filed for bankruptcy protection in April. During this expedited bankruptcy, Longview Power extinguished more than $350 million of loans and now emerges well capitalized with new equity owners that have provided a $40 million 5-year term loan to support its operations and growth. The bankruptcy did not affect relationships with vendors or employees, and none of the Company’s 140 employee plant staff were furloughed during the case or on account of the ongoing global pandemic. Due to its low cost operations, the Company’s plant has continued to operate at high capacity factors notwithstanding the COVID-19 related electricity demand reductions that occurred in the spring. Longview Power management has continued to make substantial progress in the development of the 1200 MW natural gas combined cycle plant and a 70MW solar facility that will be built adjacent to the coal plant. The CCGT and solar facility received their final siting certificate from the West Virginia Public Service Commission and the CCGT is in the final stages for an air permit and interconnection agreement from PJM. Jeffery Keffer, CEO of Longview Power, commented that, “The power generation industry faces many challenges in these difficult times. There is no power plant better positioned to meet those challenges. We have state of the art technology and a world class plant staff able to attain and sustain the highest performance from the plant. Moreover, we are at the late stages of developing a cutting edge technology combined cycle gas fired turbine generation plant and solar facility next to the coal plant. These facilities will utilize abundant local high quality fuels and the sun to produce low cost energy for the region for years to come.”

1 0

Notes from Longview work session with Mon County Commission
by Duane Nichols 12 Aug '20

12 Aug '20

From: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)gmail.com> > Date: August 7, 2020 at 9:22:03 AM EDT > > Subject: Notes from Longview work session with Mon County Commission > > Duane Nichols, Marge Batton (Ft. Martin Community), Betsy Lawson and I, had a one-hour work session Wednesday, August 5th, with the three commissioners, Ed Hawkins, Tom Bloom and Sean Sikora. Duane is getting a copy of the video recording so we can get the specific words down, but here are some of my notes. > > 1) The Mon County Commission (MCC) has not had communications with Longview for several months, and the PILOT Agreement (Bloom calls it a PILT) has not been a priority for MCC, as they deal with the COVID-19 crisis. They were aware that Longview has emerged from bankruptcy, but the status of air permits or the Longview I greenhouse gas permit appeared to be news to them. > > 2) The PILOT will not be made public until a final negotiated document is presented to the Commission. Public comment may be considered then, but they do not currently plan any extended public comment period, it would be handled the same as any other contract before the MCC. > > 3) The MCC acknowledged concerns about the traffic and road conditions affecting residents on Fort Martin road, and had taken a site visit last year. But > I think their real attitude was expressed when Hawkins said "That's the DOH" (as in it is DOH's responsibility) and a couple indicated that "There are lots of bad roads in Mon County". They (at least Sikora) were aware of the PSC Order that Longview should use the northern route where feasible, but did not seem to recognize that they could or should make that a mandate in the PILOT. > > 4) Preservation of the old Fort Martin school was discussed, but the MCC had taken over several old schools in the past and does not see a need for another museum or community center because the upkeep of those buildings is a significant budget strain. > > 5) Duane raised an issue of the excessive steam plumes in the neighborhood as well as GHG from three power plants in one community, but it did not really get a response from MCC. > > 6) When asked about climate change and carbon capture, MCC indicated that CCS is "not in our jurisdiction" and did not seem inclined to make it an issue for the PILOT. We came back to the greenhouse gas issues repeatedly, but it just was not getting through to MCC that they could or should consider it as a condition in the PILOT. > > 7) They do not like to think of the PILOT as a "tax break", as the current taxes on the land is only a few thousand dollars a year, and the PILOT would generate ~$3 million. But they were willing to acknowledge that the property taxes would be significantly higher without the PILOT. > > 8) They also do not see any tie between a PILOT for Longview II, versus the PILOT for Longview I, the need for Longview I, or the jobs there. I think Hawkins is resigned to the early closure of Longview I, and he went into a long description of the number of dairy farms in Mon County (which is now down to one, soon to be none), implying that those changes in the economy are inevitable and out of their hands. They do not seem to recognize the relevance of the low market demand for electricity, versus their policy decisions and the role of government tax breaks in driving those economic decisions. > > 9) They did not seem to respond to the idea that the PILOT statute may be unconstitutional. But they were aware of the change in the school funding formula, as it cost Mon County Schools ~$930,000 per year. They did not describe any alternative approaches, and we did not really get a chance to press them on their ideas (While I am sure they would like to capture the PILOT money AND keep their school funding from the state too, I don't know any mechanism to do that. We may need a tax expert if they try something other than a PILOT). > > 10) Betsy raised the concern about the noise, dust, pollution and trucks associated with fracking wells in her end of the county, but that did not seem to phase MCC. > > Two new points that I learned: > 11) The MCC does expect that the PILOT for Longview II will be distinct from the solar farm (Longview III, AKA Longview Renewable Energy). While the total dollar amount is fixed, those two will be separate in a PILOT. We had proposed this a year ago, but they seemed surprised when I thanked them for it. I expressed our concern that we need to phase out of fossil fuels and a gas-fired plant cannot be expected to pay off, whereas demand for solar is increasing and costs keep coming down, so it is a better long-term decision. They repeated the concern that solar is too expensive, and Bloom promised to send me his economic data demonstrating that. > > 12) The current proposal has a "5-year financing limit". I inferred this to mean that a PILOT expires if Longview does not get financing within five years, but Duane interpreted it that Longview has financing, which expires in five years. We need to get clarification, and probably cannot until a PILOT is made public. > > Conclusions: > 13) Tom Bloom clearly stated that a PILOT is in the best interest of Mon County, and he supports it. Hawkins also appeared to support a PILOT, but did not state it clearly, and tended to wander off into tangents that distracted from the main issue. Sikora seemed open minded and willing to consider new ideas, but is not clearly on our side. > > Jim Kotcon, Conservation Chair, WV Sierra Club > > >

1 0

Kotcon, Campbell: Many winners in scrapped pipeline project (Opinion) | Op-Ed Commentaries | wvgazettemail.com
by Duane Nichols 06 Aug '20

06 Aug '20

https://www.wvgazettemail.com/opinion/op_ed_commentaries/kotcon-campbell-ma… Many winners in scrapped pipeline project (Opinion) Letter to Editor of Charleston Gazette-Mail by Jim Kotcon and Kevin Campbell, August 4, 2020 Doug Reynolds, majority owner of HD Media LLC, which owns the Charleston Gazette-Mail, questioned in a recent op-ed whether anyone wins from the cancellation of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline natural gas project. Unfortunately, he and a wide range of West Virginia leaders appear to be taking the wrong lessons from the cancellation. If West Virginia leaders want to promote economic development, they need to recognize what really happened here and what it means for the future. Developers, politicians and other industry leaders blame “regulatory uncertainty” and litigation by environmentalists for the cancellation. But West Virginians should not be fooled: The developers of the pipeline really have only themselves and their bad management decisions to blame. Courts tend to defer to regulatory agencies, so the court decisions halting the pipeline only could have happened because those violations were real. These were not the result of “regulatory uncertainty,” they were the result of developers trying to ignore the plain language of the law. For over five years, we have told developers that climate change is real, that building a pipeline on steep slopes with erodible soils requires very careful, site-specific plans to prevent water pollution and that the need for the pipeline was never really demonstrated. Instead of addressing these very real issues, developers continually tried to bulldoze over our objections. Those bad decisions resulted in dozens of violations, successful legal challenges, wasted money and continuous conflict. Water quality violations from Atlantic Coast are numerous. We saw it coming, we warned regulatory agencies in hundreds of public comments and complaints, and unfortunately, it happened as we forecast. This was not some big surprise, it was the inevitable and easily predictable result of trying to build on West Virginia’s steep slopes without adequate precautions. The lack of need for the pipeline may have been the real driver for the cancellation. It was dubious from the beginning, driven more by the greed of developers to capture guaranteed returns from ratepayers than from any realistic assessment of market demand. As prices for exported gas collapsed and plans for new power plants were shelved, the economic justification looked more and more contrived. We suspect that if there were a legitimate market need, Atlantic Coast would not have been canceled, regardless of the environmental concerns. Most importantly, climate change is real. We need to reduce use of fossil fuels quickly and be entirely out within 30 years. Investing billions of dollars in fossil fuel infrastructure would almost certainly never pay off. The passage in Virginia this spring of the state’s Clean Economy Act made that abundantly clear to developers, even if West Virginia politicians remain chained to the failed fossil fuel millstone of the past. Until we recognize the reality of climate change and adopt the needed policies to address it, economic development struggles will continue. And if West Virginians want jobs, dollars invested in renewables now produce more jobs than fossil fuels. West Virginia continues to miss real job creation opportunities by trying to save a dying fossil fuel industry. Every surrounding state has more jobs in renewables than West Virginia, primarily due to the renewable energy policies chosen by lawmakers. Reynolds asked, “Who won?” Well, landowners will get to use their property (we hope), so they won. West Virginia streams will be a little cleaner, so we all win that one. Ratepayers do not have to reward developers with billions of dollars for unnecessary costs, so they win big. Most of all, the greenhouse gases will not pollute the atmosphere for decades to come, so planet Earth wins.

1 0

A bold plan to slow the melt of Arctic permafrost could help reverse global warming
by Duane Nichols 02 Aug '20

02 Aug '20

https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-04-30/bold-plan-slow-melt-arctic-permafros…

1 0

The Cautionary Tale of the Largest Coal Ash Waste Site in the U.S. - The Allegheny Front, November 2019
by Duane Nichols 02 Aug '20

02 Aug '20

The Cautionary Tale of the Largest Coal Ash Waste Site in the U.S. - The Allegheny Front, November 2019 This story was first published on June 22, 2018. The US EPAannounced proposed rules for coal ash impoundments on November 4, 2019. LISTEN: “The Cautionary Tale of the Largest Coal Ash Waste Site in the U.S.” Audio Player Chester, West Virginia, is a small town of about 3,000 people, just a stone’s throw from Pennsylvania to the east and Ohio to the north. The region’s rolling hills are dotted with family farms and the “world’s largest teapot” proudly welcomes visitors into downtown. But the area is also home to another object of record-breaking size: the largest coal ash waste site in the United States. https://www.alleghenyfront.org/the-cautionary-tale-of-the-largest-coal-ash-…

1 0

Bruce Mansfield Power Plant of Western Pennsylvania
by Duane Nichols 02 Aug '20

02 Aug '20

Bruce Mansfield Power Plant at Shippingport, PA, was closed in November 2019. Language Watch Edit Bruce Mansfield Power Plant was a 2.49-gigawatt (2,490 MW), coal power plant located in Shippingport, Pennsylvania in Beaver County, Pennsylvania. The plant was operated by FirstEnergy. It began operations in 1976 and was shut down in November 2019. Construction of Bruce Mansfield commenced in 1970. The plant was operated by Pennsylvania Power (a subsidiary of Ohio Edison). Its ownership was a consortium of Pennsylvania Power, Ohio Edison, Cleveland Electric Illuminating, Toledo Edison, and Duquesne Light to form the Central Area Power Coordination (CAPCO). Bruce Mansfield began commercial operations of Unit 1 in 1976 with Units 2 and 3 following suit in 1977 and 1980 respectively. All three of the units generated 830 MW each with a nameplate capacity of 2490 MW. The plant was named after D. Bruce Mansfield, a former chairman of Pennsylvania Power. Murray Energy was the primary supplier of coal for Bruce Mansfield. The coal was shipped from West Virginia. FirstEnergy Solutions announced in August 2018 that they were closing Bruce Mansfield by June 2021. FirstEnergy Solutions blamed the wholesale market system, which PJM Interconnection operates on, for not relying on coal and nuclear plants. PJM Interconnection conducted an analysis and concluded the plant's closure would not affect grid reliability. The closure was moved back to November 2019 due to, "a lack of economic viability." Environmental mitigation Units 1 and 2 were installed with a flue-gas desulfurization (FGD) system to prevent sulfur dioxide (SO 2) from being emitted into the atmosphere. Its chimney is 950 feet (290 m) tall. The sludge was then transported 7 miles (11 km) by pipe to Little Blue Run Lake between Beaver County, Pennsylvania and Hancock County, West Virginia.[3][8] When Unit 3 was constructed in 1980, an electrostatic precipitator (ESP) system, designed by the Weir Group, was installed instead for the unit to curb particulate emissions. Its chimney is 600 feet (180 m) tall. To reduce waste disposal from scrubbers at Bruce Mansfield, National Gypsum constructed a nearby plant in 1998 to process synthetic gypsum from the plant to produce drywall. To deliver the gypsum for the nearby manufacturer, a forced-oxidation gypsum (FOG) system was built. A $200 million dewatering facility was completed in 2016 in response to a 2012 settlement that prohibits the further disposal of byproduct at Little Blue Run Lake. The facility would separate byproduct from water and then be properly disposed of in a lined impoundment at Murray Energy's mine in Marshall County, West Virginia. The dewatering facility began operations in January 2017, but problems at the new facility forced the plant to go offline the following month. The plant restarted two weeks later. Incidents A release of hydrogen sulfide (H 2S) during repair work on a pipe killed two and injured four workers in August 2017.[16] The workers' families who experienced casualties in the accident filed lawsuits against FirstEnergy in November 2017 seeking damages. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) fined FirstEnergy $77,605 for workplace hazards and also fined subcontractor Enerfab $129,340 for failing to provide “appropriate respiratory protection”. FirstEnergy ultimately settled by paying a fine of $65,963. On January 10, 2018, Bruce Mansfield caught on fire causing damage to its roof and duct work. In a filing later that month, FirstEnergy revealed that the fire caused significant damage to the equipment for Units 1 and 2. The damage was severe enough that deactivation of both units were accelerated from June 2021 to February 5, 2019.] Sent from my iPad

1 0

What Mask ... ? Very sad commentary!
by Duane Nichols 19 Jul '20

19 Jul '20

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY – 19 JULY 2020 “Yield to temptation. It may not pass your way again.” Robert A. Heinlein KABLER — CORONA-12JulyY2K20 CHARLESTON GAZETTE 12 JULY 2020 Statehouse Beat: West Virginia needs to wake up to pandemic's threat By Phil Kabler Staff writer, Charleston Gazette, Jul 11, 2020 Leave it to West Virginia to turn a pandemic into a pandumbic. With its isolated location, lack of major metropolitan areas and nonexistent international travel, West Virginia had every advantage to ride through the pandemic relatively unscathed but blew it all in recent days by flouting the basics of controlling the spread of COVID-19, particularly through social distancing and wearing facemasks. After pleading for weeks for residents to voluntarily wear face coverings, Gov. Jim Justice on Monday ordered masks worn in public indoor settings and spent the remainder of the week pleading with people to actually follow the executive order. As noted here, West Virginians have been hardheaded before when it came to public health issues, such as mandatory seatbelts and indoor smoking bans. While there might have been some partisanship in both issues, it was nothing like the blatant partisan politics of today’s anti-maskers.

1 0

Toxic Metal Air Pollution Nanoparticles Found Inside the "Powerhouses" of Heart Cells of City Dwellers
by Duane Nichols 07 Jul '20

07 Jul '20

https://www.technologynetworks.com/cell-science/news/toxic-metal-air-pollut… Toxic Metal Air Pollution Nanoparticles Found Inside the "Powerhouses" of Heart Cells of City Dwellers Reference: Maher, B., González-Maciel, A., Reynoso-Robles, R., Torres-Jardón, R., & Calderón-Garcidueñas, L. (2020). Iron-rich air pollution nanoparticles: An unrecognised environmental risk factor for myocardial mitochondrial dysfunction and cardiac oxidative stress. Environmental Research, 188, 109816. doi:10.1016/j.envres.2020.109816 Toxic metallic air pollution nanoparticles are getting inside the crucial, energy-producing structures within the hearts of people living in polluted cities, causing cardiac stress – a new study confirms. Using state-of-the-art electron microscopy, scientists are now able to show for the first time that tiny metal nanoparticles are getting inside the mitochondria of heart tissue – damaging these crucial ‘powerhouses’ that provide energy for the heart to pump. The research team, led by Professors Barbara Maher of Lancaster University and Lilian Calderón-Garcidueñas of The University of Montana and the Universidad del Valle de Mexico, found the metallic nanoparticles, which included iron-rich nanoparticles and other pollution-derived metals such as titanium, inside the damaged heart cells of a 26-year-old and even a three-year-old toddler. The hearts had belonged to people who had died in accidents and who had lived in highly-polluted Mexico City. The findings shed new light on how air pollution can cause the development of heart disease, as the iron-rich particles were associated with damage to the cells, and increased cardiac oxidative stress, even in these very young hearts. The repeated inhalation of these iron-rich nanoparticles, and their circulation by the bloodstream to the heart, may account for the well-established associations between exposure to particulate air pollution and increased cardiovascular disease, including heart attacks. The study indicates that heart disease can start in very early age, before progressing to full-blown cardiovascular illness later in life. This type of air pollution may thus be responsible for the ‘silent epidemic’ of heart disease, internationally. By causing pre-existing heart conditions, it may also account for some of the increased death rates from Covid-19 seen in areas with high levels of particulate air pollution. Professor Maher said: “It’s been known for a long time that people with high exposure to particulate air pollution experience increased levels and severity of heart disease. Our new work shows that iron-rich nanoparticles from air pollution can get right inside the millions of mitochondria inside our hearts…the structures which generate the energy needed for our hearts to pump properly. “That we found these metal particles inside the heart of even a three-year old indicates that we’re setting heart disease in train right from the earliest days, but only seeing its full, clinical effects in later life. It’s really urgent to reduce emissions of ultrafine particles from our vehicles and from industry, before we give heart disease to the next generation too.” The researchers, using high-resolution transmission electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray analysis, found that the mitochondria containing the iron-rich nanoparticles appeared to be damaged, with some cells showing deformities and others with ruptured membranes. Professor Calderón-Garcidueñas stated that increased levels of markers of cardiac oxidative stress are present in the very young cases examined. The iron-rich nanoparticles found inside the heart cells are identical in size, shape and composition to those emitted from sources such as the exhausts, tyres and brakes of vehicles. These air pollution nanoparticles are also emitted by industrial sources as well as open fires in homes. Some of the iron-rich nanoparticles are also strongly magnetic. This raises concerns about what might happen when people with millions of these nanoparticles in their hearts are using appliances with associated magnetic fields, such as hair dryers and mobile phones. People who work in industries that mean they are exposed to magnetic fields such as welders and power line engineers may also be at risk. This kind of exposure could potentially lead to heart electrical dysfunction and cell damage. The findings builds on the researchers’ previous findings that show that the hearts of city dwellers contain billions of these nanoparticles and can be up to ten times more polluted than the hearts of people living in less polluted places. The researchers say their study underlines the need for governments across the world to tackle ultrafine particulate pollution in their cities. Professor Calderón-Garcidueñas said: “Exposure to such air pollution is a modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease, on a global scale, reinforcing the urgent need for individual and government actions not just to reduce PM2.5 but to monitor, regulate and reduce emissions of these specific, ultrafine components of the urban air pollution ‘cocktail’.” Reference: Maher, B., González-Maciel, A., Reynoso-Robles, R., Torres-Jardón, R., & Calderón-Garcidueñas, L. (2020). Iron-rich air pollution nanoparticles: An unrecognised environmental risk factor for myocardial mitochondrial dysfunction and cardiac oxidative stress. Environmental Research, 188, 109816. doi:10.1016/j.envres.2020.109816

1 0

US utilities are skipping the gas ‘bridge’ in transition from coal to renewables | RenewEconomy
by Duane Nichols 06 Jul '20

06 Jul '20

https://reneweconomy.com.au/us-utilities-are-skipping-the-gas-bridge-in-tra… US utilities are skipping the gas ‘bridge’ in transition from coal to renewables Last week was a momentous one in the U.S. utility sector’s transition from fossil fuels to renewable power generation. Utilities in three states announced plans to close one or more of their coal plants and build new renewables—without adding any new gas-fired generation to serve as a “bridge.” Two of the three proposals, from Tucson Electric Power (TEP), in Arizona, and Colorado Springs Utilities (CSU), are part of comprehensive resource plans that outline the two companies’ intentions to transition to lower-carbon generation resources. Such plans have become increasingly common across the U.S. utility sector, but the TEP and CSU proposals are markedly different as they do not rely on the construction of new gas-fired generation to support the transition. The third proposal, an agreement between JEA, the municipal utility serving Jacksonville, Fla., and Florida Power & Light, will rely on existing gas and new solar to enable the companies to retire the 860 megawatt (MW) Unit 4 at Plant Scherer, which is the largest coal-fired power plant in the U.S. with a combined operating capacity of 3,440MW. TEP’s proposal, included in its 2020 integrated resource plan, calls for the closure of all its coal-fired generation by 2031, which will result in the shuttering of Units 1 and 2 at the Springerville Generating Station. TEP owns 100% of those units, which have a combined summer generation capacity of 793MW; it also serves as the operator of the entire four-unit plant. Unit 3 is owned by Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, and Unit 4 is owned by the Salt River Project. TEP also owns portions of the San Juan Generating Station and the Four Corners Power Plant in New Mexico, both of which already had announced closure dates of 2022 and 2031, respectively. To replace this capacity, TEP said, it will add 2,457MW of new wind and solar generation, including 457MW within the coming year. It will also add 1,400MW of battery storage to its portfoliio to firm its new renewable generation resources and provide system-wide reliability. What the company is decidedly not proposing is any new gas-fired generation: “Even with the future planned retirement of 1,073MW of coal capacity and 225MW of natural gas capacity, TEP’s Preferred Portfolio does not inlcude the addition of any new fossil-fuel resources,” the company wrote. Figure 1- TEP’s Plan: Plenty of Renewables and Storage, No New Fossil Fuels It is worth noting that Springerville is not an old coal station. TEP’s two Springerville units came online in 1985 and 1990, and have been strong performers. Unit 1’s capacity factor over the past seven years has averaged 67.9% while Unit 2 has been even higher at 73.4%—both well above the national average of 54.4%. Still, as TEP acknowledged in its IRP, “the economics of coal-fired generation have shifted…they are no longer the lowest cost resources for energy supply.” Up until recently, the easy option for utilities would have been to propose using gas to replace coal. But not any longer: Rising concerns about climate change and continuing reductions in wind, solar and battery storage costs coupled with improved performance have altered the playing field. TEP’s plan charts a new path, promising to cut its carbon dioxide emissions by 80 percent by 2035 while keeping costs low and supply reliable through its planned renewable energy buildout. Reductions in the cost of wind, solar and batteries have altered the playing field “We’re accelerating our transition to cleaner energy resources through a cost-effective plan that supports reliable and affordable service from increasingly sustainable resources,” Tuscon Electric Power CEO David Hutchens said when the plan was released. “We’ll be reducing carbon emissions at a pace that places us at the forefront of global efforts to combat climate change.” The plan put forward by Colorado Springs Utilities follows a similar approach. There, the utility board approved plans to exit coal-fired generation entirely by 2030, helping to achieve an 80 percent reduction in its carbon emissions in the coming decade. Under the plan, CSU will close the 208MW Martin Drake Power Plant no later than 2023 and the similarly sized Ray Nixon plant in 2030. As with TEP, Colorado Springs will replace the lost coal capacity with renewable energy resources. Specifically, the utility’s plan calls for the construction of 500MW of new wind generation, 150MW of solar and more than 400MW of battery storage capacity. To enable the early retirement of the Drake plant, the utility acknowledged that it will install temporary natural gas generators at the site “to ensure system reliability.” But those units will be removed as new transmission projects are completed in the years ahead. The agreement struck between FPL, a subsidiary of NextEra Energy, and JEA is an outgrowth of the Florida utility’s long-term goal to exit coal-fired generation. FPL owns 76.4% of Scherer Unit 4 while JEA owns the remainder. FPL told Florida regulators in its 10-year site plan filed in April that it intended to retire its share of the 31-year-old unit by January 2022, essentially forcing JEA to act. JEA could have sought out a new partner for the unit, and according to published reports there was some interest among financiers. But that option did not appeal to JEA’s leadership, as JEA Vice Chairman Robert Stein pointed out when the retirement deal was announced: “We would be a minority partner with a hedge fund, and their interestes were not in line with us.” Probably more important is that Scherer simply is no longer economic, as JEA acting CEO Paul McElroy noted in materials presented to the utility’s board of directors. “While the Scherer units have long been low-cost generating units, changes in the natural gas market now make Scherer the highest-cost dispatch unit in JEA’s fleet.” To replace JEA’s 198MW share of the unit’s output, the two utilities signed a long-term, fixed price power purchase agreement under which FPL will sell electricity to JEA from one of its existing gas-fired generation units. The agreement includes an option at the 10-year mark for JEA to switch to solar power. FPL has removed a large new combined-cycle plant that had been planned for completion in 2026 As with the TEP and CSU announcements, this agreement does not depend on any new gas-fired generation being built—either by FPL or JEA—despite the sizable amount of generation being taken offline. Much of the reason for that, in turn, is the roughly 7,300MW of new solar capacity FPL is planning to build in its service territory through 2029. The utility has several gas plant upgrades planned for the years ahead, but a large new combined-cycle plant that had been in previous 10-year plans for completion in 2026 has been removed from the 2020 submission. Finally, a plan put forth last week by staff at the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission regarding the future capacity needs of the Public Service Company of New Mexico recommends a similar gas-free transition. The plan is different from the ones in Arizona, Colorado, and Florida in that it is being promoted by regulators rather than utility companies, but it stands to have the same effect. It is meant to ensure the utility has sufficient capacity resources following its planned retirement of the remaining two units at the San Juan Generating Station in 2022. PNM owns 560MW of the plant’s 847MW capacity. To cover lost capacity, staff backed a plan that would have PNM build 650MW of new solar and 300MW of battery storage. PNM had already backed a plan that would have included 280MW of new gas-fired capacity. The issue now heads to the full commission for a decision. While the PNM decision remains unresolved, what is clear is that transitioning from coal to renewables can be done now, cost effectively and reliably, without an interim shift to gas. Source: IEEFA. Reproduced with permission.

1 0

Mask up and keep your distance ......across WV and beyond ....
by Duane Nichols 06 Jul '20

06 Jul '20

Update from Delegate Barbara Evans Fleischauer, Monongalia County, July 6, 2020 WV GOVERNOR JUST ORDERED MANDATORY MASK IN CONFINED SPACES. CHILDREN UNDER 9 EXCEPTED. TAKES EFFECT THIS EVENING AT MIDNITE. According to Gov. Justice, positive cases have shot up, and because West Virginia has more vulnerable people than any other state, we will "be in a world of hurt if we don't do this now." Dr. Clay Marsh said we have the seventh-highest R2 rate in the country, and a 234% increase in positive cases. Justice said is not the popular thing to do, but in his mind "it's the only thing" under the circumstances .....

1 0

Air Pollutants, PFAS Increase Coronavirus Deaths
by Duane Nichols 02 Jul '20

02 Jul '20

https://theintercept.com/2020/06/26/coronavirus-toxic-chemicals-pfas-bpa/?u… Scientists Pin Blame for Some Coronavirus Deaths on Air Pollution, PFAS, and Other Chemicals Sharon Lerner June 26 2020, 12:27 p.m. Almost six months into the coronavirus pandemic, it’s already clear that environmental pollution is responsible for some portion of the hundreds of thousands of Covid-19 deaths around the world. Now scientists are trying to pinpoint how exactly industrial chemicals make people more susceptible to the coronavirus and how much of the blame for the devastation wrought by the new coronavirus should be laid at the feet of the industry that produces those chemicals. The link between Covid-19 and air pollution is particularly strong. A study set to publish in July linked six air pollutants in 120 Chinese cities with cases of the viral disease. Researchers in Italy have also shown that long-term exposure to air pollution is “significantly correlated with cases of Covid-19” in up to 71 provinces in that country. And a study that used data from California, set to publish in Environmental Research in August, showed that the air pollutants PM2.5, PM 10, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, and sulfur dioxide were associated with coronavirus infections. The authors of that study concluded that reducing exposure to these pollutants “will contribute to defeating COVID-19.” Scientists have even managed to measure the precise harm that a single microgram/cubic meter increase in air pollution has on a population, which, according to researchers from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, is “an 8% increase in mortality from COVID-19.” While alarming, these findings aren’t surprising, according to Linda Birnbaum, the former director of the National Institutes for Environmental Health Sciences and the National Toxicology Program, who stepped down last year. “Everything in our health is determined by our environment,” she said. In addition to air pollutants, Birnbaum pointed to the potential for endocrine-disrupting chemicals to make people more vulnerable to Covid-19. Among them are BPA and its replacements; phthalates, which are found in makeup, nail polish, and plastics, particularly food packaging; and PFAS, a class of industrial contaminants most famously used to make Teflon and other nonstick products. Exposure to even very small amounts of these chemicals has been linked with conditions that have been shown to make Covid-19 worse. Phthalates are associated with damage to lungs and obesity, as well as to diabetes, the second most common underlying condition in people who die of Covid-19, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. BPA, which is often added to food packaging and drink bottles, is also linked to obesity, as well as asthma and diabetes. PFAS, which also interferes with the functioning of the endocrine system, has been shown to cause several underlying conditions that leave people more vulnerable to Covid-19. People with higher levels of PFAS in their bodies are more likely to gain weight and have a harder time losing it. The chemicals not only increase obesity risk in those exposed, but also in the granddaughters of women who were exposed. And PFAS is associated with asthma and hypertension, two other conditions that appear to worsen people’s chances of surviving Covid-19. PFAS causes kidney disease and elevates levels of cholesterol and other fats in the blood, which also increase the chances that people with Covid-19 will be hospitalized or need intensive care. Read Our Complete CoverageThe Coronavirus Crisis The vast majority of people who die of Covid-19 had at least one other illness before they got sick from the virus. Compared to people who didn’t have underlying conditions, patients who had kidney disease, diabetes, lung disease, and heart disease, among other conditions, are six times as likely to be hospitalized with Covid-19 and 12 times as likely to die, according to the most recent data from the CDC. In addition to causing medical problems that make people more vulnerable to the coronavirus, several environmental contaminants, including PFAS, also directly weaken the body’s immune response. Studies have shown that in both adults and children higher levels of certain PFAS chemicals were associated with weaker responses to vaccines. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, a division of the CDC, recognized this evidence in an announcement it recently posted to its website on the “potential intersection between PFAS exposure and Covid-19.” With the pre-pandemic knowledge of the effects of individual chemicals and the maps showing that Covid-19 is ravaging polluted areas, the next step for researchers is to address how exactly chemicals make individual people more susceptible to Covid-19. “We now know pollution is associated with increased infections and more hospitalizations,” said Birnbaum. “So it has a role. The question is how much of a role and how do you show that an individual is getting sick is because they have higher levels?” Read our complete coverageBad Chemistry Philippe Grandjean, a Danish scientist who was the first to show that children with relatively high PFAS levels had immune deficits and were more likely to get respiratory infections, has already begun to try to answer this question. Grandjean is in the process of collecting blood samples of people who were hospitalized with Covid-19 — “just a few drops of the serum from leftover blood samples that hadn’t been used” — analyzing them for PFAS levels, and comparing them with PFAS levels from the blood of people who were infected with the coronavirus but not hospitalized. “We really need to understand the connection between exposures at the individual level and Covid-19 severity,” Grandjean said. While noting that several environmental contaminants likely increase the risk of the disease, Grandjean expressed particular concern about PFAS compounds because they can remain in the body for years and some of them tend to concentrate in the lungs. Grandjean, who is conducting the research in Denmark, hopes to have results of the study within the year. Others are using animal experiments to explore how chemical exposure affects the impact of the coronavirus. Paige Lawrence, a professor of environmental medicine at the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, plans to infect mice with a mouse-adapted human coronavirus that was built from the 2003 SARS pandemic and study how exposure to PFAS alters the course of the viral infection. “We need to understand at a cellular level what’s changed” by chemical exposure, she said. “We can’t improve health if we don’t know what we’re trying to fix.” Lawrence’s past research has shown that the environmental contaminants dioxin and PCBs change the immune system by binding to receptor cells — an effect that, in the case of dioxin, lasts for generations. While the research is underway, many of the people in highly polluted communities worry about the greater risk they may face during the pandemic. “I think about it a lot,” said Hope Grosse, a resident of Warminster, Pennsylvania, who developed stage 4 cancer while drinking water that had been contaminated with PFAS from firefighting foam used at a nearby naval base. “My immune system was definitely impacted.” Grosse, who had 25 lymph nodes removed during her cancer treatment, resumed her work as a realtor last month and wears gloves and a mask when she shows houses. “I’m as careful as I can be, but I still worry,” she said. Whatever we learn from the research now in the pipeline, some scientists say there is already enough evidence to lay blame for at least a portion of the toll of the virus on chemicals — and their manufacturers. “Endocrine-disrupting chemicals are clearly involved in driving the comorbidities and are heightening mortality risk from Covid-19,” said Pete Myers, founder and chief scientist of Environmental Health Sciences. “You can’t hide from that truth.” Myers is one of several environmental scientists who have been pushing for more than a decade — with little success — for government to limit the use of these chemicals. “The American Chemistry Council has impeded our ability to develop meaningful regulations,” said Myers, referring to a powerful chemical industry trade group. “And the result of that is that these comorbidities have become epidemic over the last three decades. And now more people are dying than would have.”

1 0

Should Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Pipelines Cross National Forests & Appalachian Trail
by Duane Nichols 01 Jul '20

01 Jul '20

From the Friends of Nelson in Nelson County, Virginia, where Skyline Drive and the Blue Ridge Parkway cross Interstate 64 at the Appalachian Trail. From Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance's ABRA Update #282, June 25, 2020 The U.S. Forest Service has been cautioned that it should not depend upon the reliability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) developed in 2017 by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) as the agency develops a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the project. The Forest Service announced on June 11 that it was developing a SEIS in response to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ vacating of the Forest Service permit for the ACP. While one portion of that opinion (e.g. authority to grant the ACP the right to cross the Appalachian Trail) was overturned on June 15 by the U.S. Supreme Court, several deficiencies in the permit for the ACP are required to be remedied by the Forest Service before it can issue the ACP a new permit. The Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) stated in a June 22 letter to the Forest Service: The Forest Service cannot continue to rely on FERC’s obsolete FEIS. The original analyses of potential alternatives to the project and the environmental consequences of its risky and costly preferred route are in question. Significant, new and relevant information related to endangered and threatened species, water quality, landslides and slope failures, environmental justice communities, and climate change demonstrates the original analysis is stale and incapable of allowing effective review of the environmental consequences of the project. Meanwhile, the energy landscape of the region the ACP purports to serve also has transformed dramatically, the costs of the project have ballooned, and its timeline has been pushed back. A motion was filed with FERC on May 30 by SELC, Appalachian Mountain Advocates and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation asking that FERC conduct an SEIS for the ACP to address significant new information bearing on the project’s environmental impacts. Read more here: https://www.abralliance.org/2020/06/05/ferc-is-asked-to-conduct-supplementa…

1 0

...... about wearing masks from Jon Reed, from Pat Conner, from Sam Laucks ....
by Duane Nichols 18 Jun '20

18 Jun '20

Jon A. Reed Sr. Says .... Copied this from Patrick Conner's FB post. RETIRED SURGEON, Sam Laucks, has this to say about wearing masks: “OK, here’s my rant about masks: I have spent the past 39 years working in the field of surgery. For a significant part of that time, I have worn a mask. I have worked with hundreds (probably thousands) of colleagues during those years, who have also worn masks. Not a single one us of became ill, passed out or died from lack of oxygen. Not a single one of us became ill, passed out or died from breathing too much carbon dioxide. Not a single one us of became ill, passed out or died from rebreathing a little of our own exhaled air. Let’s begin here by putting those scare tactics to rest! (It is true that some people, with advanced lung diseases, may be so fragile that a mask could make their already-tenuous breathing more difficult. If your lungs are that bad, you probably shouldn’t be going out in public at the present time anyway; the consequences if you are exposed to Covid-19 would likely be devastating.) ~ “But”, you ask, “can’t viruses go right through the mask, because they are so small?” (“Masks keep viruses out just as well as a chain link fence keeps mosquitoes out,” some tell us.) It is true that individual virus particles can pass through the pores of a mask; however, viruses don’t move on their own. They do not fly across the room like a mosquito, wiggle through your mask like a worm, or fly up your nose like a gnat. The virus is essentially nothing more than a tiny blob of genetic material. Covid-19 travels in a CARRIER – the carrier is a fluid droplet- fluid droplets that you expel when you cough, sneeze, sing, laugh, talk or simply exhale. Most of your fluid droplets will be stopped from entering the air in the room if you are wearing a mask. Wearing a mask is a very efficient way to protect others if you are carrying the virus (even if you don’t know that you are infected). In addition, if someone else’s fluid droplets happen to land on your mask, many of them will not pass through. This gives the wearer some additional protection, too. But, the main reason to wear a mask is to PROTECT OTHERS. Even if you don’t care about yourself, wear your mask to protect your neighbors, co-workers and friends! ~ A mask is certainly not 100% protective. However, it appears that the severity of Covid-19 infection is at least partially “dose-dependent.” In other words, the more virus particles that enter your body, the sicker you are likely to become. Why not decrease that volume if you can? “What have you got to lose?!” ~ “But doesn’t a requirement or a request to wear a mask violate my constitutional rights?” You’re also not allowed to go into the grocery store if you are not wearing pants. You can’t yell “fire” in the Produce Department. You’re not allowed to urinate on the floor in the Frozen Food Section. Do you object to those restrictions? Rules, established for the common good, are component of a civilized society. ~ “But aren’t masks uncomfortable?” Some would say that underwear or shoes can be uncomfortable, but we still wear them. (Actually, being on a ventilator is pretty darned uncomfortable, too!) Are masks really so bad that you can’t tolerate them, even if they will help keep others healthy? ~ “But won’t people think I’m a snowflake or a wimp if I wear a mask?” I hope you have enough self-confidence to overcome that. ~ “But won’t I look stupid if I wear a mask?” I’ve decided not to dignify that question with an answer!! 📷📷:) ~ “But I never get sick; I’m not worried.” Well, then, wear a mask for the sake of the rest of us who are not so perfect! There is good evidence that masks make a real difference in diminishing the transmission of Covid-19. Please, for the sake of others (and for the sake of yourself), wear your mask when in public. It won’t kill you! P.S. - And, by the way, please be sure that BOTH your nose and mouth are covered! Recommendations around mask usage are confusing. The science isn't. Evidence shows that masks are extremely effective to slow the coronavirus and may be the best tool available right now to fight it.”

1 0

2020 Earth Day Facts & Research | State of the Earth | USAFacts
by Duane Nichols 17 Jun '20

17 Jun '20

To celebrate the 50th anniversary of Earth Day, USAFacts analyzed metrics from government agencies responsible for measuring the nation’s air, land conservation, and energy production. This data snapshot touches on environmental numbers from 2019 back to 1895. These are historical metrics for perspective—whether they mark positive, negative, or neutral changes for land, energy, and air in the US is up to you. Published April 15th, 2020 https://usafacts.org/earth-day-facts/

1 0

COVID-19 outbreak at church infects 17 | Health | register-herald.com, WV
by Duane Nichols 14 Jun '20

14 Jun '20

COVID-19 outbreak at church infects 17 | Health | register-herald.com, Buckley, WV An outbreak of COVID-19 has been reported at Graystone Baptist Church, a Greenbrier County church in Ronceverte, WV as health officials on Saturday announced up to 17 new confirmed cases. The outbreak caught the attention of Gov. Jim Justice and the state Department of Health and Human Resources (DHHR). https://www.register-herald.com/health/covid-19-outbreak-at-church-infects-… Sent from my iPad

1 0

A threat from above: Plastic rains down on US National Parks and Wilderness areas - EHN
by Duane Nichols 12 Jun '20

12 Jun '20

A threat from above: Plastic rains down on US National Parks and Wilderness areas From an Article by Kate S. Petersen, Environmental Health News, June 9, 2020 New research estimates more than 1,000 tons of microplastic particles, potentially circulating in global atmospheric currents, are deposited at conservation sites each year. Last August, scientists delivered the chilling news that microplastics suspended in the Earth's atmosphere were being deposited in remote areas of the Arctic and Europe. Now researchers report similar microplastic accumulation in iconic American protected areas including the Grand Canyon and Joshua Tree. Publishing their results today in Science, the researchers estimate total yearly plastics deposition over their study area to be the equivalent of 123 to 300 million discarded water bottles. The study is the first to calculate rates of microplastic pollution from the atmosphere onto American protected areas and adds to a growing body of research suggesting that microplastics are traveling long distances in the atmosphere. Microplastic pollution can harm wildlife health, and the researchers expressed concern about potential impacts to ecosystem stability in fragile and unique protected areas of the U.S. Janice Brahney, an assistant professor at Utah State University and lead scientist on the new report, made the discovery while analyzing atmospheric dust—particles that get swept up into the atmosphere and then settle out again. Examining the dust under a microscope, she found something she did not expect. "Scrolling around these samples, I started to see all these colorful pieces," Brahney told EHN. "Nearly every single sample had plastic in it." https://www.ehn.org/plastic-pollution-in-national-parks-2646169327.html Sent from my iPad

1 0

Air Pollution and Respiratory Infections Including COVID-19: Q & A
by Duane Nichols 11 Jun '20

11 Jun '20

Air Pollution and Respiratory Infections Including COVID-19: Q & A AIR POLLUTION & RESPIRATORY INFECTIONS SUCH AS COVID-19 From the Newsletter of the Environmental Health Project, Summer, Issue 6, June 2020 EHP has been taking an active look at the connection between air pollution and respiratory infections such as COVID-19. What we’re finding is a stronger relationship than you might imagine. As our blog post “Air Pollution and Respiratory Infections: Q & A” notes, if you’ve been exposed to air pollution and you contract a respiratory infection, your symptoms may be more severe. “A number of scientific studies have shown a link between air pollution and respiratory infections,” said EHP’s public health nurse Sarah Rankin, MPH, RN. “These studies show that being exposed to air pollution may aid in making a respiratory infection worse. It might also increase your chances of getting a respiratory infection in the first place.” Naturally, at EHP, we want to offer ways you can help to protect your health and your family’s health from the effects of pollution in your air. The Q & A blog post talks about how you can monitor the air in and around your home and suggests steps you can take to reduce pollution there. Along those lines, EHP has produced a short video explaining how to make an affordable and effective air filter using a box fan and a HEPA-certified furnace filter. This DIY fan/furnace filter can help to make your home’s air cleaner. If you want to take a deeper dive into the science behind the relationship between air pollution and respiratory infection, you might be interested in EHP’s review of the studies mentioned above. “Air Pollution and Respiratory Infections: Reviewing the Science” looks at more than two dozen research studies that tackle the issue from the standpoint of disease severity, hospitalizations and emergency room visits, and deaths during pandemics, including COVID-19. Feel free to contact EHP for more information on air pollution as it affects your health and well-being. Tagged as: air pollution, chemical pollution, COVID 19, EHP, filters, lung infections

1 0

We Cannot Postpone Climate Talks Until 2021
by Duane Nichols 05 Jun '20

05 Jun '20

https://www.thenation.com/article/environment/climate-conference-postpone/ We Cannot Postpone Climate Talks Until 2021 Lawmakers need to wake up: Climate change and the injustices it generates won’t break for Covid-19. So the United Nations Climate Change Conference can’t, either. By Ilana Cohen, The Nation, June 5, 2020 Sixteen-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg speaks at the 2019 United Nations Climate Action Summit. (Carlo Allegri / Reuters Pictures) On the heels of a pandemic that is hitting communities of color the hardest, and while protests for racial justice following the murder of George Floyd rock the nation and world, it is vital for meaningful climate dialogues to continue. Yet Britain last week proposed postponing international climate talks until November 2021. The potential costs of doing so are stark. Most strikingly, it will likely result in economic recovery plans by nations that seek to revitalize a fundamentally unsustainable and unjust status quo, one which harms under-resourced communities the most and which puts the futures of my peers and myself second to the profits of big corporations. If we recognize the urgency around climate change—if we want a livable planet for today’s young people and, more pressingly, if we are really committed to combating the racial violence that pervades our political, social, and economic systems—then these costs are far too high for our leaders to risk with delay. Lawmakers need to wake up: Climate change and the injustices it generates won’t break for Covid-19. So the United Nations Climate Change Conference can’t, either. It is certainly within our nations’ technological capacities to ensure that they aren’t pushed into the future. But more than that, it is within their basic political and ethical responsibilities to make the 26th annual Conference of the Party (COP) an imminent reality by whatever means possible. Already, fossil fuel companies are preparing to line their coffers with federal bailouts. They are demanding regulatory relief as the price of oil hits record lows. They’ve spent this pandemic continuing to push through pipelines, frequently at the expense of indigenous communities like the Wet’suwet’en, all under the cover of a mainstream media dominated by Covid-19 coverage. The potential for a postponed COP gives these bad actors even more wiggle room to exploit the current crisis, securing a model of business that will wreck the environment and jeopardize our futures. And it’s happening right under our noses. At the same time, the effects of climate change are already becoming more palpable. We’re approaching a potentially record-breaking Atlantic hurricane season, which will put coastal and low-lying communities now struggling to shelter in place from Covid-19 in a uniquely precarious position— fierce storms may necessitate evacuation. And with climate change increasing the likelihood for the spread of infectious disease, we’re only sampling the harsh intersection of our environmental and public health emergencies. Current Issue If our government officials really want an economy and a planet that does not discriminate along racial, gender, and socioeconomic lines and that can support all of their children and grandchildren, then they need to radically rethink business as usual. Preserving the status quo puts us on the trajectory toward climate apartheid, with those who can afford to escape the worst effects of climate change doing so while leaving our most vulnerable and historically marginalized community members behind, as we have already seen during this pandemic. Investing in an economy that works for young people means investing in a more environmentally sustainable and socially responsible system, not just for the coming, post-pandemic years but also for the coming decades. That starts with the policies we put in place to recover from Covid-19. Like the coronavirus crisis, tackling the climate crisis and the injustices it generates necessitates innovation. We have to think creatively and strategically if we’re going to achieve the rapid and equitable transition to a clean energy economy within the next decade that is necessary, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, to avert potentially catastrophic and irreversible impacts of climate change. And with surging demand for jobs, now is the opportune moment for such thinking. But if world leaders fail to forge a way forward for a safe and effective COP conference in the time of Covid-19, then we’re in a worse position on climate change than many of us could have ever imagined. The kind of thinking we need on the scale that we need it seems unlikely, in this case, to come to fruition. Already, scores of universities have made the transition to online learning. Companies have learned to organize business meetings over video conferencing platforms to continue conducting daily business as much as possible. With access to the world’s top health experts, perhaps our government leaders can make possible a socially distanced COP. But if not, why can’t our world leaders at least convene a remote one? University students have managed to Zoom into higher education from around the world; I’d hope that our top-ranking officials could display the same resolve to stave off an existential global threat. A remote COP may not hold quite the same appeal as the traditional in-person conference and, certainly, any dependence on online and remote technologies will produce new challenges in logistics and accessibility. But as universities and institutions are learning to overcome such hurdles, so could our leaders. Convening COP could quite literally make a world of difference, because it could radically alter the world we end up with decades from now. At the very least, it will provide an opportunity to halt the development and proliferation of economic recovery plans that do further damage to our planet and burden our most vulnerable communities. More than that, it could provide a unique chance to harness international cooperation to advance the bold agenda needed to tackle both climate and Covid-19. Otherwise, our leaders risk sacrificing even more lives and livelihoods to the climate crisis on top of those lost to the current pandemic. Many of us have become all too familiar with the sounds of sirens over the last few months and with worries that our neighbors, family, and friends will next enter the ambulance. Delaying COP and risking the adoption of policies that fail to mitigate or that even exacerbate climate change may only increase the buildup of bodies that this pandemic and the state-sanctioned violence rising in its midst ultimately produce. For many of us, the reality of tomorrow alone—not to mention the future beyond that next day—feels highly uncertain right now. The financial, mental, physical, and emotional stresses of this moment weigh differently on people in different circumstances, but no one is immune. In a few decades or so, without dramatic action, we’ll face the same reality with climate change—as low-lying and developing nations have already. If we want our future to look different, we have to seize this political moment. A 26th annual COP, a uniting of leaders around our shared world, is a critical step in making that possible. This story was produced for Student Nation, a section devoted to highlighting campus activism and student movements from students in their own words. The Student Nation program is made possible through generous funding from The Puffin Foundation.

1 0

Cornell announces moratorium on fossil fuel investments | Cornell Chronicle
by Duane Nichols 29 May '20

29 May '20

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2020/05/cornell-announces-moratorium-fossi… Cornell announces moratorium on fossil fuel investments By James Dean, Cornell Chronicle, May 22, 2020 The Cornell University Board of Trustees voted May 22 to support a decision by its Investment Committee to institute a moratorium on new private investments focused on fossil fuels and to grow its investments in alternative energy technologies. The moratorium emerged from the committee’s review of Cornell’s $6.9 billion endowment portfolio; the near- and medium-term financial outlook for the coal, oil and gas industries; and the potential threat posed by climate change, according to a resolution approved by trustees. “There’s a growing recognition that we’re transitioning away from fossil fuels globally, and the economic competitiveness of renewable energy sources is rising,” said Ken Miranda, the university’s chief investment officer. “We’re doing the right thing from an investment perspective, particularly for an endowment with a perpetual time horizon.” Effective immediately, the moratorium applies to new private equity and bond vehicles focused on fossil fuels, a category that makes up about 4.2% of Cornell’s long-term investments, Miranda said. That percentage is expected to dwindle to zero over time as existing investments mature and assets are redeployed to other areas, including renewables, he said. The new policy does not apply to indexed and other public equity mandates, such as the S&P 500, where typically the university may be one of hundreds or thousands of investors and does not have the ability to alter an index’s composition or direct managers to include or exclude particular securities. As a matter of policy, the Investment Office does not invest directly in any individual equity securities, including those of fossil fuel companies. The moratorium formalizes practices the portfolio had already been following for some time, Miranda said, and builds upon several strategies Cornell has implemented as part of the gradual transition toward more environmentally friendly energy sources. More than 70% of the university’s assets under investment are run by managers committed to considering environmental, social or governance issues in their investment decisions, through frameworks including the U.N. Principles for Responsible Investment. The resolution trustees endorsed on May 22 calls for growing that percentage. The Investment Committee already had changed its proxy voting policies to require fund managers voting on Cornell’s behalf to emphasize the maximization of long-term sustainable economic value over short-term gains. Proxy voting enables Cornell to push corporate managers and boards to pursue more sustainable practices, Miranda said. Now, the Investment Committee has also directed the endowment to redouble its efforts to invest in more energy-efficient and new technologies, such as carbon reduction and carbon capture, “that offer competitive risk-adjusted rates of return and which help in a transition to a more sustainable future, both nationally and globally,” according to the board resolution. “We’ve been doing that for quite some time,” Miranda said, “but we’re going to enhance that.” Cornell’s Investment Office has a mandate to support the university’s research, education and engagement missions, including providing need-blind financial aid to expand access. The Investment Committee determined that the moratorium and other new measures were “consistent with its fiduciary and stewardship responsibilities,” according to the resolution. Beyond its investment portfolio, Cornell is recognized as a leader in sustainability research and education and has committed to a goal of becoming a carbon neutral campus by 2035, trustees have noted. Through Lake Source Cooling, the university uses water from Cayuga Lake as a renewable source of chilled water, reducing reliance on fossil fuels, and it is exploring Earth Source Heat, a proposed enhanced geothermal system for heating campus. Cornell was ranked first among the Ivies in national sustainability ratings by the Princeton Review. The university’s sixth large-scale solar project came online in January, doubling the amount of campus net electricity offset by renewable energy credits from 10% to 20%. The Cornell hydroelectric plant doubled production in the past year, increasing renewable power to campus. And the university has certified 26 green buildings, including 18 meeting LEED Gold and five meeting LEED Platinum criteria, according to the Campus Sustainability Office. In recent months, all five of Cornell’s governance bodies – the Faculty Senate and the Employee, Graduate and Professional Student, Student and University assemblies – have passed resolutions calling for the university to divest from fossil fuels. The Investment Office shares the long-term goal of reducing reliance on fossil fuels and accelerating a shift to greener technologies while meeting its fiduciary obligations, Miranda said. The moratorium, new alternative energy investments, increased use of socially responsible managers and existing proxy voting guidelines represent a strong approach to gradually reaching that goal, he said. “We’re still focusing on risk-reward, but we know that technology is changing every day and we have to get in front of technology,” Miranda said. “Increasingly, the world is evolving to an alternative energy future.” >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

1 0

Tomorrow! Frackland Tour: Virtual Edition
by Duane Nichols 20 May '20

20 May '20

From: Clean Air Council <members(a)cleanair.org> > Date: May 20, 2020 at 11:22:03 AM EDT > To: MonValley Clean Air Coalition > Subject: Tomorrow! Frackland Tour: Virtual Edition > Reply-To: Clean Air Council <rzerbo(a)cleanair.org> > > Dear MonValley Clean Air Coalition, > > On May 21 at 12PM EDT, Clean Air Council, Breathe Project, Earthworks, Environmental Health Project and Philadelphia Physicians for Social Responsibility will be co-sponsoring a virtual frackland tour. > > This presentation can be viewed on EHP's Facebook at facebook.com/EnvironmentalHealthProject, EHP's website at www.environmentalhealthproject.org, or the Breathe Project's YouTube page at www.youtube.com/user/breatheproject. > > Presenters include: > *Matthew Mehalik, Breathe Project > *Ned Ketyer, Environmental Health Project and Philadelphia Physicians for Social Responsibility > *Lois Bjorson, Clean Air Council > *Leann Leiter, Earthworks > *Impacted Pennsylvania residents > > Following the presentation, there will be a live Q&A.

1 0

The pros and cons of planting trees to address global warming » Yale Climate Connections
by Duane Nichols via MVCAC 25 Mar '20

25 Mar '20

https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/03/the-pros-and-cons-of-plantin… The pros and cons of planting trees to address global warming Bruce Lieberman It seems like such a simple, straightforward, empowering idea: plant trees – a lot of trees – all over the world, and watch the planet’s temperature fall. Who doesn’t love a tree or two, even far more – the right tree in the right place? Along with the refreshing shade they provide on hot days, trees of course also store carbon, and they’ll suck it right out of our fragile atmosphere as they grow. Who could argue with more trees, more forests – more shade! – in a warming world? Nary a soul, one suspects, whether of conventional “tree hugger” category or rabid climate science detractor. Earlier this year, the one-trillion tree campaign was big news at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Salesforce founder Businessman Marc Benioff announced at the meeting that his company will “support and mobilize the conservation and restoration of 100 million trees over the next decade.” Back in Washington, D.C., President Trump and Republican lawmakers said they too support the international campaign – although Arkansas Republican Rep. Bruce Westerman came under fire for proposing a “Trillion Trees Act” that would pair a commitment to planting trees with a plan to increase logging on public lands. Numerous other Republican representatives are endorsing the trees effort. Cautions against just randomly digging and planting Over the past few weeks, chatter has picked up that planting trees is only one piece of the puzzle when it comes to combating climate change. Trees are a good thing, but: We also need to protect existing forests – the Amazon, for example. We need to ramp up wind, solar, and geothermal energy. We need to burn less fossil fuel. We need to eat more of the right foods and less of the wrong ones and, above all else, eat sustainably. We need higher vehicle-mileage standards and more electric cars. We need to get our act together so we can better adapt to rising seas, more droughts and wildfires, and unpredictable swings in weather. Like other initiatives to tackle climate change, planting trees requires some forethought. Recent news coverage of the trillion tree campaign points to several things people should be thinking about before digging and planting. Authors of a 2019 study from the Swiss research university, ETH Zurich, estimated that the planet can support about 2.5 billion more acres of newly planted trees – without tearing down cities and doing away with farms. And they say those trees could store about 200 gigatons of carbon (GtC) once they mature. That’s equal to one-third of all the carbon that humans have emitted into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide pollution, the authors claimed. The New York Times summarized the study last year. Researcher: ‘Nations absolutely should plant and protect as many [trees] as possible. … But it’s also a limited and unreliable way of addressing climate change.’ Scientist Zeke Hausfather, long a regular contributor to Yale Climate Connections, suggested in a series of tweets at the time that the study was misleading on a few counts. For one thing, cumulative emissions from land use and burning fossil fuels were closer to 640 GtC, “so removing 200 GtC would represent one-third of historic emissions.” Hausfather also pointed to the practical and economic challenges of planting trees on every acre of available land. India is intimately familiar with this challenge. Last summer the country planted hundreds of millions of trees as part of an initiative to keep one-third of its land area covered in trees. But the nation’s high population and rapid industrialization pose challenges to sustained reforestation. Only about 60% of the saplings are expected to survive – the rest succumbing to disease and a lack of water. A Skeptical Science article by Dana Nuccitelli, a regular contributor to Yale Climate Connections and an environmental scientist, cites additional studies that have raised several other key points. Among them: Tundra and boreal regions unpopulated by trees play an important global role in reflecting energy from the sun back into space. Planting trees in these regions would darken landscapes at these high latitudes, causing them to absorb energy from the sun rather than reflect it – ultimately contributing to higher global temperatures and offsetting cooling created by planting trees. The ETH Zurich researchers mistakenly considered natural savannas, grasslands, and shrublands as places where forests could be restored. And in their ETH Zurich study, they estimated a carbon sequestration rate of 0.22 GtC per million hectares (i.e., for every 2.47 million acres). But 0.22 GtC is twice the amount cited by previously published estimates. Trees deserve a ‘moment’ of fame, but keep reality in mind So while the right kinds and numbers of tree species in the right places have lots of appeal, big questions remain over exactly what can be accomplished by planting one trillion trees – and whether it may cause more harm than good. James Temple, senior editor for energy at MIT Technology Review, summed up the view of many experts in a January 28 piece when he wrote: “It’s great that trees are having a moment. Nations absolutely should plant and protect as many as possible. … But it’s also a limited and unreliable way of addressing climate change.” Temple raised a few more important points, some of which have been echoed elsewhere. Among them: trees take time to grow and reach maturity – decades and even centuries for redwoods and other behemoths that can store massive amounts of carbon. If you think you’re going to immediately offset your carbon footprint from flying across the country by planting a tree … think again. Another point Temple made: You really have to work the numbers to get a true sense of the challenge. For example, he wrote, the U.S. produced 5.8 billion gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions in 2019. To offset that much CO2 pollution, you’d have to plant a forest – and wait for it to fully mature – that is more than twice the size of Texas. The one-trillion tree campaign raises still more questions for forest ecologists – one of them having to do with biodiversity. If the campaign results in what are essentially tree plantations lacking biodiversity and genetic variation, often referred to as monoculture, those artificial forests won’t get very far. “People are getting caught up in the wrong solution,” Forrest Fleischman of the University of Minnesota told The Verge in late January. “Instead of that guy from Salesforce saying, ‘I’m going to put money into planting a trillion trees,’ I’d like him to go and say, ‘I’m going to put my money into helping indigenous people in the Amazon defend their lands.’ That’s going to have a bigger impact.” A campaign to plant “one trillion trees” sounds ambitious, it sounds daring, and it sounds exciting. And in many ways it could be all of those. But keep in mind that since 2015 and just in the Sierra Nevada – that sliver of mountain habitat that runs along the spine of California – nearly 150 million trees have died, victims of drought, disease, and invasion by beetles. Warmer winters have contributed to a population explosion of these destructive insects, and it’s a story being played out across the American West where forest fires are growing in frequency and intensity. So maybe we can plant a trillion trees around the globe. But if we don’t do much else about climate change, will we just be fueling the fire? So maybe we can and should plant a trillion trees around the globe. Go for it. But a wide array of experts insist that if we don’t also take numerous other actions to address climate change – specifically including major cuts in fossil fuel emissions and in particular carbon dioxide – we may just be fueling the fire. In the end, it comes down to more trees and lots of other actions, not to more trees or. More to read “Tree planting is Trump’s politically safe new climate plan,” Vox, Feb. 4, 2020 “Trump and the trillion trees,” The New York Times, Feb. 5, 2020 “What’s better than planting a trillion trees? Protecting the forests while we are at it.,” The New York Times, Feb. 10, 2020 “Planting trees won’t save the world,” The New York Times, Feb. 12, 2020 “Republican lawmakers introduce trillion trees act to combat climate change,” Reason, Feb. 13, 2020 “1 trillion trees: What would it take, how would it work, and is it even worth it?,”Fast Company, Feb. 19, 2020 “Panel battles over tree-planting legislation,” The Hill, Feb. 26, 2020 “A trillion trees not enough to fix climate crisis, critics say,” PhysOrg, Feb. 27, 2020 Filed under: Bruce Lieberman Sent from my iPhone

1 0

Virginia Clean Economy Act clears General Assembly, aided by beefed-up ratepayer protections - Virginia Mercury
by Duane Nichols via MVCAC 07 Mar '20

07 Mar '20

Virginia Clean Economy Act clears General Assembly, aided by beefed-up ratepayer protections - Virginia Mercury, March 7, 2020 The Virginia Clean Economy Act cleared its last hurdle in the General Assembly this week when both the House of Delegates and the Senate agreed to a final version that reflected the more aggressive House timeline of making Virginia’s electric grid carbon-free by 2045 while also incorporating stronger protections for electric utility ratepayers. The bill, SB 851, heads to the desk of Gov. Ralph Northam, whose administration has been heavily involved in pushing it forward. Sen. Jennifer McClellan, D-Richmond, the Senate patron of the bill, called the passage “a major historic moment” that will “break our reliance on fossil fuels.” “I kept thinking the entire time we were voting about the moon landing and wanted to shout, ‘The eagle has landed!’ on that final vote,” she said at a news conference Friday. “That’s how big this is. This is a giant leap forward for Virginia.” https://www.virginiamercury.com/2020/03/06/virginia-clean-economy-act-clear…

1 0

West Virginia burn laws now in effect | WVNS
by Duane Nichols via MVCAC 03 Mar '20

03 Mar '20

https://www.wvnstv.com/news/west-virginia-burn-laws-now-in-effect/ West Virginia burn laws now in effect Adeena Balthazor, West Virginia News Service, March 1, 2020 GHENT, WV (WVNS)– With the winter season nearing its end, many people are raking up leaves from last fall and burning them. However, certain laws going into effect only allow residents to do so within certain times. Spring fire season starts Sunday, March 1, 2020 and runs until May 31, 2020. Statewide burning is only permitted from 5 p.m. until 7 a.m. All fires mush have a ring or safety strip. Only materials such as leaves, brush and yard clippings are permitted to be burned. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOTE: I question whether leaves should be burned anytime, night or day. They do not burn well (often damp), resulting in extremely toxic fumes, i.e. highly reactive organic species that damage the human lungs. More generally, outdoor burning of ANYTHING results in more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, which needs to be discouraged and outlawed. Waste disposal services can landfill such materials or composting can be done. Duane Nichols

1 0

No PTTG & No Storage Hub: Petrochemicals and Plastics
by Duane Nichols via MVCAC 02 Mar '20

02 Mar '20

https://ohvec.org/no-pttg-petrochemicals-plastic/ No PTTG: Petrochemicals and Plastic For Immediate Release Date: March 2, 2020 Contacts: Dustin White, OVEC—Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, 304-541-3144, dustin(a)ohvec.org Bev Reed, Concerned Ohio River Residents, 740-738-3024, ConcernedOhioRiverResidents(a)yahoo.com No PTTG: Petrochemicals and Plastics Local Citizens go to State Capitol and Voice Opposition to Petrochemicals/Plastics Hub CHARLESTON, W.VA.—Residents from Marshall and Ohio counties, WV, and Belmont County, OH, made a three-hour trek to the WV State Capitol today to meet with legislators to speak about their opposition to an ethane cracker plant that PTT Global Chemical wants to build in Dilles Bottom, OH, across from Moundsville, WV. The cracker plant would impact the air quality of Moundsville and Wheeling, WV, which already have poor air quality. The residents informed lawmakers of their concerns about the PTTG cracker, which is just one component of many that would be part of the Appalachian Storage and Trading Hub (ASH). This is an umbrella name for a proposed petrochemical mega-complex, which primarily would use fracked natural gas liquids to make plastics in the Ohio and Kanawha River valleys. One similar facility, the Shell ethane cracker, is already under construction in Monaca, PA. If built, the petrochemical hub would span more than 400 miles along the rivers. Infrastructure related to the hub could reach into a 500-square-mile area in more than 50 counties in West Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky. The infrastructure would include cracker plants and other types of refineries, underground storage facilities, and thousands of miles of pipelines. The feedstock for the petrochemical factories would come from a massive increase in regional fracking. The residents noted that this proposed petrochemical buildout would exacerbate air and water pollution and threaten the health of the five million residents who depend on the Ohio River as a public water source. West Virginia already has a history of petrochemical-related disasters, including C8 pollution and the 2014 MCHM water crisis. This proposed petrochemical corridor would exacerbate both climate change and the growing global plastic pollution crisis. Nonetheless, during the 2020 Legislative Session, many legislators have pushed a pro-petrochemical agenda, often referring to the proposed hub as a “petrochemical renaissance.” Several bills were introduced to “lure” the petrochemical industry to West Virginia, including HB 4001, the Mountaineer Impact Fund, which could, according to one reporter’s analysis, “reopen the door” for an $83.7 billion investment by China Energy in petrochemical infrastructure in the state. The bill would allow West Virginia to serve as an official partner in investment deals, potentially putting taxpayers on the hook. HB 4421, the Natural Gas Liquids Economic Development Act, would provide tax credits to companies that transport or store natural gas liquids. HB 4019 would also give major tax breaks to the industry. Another proposal is HB 4615, an anti-protest bill, written to intimidate residents like those visiting the capitol today and keep them from participating in direct-action protests aimed at so-called “critical infrastructure”—oil, gas, and petrochemical industries—by enacting harsh penalties on protestors and their allies. Legislators are pushing this agenda with little to no input from community members affected by the petrochemical complex and are ignoring scientific evidence and real-world precedence: Louisiana’s “Cancer Alley” has disproportionately high cases of human health impacts and economic disparity. Quotes from residents at the State Capitol today: Bev Reed, Bridgeport, OH, resident and leader with the community group Concerned Ohio River Residents, who lives just a few miles north of the proposed PTTG site: “I went to a university in West Virginia and I currently work in West Virginia. It is very unfortunate to see Ohio and West Virginia legislators pushing hard for this petrochemical/plastics hub. The Hub is about propping up a failing fossil fuel industry with plastic production at the expense of our health, air, water, pocketbooks, and future generations. There is much opposition to the hub in the Northern Panhandle of West Virginia. We are here today to represent our communities. We ask the legislators to represent their people, not overseas corporate profits.” Vincent DeGeorge, Ph.D., a Wheeling resident, researcher, and teacher of materials science and engineering at a state university: “As a lifelong West Virginian and as a scientific expert in both energy and materials, I cannot justify new large-scale investment in fossil fuels and plastics as positive for our state. If West Virginia fails to diversify our economy away from its fossil-fuel dominance and dependence, and instead doubles down by adding the globally collapsing plastics industry, we can only expect our economic, environmental, and public health problems to continue for future generations.” Barbra Chamberlin, Moundsville resident: “My home in Moundsville, West Virginia is being threatened with toxic air and water and environmental destruction due to the possible construction of a petrochemical plant on the Ohio River. I have children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, great-nephews and great-nieces, and a great-great-niece. I am sure they would wonder why we would do this to their home. Will the final years of my life be spent struggling to stay healthy in this toxic environment? Will I be able to breathe clean air and find clean water to drink? The transient jobs would not be worth the destruction of our home.” ### Sent from my iPad

1 0

Whose Land Is This Land? | Sierra Club
by Duane Nichols via MVCAC 26 Feb '20

26 Feb '20

https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/whose-land-atlantic-coast-pipeline-appala… Whose Land Is This Land? A battle over a fracked gas pipeline turns into a fight for the future of energy The Appalachian Trail winds for over 2,000 miles from Georgia to Maine, through state, federal, and private land. Some portions of the trail run alongside city streets, like in Hot Springs, North Carolina. Some portions of the trail cross rivers, like the Kennebec River in Maine. And some portions of the trail cross through National Forest, like the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests that cover parts of Virginia, West Virginia, and Kentucky. Typically, land within a national forest is managed by the US Forest Service, while the Appalachian Trail itself is administered by the National Park Service. The Forest Service, for its part, is authorized to allow the development of national forests for multiple use, meaning that it can grant permits to industries that want to use the resources of the national forest to their benefit. But what about the parts of the Appalachia Trail that cross through a national forest—are those areas Forest Service land, or Parks Service land? That is largely the question that the Supreme Court sought to answer when it heard oral arguments Monday in Atlantic Coast Pipeline LLC v. Cowpasture River Preservation Association. The case concerns the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, a joint venture of the energy giants Dominion Energy and Duke Energy that would carry fracked gas from the Marcellus Shale in West Virginia to Virginia and North Carolina. In 2017, the US Forest Service issued the necessary permits for the pipeline to cross a portion of the Appalachian Trail that runs through the George Washington National Forest. Environmental and conservation groups, including the Sierra Club, sued to overturn the permits. Eventually, a federal court of appeals ruled that the permits were invalid because, among other things, the Forest Service lacked jurisdiction under the 1920 Mineral Leasing Act to grant a right-of-way for a pipeline on any land in the National Parks System. In one sense, the Supreme Court’s decision in Atlantic Coast Pipeline will have a limited impact on the pipeline’s future. The court of appeals vacated eight permits based on four independent grounds, including an inadequate environmental review process and an inadequate consideration of alternative routes. The pipeline’s construction has been plagued by delays and beleaguered by community protests. Because of these setbacks, developers have seen the cost of the pipeline balloon to $8 billion from the original price tag of about $5 billion. Even if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the pipeline, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the pipeline will ever become operational. But don’t mistake the fate of this single pipeline for the fate of fossil fuel development in the United States, particularly across some of the country’s most beloved natural lands. Even if a favorable decision won’t automatically save the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, there’s a reason that the energy companies petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the issue. This case is not just about the one pipeline: it’s about all the pipelines to come. On a map, the National Park system is a scatter-shot constellation of the 84 million acres that comprise the US National Parks. While there are notable exceptions in the West and in Alaska, in most places, a national park is an island unto itself; the parks may be numerous, but they relatively isolated from one another. That isolation creates gaps between the boundaries of the parks that, as the attorney for the pipeline companies told the Supreme Court, are “easy enough to steer a pipeline around.” But take a look at the National Trails system--which was created by Congress in 1968 to allow for “the establishment of a national system of recreation and scenic trails”-- and things change. Unlike the Park System, the National Trails system runs like rivulets across the entire map. The Appalachian Trail follows the length of the East Coast; in the center of the country, the Lewis and Clark Trail cuts down the middle of the Dakotas into the heart of the Midwest. And in California and Oregon, the California Historic Trail curves through a thicket of national parks and national forests as its tributaries reach for the Pacific. The environmental groups in Atlantic Coast Pipeline don’t suggest that an oil and gas pipeline can never cross any land in the National Trails system. But just as the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 prohibits the construction of pipeline on National Park System land without Congressional approval, environmental groups argue that pipelines cannot be built across National Trails land that is administered by the National Park Service without Congressional approval. Put another way: if federal land is administered by the National Park Service, environmentalists argued before the court, it is necessarily National Park System land. And Congress has made it very clear that you can’t build oil-and-gas pipelines on federal land in a national park without Congressional approval. If the Supreme Court were to side with the environmental groups, it would mean that, on the map of the United States, the gaps between the national parks where it is currently “easy enough to steer a pipeline around” would constrict, if only just a little bit. It wouldn’t make pipeline construction impossible, by any stretch. The Appalachian Trail, which is a patchwork of federal, state, and private land, wouldn’t become the “impermeable barrier” that Chief Justice John Roberts described at oral argument. Companies like Duke and Dominion could still construct a pipeline across the Appalachian Trail. They would just have to do it across private, local, or state land. Limitations, of course, create costs, which is perhaps the real reason that Duke Energy (which earned $2.7 billion in 2018) and Dominion (which earned $2.6 billion over the same period) would balk at the idea of having to choose from a slightly more limited set of options for delivering fossil fuels to consumers. Pipelines are already a costly venture, and fossil fuels are a bad investment. To capitalize on as much profit as possible, energy companies need to build their oil and gas pipelines now. That, ultimately, is the problem that the energy companies asked the Supreme Court to solve--and the problem that the court’s conservative justices seem most eager to answer. Describing the consequences of the environmental groups’ argument as “enormous,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito, appeared deeply skeptical of the idea that Congress would ever intend to make the Appalachian Trail off limits to oil and gas pipelines (per his usual silence, Justice Clarence Thomas did not ask a question at oral argument). “You would expect to see clear language like that to generate the significant consequences that your position has,” Kavanaugh told the environmental groups’ attorney at oral arguments. “You have textual arguments, the other side has textual arguments, but your position has significant consequences to it, enormous consequences.” Later, Justice Alito described the environmental groups’ claim as a “gotcha” argument, patched together through a lucky confluence of statutory language. The court’s conservative justices did not, at oral argument, acknowledge the enormous consequences on the other side of the ledger; that is, the consequences that have already come from the unfettered extraction and consumption of fossil fuels, like the gas that the Atlantic Coast Pipeline would carry to the eastern seaboard. Nor did the conservative justices signal any discomfort with the consequence of upending parts of the Appalachian Trail for a pipeline intended to serve a demand that might not exist. At one point, Justice Stephen Breyer—considered to be part of the court’s more liberal arm—suggested that the pipeline developers might be able to win on narrower grounds than a sweeping proclamation that National Trail lands administered by the Park Service are not units of the National Park System. “I represent the Atlantic Coast Pipeline,” the attorney for the pipeline replied. “It's not my job to resist winning this case on a narrow ground.” But with a five to four conservative majority, the Supreme Court seems poised to give the pipeline company the broad victory it desires, thwarting environmentalists’ attempts to limit, even slightly, the land across which oil and gas pipelines can be built in this country. Our national trails, the court seems ready to rule, are important—just not so important as a company’s right to bring fossil fuels to market. The consequences of hindering an energy company’s profits are “enormous;” the consequences of allowing the unfettered extraction and use of fossil fuels, at least to the court’s conservative majority, merits no consideration. It is a sobering vision of our country’s energy future. Perhaps more importantly, it is a sobering look into the role that the courts will play in halting—or hastening—the climate crisis. Sent from my iPad

1 0

Tell states to cut transportation emissions: 2 days left
by Duane Nichols via MVCAC 26 Feb '20

26 Feb '20

From: Clean Air Council <joe_minott(a)cleanair.org> > Date: February 26, 2020 at 10:30:40 AM EST > Subject: Tell states to cut transportation emissions: 2 days left > Reply-To: nzr(a)cleanair.org > > > > > > Donate > > Submit a comment to the Transportation & Climate Initiative by Friday 2/28 > Tell your state to reduce emissions and invest in a clean transportation system. > TAKE ACTION > MonValley Clean Air Coalition, > > > Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and other northeast states are considering a program that would transform the transportation sector in this part of the country through the Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI). Clean Air Council and other advocates across the region believe this is a critical step to improving transportation and addressing the climate crisis. > > > If designed correctly, this program could help to create safe roads for biking and walking, more frequent and reliable public transportation, greater access to electric vehicles, and a more equitable system with cleaner transportation options for everyone in the region. > > > Transportation is the country’s and region’s leading source of carbon emissions. Clean Air Council believes TCI will help to clean this sector up, but we need your help to move it forward. Fossil fuel companies are hard at work getting opponents to leave negative feedback in the program’s public comment portal, and we need environmentalists like you to help counteract that. > > > Click here to leave a comment supporting TCI and demand the most comprehensive program possible: we need improved transportation options, we need polluters to pay their fair share for the damage they are causing, and we need to act now! > > > Tips for comments: > Affiliation can be concerned resident/parent/voter/etc. > Request your state join the plan to reduce transportation emissions. > Explain why it is important to you that the states take action on the climate crisis now. > Demand a strong program that invests in public transportation, biking, walking, and prioritizes equity. > Leave a comment in support of a strong TCI program by this Friday, February 28th! > > > > Contact Nick Zuwiala-Rogers for more information about TCI and the Council’s work on this issue at nzr(a)cleanair.org. > > > Thank you for your action, > > > Joseph Otis Minott, Esq. > Executive Director and Chief Counsel > > > > Donate > > > > > > CONNECT WITH US > > > > > > > > > > PHILADELPHIA OFFICE > 135 S. 19TH STREET > SUITE 300 > PHILADELPHIA, PA, 19103 > PITTSBURGH OFFICE > 200 FIRST AVE. > SUITE 200 > PITTSBURGH, PA 15222 > > View this email in your browser > WILMINGTON OFFICE > 100 W. 10TH STREET > SUITE 1004 > WILMINGTON, DE, 19801 > Unsubscribe > > > > > > > > > > > >

1 0

WVU Climate Conversations Podcast: An Introduction to the Podcast | WVU Climate Conversations Podcast | thedaonline.com
by Duane Nichols via MVCAC 22 Feb '20

22 Feb '20

https://anchor.fm/climate-conversations/episodes/An-Introduction-to-the-Pod… WVU Climate Conversations Podcast: An Introduction to the Podcast From the Climate Conversations, WVU Daily Athenaeum, February 19, 2020 Kathryn Williamson, teaching assistant professor of physics and astronomy at West Virginia University, gives us an introduction to the WVU Climate Conversations podcast. Inspired by Katharine Hayhoe’s TED talk that, “the most important thing you can do to fight climate change is to talk about it,” students in the West Virginia University Fall 2019 Honors book club host their own climate conversations with a variety of guests. Episode Transcription: Hi everyone. My name's Katherine Williamson. I'm a professor of physics and astronomy at West Virginia University, and I usually teach astronomy, but this semester I got the chance to lead a book club for the honors college. So the name of the book club, Climate Conversations, I chose after listening to Katharine Hayhoe's TED talk, which says that the most important thing you can do to fight climate change is to talk about it. So that was the aim of every one of our book club meetings. And that's the aim of this podcast, is to keep that conversation going. We all have something to bring to the table. We all have a perspective that is valuable no matter how old or young where we live. If it's rural or urban, whether we're male or female, regardless of any sort of identity we have, we have our voice. This podcast series is a result of students' final projects in the climate conversations book club. I had seven students we met. The second half of the semester in Fall 2019 we read three books. The first book was the Two Mile Time Machine, which is about ice cores, climate change, and our future. Written by Richard Alley, Two Mile Time Machine is really about how we know the science of climate change throughout the eons. But when we dig through ice cores, we can see what was the temperature hundreds of thousands of years ago, what was the carbon dioxide concentration. And then the second book we read was called Earth and Human Hands. That was written by a planetary scientist, David Grinspoon. He actually called into her book club meeting and we got to ask him lots of fascinating questions about the Anthropocene and how planetary science has really given us a perspective of our own planet by studying Venus and Mars and other planets, we can learn about home. So those first two books were very science heavy. As a scientist myself, I felt compelled to make sure all the students in the book club got a chance to talk about the science and how we know what we know. But those two books kinda, they didn't lead to as interesting conversations as our third book, which was called renewable. Written by Eileen Flanagan about her search for the subtitle as her one woman's search for simplicity, faithfulness, and hope. And she is a Quaker activist who had served in the peace Corps in Botswana and just found herself sort of in her midlife, struggling to live true to her values. And she became an activist who actually. Got arrested right outside of the white house because of pushing for more action on climate change. So that sort of personal responsibility, I think spoke to a lot of students. And with this conversation with this podcast, we want to just encourage everyone, all of our guests, we want to highlight their voice and just show an example of what it means to have a climate conversation. In this podcast, we'll have a guest from the West Virginia House of Delegates, we'll have a physicist. one of my colleagues here at WVU, we will have students talking about their experience, either studying abroad, studying history, or just trying to live sustainably on campus, and we'll even talk to some activists here in West Virginia from the Citizens' Climate Lobby. So we're getting a broad perspective, political, scientific, personal, and I hope there's something in this podcast series that you can relate to, feel inspired by, and maybe you'll have your own climate conversations after this.

1 0

University student organizations to rally against Longview Power Plant | WVU News | thedaonline.com
by Duane Nichols via MVCAC 20 Feb '20

20 Feb '20

University student organizations to rally against Longview Power Plant Article by Gabriella Brown, WVU Daily Athenaeum, February 20, 2020 Student organizations will rally together at Woodburn Circle on Saturday at noon to protest against the construction of a natural gas and solar power plant. The organizations include WVU Sierra Club Coalition, Mountaineers for Green Design and the Sunrise Movement Greater Morgantown. Stephen Nelson, chief operating officer of Longview, said the $1.1 billion gas and solar power plant will use regionally produced Marcellus gas, and the solar facility will be one of the largest in Appalachia. Part of the project will be located on Longview’s property in Pennsylvania and part will be in Maidsville, West Virginia. Alexis Yost, a junior landscape architecture student and member of the Mountaineers for Green Design, said the construction of this plant could have irreversible environmental implications, including water contamination and the release of four million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. She said the construction of the plant poses its own set of problems, such as pipeline installation and deforestation. She said few people within the Morgantown community are aware of the situation. “The more you talk about it to people the more you realize no one knows that this is a really big deal,” Yost said. Jonah Kone, an Americorps Volunteer in Service to America in the WVU Land Use Clinic, said based on most scientific predictions, if carbon emissions are not reduced within 13 years, catastrophic impacts of climate change will become inescapable. He said this plant would simply add fuel to the fire. “For one, the Sierra Club and the Sunrise Movement are adamantly against any new fossil fuel infrastructure,” Kone said. “The reality is renewable energy can be competitive in West Virginia. We have a ton of untapped potential.” Kone said with this project in particular, one of the biggest problems is related to the payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) program, meaning the company agrees to pay a set stipend of fees to the county government in exchange for a property tax exemption. If approved, Kone said by being a part of the PILOT program, Longview would be granted a $200 million property tax and business inventory tax break. In order for this to pass, he said the Board of Education and the county commission will first need to approve it. Kone said the Sierra Club had its economics policy advisor do the numbers on the plan. He said the club found around 75% of the taxes the plants would normally be required to pay would be exempt. Nelson said Longview Power plans to take part in the PILOT program, and it will provide $2 million in PILOT payments and taxes in Monongalia County every year. He said this one of many benefit’s the plant will bring to Monongalia County, including creating thousands of jobs during construction and during the plant’s operation. “Employee compensation, direct, indirect and induced, will exceed $200 million,” Nelson said in an email. “In full operation, the gas and solar facilities will add approximately 35 new, high skill/high wage jobs with a payroll of around $2 million.” In response to the protest that will occur on campus, Nelson said Longview Power is committed to producing clean energy. “Longview is one of the cleanest burning coal-fired electric generation units in the world and our proposed gas facility, once operational, will be as well,” Nelson said. “We are committed to clean fossil and renewable development. We hope folks will take the time to learn more about us.” Yost said even if the rally has a small turnout, it is important to the environmentalist groups to get the word out about the situation. “If this still passes, young people need to vote,” Yost said. P.S. The proposed new plant would add 4 million tons per year of CO2. Source: https://www.thedaonline.com/news/university/university-student-organization…

1 0

Re: [MVCAC] Longview Power, LLC vs. APPALACHIAN STEWARDSHIP FOUNDATION
by Duane Nichols via MVCAC 16 Feb '20

16 Feb '20

DOMINION POST EDITORIAL 16 FEBRUARY 2020 APOLOGY STILL OWED GROUPS FOR REMARKS County commissioner needs to set false accusations right It’s a lesson most of us learn the hard way on more than one occasion. Make your words soft and sweet because you never know when you’ll have to eat them. But more importantly, you want to check out your sources and get your facts straight first. In mid-January, Monongalia County Commissioner Tom Bloom’s words against an environmental foundation were hard and sour. Some of his frustration was a reaction to comments by a Sierra Club representative who questioned the C o m m i s s i o n’s transparency in negotiations with Longview Power. The Commission is negotiating a second payment in lieu of taxes deal with Longview Power for a solar and natural gas expansion to accompany its coal-fired power plant. Yet, when Bloom responded in a public meeting to those comments with accusations of a misappropriation of funds and maligning environmentalists for even receiving those funds, then threatening to forward the matter to the p ro s e c u t o r ’s office if certain conditions were not met, he stepped out of bounds. The funds in question are payments from Longview Power to the Appalachian Stewardship Foundation, an umbrella organization, created to administer and distribute funds Longview pays as a result of a challenge by the Sierra Club and two other environmental groups in Longview’s permitting process for its existing plant. A settlement with these groups resulted in Longview paying $500,000 for 10 years and $300,000 each year thereafter — $4 million to date — to be used for remediation efforts. Representatives from the Sierra Club, the other environmentalists and two nonvoting members, Longview and AMD Reclamation, comprise ASF’s board. Based on data provided by L o n g v i ew ’s president and CEO, Bloom asserted ASF had spent less than $355,400 on appropriate projects and had spent more than $1.2 million on “lawyers and other activities.” After reviewing the ASF’s public data on its website we cannot find a single fact that supports those accusation. The organizations that have received grants from these ASF funds all appear to fund appropriate activities. The ASF has provided grants totaling $2.2 million to fund appropriate activities and has not paid $1.2 million to lawyers. Period. ASF’s list of grants and tax forms are available to the public. And trying to cast these payments to ASF as “t a x p aye r ” funds or as shortchanging the school board is disingenuous, at best, wrongheaded, at worst. Yet, we have yet to hear a public apology to these groups from Bloom. It’s almost as if he’s not going to admit he’s wrong, because he didn’t look at the facts. But he’s not going to look at the facts, because he would have to admit he’s wrong. Our newspaper is well versed on making mistakes and having to clarify, correct and apologize for them. It’s better to err and apologize than to hope a problem just magically goes away. Especially, a public problem in a public venue caused by a public official. P.S. The President of Longview is the source of these accusations, which he repeated in a public meeting in Morgantown hosted by the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition. dgn

1 0

Your Rights at Stake: Come to Public Hearing on Anti-Protest Bill
by Duane Nichols via MVCAC 08 Feb '20

08 Feb '20

https://ohvec.org/public-hrg-on-anti-protest-bill/ Your Rights at Stake: Come to Public Hearing on Anti-Protest Bill OVECFeb 6, 2020 Please come out for a public hearing on HB 4615, “The West Virginia Critical Infrastructure Protection Act,” which would create new criminal and civil penalties for conduct around gas and oil pipelines that could be applied to individuals and organizations involved in peaceful protests. Public Hearing on HB 4615, the Anti-Protest Bill 8:30 a.m., Monday February 10 in the House Chamber at the WV State Capitol 1900 Kanawha Boulevard East, Charleston, West Virginia Can’t come? Call your delegate and state your opposition to HB 4615. Find out who your delegate is here and find their contact info here. In State Houses around the United States, bills are being introduced that would criminalize peaceful protest. The bills would dramatically increase civil fines for protesters, and increase criminal penalties for specific forms of protest, even for organizations and individuals supporting protest. In the states where the bills have become enacted to law, challenges are underway at great expense to all involved. Greenpeace protesters in Texas appear to be the first to have been charged under these types of bills, and could face two years in prison and fines of up to $10,000. The organization itself could face a fine of up to $500,000 under the new state law. The Texas bill could even impact journalists covering protests. South Dakota appears to be the first state where a legal challenge to one of these bills has had a successful outcome. People in Ohio have been resisting a similar bill there, and now this corporations-over-people bill has invaded West Virginia. HB 4615 is un-American. A basic right for Americans is the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression in the country. Protest was a foundational tenant for American democracy, and since our foundling days, protest has been essential in raising awareness about injustices to bring about social reforms. HB 4615 is unconstitutional. The right to peacefully assemble is protected under the First Amendment. Peaceful protest works. Almost every day in America people come together peacefully to demonstrate and raise our voices about clean air and water, equal rights for women and people of color, fair wages and working hours, local land use, and other issues we believe in. We all deserve to live in a society where we can speak our mind without fear of punishment. This is free speech. If a company is polluting our water source or a politician is acting against the people, we should be able to speak up. This bill stops people from criticizing the powerful. HB 4615 reeks of ALEC’s* widespread efforts to clamp down on protests of all kinds. HB 4615 has heightened penalties for trespass onto “critical infrastructure” (one year in jail), and felony penalties for trespass with intent to “willfully damage, destroy, vandalize, deface, tamper with equipment, or impede or inhibit operations” (three years in prison and a $1,000 fine). Actual damage, destruction, vandalism, defacing, tampering, impeding/inhibiting is a felony subject to five years in prison and a $2,000 fine. A person convicted of any of these offenses is also civilly liable to third parties for any personal or property damage that results. (*See: ALEC Exposed: The Koch Connection.) The bill contains conspiracy provisions as well, creating liability for a person or organization that “conspires” to trespass (a $5,000 fine) or to damage/tamper/etc. (a $10,000 fine). Any entity that “compensates, provides consideration to or remunerates a person” for trespassing is also civilly liable for any personal or property damage. If you can’t make it to the public hearing, please do let your delegate know this bill is unacceptable. As it begins, you should be able to access a live stream of the public hearing by clicking on the “House of Delegates Chamber” audio or video link here. Please stand up for democracy! Come out to this hearing and/or comment to legislators, and then make plans to join us the following Monday, February 17, for Good Government Lobby Day. Register for that, here. Sent from my iPad

1 0