- MVCAC - lists.bikelover.org

NIETC become reality
by Duane330＠aol.com 03 Oct '07

03 Oct '07

THE DECISION OF THE US-DOE SHOWN BELOW INDICATES THAT THE MID-ATLANTIC "NIETC" NOW EXISTS, HOWEVER THE PROPOSED TRAIL LINE WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR APPROVAL BY THE US-DOE WITHIN THIS CORRIDOR UNTIL ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE STATES, EITHER APPROVING, DISAPPROVING, OR NEGLECTING TO MAKE A DECISION. THEN, THE US-DOE CAN APPROVE THE TRAIL LINE, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE STATES DECIDE. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: DOE Designates National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors, October 2, 2007. ************************************************************ DOE Designates Southwest Area and Mid-Atlantic Area National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors ************************************************************ WASHINGTON, DC - U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Assistant Secretary for Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability Kevin M. Kolevar today announced the Department's designation of two National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (National Corridors) -- the Mid-Atlantic Area National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor, and the Southwest Area National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor. These corridors include areas in two of the Nation's most populous regions with growing electricity congestion problems. The Department based its designations on data and analysis showing that persistent transmission congestion exists in these two areas. Further information, including the complete National Electric Transmission Congestion Report and the maps, is available on the Corridors web site at http://www.nietc.anl.gov. For More Information ******************** For more information about the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors and Congestion Study, visit the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors and Congestion Study Web site at _http://nietc.anl.gov/index.cfm_ (http://nietc.anl.gov/index.cfm) . ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

2 1

US Climate Change Science Program
by duane330＠aol.com 21 Sep '07

21 Sep '07

US CLIMATE CHANGE SCIENCE PROGRAM PANEL GIVES U.S. PROGRAM MIXED GRADES. The National Research Council is pleased that the Bush Administration has advanced the science of climate change, but?has serious concerns about the management, funding, and emphasis of the? $1.7 billion a year Climate Change Science Program.? ? http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=11934 ? http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11934 ? http://www.gcrio.org/ipcc/ar4/wg1/faq/index.htm ? Chapter from which Questions have been taken [PDF files] Questions [PDF files] Multiple chapters All Questions in Single File? [7Mb] 1. Historical Overview of Climate Change Science 1.1. What Factors Determine Earth's Climate? [392Kb] 1.2. What is the Relationship between Climate Change and Weather? [514Kb] 1.3. What is the Greenhouse Effect? [2.7Mb] 2.Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing 2.1. How do Human Activities Contribute to Climate Change and How do They Compare with Natural Influences? [298Kb] 3.Observations: Surface and Atmospheric Climate Change 3.1. How are Temperatures on Earth Changing? [3.7Mb] 3.2. How is Precipitation Changing? [296Kb] 3.3. Has there been a Change in Extreme Events like Heat Waves, Droughts, Floods and Hurricanes? [412Kb] 4.Observations: Changes in Snow, Ice and Frozen Ground 4.1. Is the Amount of Snow and Ice on the Earth Decreasing? [254Kb] 5. Observations: Oceanic Climate Change and Sea Level 5.1. Is Sea Level Rising? [139Kb] 6. Palaeoclimate 6.1. What Caused the Ice Ages and Other Important Climate Changes Before the Industrial Era? [549Kb] 6.2. Is the Current Climate Change Unusual Compared to Earlier Changes in Earth's History? [79Kb] 7.Couplings Between Changes in the Climate System?and Biogeochemistry 7.1. Are the Increases in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Other Greenhouse Gases During the Industrial Era Caused by Human Activities? [701Kb] 8.Climate Models and their Evaluation 8.1. How Reliable Are the Models Used to Make Projections of Future Climate Change? [183Kb] 9.?Understanding and Attributing Climate Change 9.1. Can Individual Extreme Events be Explained by Greenhouse Warming? [129Kb] 9.2. Can the Warming of the 20th Century be Explained by Natural Variability? [601Kb] 10.?Global Climate Projections 10.1. Are Extreme Events, Like Heat Waves, Droughts or Floods, Expected to Change as the Earth's Climate Changes? [79Kb] 10.2. How Likely are Major or Abrupt Climate Changes, such as Loss of Ice Sheets or Changes in Global Ocean Circulation? [100Kb] 10.3. If Emissions of Greenhouse Gases are Reduced, How Quickly do Their Concentrations in the Atmosphere Decrease? [211Kb] 11. Regional Climate Projections 11.1. Do Projected Changes in Climate Vary from Region to Region? [1.2 Mb] U.S. Global Change Research Information Office, Suite 250, 1717 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20006. Tel: +1 202 223 6262. Fax: +1 202 223 3065. Email: information(a)gcrio.org. Web: www.gcrio.org. Webmaster: webmaster(a)gcrio.org. ________________________________________________________________________ Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com

1 0

Fwd: Health Care Reform Forum Tonite - Valley, 7:00
by Duane330＠aol.com 20 Sep '07

20 Sep '07

For Your Information. ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com

1 0

The two-hit model for nano-particles
by duane330＠aol.com 08 Sep '07

08 Sep '07

WVU awarded $2.1M to study effects of air pollution Submitted to The Dominion Post, Page 6-D, September 6, 2007 WVU cardiovascular researcher Dr. Timothy R. Nurkiewicz has received a $2.1 million grant to study the effects of air pollution particles and engineered nanoparticles on the cardiovascular system. The grant, which distributes funds over a five-year period, is awarded by the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Nurkiewicz is a microvascular specialist who studies tiny blood vessels, called arterioles, capillaries, and venules that are not visible to the naked eye. They govern the parameters of blood flow, nutrient delivery and waste removal in the body. Particulate matter is one of six common pollutants for which the Environmental Protection Agency sets National Ambient Air Quality Standards. “Our hypothesis is that combustion source particulate matter impairs the vascular and immune systems in such a manner that blood flow to tissues is greatly compromised,” Nurkiewicz said. “We’re focusing primarily on diesel particles because they’re environmentally relevant and one of the most prolific components of ambient air pollution.” “Everyone has been stuck behind that ominous large truck spewing out black soot,” he said. “But we are exposed to particulate matter from more sources than exhaust from semi-tractor trailers.” According to Nurkiewicz, school buses and large vehicles associated with construction, city upkeep or road maintenance constantly run, putting particles into the air. “As a community, we frequently breathe in particles from these sources,” he said. “Our population and infrastructure are growing fast; however, we cannot expect the government, on any level, to appropriately regulate air quality and personal exposure if we don’t first have a full understanding of the health effects.” The grant also funds studies of the fairly new area of nanoparticle research. “There used to be a time when everyone thought asbestos was the wave of the future,” Nurkiewicz said. “Years later we know the detrimental health effects of asbestos, and we’re still struggling to deal with it because its toxicity was not properly characterized. We aren’t saying that will be the case with nanoparticles, but if nanotechnology is to reach its full potential, its health effects must be clearly identified, and this grant shows us that the NIH agrees.” The grant funds research to help assess possible risks related to the particles. Major risks include impairing the ability of blood vessels to dilate and immune system activation. If blood vessels cannot get bigger, then blood cannot flow. “The immune system normally activates when bacteria or viruses invade the body,” he said. “But our preliminary findings suggest particle exposure activates our immune system. If you are sick, you want your immune system to be active so the body can heal itself. If you’re not sick, it can be very bad because healthy tissues can be impaired or destroyed in the process.” According to the researcher, the risks associated with the “two-hit” model are much greater. In a twohit model, one’s health is already compromised by a preexisting disease such as hypertension, diabetes or obesity before exposure to particulate matter. Nurkiewicz’s studies will investigate the two-hit model with the intent to identify diseases or conditions that may increase susceptibility to air pollution exposure. “The effects of air pollution on cardiovascular function, including its ability to intensify cardiovascular disease, have become quite clear,” said Dr. Matthew A. Boegehold, director of the WVU Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Cardiovascular Sciences (CIRCS). “But we are still a long way from understanding the mechanisms by which these changes arise. Dr. Nurkiewicz’s project, along with similar studies, could serve as an important foundation for developing better clinical treatments for this problem.” Nurkiewicz’s lab will conduct the bulk of the research. Collaborating researchers include Vince Castranova, Ph.D., from NIOSH and WVU’s Dr. Judy Delp and Dr. Jeff Frisbee. “Dr. Nurkiewicz has assembled a creative, highly skilled group of investigators to assist him with this project,” Boegehold said. “The data they collect will not only answer the important questions currently outlined in the grant, but will also lead to new questions and possibly other exciting avenues of investigation in this area.” For more information on the CIRCS visit www.hsc.wvu.edu/circs/. ________________________________________________________________________ Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com

1 0

1998 remains the warmest year (NY Times)
by Duane330＠aol.com 26 Aug '07

26 Aug '07

Quarter-Degree Fix Fuels Climate Fight By ANDREW C. REVKIN, The New York Times Posted: 2007-08-26 13:51:58 Filed Under: _Science News_ (http://news.aol.com/science) (Aug. 26) - Never underestimate the power of the blogosphere and a quarter of a degree to inflame the fight over _global warming_ (javascript:;) . A quarter-degree Fahrenheit is roughly the downward adjustment _NASA_ (javascript:;) scientists made earlier this month in their annual estimates of the average temperature in the contiguous 48 states since 2000. They corrected the numbers after an error in meshing two sets of temperature data was discovered by Stephen McIntyre, a blogger and retired business executive in Toronto. Smaller adjustments were made to some readings for some preceding years. All of this would most likely have passed unremarkably if Mr. McIntyre had not blogged that the adjustments changed the rankings of warmest years for the contiguous states since 1895, when record-keeping began. Suddenly, 1934 appeared to vault ahead of 1998 as the warmest year on record (by a statistically meaningless 0.036 degrees Fahrenheit). In NASA's most recent data set, 1934 had followed 1998 by a statistically meaningless 0.018 degrees. Conservative bloggers, columnists and radio hosts pounced. "We have proof of man-made global warming," Rush Limbaugh told his radio audience. "The man-made global warming is inside NASA." Mr. McIntyre, who has spent years seeking flaws in studies pointing to human-driven climate change, traded broadsides on the Web with James E. Hansen, the NASA team's leader. Dr. Hansen said he would not "joust with court jesters" and Mr. McIntyre posited that Dr. Hansen might have a "Jor-El complex" -- a reference to _Superman_ (javascript:;) 's father, who foresaw the destruction of his planet and sent his son packing. Blogs are still reverberating, but Mr. McIntyre, Dr. Hansen and others familiar with the initial data revisions are clarifying what is, and is not, at issue. One thing not in question, Mr. McIntyre and Dr. Hansen agree, is the merit of shifting away from energy choices that contribute heat-trapping greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. Mr. McIntyre said he feels "climate change is a serious issue." His personal preference is to shift increasingly to nuclear power and away from coal and oil, the main source of heat-trapping carbon dioxide. Mr. McIntyre and Dr. Hansen also agree that the NASA data glitch had no effect on the global temperature trend, nudging it by an insignificant thousandth of a degree. Everyone appears also to agree that too much attention is paid to records, particularly given that the difference between 1934, 1998, and several other sets of years in the top 10 warmest list for the United States are so small as to be statistically meaningless. Mr. McIntyre said that when he posted the revised list under the heading "A New Leaderboard at the U.S. Open," "I just was sort of having some fun with it as much as anything." He added: "The significance of things has been misstated by Limbaugh and people like that." Dr. Hansen and his team note that they rarely, if ever, discuss individual years, particularly regional findings like those for the United States (the lower 48 are only 2 percent of the planet’s surface). "In general I think that we want to avoid going into more and more detail about ranking of individual years," he said in an e-mail message. "As far as I remember, we have always discouraged that as being somewhat nonsensical." Jay Lawrimore, a scientist at the National Climatic Data Center of the Commerce Department who works on assembling the climate records that NASA analyzed, said his agency could probably do a better job of emphasizing the uncertainty surrounding its annual temperature announcements. Indeed, there is enough wiggle room in the numbers that the center has a different list of the 10 warmest years than those produced using NASA’s and Mr. McIntyre’s analyses. By the climate center’s reckoning, 1998 remains the warmest year for the 48 states (with 2006 second and 1934 third). Dr. Lawrimore, Dr. Hansen and other experts said that trends are far more important than particular years, and the recent widespread warming trend has been clear — and very distinct from the regional hot spell that drove up United States temperatures in the 1930s. Mr. McIntyre and the government scientists do agree on at least one more thing: the need to improve the quality of climate data gathered around the world, including in the United States, which has by far the planet’s biggest network of meteorological stations. Mr. McIntyre is not alone in pointing out that the need to adjust and revise such data -- with the attendant risk of mistakes -- would be reduced with more care and consistency taken in collecting climate data. The National Academy of Sciences has repeatedly called for improvements in climate monitoring. An independent group of meteorologists and weather buffs is compiling its own gallery of American weather stations at www.surfacestations.org, with photographs showing glaring problems, like thermometers placed next to asphalt runways and parking lots. Dr. Lawrimore said that the government is preparing to build a climate reference network of more sophisticated, and consistent, monitoring stations that should cut uncertainty in gauging future trends. In any case, he said, the evidence for human-driven warming remains robust. "Saying what they're saying has just provided an opportunity for them to create doubt in people's minds," he said of the bloggers. Copyright © 2007 _The New York Times Company_ (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html) 2007-08-26 ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

1 0

Fwd: Virginia's State Corporation Commission holds hearings
by Duane330＠aol.com 25 Aug '07

25 Aug '07

FYI ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

1 0

Pennsylvania Hearings on TrAIL
by Duane330＠aol.com 25 Aug '07

25 Aug '07

To: Duane. RE: Public Hearings on TrAIL power line in Western Pennsylvania.............. Here is the schedule: 1. Washington County fairgrounds – Building B – August 29 & 30, September 19 & 20 – 1:00 and 7:00 pm daily 2. Greensboro VFD – September 5 – 1:00 pm 3. Carmichaels High School – September 5 – 7:00 pm 4. Waynesburg University Alumni Hall – September 6 – 1:00 and 7:00 pm To get on the schedule, you simply sign up when you arrive at the hearings. Rick Layton, Greene County. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> P.S. I am planning to testify, either at Greensboro or Carmichaels, on behalf of the MonValley Clean Air Coalition. I will try to get representatives from the WV Sierra Club and from a few other groups to come out as well. Duane Nichols ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

1 0

The Climate Game is Over..(y, n, really.?)
by Duane330＠aol.com 29 Jul '07

29 Jul '07

Editorial Climate: Game Over Donald Kennedy, editor, Science (AAAS) With respect to climate change, we have abruptly passed the tipping point in what until recently has been a tense political controversy. Why? Industry leaders, nongovernmental organizations, Al Gore, and public attention have all played a role. At the core, however, it's about the relentless progress of science. As data accumulate, denialists retreat to the safety of the Wall Street Journal op-ed page or seek social relaxation with old pals from the tobacco lobby from whom they first learned to "teach the controversy." Meanwhile, political judgments are in, and the game is over. Indeed, on this page last week, a member of Parliament described how the European Union and his British colleagues are moving toward setting hard targets for greenhouse gas reductions. Science, 27 July 2007 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "City welcomes TrAIL blazers", Fairmont Times West Virginian, front page headlines Regional office for the power line will be in Vets' Plaza. Kenny Construction Co. President John Kenny, Jr, Allegheny Power President Dave Filtman and state Sen. Brooks McCabe announce the construction company will open an office in Fairmont to build AE's new transmission line. The TrAIL project will create an estimated 700 construction jobs for the next five years. Fairmont Mayor Scott Sears officially welcomed Kenny Construction to the "family of Fairmont" and declared the city is "open for business". Kenny Construction is a Chicago-based construction company that has its focus on honesty, integrity and safety, according to its President. Friday, July 27, 2007. ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour

1 0

Next meeting of MVCAC--July 24th
by William Wonderlin 20 Jul '07

20 Jul '07

The next meeting of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition will be: Tuesday, July 24th, at 7PM. Location: St. Paul Lutheran Church, 309 Baldwin St., Morgantown This will be a "working" meeting at which we will be stuffing envelopes with our nifty new flyers and discussing current issues and upcoming plans. Please try to join us. Thanks

1 0

Moving Beyond Kyoto -- Al Gore
by Duane330＠aol.com 12 Jul '07

12 Jul '07

Moving Beyond Kyoto by: Al Gore 2 July 2007, New York Times WE — the human species — have arrived at a moment of decision. It is unprecedented and even laughable for us to imagine that we could actually make a conscious choice as a species, but that is nevertheless the challenge that is before us. Our home — Earth — is in danger. What is at risk of being destroyed is not the planet itself, but the conditions that have made it hospitable for human beings. Without realizing the consequences of our actions, we have begun to put so much carbon dioxide into the thin shell of air surrounding our world that we have literally changed the heat balance between Earth and the Sun. If we don't stop doing this pretty quickly, the average temperature will increase to levels humans have never known and put an end to the favorable climate balance on which our civilization depends. In the last 150 years, in an accelerating frenzy, we have been removing increasing quantities of carbon from the ground — mainly in the form of coal and oil — and burning it in ways that dump 70 million tons of CO2 every 24 hours into the Earth's atmosphere. The concentrations of CO2 — having never risen above 300 parts per million for at least a million years — have been driven from 280 parts per million at the beginning of the coal boom to 383 parts per million this year. As a direct result, many scientists are now warning that we are moving closer to several "tipping points" that could — within 10 years — make it impossible for us to avoid irretrievable damage to the planet's habitability for human civilization. Just in the last few months, new studies have shown that the north polar ice cap — which helps the planet cool itself — is melting nearly three times faster than the most pessimistic computer models predicted. Unless we take action, summer ice could be completely gone in as little as 35 years. Similarly, at the other end of the planet, near the South Pole, scientists have found new evidence of snow melting in West Antarctica across an area as large as California. This is not a political issue. This is a moral issue, one that affects the survival of human civilization. It is not a question of left versus right; it is a question of right versus wrong. Put simply, it is wrong to destroy the habitability of our planet and ruin the prospects of every generation that follows ours. On Sept. 21, 1987, President Ronald Reagan said, "In our obsession with antagonisms of the moment, we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world." We — all of us — now face a universal threat. Though it is not from outside this world, it is nevertheless cosmic in scale. Consider this tale of two planets. Earth and Venus are almost exactly the same size, and have almost exactly the same amount of carbon. The difference is that most of the carbon on Earth is in the ground — having been deposited there by various forms of life over the last 600 million years — and most of the carbon on Venus is in the atmosphere. As a result, while the average temperature on Earth is a pleasant 59 degrees, the average temperature on Venus is 867 degrees. True, Venus is closer to the Sun than we are, but the fault is not in our star; Venus is three times hotter on average than Mercury, which is right next to the Sun. It's the carbon dioxide. This threat also requires us, in Reagan's phrase, to unite in recognition of our common bond. Next Saturday, on all seven continents, the Live Earth concert will ask for the attention of humankind to begin a three-year campaign to make everyone on our planet aware of how we can solve the climate crisis in time to avoid catastrophe. Individuals must be a part of the solution. In the words of Buckminster Fuller, "If the success or failure of this planet, and of human beings, depended on how I am and what I do, how would I be? What would I do?" Live Earth will offer an answer to this question by asking everyone who attends or listens to the concerts to sign a personal pledge to take specific steps to combat climate change. (More details about the pledge are available at algore.com.) But individual action will also have to shape and drive government action. Here Americans have a special responsibility. Throughout most of our short history, the United States and the American people have provided moral leadership for the world. Establishing the Bill of Rights, framing democracy in the Constitution, defeating fascism in World War II, toppling Communism and landing on the moon — all were the result of American leadership. Once again, Americans must come together and direct our government to take on a global challenge. American leadership is a precondition for success. To this end, we should demand that the United States join an international treaty within the next two years that cuts global warming pollution by 90 percent in developed countries and by more than half worldwide in time for the next generation to inherit a healthy Earth. This treaty would mark a new effort. I am proud of my role during the Clinton administration in negotiating the Kyoto protocol. But I believe that the protocol has been so demonized in the United States that it probably cannot be ratified here — much in the way the Carter administration was prevented from winning ratification of an expanded strategic arms limitation treaty in 1979. Moreover, the negotiations will soon begin on a tougher climate treaty. Therefore, just as President Reagan renamed and modified the SALT agreement (calling it Start), after belatedly recognizing the need for it, our next president must immediately focus on quickly concluding a new and even tougher climate change pact. We should aim to complete this global treaty by the end of 2009 — and not wait until 2012 as currently planned. If by the beginning of 2009, the United States already has in place a domestic regime to reduce global warming pollution, I have no doubt that when we give industry a goal and the tools and flexibility to sharply reduce carbon emissions, we can complete and ratify a new treaty quickly. It is, after all, a planetary emergency. A new treaty will still have differentiated commitments, of course; countries will be asked to meet different requirements based upon their historical share or contribution to the problem and their relative ability to carry the burden of change. This precedent is well established in international law, and there is no other way to do it. There are some who will try to pervert this precedent and use xenophobia or nativist arguments to say that every country should be held to the same standard. But should countries with one-fifth our gross domestic product — countries that contributed almost nothing in the past to the creation of this crisis — really carry the same load as the United States? Are we so scared of this challenge that we cannot lead? Our children have a right to hold us to a higher standard when their future — indeed, the future of all human civilization — is hanging in the balance. They deserve better than a government that censors the best scientific evidence and harasses honest scientists who try to warn us about looming catastrophe. They deserve better than politicians who sit on their hands and do nothing to confront the greatest challenge that humankind has ever faced — even as the danger bears down on us. We should focus instead on the opportunities that are part of this challenge. Certainly, there will be new jobs and new profits as corporations move aggressively to capture the enormous economic opportunities offered by a clean energy future. But there's something even more precious to be gained if we do the right thing. The climate crisis offers us the chance to experience what few generations in history have had the privilege of experiencing: a generational mission; a compelling moral purpose; a shared cause; and the thrill of being forced by circumstances to put aside the pettiness and conflict of politics and to embrace a genuine moral and spiritual challenge. Al Gore, vice president from 1993 to 2001, is the chairman of the _Alliance for Climate Protection_ (http://www.climateprotect.org/) . He is the author, most recently, of "The Assault on Reason." ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

2 1

Re: [MVCAC] BE ACTIVE Re: transmission line
by Paul Brown 05 Jul '07

05 Jul '07

Jim, I think I speak for all of us in thanking you for your analysis. It would make an important contributiin as a letter to the editor (fewer than 600 words in the Dom Post) - I'd be willing to draft one for you if you like. It would also be an excellnt argument against the power line, especially n combination with the battery argument. Something like this: The stated reason is invalid on its face because new technology makes the power line obsolete. Then expose the actual motive, which screws customers in order to enrich allegheny. Thanks again. Could I use your analysis in my column? Paul Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512 >>> "James Kotcon" <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> 07/05/07 5:43 PM >>> Paul, et al.: You have obviously made the mistake of believing what Allegheny Energy says about their transmission line. :-) The purpose of the transmission line is NOT to relieve congestion or increase system reliability, no matter how many times Allegheny says so. The purpose is to make more money from Allegheny's old dirty power plants. They can do that by supplying more electricity to East Coast cities during peak periods. Installing batteries in those cities would allow those customers to recharge the batteries at night when demand is low and electricity is cheap, but Allegheny makes more money by selling during peak daytime periods. This is primarily due to the obscure way that electricity is priced on the wholesale market. The congestion is not so much a "capacity" congestion, but an "economic" congestion. It costs Allegheny approximately 3 cents per kilowatt to generate electricity, and another 3 cents per kilowatt to transmit it through the grid to your home. (All numbers used are approximate and may vary from year to year, but they illustrate the principles involved.) That retail price of 6 cents is a monthly average of all the plants and transmission lines and all their expenses used over a period of years. But at any given time, cheap base load plants like Fort Martin can generate electricity at 1-2 cents, while more expensive natural gas plants require up to 6-12 cents per kilowatt. Coal-fired base load plants take a lot of time to ramp up and shut off, so they are mostly used full time for "base load. Because it takes time to heat them up and cool them off, utilities keep looking for ways run their plants at night so they do not have to waste money and energy during start-ups and shut-downs. Natural gas plants can be turned on and ramped up very quickly, but their fuel costs are higher, so they are turned on only a few hours per day when needed for peaking power. The natural gas plants, and their higher costs, are averaged into your monthly bill with the coal plants. Within a given service territory, it makes sense to use the batteries to more completely utilize the lowest cost plants. But on the wholesale market, electricity is sold on an hour-by-hour, or even minute-by-minute basis. When demand is high, utilities need to buy the more expensive peaking power, often at prices of 12, 15, or even 25 cents per kilowatt. The Regional Transmission Operator (PJM) holds an hourly auction to determine the price of electricity, so each plant bids to deliver so many megawatts at whatever price they can afford. PJM then accepts bids, in order, from the lowest to the highest cost generators, until they have enough generation capacity to meet the demand for that particular hour. But every power plant whose bid is accepted is paid the same rate as the highest accepted rate, and any plants whose bids are higher (and whose electricity is not needed) will not sell any electricity and must be shut down until they are needed. This auction is rigged to provide an incentive for generators to bid the lowest price they can while still making a profit, as they make no money at all if they do not operate their plants. But the net effect is that wholesale generators who can generate very cheaply (1-3 cents) can sell that electricity for e.g., 24 cents if they can get it to the market and displace generators who cost 25 cents per kilowatt. Hence use of storage batteries would make good energy policy, but it does not make fabulous windfall profits for Allegheny because recharging the batteries at night (using nighttime base-load rates) would only make Allegheny 2-3 cents, not 12-24 that they can make during peak load periods. In fact, under this auction system, Allegheny wants to maximize the loads during peak daytime periods, so investments to even out the day/night peaks are counterproductive (for Allegheny). The only thing standing in Allegheny's way is the economic congestion on the current transmission grid, which prevents them from actually delivering the electricity to the highest paying customers. This is what the US-DOE describes as "economic congestion" which means that there is already enough generating capacity to meet the demand in East Coast communities, but with a new transmission line, electricity from these expensive East Coast plants could be economically displaced by Allegheny's older, dirtier, cheaper plants. US-DOE and Allegheny want us to believe that their is a "capacity congestion" which could lead to blackouts and system-wide collapse. But the capacity congestion really only occurs a few days per year, and could be addressed much more cheaply, while the economic congestion is the real driver that makes the power line cost-effective. Thus the real effect of the new transmission line is to dramatically increase Allegheny's profit potential, while making everyone's air dirtier. (Incidentally, this is the same mechanism that Enron used to manipulate the California markets and led to their energy crisis in 2000.) I am still unclear if it would assure that West Virginia customers would have to pay an increased cost for our electricity (in addition to paying for the power line) so that East Coast customers can pay less, but it seems likely. And that is the real reason for the new power line. JBK >>> "Paul Brown" <pbbrown(a)hsc.wvu.edu> 7/5/2007 4:09 PM >>> It can now be argued that the transmission line is no longer the optimal solution to power distribution problems, because a better technology is already in use in West Virginia and elsewhere. See following story: New battery packs powerful punch, http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/environment/2007-07-04-sodium-battery… By Paul Davidson, USA TODAY Batteries have long been vital to laptops and cellphones. They are increasingly supplying electricity to an unlikely recipient: the power grid itself. Until recently, large amounts of electricity could not be efficiently stored. Thus, when you turn on the living-room light, power is instantly drawn from a generator. A new type of a room-size battery, however, may be poised to store energy for the nation's vast electric grid almost as easily as a reservoir stockpiles water, transforming the way power is delivered to homes and businesses. Compared with other utility-scale batteries plagued by limited life spans or unwieldy bulk, the sodium-sulfur battery is compact, long-lasting and efficient. Using so-called NaS batteries, utilities could defer for years, and possibly even avoid, construction of new transmission lines, substations and power plants, says analyst Stow Walker of Cambridge Energy Research Associates. They make wind power * wildly popular but frustratingly intermittent * a more reliable resource. And they provide backup power in case of outages, such as the one that hit New York City last week. Such benefits are critical, because power demand is projected to soar 50% by 2030 and other methods of expanding the power supply are facing growing obstacles. Congress is likely to cap carbon dioxide emissions by traditional power plants to curtail global warming. Meanwhile, communities are fighting plans for thousands of miles of high-voltage transmission lines needed to zap electricity across regions. A test case in West Virginia American Electric Power (AEP), one of the largest U.S. utilities, has been using a 1.2 megawatt NaS battery in Charleston, W.Va., the past year and plans to install one twice the size elsewhere in the state next year. Dozens of utilities are considering the battery, says Dan Mears, a consultant for NGK Insulators, the Japanese company that makes the devices. "If you've got these batteries distributed in the neighborhood, you have, in a sense, lots of little power plants," Walker says. "The difference between these and diesel generators is these batteries don't need fuel" and don't pollute. The NaS battery is the most advanced of several energy-storage technologies that utilities are testing. The oldest and most widespread form of energy storage in the USA, pumped hydroelectricity, collects water after it spins a turbine and uses a small amount of electricity to send it back and repeat the process. Lead-acid batteries * the same kind used in cars * were installed by Southern California Edison in 1988. But the batteries, though inexpensive, typically fill warehouse-size buildings and last about five years. That's because the acid that connects positive and negative electrodes corrodes components. An NaS battery, by contrast, uses a far more durable porcelain-like material to bridge the electrodes, giving it a life span of about 15 years, Mears says. It also takes up about a fifth of the space. Ford Motor pioneered the battery in the 1960s to power early-model electric cars; NGK and Tokyo Electric refined it for the power grid. Since the 1990s, Japanese businesses have installed enough NaS batteries to light the equivalent of about 155,000 homes, says Brad Roberts, head of the Electricity Storage Association. In the USA, AEP is using the 30-foot-wide by 15-foot-igh battery to supply 10% of the electricity needs of 2,600 customers in north Charleston, says Ali Nourai, AEP manager of distributed energy. The battery, which cost about $2.5 million, is charged by generators from the grid at night, when demand and prices are low, and discharged during the day when power usage peaks. By easing strains on the grid, especially on the hottest summer days, the battery lets AEP postpone by about seven years the roughly $10 million upgrade of a substation and reduce the chances of a blackout, Nourai says. After it upgrades the substation, AEP can move the battery to another location. "Our vision is to have (batteries) throughout our system," he says. Storing wealth from wind farms A more intriguing goal is to wring more energy out of the wind farms that are cropping up across the country. Wind typically blows hard at night when power demand is low, producing energy that cannot be used. When demand peaks midday, especially in the summer, wind is often sporadic or absent. NaS batteries could let AEP store wind-generated power at night for daytime use. Next year, AEP plans to install another NaS battery in West Virginia to provide backup power in case of an outage * the first such application of the technology, Nourai says. The battery would kick in automatically, so customers would see no disruption. Other utilities are planning or considering the technology. In Long Island, N.Y., a group of utilities plans this summer to install an NaS battery at a bus depot. The battery is charged at night, when power prices are low, and discharged during the day to pump natural gas into tanks to provide fuel for the buses, says Mike Saltzman of the New York Power Authority. That cuts electric costs for the bus company and eases stresses on the grid. Pacific Gas & Electric is leaning toward installing a much larger, 5-megawatt battery by 2009, enough to power about 4,000 homes, says PG&E's Jon Tremayne. The biggest drawback is price. The battery costs about $2,500 per kilowatt, about 10% more than a new coal-fired plant. That discourages independent wind farm developers from embracing the battery on fears it will drive the wholesale electricity prices they charge utilities above competing rates, says Christine Real de Azua, spokeswoman for the American Wind Energy Association. Mass production, however, is expected to drive prices down, Mears says. He predicts NaS batteries will start to become widespread within a decade. Meanwhile, other storage devices are gaining traction, too. A group of Iowa municipal utilities plans to use wind turbines to compress air during off-peak hours that will be stored in an underground cavern. The air would be released at peak periods to run turbines and generate power for about 200,000 homes. Another technology, the flywheel, has a massive cylinder that can spin for days after being started by a generator. The cylinder can then activate a turbine to supply electricity for a few seconds or minutes when it's needed, for instance, to head off an interruption to a computer center from a lightning strike. "We'd like to see storage ubiquitous," says Imre Gyuk, head of energy storage for the Department of Energy, which helped fund the AEP project. "Stick it any place you can stick it." Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512 >>> <Duane330(a)aol.com> 7/5/07 3:50 PM >>> REMEMBER: The DOE National Interest Electricity Transmission (NIET) Corridor comments DEADLINE is July 6th! You should submit comments electronically at: http://nietc.anl.gov You can attach one file no larger than 10MB. So write a letter and attach it to an email. Or, just send an email letter. Address it to: The Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, OE-20 U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20585 "If you are commenting on Docket No. 2007-OE-01 (the draft Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor), your comments must be marked "Attn: Docket No. 2007-OE-01." So let's get all of our comments submitted a.s.a.p. Getting comment in on the excessively large area of the NIET Corridor is extremely important, covering essentially the northern half of West Virginia. Note that Gov. Manchin first supported this Corridor, but now opposes it, more or less. NOTE: There is no crisis in power on the East Coast. The eastern states need to (1) practice conservation and energy efficiency to the greatest extent possible, then (2) devise a plan that involves alternative fuels such that carbon dioxide emission can be REDUCED, not EXPANDED in the near and long term future. The "greenhouse effect" is real and huge! Duane Nichols, CLEAR and Board Member of MVCAC. See what's free at AOL.com.

1 0

BE ACTIVE Re: transmission line
by Duane330＠aol.com 05 Jul '07

05 Jul '07

REMEMBER: The DOE National Interest Electricity Transmission (NIET) Corridor comments DEADLINE is July 6th! You should submit comments electronically at: _http://nietc.anl.gov_ (http://nietc.anl.gov) You can attach one file no larger than 10MB. So write a letter and attach it to an email. Or, just send an email letter. Address it to: The Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, OE-20 U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20585 "If you are commenting on Docket No. 2007-OE-01 (the draft Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor), your comments must be marked "Attn: Docket No. 2007-OE-01." So let's get all of our comments submitted a.s.a.p. Getting comment in on the excessively large area of the NIET Corridor is extremely important, covering essentially the northern half of West Virginia. Note that Gov. Manchin first supported this Corridor, but now opposes it, more or less. NOTE: There is no crisis in power on the East Coast. The eastern states need to (1) practice conservation and energy efficiency to the greatest extent possible, then (2) devise a plan that involves alternative fuels such that carbon dioxide emission can be REDUCED, not EXPANDED in the near and long term future. The "greenhouse effect" is real and huge! Duane Nichols, CLEAR and Board Member of MVCAC. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

3 2

URGENT - NIETC Comment Period nearly over
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 05 Jul '07

05 Jul '07

July 6th is the last day to leave comments with the DOE concerning NIETC at http://nietc.anl.gov/involve/comments/index.cfm . How important is this? If the National Interest Electric Transmission Congestion Corridors becomes a reality, then even if WVPSC rejects TrAIL we will still have to contend with the fact that FERC may implement TrAIL. TrAIL won't be the last transmission line we end up opposing due to the fact that every large power utility in the United States has signed up for an early inclusion in Section 1221(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. How can you comment?: Many feel the comment period should have been extended, so at the very least send in a comment saying NO to the question " Would designation of one or more National Corridors in these areas be appropriate and in the public interest?," and request that the comment period be extended for the public. I used these guidelines provided by DOE in their Congestion Study document to provide comments to questions they have for the public: 1. Would designation of one or more National Corridors in these areas be appropriate and in the public interest? A. Does a major transmission congestion problem exist? B. Are key transmission constraints creating the transmission congestion? C. What is the magnitude of the problem? D. What are the relevant transmission or non-transmission solutions? 2. How and where should DOE establish the geographic boundaries for a National Corridor? 3. How would the costs of a proposed transmission facility be allocated? It's a lot of fun answering these questions, but I must admit I haven't had enough time to perform adequate research, however I'm giving it my best try. Keep in mind that the deregulation of the electricity market in 1996 is a key factor in today's congestion, due to shoddy practices by Power Utilities like Enron. It's not clear to me as a Citizen of the United States of America that we actually have a congestion problem, but what we do have are businesses very interested in making money under the guise that the National Security of America is under threat. In that case, the DOE should be interested in creating a decentralized electricity solution, and should recognize that Global Warming is a much greater threat to National Security than the energy economics of congestion. Here's how I answered 1(C). C. What is the magnitude of the problem? It's an insignificant problem compared to Global Warming. This is a perfect time for the DOE to become a significant part of the Global Warming solution. In the process of applying practices that reduce Global Warming, the transmission congestion problem will dissipate and eventually disappear. Jonathan

1 0

Global Warming to uproot millions
by Duane330＠aol.com 23 Jun '07

23 Jun '07

from the June 21, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0621/p10s01-wogi.html Global warming may uproot millions In the coming decades, the effects of global warming are likely to turn millions into refugees. By _Brad Knickerbocker_ (http://www.csmonitor.com/cgi-bin/encryptmail.pl?ID=C2F2E1E4A0CBEEE9E3EBE5F2…) | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor GLOBAL WARMING IS likely to uproot millions of people, forcing them to leave their homes and in the process create large-scale political, economic, and military challenges. In fact, say a growing number of experts, it's already beginning to happen. "Human-induced climate and hydrologic change is likely to make many parts of the world uninhabitable, or at least uneconomic," writes Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University in New York, in the current online issue of Scientific American. As a result, he says, "Over the course of a few decades, if not sooner, _hundreds of millions of people may be compelled to relocate because of environmental pressures_ (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=31&articleID=E82F5561-E…) ." Rising sea levels, stronger cyclones, the loss of soil moisture, more intense precipitation and flooding, droughts, melting glaciers, and changing snow-melt patterns are among the problems humanity will face, says Dr. Sachs. He warns: "Combined with the human-induced depletion of groundwater sources by pumping, and the extensive pollution of rivers and lakes, mass migrations may be unavoidable." The Christian Aid agency predicts that by 2050 global warming could displace as many as 1 billion people. "All around the world, predictable patterns are going to result in _very long-term and very immediate changes_ (http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=12976) in the ability of people to earn their livelihoods," Michele Klein Solomon of the International Organization of Migration told Reuters. "It's pretty overwhelming to see what we might be facing in the next 50 years. And it's starting now." Forced migration linked to climate change is part of a larger problem: refugees due to floods, famine, and other environmental conditions. In 2002, the United Nations estimated that there were about 24 million environmental refugees. _By 2010, about 50 million people will have migrated for environmental reasons_ (http://www.enn.com/globe.html?id=1651) , according to a 2005 study by Norman Myers, a professor of environmental science at Duke University in Durham, N.C., the Associated Press reported recently. Thomas Downing, director of the Stockholm Environment Institute, told French news service AFP: "There is going to be a lot of population movement linked to climate. ... Not all will be permanent refugees, but _when you add climate to other forces that push people beyond the capacity to cope_ (http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Global_Warming_Could_Lead_To_Millions_O f_Climate_Refugees_999.html) , the numbers will increase." While concern is rising for low-lying island nations and sub-Saharan countries especially vulnerable to drought, some experts say climate-caused forced migration already has happened on a large scale in North America – in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina along the Gulf Coast. Lester Brown of the Earth Policy Institute points out that the 2005 hurricane _"forced a million people from the [city] of New Orleans_ (http://sundaytimes.lk/070527/Columns/inside.html) and other small towns on the Mississippi and Louisiana coasts in the United States to move inland, either within states or neighboring states, such as Texas and Arkansas," according to an article in Sri Lanka's The Sunday Times. But the largest numbers of those forced to move by climate change are likely to be in developing countries, especially those threatened by desertification, AFP reported this week after the United Nations' annual World Day to Combat Desertification on June 17. "By 2025, _Africa could lose as much as two-thirds of its arable land_ (http://www.terradaily.com/2007/070615023018.6zxs5ha8.html) compared with 1990, and there could be declines of one-third in Asia and one-fifth in South America. Migration – from the Sahelian regions to the West African coast, from sub-Saharan Africa to Europe, from Mexico to the United States – will be an inevitable consequence as poor people are driven off their land." Among the most threatened are people in Bangladesh, reports the Chicago Tribune. Writes Tribune foreign correspondent Laurie Goering: "Bangladesh is hardly the only low-lying nation facing tough times as the world warms. But scientists say it in many ways represents _climate change's 'perfect storm' of challenges_ (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0705010817may02,1,703300…) because it is extremely poor, extremely populated, and extremely susceptible.... The extent of Bangladesh's coming problem is evident in Antarpara, a village stuck between the Jamuna and Bangali rivers five hours northwest of Dhaka, the capital. In it and other low-lying villages nearby, more than half of the 3,300 families have lost their land to worsening river erosion. Some have moved their homes a dozen times and are running out of places to flee." Meanwhile, according to a report on the People & the Planet website, "_climate refugees are already fleeing from the catastrophic rise in sea levels" in the Ganges River delta_ (http://www.peopleandplanet.net/doc.php?id=3036) of India. According to Sugata Hazra, director of Jadavpur University's school of oceanographic studies, over 70,000 people will be rendered homeless in the next 13 years due to the rising seas. By contrast, officials in Israel worry that climate change will mean less water for them. Warns Gidon Bromberg, director of the Israeli office of Friends of the Earth – Middle East, on the website of The Jewish Chronicle of Pittsburgh: "There will be less water available for Israel, but there will also be less water available for Israel's neighbors, and that will make [compliance with] existing peace treaty commitments more difficult between Israel and Jordan. ... And it makes difficult future agreements to be struck between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, between Israel and Syria, and between Israel and Lebanon." Thousands of people have died or been driven from their homes in the Darfur region of Sudan, says UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon in a recent column in The Washington Post. Mr. Ban sees _a direct link between social and political unrest in Darfur and its roots in an ecological crisis_ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/15/AR200706150…) , at least partly attributable to climate change. Ban writes: "Two decades ago, the rain s in southern Sudan began to fail. ... Scientists at first considered this to be an unfortunate quirk of nature. But subsequent investigation found that it coincided with a rise in temperatures of the Indian Ocean, disrupting seasonal monsoons. This suggests that the drying of sub-Saharan Africa derives, to some degree, from man-made global warming." Similarly, _political instability resulting from climate-caused forced migration is becoming a major concern among senior military officers_ (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/15/america/NA-GEN-US-Global-Warming-…) , reports the International Herald Tribune . In a recent report, retired senior officers warned that in the next 30 to 40 years, wars could be fought over water resources, hunger instability from worsening disease and rising sea levels, and refugees fleeing other effects of global warming. "The chaos that results can be an incubator of civil strife, genocide and the growth of terrorism," the 35-page report predicted. "We will pay for this one way or another," wrote retired Marine Corps Gen. Anthony Zinni, former commander of US forces in the Middle East, Central Asia, and the Horn of Africa. "We will pay to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions today, and we'll have to take an economic hit of some kind. Or we will pay the price later in military terms, and that will involve human lives." ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

CO2 Uptake In The Oceans
by Duane330＠aol.com 22 Jun '07

22 Jun '07

CARBON UPTAKE RECONSIDERED.... Approximately half of the CO2 emitted by fossil fuel burning remains in the atmosphere; the rest is absorbed by the ocean or incorporated by the terrestrial biosphere in roughly equal measures. Two studies reassess the uptake of CO2 by these sinks (see the Perspective by _Baker_ (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/316/5832/1708) ). In order to understand the relative role of different parts of the terrestrial biosphere as carbon sinks, global measurements of atmospheric CO2 concentration must be interpreted by "inversion" models to determine how uptake, emission, and transport contribute to the seasonal and regional differences. Previous studies have suggested that there must be a strong carbon sink in the Northern Hemisphere, and that the tropics are a net carbon source. Stephens et al. (p. _1732_ (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/316/5832/1732) ) report that global vertical distributions of CO2 in the atmosphere are not consistent with that interpretation but are more consistent with models that show a smaller Northern Hemispheric carbon sink and possibly strong carbon uptake in the tropics. The rate of uptake of CO2 depends on the difference between the partial pressure of CO2 in the atmosphere and that which would exist if the ocean and the atmosphere were at equilibrium. Le Quéré et al. (p. _1735_ (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/316/5832/1735) , published online 17 May) report that the rate of uptake by Southern Ocean, one of the most important CO2-absorbing regions, has slowed relative to what would be expected based solely on how fast the concentration of atmospheric CO2 has risen since 1981. They attribute this shortfall to an increase in windiness over the Southern Ocean that increases the outgassing of natural CO2. The increased windiness has also been ascribed to human activity, and the authors predict that this relative trend will continue. This Week in SCIENCE, Volume 316, Issue 5832 dated June 22 2007 ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Urgent. NIETC vote Mon. or Tue.
by Duane330＠aol.com 17 Jun '07

17 Jun '07

PLEASE FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO OTHERS WHO AREN'T CONNECTED YET. THANKS! Dear Citizen: On April 26, 2007, the Department of Energy issued two draft National Interest Electric Transmission (NIET) Corridor designations. SEE ATTACHMENTS 1 AND 2 for maps of the corridors. If these draft NIET Corridor designations are approved, they would include all or parts of eleven states and the District of Columbia for 12 years or more. THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY HAS ALSO IDENTIFIED CONGESTION AREAS OF CONCERN IN THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES, PARTS OF WASHINGTON AND OREGON, THE MIDDLE OF CALIFORNIA, AND SOUTHEASTERN ARIZONA. FOR MORE INFORMATION, GO TO THE DOE WEBSITE. All across the country, citizens are expressing serious objection to these draft NIET Corridor designations. Citizens are concerned about the size and life span of the corridors, the process by which they are being considered, and the potential eminent domain and environmental ramifications of the corridors. Even citizens who do not reside in states that would be impacted by these draft NIET Corridor designations are objecting to them. SURELY OUR NATION COULD FORMULATE BETTER 21ST CENTURY ENERGY POLICY THAT WOULD NOT INVOLVE THE DESIGNATION OF MASSIVE NIET CORRIDORS! In response to the draft NIET Corridor designations, Congressman Hinchey (D - New York) and Congressman Wolf (R - Virginia) have co-sponsored an Amendment to the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill, 2008, that says: NONE OF THE FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE IN THIS ACT MAY BE USED BY THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY TO DESIGNATE ANY GEOGRAPHIC AREA AS A NATIONAL INTEREST ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR UNDER SECTION 216(a) OF THE FEDERAL POWER ACT (AS ADDED BY SECTION 1221 OF THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005), AND NONE OF THE FUNDS MADE AVAILABLE IN THIS ACT MAY BE USED BY THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION TO TAKE ANY ACTION RELATED TO THE PROCESSING OR ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT UNDER SECTION 216(b) OF THE FEDERAL POWER ACT. This Hinchey/Wolf Amendment would postpone the designation of NIET Corridors for a one-year period. SEE ATTACHMENT 3 FOR THE CONGRESSMEN’S LETTER DATED JUNE 12, 2007, WHICH ADDRESSES THE REASONS WHY YOUR CONGRESSMAN OR CONGRESSWOMAN SHOULD SUPPORT THEIR AMENDMENT. The Hinchey/Wolf Amendment probably will be introduced on the House floor for a vote on Monday or Tuesday of this week. That’s why it’s so important for you to EMAIL AND FAX your Congressman NOW if you oppose the DOE’s draft NIET Corridor designations and if you support the Hinchey/Wolf Amendment. Use this link to email your Congressman and to identify a fax number: _http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L_ (http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/officials/?lvl=L) SEE ATTACHMENT 4 FOR SAMPLE LETTERS YOU CAN USE OR MODIFY IN PREPARING YOUR EMAIL AND FAX. Thank you for your attention to this important issue! Barbara Kessinger Haymarket, Virginia PLEASE FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO OTHERS WHO AREN'T CONNECTED YET. THANKS! ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Action for Sustainability
by Duane330＠aol.com 31 May '07

31 May '07

EPA TO HOST PHILADELPHIA ENERGY EFFICIENCY INITIATIVE [EPA-Region 3]. Philadelphia formally announced its Energy Action Plan for Sustainability, and a new workgroup whose goal is to increase energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in buildings throughout the city. EPA is part of the work group and will host the initial planning event at the regional office on July 18, 19 and 20. EPA collaborated with city officials, the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, and others to make this happen. Cities are responsible for three-quarters of the world's energy consumption, so Philadelphia has a critical role to play in the reduction of carbon emissions and the reversal of climate change. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

EPA Region 3 Updates
by Duane330＠aol.com 31 May '07

31 May '07

EPA'S BIOLOGY TEAM DETERMINING CAUSE OF FISH KILLS The Wheeling Freshwater Biology Team began conducting a 7-day chronic toxicity test on May 15 for eight sites along the _South Branch of the Potomac and Shenandoah Rivers_ (http://www.wm.edu/geology/virginia/rivers/potomac-shenandoah.html) to identify the possible source or cause of the mysterious fish kills occurring there. Recent reports of dead and dying fish in the South Branch of the Potomac River are being investigated as is a substantial fish kill in the Shenandoah River and its tributaries in Virginia. Both states are actively cooperating and conducting research. EPA UPDATES AIR QUALITY WEBSITE EPA has made several air quality maps available depicting the current air quality conditions of the Mid-Atlantic region. The maps use the latest Air Quality Index (AQI) values for ozone and particulate matter, and can be found at EPA's "Air Quality" web page at _http://www.epa.gov/reg3artd/airquality/airquality.htm#currentcond_ (http://www.epa.gov/reg3artd/airquality/airquality.htm#currentcond) . The AQI describes the daily extent of pollution in the air, what associated health effects might be present, and what health effects may be experienced a few hours or days after breathing polluted air. For more information on the AQI visit EPA's AirNow web site at _http://www.airnow.gov_ (http://www.airnow.gov/) . ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Pennsylvania perspectives on powerline
by Duane330＠aol.com 29 May '07

29 May '07

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DeWeese seeks help on fighting high-voltage lines Thursday, April 26, 2007, By Jerome L. Sherman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette WASHINGTON -- Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Bill DeWeese yesterday called on Congress to repeal a federal law that could potentially allow energy companies to bypass state approval for the construction of new high-voltage power lines. At issue is Allegheny Power's plans to partner with Dominion Virginia Power in building a 240-mile, 500-kilovolt transmission line that would extend from Washington and Greene counties to substations in West Virginia and end in northern Virginia. Allegheny Power is seeking approval from Pennsylvania's Public Utility Commission, but the company is also asking the federal government to designate the project as a "national interest electric transmission corridor," or NIETC, meaning construction permits and eminent domain approval could be fast-tracked to circumvent state regulations. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 permits the creation of the electric transmission corridors. "This is an unprecedented usurping of state power," Mr. DeWeese, D-Waynesburg, told a U.S. House committee hearing yesterday. He argued that states have played a central role in approving the building of energy infrastructure "since the invention of the light bulb." He has joined a group of local activists, _stopthetowers.org_ (http://stopthetowers.org/) , in opposing Allegheny Power's Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project, or TrAIL, which would include new substations at the 502 Junction in Dunkard, southern Greene County, and North Strabane, Washington County. They say the project is unnecessary and would mostly benefit energy-hungry areas in New York, New Jersey and elsewhere. But David Neurohr, spokesman for Allegheny Energy, the parent company of Allegheny Power, said the new line is only aimed at local Pennsylvania energy demands, especially in rapidly growing areas of Washington County. He also noted that the project is mandated by PJM Interconnection, which manages electric transmission services of the Mid-Atlantic power grid in 13 states and Washington, D.C. During yesterday's hearing, local officials and activists from Maine, New York, and Virginia joined Mr. DeWeese in expressing concerns about the new federal law, and they seemed to have the sympathy of Democrats who won control of Congress last year. They're considering several bills that would restore some state powers. "As the law is written, a state may have little or no ability to determine whether a transmission line goes through one of its state parks, a historic battlefield, land protected by conservation easements, or private land," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, who chaired the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee hearing. Mr. Neurohr said Allegheny Power is focused on winning Pennsylvania state government approval for its project, even though it is also exploring the option of having the U.S. Department of Energy designate a national interest corridor in the state. "That's a bridge that we'll cross way down the road," he said. Allegheny Power's portion of the line extends about 210 miles at a cost of $820 million, with the total project estimated at more than $1 billion. The smaller portion of the line will be built and paid for by Dominion Virginia Power. Allegheny Power has said it will raise consumer rates to pay for the upgrades. Currently, customers pay 5 percent of their bill for transmission costs. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE FORMAT FOR THE PUBLIC MEETINGS IN JUNE WILL BE AS PRESENTED IN THE FOLLOWING INTERNET WEB SITE: _http://www.energetics.com/NIETCpublicmeetings/_ (http://www.energetics.com/NIETCpublicmeetings/) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< the allegheny front News Analysis: Proposed National Electric Transmission Corridors Raise Questions Ann Murray, Air date: 05/16/2007 OPEN: After the big electrical blackouts a few years ago, the US Department of Energy studied which parts of the country need the most help getting additional power to communities. The DOE has just proposed two National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors. The proposed Mid-Atlantic Area Corridor passes through Pennsylvania and surrounding states. Ann Murray joins me to talk about questions being raised about these power pathways. M: What does the DOE mean by calling these electrical corridors National Interest Electric Transmission corridors? A: The federal government believes these corridors- pathways for electrical transmission- serve the entire country in the sense that electrical power loss affects the national economy. In an effort to speed up development of major energy transmission lines that would help feed an always growing energy demand in the US, the federal government is trying to make the necessary lands available. M: How would the federal government make sure land is available for transmission lines? A: If corridor designations are approved, the DOE would set up a process that lets local governments, industries, individuals, and others haggle over energy transmission corridors for a period of time, then allow the federal or state government to sanction the use of eminent domain if necessary to make sure the corridors work on county, city, and private lands. M: How did the federal government get the authority to condemn land for transmission lines? A: It's the so-called "backstop" siting authority that Congress granted to the agency in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 It gave the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission the right to issue permits for construction of transmission lines and condemn right of way for those transmission lines. Until now, only state regulators and siting authorities possessed this authority. M: Eminent domain is a really controversial approach for securing land. I assume that prospect has raised some hackles? A: Yes, the prospect of government seizing property doesn't sit well with a lot of people including some local governments, people in Congress. The DOE is now taking comments during a public comment period that will run through July 6th. M: I understand that the DOE says because the current electrical grid is aged and stressed, the agency plans to be more assertive about getting these kinds of projects rolling. A: Yes, that right. US Energy Secretary Sam Bodman said in a recent press meeting that the government would take a more aggressive role in energy projects opposed by local groups. I'm quoting here:"The parochial interests that shaped energy policy in the 20th century will no longer work." M: There will be a public hearing in Pittsburgh to talk about the proposed corridor. When will that happen? A: The DOE hasn't announced the exact date but has said that the hearing will take place next month. Hearing are also underway in Washington,DC and New York and on the West Coast. M: The West Coast hearings cover the other proposed corridor? A: Yes, the other corridor is proposed for areas in the Southwest through California, Arizona and Nevada. M: How did the DOE decide where electric transmission corridors are needed? A: The agency did a study in 2005 that looked for areas on the electrical grid that are clogged and need additional pathways to get power. The DOE is charged with doing similar studies every three years. M: Will there be an environmental impact assessment on the land included for the proposed corridors? A: DOE contends that there's no need for an environmental assessment of these corridors, since they don't involve a proposal to build a specific line or any siting decisions. But the agency concedes that an environmental assessment of some type would be needed if a specific line is proposed within a corridor. The National Corridor designations don't necessarily mandate building new lines since the process still allows for other ways of reducing demand like conservation, improved energy efficiency, or locating extra generation close to customers. M: Where does the proposed corridor run through Pennsylvania? A: Through all the counties except in the north central and northwestern part of the state. M: Will the DOE designate other national power corridors ? A: Right now,there aren't any immediate plans to designate a National Corridor anywhere else in the country. M: Could trends in generation of alternative energy have any effect on building transmission lines? A: Trends in decentralized energy could make the need for transmission lines less relevant. Some energy experts predict that energy sources will become smaller and more localized by using solar, geothermal and wind power. M: Thanks , Ann. A: You're welcome, Matthew. More information about the proposed corridors and how to comment are on our web site alleghenyfront.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Power line project has wider relevance New Allegheny Power application asks for another transmission line Sunday, May 27, 2007, By Janice Crompton, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette As protesters and publicists alike gear up for state and federal hearings into plans for a high-voltage power line through Washington and Greene counties, it's become apparent that the consequences of the project could be felt statewide.Allegheny Power submitted an application last month to the state Public Utility Commission, seeking approval for the construction of 37 miles of 500-kilovolt power lines from a substation to be built in North Strabane, called Prexy, to a substation planned for Dunkard, Greene County. It also wants to build three 138-kilovolt power lines that would extend outward from the Prexy station. The project is part of a 240-mile transmission line to extend from Pennsylvania to existing substations in West Virginia and end in northern Virginia. The company has submitted a similar application to West Virginia. The Virginia portion of the line will be built by Dominion Virginia power company. Allegheny's portion of the total project extends about 210 miles at a cost of $820 million, with the total project estimated at more than $1 billion. As part of its review process, the PUC will conduct public hearings to determine if there is a need for additional power in the region and whether Allegheny Power has the best solution. Complaints from ratepayers and property owners are to be submitted to the PUC by Tuesday. The hearings, expected this summer, haven't been scheduled. All those who protest the project may offer comment at the hearings, even if they haven't filed a written complaint. A grass-roots organization that opposes the project, Stop the Towers, plans to fight the plan on two levels. The group, along with the more than 4,000 people who have signed petitions opposing the power lines, will protest the location of the line, which would affect hundreds of property owners. A newly formed legislative branch of the group, called the Energy Conservation Council of Pennsylvania, will litigate the need for the power line and concentrate its efforts on lobbying. Local opposition leaders say it's vital to win the battle with the PUC, especially because of federal intervention, and because other Pennsylvania communities could be facing the same issues soon. "If we don't win this in front of the PUC, we've lost," said Robbie Matesic, executive director of the Greene County Planning and Economic Development Department. If the project is turned down by the PUC, it could kick in a provision in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that allows the federal government to override state and local laws in certain cases. Recently, the U.S. Department of Energy designated a large swath of the northeastern United States., including 50 of Pennsylvania's 67 counties, as a potential "national interest electric transmission corridor," or NIETC. If the designation is approved by the DOE, it clears the way for the federal government to step in. If a state withholds construction approval for more than one year, denies approval, or if too many conditions are placed on construction of electric transmission lines within a NIETC, the federal government can intervene and approve the project. The law also authorizes the taking of private property by eminent domain for rights of way. Efforts to repeal that portion of the Energy Act are under way in Congress, including a bill recently co-sponsored by U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Johnstown, who, like most other public officials in southwestern Pennsylvania, opposes the project. The DOE is planning a public hearing for the Pittsburgh area next month on the NIETC designation. Rebecca Foley, of Jefferson, Greene County, said she and about 20 other Pennsylvania and West Virginia residents chartered a bus to attend a NIETC hearing May 15 in Virginia. She said she spoke briefly to DOE panelists and said they were "visibly moved" by the testimony from people who would be affected by the power line. Greene and Washington county commissioners have said the power line is becoming the most significant grass-roots issue in their memory. "People are concerned about the environmental issues for our children and what government does to property owners," Greene County Commissioner Pam Snyder said. The local power line issue also is seen as a harbinger of several other transmission projects being proposed for the state. The local upgrade was mandated by PJM Interconnection, which manages electric transmission services of the Mid-Atlantic power grid in 13 states and Washington, D.C. The line is part of PJM's five-year regional electric transmission plan, meant to address future energy needs at certain points in the grid. As part of a longer range 15-year plan, PJM is considering several additional proposals, including a joint venture between Allegheny Power and American Electric Power that calls for a $3 billion, 550-mile, 765-kilovolt transmission "superhighway," beginning at the Amos power station in Putnam County, in western West Virginia. It would travel through Maryland and southeastern Pennsylvania and end in Middlesex County, N.J. AEP also proposed a line closer to home, from Kammer-Mitchell power plant near Moundsville, W.Va., into Pennsylvania to the Prexy substation in North Strabane. From there, the line would traverse Central Pennsylvania to Conemaugh power plant in West Wheatfield, Indiana County, ending near the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Harrisburg. In Ohio, north of the Kammer-Mitchell plant, AEP proposed a line into Western Pennsylvania to the Keystone power plant in Shelocta, Armstrong County, east to the Sunbury Power Plant near Shamokin Dam in Snyder County. PJM spokesman Ray Dotter said the proposals and routes haven't been finalized and only are under consideration. "They are being analyzed," he said. "It doesn't necessarily mean it's going to happen." Local opponents of the project cite concern about property values, quality of life, and health and safety. They have questioned the need for the power lines and the rate increases that will go with it. Allegheny Power says the plan, called the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project, or TrAIL, is necessary to address power shortages in the East, and to provide additional power to the developing areas of central and northern Washington County, which could begin to experience rolling blackouts and brownouts within a few years if nothing is done. In its application to the PUC, Allegheny Power outlined four reasons the power line was needed, each involving the failure of existing 138-kilovolt lines because of demand. The outages would be widespread, and likely to occur during the early evening hours on hot days. "When it gets to be a hot day, everybody turns on their air conditioners," said David Neurohr, Allegheny Power spokesman. "If the existing 138-kilovolt system goes, the lights will go out," he said. But, Stop the Towers members and local officials have argued that Washington County has more than enough power for years to come, and that the company's intention is to tap local power plants for low-cost, coal-generated energy to ship to the power-strapped Eastern U.S., where energy plants are closing without being replaced. Even though the local plan is outlined in detail in the PUC application, it isn't mentioned at all in the application last year to the DOE, asking that the area be designated as a NIETC. Mr. Dotter said the reason was the DOE was looking at the issue from a regional perspective. The agency is trying to supply power to the East Coast, from New York to northern Virginia, an area which it identified as in "critical" need of more power in a study done last summer. "Everything is tied together," Mr. Dotter said. It's clear that power is no longer a local issue. Planning occurs on a regional level and ,perhaps, the best evidence for its necessity came in August 2003, when a downed tree near Cleveland resulted in a widespread blackout from New York to Canada. "The grid is like a net," Mr. Dotter said. "It pulls everything together." Mr. Dotter said that, while PJM can't force companies to build power plants, it can and does order new transmission lines built to serve power needs wherever necessary. The company has no stake in who builds the lines or how it's accomplished, only that the job gets done. "Whether the line gets built or not, we don't make money. We don't make money, period," Mr. Dotter said. "Our goal is to keep the lights on. We have to look at the needs and make that determination." ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Big Subsidies for Coal proposed..........
by Duane330＠aol.com 29 May '07

29 May '07

Lawmakers Push for Big Subsidies for Coal Process New York Times, May 29, 2007, By _EDMUND L. ANDREWS_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/a/edmund_l_andre… er) WASHINGTON, May 28 — Even as Congressional leaders draft legislation to reduce greenhouse gases linked to _global warming_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/topics/globalwarming/index.html?…) , a powerful roster of Democrats and _Republicans_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/r/republi…) is pushing to subsidize coal as the king of alternative fuels. Prodded by intense lobbying from the coal industry, lawmakers from coal states are proposing that taxpayers guarantee billions of dollars in construction loans for coal-to-liquid production plants, guarantee minimum prices for the new fuel, and guarantee big government purchases for the next 25 years. With both House and Senate Democrats hoping to pass “energy independence” bills by mid-July, coal supporters argue that coal-based fuels are more American than gasoline and potentially greener than ethanol. “For so many, filthy coal is a dirty four-letter word,” said Representative Nick V. Rahall, Democrat of West Virginia and chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee. “These individuals, I tell you, have their heads buried in the sand.” Environmental groups are adamantly opposed, warning that coal-based diesel fuels would at best do little to slow global warming and at worst would produce almost twice as much of the greenhouse gases tied to global warming as petroleum. Coal companies are hardly alone in asking taxpayers to underwrite alternative fuels in the name of energy independence and reduced global warming. But the scale of proposed subsidies for coal could exceed those for any alternative fuel, including corn-based ethanol. Among the proposed inducements winding through House and Senate committees: loan guarantees for six to 10 major coal-to-liquid plants, each likely to cost at least $3 billion; a tax credit of 51 cents for every gallon of coal-based fuel sold through 2020; automatic subsidies if oil prices drop below $40 a barrel; and permission for the Air Force to sign 25-year contracts for almost a billion gallons a year of coal-based jet fuel. Coal companies have spent millions of dollars lobbying on the issue, and have marshaled allies in organized labor, the Air Force and fuel-burning industries like the airlines. _Peabody Energy_ (http://www.nytimes.com/mem/MWredirect.html?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com… ymb=BTU) , the world’s biggest coal company, urged in a recent advertising campaign that people “imagine a world where our country runs on energy from Middle America instead of the Middle East.” Representative Rick Boucher, a Virginia Democrat whose district is dominated by coal mining, is writing key sections of the House energy bill. In the Senate, champions of coal-to-liquid fuels include _Barack Obama_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_obama/i… t-per) , the Illinois Democrat, Jim Bunning of Kentucky and Larry Craig of Wyoming, both Republicans. President Bush has not weighed in on specific incentives, but he has often stressed the importance of coal as an alternative to foreign oil. In calling for a 20 percent cut in projected gasoline consumption by 2017, he has carefully referred to the need for “alternative” fuels rather than “renewable” fuels. Administration officials say that was specifically to make room for coal. The political momentum to subsidize coal fuels is in odd juxtaposition to simultaneous efforts by Democrats to draft global-warming bills that would place new restrictions on coal-fired electric power plants. The move reflects a tension, which many lawmakers gloss over, between slowing global warming and reducing dependence on foreign oil. Many analysts say the huge coal reserves of the United States could indeed provide a substitute for foreign oil. The technology to convert coal into liquid fuel is well-established, and the fuel can be used in conventional diesel cars and trucks, as well as jet engines, boats and ships. Industry executives contend that the fuels can compete against gasoline if oil prices are about $50 a barrel or higher. But coal-to-liquid fuels produce almost twice the volume of greenhouse gases as ordinary diesel. In addition to the carbon dioxide emitted while using the fuel, the production process creates almost a ton of carbon dioxide for every barrel of liquid fuel. Coal industry executives insist their fuel can actually be cleaner than oil, because they would capture the gas produced as the liquid fuel is being made and store it underground. Some could be injected into oil fields to push oil to the surface. Several aspiring coal-to-liquid companies say that they would reduce greenhouse emissions even further by using renewable fuels for part of the process. But none of that has been done at commercial volumes, and many analysts say the economic issues are far from settled. “There are many uncertainties,” said James T. Bartis, a senior policy researcher at the RAND Corporation, who testified last week before the Senate Energy Committee. “We don’t even know what the costs are yet.” The clash between “energy independence” and global warming will break into the open next month. The Senate energy bill, being drafted by Senator Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico, would promote renewable fuels — but not coal-to-liquid fuels — and would require electric utilities to produce 15 percent of their power with renewable fuels by 2020. But coal-state Republicans have vowed to resume their push for coal incentives when the bill reaches the Senate floor, and many Democrats are likely to support them. In the House, Democrats like Mr. Boucher and Mr. Rahall will be pushing in the same direction. But some energy experts, as well as some lawmakers, worry that the scale of the coal-to-liquid incentives could lead to a repeat of a disastrous effort 30 years ago to underwrite a synthetic fuels industry from scratch. When oil prices plunged in the 1980s, the government-owned Synthetic Fuels Corporation became a giant government albatross that lost billions and remains a symbol of misguided industrial policy more than 25 years later. “This is the snake oil of energy alternatives,” said Peter Altman, a policy analyst at the National Environmental Trust, an environmental advocacy group. “The promises are just as lofty and the substance is just as absent as the first snake oil salesmen who plied their trade in the 1800s.” Coal executives contend that the technology for converting coal to “ ultraclean” diesel fuel for use in cars and trucks has been around for decades. Known as the Fischer-Tropsch process, the technology dates to the 1920s. It was used by Germany during World War II and by South Africa during the apartheid era, in both cases because the countries were blocked by international embargoes from buying oil. SASOL, a South African chemical conglomerate, is the world’s largest producer of coal-based liquids and operates a plant that produces 150,000 barrels a day. “Greener and cleaner — we can do it, and we will do it,” said John Baardson, president of Baard Energy, a firm in Vancouver, Wash., that is trying to build a $4 billion coal-to-liquid plant in Ohio. But no company has built a commercial-scale plant that also captures carbon, and experts caution that many obstacles lie ahead. “At best, you’re going to tread water on the carbon issue, and you’re probably going to do worse,” said Howard Herzog, a principal research engineer at the _Massachusetts Institute of Technology_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/m/massach…. html?inline=nyt-org) and a co-author of “The Future of Coal,” a voluminous study published in March by M.I.T. “It goes against the whole grain of reducing carbon.” The M.I.T. team expressed even more skepticism about the economic risks. It estimated that it would cost $70 billion to build enough plants to replace 10 percent of American gasoline consumption. The study estimates that the construction costs for coal-to-liquid plants are almost four times higher than the costs for comparable petroleum refineries, and it argues that cost estimates for synthetic fuel plants in the past turned out to be “wildly optimistic.” In a new report last week, the Energy Department estimated that a plant capable of making 50,000 barrels of liquefied coal a day — a tiny fraction of the nearly 9 million barrels in gasoline burned daily in the United States — would cost $4.5 billion. But the Energy Department also estimated that such a plant could produce a 20 percent annual return if oil prices remain about $60 a barrel. Coal executives say that they need government help primarily because oil prices are so volatile and the upfront construction costs are so high. “We’re not asking for everything. All we’re asking for is something,” said Hunt Ramsbottom, chief executive of _Rentech Inc._ (http://www.nytimes.com/mem/MWredirect.html?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com… &symb=RTK) , which is trying to build two plants at mines owned by Peabody Energy. But coal executives anticipate potentially huge profits. Gregory H. Boyce, chief executive of Peabody Energy, based in St. Louis, which has $5.3 billion in sales, told an industry conference nearly two years ago that the value of Peabody’s coal reserves would skyrocket almost tenfold, to $3.6 trillion, if it sold all its coal in the form of liquid fuels. Coal industry lobbying has reached a fever pitch. The industry spent $6 million on federal lobbying in 2005 and 2006, three times what it spent each year from 2000 through 2004, according to calculations by _Politicalmoneyline.com_ (http://politicalmoneyline.com/) . Peabody, which has quadrupled its annual lobbying budget to about $2 million since 2004, recently hired _Richard A. Gephardt_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/richard_a_geph…) , the Missouri Democrat who was House majority leader from 1989 to 1995 and a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1988 and 2004, to help make its case in Congress. One of the most vociferous champions of coal-to-liquid fuels is the Southern States Energy Board, a group organized by governors from 16 states. Last year, the group published a study, which cost $500,000, that concluded that coal-to-liquid fuel could and should replace almost one-third of imported oil by 2030. As it happens, the coal industry supplied much of the financing for the study and subsequent marketing. Peabody Energy contributed about $150,000 and the National Mining Association added $50,000, officials at the Southern States Energy Board said. The inducements under discussion would not only subsidize up to 10 coal-to-liquid plants, but also guarantee a minimum market through long-term contracts with the Air Force and minimum prices for at least some producers. “There is financial uncertainty, which is inhibiting the flow of private capital into the construction of coal-to-liquid facilities,” said Mr. Boucher, who supports most of the proposals and is drafting portions of the energy bill. In addition to construction loan guarantees, Mr. Boucher would protect the first six liquid plants from drops in energy prices. If oil prices fell below about $40 a barrel, the government would automatically grant loans to the first six plants that make coal-based fuels. If oil prices climbed to $80 a barrel, companies would have to pay a surcharge to the government. But the most important guarantee, many coal producers said, is the prospect of signing 25-year purchase contracts with the Air Force. The Air Force consumes about 2.6 billion gallons a year of jet fuel, and Air Force officials would like to switch as much as 780 million gallons a year to coal-based fuels. Air Force officials strongly support the idea of extremely long contracts, but others at the Defense Department worry that the military could be left holding the bag for years if oil prices dropped significantly. For Mr. Boyce, chief executive of Peabody Energy, there is no reason to be timid. “If America has the will to be one of the great energy centers of the world,” he told an industry conference last year, “we have the resources right under our feet.” ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

2nd of 3 state journal articles
by Paul Brown 15 May '07

15 May '07

GLOBAL WARMING COMES TO COAL COUNTRY: THE PROSPECTS If West Virginia doesn’t act aggressively to stop global warming and species extinctions, the best we can hope for is that we’ll revert to an impoverished hillbilly state, with a wrecked environment. At worst, if global anti-warming action is inadequate, our children and grandchildren will experience the worst times our species has encountered. Global warming and mass extinctions aren’t diseases in themselves, they’re symptoms. The disease is avoidable, harmful human behavior. We’re consuming resources and laying waste to our planet faster than it can heal. The richer countries, especially the US, are consuming and polluting far beyond a sustainable rate. The poorer countries are consuming far less per capita, but their populations are exploding and they aspire to consuming as much as we do. Result: carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, habitat destruction, and fisheries depletion are skyrocketing, with no end in sight. The rest of the educated world knows this, but the US is in denial. We should be leading the anti-warming effort, but instead the Bush administration suppresses scientific findings and tells us to keep on shopping - and driving SUVs. CO2 takes around 150 years to clear from the atmosphere. That means it would take decades to stop global warming even if we stop burning carbon today. And warming now causes more warming: Melting ice decreases reflection of sunlight (albedo) and increases absorption and heating. Thawing tundra is releasing methane, a greenhouse gas twenty times as potent as CO2. In 20 - 50 years, this self-reinforcing effect may take off explosively, beyond our power to stop. Yet greenhouse gas emissions are increasing. The only prudent course is to stop emissions in 10 years and try to reduce atmospheric CO2 and increase albedo as quickly as possible. Nuclear power isn't an option, because we've never figured out what to do with the waste, and that waste could end up killing or maiming us. Nuclear, like carbon, energy is far more expensive than our electric bills suggest because of enormous subsidies and hidden costs. Our military enterprise is mostly devoted to securing our access to other people's oil. Renewables are cheaper than those subsidized costs. As for coal, there's no way to burn it without producing CO2, and there's no way to sequester all the CO2 we produce. Sequestration would make carbon energy far more expensive than renewables. Wind and sun alone would provide more energy than we need once the generating capacity is in place. They have to be sited responsibly. It will take more than 10 years to install that capacity, meaning there will be less energy per capita for awhile, meaning we’ll need to ration energy the way we rationed gasoline in WWII. Our economy will be radically changed, with big winners and big losers. Will West Virginia be a leader in this radically changed economy? Paul Brown is a professor of physiology at West Virginia University and author of Notes from a Dying Planet, 2004 - 2006. Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512

1 0

State Journal op eds
by Paul Brown 09 May '07

09 May '07

1st of 3: GLOBAL WARMING COMES TO COAL COUNTRY: THE SYMPTOMS Winter in West Virginia lasted less than two months this year. That could just be a fluke, but globally, eleven of the last twelve years have been the hottest on record, with later winters and earlier springs. There are severe droughts out West, with whole forests dying. Forest fires are worse and more frequent. It’s the same for much of the world. The US is producing less food. Not a fluke: for five out of the last six years the world has produced less food than was consumed, depleting food reserves. We hosted some Katrina evacuees last September; severe weather and floods have increased around the world and the numbers of refugees from these disasters are climbing. Also, due to global warming and habitat destruction, we’re undergoing the Earth’s sixth mass extinction. Our global fisheries will be wiped out by mid-century. Island countries are being submerged by rising seas, and the Dutch are developing floating architecture. The denial industry, funded by the fossil fuel industry, says the current warming is just another routine fluctuation caused by variations in solar energy reaching Earth. Although there are cyclic variations in solar irradiance of Earth, they can’t account for this much warming. We know from radioisotope analyses of annual ice layers in Greenland and Antarctica that temperatures are the highest in more than 600,000 years. Our species is only 120,000 years old, so we’ve never experienced this before. Over all that time, carbon dioxide (CO2) and temperature have varied in parallel. Carbon isotope analysis of tree rings, which provide a sample of atmospheric CO2 over the life of a tree, shows that today’s excess carbon above preindustrial levels is millions of years old - the age of carbon in fossil fuels. There’s no other source of ancient carbon (such as volcanic eruptions) that can account for it. We know from satellite studies how much heat is trapped by atmospheric CO2. Quantitative studies show that the amount of fossil fuel we’ve burned since the industrial revolution accounts for the excess CO2, and the excess CO2 accounts for the warming. Over 2500 scientists from all over the world on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are unanimous in their conclusion that our fossil fuel use is behind global warming. Ice all over the world is melting, including Arctic and Antarctic ice that hasn’t melted since before we appeared on Earth. Increasing energy consumption is causing greenhouse emissions to skyrocket. We have little time left to turn this around, before Earth becomes a wholly different planet - probably without any people. If we had responded appropriately to the 2001 IPCC report, we could be turning this around by 2010, at lower cost than the Iraq war, brought to us by - you guessed it - the fossil fools running our state and national governments. Now it will be much more expensive or impossible. Some states, those that are switching to renewable, non-carbon energy sources, will do relatively well. States that stick with carbon fuels will do poorly, because soon there will be no demand for carbon. Which way do you think West Virginia will go? Paul Brown is a professor of physiology at West Virginia University and author of Notes from a Dying Planet, 2004 - 2006. Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512

1 0

AE TrAIL power line, et al.
by Duane330＠aol.com 05 May '07

05 May '07

Upcoming meetings that you should consider attending, as action is needed on these: 1. AE TrAIL power-line meeting – Tomorrow, Sunday, May 6th, at the Triune-Halleck Fire Hall, on Halleck Road off WV 73 South (Smithtown Road). Start time: 2 pm. Host: Halleck Community Association. 2. MonValley Clean Air Coalition -- Monday, May 7th, at the home of Martha and Larry Schwab, 3333 Collins Ferry Road, Morgantown. Start time: 7 pm. Info: Duane Nichols, 599-8040. Topics include: Longview power plant, Ft. Martin scrubbers, and AE TrAIL power line. 3. Sierra Club -- Thursday, May 10th, at the WVU Mountainlair, 7 pm. Matt Keller "WV Wilderness Coalition". Info: Jim Kotcon, 594-3322. 4. AE TrAIL power-line meeing – Wednesday, May 16th, at the Monongalia County Courthouse, Court Room #1. Start time: 7 pm. Host: Mon. County Commission. The WV Consumer Advocate (Public Service Commission) Billy Jack Gregg to participate. 5. Mon. County Farmland Preservation Board – Thursday, May 17th, Mon. County Courthouse, Room 202 (Second Floor). The meeting is open to the public. For information on the proposed 500,000 volt transmission line, see the following: _www.stopthetowers.org_ (http://www.stopthetowers.org) _www.laurelrunwatershed.org_ (http://www.laurelrunwatershed.org) _www.alleghenypower.com/TrAIL/TrAIL.asp_ (http://www.alleghenypower.com/TrAIL/TrAIL.asp) ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Revenue bonding authority for Longview
by Duane330＠aol.com 01 May '07

01 May '07

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Power plant project gets $600 million April 20, 2007, Charleston Gazette, By Sarah K. Winn, Staff writer. The West Virginia Economic Development Authority committed Tuesday to help fund a $600 million construction project at the Longview Power Plant in Monongalia County. At Tuesday’s monthly meeting, the authority gave preliminary approval for possible future revenue bonds for Longview Power LLC, the plant’s developer. The resolution allows Longview to begin developing solid waste disposal and recycling facilities at the plant, said Cam Siegrist, counsel for Longview. The Internal Revenue Service requires the resolution so Longview can use future bond funds to pay for expenses accrued now, said David Warner, WVEDA’s executive director. The company likely will come back over the next few years to request revenue bonds from the authority, Siegrist said. Also, the authority approved a $75 million bond for additional work on Appalachian Power’s Mountaineer Plant in Mason County, which began in 2005. In other financial allocations, the authority gave preliminary approval for two nearly $800,000 7-year loans-one to Merrick Engineering, Inc., in Clarksburg and another to Tramco Services, Inc., in Shrewsbury. Merrick, which manufactures hangers and closet accessories, plans to purchase and install injection-molding equipment at its Clarksburg manufacturing facility. Tramco, an electrical motor repair and machine shop, will finance a 6.5-acre site and renovate about 30,000 square feet of manufacturing space to create a new facility in Campbells Creek. The authority also gave final approval for a $5 million loan to Recycle West Virginia LP and approved a high-growth business investment tax credit of up to $50,000 to William P. Zitter of Huntington. Also, at the authority’s June meeting, the authority will be given updates on the uncompleted projects funded by the Economic Development Grant Committee two years ago. Currently, $182 million of the $225 million allocated has been spent, and the projects risk losing the money if not completed by Dec. 31. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Charleston Daily Mail ____________________________________ State agrees to issue bonds to fund power plant _George Hohmann_ (http://www.dailymail.com/contactEmail.php?rid=87) , Daily Mail business editor, Friday April 20, 2007 The West Virginia Economic Development Authority has given preliminary approval for the issuance of up to $600 million in tax-free bonds to help finance portions of the Longview Power Plant near Morgantown. The state Public Service Commission granted permission to build the $1 billion coal-fired plant last year. The Economic Development Authority bonds would help finance parts of the plant such as air and water pollution control systems. Thursday's vote is the first step in issuing bonds. The plant's developers would have to come back to the authority at least two more times before bonds could actually be issued. The bonds would be backed by revenue from the power plant and would not be an obligation of the state. Also on Thursday, the authority took the final step toward issuing up to $75 million in tax-free bonds to help pay for parts of the scrubber Appalachian Power Co. has installed on its Mountaineer power plant in Mason County. The authority agreed in 2004 to issue up to $567.4 million in bonds for the project. It had issued $50.3 million in bonds last year. The scrubber went into operation in February. Also at the meeting, the authority gave final approval for a $5 million loan to Recycle West Virginia Limited Partnership of Princeton. The company plans to purchase 14 acres in an inactive rail yard known as the Princeton Roadway Shop and refurbish the five buildings on the site. The company will use the low-interest state loan to purchase and install a shredder and related equipment in a 56,000-square-foot building on the site, according to a project summary provided by the authority. In other action, the authority gave preliminary approval to: A $787,500 loan to Tramco Services Inc., doing business as Kanawha Electric & Machine Co. Tramco acquired the assets of Kanawha Electric in 2002. The Kanawha Electric operation will move from Shrewsbury to a 6.5-acre site at Campbells Creek. Kanawha Electric will renovate existing buildings at Campbells Creek and will erect a new building for its motor repair and machining operation. A $787,378 loan to Merrick Engineering Inc. to purchase and install injection-molding equipment at its Clarksburg plant. Merrick is a manufacturer of hangers and closet accessories. Also on Thursday, the authority: Agreed to sell 7.44 acres in the Three Springs Business Park near Weirton to Wal-Mart. David Warner, the authority's executive director, said, "Our acres are just part of the property to be bought by Wal-Mart." He said the retailer plans to build a super center adjacent to the general office complex previously occupied by Weirton Steel Corp. Amended a lease it has with Bombardier to add a 21,000-square-foot building at the Harrison-Marion Regional Airport in Bridgeport. Bombardier repairs and refurbishes aircraft at the airport. Received a report that showed $181.6 million or 81 percent of the $225 million in grants approved by the West Virginia Economic Development Grant Committee has been disbursed. A total of $2.6 million was disbursed to 14 projects during March. Agreed to extend the deadline for completion of the marina portion of the West Virginia Public Theater & Marina project in Morgantown from Dec. 31, 2006, to Dec. 31, 2007. The city received a $13.9 million grant for the project from the West Virginia Economic Development Grant Committee in 2003. As of March 31, the city had spent $5.2 million. State Commerce Secretary Kelley Goes, who chaired the meeting, said the status of all of the grant committee projects will be reviewed at the authority's June meeting. Decided to wait until next month before determining whether it will renew or re-bid its legal contracts with the law firms of Spilman Thomas & Battle and Bowles Rice McDavid Graff & Love. Granted state tax credits to William Zitter of Huntington under the High Growth Business Investment Tax Credit. This credit, passed by the Legislature in 2005, is designed to encourage investment in potentially high-growth research and development businesses in the state. Zitter is investing in Vandalia Research Inc., a spin off of Marshall University research. Vandalia is involved in the synthesis of DNA sequences. State law does not require the development authority to reveal how much in tax credits is given. A taxpayer can receive no more than $50,000 in credits a year. The authority said it approved credits for Zitter of more than $1 but not more than $50,000. Agreed to allow Blue Sky Brands Inc. of Martinsburg to change how it uses a loan previously approved by the authority. The company had planned to use the loan proceeds to move a call center. It will now use the proceeds to buy racks and conveyor systems, Warner said. Agreed to extend previously approved loan commitments to Tech-Seal Products Inc. of Wheeling; Mountain State Log Homes Inc. of Ireland, W.Va.; The K Group Limited Liability Co. of Roanoke, Va.; and the Huntington Industrial Corp. for InfoCision Management Corp. Agreed to extend its commitment to insure $3 million of a loan the First National Bank of Ronceverte has made to the Western Greenbrier Co-Generation Limited Liability Co. of Rainelle from April 30 to Aug. 31. Acting as the West Virginia Certified Development Corp., the board members also extended two $300,000 loan commitments to Western Greenbrier Co-Generation to Aug. 31. Western Greenbrier Co-Generation is planning to build a $215 million power plant in Rainelle. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Active issues in Mon. County
by Duane330＠aol.com 30 Apr '07

30 Apr '07

Please be reminded of our meeting next Monday at 7 pm at the home of Larry and Martha Schwaub.. ALSO......... 1. The proposed meeting at the Courthouse on Wednesday has been postponed by the County Commission, because Allegheny Energy was unavailable to come out and answer questions on the Allegheny TrAIL 500 kv power line. 2. Tomorrow morning, Tuesday, May 1st, WAJR radio will host a program on the proposed TrAIL power line. The program will include representatives of the Laurel Run Watershed Association, Allegheny Energy, and Billy Jack Gregg, who is the Consumer Advocate of the WV Public Service Commission. This will occur between 9 am and 10 am. You can call on on 291-0041. 3. Please consider attending the "Town Meeting" on Wednesday, May 2nd, at the South Middle School, starting at 7 pm. The topic is the "comprehensive health care reform package" developed by the West Virginians for Affordable Health Care. Our member of the House of Representatives Barbara Evans Fleischauer is supporting this program, as are many other individuals and groups. We cannot have too much support for this activity, to involve shared responsibilities and shared sacrifices. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Meet Monday, May 7th @ 7 pm
by Duane330＠aol.com 25 Apr '07

25 Apr '07

MVCAC.........participants and friends........ Please attend a General Meeting of the........... Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition Location: the home of Larry Schwab, 3333 Collins Ferry Road. Time: 7 pm to socialize with the meeting at 7:30 pm. The Agenda will include the following................. 1. Update on Longview permits and construction activities....... 2. Update on Longview legal action in federal district court......... 3. Update on scrubber construction schedule for Allegheny Energy 4. Consideration of action on Allegheny Energy 500 kv transmission line 5. Activities and options relative to greenhouse gases... 6. Public health information and possible projects... 7. Air quality monitoring and public education projects... 8. Membership and fundraising........... ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Planning for Meeting.........
by Duane330＠aol.com 23 Apr '07

23 Apr '07

To: Participants and Friends of MVCAC MON VALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION.......... Let's consider a meeting on May 1st, 2nd, 3rd, [Tuesday thru Thursday of the first week of May], or on May 7th (Monday) or May 10th (Thursday). PLEASE TELL ME YOUR AVAILABILITY ON THESE DATES. NOTE: Please direct correspondence and contributions to: MonValley Clean Air Coalition P. O. Box 4679 Morgantown, WV 26504-4679. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

2 1

37th Earth Day.. "inconvenient truth"
by Duane330＠aol.com 22 Apr '07

22 Apr '07

How eager are we to fight global warming? Statewide poll finds most Pennsylvanians see individual efforts as too inconvenient Sunday, April 22, 2007By Don Hopey, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette On this 37th Earth Day, most Pennsylvanians think global warming is an inconvenient truth, but not many are willing to be inconvenienced enough to do anything about it. Seven out of 10 Pennsylvanians agree that global warming exists and is a concern, according to a survey by two Mansfield University researchers released last week, but significantly fewer are willing to do so much as change a light bulb to help address the problem. Instead, they are looking to government or science for solutions, said Tim Madigan, associate professor of sociology at Mansfield University. "Our results suggest that a majority of people in the state are not very committed to taking broad action against global warming," said Mr. Madigan, who along with co-researcher Dr. Janice Purk surveyed 920 Pennsylvanians over the age of 18 about their willingness to take 10 specific steps to reduce global climate change. The survey results do show that the number of people who agree that global warming is occurring is up from 5-in-10 in 1999, to 7-in-10, a significant increase, but the impact on behavioral change has not been as great. The 10 personal actions that people were asked if they do, or would do, were: use compact fluorescent light bulbs, compost kitchen scraps, take reusable bags to the grocery store, buy from environmentally friendly companies, wash dishes by hand, own a hybrid car, purchase a solar power system for their home, allow clothes to air dry, buy a windmill and stop eating meat. If those surveyed were already taking the step, they received a score of two for that item. If they said they would take the step, they received a score of one. Those unwilling to change got a zero for that item. Out of 20 possible points, half of those surveyed scored a six or lower on the "action index," which the researchers created to measure the feasibility of a social solution to global warming. If few people are willing to change their behavior, a social solution is impossible and government action or scientific innovation, or both, will be required. "Since the majority of people are not very willing to change many of their behaviors, and belief in global warming is not strongly related to taking action, the social solution to the problem of global warming does not look very promising," Mr. Madigan said. Slightly more than half of those surveyed said they would use fluorescent light bulbs, take reusable bags to the grocery and buy from environmentally friendly companies. Slightly less than half said they'd feed the composter. Only 41 percent said they'd be willing to drive a hybrid car or install solar panels; 38 percent were willing to wash dishes by hand; 30 percent were willing to stop eating meat. Just 26 percent would let their clothes air dry and 25 percent said they would buy a windmill. Only 13 percent of those surveyed had seen former Vice President Al Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth," and those who had seen it scored less than a point higher than those who had not. "Assuming that Gore's movie had a casual impact," Mr. Madigan said, "it would take many more such movies to change attitudes and behaviors enough to reverse the trends as he calls for in his book and movie." The random telephone survey was done at the end of February and the beginning of March of residents throughout the state and has a 3.2 percent margin of error. ____________________________________ ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Why We Can't Wait
by Duane330＠aol.com 21 Apr '07

21 Apr '07

Climate Change: Why We Can't Wait By James Hansen, The Nation Posted on April 21, 2007 http://www.alternet.org/story/50795/ This is an adaptation of a talk delivered February 26 at the National Press Club. Comments relating to policy are Dr. Hansen's personal opinion and do not represent a NASA position. There's a huge gap between what is understood about global warming by the relevant scientific community and what is known about global warming by those who need to know: the public and policy-makers. We've had, in the past thirty years, one degree Fahrenheit of global warming. But there's another one degree Fahrenheit in the pipeline due to gases that are already in the atmosphere. And there's another one degree Fahrenheit in the pipeline because of the energy infrastructure now in place -- for example, power plants and vehicles that we're not going to take off the road even if we decide that we're going to address this problem. The Energy Department says that we're going to continue to put more and more CO2 in the atmosphere each year -- not just additional CO2 but more than we put in the year before. If we do follow that path, even for another ten years, it guarantees that we will have dramatic climate changes that produce what I would call a different planet -- one without sea ice in the Arctic; with worldwide, repeated coastal tragedies associated with storms and a continuously rising sea level; and with regional disruptions due to freshwater shortages and shifting climatic zones. I've arrived at five recommendations for what should be done to address the problem. If Congress were to follow these recommendations, we could solve the problem. Interestingly, this is not a gloom-and-doom story. In fact, the things we need to do have many other benefits in terms of our economy, our national security, our energy independence and preserving the environment -- preserving creation. First, there should be a moratorium on building any more coal-fired power plants until we have the technology to capture and sequester the CO2. That technology is probably five or ten years away. It will become clear over the next ten years that coal-fired power plants that do not capture and sequester CO2 are going to have to be bulldozed. That's the only way we can keep CO2 from getting well into the dangerous level, because our consumption of oil and gas alone will take us close to the dangerous level. And oil and gas are such convenient fuels (and located in countries where we can't tell people not to mine them) that they surely will be used. So why build old-technology power plants if you're not going to be able to operate them over their lifetime, which is fifty or seventy-five years? It doesn't make sense. Besides, there's so much potential in efficiency, we don't need new power plants if we take advantage of that. Second, and this is the hard recommendation that no politician seems willing to stand up and say is necessary: The only way we are going to prevent having an amount of CO2 that is far beyond the dangerous level is by putting a price on emissions. In order to avoid economic problems, it had better be a gradually rising price so that the consumer has the option to seek energy sources that reduce his requirement for how much fuel he needs. And that means we should be investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies at the same time. The result would be high-tech, high-paid jobs. And it would be very good for our energy independence, our national security and our balance of payments. But a price on carbon emissions is not enough, which brings us to the third recommendation: We need energy-efficiency standards. That's been proven time and again. The biggest use of energy is in buildings, and the engineers and architects have said that they can readily reduce the energy requirement of new buildings by 50 percent. That goal has been endorsed by the US Conference of Mayors, but you can't do it on a city-by-city basis. You need national standards. The same goes for vehicle efficiency. We haven't had an improvement in vehicle efficiency in twenty-five or thirty years. And our national government is standing in court alongside the automobile manufacturers resisting what the National Research Council has said is readily achievable -- a 30 percent improvement in vehicle efficiency, which California and other states want to adopt. The fourth recommendation -- and this is probably the easiest one -- involves the question of ice-sheet stability. The old assumption that it takes thousands or tens of thousands of years for ice sheets to change is clearly wrong. The concern is that it's a very nonlinear process that could accelerate. The west Antarctic ice sheet in particular is very vulnerable. If it collapses, that could yield a sea-level rise of sixteen to nineteen feet, possibly on a time scale as short as a century or two. The information on ice-sheet stability is so recent that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report does not adequately address it. The IPCC process is necessarily long and drawn out. But this problem with the stability of ice sheets is so critical that it really should be looked at by a panel of our best scientists. Congress should ask the National Academy of Sciences to do a study on this and report its conclusions in very plain language. The National Academy of Sciences was established by Abraham Lincoln for just this sort of purpose, and there's no reason we shouldn't use it that way. The final recommendation concerns how we have gotten into this situation in which there is a gap between what the relevant scientific community understands and what the public and policy-makers know. A fundamental premise of democracy is that the public is informed and that they're honestly informed. There are at least two major ways in which this is not happening. One of them is that the public affairs offices of the science agencies are staffed at the headquarters level by political appointees. While the public affairs workers at the centers are professionals who feel that their job is to translate the science into words the public can understand, unfortunately this doesn't seem to be the case for the political appointees at the highest levels. Another matter is Congressional testimony. I don't think the Framers of the Constitution expected that when a government employee -- a technical government employee -- reports to Congress, his testimony would have to be approved and edited by the White House first. But that is the way it works now. And frankly, I'm afraid it works that way whether it's a Democratic administration or a Republican one. These problems are worse now than I've seen in my thirty years in government. But they're not new. I don't know anything in our Constitution that says that the executive branch should filter scientific information going to Congressional committees. Reform of communication practices is needed if our government is to function the way our Founders intended it to work. The global warming problem has brought into focus an overall problem: the pervasive influence of special interests on the functioning of our government and on communications with the public. It seems to me that it will be difficult to solve the global warming problem until we have effective campaign finance reform, so that special interests no longer have such a big influence on policy-makers. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Huge turnout protests powerline in PA
by Duane330＠aol.com 06 Apr '07

06 Apr '07

(http://www.post-gazette.com/pghmap/) (https://ssl.post-gazette.com/placead) (http://classified.post-gazette.com/auto/) (http://www.post-gazette.com/xtras/a1pdf.asp) (http://www.post-gazette.com/aboutpg/emailheadlines/) 650 turn out to protest power line proposal Friday, April 06, 2007, By Janice Crompton, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette More than 600 angry Washington and Greene county residents turned out last night at the Washington County fairgrounds to oppose the construction of a high-voltage power line in their area. The event, organized by the citizen's group "Stop The Towers," also drew a flock of local and state politicians, most of whom vowed to fight the project by Allegheny Energy Inc. The plan involves the Greensburg-based energy company's proposed construction of a 240-mile, 500-kilovolt transmission line, extending from Washington and Greene counties to existing substations in West Virginia, ending in northern Virginia. Also part of the plan is the construction of two substations, including a 502 Junction substation in Dunkard, southern Greene County, which will direct flow northward in Washington County and eastward into West Virginia. The other substation, nicknamed Prexy, will be built along Thomas Ei ghty-Four Road in North Strabane, Washington County. It will include three smaller transmission lines that will branch off into South Strabane, Nottingham and Somerset townships. Allegheny Energy's portion of the line extends about 210 miles at a cost of $820 million, with the total project estimated at more than $1 billion. The smaller portion of the line will be constructed and paid for by Dominion Virginia Power, which serves customers in Virginia. Company officials have said they believed there was a misunderstanding over who would benefit from the new lines. Misconceptions that southwestern Pennsylvania would be providing power for Virginia are incorrect, officials said. But many of the residents who turned out at last night's meeting, and another held Tuesday night by the company, said they don't buy it. "I don't believe that," said Washington County Commissioner Larry Maggi after a company open house Tuesday at the Bentleyville Fire Hall. "They are having problems on the East Coast." Tuesday's event was one of 10 open houses sponsored by Allegheny Energy during recent weeks to explain the company's plans. Although the Mid-Atlantic, from New York to northern Virginia, was identified by the federal government last year as an area in critical need of more power, company officials said power lines in southwestern Pennsylvania will serve electric needs in this area only. A separate line, at the 502 junction in Greene County, will transmit electricity to northern Virginia. Residents said they believed the project would decrease property values and the quality of life, and possibly be a health and safety hazard. They also questioned the company's claim that it owns rights of way along all but two miles of the proposed 38-mile route through Washington and Greene counties. "We are opposed to it," said Mr. Maggi. "We will do whatever we can to stop it. We do not want to lose our country charm." "What do we get out of it? Nothing. We lose," said county Commissioner Diana Irey. U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Johnstown, in a letter made public last night, opposed the power line project for the first time. He is congressman for a large part of the affected area. Wendell Holland, chairman of the state Public Utility Commission, explained PUC procedures to last night's audience and said: "There's nothing like being here. There's nothing at all like coming to the people and listening to what they have to say." The upgrade was mandated by PJM Interconnection, which manages electric transmission services of the Mid-Atlantic power grid in 13 states and Washington, D.C. The proposed line is part of PJM's five-year regional electric transmission plan, meant to address future energy needs at certain points in the grid, such as southwestern Pennsylvania and northern Virginia. If local lines aren't updated to a higher capacity, company officials have said customers in southwestern Pennsylvania can expect rolling blackouts and brownouts by 2011. The existing 138-kilovolt lines aren't large enough to accommodate electricity load growth rates of about 4 percent in central and northern Washington County. Growth rates elsewhere in the region average about 11/2 percent, company spokesman David Neurohr said. PJM has asked Allegheny Energy to make the southwestern Pennsylvania line a priority, said company officials, requesting that the project be completed by 2010 if possible. It will be built even if a line to northern Virginia is not, Mr. Neurohr said. The company is expected to file an application with the PUC soon, as it did in West Virginia last week. If construction permits are denied or not issued within the next year, it could kick in a backstop provided for in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which gives the federal government the right to intervene with construction permits. (http://www.post-gazette.com/popup.asp?img=http://www.post-gazette.com/image…) Bill Pollock, managing director of Energy and Environment Advisory, talks up the business and economic arguments against Allegheny Energy Inc.'s plan to build a high voltage power line through Washington and Greene counties. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Stopaptrail.org, Stopthetowers.org
by Duane330＠aol.com 03 Apr '07

03 Apr '07

Group opposes power line through counties Sunday, March 11, 2007, Pittsburgh PressBy Crystal Ola There's a grassroots campaign under way to stop the construction of a proposed power line that will stretch from Washington and Greene counties through Maryland and West Virginia and into northern Virginia. The face of the campaign is Rich Yanock, a South Strabane resident who is heading a group to halt the plans of Allegheny Energy Inc. to build a section of Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line. In Washington County, the line would pass through North Strabane, South Strabane, Somerset, West Bethlehem and Amwell. The 500-kilovolt transmission line also would require the construction of two new substations -- Prexy, to be built in North Strabane, and 502 Junction, to be built in Dunkard, just northeast of Mount Morris in Greene County. The line and other electric transmission upgrades are expected to cost $1.3 billion. Allegheny Energy's portion will be in excess of $850 million. The project is expected to be completed by 2011. "I oppose this line," Mr. Yanock told a standing-room-only crowd of more than 300 people during an informal Feb. 28 meeting in Emanuel United Presbyterian Church on Route 519 in Somerset. "I'll tell you the truth, this is wrong ... It's up to us to expose it for what it is, not a national defense issue, but a profit issue." Mr. Yanock believes the power line will scar the landscape, lower property values and be a detriment to the health and safety of the residents. He also was at a Feb. 27 meeting of the Somerset Township Board of Supervisors, where more than 100 people attended. Nellie Chester, a resident of the township, said one proposed route would be about three blocks from her home. She's also opposed to the Prexy substation and having to pay higher bills for a project she doesn't believe will benefit anyone locally. "I don't want it in my backyard," she said before the meeting. "We're not getting anything out of it." A final route has yet to be established, although it is expected to be filed with the state Public Utility Commission by the end of March or in early April, said David Neurohr, spokesman for Allegheny Energy. The PUC will hold public hearings on the matter. The line is part of a five-year regional electric transmission plan approved by PJM Interconnection, which manages electric transmission services of the Mid-Atlantic power grid in 13 states and Washington, D.C. Allegheny Power's transmission zone is in PJM's region. Dominion Virginia Power will construct the line within its transmission zone. The line in Allegheny Power's zone will be about 210 miles long and the entire line will be 240 miles long. PJM maintains transmission expansion is needed to address reliability issues. PJM's planning process indicated a new line is necessary to relieve overloading existing West Virginia and Virginia substations. "Throughout the PJM region, the demand for electricity has increased significantly, while the transmission infrastructure has not increased at a proportional pace," according to the TrAIL Web site. "Due to the growth in the demand for electricity, additional transmission lines are needed to improve the grid's reliability and reduce congestion so power can be transferred from where it is generated to where it is needed." Allegheny Energy held open houses last year, including one for Greene and Fayette counties on Dec. 13 and one in Washington County on Dec. 14. Mr. Neurohr said the open houses are proof that the company isn't doing this without letting anyone know. "We did them on our own to involve the public, to solicit information from the public and to inform the public," he said. Mr. Yanock, however, believes Allegheny Energy "dropped the ball on this." Part of his campaign is informing the public about the power line. "You'd be surprised at the widespread ignorance of this project," he said last week. Mr. Yanock didn't attend the open house because he wasn't aware of it beforehand. He heard about it after the fact and began meeting with a small group of 10 people or so. The group is planning to develop an official name and find the best legal structure in order to become an entity recognized by the PUC, he said. Mr. Yanock's first formal step was to ask South Strabane supervisors for an official letter of support. Township Solicitor Thomas Lonich said the township sent a Jan. 24 letter of protest to the chairman and the president of Allegheny Energy, Inc., the state Public Utility Commission, county commissioners and Amwell supervisors. The township didn't receive a response from Allegheny Energy. The letter, based on Mr. Yanock's suggestions, stated the supervisors were unanimous in acting on behalf of township citizens in objecting to and protesting the line crossing through the township. A petition with 24 signatures from a Jan. 9 meeting was included with the letter. The letter also was sent to state Sen. Barry Stout, D-Bentleyville; state Rep. Tim Solobay, D-Canonsburg; U.S. Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Upper St. Clair, and U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter. Mr. Stout and some other local politicians attended the Feb. 28 meeting, where Mr. Yanock urged the crowd to contact legislators for their support. "They are the best allies we have," Mr. Yanock said. "As a matter of fact, we're not asking for help, we're begging for help." The effort has grown from a small group to hundreds of people and is nearing a thousand participants, he said. Petitions are being circulated. Mr. Yanock and his group are planning to hold an even bigger meeting at a large venue, such as the Washington County Fairgrounds. The meeting is tentatively scheduled for April 5. Additional information and maps of proposed routes are available at _aptrailinfo.com_ (http://aptrailinfo.com/) . Mr. Yanock's group also has a Web site, _stopaptrail.org_ (http://stopaptrail.org/) ____________________________________ (Crystal Ola is a freelance writer. ) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Power line gets negative reaction Residents fear impact of Allegheny project Sunday, March 25, 2007, By Lynda Guydon Taylor, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette About 100 people jammed a North Strabane meeting room to object to a power line proposed by Allegheny Energy Inc. The 500-kilovolt line would pass through parts of Washington and Greene counties to provide power to Northern Virginia suburbs, where there's a huge demand for electricity, South Strabane resident Rich Yanock told supervisors Tuesday. "I don't know of any line that large," said Mr. Yanock, who is heading a grassroots campaign against the 210-mile line to be built by Allegheny Power, part of the Allegheny Energy system. The line also involves construction of two substations, Prexy, which would be built in North Strabane, and 502 Junction, to be constructed in Dunkard, northeast of Mount Morris in Greene County. Two informational meetings are scheduled next month -- one on April 3 at the Bentleyville Fire Hall and another April 5 at the Washington County Fairgrounds. Among Mr. Yanock's concerns are that the line will scar the landscape, ruin property values and pose health risks. Although he is neither a doctor nor a scientist, he said, all he's read about health risks indicate that further research is necessary. While a not-in-my-backyard response is typical, Mr. Yanock said "in my opinion, I don't want this line in anybody's backyard." J.R. Morton, a township resident, echoed that sentiment. Those who look at the maps of the proposed routes of the line on the Allegheny Web site at _aptrailinfo.com_ (http://aptrailinfo.com/) , and think they are not affected, should think again, Mr. Morton said. There's still a price to pay. Mr. Yanock said customer rates are expected to increase substantially to allow Allegheny Power to recoup its $820 million cost of building the line. So far, Washington and Greene County commissioners are opposing it and local legislators have expressed concerns, Mr. Yanock said. Although he said he was not telling North Strabane supervisors what to do, he urged them to look into it carefully. A lot of questions remain to be answered. Supervisor Brian Spicer said the April 3 meeting, sponsored by Allegheny Power, is expected to identify where the line will go. At that point, residents and public officials should have a better understanding of the project. Mr. Spicer also said the Public Utility Commission has the ultimate authority to decide about the line. But Mr. Yanock said don't count on it. He believes Allegheny is prepared to appeal and fight to the end. Furthermore, he cited the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which allows a PUC decision to be overridden by the federal government to make sure such corridors receive priority treatment. Under the act, the federal Department of Energy can identify areas experiencing electric transmission constraints or congestion. In addition to information about the line at Allegheny's Web site, there also is data at a Web site, _stopaptrail.org_ (http://stopaptrail.org/) , posted by Mr. Yanock's group. ____________________________________ (Lynda Guydon Taylor can be reached at _ltaylor(a)post-gazette.com_ (mailto:ltaylor@post-gazette.com) or 724-746-8813. ) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Power line plan draws opposition By Steve Ferris, Uniontown Herald-Standard, 03/30/2007, Updated 03/31/2007 FRANKLIN TWP. - More than 300 people attended a meeting Thursday held by the Greene County chapter of a grass-roots organization to rally opposition against Allegheny Energy's plans to construction a high-voltage power line through the Greene and Washington counties. Stopthetowers.org already has the support of the county commissioners from both counties as well as state Rep. H. William DeWeese, D-Waynesburg, in its fight against the proposed 240-mile, 500-kilovolt Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line, or TrAIL. Rick Layton, of the Greene County chapter, said the line would not provide electricity or any other benefits to the county. He said he believes the purpose of the line is to transmit power that is inexpensively generated in the area to east coast cities where it is sold at a high price. "This is about profit, pure and simple," Layton said to the crowd that gathered in the Waynesburg Central High School auditorium. Layton said Allegheny Power is expected to file an application to construct the line with the state Public Utility Commission within a week or two. The line would begin at the Prexy Substation, which Allegheny Power would build in the area of Eighty-Four in Washington County, and take one of three proposed routes to the 502 Junction substation that would be built in Mount Morris. >From there, it would go to an existing substation in Mount Storm, W.Va., and then to a Dominion Virginia Power substation in Loudoun, Va. The anticipated completion date is 2011. Allegheny Power said the line is needed to ensure the stability of the regional power grid and the reliable flow of electricity in the region. The project grew from a June 2006 directive from PJM Interconnection, a regional transmission organization that manages electrical transmission services in all or parts of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Michigan, Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, Kentucky, Indiana, Tennessee and the District of Columbia. Allegheny Power is hosting two open houses to explain and answer questions about the project. The first is in Greene County on Monday from 4 to 7 p.m. at the Jefferson Volunteer Fire Department on Route 188 in Jefferson. The second one is Tuesday from 5 to 8 p.m. at the Bentleyville Volunteer Fire Department on Main Street in Bentleyville. Stopthetowers.org is holding a second opposition rally Thursday at 7 p.m. in Hall No. 1 at the Washington County Fairgrounds. Layton said the line would impact the county in a number of ways and none of them are good. It would decrease property values, result in a rate increase, create huge eyesore in the county rural landscape and possibly cause health problems, said Layton. He said the right of way, which would be 200 feet wide with towers up to 160-feet tall, would be sprayed with herbicides and the county already has a poor air quality rating. Along with the county commissioners and DeWeese, supervisors from several townships have issued letters of opposition to the project, said Layton. Pam Snyder, chairwoman of the Greene County Commissioners, said the board first expressed its opposition in December and has written letters stating their opposition to state and federal officials. "We stand ready to do whatever it takes to keep this power line out of our pristine county," said Snyder. "Lets show them we're not positive they're not going to impact this county any more." DeWeese said his staff and eight "capital" attorneys in Harrisburg are researching the project. He said he met with Allegheny Power officials and he believes profit is the motive behind the line. "They did not have a series of solid and inflexible reasons to build this," DeWeese said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Power transmission line drawing protests Residents in Washington, Greene counties oppose Allegheny Power plans Tuesday, April 03, 2007, By Janice Crompton, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Residents in Washington and Greene counties have mounted a campaign to block plans for a new power transmission line through their neighborhoods, saying it will hurt property values and the quality of life without providing any local benefits. Allegheny Energy Inc. officials, though, say misconceptions about the plan have snowballed and that many residents and municipal officials don't realize the new power line is to transmit power into, not out of, Western Pennsylvania. Allegheny Energy is the parent of Allegheny Power, which provides service to most customers in Washington and Greene counties. Local, county and state officials have signed petitions against the plan, citing concerns about whether such a line is necessary. The Greensburg-based company has held 10 open houses to explain its plan for the Trans Allegheny Interstate Line, commonly referred to as TrAIL. The company's last scheduled meeting is set for tonight from 5 to 8 p.m. at the Bentleyville Fire Hall in Washington County, Company officials said they plan to emphasize details they believe have been misunderstood and reasons why they believe the project is needed. The company wants to build a 240-mile, 500-kilovolt transmission line extending from southwestern Pennsylvania to existing substations in West Virginia and ending in northern Virginia. The final 30 miles of the line will be built and controlled by Dominion Virginia Power. Allegheny's portion of the cost is $820 million, while the total project is estimated at about $1.3 billion. The upgrade was mandated by PJM Interconnection, which manages electric transmission services of the Mid-Atlantic power grid in 13 states and Washington, D.C. The line is part of PJM's five-year regional electric transmission plan, meant to address future energy needs at certain points in the power grid. Grassroots organizations, including _stopthetowers.org_ (http://stopthetowers.org/) , are opposed to the plan, saying the project is a ploy by Allegheny Energy to make profits from outside the region at the expense of local customers. Residents have also expressed concern over rate hikes, and health and safety issues, and claim the company hasn't done all it could to avoid construction of the new lines, which will be supported by 125-foot towers along 200-foot rights-of-way. One of the group's organizers, Richard Yanock of South Strabane, said such large lines are over capacity for local demand, and he said the company has not made clear what it's plans are beyond five years. "We need to understand what the plan is before they put a 500-kilovolt monster into the countryside," he said. The company intends to submit it's plan to the state Public Utility Commission for approval soon, but even if the state opposes the plan or doesn't approve it within the next year, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 gives the federal government the right to intervene with construction permits. The company claims if the new lines aren't approved, the area could see rolling blackouts and brownouts by 2011 due to a growth rate of about 4 percent in central and northern Washington County. Growth elsewhere in southwestern Pennsylvania averages about 1.5 percent, Allegheny Energy spokesman David Neurohr said. The size of the current transmission lines, at 138 kilovolts, isn't large enough to accommodate the additional load. "You can't wait until the well's run dry to figure out where you're going to get your next cup of water," he said. ____________________________________ (Janice Crompton can be reached at _jcrompton(a)post-gazette.com_ (mailto:jcrompton@post-gazette.com) or 724-223-0156. ) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

CO2 in the Clean Air Act
by Duane330＠aol.com 03 Apr '07

03 Apr '07

April 3, 2007, Editorial, New York Times. The Court Rules on Warming It would be hard to overstate the importance of yesterday’s ruling by the Supreme Court that the federal government has the authority to regulate the carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases produced by motor vehicles. It is a victory for a world whose environment seems increasingly threatened by climate change. It is a vindication for states like California that chose not to wait for the federal government and acted to limit emissions that contribute to global warming. And it should feed the growing momentum on Capitol Hill for mandatory limits on carbon dioxide, the principal greenhouse gas. The 5-to-4 ruling was a rebuke to the Bush administration and its passive approach to the warming threat. The ruling does not require the government to regulate greenhouse gases. But it instructs the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its refusal to regulate emissions, urges it to pay attention to the scientific evidence and says that if it takes the same stance, it has to come up with better reasons than its current “laundry list” of excuses. The ruling also demolishes President Bush’s main justification for not acting — his argument that because the Clean Air Act does not specifically mention greenhouse gases, the executive branch has no authority to regulate them. The president has cited other reasons for not acting, including costs. But his narrow reading of the Clean Air Act has always been his ace in the hole. The court offered a much more “capacious” reading of the act, as Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority. The plaintiffs — 12 states and 13 environmental groups — had argued, and the court agreed, that while the act does not specifically mention greenhouse gases, it gives the federal government clear jurisdiction over “any air pollutant” that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger “public health or welfare.” This interpretation was first set forth by Carol Browner, administrator of the E.P.A. under President Clinton, and remained agency policy until Mr. Bush reversed it in 2001. The administration had also argued that the states did not have standing to sue on this issue because they could not show that they would be harmed by the government’s failure to regulate greenhouse gases. The court ruled that the states have a strong and legitimate interest in protecting their land and their citizens against the dangers of climate change and thus have standing to sue. The ruling reinforces state efforts in other ways. California and nearly a dozen other states have adopted their own regulations requiring lower greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. These rules, however, require federal approval, which seemed unlikely as long as the agency could claim that carbon dioxide was not a pollutant — a claim it can no longer make. The E.P.A. had also argued that reducing emissions would require it to tighten fuel efficiency standards, a job assigned by law to the Department of Transportation. The automakers have made much the same argument against California ’s emissions rules. But the court said that the E.P.A. could not shirk its responsibilities just because another department sets mileage standards. The agency is clearly in for some serious soul-searching. The decision was unnervingly close, and some of the arguments in the dissent, written by Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., were cause for concern — especially his comments about the “complexities” of the science of climate change, which is too close for comfort to the administration’s party line. Still, the Supreme Court, for the first time, has said that global warming is a real and present danger. This can only encourage those on Capitol Hill and in the states who are growing increasingly impatient for aggressive action. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Search for New W.V.U. President
by duane330＠aol.com 26 Mar '07

26 Mar '07

RE: SEARCH FOR NEW W.V.U. PRESIDENT................ FROM: Duane Nichols, B.S.Ch.E. 1959. NOTE: You can send your comments as correspondence to the following email address, to which everything sent will be provided to the Search Committee: PresidentSearch(a)mail.wvu.edu If you would prefer a hard copy address, you can send to: WVU Board of Governors, c/o Board Secretary, West Virginia University, PO Box 6201, Morgantown, WV 26506. Profiles of the 3 finalists for president of WVU The Dominion Post Daniel Bernstine Daniel Bernstine, 59, has been president of Portland State University since August 1997. Portland State has about 24,000 students, 2,049 faculty, a budget of $429.7 million, and research expenditures of $40 million, according to the PSU Web site. Before coming to PSU, Bernstine served as dean of the University of Wisconsin Law School from 1990-’97. He served as general counsel of Howard University from 1987-’90 and also as the interim dean of Howard University Law School from 1988-’90. Bernstine graduated from the University of California at Berkeley with a B.A. degree in 1969, from the Northwestern University School of Law with a J.D. degree in 1972, and received his LL.M. degree from the University of Wisconsin Law School in 1975. He received Honorary Doctor of Law degrees from Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea, in 1999, and from Waseda University, one of the top two private universities in Japan, in 2003. Bernstine was awarded an Honorary Doctor of Human Letters degree from Nizhny Novgorod Linguistic University, in Russia, in 2004. In 2005, Bernstine was awarded the Michael P. Malone International Leadership Award in recognition of his work in internationalization in higher education. He was given the International Citizen Award by the Oregon Consular Corps in 2004. >From 1972-’73, Bernstine was a staff attorney with the Office of the Solicitor at the U.S. Department of Labor, and from 1974-’75, he was the William H. Hastie Teaching Fellow at the University of Wisconsin Law School. From 1975-’78, Bernstine was assistant professor at Howard University Law School. He joined the University of Wisconsin Law School faculty in 1978 and was on leave from Wisconsin while serving as general counsel and interim law school dean at Howard. Among other schools, Bernstine has been a visiting law professor at the Inter-American Comparative Law Institute at the University of Havana Law School, in Havana, Cuba, and Justus-Liebig-Universitat in Giessen, Germany. He has served as a member of the National Conference of Bar Examiners Multi-State Torts Drafting Committee and the American Law Institute. He has served on the Association of American Law Schools Committee on Accreditation, and the Supreme Court of Wisconsin Board of Bar Examiners. Bernstine has also been involved in Portland organizations such as the United Way of Columbia-Willamette. According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, Bernstine’s annual salary is about $340,000. He also receives about $50,000 toward his retirement. His total compensation is $390,000. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Mike S. Garrison Mike Garrison, 38, a native of Fairmont and the only finalist working in West Virginia, resigned Wednesday as chair of the Higher Education Policy Commission, a position he was named to in July 2006. The commission is responsible for developing, establishing and overseeing the implementation of a public-policy agenda for the state’s fouryear colleges and universities — including WVU. State law would have required Garrison to step down as chair if he was named WVU president. Garrison said he resigned prior to this week’s announcement that he is a candidate to avoid the appearance of any impropriety. According to the state Auditor’s Office, Garrison received no state salary for this job. He is a lawyer and the managing partner for the Morgantown office of Spilman, Thomas and Battle, PLLC, which has offices in West Virginia, North Carolina and Pennsylvania. Garrison is registered as a lobbyist with the West Virginia Secretary of State’s office. His clients include companies in the Morgantown area such as Mylan Laboratories and Platinum Properties. Two members of the WVU Board of Governors are on the board of directors at Centra Bank, another of Garrison’s clients. Garrison received a bachelor’s degree in political science and English literature from WVU in 1992. He served his alma mater as student body president. Garrison spent a year in England as a Rotary Scholar at Oxford, then returned to Morgantown to attend the WVU College of Law, which he graduated from in 1996. He teaches “Politics in West Virginia” at the university, though he is not teaching this semester. Garrison said he does not draw a salary for teaching this course. Garrison’s public service experiences include work as a legislative assistant for both Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., and Rep. Alan B. Mollohan, D-W.Va. Garrison was a member of former Gov. Bob Wise’s administration when he was appointed cabinet secretary of the Department of Tax and Revenue, in January 2001. In May 2001, Garrison became the governor’s chief of staff, a position he held until October 2003. Wise later appointed him to serve as a member of the commission in 2003. Garrison was a member of Joe Manchin’s transition team when he was elected West Virginia governor, in 2004. Garrison is active on many boards and associations related to the university. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< M. Duane Nellis Nellis, 52, became Kansas State University’s provost in June 2004, after serving for seven years at WVU as dean of the Eberly College of Arts and Sciences. As provost, Nellis serves as chief academic officer of Kansas State, which has more than 23,000 students, 1,500 faculty, a budget of more than $683 million and research funding that exceeds $197 million. Nellis said he earns $220,000 a year as provost. Nellis also serves as a representative of the president and in place of the president during his absence. At WVU, Nellis led a capital fundraising campaign, oversaw the planning and construction of a $50 million Life Sciences building, and established a new Center for Writing Excellence and a Math Learning Institute. Nellis completed his Ph.D. in geography from Oregon State University in 1980 and accepted his first academic appointment at KSU. Prior to his departure in 1997 for WVU, Nellis served as head of Kansas State’s department of geography, and then senior associate dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, according to WVU News and Information Services. Nellis recently served as president of the Association of American Geographers, one of the largest professional geography organizations in the world. He is past president of the National Council for Geographic Education, past president of Gamma Theta Upsilon, the International Geographic Honor Society, past president of the Kansas Academy of Sciences, and serves as an executive committee member of the National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges Chief Academic Officers. Nellis is recognized for his research using satellite data and geographic information systems to analyze various dimensions of the Earth’s land surface, according to WVU News and Information Services. This research has been funded by grants totaling more than $3 million from sources such as NASA and National Geographic Society. He has been recognized through numerous awards, such as being named a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, National Honors from the Association of American Geographers and the AAG’s John Fraser Hart Award for Excellence in Research, At WVU, he received the Neil S. Bucklew Award for Social Justice in 2003 and the University’s Leadership Award for Safety in 2002. He is also an honorary member of Phi Beta Kappa and Golden Key National Honor Society. Nellis completed his undergraduate degree at Montana State University before pursuing his graduate work at Oregon State University. ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.

2 1

Re: [MVCAC] Appeal of Longview Air Quality Permit
by Bill Reger-Nash 24 Mar '07

24 Mar '07

Thank you, Duane, Phil, and the many others working so diligently on our behalf. The health and public health implications of this proposed antiquated monstrosity are monumental. Where and when will it ever end? Bill and Jan Reger-Nash WV Walks - 30 minutes or more daily Feel the power of half an hour! Bill Reger-Nash, Ed.D Professor of Community Medicine West Virginia University School of Medicine Morgantown WV 26506-9190 Phone: 304/293-0763 Fax: 304/293-6685 Dept. web page: http://www.hsc.wvu.edu/som/cmed BRN's web page: http://www.hsc.wvu.edu/som/cmed/wreger/ >>> <Duane330(a)aol.com> 03/23/07 6:08 PM >>> Appeal of Longview Air Quality Permit Today, March 23, 2007, a Complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court in Clarksburg laying out the fact that the Air Quality Permit R14-0024 actually expired on September 2, 2004 and that the actions of Longview attempting to renew this permit since that time have not been valid or legal. This Appeal No. 1:07 cv 41 is shown below and is attached as a Microsoft Word document. This Appeal will be the subject of a Hearing before Judge Irene Keeley in Clarksburg within a few weeks. The attached Appeal was submitted by Jarrett F. Jamison III, the Fort Martin Community Association, and the Forks of Cheat Forest Property Owners Association. These same Plaintiffs filed an Appeal with regard to this same Air Quality Permit in 2004, viz. Appeal No. 04-02-AQB, before the WV Air Quality Board. That Appeal contested the procedures used to prepare the Permit as issued on March 2, 2004, especially with regard to the lost transcript of a Public Hearing held in Morgantown. That Appeal was subsequently turned down by the Air Quality Board, by the Kanawha County Circuit Court, and by the WV Supreme Court of Appeals. Mr. Jarrett F. Jamison III is a resident of the Fort Martin Community and a professional electrician with experience in power plant construction. The Fort Martin Community Association includes families of the area within which the proposed Longview power plant is to be constructed, where already the noise and adverse safety conditions from truck traffic is severe, and where the levels of pollutants from the existing Ft. Martin power plant are the greatest. The Forks of Cheat Forest became an Intervenor in these proceedings because (a) an obligation exists to preserve and protect the Nature Preserve that surrounds the properties, and (b) the Forks of Cheat Forest is directly downwind of the Ft. Martin power plant as well as the proposed Longview power plant, given the direction of the prevailing winds, and subject to the air pollutant effects on the health of our residents including children and senior citizens. The aesthetic effects of steam plumes from the evaporation of approximately 4,000 gallons per minute of water in up to 20 cooling towers of the Longview plant has also been of concern, given its location on the ridge overlooking the Monongahela River valley. It has also been pointed out to the WV Division of Air Quality that the 14,000 tons per day of carbon dioxide that will issue from the Longview plant will contribute greatly to the greenhouse gas inventory of our atmosphere. Note-- A similar Complaint was filed earlier this year and was the subject of a Hearing before Judge Keeley on February 23rd. This earlier Complaint was subsequently modified, at the suggestion of the Judge, and then it was withdrawn so that it could be rewritten in order to frame the legal argument more accurately. The legal work is being done by the lawyer Phillip D. Gaujot, with advice and consultation provided by a legal entity that specializes in the U. S. Clean Air Act. These legal services are being provided pro bono (at no charge), in the public interest. A filing fee of $350 is being shared among the Plaintiffs. If any questions arise, please send an email to _duane330(a)aol.com_ (mailto:duane330@aol.com) . 00 to 695 MW and increase the water usage to 5,600 gallons per minute via a "waiver" from the WV Public Service Commission, without presenting full information as to the increased environmental impacts to the PSC or the public. This "waiver" has been appealed to the WV Supreme Court of Appeals by Barbara Born, et.al., a group that includes a number of residents of Monongalia County plus three non-profit organizations (the Cheat Lake Environment And Recreation Association [CLEAR], the Citizens for Alternatives to Longview [CALP], and the Citizens for Responsible Development). The initial Hearing on this waiver appeal is set for April 18th in Charleston. Note -- The NPDES ("storm water and waste water") permit for the Longview plant was granted by the WV Department of Environmental Quality on October 16, 2006. This Permit WV0116238 was appealed by the Fort Martin Community Association on November 14, 2006, as Appeal No. 06-31-EQB before the WV Environmental Quality Board (EQB). Two days of Hearings have been held in Charleston. Initial Briefs are due from the parties to this Appeal on or near April 30th, and then Rebuttal Briefs will be filed on or near May 15th. The EQB will then render a decision. It is claimed that Longview did not provide accurate and complete information in the permit application and that the WV-DEP did not follow systematic or proper procedures in granting the permit; and, that the permit violates the public interest and needs to be voided. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA (CLARKSBURG) Jarrett F. Jamison III, ) Fort Martin Community Association and ) Forks of Cheat Forest Property ) Owners Association, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 1:07 cv 41 vs. ) ) ) ) Longview Power, LLC, ) Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT ________________________________________________________________________ Plaintiffs, Jarrett F. Jamison III, Fort Martin Community Association and Forks of Cheat Forest Property Owners Association, allege as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. Plaintiffs, Jarrett F. Jamison III, Fort Martin Community Association and Forks of Cheat Forest Property Owners Association, bring this citizen suit against Defendant Longview Power, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; for declaratory and injunctive relief and the imposition of civil penalties under the Federal Clean Air Act (“the Act”), 42 U.S.C. §§7401-7671(q). This action seeks an order enjoining Defendant from constructing or proposing to construct a merchant power plant (“the Power Plant”) near Maidsville, in Cass District, Monongalia County, West Virginia without a valid Prevention of Significant Deterioration (“PSD”) permit. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2. This citizen suit is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §7604(a)(3). As such, this Court has subject matter jurisdiction of this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §7604(a) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1355. 3. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §7904(c)(1) because the Power Plant is located in this District. PARTIES 4. Plaintiff Jarrett F. Jamison III, is a resident of Cass District, Monongalia County, West Virginia. Fort Martin Community Association (hereinafter FMCA) and Forks of Cheat Forest Property Owners Association (hereinafter FOCF) are non-profit organizations consisting of residents of Monongalia County, West Virginia who live in close proximity to the proposed Power Plant. The associati natural environment. Plaintiff Jamison and the members of Plaintiff associations, own real estate, work, recreate, grow crops and study in and near areas affected by the proposed Power Plant. The air quality of these areas affects the recreational, aesthetic, and economic interests of Plaintiffs. The interests of Plaintiffs will be adversely affected by pollution from the Power Plant because the level of pollutants to be discharged from the proposed Power Plant will degrade air quality, injuring and/or damaging wildlife, vegetation, and real estate in areas used by Plaintiffs, and harm the aesthetic enjoyment of these areas by Plaintiffs. Construction of the proposed Power Plant without a valid PSD permit will also adversely affect the health of Plaintiffs. An order of this Court directing Defendant to procure a valid PSD permit prior to constructing the Power Plant will redress the injuries to Plaintiffs because of the recent significant advances in pollution control technologies that will be required under a new permit. 5. Defendant Longview Power, LLC is a Delaware for-profit limited liability company with its principal place of business located at 1040 Great Plains Avenue, Needham, Massachusetts. Longview was incorporated and became qualified to perform business in West Virginia on May 24, 2001. CLAIM FOR RELIEF DEFENDANT DOES NOT CURRENTLY HAVE A REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION PERMIT UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT 6. Plaintiffs, re-allege paragraphs 1 through 5 above as if fully alleged herein. 7. The Clean Air Act (“CAA” or “the Act”) is designed to protect and enhance the quality of the nation’s air. 42 U.S.C. § 7401(b)(1). One of the programs that the CAA established to achieve that goal is the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (“PSD”) Program. See 42 U.S.C. § 7401, et al. 8. In general, the PSD program imposes limitations on the ambient air quality impact of new major stationary sources and requires such facilities to install the “best available control technology” (“BACT”) for each pollutant subject to regulation under the Act that is emitted from, or that results from, such facilities. 42 U.S.C. § 7475(a)(4). 9. Under the PSD program, “no major emitting facility on which construction is commenced after August 7, 1977, may be constructed in any area to which [the PSD program] applies unless a permit has been issued for such proposed facility in accordance with this part setting forth emission limitations for such facility which conform to the requirements of this part [.]” 42 U.S.C. § 7475(a). 10. The U.S. EPA has delegated authority to the State of West Virginia to carry out the PSD program in that state. The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is the agency responsible for administering the PSD program in West Virginia. DEP’s PSD regulations, which have been approved by the EPA and which are in effect as federal law in West Virginia’s State Implementation Plan under 42 U.S.C. § 7410, are contained in 47 CSR Part 14. 11. Under 47 CSR 14-7.1., no person may construct a major stationary source without a permit issued by DEP under that section. Under 47 CSR 14-8.2., the permitted source must install BACT to control regulated pollutants from the source. 12. The Power Plant is a major stationary source as defined in 47 CSR 14-2.43. 13. The Director of DAQ issued a PSD construction permit to an extension of the Permit to allow time for the issuance of the remaining pre-construction permits needed for the Project.” 19. By letter dated February 1, 2006, to Mr. Place, the Director of DAQ summarily granted a “…twelve-month extension of the deadline to commence construction authorized in the permit…” The letter did not give a specific time frame for thet such an extension. 20. West Virginia’s PSD regulations in 47 CSR Part 14, do not authorize DEP to extend the 18-month commencement period. 21. Defendant Longview Power, LLC, has entered into agreements with other companies for equipment and/or construction services for the proposed Power Plant, the details of which are unknown to the Plaintiffs. 22. The Director of DAQ refuses to suspend or revoke the permit granted to Longview Power, LLC granted on March 2, 2004. 23. Defendant Longview Power currently does not have a valid PSD construction permit for the Power Plant under the Clean Air Act, the West Vi rginia State Implementation Plan, and 47 CSR Part 14. 24. Any actions by Defendant to construct the Power Plant without a valid PSD construction permit violate the Clean Air Act and are subject to an injunction and the imposition of civil penalties under 42 U.S.C. §§ 7604(a) and 7413(b). 25. The violations herein are subject to enforcement by citizens. 42 U.S.C. § 7604(a),(f). WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for the following relief: A. A temporary and permanent injunction requiring Defendant to stop actual construction activities of the Power Plant until Defendant has a valid PSD permit; B. A declaration that Defendant’s construction activities regarding the Power Plant after September 2, 2005 are illegal; C. An order requiring Defendant to pay a fine for each day that Defendant constructs or propose to construct the Power Plant without a valid PSD permit. See 42 U.S.C. §7604(a) and § 7413(b); D. An order requiring Defendant to pay the costs of litigation, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees; and E. All other relief the Court deems just and proper. Jarrett F. Jamison III Fort Martin Community Association Forks of Cheat Forest Property Owners Association / s / Phillip D. Gaujot __________________________________________ Phillip D. Gaujot (SB#1355) Counsel for Plaintiffs 445 Lakeview Drive Morgantown, WV 26508 (304) 594-3904 . ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Appeal of Longview Air Quality Permit
by Duane330＠aol.com 23 Mar '07

23 Mar '07

Appeal of Longview Air Quality Permit Today, March 23, 2007, a Complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court in Clarksburg laying out the fact that the Air Quality Permit R14-0024 actually expired on September 2, 2004 and that the actions of Longview attempting to renew this permit since that time have not been valid or legal. This Appeal No. 1:07 cv 41 is shown below and is attached as a Microsoft Word document. This Appeal will be the subject of a Hearing before Judge Irene Keeley in Clarksburg within a few weeks. The attached Appeal was submitted by Jarrett F. Jamison III, the Fort Martin Community Association, and the Forks of Cheat Forest Property Owners Association. These same Plaintiffs filed an Appeal with regard to this same Air Quality Permit in 2004, viz. Appeal No. 04-02-AQB, before the WV Air Quality Board. That Appeal contested the procedures used to prepare the Permit as issued on March 2, 2004, especially with regard to the lost transcript of a Public Hearing held in Morgantown. That Appeal was subsequently turned down by the Air Quality Board, by the Kanawha County Circuit Court, and by the WV Supreme Court of Appeals. Mr. Jarrett F. Jamison III is a resident of the Fort Martin Community and a professional electrician with experience in power plant construction. The Fort Martin Community Association includes families of the area within which the proposed Longview power plant is to be constructed, where already the noise and adverse safety conditions from truck traffic is severe, and where the levels of pollutants from the existing Ft. Martin power plant are the greatest. The Forks of Cheat Forest became an Intervenor in these proceedings because (a) an obligation exists to preserve and protect the Nature Preserve that surrounds the properties, and (b) the Forks of Cheat Forest is directly downwind of the Ft. Martin power plant as well as the proposed Longview power plant, given the direction of the prevailing winds, and subject to the air pollutant effects on the health of our residents including children and senior citizens. The aesthetic effects of steam plumes from the evaporation of approximately 4,000 gallons per minute of water in up to 20 cooling towers of the Longview plant has also been of concern, given its location on the ridge overlooking the Monongahela River valley. It has also been pointed out to the WV Division of Air Quality that the 14,000 tons per day of carbon dioxide that will issue from the Longview plant will contribute greatly to the greenhouse gas inventory of our atmosphere. Note-- A similar Complaint was filed earlier this year and was the subject of a Hearing before Judge Keeley on February 23rd. This earlier Complaint was subsequently modified, at the suggestion of the Judge, and then it was withdrawn so that it could be rewritten in order to frame the legal argument more accurately. The legal work is being done by the lawyer Phillip D. Gaujot, with advice and consultation provided by a legal entity that specializes in the U. S. Clean Air Act. These legal services are being provided pro bono (at no charge), in the public interest. A filing fee of $350 is being shared among the Plaintiffs. If any questions arise, please send an email to _duane330(a)aol.com_ (mailto:duane330@aol.com) . Note -- Longview has proposed to increase the power plant capacity from 600 to 695 MW and increase the water usage to 5,600 gallons per minute via a "waiver" from the WV Public Service Commission, without presenting full information as to the increased environmental impacts to the PSC or the public. This "waiver" has been appealed to the WV Supreme Court of Appeals by Barbara Born, et.al., a group that includes a number of residents of Monongalia County plus three non-profit organizations (the Cheat Lake Environment And Recreation Association [CLEAR], the Citizens for Alternatives to Longview [CALP], and the Citizens for Responsible Development). The initial Hearing on this waiver appeal is set for April 18th in Charleston. Note -- The NPDES ("storm water and waste water") permit for the Longview plant was granted by the WV Department of Environmental Quality on October 16, 2006. This Permit WV0116238 was appealed by the Fort Martin Community Association on November 14, 2006, as Appeal No. 06-31-EQB before the WV Environmental Quality Board (EQB). Two days of Hearings have been held in Charleston. Initial Briefs are due from the parties to this Appeal on or near April 30th, and then Rebuttal Briefs will be filed on or near May 15th. The EQB will then render a decision. It is claimed that Longview did not provide accurate and complete information in the permit application and that the WV-DEP did not follow systematic or proper procedures in granting the permit; and, that the permit violates the public interest and needs to be voided. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA (CLARKSBURG) Jarrett F. Jamison III, ) Fort Martin Community Association and ) Forks of Cheat Forest Property ) Owners Association, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 1:07 cv 41 vs. ) ) ) ) Longview Power, LLC, ) Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT ________________________________________________________________________ Plaintiffs, Jarrett F. Jamison III, Fort Martin Community Association and Forks of Cheat Forest Property Owners Association, allege as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. Plaintiffs, Jarrett F. Jamison III, Fort Martin Community Association and Forks of Cheat Forest Property Owners Association, bring this citizen suit against Defendant Longview Power, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; for declaratory and injunctive relief and the imposition of civil penalties under the Federal Clean Air Act (“the Act”), 42 U.S.C. §§7401-7671(q). This action seeks an order enjoining Defendant from constructing or proposing to construct a merchant power plant (“the Power Plant”) near Maidsville, in Cass District, Monongalia County, West Virginia without a valid Prevention of Significant Deterioration (“PSD”) permit. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2. This citizen suit is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §7604(a)(3). As such, this Court has subject matter jurisdiction of this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §7604(a) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1355. 3. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §7904(c)(1) because the Power Plant is located in this District. PARTIES 4. Plaintiff Jarrett F. Jamison III, is a resident of Cass District, Monongalia County, West Virginia. Fort Martin Community Association (hereinafter FMCA) and Forks of Cheat Forest Property Owners Association (hereinafter FOCF) are non-profit organizations consisting of residents of Monongalia County, West Virginia who live in close proximity to the proposed Power Plant. The associations were formed, in part, to preserve, protect, and enhance the natural environment. Plaintiff Jamison and the members of Plaintiff associations, own real estate, work, recreate, grow crops and study in and near areas affected by the proposed Power Plant. The air quality of these areas affects the recreational, aesthetic, and economic interests of Plaintiffs. The interests of Plaintiffs will be adversely affected by pollution from the Power Plant because the level of pollutants to be discharged from the proposed Power Plant will degrade air quality, injuring and/or damaging wildlife, vegetation, and real estate in areas used by Plaintiffs, and harm the aesthetic enjoyment of these areas by Plaintiffs. Construction of the proposed Power Plant without a valid PSD permit will also adversely affect the health of Plaintiffs. An order of this Court directing Defendant to procure a valid PSD permit prior to constructing the Power Plant will redress the injuries to Plaintiffs because of the recent significant advances in pollution control technologies that will be required under a new permit. 5. Defendant Longview Power, LLC is a Delaware for-profit limited liability company with its principal place of business located at 1040 Great Plains Avenue, Needham, Massachusetts. Longview was incorporated and became qualified to perform business in West Virginia on May 24, 2001. CLAIM FOR RELIEF DEFENDANT DOES NOT CURRENTLY HAVE A REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION PERMIT UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT 6. Plaintiffs, re-allege paragraphs 1 through 5 above as if fully alleged herein. 7. The Clean Air Act (“CAA” or “the Act”) is designed to protect and enhance the quality of the nation’s air. 42 U.S.C. § 7401(b)(1). One of the programs that the CAA established to achieve that goal is the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (“PSD”) Program. See 42 U.S.C. § 7401, et al. 8. In general, the PSD program imposes limitations on the ambient air quality impact of new major stationary sources and requires such facilities to install the “best available control technology” (“BACT”) for each pollutant subject to regulation under the Act that is emitted from, or that results from, such facilities. 42 U.S.C. § 7475(a)(4). 9. Under the PSD program, “no major emitting facility on which construction is commenced after August 7, 1977, may be constructed in any area to which [the PSD program] applies unless a permit has been issued for such proposed facility in accordance with this part setting forth emission limitations for such facility which conform to the requirements of this part [.]” 42 U.S.C. § 7475(a). 10. The U.S. EPA has delegated authority to the State of West Virginia to carry out the PSD program in that state. The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is the agency responsible for administering the PSD program in West Virginia. DEP’s PSD regulations, which have been approved by the EPA and which are in effect as federal law in West Virginia’s State Implementation Plan under 42 U.S.C. § 7410, are contained in 47 CSR Part 14. 11. Under 47 CSR 14-7.1., no person may construct a major stationary source without a permit issued by DEP under that section. Under 47 CSR 14-8.2., the permitted source must install BACT to control regulated pollutants from the source. 12. The Power Plant is a major stationary source as defined in 47 CSR 14-2.43. 13. The Director of DAQ issued a PSD construction permit to Defendant Longview Power, LLC to Construct an Electric Power Generation Facility on March 2, 2004. 14. On August 4, 2004, Defendant Longview Power, LLC entered into a settlement agreement with certain parties who had appealed the granting of the permit to the West Virginia Air Quality Board. On the same day the settlement agreement was incorporated into a Consent Order of the Air Quality Board signed by the Chairman of the Board. The Consent Order added restrictions to the original permit. The Consent Order did not change the effective date of the permit entered on March 2, 2004. 15. Subsequently, the terms of the settlement agreement between Longview Power, LLC and the certain parties who had appealed the original granting of the permit, where incorporated into a revised permit, however, the “ effective date” was never changed from March 2, 2004. 16. By letter dated September 2, 2005, to counsel for the Defendant Longview Power, LLC, the Director of DAQ opined that the effective date of the “revised permit is August 4, 2004” but took no action to amend the permit. 17. Under 47 CSR 14-8.4., DEP’s BACT determination for a PSD permit must occur no later than eighteen months prior to construction of the project. Thus, 18 months after the permit is issued, the BACT determination expires, and the permit is no longer valid. In addition, 45 CSR 14-19.2., provides as follows: The Secretary shall suspend or revoke a permit if, after eighteen (18) months from the date of issuance the holder of the permit cannot provide the Secretary, at the Secretary’s request, with written proof of a good faith effort that such construction, modification, or relocation has commenced and remains ongoing. Such proof shall be provided not later than thirty (30) days after the Secretary’s request. 18. By letter dated January 5, 2006, Mr. Robert Place of Longview Power, LLC requested “…an extension of the Permit to allow time for the issuance of the remaining pre-construction permits needed for the Project.” 19. By letter dated February 1, 2006, to Mr. Place, the Director of DAQ summarily granted a “…twelve-month extension of the deadline to commence construction authorized in the permit…” The letter did not give a specific time frame for the extension and did not cite any authority to support such an extension. 20. West Virginia’s PSD regulations in 47 CSR Part 14, do not authorize DEP to extend the 18-month commencement period. 21. Defendant Longview Power, LLC, has entered into agreements with other companies for equipment and/or construction services for the proposed Power Plant, the details of which are unknown to the Plaintiffs. 22. The Director of DAQ refuses to suspend or revoke the permit granted to Longview Power, LLC granted on March 2, 2004. 23. Defendant Longview Power currently does not have a valid PSD construction permit for the Power Plant under the Clean Air Act, the West Vi rginia State Implementation Plan, and 47 CSR Part 14. 24. Any actions by Defendant to construct the Power Plant without a valid PSD construction permit violate the Clean Air Act and are subject to an injunction and the imposition of civil penalties under 42 U.S.C. §§ 7604(a) and 7413(b). 25. The violations herein are subject to enforcement by citizens. 42 U.S.C. § 7604(a),(f). WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for the following relief: A. A temporary and permanent injunction requiring Defendant to stop actual construction activities of the Power Plant until Defendant has a valid PSD permit; B. A declaration that Defendant’s construction activities regarding the Power Plant after September 2, 2005 are illegal; C. An order requiring Defendant to pay a fine for each day that Defendant constructs or propose to construct the Power Plant without a valid PSD permit. See 42 U.S.C. §7604(a) and § 7413(b); D. An order requiring Defendant to pay the costs of litigation, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees; and E. All other relief the Court deems just and proper. Jarrett F. Jamison III Fort Martin Community Association Forks of Cheat Forest Property Owners Association / s / Phillip D. Gaujot __________________________________________ Phillip D. Gaujot (SB#1355) Counsel for Plaintiffs 445 Lakeview Drive Morgantown, WV 26508 (304) 594-3904 . ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Allegheny & AEP | more
by Duane330＠aol.com 18 Mar '07

18 Mar '07

ALLEGHENY to install scrubbers at Fort Martin Charleston Gazette, page 2-C, March 16, 2007. Maidsville --- Allegheny Energy Inc. has hired a contractor to install scrubbers to reduce pollution at its Fort Martin power station, the company announced this past Thursday. The Greensburg, Pa-based company signed the agreement with Washington Group International, which will install flue gas desulfurization systems, also called scrubbers, to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions at its Maidsville power plant. The project is expected to create 350 construction jobs, the company said in a new release. Other full-time jobs to operate and maintain the equipment will be created once construction is complete. "This project will bring cleaner air and more jobs to West Virginia, and allow us to use more locally sourced coal," Paul J. Evanson, chairman, president and chief executive officer of Allegheny Energy, said in the prepared statement. The state Public Service Commission has approved the company's plan to pay for the $550 million pollution control project. The company will sell $450 million worth of bonds and increase customer rates to repay them, Allegheny has said. The typical residential customer's bill of about $70 a month is expected to go up by about $3.50 a month. The installation of the scrubbers is scheduled to be completed in 2009. [NOTE: Allegheny Energy is planning to assemble scrubbers for the Hatsfield Ferry plant also at the Ft. Martin plant, then transport them via river barges downstream to the Hatsfield Ferry plant, opposite Masontown, Pa, which is just a few miles north of Pt. Marion. Work space at Hatsfield Ferry is limited. ] <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alstom and American Electric Power sign agreement to bring C02 capture technology to commercial scale by 2011 Press Release for Alstom: 15 March 2007 Alstom, a full-service power industry services company based in France, and American Electric Power (AEP) today signed a Memorandum of Understanding to bring Alstom’s chilled ammonia process for CO2 capture to full commercial scale of up to 200 MW by 2011. This is a major step in demonstrating post-combustion carbon capture. The technology has the great advantage versus other technologies of being fully applicable not only for new power plants, but also for the retrofit of existing coal-fired power plants. The project will be implemented in two phases. In phase one, Alstom and AEP will jointly develop a 30 MWth product validation plant that will capture CO2 from flue gas emitted from AEP’s 1300 MW Mountaineer Plant located in New Haven, West Virginia. It is targeted to capture up to 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year. The captured CO2 will be designated for geological storage in deep saline aquifers at the site. This pilot is scheduled for start-up at the end of 2008 and will operate for approximately 12-18 months. In phase two, Alstom will design, construct and commission a commercial scale of up to 200 MW CO2 capture system on one of the 450 MW coal-fired units at its Northeastern Station in Oologah, Oklahoma. The system is scheduled for start-up in late 2011. It is expected to capture about 1.5 million tonnes of CO2 a year, commercially validating this promising technology. The CO2 captured at Northeastern Station will be used for enhanced oil recovery. Alstom’s post-combustion process uses chilled ammonia to capture CO2. This process dramatically reduces the energy required to capture carbon dioxide and isolates it in a highly concentrated, high-pressure form. In laboratory testing sponsored by EPRI and others, Alstom’s process has demonstrated the potential to capture over 90% of CO2 at a cost that is far less expensive than other carbon capture technologies. The isolated CO2, once captured, can be used commercially or stored in suitable underground geological sites. Philippe Joubert, President of Alstom Power Systems, said: ”We are extremely proud that AEP has chosen Alstom’s clean coal technology for this major project. Our partnership with AEP will result in the world’s first clean coal power plant and will be applicable not only for new plants but also for existing power plants”. About Alstom Alstom sets the benchmark for innovative, environmentally friendly technologies in the world of power and rail transport infrastructure. Alstom built the fastest train and the highest capacity automated metro in the world, and provides turnkey integrated power plant solutions and associated services for a wide variety of energy sources, including hydro, gas and coal. The Group employs 60,000 people in 70 countries, and had sales of € 13.4 billion in 2005/06. Please contact ALSTOM at : 3 avenue André Malraux 92309 Levallois-Perret Cedex, France. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are indebted to Herman Rieke for the above Press Release, as his son-in-law is Vice President for the Alstom Power Division. Thank you very much, Herman. ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

AEP carbon dioxide control
by Duane330＠aol.com 17 Mar '07

17 Mar '07

AEP Endorses 'Path to Sustainability' Statement of the Global Roundtable on Climate Change COLUMBUS, Ohio, Feb. 20 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- American Electric Power (NYSE: _AEP_ (http://studio.financialcontent.com/Engine?Account=prnewswire&PageName=QUOTE…) ) is one of more than 85 international companies and organizations who signed a statement released today that proposes a post-Kyoto framework for addressing global climate change. "The Path to Climate Change Sustainability: A Joint Statement by the Global Roundtable on Climate Change" puts forth principles for creating an effective global approach to climate policy. "AEP has been actively engaged in efforts aimed at successfully addressing global climate change since the early 1990s," said Michael G. Morris, AEP chairman, president and chief executive officer. "As we support the effort to develop a well-thought-out approach to carbon controls in the United States, we must remember that global warming is a global issue that will require a global solution. The joint statement of the Global Roundtable on Climate Change outlines the core aspects of a realistic global policy on climate change that will be critical for effectively stabilizing atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide while meeting the global need for energy, economic growth and sustainable development." Key principles in "The Path to Climate Change Sustainability" include: involving all significant sectors of the economy, including all major emitters of greenhouse gases, developing market-based emission reduction mechanisms with incentives for early action, and supporting energy efficiency and deployment of clean coal and carbon capture and storage technologies. Signing the joint statement also includes a commitment from AEP to continue its efforts to reduce and offset its greenhouse gas emissions, advance technology and work to increase public and industry understanding of both the risks of climate change and potential solutions. AEP has led the U.S. electric utility industry in taking action to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. AEP was the first and largest U.S. utility to join the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), the world's first and North America's only voluntary, legally binding greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction and trading program. As a member of CCX, AEP committed to gradually reduce, avoid or sequester its GHG emissions to 6 percent below the average of its 1998 to 2001 emission levels by 2010. Through this commitment, AEP will reduce or offset approximately 46 million metric tons of GHG emissions by the end of the decade. AEP is achieving its GHG reductions through a broad portfolio of actions, including power plant efficiency improvements, renewable generation such as wind and biomass co-firing, off-system GHG reduction projects, reforestation projects and the potential purchase of emission credits through CCX. AEP has already made efficiency improvements to its current generating fleet, retired inefficient generation, enhanced the performance of its nuclear generation and expanded its use of renewable generation. The company is one of the larger generators and distributors of wind energy in the United States, operating 310 megawatts (MW) of wind generation in Texas and purchasing an additional 373 MW of wind generation from wind facilities in Oklahoma and Texas. AEP also has invested more than $25 million in terrestrial sequestration projects designed to conserve and reforest sensitive areas and offset more than 20 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) over the next 40 years. Going forward, AEP is focused on developing and deploying new technology that will reduce the GHG emissions of future coal-fueled power plants. In August 2004, AEP was the first electric utility to announce plans to scale up Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) technology to build baseload, coal-fueled power plants with less environmental impact. AEP has initiated the regulatory approval process in Ohio and West Virginia to build one large, commercial-scale (629-MW) IGCC plant in each state. Both plants would be designed to accommodate retrofit of technology to capture CO2 emissions. A strong supporter of research to address GHG emissions from coal-fueled power generation, AEP is a member of the FutureGen Alliance, which, in conjunction with the Department of Energy, will build the world's first nearly emission-free plant to produce electricity and hydrogen from coal while capturing and permanently storing CO2 in geologic formations. Additionally, AEP's Mountaineer Plant in New Haven, W.Va., is the site of a $4.2 million carbon sequestration research project through which scientists from Battelle Memorial Institute are seeking to better understand the capability of deep saline aquifers for permanent and ecologically safe storage of carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. AEP is one of the largest electric utilities in the United States, delivering electricity to more than 5 million customers in 11 states. AEP ranks among the nation's largest generators of electricity, owning nearly 36,000 megawatts of generating capacity in the U.S. AEP also owns the nation's largest electricity transmission system, a nearly 39,000-mile network that includes more 765 kilovolt extra-high voltage transmission lines than all other U.S. transmission systems combined. AEP's utility units operate as AEP Ohio, AEP Texas, Appalachian Power (in Virginia and West Virginia), AEP Appalachian Power (in Tennessee), Indiana Michigan Power, Kentucky Power, Public Service Company of Oklahoma, and Southwestern Electric Power Company (in Arkansas, Louisiana and east Texas). The company is based in Columbus, Ohio. MEDIA CONTACT: Melissa McHenry Manager, Corporate Media Relations 614/716-1120 SOURCE American Electric Power >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Charleston Gazette. March 16, 2007 AEP to capture carbon at two plants, by Ken Ward Jr., Staff writer American Electric Power will begin to capture carbon dioxide emissions at two of its coal-fired power plants, including one in West Virginia, the company announced Thursday. AEP said it would perform an advanced test of new “carbon capture” technology next year at its Mountaineer Plant in New Haven, Mason County. When those tests are completed, AEP plans to deploy the equipment on a commercial scale at its Northeastern Station in Oologah, Okla. That project is scheduled for 2011. The projects mark the first large-scale use of technology that uses chilled ammonia to scrub carbon dioxide from power plant emissions. “With Congress expected to take action on greenhouse gas issues in climate legislation, it’s time to advance this technology for commercial use,” said Michael G. Morris, AEP’s chairman, president and chief executive. Carbon dioxide it the primary “greenhouse gas” that is building up in the atmosphere, trapping heat near the Earth, and warming the planet. Global warming could cause rising seal levels, unprecedented heat waves, floods, soil erosion, water shortages and other climate changes. In the U.S., power plants produce 5.8 billion tons of carbon dioxide a year, and account for 39 percent of nationwide carbon emissions. Just two months ago, AEP announced that it would delay for at least six months construction of two new coal gasification power plants in West Virginia and Ohio. The Columbus, Ohio-based utility cited increased cost estimates. Those two plants would use a process called Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle, or IGCC, which turns coal into a gas before it is burned. IGCC plants do not necessarily collect carbon emissions to keep them out of the atmosphere, and the AEP plants were not designed to do so. But their design makes it easier to retrofit them for such a process later. Still, the two projects announced Thursday would collect carbon dioxide emissions after coal is burned, while the IGCC plants would strip out the carbon gases before the coal is burned. Melissa McHenry, an AEP spokeswoman, said the company does not believe that IGCC plants can replace all existing coal-fired power plants anytime soon. So, she said, utilities need to examine ways to retrofit existing plants to capture carbon dioxide post-combustion. “We are focused on both technologies,” McHenry said. In the projects announced Thursday, chilled ammonia is used to scrub carbon dioxide from power plant flue gases. The carbon dioxide is compressed, and can be pumped underground for storage or to enhance oil recovery. The first project will test the method on a small emissions stream — representing about 30 megawatts of the plant’s total production of 1,300 megawatts — at the Mountaineer Plant, AEP said. This process should capture about 110,000 tons of carbon dioxide. In 2005, the Mountaineer Plant emitted a total of 9.3 million tons of carbon dioxide, officials said. Carbon dioxide captured from Mountaineer will be pumped underground nearby, as part of a continuing experiment on carbon sequestration being funded in part by the U.S. Department of Energy. The second project will install the carbon capture system on the entire 450-megawatt Northeastern Station in Oklahoma. There, carbon that is captured will be sold to oil companies, which will pump it underground to force out more oil and gas. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

National Children's Study gets funds
by Duane330＠aol.com 08 Mar '07

08 Mar '07

WHAT IS THE NATIONAL CHILDREN'S STUDY? The National Children's Study will examine the effects of environmental influences on the health and development of more than 100,000 children across the United States with the goal to improve their health and well-being. The study has designated 105 locations in the United States where it will recruit and enroll eligible participants, and track them from before birth until their 21st birthday. The pace of the study preparations benefited from a recent Congressional appropriation of funds for fiscal year 2007. For more information, go to _http://www.nationalchildrensstudy.gov/about/mission/index.cfm_ (http://www.nationalchildrensstudy.gov/about/mission/index.cfm) ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Global Warming Bus to D.C. <3/20/07>
by Duane330＠aol.com 08 Mar '07

08 Mar '07

To: Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition From: Duane Nichols, Convenor RE: Global Warming Bus to D.C. I hope you can join us in D.C. We will have a bus leave from Morgantown at 6 AM on March 20th from WVU. The bus will leave and return from the Agricultural Sciences Building. The Bus will leave D.C. and head back to Morgantown at 4 PM Our goal is to have 50 people join us from West Virginia. I will be visiting Morgantown on March 14th and 15th to help recruit for the event. Thanks so much for your help! Samuel Goldman Climate Crisis Action Day Organizer samuelrgoldman(a)gmail.com 202-744-3809 Climate Crisis Action Day is March 20, 2007 _www.climatecrisisaction.org_ (http://www.climatecrisisaction.org) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOTE: Click on the web site just above to find out more on details and to sign up for the trip.............. Temperatures are rising across the globe, and the impacts are devastating. But a new Congress is in session, and we have an opportunity unlike any we've seen in years. That's where you come in. Join thousands of dedicated activists for an action day at the US Capitol building in Washington, DC on March 20, 2007, along with politicians, celebrities, and community leaders. We'll even take you into the halls of Congress to meet your elected officials. What are we asking for? Sensible solutions to global warming, a path to a clean energy future, and permanent protections for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge – a land perpetually threatened by a warming planet. YES! I want to come to Washington, DC at 11am on March 20th. Sign up at: _www.climatecrisisaction.org_ (http://www.climatecrisisaction.org) ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Selected News Updates
by Duane330＠aol.com 06 Mar '07

06 Mar '07

The Charleston Gazette, March 06, 2007, Lack of safety check cited in mine roof fall death By Ken Ward Jr., Staff writer Operators of a Monongalia County coal mine did not make sure the mine was safe before a December roof fall that killed a worker, state investigators have concluded. Inspectors faulted Dana Mining Co. in the Dec. 17 death of mine electrician John Elliott, 26, of Newburg, according a new report from the state Office of Miners' Health, Safety and Training. "The active workings of the mine had not been completely examined by the pre-shift examiners before the miners of such shift were allowed to enter the mine," says the report, which was recently released to Elliott's family and then made public. In their report, state inspectors also cited Dana Mining foreman Ken Losh individually for his alleged failure to perform a proper preshift safety check. The death occurred at Dana Mining's Prime No. 1 Mine near Maidsville, outside Morgantown. James L. Laurita Jr. of Morgantown is president of the company, according to records from the state secretary of state's office. At the time of the accident, Elliott, Losh and a third worker, Gary Mayle, were riding into the mine on a rubber-tired mantrip, according to the state report. Mayle noticed the roof starting to fall, and told Losh, who stopped the mantrip and tried to back up, the report said. All three men jumped from the vehicle and attempted to run away. Mayle made it out safely. Losh was knocked down by falling roof, but was unhurt and crawled to safety, the report said. Elliott was hit by the roof fall and pinned against the mantrip, the report said. The roof fall measured 28 feet long, 20 feet wide and 5.5 feet thick, the state report said. Inspectors found that the roof in the roadway where the fall occurred "was not supported or otherwise controlled adequately to protect" against roof falls, the report said. The report recommended that the company be considered for a "special assessment," which could result in a more significant fine. One day before Elliott was killed, additional wooden roof supports, called cribs, were installed in the area where the accident occurred, an indication that the company was having roof problems there, the report said. Two days after Elliott was killed, the company submitted a plan to install additional roof bolts in the same area, the state report said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Boston Globe, GLOBE EDITORIAL, Dethroning King Coal, March 5, 2007 WITH PRESIDENT BUSH finally acknowledging climate change but still opposing mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions, environmentalists have to content themselves with limited victories in the effort to curb global warming. There were two such signs of progress recently. First, Al Gore's film on climate change won an Academy Award for best documentary. Second, the buyers of the biggest utility in Texas have agreed to reduce the number of new coal-fired generating plants to be built by TXU from 11 to three. The success of the film and the green buyout demonstrate that both the public and the business world are ahead of the Bush administration when it comes to taking the threat of a warming planet seriously. The report last month by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change left little doubt that humankind is remaking the planet's climate through emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases that form a heat-trapping layer in the atmosphere. Changing this course on a global basis will require the kind of leadership from the United States that has been sadly lacking. But the election last November brought to power on Capitol Hill senators and representatives who are determined to tackle this problem. Two of them, Democratic Senators Barbara Boxer of California and Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, have warned utility owners that coal-fired plants they are now hurrying to build will not be grandfathered under any legislation they pass that restricts carbon dioxide emissions. Coal yields more carbon dioxide than other hydrocarbons, but US utilities have plans on the drawing board to build 150 plants using this relatively cheap and abundant fuel. Make that 142 after the negotiations between the TXU buyers and leaders of environmental organizations. Whether the scaling back of TXU's coal plans will set an example for other utilities remains to be seen. Last week, a leadingclimate change scientist for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, James Hansen, said the nation should put a moratorium on all new coal-burning plants and plan to "bulldoze" by midcentury any such plants that do not include technology for capturing and burying their carbon dioxide emissions. The TXU deal would not pass muster with Hansen, but the agreement does include a commitment by the utility to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, support a $400 million efficiency program, and back mandatory national caps on greenhouse gas emissions. That puts TXU in the same camp as major corporations like GE and Du Pont, and leading presidential contenders in both parties. Thanks to the likes of Al Gore and James Hansen, the public and the corporate boardroom are preparing for the kind of climate change action that the Bush administration still shrinks from. Observer-Reporter, Washington, PA, Monday, March 5, 2007 Nemacolin plant should proceed Several environmental groups announced last week that they intend to file another lawsuit to halt construction of a waste-coal fired power plant in Nemacolin. Group Against Smog and Pollution, National Parks Conservation Association and Sierra Club filed a notice of intent to sue the plant developer, Wellington Development LLC, in federal court. Two of the groups, Group Against Smog and Pollution and National Parks Conservation Association, are seeking to appeal the issuance of the company's air quality permit in state court. The groups will claim in their federal suit that Wellington did not begin construction of its plant before its air quality permit expired. Stanley Sears of Wellington Development said the lawsuit is just another attempt to delay the project. We agree. The company received an air quality permit from DEP in June 2005. The issuance of the permit was subsequently appealed to the state Environmental Hearing Board, which dismissed the appeal. The Group Against Smog and Pollution and the National Parks Conservation Association then filed a petition for review in December with the state's Commonwealth Court. Briefs are expected to be filed on that suit this month. We urge the court to refuse review, if for no other reason than to quiet the opposition from environmental groups whose goals, it seems, are to oppose anything put into the air other than pixie dust. We recognize supporting a power plant is not a popular position, but we have supported Wellington's efforts because of the company's commitment to meet or exceed most environmental standards. The $800 million plant is expected to burn more than 3.1 million tons of waste coal annually from the Nemacolin, Isabella, LaBelle and Clyde coal refuse piles. We thought initially, and we do now, that the main benefit of this project was that it would placate both environmentalists and economists. The lawsuits need to stop. Construction has begun, and we take the position it should continue. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Daily American, March 3, 2007, Coal could help country be 'energy independent' By ROB GEBHART, Daily American Staff Writer Some people are hoping hydrogen someday powers cars. Others are looking toward technology that enables cars to run on electric. Rep. Bill Shuster wants to see the region's coal do the job. It could happen if technology that enables coal to be converted to liquid fuel is implemented in the state. Shuster, R-Hollidaysburg, is co-sponsoring legislation that would provide tax incentives for investors in coal-to-liquid-fuel plants. Advocates of the technology say it is an environmentally friendly means of power production that would make the nation energy independent. During a telephone interview, Shuster said a coal-to-liquid-fuel plant in Pennsylvania would be a great benefit to areas like Somerset County, which sit upon large coal reserves. "Because Pennsylvania is such a large coal producing state, I think it's natural to build the facilities in the state," Shuster said. The technology is as simple as taking a piece of coal and liquefying it into a fuel or converting it into a gas, Corey Henry, spokesman for the National Mining Association, said. Any coal in the United States is suitable for coal-to-liquid-fuel use. The fuel the process produces can be burned in the cars and trucks on the road today. Shuster is promoting coal gasification as a means of making the country independent of foreign energy. The United States possesses 27 percent of the world's coal supply, he said. The National Mining Association has estimated the country's coal reserves are sufficient to power the nation for the next 240 years. The legislation would authorize the Department of Energy to distribute loan guarantees for America's first coal-to-liquid fuel plants. To qualify for the loan guarantees, these plants must have a minimum production of 10,000 barrels a day and the loan guarantee program would expire once 10 large-scale plants are built or commercial production reaches 100,000 barrels of coal-to-liquid-fuel daily. There are no technological barriers for creating coal-to-liquid-fuel plants in the United States, Henry said. The main obstacle is financial. "The technology is proven, but it's not in use in the U.S.," he said. Coal gasification has been used in other parts of the world for many years already, he noted. In South Africa, fuel has been created with coal-to-liquid technology for the past 30 years; during Apartheid, South Africa was forced to develop the plants because many countries refused to ship oil there. Today, the technology accounts for about 30 percent of the nation's fuel. No plants have been built here because production fees are cost-prohibitive, Henry said. Cost estimates for the plants range in the billions of dollars. Henry said it's his hope that the tax incentives offered by the legislature would encourage investors to build a "first fleet" of coal to liquid fuel plants. Once the technology proves profitable, Henry said he believes investors will stake the money on their own. The government also has to subsidize coal-to-liquid-fuel plants to support investors in the event that petro-states try to manipulate the market, Shuster said. Investors are worried that when a coal-to-liquid-fuel plant begins producing gas, petro-states will drop the cost of crude oil and undercut the market, he said. Right now, when oil costs $60 a barrel, investing in a coal-to-liquid-fuel plant makes economic sense to investors. But when the price of oil drops below $40 a barrel, it's harder for private investors to justify the expensive plants. Plans for a plant in eastern Pennsylvania have been under discussion for the past several years. The federal government had pledged to contribute $100 million of the next budget to construction costs, but that money has since been removed from the budget by the Bush administration. The state's Congressional delegation and Gov. Ed Rendell cried foul and have since been working to restore the funding. Shuster said the defunding has the potential to derail the project. "If we don't have the $100 million, it's not going to move forward," Shuster said. Pennsylvania coal companies are in support of the effort. "There's a big potential for the expansion of the use of coal," if liquid fuels facilities would be built, said Stan Geary, spokesman for the Pennsylvania Coal Association. The process can use coal of an inferior quality - coal that ranks low enough in quality that it cannot be burnt in traditional coal fired power plants because even scrubbers cannot get it clean, Geary said. Yet the process of converting the coal to liquid is relatively clean, Geary said. It produces 85 percent less carbon emissions than traditional coal-fired power plants. And scientists are working on means to capture those emissions and sequester them in caves underground. The technology has the potential to specifically benefit Somerset County coal mines, PBS Coal spokesman Hank Parke said. "I think it's really going to be the future of the country being more energy independent," Parke said. He said his main concern with the technology is that any plant that is built in the state would burn the type of coal Pennsylvania produces, and not be specifically designed for coal from Wyoming, for example. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Journal, March 05, 2007, Activist wants end to harmful mining By EDWARD MARSHALL / Journal Staff Writer CHARLES TOWN - Judy Bonds' family has lived in southern West Virginia for the past ten generations, but the effects of mountaintop removal coal mining is making her home a wasteland and endangering that part of the state's way of life, she said. Bonds, a grassroots activist and 2002 recipient of the Goldman Environmental Prize for North America, brought her message calling for such mining practices to cease to Charles Town Sunday during a special event. Bonds, a co-director of Coal River Mountain Watch, said coal companies in West Virginia are using three million pounds of explosives a day to blow up and "bomb the people" of southern West Virginia by blowing the tops off of mountains. "It creates a wasteland on top which is devoid of trees and vegetation so when it rains the runoff causes flooding in the valleys and (to) the people," Bonds said. "We have children who sleep fully clothed at night because of the rain. We have people suffering from air pollution from the blasting effects." She also said that after the tops of these mountains are blasted off and the coal is mined, the remains of the mountains are pushed into the valleys and the streams below. "They've covered up already a thousand miles of streams," said Bonds, adding the people of southern West Virginia are being sacrificed for "so-called" cheap electricity. "There's nothing cheap about it when you poison people," said Bonds, adding taxpayers will ultimatley be the ones to pay the bill for flooding and the effects of such mining practices on people's health. "What we're trying to do is literally educate people all over America and other parts of the country about what happens when they flip that light switch on, she said." Bonds rejects the friendly image of clean coal that is promoted by large coal companies in the state. "Even if we could get marshmallows to come out of the smokestacks if you can't dig it clean, you can't burn it clean. They cannot dig the coal cleanly in Appalachia, in Southern West Virginia by blowing the tops off of mountains, by bombing the people that live there and covering up streams," Bonds said. "You haven't lived until you've seen black sludge going down the stream by your house." Bonds has been involved in the cause to stop mountaintop removal mining since 1998, after a Massey Energy subsidiary moved into her "little hollow" where generations of her family had lived. Before long coal dust blanketed the region and her grandson would be diagnosed with asthma. "They started letting loose black sludge water down in our creek and there was fish kill. My grandson stood in a stream full of dead fish," she said. "It was nonstop coal truck traffic and trains with no regard for the people that lived there." While many moved away, Bonds remained to fight until she found out about a huge sludge dam that was being built above her home. "It was the irresponsible mining techniques of Massey Energy that brought me into this fight," she said. Bonds is no stranger to the coal industry. Her father, grandfather, brother and cousin were all coal miners. Now she is a proponent for clean, renewable energy sources. "This is an industry that could cause an economic boom to this state and it's forever. It's not like coal. It's infinite," she said. "There are alternatives; we just have to look at those." Bonds, who said the coal industry contributed heavily to politicians, said people who want change should contact their elected leaders, both statewide and national. "We want a change," Bonds said. "We want clean, renewable energy. We want a future for our children and a future for West Virginia." ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Texas Utilities Make a "U"-Turn
by Duane330＠aol.com 27 Feb '07

27 Feb '07

TXU's emissions U-turn shocks power industry By _Jasmina Kelemen_ (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/mailto.asp?x=106+107+101+108+101+109+101+11… 533-a7e8-cc903d8e243b}&siteid=mktw) , MarketWatch, February 26, 2007 HOUSTON (MarketWatch) -- TXU Corp.'s decision to whittle down plans to build 11 carbon-spewing, coal-fired power plants as part of its buyout deal with private-equity firms sent a chill Monday through both Wall Street and Washington, signaling that utilities can no longer afford to ignore climate change. But with coal becoming too toxic to handle, nuclear plants taking too long to build and natural-gas prices going through the roof, little in the way of specifics is being offered on how utilities will provide clean and affordable power to an energy-hungry nation as more states push to deregulate their electrical grid and open it to the market's machinations. Environmentalists cheered the announcement that TXU was axing eight of 11 coal-fired power plants that it had planned to build in Texas by 2010 as part of a $45 billion buyout deal with Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., Texas Pacific Group and Goldman Sachs Group. Prior to announcing the largest leveraged buyout in corporate history, the private equity firms spent about two weeks negotiating with powerful environmental groups to fashion a takeover proposal that would bring the activists on board and head off any potential costly litigation. "The decision by the buyers to reach out to our organization reflects a conclusion by the business community that they can't simply ignore global warming and come up with sound business strategies," said Dave Hawkins, director of the Natural Resource Defense Council's Climate Center during a call with journalists. "It's an earthquake that happened in Texas but the shock waves will be felt in Wall Street and Washington." People on Wall Street said the deal's ramifications went beyond the power industry, making it clear carbon emissions will be a factor for the entire economy. "It's a wake-up call to the whole industry and the whole economy," said Jeffrey Holzschuh, a vice chairman at Morgan Stanley. "The auto guys, the airline industry, everyone" has to deal with carbon emissions now, he said. Industry watchers in and outside the investment community consider it a near given that some sort of legislation restricting carbon dioxide emissions is on the horizon. For the power industry, this means balancing their customers' power needs against a hazy notion of potentially stricter air-quality regulations. "It's very difficult to build and design a plant that would have the ability to control for emissions before they know what those regulations are going to be," said Mark Morey, a director at Cambridge Energy Research Associates. In the 1990s, natural-gas replaced coal as utilities' fuel of choice, embraced as a cleaner and cheaper way to generate electricity while tapping secure and plentiful domestic supplies. In fact, gas was so cheap, around $2 per million British thermal units, that many state regulators said it was time to open their power markets to competition, thinking deregulation would inject more capital investment into the sector. For a time it worked. In the past decade, most of the country embarked on an aggressive buildup of power plants, 99% of which burned natural-gas, said Charles Gaffney, a utility analyst that manages the Eaton Vance Utility Fund. Not-so-cheap gas Meanwhile, natural-gas prices have risen steadily, peaking around $15 per million Btu in the weeks after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita thrashed the Gulf Coast oil and gas fields, eventually leveling off just below $8 per million Btu. Higher natural gas prices have meant higher electricity bills, especially in the states that have gone farthest toward deregulation, prompting many to demand lawmakers roll back plans to completely open their power markets and extend rate caps to shield consumers from rising costs. As a result, utilities are once again searching for cheaper fuel, bringing coal and nuclear power back to the table. But nuclear power plants are hugely expensive and take far longer to build than coal-fired plants and therefore cannot be relied upon to quickly meet growing power needs. "We are looking at potential (power) shortages say within 5-10 years if no new facilities are built," said Terry Hadley with the Texas Public Utilities Commission prior to the announcement of TXU's buyout deal. Prior to agreeing to the takeover, TXU insisted Texas needed its 11 power plants or else the Lone Star State risked the rolling blackouts that beset California at the start of the century. The Texas powerhouse has yet to spell out how it will replace the megawatts lost as a result of scrapping its plans and has not returned repeated calls and e-mails seeking a response. Other than vague calls for more energy efficiency programs, analysts and activists cheering the deal are also largely sidestepping the question of what power source will fill the looming gap on the state grid while the industry and its stakeholders look to Washington for further clarification on carbon emissions. But unless legislators mandate lower prices, electricity bills clearly will continue to rise along with the cost of generating power. Around the country, there are about 150 new coal-fired power plants on the drawing board. Following TXU's move, many will likely have to recalculate their expansion plans. "As utilities seek low-cost generation capacity, it's clear that coal continues to look attractive. But as air quality standards become more stringent, we expect the costs will continue to increase," said Eric Kane, an analyst with Innovest Strategic Value Advisors. Jasmina Kelemen is a MarketWatch reporter based in Houston. ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Texas: power plants & non-attainment
by Duane330＠aol.com 26 Feb '07

26 Feb '07

Questions continue to arise in coal debates By KATE BOSWELL, Staff writer, The Baylor University Lariat, February 23, 2007 Gov. Rick Perry's October 2005 executive order to fast-track permits for 18 coal-fired power plants met with immediate controversy, which has reached a fever pitch in Central Texas. State District Judge Stephen Yelenosky's Tuesday ruling stated that Perry does not have the constitutional authority to issue such an order, and Wednesday, a panel of judges agreed with environmental groups who requested more time to prepare their opposition case. One of the complaints on this issue has been the lack of clear and objective information. A quick Internet search will reveal that even the stated number of proposed plants varies, depending on who the source is. "It looks to me like we have two political campaigns here," said Michael E. Webber, associate director for Center for International Policy at the University of Texas. "A lot of the facts are being misinterpreted or are misleading." What is certain is that TXU is has a proposition to build 11 coal-fired plants. Nine of these are in Central Texas and four in McLennan County. TXU has named Texas' growing demand for energy as the reason for the construction of the new plants. The company cites a study by the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) that says electric demand will increase by 19 percent over the next 10 years, but that the confirmed power capacity will only increase by 6 percent. Texas is listed as one of the areas where demand is expected to outstrip confirmed power capacity. TXU spokesman Tom Kleckner said this urgent need for power is the reason behind Perry's executive order. "Because the governor recognizes the same need for power to reach the state's growing energy demand that we did," he said. "One of the things his order did was eliminate all the administrative processes. It maintained the same time for public input and technical review, which are the most important parts of the process." Others have criticized the fast-tracking of the permits, which allow six of the proposed plants to be reviewed together as one plant. "I'd like to see people step away from a sense that we have to hurry," Webber said. He emphasized the need for objective facts and a reasoned decision, and pointed out that Texas could help reduce its current energy demand with conservation. "These plants are here for decades," he said. "I'm not saying coal is the wrong choice, but we just don't know." Webber said tactics such as energy-efficient appliances and public awareness campaigns helped reduce energy use in California and that simple adjustments could do the same in Texas. He said that Austin Energy was considering "smart meters," which can track when the most energy is used. Companies can then manage energy use by charging more for electricity during peak hours. "There's no single answer about what's best and what we need," Webber said. "We just don't have answers, at least not in a scientifically rigorous or objective form. None of us do." Others have cast TXU's motivations in a darker light, such as the Texas Clean Air Cities Coalition, a group made up of 36 cities, counties and school boards, of which Waco is one. "TXU's motives are something other than trying to provide you with affordable power," coalition attorney Stephen Susman, of the Houston-based law firm Susman Godfrey, told a cheering crowd in the Waco Convention Center Tuesday night. "We intend to prove that the idea of building these 11 plants in one year had nothing to do with providing affordable energy for Texas. It was all about locking competitors out of the Texas market." Dr. Max Shauck, director of the Institute of Aviation Sciences at Baylor, said there has been conjecture that a possible carbon tax is playing a part in the issue. He said because of concerns about global warming, there may be a tax imposed on the pollutant. "One of the conjectures about this rush to build all the plants is that they want to get these plants built and grandfathered in before the carbon tax," he said. "The tax would make building these inefficient and highly polluting plants much more expensive." Susman said he believes that TXU intends to gain as many credits as possible, through building new plants, before new federal regulations go in. "The more (pollution) they put in the atmosphere before federal regulations go in, the more carbon credits they get," Susman said. Another factor is non-attainment, which Shauck said is a technical status given to an area when it has exceeded safe pollution levels. "It means you've exceeded certain levels of one of the pollutants and in this case it's going to be ozone, because we are most in danger of exceeding the ozone standard here," he said. The consequences of non-attainment for Waco are two-fold, Shauck said. "That criteria is set because (the federal government) has determined that above that level there are health hazards," he said. Pollutants such as nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds and others can become health hazards. Shauck said though health consequences are the most important, there are also economic consequences. "For example, new industry that might exacerbate that situation would only be allowed to come in if they could get trade-offs from existing industry," he said. "If they want to come in and start the business, they would have to go into another business and buy (pollution) credits. The other business would have to agree to reduce their pollution by that amount." Shauck and his research team conducted a study on behalf of the city of Waco that measured the effects the proposed plants would have on the Waco area. They used an airplane with specialized equipment to measure the air quality around the Waco area. Shauck, who has been air sampling in Waco since 1976, said this method is often more accurate than modeling since it deals with specific, rather than conjectured, data. According to Sergio Alvarez, Shauck's research assistant, the plane also has an advantage over ground stations. "They're in a fixed location, so if the wind blows from a different direction and the air pollution is being put out by a certain facility, that monitor might not measure it," he said. "That's the advantage of having an aircraft. You can measure and track a specific plume from a facility or urban area." Plumes, pollution from factory stacks that a is carried by wind, can travel from another city or facility and bring an area close to non-attainment, Shauck said. The power plants can bring the area the rest of the way. Shauck said the study's conclusions were clear, though it was started late in the season. Since ozone is what Shauck calls a "photochemical cocktail" created from a combination of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic chemicals in conjunction with sunlight and elevated temperatures, the weather plays a large factor. "The real question is how much effect does a power plant have? How much does it increase the ozone?" he said. "And, even late in the season when we didn't have the kind of temperatures that are productive of ozone, we saw a significant increase in the amount of ozone as a result from the (nitrogen oxide) from the power plant. It was definitive." TXU says the new plants will help, not harm Texas pollution levels. "We have modeling data that was done by independent organization called (Texas Emissions Reductions Plan)," Kleckner said. He said the data showed that the new plants are 80 percent cleaner than coal plants currently used. "It did show that there would be a minimal impact in the Waco area, but they did not take into account other companies shutting down their older units like we're doing," he said. "If other companies would shut down their older units it would help." However, TXU says there is no better alternative to these plants. "Coal is an easy way to meet the growing demand for energy," Kleckner said. "We can build the plants more quickly than nuclear ones." He said that while TXU is looking at nuclear power, it will be a long time before it's a viable replacement. He said that Texas is already overly dependant on natural gas and that the fuel's volatility makes the state vulnerable to swings. "The alternative is continuing to run older, less efficient, dirtier gas plants," he said, adding that 69 of those plants are already in non-attainment zones. "And to meet the demand if we can't build these, then we're looking at unmothballing 40 to 50-year-old gas plants, and our coal plants are cleaner than many of those gas plants." According to Webber, the most important thing in this issue is that everyone slow down and think. "We need to have an honest evaluation of options," he said. "Coal has some merits which need to be considered honestly, and it also has some problems which need to be considered." ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

150 new power plants
by Duane330＠aol.com 25 Feb '07

25 Feb '07

February 25, 2007 Editorial, New York Times The Truth About Coal Last Wednesday, members of the Rainforest Action Network, a scrappy little advocacy group, assembled in New York outside the Citigroup Center, where Merrill Lynch has a branch office. Dressed in top hats, carrying bags of coal and calling themselves “Billionaires for Coal,” the group was protesting what it felt was the hypocrisy of a giant investment bank that proclaims a devout commitment to “environmental excellence” even as it provides financing for dirty power plants. Merrill is a lead underwriter for TXU, a Dallas-based utility that plans to build a dozen coal-fired power plants in Texas that will add significantly to atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, the main global warming gas. Though Merrill was the protesters’ target, Citigroup must have been feeling queasy. It has also trumpeted its environmental virtues and is among TXU’s lead underwriters. There are at least two points to be made here. One, obviously, is there is a difference between talk and reality. Much of corporate America now appears to be out in front of the Bush administration in facing up to global warming. Some big players like Pacific Gas and Electric and DuPont seem seriously committed to mandatory controls on carbon dioxide emissions — in sharp contrast to the administration’s voluntary approach. Others, notably big investment banks, are still doing what comes naturally: seizing opportunities, whether or not those opportunities fit their green posturing. TXU can fairly claim that its plants, outfitted with the latest technology, will emit fewer pollutants that cause smog and acid rain than the clunkers that have been around for 50 years. But these plants will still be using the same basic technology — burning coal, with no ability to capture and dispose of immense amounts of carbon dioxide. That’s distressing from a global warming perspective. It is also distressing because cleaner, if costlier, technologies are available that could capture greenhouse gases before they enter the atmosphere (that is, if TXU or the private equity group that is negotiating to buy the utility were willing to make the investment). Which leads to the second point: There is a need to put a price on carbon to force companies to abandon older, dirtier technologies for newer, cleaner ones. Right now, everyone is using the atmosphere like a municipal dump, depositing carbon dioxide free. Start charging for the privilege and people will find smarter ways to do business. A carbon tax is one approach. Another is to impose a steadily decreasing cap on emissions and let individual companies figure out ways to stay below the cap. Barbara Boxer and Jeff Bingaman, the two senators who will have the most to say about climate change legislation, warned in a recent op-ed piece in The Dallas Morning News that companies like TXU that are racing to complete conventional coal-fired plants (nearly 150 are on the drawing board) will not be grandfathered under any new emissions law. Like any other company, they will be forced to meet their assigned carbon targets — which could be an expensive proposition. A surer way to prevent the construction of these plants is not to warn about such a law, but to pass it. ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Federal District Court---tomorrow
by Duane330＠aol.com 22 Feb '07

22 Feb '07

To: Participants and Friends RE: Complaint In Federal District Court, Hearing on Motion. DETAILS: Tomorrow, Friday, February 23rd, starting at 1:30 pm, a Hearing on Longview's Motion For Bond and Expedited Treatment will be held. The Complaint was filed by the Plaintiffs on February 13th, seeking a temporary injunction and permanent injunction for the Longview Power Plant, on the basis that the Air Quality Permit expired on September 2, 2005. Longview disputes this claim. Plaintiffs are Jarrett Jamision III, Fort Martin Community Association, and the Forks of Cheat Forest Property Owners Association. This is a continuation of the Appeal submitted by these same plaintiffs back in the spring of 2005, regarding this same Air Quality Permit [R14-0024]. Plaintiffs are represented by local attorney, Phillip D. Gaujot, of Morgantown. Defendants are Longview Power, LLC, the two holding companies and the three companies seeking to provide equipment and construction services. NOTES: 1. The above Hearing will be held in the US Post Office Building, Clarksburg, second floor court room. Photo-ID is required to enter the Second Floor 2. More details and an update will be provided after the Hearing this Friday. ************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Taxes and Meeting Re: MVCAC Digest, Vol 22
by paula - pj- hunt 20 Feb '07

20 Feb '07

Duane, 1.) Don't we have to file *something* with the IRS for taxes, even if we brought in $0 ?? 2.) I NEVER heard anything from Jeff Riffle. He was responsive at first; now nothing. He has my USB drive too! I would really like a new voter list. It will save a lot of time. I guess we could buy one from the County ourselves. He told me "It was only a penny per name so I think it was somewhere around $230." 3.) Meeting: Mon Feb 26: I am in the field all day long and would likely be late to the meeting, if attend at all Tues Feb 27: good March 5,6,7: all good so far..... Thanks, paula At 2/20/2007 12:00 PM, you wrote: >Send MVCAC mailing list submissions to > mvcac(a)cheat.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > mvcac-request(a)cheat.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at > mvcac-owner(a)cheat.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of MVCAC digest..." > > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Planning & Notes (Duane330(a)aol.com) > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message: 1 >Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 10:27:27 EST >From: Duane330(a)aol.com >Subject: [MVCAC] Planning & Notes >To: mvcac(a)cheat.org >Message-ID: <d43.2b13bca.330c6d5f(a)aol.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >Proposed upcoming meeting dates. > >Let me propose the following possible dates > >for the next meeting of the MonValley Clean Air Coalition > >1. Monday or Tuesday, February 26th or 27th > >2. Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday, March 5, 6, 7. > >PLEASE LET ME KNOW AS SOON AS POSSIBLE OF ANY CONFLICTS >WITH THESE DATES. THIS WOULD BE AN EVENING MEETING STARTING >AT 6:30 OR 7 PM. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >I have just inquired into the database of the WV Secretary of State; > >it appears the following are in good standing: > >1. MonValley Clean Air Coalition, chartered on 7/11/2005 >as a non-profit volunteer association in the State of West Virginia. > >2. Citizens for Alternatives to Longview Power, chartered on 7/11/2005 >as a non-profit volunteer association in the State of West Virginia. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >NOTE: On January 26, 2007, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service approved >the application of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition for tax exempt status >under Section 501-(c)-3 of the Internal Revenue Code. This means that >contributions to MVCAC are tax deductible under Section 170 of the Code. > >This tax status is retroactive back to July 11, 2005. We are required to >submit >Form 990 only if our gross receipts are normally more than $25,000 per year. >So, let's do some fund raising, up to $24,999.99. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >MonValley Clean Air Coalition >P. O. Box 4679 >Morgantown, WV 26504-4679 >

1 0

Planning & Notes
by Duane330＠aol.com 20 Feb '07

20 Feb '07

Proposed upcoming meeting dates. Let me propose the following possible dates for the next meeting of the MonValley Clean Air Coalition 1. Monday or Tuesday, February 26th or 27th 2. Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday, March 5, 6, 7. PLEASE LET ME KNOW AS SOON AS POSSIBLE OF ANY CONFLICTS WITH THESE DATES. THIS WOULD BE AN EVENING MEETING STARTING AT 6:30 OR 7 PM. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have just inquired into the database of the WV Secretary of State; it appears the following are in good standing: 1. MonValley Clean Air Coalition, chartered on 7/11/2005 as a non-profit volunteer association in the State of West Virginia. 2. Citizens for Alternatives to Longview Power, chartered on 7/11/2005 as a non-profit volunteer association in the State of West Virginia. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOTE: On January 26, 2007, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service approved the application of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition for tax exempt status under Section 501-(c)-3 of the Internal Revenue Code. This means that contributions to MVCAC are tax deductible under Section 170 of the Code. This tax status is retroactive back to July 11, 2005. We are required to submit Form 990 only if our gross receipts are normally more than $25,000 per year. So, let's do some fund raising, up to $24,999.99. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MonValley Clean Air Coalition P. O. Box 4679 Morgantown, WV 26504-4679

1 0

AP: Citizens Suit vs. Longview Power
by Duane330＠aol.com 14 Feb '07

14 Feb '07

The Associated Press: February 14, 2007, 4:11PM EST Foes sue to stop W.Va. power plant By VICKI SMITH, AP, MORGANTOWN, W.Va. Opponents of a $1 billion, coal-fired power plant are trying once again to halt the construction, filing a federal lawsuit that claims an air quality permit for the project expired in 2005. The lawsuit was filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court on behalf of Cass resident Jarrett F. Jamison III, the Fort Martin Community Association and the Forks of Cheat Forest Property Owners Association. It seeks an injunction against Longview Power LLC, a subsidiary of Needham, Mass.-based GenPower LLC, which plans to start building the 600-megawatt plant near Allegheny Energy's Fort Martin plant this year. Local citizen groups have fought the project for years, complaining it would create noise and air pollution, damage their views and cause harm to their health and environment. An original permit issued by the state Department of Environmental Protection expired in September 2005, but the DEP's Division of Air Quality granted a one-year extension in February 2006. The lawsuit, however, argues that both the state and Longview Power failed to ask permission from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which the plaintiffs contend should have held a 30-day comment period. Last month, the plaintiffs asked the state to revoke the permit, but were refused in a Feb. 1 letter that said Longview now has "irrevocable financial commitments" and already has begun site work. That leaves the state unable to act, the letter said. Chris Colbert, GenPower's vice president of coal power development, dismissed the latest lawsuit as being "without merit." Longview started construction in January, he said, and it has signed contracts and "large financial commitments that can't be taken back." Last summer, the state Public Service Commission issued final approval for construction, ruling the job creation and financial benefits of the plant outweigh any negative effects. The PSC laid out conditions to placate the citizen groups, including a noise control plan, proof of financing and a $3 million performance bond in case the money runs out before construction is completed. The opponents, however, dismissed that as "a sellout to out-of-state developers, a tax scam, and a threat to our health and well-being." Longview could become the first company to built a coal-fired plant in West Virginia since the 80-megawatt Grant Town power plant in 1993. All of Longview's output is targeted for the wholesale electricity market outside West Virginia, while about 25 percent of the Fort Martin plant's generation now heads to state consumers. Longview says the plant will employ 60 people and create up to 1,600 construction jobs, then consume more than 2 million tons of coal a year when completed. Monongalia County, which approved a payment in lieu of taxes plan, would get $105 million from the project over 30 years.

1 0

Fwd: Texas Coal Plants
by Duane330＠aol.com 12 Feb '07

12 Feb '07

FYI

1 0

NRDC
by Duane330＠aol.com 11 Feb '07

11 Feb '07

National Resources Defense Council ONEARTH magazine, winter 2007, FRONTLINES column. _http://www.nrdc.org/onearth/07win/frontlines2.asp_ (http://www.nrdc.org/onearth/07win/frontlines2.asp) Running on Fumes How bad is the current energy crisis? Really, really bad, says oil expert Charley Maxwell. After half a century in the oil business, Charles Maxwell is widely referred to as the dean of energy analysts. As a Marshall Scholar at Oxford he specialized in Arabic and Persian language and history before joining Mobil in 1957. He spent a decade with the oil giant, scheduling tanker shipments, working in a field office in Nigeria, and negotiating Middle East production agreements. When the Arab oil embargo hit in 1973, he was already being hailed by Institutional Investor as Wall Street's number-one oil analyst. Today he is a senior energy analyst with Weeden & Co., which provides proprietary research to institutional investors. Charley Maxwell is not your classic environmentalist -- he favors further development of coal and nuclear energy and sits on the board of a coal-bed methane company in Denver. But in this late-September conversation with Sonia Shah, author of Crude: The Story of Oil, Maxwell urges a new conservation ethic that may -- or may not -- save us from the worst energy crisis we have yet faced.You are famous for coining the term "energy crisis" in the 1970s. Do you think that we're entering another crisis now? I do. In the first energy crisis, we tried to keep prices low and ration the physical gasoline. People sat in these long queues and it was a huge loss of time and money. When the second energy crisis hit, in the late seventies and early eighties, we just allowed the price to rise. And that's what we're doing now -- rationing by price. The fact that gasoline recently hit $3.20 a gallon would suggest that we are in crisis. I would say even $2.50, which is where it is now, represents some form of crisis.What are the underlying reasons? There are four, I think. First and foremost, there was a lot of oil that could have been discovered that wasn't, because the national oil companies such as Saudi Aramco didn't invest enough in exploration. Second, the big oil companies didn't exercise much vision. When prices went up in 2000, they basically pocketed the money. Of course, if you're an executive and you have stock options, you start to think that the whole world depends on your stock price rather than on getting more oil. And who's to say that we should have more oil? If it means that everyone is going to work harder and longer to make possible the greater use of SUVs, is that a worthy end in the world of God?And the other two reasons? The third is political instability around the world. And the fourth is that we are now approaching the 50 percent mark of recoverable oil. Global oil production will reach a maximum rate and then it will inexorably start to go down. I predict that will be between 2015 and 2020. When that happens it will be the single biggest problem that we face.And we're using more oil all the time. Yes, as the world economic system grows, we're needing about 1.5 percent to 2 percent more oil every year. Right now the non-OPEC countries are providing about half of that. But those proportions are changing fast. In 2010 that door slams shut, and we will have to call on OPEC for all the new oil we need. So they will have complete control over its availability and its price.How much more oil is still waiting to be discovered? There is still a lot of oil out there. But if it takes 30 years rather than 10 to discover it, then we're not going to be producing enough each year to meet our needs. What's happened is that the search has slowed dramatically. So we're in deep trouble.Exxon has said there could be up to 4.8 trillion barrels of oil still recoverable. And there are other industry estimates that go as high as 7 trillion. I read that stuff and it's good background humor, you know what I mean? But I really hope they don't think anyone takes them seriously.So is it just a PR thing? No, I think Exxon actually believes it, which is really sad.What's the outlook for new sources of oil, so-called unconventional sources? Most of that is actually gas. There's coal-bed methane, which is the gas from coal deposits. There's the gas from so-called tight sands, which are geologic formations on the way to becoming sandstone. And then there's shale, which gives up the gas very slowly. That makes it uneconomic when [natural] gas costs $2 [per million Btu], but in a world of $7 gas, you'd accept the slow production and you'd still be happy to get it.Do you think price levels are high enough at the moment to start triggering changes in our behavior? Even with $3 gas, nobody's saying, "I can't take Johnny to the soccer match." But there's no doubt we're going to have to change our habits. We're going to have to design our cities differently. We're going to need greater population densities and more public transportation. We're going to have to build our houses to different building codes. But the system can't change overnight. We can change our habits in two or three years and the next generation of equipment will be developed with energy conservation in mind, but people will have to go on with their present equipment for a time. Even so, I think we're already triggering some favorable changes at $3, like the decline in SUV sales and the increased sales of smaller sedans. I read the other day that in 10 years, 10 percent of the country will be using hybrids -- which isn't that much. So there's got to be more than hybrids, and I think Honda is on to it with a new small diesel with a very efficient engine. One advantage of diesel is that the engine lasts longer than the gasoline engine.But doesn't our whole model of economic growth depend on throwing things out and getting new ones? Yes, but I think this new conservation ethic is going to come in. It will be hard on General Motors and Ford and Chrysler, and it may take some subsidies. I don't think the government can afford to put any of those companies into bankruptcy.Do you see any prospect of a gasoline tax? Or is that still a taboo? I think it's changing. But there are lots of ways to do it. You don't have to have a gasoline tax; you can have a tax on horsepower and thus give a huge lift to lighter cars with less powerful engines. There's a recognition that we have to decrease the weight of vehicles. We can now make cars with traditional engines that are half the weight of the cars today. There are some marvelous new plastics that give us this very light weight with great strength, so we'll be able to hold on to these cars for much longer.Where's the political leadership on all this? I mean, when the president talks about our being "addicted to oil" and needing more ethanol... Well, he's just being told what to say by his minions, you know. Ethanol, for the moment -- meaning ethanol from corn -- is a stupid investment, as people are discovering. Pretty close to 100 percent of the savings [in oil consumption] that you get on ethanol is consumed by the hydrocarbon fuel that has to be used to grow the corn. You do save something in national security terms -- it's not from the Middle East, and you're not putting dollars out into the wider world. But if they can convert cellulose to sugar, and sugar to alcohol, then we will really have something.They're using sugarcane in Brazil, of course. But you mean other crops, like switchgrass? Yes, that's right, and that would give you maybe a 40 percent savings. That's coming, but probably not for six or seven years.What about solar and wind and other alternatives? I'm very keen on solar, because it works and it's getting more efficient every year. But the problem is that today it represents maybe one-tenth of 1 percent of the energy we produce. In 10 years it may be half a percent. So it won't solve the problem. Wind will be a little better, a little bigger. And I do believe that when the problem is solved, it will be solved by a host of small contributions like this, from different directions.And that will take a lot of technological innovation. Yes. You know, entrepreneurs are doing all kinds of things -- racing to design new types of wiring for electric motors, new types of batteries for cars. In garages around the country, the inventive geniuses are being let loose. I think it's going to become an American jamboree, in a way, because what we do best is innovate.Does that make you an optimist? I think we'll get through this problem by about 2020 to 2025. My worry is how we get there. We have a time when oil is winding down before anything is able to slide over and solve the problem. A lot of nuclear development is being brought along by the incipient shortage of future oil, and it's putting people into a proliferation mode. The whole world could come under this threat, and it's a terrible one. We could also be in deep trouble as a social system. How do we achieve fairness [in rationing scarce energy supplies] when the gridlock between rich and poor already stops us from having an energy policy in this country? We could see democracy entering its death throes.

1 0

City Council To Formally Consider Cool City Status
by Duane330＠aol.com 31 Jan '07

31 Jan '07

Update, information, report: I went to two meetings this week. On Monday night I went to the Morgantown Cools City Committee meeting. At their meeting they strategized for their up and coming Tuesday night meeting with the City Council. They were number 5 on the list of groups that were to present their case. I was impressed at how determined and clear sighted every member of the committee was to their cause. They planned for who would speak at the City Council meeting and what each member would talk about. Last night, Tuesday, the City Council met and the Cool City Committee was in attendance, along with support people, including myself. When their turn came up, #5, the City Council officials took the floor! They were replete with praise for the Sierra Club and the Clean Air Coalition. They thanked these groups officially for bringing the Cools Cities agenda to them. They reviewed the twelve point Kyoto Protocol listed by the U.S. Mayors Climate Pretection Agreement ( provided by the Sierra Club) and talked about steps they have already taken, and will continue to take, in order to address these critical actions. I wasn't sure if this sounded as good to everyone else as it sounded to me until Jim Kotcon stood up, turned around to all of us and said, "We won!!!" We were all aglow with joy. Of course Jim Kotcon and Joshua Rutkowski went immediately to the hallway and started to plan the next move, but even Jim took a few minutes to just be happy. So, someone from the committee can add details to this note, my intention was to sing your praises. Please pass this note on to Cool City Committee members who are not on the Energy Committee and thereby in my address book. Good work. Thank you Barbara Fallon, Sierra Club's Energy Committee ____________________________________

1 0

PSC hearing yesterday.
by Duane330＠aol.com 25 Jan '07

25 Jan '07

To: MVCAC Testimony was entered by Duane Nichols, Charles Yuill, and Adam Polinski to the WV Public Service Commission yesterday regarding the environmental impacts of the proposed changes to the Longview power plant. Our attorney, Phillip Gaujot, did an excellent job of presenting our case and of posing questions to the single Longview witness, Chris Colbert. Colbert gave what we consider to be vague and incomplete answers, but the two Commissions present, were not apparently concerned about his lack of specificity and meager amount of information. Mr. Shaw has resigned from the Commission. [The Governor must appoint a Republican lawyer to replace him, since both major parties must be represented and since at least one must be a lawyer....neither Chairman Jon McKinney nor Edward Staats are lawyers.] ............The PSC Staff recommended that the changes be approval, with a list of 10 or 11 stipulations. Our position is that the increased steam plumes are significant and should be the reason for greater evaluation, i.e. a "material" modification. Neither the Staff nor the Commissions are particularly inclined to side with us. In any case, the final decision will not be made until after a Briefing Schedule has transpired: Initial Briefs due Jan. 29th, Reply Briefs due January 31st, and Final Briefs due February 2nd. .......................We are very unhappy with this schedule, because Briefs are to be submitted without the benefit of the Transcript, which will not be ready in time for use during this schedule. ............... Duane Nichols, Convener, MVCAC

1 0

power line thru Virginia..?
by Duane330＠aol.com 22 Jan '07

22 Jan '07

[[note the paragraph that is underlined...........]] Preservationists Resist Proposed Power Line BROAD RUN, VA (AP) - The landowners and preservationists in Virginia’s hunt country have taken on Disney and won, so a battle against the state’s dominant utility over a proposed high-voltage power line leaves them undaunted. The Piedmont Environmental Council, which more than a decade ago famously fought off a proposed Disney theme park in rural Prince William county, is gearing up for battle over some of the same turf - this time a 40-mile section of a proposed multistate power line that cuts through pristine fields and mountains but utilities say is badly needed to meet growing demand and buck up the Northeast region’s electrical grid. The council held a press conference with its brightest star, actor Robert Duvall, to denounce plans to run the line through parts of Fauquier, Loudoun, and Prince William counties that have generally remained preserved despite the Washington, D.C. region’s exploding growth. Duvall, a Fauquier County resident who was also active in the 1990s in opposition to the proposed Disney’s America theme park, said he believes the region ’s residents are even more united against the power line. “ There were people who were for the Disney park back then,” said Duvall, who has consistently supported the region’s preservation efforts but only rarely steps into the spotlight on the issue. “I think everybody is against this. People are up in arms.” The council placed weather balloons 12 stories in the air along the proposed route to simulate the impact the lines would have on the region’s viewshed. In some spots, the balloons dominated a landscape that was largely pristine, dotted by historic sites including Civil War battle sites and the home of former Supreme Court Justice John Marshall. David Botkins, a spokesman for Dominion Virginia Power, said the utility appreciates residents’ concerns and will take them into account as it continues to evaluate the best route for a transmission line. But, he said, it’s wrong to compare Dominion’s proposal to Disney’s efforts. “ Disney’s proposal was about a theme park. This is about providing a lifeblood to hospitals, airports, homeland security facilities, and high-tech businesses, not to mention millions of households,” Botkins said. Northern Virginia could face rolling blackouts as soon as 2011 without additional capacity, Botkins said, and the proposed route is the only way to deliver it. Opponents have questioned whether Dominion is overstating its needs and want the utility to do more to embrace conservation. Opponents are also concerned that a new federal law enacted last year will make it easier for utilities to override residents’ concerns. Passed in response to warnings of gaps in the nation’s electrical network, the law allows the U.S. Energy Department to designate certain transmission corridors as being in the national interest. That would let federal regulators overrule states that would reject a power line with a demonstrated interstate interest. Botkins said Dominion is pursuing approval through traditional means - Virginia’s State Corporation Commission - and has no intention of asking the federal government to override the state. But others - including PJM Interconnection, which operates the region’s electrical grid - could seek a federal override. Power line opponents were sensitive to the perception that a few well-heeled gentlemen farmers concerned about the views from their estates are blocking progress and jeopardizing electricity for the region. “ This is not about a few wealthy landowners’ self-interest,” Duvall said. “ This is about corporate vandalism.” Martha Toomey of Orlean said the power lines would hurt a region that has eschewed residential growth and sought to build an economy based on agriculture and tourism. “ We’re not sitting out here making daisies. This is about business,” Toomey said. The 40-mile section running through Virginia is part of a 240-mile, $850 million line that would start about 20 miles south of Pittsburgh, then head southeast across a corner of western Maryland and West Virginia’s heavily touristed eastern panhandle before crossing into Virginia. The line is a joint project of Dominion and Pennsylvania-based Allegheny Power. JANUARY 2, 2007.

1 0

Minutes and Notes.
by Duane330＠aol.com 20 Jan '07

20 Jan '07

To: MVCAC participants and friends: NOTE: Longview provided "public notice" in the Dominion Post on January 16th of the Hearing set for the Public Service Commission at 9:30 a.m. in Charleston. The Concerned Citizens, including local residents, CLEAR, Citizens for Responsible Development, and the Citizens for Alternative to Longview Power, will be represented to provide testimony on the inconsistencies and impacts in the Longview filing of November 8, 2006. This latter filing seeks changes which include increasing the power output to 695 MW, increasing the size of the boiler and turbine buildings, and increasing the amount of water usage. Longview has provided only meager information on the equipment design and specifications. See the Notes at the end of the MVCAC Minutes provided below: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Minutes of the MVCAC January 8, 2007 The MVCAC met at the St. Paul Lutheran Church with 10 participants in attendance. The meeting began with a report on the application for 501c3 status. The IRS provided some queries to which Paula wrote responses. MVCAC currently has a balance of $391.00 in the checking account. We received a $3000.00 contribution in December. One thousand dollars was sent to Synapse Energy for their costs related to their expert testimony, $1751.00 went to Phil Gaujot for his expenses related to the Longview issues, and $350.00 went for brochures. Paula developed a budget to accompany the 501c3 application. There was some discussion regarding whether we should develop a formal membership process and dues. A sub-committee was formed to further explore this issue. The group then discussed the cover letter that Paula had developed to accompany the brochures that we will mail. A few participants provided some suggestions for revisions. Duane then read Dennis’ report on the appeal of the proposed waste burning (gob) plant at Nemacolin, PA. The appeal was fined by the following Petitioners, namely: Dennis Groce, National Parks Conservation Association, Group Against Smog and Pollution and Phil Coleman. The appeal was turned down, but subsequent action may be feasible. A separate report will be provided shortly. Duane provided an update on Longview. They have received both their siting and transmission line certificates. In November, Longview proposed to increase the output of the plant from 600 to 695 megawatts. They have argued that this increase will have negligible effects. However, the Concerned Citizens have filed documents with the Public Service Commission to protest, because of the effects that this increase will have on the local environment. Longview wants to increase the amount of water necessary (a 12% increase). Also, the main boiler building will be increased from 257 to 270 feet high. So, the larger building and the greater steam plume represent a greater obstacle to the view shed issue. We are also concerned that the cost to build the plant has escalated to $1.8 billion. The Public Service Commission (PSC) will decide whether the increase in output and its effects constitute a significant change to Longview’s plan. If it does constitute a significant change, the consequences could include a new air quality permit. Allegheny Energy has concluded that adding scrubbers to the Ft. Martin power plant will cost more money than they originally anticipated. They have asked the PSC to increase their securitization to cover this additional expense. This will add about $3.50 to each household electric bill, until the scrubber are paid for. Duane asked whether MVCAC should send a letter supporting this increase expense, since we would benefit from scrubbers. It was decided that the board would make the final decision regarding whether to send such a letter. There have been public hearings regarding the proposed power line that will run through West Virginia, PA, MD, and VA. Jim recommended that the MVCAC send a letter to the PSC opposing such a power line and emphasize the problems with the taking of property that would accompany such a power line. Jim has argued that if Allegheny Energy would spend the same amount of $$ on energy conservation as it is proposing to spend on the power line, there would be no need for a power line. Duane spoke to a wire expert with Allegheny Power who stated that if they could upgrade the existing line while it was still being used, there would be no need for a new route. Jim reported on the proposed co-generation power plant for Greenbrier County. Sierra Club and others are protesting the plant based on several issues, such as the fact that the plant will violate EPA’s new particulate standards and that there is not sufficient energy in the gob they are proposing to use. Jim passed around a petition related to the Cool Cities effort. The intent of the petition is to persuade the city of Morgantown to sign on to this effort. This would mean the city would agree to take measures to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases, by adopting strategies such as using biofuels, making city buildings more energy efficient, etc. City Council will consider this issue at the next Committee of the Whole meeting on January 30 at 7:00 pm. Please consider attending this meeting to voice your support. Respectfully submitted, Linda Shuster, Secretary >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOTE: The Public Service Commission has set a “public hearing” for January 24th at 9:30 am in Charleston, to determine whether the proposed changes to the Longview power plant are significant (“material”) or insignificant (“ non-material). The Concerned Citizens as “intervenors” will be present to testify. The public is invited to send comments on whether Longview should be allowed to increase their power output from 600 to 695 megawatts while increasing their water usage by 12% and installing larger buildings on the 160 acre plant site. Based upon past practice, the smoke stack at 554 feet should be redesigned to take into account the other changes including the larger buildings. Longview does not want to consider this redesign. Therefore, Concerned Citizens considers the proposed changes to be “material”, i.e. significant. You can express your opinion and concerns by writing to: Sandra Squire, Executive Secretary, WV Public Service Commission, 201 Brooks Street, Charleston, WV 25323. The letter should contain the following reference: RE: Siting Certificate for Longview Power, LLC.

1 0

Tue at 7 pm
by Duane330＠aol.com 08 Jan '07

08 Jan '07

IMPORTANT MEETING OF THE MON VALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION, TUESDAY, JANUARY 9TH, 7 PM. Location: St. Paul's Lutheran Church, Basement Meeting Area. We will review recent activities. We have a new budget to present. Come and enjoy seeing your old friends, and prepare for a new year of activities. We can focus and be efficient!!! Duane Nichols, Convenor. That's Tuesday, January 9th at 7 pm.......................................... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< For Immediate Release: For More Information, contact Jan. 6, 2007 James Kotcon 304-594-3322 (home) 304-293-8822 (office) _jkotcon(a)wvu.edu_ (mailto:jkotcon@wvu.edu) Energy Options and Solutions for Global Warming Changes in energy use to address global warming are increasingly likely. But what kind and how much change is still debated. Three approaches to new energy policies for America will be presented at the next meeting of the Monongahela Group of Sierra Club on Thursday, Jan. 11. A panel of speakers will review changes in energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. Ken Markel, an expert on fossil energy will present technical information on energy options. Paul Brown will review the need for dramatic reductions in carbon emissions. A major new policy proposal from the Sierra Club will be presented by Jim Kotcon. The “Smart Energy Solutions” initiative presents a comprehensive, but realistic approach to protecting the planet from dangerous climate changes. The meeting will be held at 7 PM in the Blackwater Room of the WVU MountainLair. The public is invited and a discussion will follow the presentations. For details, call 594-3322. -End-

1 0

Immediate reply necessary
by Duane330＠aol.com 04 Jan '07

04 Jan '07

To: Participants of the MVCAC From: Duane Nichols, Convenor RE: Adoption of Six (6) Amendments to Articles of Organization ACTION: Please vote immediately: Yes-- for approval, No-- for objection. NOTE: Contributions to the MVCAC will be exempt of IRS taxes if the MVCAC meets the requirements of Section 501-c-3 of the IRS code. We have been informed by the IRS that six amendments are needed to our Articles of Organization. These required amendments are herewith proposed by Paula Hunt for adoption by email vote of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition. Decision is by consensus, so if there are any objections, said objections will need to be resolved at our upcoming meeting on Tuesday, January 9, 2007, at 7 pm in the Basement Meeting Area of St. Paul's Lutheran Church, Patterson Drive, Morgantown, WV. MON VALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION Articles of Organization Adopted: January 23, 2006 In consideration of health concerns relating to high levels of air pollutants in the Monongahela River valley and surrounding areas, the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition, a nonprofit organization whose participants serve on a voluntary basis, has been founded to promote public education and advocacy relating to air quality issues and to enhance capabilities for monitoring air quality in the region. Activities may include 1) partnering with the local school systems to provide educational materials regarding energy awareness and genesis of air pollutants such as ozone, sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds and particulates, 2) financially assisting in the acquisition of air monitoring equipment to be used in conjunction with the school programs, 3) exploring avenues for performing independent air monitoring either through direct equipment acquisition and operation by volunteers or via contractual agreement with a third party, 4) development of presentations and pamphlets to be used in adult public outreach, 5) participation in health fairs and other public opportunities for adult education, 6) the submission of data and other relevant information to local, state, and federal agencies regarding the development of rules for regulatory functions and environmental quality permits, 7) the writing of letters and testifying at public hearings on environmental issues and proposed permits for pollution control, as well as 8) the legal appeal of permits or regulations within the statutory time periods set aside in the permitting process. Each of these activities is intended only to the extent permitted under the Internal Revenue Service 501-c-3 rules. The Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition functions under the leadership of a Convenor, Secretary, and Treasurer. These officers are chosen by consensus, serving short indefinite terms of less than one year under typical circumstances. A Board of Directors is made up of the current and former Convenors and serves to facilitate decision-making, when necessary, between regular monthly meetings. The Treasurer maintains a bank account for the deposit of receipts and the payment of expenses, consistent with an annual Budget and approval of the officers and/or participants. A list of participants is to be maintained by the Secretary; and, an email list exists and is used as the primary means of communication among the officers and the participants. There is no membership fee or regular assessment. Voluntary contributions are welcomed from anyone who shares an interest in the objectives and mission of the Coalition, as it is stated above. Current funding categories for expenditures are 1) public education to include newsletters and brochures plus expenses for seminars and other public speaking functions, 2) the air monitoring project for data collection, training, and public awareness, 3) fees for consultants and experts, secretarial fees, and legal expenses (lawyers and court costs), and 4) other miscellaneous organization expenses. Monthly meetings involve a systematic discussion of all the relevant topics at that time. Decisions are made by consensus of those present, and minutes of each monthly meeting are distributed promptly to the participants. Committee meetings are held on an as-needed basis. The Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition is incorporated in the State of West Virginia as a not-for-profit Voluntary Association, Control Number 77545, July 11, 2005. The West Virginia Taxpayer Identification Number is WV-041-2704-001. The Employer Identification Number that as been assigned by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service is EIN 75-3199088. In the case of the dissolution of the Coalition, its monetary assets are to be donated to the American Lung Association and any equipment or supplies are to be donated to the Monongalia County Board of Education, Morgantown, WV. The formal address of the Coalition is as follows: Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition P. O. Box 4679 Morgantown, WV 26504 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Amendments to Articles of Organization (Prepared: January 2, 2007) 1. The MVCAC is organized exclusively for charitable, educational, and scientific purposes, including for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (or the corresponding section of any future Federal tax code). 1. No part of the net earnings of the MVCAC shall inure to the benefit of, or be distributed to its members, trustees, directors, officers or other private persons, except that the MVCAC shall be authorized and empowered to pay reasonable compensation for services rendered and to make payments and distributions in furtherance of Section 501(c)(3) purposes. 1. No substantial part of the activities of the MVCC shall be the carrying on of propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation, and the MVCAC shall not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distribution of statements) any political campaign on behalf of, or in opposition to, any candidate for public office. 1. Notwithstanding any other provision of these articles, the MVCAC shall not carry on any other activities not permitted to be carried on (a) by a corporation or organization exempt from Federal income tax under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (or corresponding section of any future Federal tax code) or (b) by a corporation or organization, contributions to which are deductible under Section 170(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code (or corresponding section of any future Federal tax code). 1. Upon the dissolution of the MVCAC, assets shall be distributed for one or more exempt purposes within the meaning of Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, or corresponding section of any future Federal tax code, or shall be distributed to the Federal government, or to a state or local government, for public purpose. 1. However, if the named recipient is not then in existence or no longer a qualified distributee, or unwilling or unable to accept the distribution, then the assets of the MVCAC shall be distributed to a fund, foundation, or corporation organized exclusively for the purposes specified in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (or corresponding section of any future Federal tax code). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

1 0

Meet Jan 9th. St. Paul's Lutheran
by Duane330＠aol.com 27 Dec '06

27 Dec '06

To: MVCAC participants and friends RE: General Meeting, Tuesday, January 9th Time & Location: 7 pm, St. Paul's Lutheran Church (Basement), Patterson Drive, Morgantown, WV. Agenda to include the following: 1. The Longview "siting certificate" case has been reopened at the Public Service Commission, since Longview wants to increase the power output, the size of buildings, and the amount of water usage. 2. The Allegheny Energy scrubbers for the Ft. Martin power plant have an updated financing plan, due to cost inflation. 3. The Allegheny Power transmission line plan is to be filed at the PSC. 4. Status of Green County coal refuse power plant. 5. MVCAC plans for 2007, including local educational and local monitoring activities. 6. MVCAC plans for 2007, including fund raising and grant applications.

1 0

General Meeting 1-9-07
by Duane330＠aol.com 17 Dec '06

17 Dec '06

To: MVCAC participants and friends. We are planning a general meeting, to include a number of important topics, for Tuesday, January 9th, at 7 pm. I hope that you can attend. Please add this date and time to your calendar now and plan to come out. Let's start the New Year with a bang, an emissions free bang! Duane

1 0

Electricity and Climate Change in Tuesday's News
by paula - pj- hunt 13 Dec '06

13 Dec '06

In addition to the Allegheny Transmission line public meeting south of Morgantown (thanks for your comments Jim K), yesterday was a big news day for electricity and global climate change (at least on public radio). Here are some links in case you missed them: Jim referred to a story on coal-fired power plants, how some are being thwarted, and what Congress may do (or not) about capping carbon emissions: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6612925 WalMart, the store many love to hate, is switching some of its lights to LEDs (at least refrigerated case lights in its new stores). The company spends about $1Billion on electricity every year (I think that is what the guy said in this story), so they say a 1% savings is a lot of money: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6612916 The program Justice Talking had an entire show on greenhouse gases and global climate change. You can listen to/ download an mp3 of the entire show here http://www.justicetalking.org/viewprogram.asp?progID=578 - paula hunt

2 1

"power line"--Tue. Dec 12, 5 - 8 pm
by Duane330＠aol.com 12 Dec '06

12 Dec '06

NOTE: Allegheny Energy is planning a new 500 kilovolt transmission line crossing portions of western Pennsylvania, northern West Virginia, western Maryland and northern Virginia. In this regard, there will be a public meeting Tuesday evening from 5 pm to 8 pm at the Clinton District Fire Hall, on Grafton Road, US 119 South. [A similar meeting will be held in Waynesburg on Wednesday and in Washington, PA on Thursday.] See the following web site: _http://www.aptrailinfo.com/_ (http://www.aptrailinfo.com/) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Landowners Fear Ruin From Power Line Route By _Sandhya Somashekhar_ (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/sandhya+somashekhar/) Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, December 11, 2006; Page B01 The 15-story towers and crackling cables that are planned to cut across the Northern Virginia countryside are just red lines on a map, a paper illustration of what could come. But for Cameron Eaton, who learned shortly after Thanksgiving that one of the proposed routes for a new high-voltage power line slices across her Fauquier County property, they have already brought the specter of financial ruin. She bought her 100-acre Delaplane farm last year, when it was an overgrown slice of land anchored by a rundown old farmhouse just off Interstate 66. She plowed all her savings into it. To pay down her $1 million mortgage and build up her horse business, she planned to sell a five-acre chunk within a couple of years. Then came what her neighbors have come to regard as "the black cloud." "I'm probably sunk by this," said Eaton, 45, seated by the wood stove she uses to heat the farmhouse. "No one will buy that land if some ugly power line could run right over their house. I'm broken off at the knees." Across parts of Loudoun, Prince William and Fauquier counties, property owners who possess some of the most valuable land in Virginia are struggling with the sudden shock of learning that Dominion Virginia Power, which supplies electricity to most of the state, plans to erect 40 miles of power line through their back yards. Of particular concern is that plans call for the 500,000-volt cables to be carried by a series of steel lattice towers planted along a 150-foot-wide ribbon of land stripped of trees and buildings. The area's picturesque countryside, with its emerald farms dotted by Civil War-era barns, is arguably its most valuable quality, area real estate agents say. The mere suggestion that it could be marred by this line has sent land values plummeting, said Matt Sheedy, a land developer and president of Virginians for Sensible Energy Policy, a group opposed to the power line. "We've talked to a number of brokers, and we're being told that the real estate market is just frozen," Sheedy said. "People are backing out of contracts, and no one is prepared to buy with this hanging over them." Sheedy's group was formed primarily to raise awareness of the line's impact on property values and to fight any effort by Dominion to confiscate private property through eminent domain. The group estimates that land directly in the cross hairs could diminish in value by as much as 75 percent. Dominion officials have not selected a specific route for its portion of the 240-mile electric transmission line, a $1.3 billion project planned jointly by Dominion and Pennsylvania-based Allegheny Power. Last week, the company released a map of several possible routes for its section, all of which roughly track I-66 between Winchester and a substation just across the Prince William border in Loudoun. Although Dominion can use eminent domain to take private property to build a power line across it, the company usually tries first to negotiate a settlement with a landowner in accordance with state law, said John D. Smatlak, Dominion's vice president for electric transmission (javascript:void(popitup('http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/postphotos/orb/metro/2006-12-11/… /10/PH2006121001043.html',650,850))) _Buy This Photo_ (http://pictopia.com/perl/ptp?provider_id=25&ptp_photo_id=xt-mt-25-title_706…) (javascript:void(popitup('http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/postphotos/orb/metro/2006-12-11/… /10/PH2006121001043.html',650,850))) Cameron Eaton fears that a power line will drastically devalue her Fauquier County property. (By Gerald Martineau -- The Washington Post) Graphic (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2006/12/08/GR200612080…) _Potential Routes for New Line_ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2006/12/08/GR200612080…) Dominion successfully negotiates with property holders about 97 percent of the time, Smatlak said, although critics argue that landowners often simply acquiesce to avoid going to court. The company does not expect to take anyone's home for the project, Smatlak said, and in some cases Dominion will offer landowners damages to compensate for other impacts to property values. But it is rare that landowners are happy with such settlements, said John Foote, a Virginia land-use lawyer. "It's an emotional process for most people," said Foote, "because here you have a [big company] coming in and saying, 'We are going to take your property, and there is nothing you can do about it.' " It will be especially unwelcome on the western edge of Northern Virginia, where vistas will be diminished by unsightly industrial towers, Sheedy said. "When you're out in the country and you're selling property, what you're selling is the open space and the bucolic views and the history," Sheedy said. "Running power lines through an area like this is just devastating." Dominion says it has no choice but to put up the lines. Officials say that the company's power grid is growing dangerously congested and that demand will outstrip capacity by 2011. The only way to avoid the possibility of rolling blackouts is to add more lines and bring more power from the Midwest, they say. And the most efficient route, they say, is through parts of Northern Virginia. That is little consolation for Gene and Deborah Bedell, who invested in their 223-acre Markham farm as their retirement plan. They pulled their house off the market last week after learning that one of the proposed routes slices through their back yard. No one, their real estate agent told them, would buy it if they knew that it could have a power line looming over it. "Not along it, not around it, but directly through our property," said Deborah Bedell, 54. "It's like finding out your 401(k) is in Enron stock." They will have to put off their plans to retire to a warmer climate until the process plays out, which could be years, they said. Opposition to the project is fierce. The Piedmont Environmental Council, a vociferous opponent of the power line, plans to hold a news conference today during which U.S. Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.) and actor Robert Duvall, who lives in Fauquier, are expected to speak. Eaton, a horse trainer and riding teacher, says she won't be able to afford her mortgage payments without selling part of her land, and she believes she will go bankrupt as a result. The farm had been her dream, Eaton said. She had looked for years for a property where she could care for her clients' horses, give riding lessons and invite drug-addicted and mentally ill women to enjoy the therapeutic effects of being near horses through a local equine-assisted psychotherapy program. She could help pay off the debt from the property and invest in her business, she calculated, by selling three subdivided plots for about $300,000 apiece. Then she learned from a friend that the properties she planned to sell were in one of the proposed paths for the line. "She said, 'Cammie, it's a direct hit,' " Eaton said. "I couldn't deal with it. I couldn't even ask questions. I had planned it all so well. My business plan was rock-solid."

4 3

Response to Longview @ PSC
by Duane330＠aol.com 07 Dec '06

07 Dec '06

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON Longview Power, LLC And Longview Power, LLC Case No. 03-1860-E-CS-CN Case No. 05-1467-E-CN RESPONSE AND OBJECTIONS OF BARBARA BORN, ET AL. TO THE PETITION OF LONGVIEW POWER, LLC FOR WAIVER OF MODIFICATION OR AMENDMENT REQUIREMENT FOR SITING CERTIFICATE TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF POWER PRODUCED I. INTRODUCTION On June 26, 2006, the Public Service Commission (PSC) granted certificates to Longview Power to construct at 600 MW coal-fired electric generation station and associated transmission line in the Cass District of Monongalia County, WV. On November 8, 2006, Longview Power submitted a Petition to the PSC to increase the power output of this plant to 695 MW with an increase in water usage but no increase in coal input. Barbara Born, et al. (Concerned Citizens) now responds and raises significant objections to the proposed plant. The resolution of these issues is of importance to the State and its citizens, particularly those residing in Monongalia County. Now, herewith, Concerned Citizens submits this Response and Objections to the Petition of Longview of November 8th, and requests a full hearing so that said objections can be considered, and related issues as stated herein can receive proper resolution. II. ARGUMENT The power output is to increase from 600 to 695 MW at constant maximum design heat input of 6,114 MM Btu per hour. And, the cooling water usage is to increase by about 12% to approximately 5,000 gallons per minute. This raises a number of issues and concerns for the Concerned Citizens and for the PSC, as follow: 1. The increased power generation level means an increase in the overall thermal efficiency of the plant, yet the increase in the cooling water rate means a decrease in the overall thermal efficiency of the plant. These conditions are at odds with each other, and a full explanation is necessary. A variety of impacts to the local environment will be precipitated by these changes, as indicated below. 2. An increased cooling water usage will require more or larger cooling towers, which will result in additional environmental impacts. The steam plume quantities in the local environment will be greater with attendant increased local rainout of pollutants and other impacts. The noise from cooling fans will be greater and, the view shed profiles will be increased. These problems are examined further below. 3. It is stated by Longview that “No modification of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permit issued by DEP to Longview is necessary due to the increased water usage by the facility.” This is a premature statement since no evidence of such a determination by WV-DEP is given, and because the existing permit is under appeal before the WV-Environmental Quality Board. 4. It is stated by Longview that the boiler building will increase from 257 feet high to 270 feet high, and the steam turbine building will increase from 100 feet high to 120 feet high. It is these heights that determine the plant primary stack height, currently at 557 feet. Good engineering practice will necessitate that the stack height be recalculated, to become a larger number, i.e. a higher stack will be required. Further, the air pollution modeling for the plant was based upon the previous values for the building and stack heights as well as previous values for the boiler exit temperature and the temperature profile in the stack. The air modeling needs now to be repeated to determine the impacts of pollutant dispersion on the local environment. Further, the stack height currently exceeds federal guidelines for obstacles in the vicinity of public airports; so the changes will require a re-examination of the stack height. 5. The issues raised in Argument 4 above will necessitate that the Air Quality Permit granted to Longview by the WV-DEP Division of Air Quality be reconsidered. Among the issues in need of consideration are (a) the new stack height determined from best engineering practice, (b) the number and quantity of cooling towers and the quantity and quality of the evaporated cooling water, (c) atmospheric dispersion modeling for the new stack and cooling towers given the new boiler building and steam turbine building, and other possible considerations some of which are mentioned below. 6. Longview reports that the view shed problems due to the boiler building and steam turbine building will increase from 2.08 square miles to 2.176 square miles. “The increase in building height causes a 0.6 percent increase in the area that can see the buildings.” However, the view shed problems are not well represented by these numbers or by this analysis technique. The residents of Ft. Martin, Bakers Ridge and Stewartstown will see a substantial increase in the size of the plant profile on the horizon as well as the extremely large steam plume that will dominate the day and night sky continuously. The views of the plant and its plumes from important observation sites at Coopers Rock, Dorsey’s Knob, and from the Evansdale and Medical Center campuses of West Virginia University will be significantly increased. 7. The cost of the proposed 600 MW power plant has gone from $940 million to $1.8 billion. Whether these are realistic estimates is not known to the Concerned Citizens; but clearly, it is important that the PSC know and understand the estimates for the capital and operating cost for the proposed plant. [Estimates for two coal-fired power plants proposed by Duke Energy to the North Carolina Utilities Commission (NCUC) were brought into question this past September; and, in late October Duke Energy notified the NCUC that the cost of these plants had gone up by 50% to $3.0 billion. The NCUC has now reopened the record and additional hearings will be held in January.] The cost issue is relevant to the financial viability of the proposed Longview power plant as well as to whether the public interest is served by the “payment in lieu of taxes” (PILOT) and other agreements pertaining to the proposed plant. 8. The decision of whether to build a conventional power plant such as a pulverized coal boiler unit or an advanced power plant such as an integrated gasification combined cycle system (IGCC) should involve environmental impacts and costs. Clearly, “best available control technology” (BACT) takes some account of the costs to achieve low environmental impacts. Given the high costs for a conventional power plant, as recently presented by Longview, it is now time to understand why the State of West Virginia cannot or should not benefit from advanced technology as represented by the IGCC option. Other BACT options may also be feasible given the new cost domain associated with the proposed plant. If Longview is to benefit from advances in boiler design, in achieving an increase from 600 to 695 MW with the same coal input, then the public should benefit from advances in environmental control at the same coal input level. III. RELIEF For these reasons, including other possible questions of financial viability, cooling tower performance and noise control that are still under study, it is appropriate that a full hearing on the various proposed changes be held. Only after the complete extent of the proposed changes have been determined and examined can a proper judgment be made as to the appropriate course for the future. It is the Public Service Commission that has the responsibility to gather the relevant information, hold hearings as appropriate to gain a complete understanding of the issues and information involved, and to render decisions in the public interest. The Public Service Commission must place the burden of proof upon Longview to establish that the public is protected. The primary purpose of the Commission is to serve the interests of the public. WHEREFORE, the Concerned Citizens respectfully request that the Petition of Longview Power of November 8, 2006, be denied subject to a full hearing for examination of all the details of anticipated impacts from the proposed changes. Barbara Born et al. (Concerned Citizens) By Counsel ________________________ Phillip D. Gaujot, Esquire (WVSB # 1355) 445 Lakeview Drive Morgantown, WV 216505 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON Longview Power, LLC And Longview Power, LLC Case No. 03-1860-E-CS-CN Case No. 05-1467-E-CN As counsel for Barbara Born, et al. (Concerned Citizens), I do hereby certify that on this 7th day of December 2006, copies of the foregoing “Response and Objections of Barbara Born, et al., to the Petition of Longview Power, LLC for Waiver of Modification or Amendment Requirement for Siting Certificate to Increase the Amount of Power Produced” were served upon the parties and/or counsel of record in this proceeding, and addressed as follows: Leslie J. Anderson, Staff Attorney Vincent Trivelli, Esquire Public Service Commission The Calwell Practice 201 Brooks Street 178 Chancery Row Charleston, WV 25301 Morgantown, WV 26505 Leonard Knee, Esquire Kathryn L. Patton, Esquire Bowles Rice McDavid Graff & Love LLP Allegheny Power 600 Quarrier Street 800 Cabin Hill Drive Charleston, WV 25301 Greensburg, PA 15601-1689 ______________________ Phillip D. Gaujot, Esquire WV Bar # 1355 445 Lakeview Drive Morgantown, WV 216505

1 0

WV sustainable communities project
by Duane330＠aol.com 12 Nov '06

12 Nov '06

Arbogast to lead WV Sustainable Communities Project CHARLESTON – An expert in sustainable communities with a special interest in ecotourism has been named project leader of the next West Virginia Sustainable Communities Project. Doug Arbogast, a Pennsylvania native and avid outdoor enthusiast, will lead six young adult interns in their efforts to conduct pollution prevention projects focused on energy efficiency, water conservation and waste minimization throughout 2007. The project will begin in January and will focus on all four sectors of the community including homes, schools, businesses and community institutions. “This is such an amazing opportunity for us, not only to continue on with this grassroots effort, but to see what people can do when you give them the right tools,” Arbogast said. “We are right now building an enthusiastic and committed team of interns who are willing to roll up their sleeves and make a difference one person, one community, one county at a time.” The project is a joint effort of the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, the Claude Worthington Benedum Foundation and the Student Conservation Association – Students Conserving America. In 2005-2006, a team of SCA interns was based in Summersville to target Nicholas and Braxton counties. In 2007, the momentum will continue in those areas while also targeting Gilmer and Fayette. There will be a statewide outreach and education campaign, but these four counties are targeted specifically because they are Alliance of West Virginia Champion Communities, which is a publicly and privately funded grassroots movement to empower communities to achieve sustainable development. “We will strive to have as broad an impact as possible while working hard to make a difference to individual citizens and communities,” he added. Arbogast earned his bachelor’s in environmental geo-science and a master’s in recreation, parks and tourism resources from West Virginia University. He was involved in the implementation in Richwood and Pineville of “Creating A Value Added Community Curriculum,” a pilot project for Appalachian communities developed to provide a business plan for poverty reduction and the creation of community wealth. He has served as a project coordinator for the West Virginia Ecotourism Association and earned a certificate in ecotourism planning and management from Humboldt State University in Arcata, Calif. He, his wife Susan and daughter Abby will reside in Fayette County during the project. For more information on the program, contact Arbogast at (304) 846-4268, (304) 619-0668 or _darbogast(a)thesca.org_ (mailto:darbogast@thesca.org) . >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday, October 25, 2006 @ 1:16 PM ============================================================ Sustainable communities program seeking interns CHARLESTON – Young adults with an interest in the environment and sustainability are encouraged to apply online for an internship with the West Virginia Sustainable Communities Project. This unique internship, which begins in January, offers young adults a chance to make a difference in the Mountain State. They will be part of a team that will conduct pollution prevention projects focused on energy efficiency, water conservation and waste minimization. The project focuses on all four sectors of the community: homes, schools, businesses and community institutions. Online applications will be accepted through Nov. 20. Members of the corps will conduct energy audits, help communities start recycling and composting programs, construct rain barrels, promote national and state programs related to conservation, and provide outreach and education through group presentations. They also will operate displays at community events and develop educational programs for schools and youth groups. Interns will spend half of their time in the field and the other half conducting research and coordinating events. They will report to a project leader. The project is a joint effort of the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, the Claude Worthington Benedum Foundation, and the SCA – Students Conserving America. In 2005-2006, the program was based in Summersville so interns could target Nicholas and Braxton counties. In 2007, it will keep the momentum going in those areas while also targeting Gilmer and Fayette. There will be a statewide outreach and education campaign, but these four counties are targeted specifically because they are Alliance of West Virginia Champion Communities, which is a publicly and privately funded grassroots movement to empower communities to achieve sustainable development. Candidates must have a valid driver’s license and a clean driving record. They should have strong interpersonal skills, the willingness to work as part of a close team, the ability to work independently when necessary, a strong commitment to service, and a passion for sustainability issues. Experience in pollution prevention projects and programs as well as a background in environmental studies and sustainable practices are also desired. Housing and a stipend will be provided. Interns will be based in Fayette County. For more information and to apply online, go to www.thesca.org, select internships and jobs then West Virginia Sustainable Communities Project. For more information on the project, contact Doug Arbogast, project leader, at (304) 846-4268 or (304) 619-0668. E-mail him at darbogast(a)thesca.org. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

1 0

Reducing Global Warming Impacts
by Duane330＠aol.com 12 Nov '06

12 Nov '06

**************For immediate Release************** Subject: The Cool Cities Program on Global Warming Title: Reducing the Impacts of Carbon Dioxide Emission Contact: Joshua Rutkowski 304-296-3967 jrutkow(a)gmail.com Date: Wednesday, November 15th 2006, at 7 pm. Place: Morgantown Public Safety Building Concerned about global warming and its influence on our future? Join us for a meeting about taking charge of our own carbon dioxide emissions. Citizens, businesses and community leaders will be meeting this Wednesday at 7 p.m. in the Morgantown Public Safety Building to discuss our local impact on global climate change. The meeting will cover how Morgantown can take responsibility for its carbon dioxide emissions. The Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition joins the Monongahela Chapter of the Sierra Club as sponsors of this event. Please come on out, and help out; it's not too early; and, it's not too late.

1 0

Letter to the Army Corps
by Linda Shuster 02 Nov '06

02 Nov '06

>> The message below is from the WV Highlands Conservancy. Consider >> sending a letter, and checking out the link to an alternative energy >> blog at the end of the message. -Linda >> West Virginia Highlands Conservancy www.wvhighlands.org >> > In 1997 Jimmy Weekly walked into Joe Lovett’’s law office and asked >> for help to fight a 3,000 acre (~5 square miles) mountaintop removal >> coal mine planned for the hollow where his family had lived for >> decades. Spruce #1 was to be a continuation of the nearly 9,000 acre >> Dal-Tex mine that had already destroyed the community of Blair on the >> other side of Rt 17 in Logan County. > > The mountains surrounding the Weekly home would be blasted apart >> and Pigeonroost Branch would be filled from its beginning high in the >> hills for over a mile on down to within spitting distance of Jim and >> Sibbey Weekly’’s home. > > WV Highlands Conservancy joined the Weeklys and >> five other families whose homes were threatened by other similar >> mining proposals in the lawsuit titled Bragg v Robertson. Ruling on >> part of that litigation in 1998, Judge Charles Haden found that the >> 3,000 acre mine in Pigeonroost hollow would cause significant >> irreversible damage and that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) >> would be necessary before the large fills of the Spruce #1 mine > could be allowed. > > The final EIS has been released and comments are due by >> November 22, 2006. Talking points are below. Send your comments to >> Mrs. Teresa Spagna, Regulatory Project Manager, U.S.Army Corps of >> Engineers, 502 8th St., Huntington, WV 25701 or email to >> Teresa.D.Spagna(a)lrh01.usace.army.mil >> >> > Mingo Logan Spruce No. 1 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS): > > Talking Points >> The Mine: Mingo Logan, Spruce No 1 Mine, six valley fills with >> permanent discharge of fill material into approximately 36,814 linear >> feet of intermittent and ephemeral jurisdictional streams (i.e. >> approx. 7 miles) and .12 acres of wetlands. The project will also >> have terrestrial impacts of 2,278 acres or 3.55 square miles. The >> proposed project is located in the Spruce Fork watershed of the > Little Coal River near Blair in Logan County, West Virginia. >> > > Talking points: >> >> · The Corps has issued a final Environmental Impact Statement >> (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on this >> mine. Under NEPA, the Corps’’ EIS must consider all past, present and >> future direct and indirect environmental harms of a proposed action. >> Under the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Corps cannot issue a 404 permit >> if it would cause significant degradation of the environment. > >> · The Corps’’ entire rationale for finding no significant >> environmental degradation hinges on its claim that, even though >> Spruce Mine No. 1 would bury seven miles of streams, those losses >> are offset by environmental gains due to compensatory mitigation. > >> · That rationale is both dishonest and unscientific. > >> · The company’’s mitigation plan is based on a phony stream >> assessment method that the company made up and that, >> according to the Corps’’ own regulatory chief, is “not scientifically >> defensible.” > >> · Contrary to CWA requirements, the Corps has no other approved >> method for assessing and mitigating the biological, chemical and >> physical functions of buried streams. > >> · Despite the absence of any functional assessment method, the >> Corps claims that the mitigation plan has a “high” chance of success. > >> · That claim of mitigation success is unfounded, since the >> Corps itself admits that functioning headwater streams have >> never been created successfully anywhere in the country. > >> · The mitigation plan would also trade minor enhancements of a >> different stream (e.g. bank stabilization) for total destruction of >> headwater streams, even though there is no scientific evidence that >> this enhancement will compensate fully for the functions of the lost >> streams. > >> · The Corps requires no meaningful long-term monitoring to >> ensure that mitigation will actually work as planned. > >> · Cumulatively, past and planned mines and valley fills in the >> Spruce Fork watershed cover 35.5% of total stream length and an >> alarming 44% of first order stream length. In the entire Coal River >> watershed (of which Spruce Fork is a part), past and planned mines > and > valley fills conservatively cover 11.5% of total streams and > 14.9% of first order streams. Although the Corps claims that this > cumulative >> devastation is insignificant, expert stream biologists believe that > it is very significant and alarming. > >> · The Corps has ignored the information it collected in >> preparing the October 2005 Mountaintop Removal Programmatic >> Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). That information also >> demonstrates that the cumulative impacts of past and present mining >> are significant. > >> · The Corps fails to evaluate adequately the harmful effects of >> selenium contamination on streams and aquatic life, even though the >> Mountaintop Removal PEIS identified the Spruce mine area as a >> selenium hot spot. > >> · The Corps does not independently evaluate the risk of >> flooding and ignores information in the Mountaintop EIS that says >> flooding risk is increased at mining sites. > >> · The Corps erroneously claims that reforestation at mining >> sites has been successful despite the fact that experts say >> restoration of forests to former productivity under current generally >> used planting protocols does not occur at all and that even less >> desirable forests will take more than a hundred years to develop if >> they develop at all. > >> · The Corps fails to consider significant and irreparable >> impacts on the citizens living in the area including flooding, danger >> from coal trucks, traffic, dust, decline of property values, noise, >> blasting impacts, aesthetic loss and community disruption. >> >> Conclusion >> >> The Corps’’ FEIS for the Mingo Logan Spruce No. 1 Mine does not > comply > with the NEPA or the CWA. Over and over again the Corps has > made unsubstantiated claims minimizing the individual and cumulative >> damages from MTR and embellishing the benefits of the planned >> mitigation. If the Corps had thoughtfully used prevailing science to >> evaluate the project, it would have to conclude that significant harm >> to the environment and communities has already occurred and the >> proposal will add to the devastation. Thus, because the FEIS is >> flawed the only alternative is for the Corps to either deny the > permit or to extensively reevaluate the FEIS, the project, and the > mitigation plan. >> >> >> "Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, things aren't going >> to get better, they're not!" From The Lorax by Dr. Suess >> >> What you do is of little significance; but it is very important that >> you do it. -Mohandas K. Gandhi (1869-1948) >> >> For The Mountains >> Julian Martin >> Vice-President for State Affairs >> West Virginia Highlands Conservancywww.wvhighlands.org >> 1525 Hampton Road, Charleston, WV 25314 > > > Contact me(martinjul(a)aol.com) for a trip to Kayford Mountain to see >> active and so-called reclaimed mountain top removal. Also contact me >> for I Love Mountains t-shirts, hats and bumper stickers(for pictures >> go to wvhighlands.org ) and for speakers, information and exhibits on >> environmental issues in West Virginia. > >> And check out these blogs on mountain top removal >> >> http://www.clipfile.org/antrim/http://mtrinfo.wordpress.com >> >> This one on alternative energy >> http://alt-e.blogspot.com/2006/10/clean-coal-or-dirty-coal.html

1 0

Thanks!
by William Wonderlin 01 Nov '06

01 Nov '06

A week ago today, several CALP/MVCAC members made the trip to Charleston for our final appeal to the WV Supreme Court to overturn the Public Service Commission's approval of Longview's siting and transmission line certificates. The road to our day in court was, in fact, much longer than a 160 mile drive down I-79, because it really was the culmination of the effort to stop Longview that we began organizing in late 2002 and continued through the PSC's review from 2003 until now. As you have probably heard, the Supreme Court voted 4 to 1 not to hear our appeal. The justices' decision was a bitter disappointment given the many good arguments and the weight of evidence on our side. Although Longview still needs more permits, the Supreme Court's decision is the end of the road for challenging the PSC's approval of Longview's certificates. This truly was a battle of David versus Goliath, and the big money and political influence wielded by Longview's proponents outweighed the public's welfare. It has been a reminder that the people who ultimately make the big decisions that influence our communities and environment often fly under the public's radar. Too few people are aware of the irresponsible decisions made by our County Commission, the pro-business appointees on the Public Service Commission, the corruption and incompetence of the Supreme Court justices, or the myopic lobbying by the construction trades. With West Virginia now being "Open for Business", we need to be even more vigilant and active in protecting our communities and environment. I am certainly looking at the recent deluge of election flyers from the Affiliated Construction Trades in a different light now. So, where does this leave us? First of all, as Jim Kotcon has frequently reminded us, "we haven't lost--they haven't built Longview." We have been successful in delaying the construction of Longview, and perhaps it never will be built. Although coal-fired power plants are a hot commodity these days, the delay might have bought enough time for potential investors to want to take a closer look at whether it really is a good idea to build a new coal-fired power plant with out-of-date technology. Some utility companies are beginning to push for higher-tech, cleaner coal-fired power plants in anticipation of new and costly regulations that are likely to come into effect during the lifetime of the power plants. Perhaps those concerns will diminish the interest of investors in Longview. Second, our experience with Longview has greatly increased the local awareness of air quality issues, and we must continue to work on these issues. Our opposition to Longview was a reactive effort--it's time to be proactive. ----------------------------------- Now, for the important part! Thanks to the all of the people who: *wrote letters to our County Commissioners, the DEP and the PSC *spoke out in favor of better air quality *made donations to help stop Longview *handed out flyers *attended countless organizational meetings *wrote letters to the editor opposing Longview *generally helped raise public awareness of our concerns about air quality A special thanks must also go to Phil Gaujot, our fearless lawyer who led us through the legal jungle of the PSC & Supreme Court. Phil displayed a lot of passion and professionalism in preparing for the PSC & Supreme Court and going toe-to-toe with the lawyers for Longview. He ensured that we left no stone unturned in developing our case against Longview, and, judged on its merits, we should have prevailed. Thanks, Bill Wonderlin

4 3

Next MVCAC meeting
by Duane330＠aol.com 22 Oct '06

22 Oct '06

Dear Friends, it's time to plan our next meeting of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition......... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COOL ROOFS - AN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOLUTION CBS 3 - TV News (Philadelphia) featured a segment on alternative energy solutions on Aug. 3, during its 4 p.m. news. Meteorologist Maria LaRosa discussed the environmental and economic benefits of cool roofs with EPA's Stephanie Lamster. Cool roof technology can be a boon on hot days. The technology coats a roof surface with a reflective material that can lower a building's roof surface temperature by up to 100 degrees Farenheit. Interior temperatures are also lowered, reducing cooling costs by up to 50 percent.

1 0

Doing Our Part, RE: Climate Change
by Duane330＠aol.com 19 Oct '06

19 Oct '06

Will Morgantown Become a Cool City? The Monongahela Group of Sierra Club has been encouraging the Morgantown City Council to participate in the Cool Cites Campaign by signing the U. S, Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement. This Agreement pledges the City to reduce its emissions of greenhouse gases by 7 % below 1990 levels by the year 2012. The real goal of this Campaign is not so much in passing a resolution, but in providing a long-term mechanism to develop an emissions baseline, implement emissions reductions, and track success in a meaningful way. It is clear that, although we might get a resolution passed in City Council, the effort needed to actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions will require community support beyond what can be generated by any one organization. Thus it is our hope to engage the broader community in this effort as a long range campaign to conserve energy and reduce pollution emissions. While many money-saving practices can be adopted easily, some of the changes needed may require substantive efforts by the City, and this can only happen if their is broad support in advance. Thus we want to engage other organizations in this effort early, and identify ways that each can build on the strenghts of the others to encourage wider participation. While there has been some support in Morgantown City Council, it is clear that a broader community-wide effort is now needed. Therefore, we plan to host a meeting of community leaders at 7 PM on Nov. 15 at the Morgantown Public Safety Building. Our tentative agenda would include: 1) Introduction of the organization representatives and interested citizens, 2) Introduction to the U. S, Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement and resources available through the the Cool Cities Campaign. 3) Informal brainstorming and planning to identify specific needs of each entity and how they can contribute most effectively. 4) Develop a list of actions and tactics as "next steps" in the campaign. 5) Social hour for further informal discussions Submitted by : Jim Kotcon, Sierra Club, MVCAC, CLEAR, et al. Would the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition be willing to co-host this event? Tell me your questions or comments if you have any reservations, as our decision process is by "consensus". Thanks, Duane Nichols

1 0

proposed Longview plant-- news
by Duane330＠aol.com 19 Oct '06

19 Oct '06

NOTICE: The "concerned citizens of Monongalia County" will present their Appeal of the Longview siting and transmission certificates to the state Supreme Court this coming Tuesday, October 24th, shortly after 10 am in the East Wing of the Capitol Complex, in Charleston, WV. These proceedings are open to the public. Our lawyer Phil Gaugot will have about 5 minutes to review our case, which has already been presented in written form as a petition. Longview, the PSC, and the Building Trades will each have about 5 minutes for rebuttal. Then, within a day or two the Supreme Court will decide whether to schedule the case for full hearing or to set it aside (reject it). Jarrett Jamison will be driving a new Suburban and invites anyone who wishes to ride along to join him; please call Jarrett on 292-2323 to arrange to park in Westover and meet him at around 7 am on October 24th. [Jarrett has an email address: Jarrett425(a)aol.com] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Recent Information On Longview Power, LLC I presented the following information to the Mon County Commission yesterday. 1. The ownership of Longview Power, LLC, has changed to: 10% GenPower, LLC (the former owner) 90% GenPower Holdings, L.P., a Cayman Islands Limited Partnership. 2. The above change was made after First Reserve Corporation joined GenPower as a venture partner. First Reserve has been in business for a number of years to promote a wide variety of energy related projects. 3. Longview has changed the estimated cost of the proposed power plant to 1.8 billion dollars, from an initial estimate of around 900 million, to an estimated 1.2 billion this past April. 4. First Reserve has put 500 million on the table as equity financing. Now, I don't believe that a check was actually written, rather a letter was probably provide to state their intention. So 1.8 billion minus 500 million, that leaves 1.3 billion yet to be raised. [Seems to me, if you raise the cost by 600 million, then claim equity of 500 million, you now have more to raise than before.] SO, FINANCING FOR THIS PROPOSED PLANT IS STILL UP IN THE AIR. 5. Longview stated that they are aiming for a start of construction this January. This is not feasible since they must submit blue prints 120 days before construction, and they still have a number of outstanding permits to secure. 6. I pointed out that I would have preferred a county wide referendum on this proposed plant as the majority of citizens have questions about it. Commissioner Kennedy said that according to the law, they are not allowed to put this question out for referendum. 7. I pointed out that the Ft. Martin Church received a letter from Longview requesting permission to place a noise monitor on the Church, and this the same day that Longview submitted a brief to the Public Service Commission stating that the Ft. Martin Church was uncooperative. 8. I pointed out some of my own problems with the Longview plant, to night glow, the large steam plume, the fine particulates (non-attainment) problems, noise and traffic on local roads, and a very very large addition to greenhouse (carbon dioxide) gas emissions in the county. Commissioner Kennedy said that he understood these problems and had some concerns too. He said that he had been told that there would be no steam plume (but there will be). He said that he liked the idea that some trees are being planted around the region to help bring the carbon dioxide problem under control; and I said that this will be an insignificant improvement, and he nodded agreement with that. 9. I talked about Longview's incomplete information to the PSC regarding estimated taxes, the offense PILOT agreement, the noise studies and the incomplete specification of the plant equipment and viewshed. They were very attentive and thanked me for presenting this information. 10. Commissioner Bell (President of the Commission) said that he was going to refer some of these questions to the County Development Authority, that he didn't know whether the agreements with Longview would be affected. Both Commissioners said they were trying to do their best, believing the benefits to the county will be substantial, with some disadvantages. Duane Nichols, Convenor, Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition, P. O. Box 4679, Morgantown, WV 26504-4679

1 0

proposed Longview power plant............
by Duane330＠aol.com 17 Oct '06

17 Oct '06

THE PROPOSED LONGVIEW POWER PLANT On October 12th, 90% Ownership of Longview, LLC was assigned to GenPower Holdings, L.P., a Cayman Islands Limited Partnership, according to documents filed with the WV Public Service Commission. See below. [Note: The announcement that Longview has acquired $1.8 billion in financing is incomplete without a full disclosure of all the conditions and stipulations attached thereto. It would be in the public interest for these conditions to be known, as they are relevant to the public understanding of this proposed power plant project. We do know that the Siting and Transmission Certificates are under appeal to the WV Supreme Court of Appeals, the preliminary hearing being scheduled for October 24th at 10 a.m. in Charleston. We also know that the Storm Water permits for construction and for operation have not been granted, as is the case for a few other permits.] Duane Nichols, Convenor, MVCAC. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOTICE OF TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF LONGVIEW POWER, LLC Comes Longview Power, LLC (“Longview”) by counsel, and provides notice to the Public Service Commission (“PSC” or “Commission”) that the ownership of Longview Power, LLC has been transferred in part to a third party. Longview will retain both the Siting Certificate for the facility and the Certificate of Convenience and Necessity for the transmission line. Longview makes this notice even though a change in the ownership of Longview does not require notice to the Commission under either the certificate of site approval statute or regulations. The PSC’s regulations, as quoted below, require notice to the Commission only if the Siting Certificate itself is transferred or assigned to a new owner. In the case of the transmission line certificate of convenience and necessity, Commission approval is required only when a public utility holds the certificate, and Longview is not a public utility. 1. Under the Exempt Wholesale Generator (EWG) Siting Regulations, 5 150-30-7.1, the Commission must be given thirty days’ notice of a transfer of ownership or assignment of an siting certificate: [The owner or operator shall, at least 30 days prior to the closing date of such transfer or assignment, provide the Commission with notice of the identity of the transferee, the mailing address of the transferee, the name and mailing addresses of the management members or officers of the transferee and an affidavit of the transferee stating that the transferee agrees that it is bound by all terms and conditions of the Siting certificate for the 24-2-1 1 (c) facility.] 2. Under West Virginia Code (“WVC”) §24-2-12(g) a public utility must obtain advance approval from the Commission before a third party “acquires directly or indirectly a majority of the common stock of any public utility organized and doing business in this state.” 3. The Commission has specifically held that Longview, like other EWG facilities, is not a public utility. Longview Power, LLC, Case No. 03-1 860-E-CS, Order entered August 27, 2004, (“[T]he Commission recognizes that an exempt wholesale generator is not a regulated public utility., .”), p. 117. 4. The Commission has specifically held that the “enactment of W.Va. Code $24-2-1 IC, clarified that the requirements of W.Va. Code §24-2-12(g) do not apply when an EWG decides to sell or otherwise transfer a siting certificate issued by the Commission.” [Nedpower Mount Storm, LLC and Shell Windenergy, Inc., Case No. 05-1486-E-PC, Conclusion of Law, No. 1, Order entered December 14,2005, p. 10. ] 5. Though the Siting Certificate and the Certificate of Convenience and Necessity are not being transferred or assigned, Longview has elected to provide this notice to the Commission of the transfer of ownership. 6. On October 12, 2006, GenPower, LLC transferred ninety percent (90%) of its membership interest in Longview to GenPower Holdings, L.P., a Cayman Islands Limited Partnership: On that date the ownership of Longview became: 90% Ownership - GenPower Holdings, L.P. 10% Ownership - GenPower, LLC. 7. The mailing address of GenPower, LLC is 1040 Great Plain Avenue, Needham, MA 02492. 8. The names and addresses of the managing members of GenPower, LLC are as follows: Robert D. S. Place, Chairman and Managing Director, 1040 Great Plain Avenue, Needham, MA 02492. John A. O’Leary-Vice Chairman and Managing Director, 1040 Great Plain Avenue, Needham, MA 02492. 9. The mailing address of GenPower Holdings, L.P., is 1 Lafayette Place, Greenwich, CT 06830. 10. The directors of GenPower Holdings, L.P. are as follows: Anne E. Gold, 1 Lafayette Place, Greenwich, CT 06830 Mark McComiskey, 1 Lafayette Place, Greenwich, CT 06830 11. Longview acknowledges that it remains obligated and bound by all terms and conditions of the Siting Certificate and Certificate of Convenience and Necessity issued by the Commission in the above-referenced cases and will ensure that the terms and conditions of the Siting Certificate and Certificate of Convenience and Necessity are met. 12. Longview will continue to be responsible for compliance and reporting on the same to the Commission. Longview will continue to honor all agreements entered into with third parties relating to the construction and operation of the EWG facility and transmission line. LONGVIEW POWER, LLC By Counsel Lynn C. Photiadis, Esquire (SB #284) Bowles Rice McDavid Graff & Love LLP 600 Quarrier Street, Post Office Box 1386 Charleston, West Virginia 25325-1386 Counsel for Longview Power, LLC

2 1

Slogan
by Linda Shuster 16 Oct '06

16 Oct '06

Some of you may have noticed the "Open for Business" slogan that has been added to the West Virginia signs at the borders. Many people have objected to this slogan, because it implies that we will welcome any business, no matter how negative its effects might be on the state and the environment. There is an online petition to Governor Manchin that asks that the slogan be removed. According to the Charleston Gazette: "It was the 20th most popular petition on an international site that boasts thousands of petitions." If you would like to sign the petition, go to the url below:. www.petitiononline.com/open4biz/petition.html Linda

1 0

PSC approves Net Metering
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 14 Oct '06

14 Oct '06

For Immediate Release 10-11-06 Contact; Gary Zuckett, WV Citizen Action Group 304-346-5891 *Community Groups Applaud PSC Agreement on Net Metering* Charleston -- Citizen groups and electric utilities testified before the WV Public Service Commission yesterday in support of a package of standards to allow homeowners who generate their own electricity using renewable methods such as wind and solar to "run the meter backwards" and actually send their excess power to the public electric grid. Net Metering, as this is called, is already allowed in all surrounding states but the rules in each state vary widely. "This agreement is a great start into Net Metering," commented Gary Zuckett, of WV Citizen Action, one of the parties of the negotiation process which brought the proposed rules to the Commission, "This will give a much needed economic incentive for homeowners and small business to install wind & solar generation equipment." Commission staff and the Consumer Advocate, Billy Jack Greg, brought together stakeholders including, AEP, Allegheny, APCO, APC and other utilities and the WV Environmental Council and WV Citizen Action Group to work out differences in their concepts of how Net Metering should be implemented in WV. After hearing no objections to the consensus agreement at the hearing yesterday, the Commissioners took a short recess then came back in and passed the Net Metering rules. The agreement accepted by the Commission has several benchmarks that are favorable for homeowners and small businesses who want to trade excess generated power back to their utilities to offset their electric bill: 1. An even trade for power used vs. power returned to the utility's grid. In other words power sent into the grid would be credited as an offset to the customer's future electric bill on a net kwh basis (the utility's applicable retail rate). In contrast, Ohio's reimbursement only cover's the utilities fuel costs (a wholesale rate much lower than retail) 2. This generation credit will be carried over on a rolling twelve (12) month basis. Again, Ohio has only a one-month window to redeem such credits. 3. Maximum rating of Net Metering installations is 25 Kilowatts where many states limits are 10 KW. William DePaulo, counsel for the citizen's groups closed his presentation to the Commission with the following comment , "My clients, WV Environmental Council and Citizen Action Group, support these Net Metering rules as a good beginning of the active promotion of domestic small-scale alternative energy generation. Our long term goal should be to maximize production of non-fossil based energy. Future generations are depending on our commitment today to deal with potentially irreversible climate change linked to our fossil-based economy. The production of clean energy is an essential component of this critical effort to combat global warming." Federal tax credits can offset up to 30% of the cost of new Net Metering installations for homeowners and small businesses. In addition, many states have their own tax incentives or matching grants to promote renewable energy. "West Virginia's new net metering standards put it in a good position to enter the emerging market of small-scale renewable energy generation. More and more households and small businesses in Ohio are opting to trim or eliminate their electric bill by becoming part of the solution to our nation's energy crisis through Net Metering," commented Matthew Bennett of DovetailSolar.com a SE Ohio company that specializes in solar and wind energy installations, "Now its time for the WV Legislature to step up to the plate and provide state tax credits or other incentives to kick-start the market." In Ohio, the Dept. of Economic Development's Office of Energy Efficiency administers an "Energy Loan Fund" (http://www.odod.state.oh.us/cdd/oee/ELFGrant.htm ) which includes a variety of loan and grant programs providing economic incentives for renewable energy installations for both homeowners and small business. This ten million dollar a year development program is funded by a small surcharge on consumer's monthly electric bills. PSC Net Metering References, Case No. 06-0708-E-GI: http://www.psc.state.wv.us/imaged_files/Docket/2006_09/dck20060914165633.pdf WV Citizen Action filed Comments http://www.psc.state.wv.us/imaged_files/Docket/2006_09/dck20060915161314.pdf WVEC comments http://www.psc.state.wv.us/imaged_files/Docket/2006_10/dck20061003105039.pdf Consensus document filed with PSC

1 0

future articles
by Paul Brown 14 Oct '06

14 Oct '06

As many of you know, the articles I write are for an ongoing series called The Clock is Ticking. The archive of more than 2 years' weekly articles is at http://clockticking.com. For a free email subscription, send an email to subscribe(a)clockticking.com. To subscribe to my free daily newslink service send an email to esamizdat(a)clockticking.com with "subscribe" in the subject line. Paul Brown Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512

1 0

Minutes from 9/25/06
by Duane330＠aol.com 09 Oct '06

09 Oct '06

Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition Meeting Minutes September 25, 2006 The monthly meeting of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition (MVCAC) was held on Monday, September 25, 2006 at the home of Martha and Larry Schwab. Attendees: Duane N., Bill W., Jarrett J., Sandy E., Larry S., Paul B., Bobby M., Mark B., Paula H., Jim E., Martha S., Jim K. Duane provided the Treasurer’s Report on behalf of Treasurer Cindy O’Brien, who was unable to attend the meeting. MVCAC currently has a balance of $105.65 in its checking account. Since the last meeting, we paid $1,000 to Synapse Energy. We still owe Synapse $1,000. Synapse provided much needed expert testimony for the Public Service Commission hearing on Longview Power’s Siting Certificate and Certificate of Need for a Transmission Line. There was some discussion of the Sierra Club helping MVCAC with some of its expenses. Jim K. said those invoices must be submitted very, very soon. Duane said he visited USEPA Region III headquarters in Philadelphia recently. The librarian was excited to help him, since she receives few visitors. Unfortunately, most of the reports on the shelves were quite dated. Duane also spoke to the person nominally in charge of our area regarding the acid-mine-drainage-cooling water coming from Pennsylvania for the proposed Longview power plant in West Virginia. He voiced concerns that the large amount of water being evaporated (3,700 gallons per minute) would create clouds, and those clouds would have large quantities of dissolved solids, due to the source of the water. The USEPA representative told Duane that essentially, she could not help us. She said Longview’s cooling-water clouds were up to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Division of Air Quality. Duane discussed Longview’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater permit application and draft permit. Some of the meeting attendees present had also attended the DEP’s public hearing regarding the draft permit. Longview applied for a stormwater permit for the construction of a parking lot and construction trailer, and then applied for a permit to operate a power plant, without a permit application to complete the major portion of the construction activities. DEP granted them a draft permit for the construction and operation on the basis of these incomplete applications. Duane thinks all of our comments at the public hearing and our letters and various phone calls are having an impact on this stormwater permit. Matt Sweeney at the DEP is the permit writer. Jarrett called him several days ago, and Mr. Sweeney had not looked at any of the public comments yet. None of the attendees present knew of a statutory deadline for DEP to approve or deny a stormwater permit. They are generally considered to be fairly routine – at least until now. Duane reported on his email interactions with Billy Jack Gregg, the PSC’s Consumer Advocate, regarding the proposed scrubbers at Fort Martin. Below is Mr. Gregg’s response: Yes, you heard right. The estimate for the construction costs of the plant that was included in the PSC's securitization order was $338 million. Allegheny has now come back and told us that based on site specific engineering, the cost will be closer to $500 million. They have not made any formal filing with the PSC as of yet. My initial reaction is to stick with securitization at $338 million and have Allegheny finance the difference, using traditional rate making for any recovery of their investment. This may ultimately cost more in the long run than securitizing the entire amount, but I think it places an appropriate share of the risk on Allegheny and will provide a better incentive for them to minimize costs. The irony here is that if they had come initially and estimated the cost to be $500 million, we probably would have approved it, since the cost is still less than the scrubbers at Harrison that were installed in 1994. Billy Jack Gregg, PSC Consumer Advocate ---------------------------------- By consensus, the participants present decided that MVCAC would send a letter to Billy Jack Gregg at the PSC stating that MVCAC does not support securitization of the additional cost in the form of a flat rate per month, but rather, MVCAC supports a rate-based approach in combination with passing the additional cost on to Allegheny Energy’s stockholders. Duane noted that when Allegheny Energy pleaded its case for securitization of the $330+ million before the PSC, the company was close to bankruptcy. Now revenues are up and its stock has increased and has even been rated a “Buy” by some stock-rating companies. The Internal Revenue Service has been contacted regarding MVCAC’s application for 501( c)(3) nonprofit status and was told we were in the queue, but they have only now reviewed applications submitted in December 2005. MVCAC’s application was submitted in February 2006. Apparently, if the IRS does not approve nonprofit status right away it means something about the application requires more scrutiny. Duane tried to call the person assigned to the case, Ms. Schaal, but she was unavailable. The meeting attendees agreed by consensus that MVCAC should continue to contact Ms. Schaal by telephone in an attempt to determine why our application was not considered to be straightforward. An overview was presented of the West Virginia Public Service Commission’s conditional approval of Longview Power’s Siting Certificate and Certificate of Need for a Transmission Line in August and the appeal by Concerned Citizens, CRD, CALP, CLEAR, and others at the State Supreme Court. The Supreme Court will hear the petition to appeal on October 24, 2006. Phil Gaujot, despite recently having the lobe of one lung removed, has agreed to present the petition on behalf of Concerned Citizens. Jim K. commented on the new USEPA air standard for fine particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5).. Jim basically said, The EPA … lowered the daily standard from 65 down to 35 ug/m3; however, they left the annual standard at 15 ug/m3, ignoring their own science advisory panel that recommended a level between 12 and 14. The American Lung Association was recommending a daily standard of 25 ug/m3, much lower than the EPA’s 35µg/m3. For Morgantown, PM2.5 has been coming down in recent years. Our 3-year average was right at the annual limit (15 ug/m3), but the scrubbers at Fort Martin should reduce that somewhat. Nevertheless, our daily peaks have been at or above the 35 ug/m3 standard in some years, and our annual average is well above the 12 ug/m3 that the American Lung Association recommended. The new standards are proposed to go into effect in 2007, with nonattainment designations to be made in 2009. Areas with bad air would not have to reduce pollution to attain the new standard until 2015, so please hold your breath until then. Dennis G. sent a note saying he regretted being unable to attend the meeting, so his “Update on the Nemacolin Greene Energy Resource Recovery Project (GERRP)” email was read to the attendees and is as follows: MVCAC donated some of the first funds that got the appeal going. The hearing of the appeal before the PA Environmental Hearing Board concluded in June. The final post-hearing briefs have been filed in the past week or so. We expect a ruling from the PA Environmental Hearing Board late this year - most likely November, but perhaps sooner. It can't be much later, because the developer must, under PA law, begin construction sometime in December (18 months after the permit was granted, with no adjustment for appeals). I was in a conference call yesterday with the other appellants and our attorneys. Of the four major issues we have raised, we think we have a reasonable chance on two of them. But we also realize that we will most likely need to carry the appeal to a higher level. We're lining up counsel for that. Please extend my thanks again, and those of the other GERRP appellants, for MVCAC’s crucial early support. Jim reminded the group that Longview in WV also had an 18-month deadline to start construction, but they quietly asked for and received an extension for two years from the WV DEP. The WV DEP considered it a minor permit modification. Paula said she would mention this to Dennis. The meeting participants suggested that the appellants require GERRP to notify the appellants, send them a copy of any extension request, and require PADEP to accept public comment before deciding on an extension. There was some discussion of a public event: bringing in speakers to talk about air quality. Possible speakers would be from the WVDEP, USEPA, American Lung Association, WVU Hospitals/Health Sciences Center, etc. Specific names were mentioned and some of those people will be called to see if they would participate. Bill announced that the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), responsible for submitting this area’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan, is having its last public meeting on October 4th at 6:30pm at the Erickson Alumni Center. Bill felt that we needed a good turnout and we need to challenge the MPO and its consultants about the plan. The plan consists of building more roads with little or no planning for mass transportation or alternate forms of transportation. The MPO and its Plan ignores air quality and the fact that this area is teetering on the brink of nonattainment. Bill asked that everyone please attend this meeting. Jarrett said he sent the WVDEP/DAQ information about mercury that he received from NIOSH. Jim K. reported on the Sierra Club’s Cool Cities initiative with the City of Morgantown and the Sierra Student Coalition’s (Student Sierra Coalition?) initiative to do the same with WVU and the “Campus Climate Challenge,” the university equivalent of Cool Cities. By consensus, the participants present decided that MVCAC would send a letter to Morgantown City Manager Dan Boroff in support of the Cool Cities initiative. In addition, the participants present decided, by consensus, that MVCAC would send a letter to WVU’s Board of Governors requesting that they choose a University President that will lead the state in environmental initiatives (not just to football conference championships). Jarrett discussed the Indiana bat and Running Buffalo Clover in relation to the Longview site. Jarrett noted that Longview does not have the letters it needs from the Fish & Wildlife Service, The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), or the Army Corps of Engineers. Bill noted that a recent issue of Scientific American is devoted entirely to energy, with a large discussion of the use of coal in energy production. The meeting was adjourned around 9:00 pm. Respectfully submitted, Paula Hunt, Assistant to the Secretary, September 26, 2006. [Reviewed and distributed on October 9, 2006.]

1 0

Local hot climate...Post Gazette
by duane330＠aol.com 06 Oct '06

06 Oct '06

URL for article: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06279/727848-113.stm Study says Pittsburgh to be one hot town Fossil fuels seen to cause soaring temperatures here Friday, October 06, 2006 By Don Hopey, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette "Hot enough for you?" It's a common, sweltering, summertime query on the streets of Pittsburgh, but no matter what your response, you ain't seen nothing yet. James Hilston, Post-Gazette A new two-year study of climate change projections in the northeastern United States. By the end of this century, summers in Pittsburgh could resemble those in Georgia or Alabama if we continue the unabated burning of fossil fuels -- coal, oil and natural gas, according to a new two-year study of climate change projections in the northeastern United States. The Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment report released Wednesday says Pittsburgh, which annually averages nine days above 90 degrees and one day above 100 degrees now, could, by 2100, see 66 days above 90 degrees and 24 days above 100 degrees. Even if we begin to substantially reduce emissions of heat-trapping gases today, Pittsburgh's summer in 2100 will still warm up to resemble the temperatures now found in Kentucky and Virginia. That means the city will experience 30 days above 90 degrees and six days above 100 degrees. Such extreme heat can be problematic in urban areas, where it is amplified by the heat island effect and can create dangerous, unhealthy conditions for the elderly, children and other vulnerable populations. "The very notion of the Northeast as we know it is at stake," said Cameron Wake, co-lead author of the report and research associate professor at the University of New Hampshire's Climate Change Research Center. "The near-term choices we make in the Northeast and around the world will help determine the climate and quality of life our children and grandchildren experience." The assessment of how global warming may further affect the climate of Pittsburgh, and other areas in the northeastern United States, uses projections from three sophisticated, independently run climate change models. Each model compared what would happen if higher emissions of heat-trapping gases -- primarily carbon dioxide -- continued, to an alternate scenario in which emissions were substantially reduced. In both scenarios, the Northeast will experience significantly higher temperatures through the century's midpoint. But if immediate action is taken to cut emissions by 3 percent annually using existing, proven technologies, heat-trapping emissions would peak by mid-century and then decline, significantly reducing peak temperatures by the turn of the century. Taking the present, higher emissions path, winters here could warm by 8 to 12 degrees and summers by 6 to 14 degrees. Projections on the lower emissions path show increases of 5 to 7.5 degrees in winter and 3 to 7 degrees in summer. The higher temperatures will mean less snow throughout the Northeast. By the end of the century, the length of the winter snow season could be cut in half and the character of the seasons will change significantly if emissions are not reduced. Already, the report said, climate is changing in noticeable ways. Temperatures have been rising, particularly in winter, snow cover is decreasing and spring is arriving earlier. That doesn't sound so bad, but the smaller snow pack and higher summer temperatures will reduce the water supply, which will be further depleted by a longer growing season. Annual droughts are probable. "The character of the Northeast is already changing," said Katharine Hayhoe, a co-author of the report and research associate professor at Texas Tech University's Department of Geosciences. "Do we want to continue using fossil fuels at the present rate when we are, in effect, picking up the Northeast and moving it to the South?" M. Granger Morgan, head of the Department of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University, said the conclusions of the new report are very similar to those of a U.S. Global Change Research Program study of climate change impacts on the United States done in 2000. "We're already committed to significant climate change. The question is can we decarbonize the electric system of the U.S., and the answer is yes for about 20 percent more than the current delivered price of electricity," said Mr. Morgan, who did not participate in the study but is an internationally recognized expert on climate change policy. "People who argue that a policy like that will wreck our economy are not paying attention to the current technology available." Though climate change is a global issue, the Northeast, from Pennsylvania through Maine, plays a big role. According to the report, the nine-state region produces more carbon dioxide emissions than all but six nations. In the Northeast, transportation emissions account for the most emissions, one-third of the total, and electric power plant emissions total just under one-third. Peter Frumhoff, Union of Concerned Scientists director of the Global Environment Program, said a simple "replacement strategy" -- using fuel-efficient, low-emission or no-emission technologies already available -- could allow the region, nation and world to reduce emissions by as much as 3 percent a year over the next 25 years. "Right now we're adding fuel to a fire and it will burn more intensely if we don't make changes," said William Moomaw, professor and director of the Center for International Environment and Resource Policy at Tufts University. "Doing nothing is the worst action we can take." The Northeast Climate Impacts Assessment is a collaboration of the Union of Concerned Scientists and a 14-member team of climate experts to assess climate change and its impacts on the northeastern United States. The group already has begun a follow-up round of analyses to assess climate change impacts on forests, agriculture, coastal areas, urban centers and human health, as well as options for mitigation and adaptation. A report is expected early next year. "Our forests will be affected by higher temperatures and lower water, as will our agriculture and public health, even under the aggressive lowering of emissions. We need to prepare and cope with the changes because the impacts are now unavoidable," Mr. Frumhoff said. "And our potential to cope is a factor of the emissions choices we make today. The chance we have now is to minimize the stresses on the system by minimizing emissions of heat-trapping gases." (Don Hopey can be reached at dhopey(a)post-gazette.com or 412-263-1983. ) ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.

1 0

Env. Council report.........
by Duane330＠aol.com 01 Oct '06

01 Oct '06

NEWS FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE W. V. EVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL OF SEPTEMBER 29 & 30. Bill McGlinchey was there for much of Saturday and gave a fine presentation on alternative fuel vehicles. Coincidentally, we learned that the Governor, in an address to the Southeast Governor's Association this weekend, was to announce a comprehensive energy proposal. It had been drafted by Allan Tweddle, long associated with the WVEC and I think maybe on the WVIGCCC Steering Committee early on. In it the Governor was to declare that WV has a goal of becoming independent of "foreign oil" in year 2020 (I think that was the date) and a mechanism was by re-birthing the Public Energy Authority which, in fact, has the authority to go into the energy business itself. Allan is one of the 7 members, including 4 citizen members. Anyway, there was a lot of excitement about this even though we know that Manchin has coal at heart. The council adopted a "renewable energy campaign" as one of its legislative priorities last year. Among the legislative/administrative implementation steps this year are: 1. Restoring the tax credit for hybrid vehicles. 2. Adopting more stringent fleet standards for state-owned vehicles. (It was noted that fewer cars are being purchased, more leased but there can be fuel efficiency conditions in the leases.) 3. Financial incentives for a) installation of energy-efficient technology for homes, businesses, etc. probably in the form of tax benefits, and b) training and certifying installers of energy-efficient technology (This could be via $$ to unions for workforce development to bring them on board and to increase jobs.) 4. Requiring all rules proposed by DEP to include a public health assessment. (Not really directly on our "screen" but if greenhouse gases were regulated, they would fall under this as well.) A bill was introduced last year with 11 sponsors; this will be long in coming but is being stimulated by efforts to at least get a study on the health impacts of air-borne mercury which is supported by the Nurses Ass'n. and others. The other "good news" was that there has already been a first step to Morgantown becoming a "cool city" in that the Mayor has signed a "proclamation" calling on mayors to sign on to the U.N.'s "Urban Environmental Accords" and to implement them. It says "We commit...to build an ecologically sustainable, economically dynamic, and socially equitable future for our urban citizens;...." The WVU Student Sierra Club has the "cool cities" designation as a priority and Council-member Don Spencer gave a presentation about how to go about getting the council to go the next steps. He pointed out that, although we would love to have the "environmental good" as their motivation, we will get response easier if we emphasize financial aspects, i.e., cost-savings. Such savings are already being realized by cities among the 300+ that have signed on to the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. Spencer was given our contact list and asked to be included on it. Speaking of savings, Bill urged those present to approach their Boards of Education to switch to bio-diesel fuel which takes no conversion of the diesel buses and gives them a higher reimbursement for transportation costs from the State BOE. Mon County has come out $70,000 ahead in their 3rd year of being on bio-diesel. I have joined the WVEC as an individual member and will recommend our group join as it is fundamentally a coalition of organizations. I believe we can work with them as they have lobbyist(s) during the sessions and who work year-round. The Sierra Club is a good opportunity to connect with young people and to support them so they will assume their leadership roles as we fade into the sunset! or just get tired! The other neat thing was that Nate Webster's brother, Dan, and his friend Ryan came from their college on Saturday afternoon. There were students from WVU and Shepherdstown who contributed a lot to the meeting. The next regular monthly meeting of the WV Interfaith Global Climate Change Campaign will be Tuesday, October 12, at 7 p.m. at St. Paul's Lutheran Church on Patteson Drive across from Hardy's. Mary Rehmann, Interfaith Global Climate Change Campaign [THANK YOU, MARY, FOR SHARING THIS SUMMARY. THE MON VALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION IS A MEMBER ORGANIZATION OF THE WV ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL.]

1 0

Re: [MVCAC] Fwd: new direction for WVU
by James Kotcon 28 Sep '06

28 Sep '06

I'll limit my reply so we stop clogging in-boxes with debate. Paul argues that the situation is already dire, that draconian measures are need immediately, and that biomass fuels and carbon sequestration are "dead-end strategies" that deflect needed resources. My position is that, although dangerous climate changes may occur within another generation or two if we maintain a business as usual scenario, a less draconian transition, if begun today, will provide important breathing room to allow new technologies to develop and to transition society to a more sustainable pathway without udergoing a collapse of civilization. Biomass energy should be an important component of the transition and is sustainable over the long term. Paul argues that dangerious climate changes are already occurring with temperature increases of 1 C, or that we will be irreversibly committed to this within 5 years. Most of the climate models suggest that changes of 2 C will produce significant adverse impacts to the environment, although even this would not cause human extinction without invoking some as yet unknown mechanism. The current level of CO2 is approximately 380 ppm, compared to a pre-industrial level of 280 ppm. Levels of 450 to 550 ppm would produce the 2 C temperature change likely to cause adverse impacts. These levels would occur by the end of the century if current trends continue. Use of energy is a fundamental characteristic of human life, and modern society uses much more of it than a subsistence-level civilization. The question is whether a 1 C change will cause dramatic threats to humanity, in which case Paul is correct, or whether we can tolerate some warming and 2 C is the threshold, in which case we have time for a more gradual transition. JBK P.S. The Sierra Club's energy policy is calling for a 2 % per year reduction in CO2, with the goal of achieving approximately 50-70 % reduction by 2050. >>> "Paul Brown" <pbbrown(a)hsc.wvu.edu> 09/28/06 1:04 PM >>> Jim, I love it when you talk technical. Seriously, your feedback is very useful, and my article will benefit from it. In the original order of presentation, I basically followed a chronological sequence of the development of thinking about the use of biofuels. The earlier sections are less important than the conclusion. I assume you all got the article about Hansen's contention that one degree more warming will cook our gooses. Many other scientists are beginning to agree, at least with the concept, if not with the actual tipping point. Based on the past 30 years, a one-degree change will take 50 years, but warming is accelerating steeply, not only because of the positive feedback effects of decreased albedo and methane release, but also because carbon combustion is skyrocketing as developing countries increase their consumption (even the developed ones are burning more carbon). Estimates indicate that China alone will need 100% of current oil production by mid-century, and India is projected to have more people than China by then. I believe it's prudent to assume we have only 20 years before we hit the 1-degree mark, in the worst case. Being unprepared for the worst case is imprudent because we can't afford to get this wrong. There’s no second try allowed. The only tools we have are reduced atmospheric CO2 and increased albedo. The longer we wait to take realistic measures, the less likely we are to survive. If we were to stop burning carbon today, the warming trend would not stop, but it would slow. We would still reach a 1-degree increase, perhaps as late as the end of the century, because of the long persistence of CO2 and continued positive feedback effects of ice melting and methan release. We would still need to remove a lot of existing CO2 from the atmosphere faster than nature can do it for us. It's much easier to stop emitting CO2 than to remove it from the atmosphere, and we can't possibly sequester all the CO2 we produce. Therefore part of the solution must be to stop burning carbon. The planet doesn't care, by the way, if this is economically or politically impossible. We can't stop burning carbon today. What's the absolute fastest we could do so, if we mobilize as a nation, and then assist the rest of the world to do the same? My guess is five years for the US, 10 years for the rest of the world. It may take longer, but we should shoot for these times because we don't know when is too late. The mobilization of resources and effort will have to be greater than it was for World War 2. It would require returning to a non-consumer society, with gratuitous (non-vital) consumption dropping to pre-electricity levels, and vital consumption (e.g., health care, development of new infrastructure) maintained as well as possible. This has to be our first priority, because there is simply no choice if we are to survive. If we do less, we die, probably by the end of the century. (Note: these time frames are all my guesses, based on the 1-degree limit and the positive feedbacks already in operation). While economic considerations are important in choosing solutions, and I don't claim to know the detailed economics, the solutions have to include switching from carbon to non-carbon energy as fast as possible, with all the lifestyle changes that may be required. As for the inefficiency of energy production from biomass and the unavailability of farmland to grow it, I stick to my stance: we need to use all available land for fast-growing (rapidly photosynthesizing) forests and relocation of endangered ecosystems. But the ciritical point is this: biomass and biodiesel are largely carbon. To stop global warming, every atom of biofuel carbon we burn from now on will have to be removed from the atmosphere (except for sequestered CO2, and we can't sequester CO2 from vehicles or heating buildings), which would require burning many more carbon atoms, in an absurd endless regress. Or look at it this way: By growing trees instead of biofuel crops, we not only don’t emit the biofuel CO2, but we absorb vastly greater amounts of CO2 already in the air. In fact, we’d be better off planting the trees and burning an equivalent amount of fossil fuels, because we’d have a net loss of CO2 instead of just breaking even. As for the economic advantages and disadvantages of solar and wind, we have no choice but to use them. The exact mix is not the issue here. Don't be distracted by that. We have to use whatever non-carbon energy sources we can get up and running fastest, given economic and environmental constraints. During the transition, we have to eliminate non-essential carbon combustion by rationing carbon, eliminating non-essential travel. The best way to handle vehicles is to convert them for hydrogen internal combustion, on a prioritized basis. Most airplanes would be grounded for good. So would our private vehicles, until essential vehicles (e.g., public transportation) have been converted. No more soccer moms because no more SUV soccer trips. We would switch from trucking to railroads and ships, and local production of essentials like food, clothing, and shelter from locally available materials. We wouldn’t be smelting metals, we’d be recycling them. Jim is right about the implications of abandoning carbon combustion. They are not pleasant. The alternative is far worse, however. Given the urgency of this crisis, we have to stop thinking in terms of business as usual. There will be enormous economic losses, although there will also be some enormous savings. Other concerns, including dependence on foreign oil, terrorism, illegal immigrants, and international economic competition, become supreficial. With regard to credibility, the programs espoused by the Sierra Club, such as biomass energy, are not credible at all to an informed public. They reflect an understandable denial which we unfortunately can't afford. Their only benefit is they may get people moving in the right direction, but we have very little time to make them move far enough * way beyond schemes like Cool Cities. We also can’t afford to deflect any resources to dead-end strategies like biofuels. Paul Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512

2 1

Re: [MVCAC] Fwd: new direction for WVU
by James Kotcon 28 Sep '06

28 Sep '06

Correction, The Sierra Club energy policy is calling for a 70-90 % reduction in CO2 emissions by the middle of the century. My earlier post said 50-70 %, but that figure does not correspond to 2 % reductions per year for the next 40+ years. JBK >>> "Paul Brown" <pbbrown(a)hsc.wvu.edu> 09/28/06 1:04 PM >>> Jim, I love it when you talk technical. Seriously, your feedback is very useful, and my article will benefit from it. In the original order of presentation, I basically followed a chronological sequence of the development of thinking about the use of biofuels. The earlier sections are less important than the conclusion. I assume you all got the article about Hansen's contention that one degree more warming will cook our gooses. Many other scientists are beginning to agree, at least with the concept, if not with the actual tipping point. Based on the past 30 years, a one-degree change will take 50 years, but warming is accelerating steeply, not only because of the positive feedback effects of decreased albedo and methane release, but also because carbon combustion is skyrocketing as developing countries increase their consumption (even the developed ones are burning more carbon). Estimates indicate that China alone will need 100% of current oil production by mid-century, and India is projected to have more people than China by then. I believe it's prudent to assume we have only 20 years before we hit the 1-degree mark, in the worst case. Being unprepared for the worst case is imprudent because we can't afford to get this wrong. There’s no second try allowed. The only tools we have are reduced atmospheric CO2 and increased albedo. The longer we wait to take realistic measures, the less likely we are to survive. If we were to stop burning carbon today, the warming trend would not stop, but it would slow. We would still reach a 1-degree increase, perhaps as late as the end of the century, because of the long persistence of CO2 and continued positive feedback effects of ice melting and methan release. We would still need to remove a lot of existing CO2 from the atmosphere faster than nature can do it for us. It's much easier to stop emitting CO2 than to remove it from the atmosphere, and we can't possibly sequester all the CO2 we produce. Therefore part of the solution must be to stop burning carbon. The planet doesn't care, by the way, if this is economically or politically impossible. We can't stop burning carbon today. What's the absolute fastest we could do so, if we mobilize as a nation, and then assist the rest of the world to do the same? My guess is five years for the US, 10 years for the rest of the world. It may take longer, but we should shoot for these times because we don't know when is too late. The mobilization of resources and effort will have to be greater than it was for World War 2. It would require returning to a non-consumer society, with gratuitous (non-vital) consumption dropping to pre-electricity levels, and vital consumption (e.g., health care, development of new infrastructure) maintained as well as possible. This has to be our first priority, because there is simply no choice if we are to survive. If we do less, we die, probably by the end of the century. (Note: these time frames are all my guesses, based on the 1-degree limit and the positive feedbacks already in operation). While economic considerations are important in choosing solutions, and I don't claim to know the detailed economics, the solutions have to include switching from carbon to non-carbon energy as fast as possible, with all the lifestyle changes that may be required. As for the inefficiency of energy production from biomass and the unavailability of farmland to grow it, I stick to my stance: we need to use all available land for fast-growing (rapidly photosynthesizing) forests and relocation of endangered ecosystems. But the ciritical point is this: biomass and biodiesel are largely carbon. To stop global warming, every atom of biofuel carbon we burn from now on will have to be removed from the atmosphere (except for sequestered CO2, and we can't sequester CO2 from vehicles or heating buildings), which would require burning many more carbon atoms, in an absurd endless regress. Or look at it this way: By growing trees instead of biofuel crops, we not only don’t emit the biofuel CO2, but we absorb vastly greater amounts of CO2 already in the air. In fact, we’d be better off planting the trees and burning an equivalent amount of fossil fuels, because we’d have a net loss of CO2 instead of just breaking even. As for the economic advantages and disadvantages of solar and wind, we have no choice but to use them. The exact mix is not the issue here. Don't be distracted by that. We have to use whatever non-carbon energy sources we can get up and running fastest, given economic and environmental constraints. During the transition, we have to eliminate non-essential carbon combustion by rationing carbon, eliminating non-essential travel. The best way to handle vehicles is to convert them for hydrogen internal combustion, on a prioritized basis. Most airplanes would be grounded for good. So would our private vehicles, until essential vehicles (e.g., public transportation) have been converted. No more soccer moms because no more SUV soccer trips. We would switch from trucking to railroads and ships, and local production of essentials like food, clothing, and shelter from locally available materials. We wouldn’t be smelting metals, we’d be recycling them. Jim is right about the implications of abandoning carbon combustion. They are not pleasant. The alternative is far worse, however. Given the urgency of this crisis, we have to stop thinking in terms of business as usual. There will be enormous economic losses, although there will also be some enormous savings. Other concerns, including dependence on foreign oil, terrorism, illegal immigrants, and international economic competition, become supreficial. With regard to credibility, the programs espoused by the Sierra Club, such as biomass energy, are not credible at all to an informed public. They reflect an understandable denial which we unfortunately can't afford. Their only benefit is they may get people moving in the right direction, but we have very little time to make them move far enough * way beyond schemes like Cool Cities. We also can’t afford to deflect any resources to dead-end strategies like biofuels. Paul Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512

1 0

Re: [MVCAC] Fwd: new direction for WVU
by Paul Brown 28 Sep '06

28 Sep '06

Here are the reasons to oppose biomass fuels, from a column I'm working on: BIOFUEL BOONDOGGLE One proposed alternative to fossil fuels is biofuels: substances made from plants grown specifically to make fuels such as ethanol and methane. These fuels can be burned in internal combustion engines and used to make electrical power. The beauty of this proposal is that the CO2 produced by biofuel combustion is balanced by the CO2 consumed by the plants to make the precursors for the fuels. Take the case of ethanol: the plant (corn, for example) makes sugars and all the other materials in the plant, like cellulose, from CO2 and substances in the soil. We then ferment the sugar to make alcohol (and yeast, which has its uses too). The alcohol is distilled and its combustion produces less CO2 than was removed from the atmosphere by the plants (because there are organic waste products). Along similar lines, soybeans can be used to produce oil that can be converted to biodiesel. In such a system, we would create a cycle in which we are using today’s sunshine, which powers the photosynthesis that makes the sugars, for power. Today’s sunshine is renewable. There will be more for all our tomorrows for billions of years. When we use fossil fuels, we use ancient sunshine, millions of years old, which powered the photosynthesis that was used to make plants and microorganisms that eventually were transformed to petroleum, coal, and natural gas. Fossil fuels are not renewable, because they’re not being replaced at the rate they’re being consumed. Unfortunately, biofuels can’t replace all our fossil fuels because we would have to devote more farmland than is available to produce them in sufficient quantities. Their advocates counter that at least we could cut down on our use of fossil fuels. Unfortunately, recent studies have shown that the amount of energy needed to fertilize the farmland, tend the plants, harvest the crop, convert the biomass to useable fuel, and distribute the fuel, exceeds or nearly exceeds the energy in the end product. A lot of farmland would be dedicated to producing a very low yield of energy. There are other problems with biofuels that outrank the low yield problem. First, there isn’t really any available farmland. Because of the population explosion, humans now use just about every bit of arable land available, and in several recent years, we haven’t grown enough food to feed everyone. We’ve had to dip into global food reserves, and they are now dangerously depleted. We can (and do) “create” more farmland with more irrigation, by destroying more rainforests, and by crowding people into cities. But these practices already lower water tables to dangerously low levels, create deserts, decrease CO2 absorption by forests in a time when we need to increase it, and increase crowding, with the attendant rise in unemployment, pollution, evolution of new disease strains, and social instability. The argument that biofuel crops provide a cycle in which CO2 is absorbed at least as much as it is produced ignores a crucial side effect. Even if we had the land needed to grow such crops, an area of farmland devoted to them absorbs far less CO2 than the same area of rapidly growing forest, because trees have far more photosynthetic capacity than any farm plants. Our use of other caebon sources will continue to accumulate CO2 in the atmosphere. Current atmospheric levels of CO2 are already too high for human survival. Positive feedback effects of melting ice (due to decreased albedo) and melting permafrost (which is releasing methane, a greenhouse gas twenty times as potent as CO2) are accelerating global warming. Left unchecked, this will result soon in runaway warming which we will not survive. The only prudent course of action is to stop burning carbon and start removing CO2 from the atmosphere as fast as we can if we hope to survive. There is no way around these facts, no "trick" we can use to keep burning carbon. We know how to stop burning carbon: go to reneable energy in the form of solar, wind, tidal, wave, and geothermal, in roughly that order of environmental friendliness, availability, and economic viability. We have the technology and the cost is lower than fossil fuel and nuclear if we consider true costs such as environmental and human health consequences. A shift of subsidies (our tax dollars) away from fossils, and withdrawal from our global military attempts to monopolize access to oil (Johnson, Chalmers, The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic. New York: Metropolitan Books, 2004) would pay for it and provide jobs and renewed prosperity at home. There’s no earthly reason to burn carbon for more than another five years, except maybe mindless consumerism. Do we know how to accelerate the removal of CO2 from the atmosphere? Yes, although not enough yet. That will be the topic of my next column. I hope you'll find this reasoning compelling. Paul Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512

2 1

Fwd: new direction for WVU
by Paul Brown 27 Sep '06

27 Sep '06

From: Paul Brown Sunday - September 3, 2006 12:18 PM To: spg(a)goodwingoodwin.com BC: pbbrown4348(a)verizon.net Subject: new direction for WVU TO: Stephen Goodwin Board of Governors FROM: Paul Brown WVU Dear Dr. Goodwin: One question the Board of Governors tackles whenever recruiting a new president for WVU is the direction in which he or she should lead us. David Hardesty was chosen with specific changes in mind, and he has brought them about successfully. Some fast-moving developments are engaging the concern of informed people worldwide: the global population explosion, climate change, the sixth mass extinction of species, and humankind’s inadequate responses to these problems. It will take courageous, insightful leadership to meet these challenges, particularly in a state dominated by coal power. In the next two or three decades nations will have to abandon the use of carbon fuels for energy. This won't happen because we’ll run out of the needed raw materials, but because of rapidly accelerating environmental damage, skyrocketing demand, and increased costs of production. Nuclear energy can’t be part of a workable solution, but all the needed technology for affordable, renewable energy exists today. The world can wait until we're forced by global crises to abandon carbon combustion, by which time climate change and mass extinctions may have become runaway processes beyond our power to reverse. Alternatively, we can make a coordinated transition away from fossil fuels now, at slightly greater cost than we could have twelve years ago, but at much lower cost than twelve years hence. This transformation will be impossible for states that remain in denial and waste limited resources on band aids such as coal liquefaction, CO2 sequestration, oil shale, tar sands, Arctic drilling, and biomass. Some states are rapidly changing over to renewable energy, exploring a hydrogen energy economy, and strengthening local economies through recycling, remanufacturing, and local production of the necessities of life. By being ahead of the curve, they will do well. Such implementation requires careful planning with regard to research, education, business, and jobs. In West Virginia, the coal and power industries and their work forces need to become part of the solution instead of remaining the problem. If they do, all parties – including the coal industry and miners – will benefit. WVU should be a key factor in this process, as should our federal and state legislators and the governor. There’s another consideration I have to mention. The three schools I attended for my education – MIT, the University of Chicago, and Cornell – differ considerably in character but they’ve averaged 60 Nobel Prizes, compared to zero at WVU. Their average endowment is $4.9 billion, compared to $0.4 billion at WVU. They became leaders through a bootstrap process upon which I believe WVU can now embark. We started too late on molecular biology, microcomputers, and nanotechnology, but we can seize this new opportunity and achieve greatness. I'd appreciate the opportunity to discuss this vision at a Board of Governors meeting. I think I can convince you in an hour that the state of West Virginia, its industries, and its institutions of higher learning must move quickly in this new direction. Sincerely, Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512 Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512

2 1

Meeting this Monday!
by paula - pj- hunt 22 Sep '06

22 Sep '06

Hi Everyone, This is just a reminder that we have a Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition meeting this Monday, September 25th at the home of Larry and Martha Schwab. Updates on Longview and Ft. Martin will be presented and, "direction" for the coming six months will be charted. We need to finalize our brochure as well! Please make a point to come out if you possibly can, since we cannot meet as often as in the past. Directions to Larry & Martha Schwab's Hpuse: Address: 3333 Collins Ferry Road, the last driveway on the left before Aspen if you are coming from Morgantown. Coming from Star City, it is the first driveway on the right past Aspen St. To get to Collins Ferry Rd, take University Ave toward Star City. University splits into University and Collins Ferry just past the Eckard drug store (Morgantown side) or Bi-Lo grocery store (coming from Star City) There is a high hedge along the road, so you cannot see the house from the street. There is a really small sign with 3333 and maybe a sign with other addresses (more than one house is located on the drive). Larry and Martha's house is the first house closest to Collins Ferry Rd (big white farm house). Park angled against the garage, or along the driveway, but don't park past the hedge next to garage (it torques the neighbor). In the event that we get a record number of attendes, there are plenty of side streets across Collins Ferry Road on which to park! Their phone number is 598-0241. My (Paula's) cell number is 692-7588 Please call if you need better directions.

1 0

Ft. Martin scrubbers $500 MM
by Duane330＠aol.com 20 Sep '06

20 Sep '06

To: BJGregg, WV-PSC-Consumer Advocate. We've been told that Allegheny Energy under estimated the cost for stack gas scrubbers for the Ft. Martin power plant, and so the "securitization" fee funds will not be adequate................... Have you considered this circumstance, and what are the options in a nutshell................? Thank you. Duane Nichols, Convenor, Mon-Valley Clean Air Coalition >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you heard right. The estimate for the construction costs of the plant that was included in the PSC's securitization order was $338 million. Allegheny has now come back and told us that based on site specific engineering, the cost will be closer to $500 million. They have not made any formal filing with the PSC as of yet. My initial reaction is to stick with securitization at $338 million and have Allegheny finance the difference, using traditional rate making for any recovery of their investment. This may ultimately cost more in the long run than securitizing the entire amount, but I think it places an appropriate share of the risk on Allegheny and will provide a better incentive for them to minimize costs. The irony here is that if they had come initially and estimated the cost to be $500 million, we probably would have approved it, since the cost is still less than the scrubbers at Harrison that were installed in 1994. Billy Jack Gregg, PSC Consumer Advocate

1 0

Supreme court hearing Oct. 24th
by Duane330＠aol.com 20 Sep '06

20 Sep '06

Morgantown Dominion Post Tuesday 19 September 2006, page 10-B: Challenge to proposed Longview Power now in the hands of the state Supreme Court ---High court to decide if it will hear appeal of case BY EVELYN RYAN The Dominion Post The state Supreme Court will decide Oct. 24 if it wants to hear a challenge to the permits for Longview Power issued by the state Public Service Commission in July. On June 26, the commission said Longview could build a 600-megawatt coal-fired power plant on 225 acres in the Fort Martin area of Monongalia County, as well as a high-voltage transmission line from the plant. Just a month later, more than 50 county residents who have been fighting the plant for three years appealed the decision to the high court. This appeal is on the motion docket, state Supreme Court spokeswoman Jennifer Bundy said. “This means that the people who filed the suit can come and tell the court why they think it should hear the case,” she said. “At that time, the justices will decide whether they want to hear the arguments.” If the justices agree to hear the appeal, another date will be set for both sides to present their cases, Bundy said. The court does not make immediate decisions on cases that are argued. Longview officials said the latest court appeal was not unexpected. “We’re going to see challenges at every opportunity for these guys to avail themselves of,” Longview Project Manager Tom Wheble said. “We hope the Supreme Court says there was a good and thoughtful process by the PSC and chooses not to hear the appeal. “We’re still moving forward on other aspects of the development,” he added. “We would love to have our construction begin this fall. We still have a tremendous amount of interest in financing the plant. I can’t say more because everything is confidential.” Longview Power was established by GenPower, of Needham, Mass., in 2001 to gain all the necessary permits to build a merchant power plant, one that would sell its output on the open power market. This differs from a plant like Fort Martin Power Station, which was built and is operated by Allegheny Energy, supplying electricity to the utility’s customers in northern West Virginia. Those trying to stop the plant are challenging the commission’s action on procedural grounds. “I think our strongest argument is that the Public Service Commission is required by statute to perform its duties within a statutory period of time and they exceeded the time frame in this case,” said Attorney Phil Gaugot, who filed the appeal. “We believe that in the end, Longview failed to provide sufficient evidence to support the PSC conclusion that it was entitled to a siting certificate and transmission line certificate. “Most important,” he added, “Gen-Power has not demonstrated that it has the financial viability to do the work or the committed financing to complete the project.” Gaugot filed the lawsuit on behalf of 20 Fort Martin residents, 30 Monongalia County residents, Citizens for Alternatives to Longview Power, Cheat Lake Environment and Recreation Association, and Citizens for Responsible Development.

1 0

EPA Region 3 activities
by Duane330＠aol.com 11 Sep '06

11 Sep '06

MID-ATLANTIC REGION AGENCIES RECEIVE FUNDING TO CONTINUE THEIR FINE PARTICLE AIR QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM EPA Mid-Atlantic Region state and local air agencies received $2,864,798 to enable the agencies to continue their PM 2.5 air quality monitoring program under the Clean Air Act. The PM 2.5 monitoring grant also assists in planning, developing, establishing, improving and maintaining adequate support for the prevention and control of air pollution. PM2.5 particles are air pollutants with a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less, small enough to invade even the smallest airways. These particles generally come from activities that burn fossil fuels, such as traffic, smelting, and metal processing. EPA MID-ATLANTIC REGION REVIEWS PROGRESS OF 2006 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE GRANT IN W. VIRGINIA EPA mid-Atlantic region staff visited the Southern Appalachian Labor School in Beards Fork, Fayette County, W.Va. , a grantee under EPA's 2006 Environmental Justice grant program, to assess the grant's progress. The grantee's funds are being used to provide test kits to determine the relative levels of contamination in the old coal industry camp houses now occupied by retired miners and other low-income families. The grantee is also working with the Department of Housing and Urban Development using at-risk youth to rebuild and renovate portions of these houses free of charge to the residents.

1 0

Woops. Meet 25th @ Larry's
by Duane330＠aol.com 10 Sep '06

10 Sep '06

RESCHEDULE............. 25th at 7 (social) and 7:30 (meeting). The next meeting of the MonValley Clean Air Coalition is now set for Monday, September 25th at the home of Larry and Martha Schwab. [A number of schedule conflicts prevailed with the previous date]. Updates on Longview and Ft. Martin will be presented; and, "direction" for the coming six months will be charted. Please make a point to come out if you possibly can, since we cannot meet as often as in the past. Phil Gaujot is scheduled for surgery this week in New York City, to remove a portion of his lung. He hopes to bounce back quickly. So, please include Phil in your thoughts and prayers, and wish him a speedy recovery. Has anyone recovered from the diverse activities of the long hot summer?

1 0

General Meeting, MVCAC, Sept 18th
by Duane330＠aol.com 05 Sep '06

05 Sep '06

To: MVCAC Participants and Friends.................. Date: September 5, 2006 RE: General Meeting for September Please attend a general meeting on Monday, September 18th, at the home of Larry and Martha Schwab, 3333 Collins Ferry Road. Come at 7 pm for the social session, the meeting to start promptly at 7:30 pm. We have a number of items to cover, including the recent appeal of the Longview siting and transmission certificates, the final version of our new brochure, plans for the public lecture series this fall, etc. THERE IS PLENTY TO DO, AND YOU ARE NEEDED TO HELP OUT AT THIS TIME. ........ duane

1 0

Picnic, Mt. Chateau, Sept 9th, 1 to 4 pm
by Duane330＠aol.com 03 Sep '06

03 Sep '06

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 9TH--- PICNIC AT MT. CHATEAU ON CHEAT LAKE. The Mt. Chateau property, owned by the State of West Virginia, is a public access point to Cheat Lake and to the Cooper's Rock trail system. The Sierra Club is working with CLEAR to let the Governor know that we want it to remain in public ownership, with public access. The Monongahela Group of the Sierra Club has made arrangements to use the grounds Saturday from 1-4 PM. A potluck picnic will be followed by a discussion of the proposed sale of the property. The public is invited to attend. Questions, contact Jim Kotcon at _jkotcon(a)wvu.edu_ (mailto:jkotcon@wvu.edu) This is a great opportunity to come out, see the grounds, see the Lake, see some old and new friends, talk it over, and help in this worthy cause! Duane Nichols, CLEAR

1 0

Longview: Before Sept 2nd! Please write DEP and ask them to deny permit
by Paula PJ Hunt 31 Aug '06

31 Aug '06

PLEASE!! You only have a couple days to submit comments to DEP about Longview. BEFORE OR ON THIS SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 2nd ! (Thanks to those who have already sent letters! We need more!!) Please ask the WV Dept. of Environmental Protection to deny the Draft NPDES (discharge) permit for Longview. It's hard to believe that a company submitted such rubbish, and even harder to believe that DEP approved it! We must require more of our regulatory agency. DEP is merely going through the motions, and we must call them on it. We must demand that the Department of Environmental Protection actually fulfills the "protection" part of its name! I urge you to pass this message along to anyone who may be interested. The following is my letter to the DEP regarding the DRAFT water-discharge permit. I ask that YOU please send a letter as well. Write your own thoughts or feel free to plagiarize anything from the following letter, Since my letter is a bit long winded (a bit hurried and a bit rude), here are the main points I am trying to get across: The application form, the fact sheet, and the draft permit appear to be for three different things. The application form states that 1.7 acres of land will be disturbed for a construction trailer and associated parking. The fact sheet is for stormwater runoff from the construction of a large power plant on 110 acres of land, and the draft permit (issued by the DEP) is for the construction and operation of a large power plant on 110 acres of land. Which is it? The Operator or Contractor (Item 3) in the application is "to be determined." So DEP does not know to whom it is granting the permit? According to the application form, the Final Storm Water Management Plan has "yet to be determined based on design." So we have no operator and no design, yet we have a draft permit. The Increase in Impervious Area (Item 16) in the application is not consistent with a 600-megawatt coal-fire power plant. The gallons of water Longview says it needs in its permit application is one half to one third the amount of water needed, according to other documents and comments made by Longview elsewhere. Speaking of water, Longview claims it will have zero discharge. That's hard to believe. Please send your comments to: Director, Division of Water and Waste Management, DEP ATTN: Michelle Brenner, Permitting Section 601 57TH St. SE Charleston, WV 25304 *************************************************************************************************** August 30, 2006 Director, Division of Water and Waste Management, DEP ATTN: Michelle Brenner, Permitting Section 601 57TH St. SE Charleston, WV 25304 Subject: NPDES Draft Permit No. WV0116238, Longview Power, LLC Dear Ms. Brenner: I have reviewed the draft NPDES permit and associated application for Longview Power, LLC, proposed to be built near Morgantown in Monongalia County, West Virginia, and I have the following comments: 1.) It would be nice if a copy of all future correspondence between Longview and the DEP could be placed in the Morgantown Public Library. Charleston is a 3-hour drive each way from here, and if Charleston is the only place the residents of Mon County can review Longview's applications and the many pages associated with them, then that is an undue hardship on the people most affected by Longview. I respectfully request that you require Longview to make an extra copy of everything it sends to you, and I request that you send those copies along with copies of your correspondence with Longview to the Morgantown Public Library. The DEP's Division of Air Quality did this for Longview's air permits. 2.) There are significant inconsistencies between the information provided in the Site Registration Application Form, the associated "Fact Sheet," and the actual Draft Permit. I find it difficult to believe that Longview filed an application with such errors, and I find it even more difficult to believe that our own DEP actually issued Longview a draft permit in the face of these glaring errors. a.) The number of Acres to be Disturbed (Item 5 in the Application Form) is almost one tenth of the acreage in the Fact Sheet and the Draft Permit. What is being permitted? 1.7 acres or 110 acres? b.) The description of the Project (Item 9 in the Application Form) is for installation of a trailer and parking area. The fact sheet is for construction of a 600-megawatt power station, and the actual draft permit is for the construction and operation of a 600-megawatt power plant! Which is it? 3.) The information provided is woefully inadequate and incomplete. The Operator or Contractor (Item 3 in the application) has "yet to be determined." Items 14 and 17 say that everything but the construction trailer and parking area have yet to be designed! How can the DEP grant a permit to someone they do not know for a project that has yet to be designed? 4.) The Increase in Impervious Area (Item 16) in the application is not consistent with a 600-megawatt coal-fire power plant. The power plant and the land disturbed by it will result in an increase of far more that 480 square feet of impervious area and 5 cubic feet per second of discharge during peak storm events! 5.) Item 10 of the Fact Sheets states that Longview will receive approximately 4,600 gallons per minute (gpm) of treated water from a plant in Pennsylvania, and that will fulfill Longview's cooling needs. Everything else Longview has submitted states that treatment plant will produce 7,000 gpm (see, for example, the report entitled Use of Mine Pool Water for Power plant Cooling, prepared by Argonne National Laboratory for the US Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory in September 2003). Longview has stated elsewhere that the water produced by the mine-pool treatment plant (approximately 7,000 gpm) will only be half of the water required by Longview, if it were built. Therefore, Longview states in the NPDES Fact Sheet that it will use approximately 4,600 gpm, but has stated elsewhere that is needs 15,000 gpm. This is a huge discrepancy. The true amount of water used by Longview must be clarified. The DEP must not allow Longview to pull numbers out of the air, as it is clearly doing. 6.) No maps or plans were attached to the Application, Fact Sheet, and Draft Permit that was given to my neighbor when he drove all the way down to Charleston to get a copy of this permit and application. Were these crucial pieces of information even submitted to the DEP by Longview? 7.) I find it difficult to believe that there will be NO water discharge. The statement that and extra water there is will be used for "dust suppression" is troubling. It sounds as if Longview will merely be land applying their water. I also don't believe that Longview will send its untreated water back to PA!! What will that water be like after it has been through a cooling tower several times? In fact, I would like to see more details on how Longview plans to reuse water multiple times in its cooling fans. That water will be so mineralized after one or two passes, it is difficult to believe it would be usable. In addition, the water will be hot after one pass through. How can hot water be used for cooling? 8.) There were no details on the water treatment plant proposed for the site; in fact it was barely mentioned in the application. There will be coal piles on site and other water runoff that must be treated, yet there is no discussion of this on-site treatment plant! As with everything else Longview has submitted to date, this NPDES permit application is a bait and switch tactic. Longview has repeatedly submitted inaccurate and incomplete information to the State Regulatory Agencies. This company has said one thing and done another throughout the whole planning and attempted permitting process, and the DEP needs to call them on it now. I hereby request that the DEP deny Longview's NPDES permit because Longview clearly failed to provide information, ALL the information, in a complete and accurate manner. Sincerely, Paula J. Hunt

1 0

Public Hearing & draft comments
by Duane330＠aol.com 21 Aug '06

21 Aug '06

NOTE: The WV DEP Water and Waste Management Division will hold a Public Hearing on Tuesday, August 22 at the Basic Sciences Auditorium of the WVU Medical Center, 6 pm. This is an important hearing, given that the Applications from Longview have problems that should not be allowed to stand up for approval. Please attend and speak if you can support any of the following or other objections to the Applications. One Application is for the Construction and the other for Operation of the power plant. But, both are being considered together even though the first is substantially incomplete. See below............... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Longview Power, LLC, 10040 Great Plain Avenue, Needham, MA 02492 APPLICATION #1. SITE REGISTRATION APPLICATION FORM, CONSTRUCTION STORM WATER WV/NPDES GENERAL PERMIT (THREE ACRES OR GREATER). Project Name: Longview Power-600-Megawatt Coal Fired Power Plant Construction-Phase 1. Operator or Contractor– To Be Determined. Acres Disturbed– 1.7, Rainfall Zone– Zone 1 Receiving Stream(s) – Crooked Run Proposed Construction Schedule– Begin Jan 31, 2006 – August 2009. Signed: Robert Place, 10/31/05. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The above permit application was received on 11/2/05. 4 page. Storm Water Pollution Prevent Plan, 10 pages of text, 91 pages of material plus 3 maps. Received 11/2/05. Ground Water Pollution Prevent Plan, 9 pages of text, 19 pages of material plus 1 map. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> APPLICATION #2. "operation permit", 3/8/06. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION and GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION, Triad Engineering, Inc., Morgantown, WV, April 8, 2004. Submitted to Division of Water & Waste Management, Permitting Section on May 3, 2006. 17 pages plus charts & graphs. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> STATEMENTS OF DUANE NICHOLS REGARDING THE "CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION" 1. The Site Registration Application Form submitted on November 2, 2005 is nearly two years old, and as such may not reflect accurately to the Public and the State as to the actual conditions for the proposed Power Plant. Thus, this Application is not timely. 2. The required "Operator or Contractor" name, address and phone number were provided only as "To Be Determined". Therefore, the Application is incomplete and cannot stand. 3. The "Acres Disturbed" is listed in item 5. at 1.7 acres, yet this cannot be the full extent of the construction area. Thus, the Application is inaccurate and cannot stand. 4. The "Rainfall Zone" for the proposed plant site is listed as Zone 1. However, a careful determination of the correct zone for this site, south of the Pennsylvania stateline, is Zone 2. Thus, the Application is inaccurate and cannot stand. 5. The "Receiving Stream(s)" is listed as Crooked Run. This is misleading and inaccurate, given that the actual receiving stream is the South Branch of Crooked Run, a.k.a. School Run, which is pristine and has a quality exceeding Crooked Run itself. 6. The "Brief Description of Project" given in the Construction Permit Application is given as "Phase 1 of a multiphase construction. Install a construction trailer and parking area". This is inconsistent with the purpose of the Public Hearing now being held. This Public Hearing is dealing with the overall Construction and Operation of the proposed Power Plant. Therefore, the Application is incomplete and very misleading. Thus, this Application is inaccurate and cannot stand. 7. The "Proposed Construction Schedule" is given as "Begin Jan 31, 2006 - August 2009. This time period is not feasible, given that the start date cannot be met, and that an accurate start date is not know. Therefore, this Application is inaccurate and cannot stand. 8. The "zero discharge" nature of the proposed Power Plant is not realistic; and, "zero discharge" cannot be achieved as a practical matter with a large project involving thousands of gallons of water, multiple applications involving the water, and considerations as large holding ponds, water sprays for dust control, and multiple cooling towers involving water sprays and evaporation. While it is possible to design systems that intend to have "zero discharge", such a condition cannot be sustained in the long term over years of continuous operation. Hence, the "zero discharge" characterization cannot be accepted as a practical condition to prevail for the overall continuous operation of the Power Plant. 9. This proposed Power Plant project has not been approved to disturb the historic Ft. Harrison location adjacent to Seece Lane, which includes an historic marker, trees, marshes and possible relics or other remains. An adequate buffer zone is needed to provide for protection and preservation of this Ft. Harrison site, which dates from the 1780's. 10. The proposed plant site includes a number of wetland areas, afforded protection by federal law. Any construction as implied in the Construction and Operation applications would interfere or destroy this wetlands. Therefore, the permits should be withheld. 11. Full investigations of rare and endangered species have not been completed for the proposed plant site and transmission corridor. Until permits are granted by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and approved by the WV Division of Natural Resources, the permits should be withheld to protect the full area that may possibly be disturbed. August 21, 2006.

1 0

Movie Coming to the Warner Theater Sept 1st: "Who Killed the Electric Car?"
by Paula -Pj- Hunt 19 Aug '06

19 Aug '06

This looks like a must-see movie (read below). -- Pj >.... have booked "Who Killed the Electric Car?" to begin showing >September 1 at The Warner. We appreciate any assistance you could >give us in publicizing this movie! See you then! > > >-Amy Prunty, GM

1 0

Longview Public Hearing for NPDES (water discharge) permit
by Paula -Pj- Hunt 18 Aug '06

18 Aug '06

Hi All, PLEASE TRY TO ATTEND THIS! Next Tuesday, August 22, from 6 to 8 pm at the WVU Health Sciences Building at the WV Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is holding a public hearing regarding Longview's NPDES draft permit. They don't say which room, but it is probably the large auditorium on the main level. I have a copy of the application as do Duane and Jarrett, if you would like to see it. They are also taking written comments until SEPTEMBER 2ND! Please send comments to: Director, Division of Water and Waste Management, DEP ATTN: Michelle Brenner, Permitting Section 601 57TH St. SE Charleston, WV 25304 Please pass this along to anyone who may be interested. Thanks, Paula

1 0

Longview's storm water permit hearing
by Duane330＠aol.com 17 Aug '06

17 Aug '06

Tue 08/22 06:00pm Public hearing for Longview Power facility located in Cass District, WV. Written and oral public comments will be accepted on the draft permit for the proposed wastewater treatment facility. Comment period ends September 2nd. West Virginia University Health Sciences Building, Hostler Auditorium, Morgantown, WV. For more information contact Michelle Brenner extension 1028. Phone: 304-926-0499

1 0

Cheat Winery event..........
by Duane330＠aol.com 30 Jul '06

30 Jul '06

ANNOUNCEMENT The Hillbilly Gypsies will perform during the Cheat Canyon Preservation Fund Raiser, on Thursday, August 3rd, at the Forks of Cheat Winery. This event has been organized by the Cheat Lake Environment and Recreation Association (CLEAR), the WV Chapter of the Sierra Club, and the Friends of Blackwater. For further information, contact: Duane Nichols, CLEAR President, at 304-599-8040 or _duane330(a)aol.com_ (mailto:duane330@aol.com) . A $25.00 donation is suggested. "Y'all ain't nutin but a bunch of Hillbilly Gypsies...." The Hillbilly Gypsies are a West Virginia native string band who specialize in playing their own homegrown style of Appalachian old time music, mixed with a hard drivin' bluegrass sound. In addition to their original material, The Hillbilly Gypsies play an eclectic mix of traditional and quite often, not-so-traditional bluegrass standards and catchy old fiddle tunes. They choose to perform live, in the old fashioned way, around one or two vintage style large diaphragm microphones. This "Old Timey" approach really adds the high energy barn party atmosphere to their show. Watching the whole band work around the mics can be like taking a trip back in time. It'll sure make you want to get up and move! The Hillbilly Gypsies were recently featured in a musical documentary called "The Music Culture of the Appalachian". This film was produced and narrated by Steven Brady. The film recently got it's debut at the New York Film Festival. The band is made up of Trae Buckner, guitar & banjo, Jamie Lynn Buckner, vocals, Jason Teel, bass fiddle & banjo, Dave Asti, banjo & guitar, and Ty Jaquay, fiddle & vocals. An added treat for the evening will be an appearance by Lindsey Clear, to sing a couple of her songs. See also the web site: _www.thehillbillygypsies.com_ (http://www.thehillbillygypsies.com/) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ANNOUNCEMENT You are cordially invited to attend a Cheat Canyon Preservation Fundraiser “Great Music, Great Food, Great Wine” Forks of Cheat Winery (On Old Stewartstown Road, north of Morgantown) Thursday August 3, 2006 from 6 - 9 pm A $25.00 donation is suggested. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We must raise funds to pay for a snail habitat study in the Cheat Canyon and to cover legal fees for our court case this coming September. Through these efforts we seek (a) to protect endangered species including the Cheat three-tooth snail and the Indiana bat (b) protect the natural and scenic character of the Cheat Canyon, and (c) maintain or improve the water quality of the entire Cheat watershed, down to and including Cheat Lake. Background: On September 4, 2004 a Coalition of Conservation Groups called for halt to illegal logging that threatens Cheat Canyon Wildlife. The Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of Blackwater, Sierra Club (West Virginia Chapter), the Cheat Lake Environment and Recreation Association (CLEAR), the West Virginia Rivers Coalition, and Coopers Rock Foundation notified Allegheny Wood Products (AWP) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“Service”) of AWP’s violations of the Endangered Species Act in an attempt to save the critically imperiled Indiana bat and Cheat three-toothed snail from AWP’s logging and roadbuilding in Cheat River Canyon. The Cheat River Canyon encases a 16-mile stretch of the Cheat River, the largest undammed river east of the Mississippi River, as it runs northwest from Albright in Preston County to Cheat Lake in Monongalia County. Throughout the canyon, the Cheat River is bordered by steep, sandstone walls and is forested by a variety of tree stands, including oak, red maple, mountain laurel, and sourwood. The portion of canyon impacted by AWP’’s activities provides crucial habitat for the Indiana bat and the Cheat three-toothed snail, both protected species under the Endangered Species Act. The Indiana bat is migratory, with a range extending throughout the eastern half of the United States. The bat hibernates in limestone caves and abandoned mines in West Virginia an spends the summer in the forest feeding and raising its young. During the swarming fall period they gather near these caves to mate and forage to put on fat for the winter. The Service has recognized a five mile radius around Indiana bat caves as a zone of concern. Both male and female bats are believed to have a strong fidelity to particular summer colony, foraging, and winter hibernating habitat. One of the bat’s key breeding and hibernating areas, Cornwell Cave, is in close proximity to AWP’s road building, tree-removal and habitat disturbance. The Cheat three-toothed snail is a land snail found only in Cheat River Canyon. It is found in sheltered, wooded areas typically associated with sandstone boulders or cliffs, and is often hidden in crevices or cave-like structures. AWP’s property in Cheat River Canyon comprises approximately one- third of the three-toothed snail’s habitat in the entire world. Although the Service informed AWP after it acquired the land that it contained Indiana bat and three-toothed snail habitat, AWP has initiated road building and logging activities in Cheat River Canyon without conducting adequate surveys for the species or even applying for a permit to harm the Indiana bat and Cheat three-toothed snail in conjunction with preparing a detailed Habitat Conservation Plan (“HCP”) to minimize and mitigate these impacts on federally protected species. AWP has converted the narrow hiking trail into a haul road near the town of Albright in Preston County, West Virginia and has logged a significant portion of the Canyon. Through their notice letter, the conservation groups have warned AWP that it is in current violation of the Endangered Species Act and must cease all of its offending activities. The Service is also on notice that it must enforce the law. Like the Blackwater Canyon, the Cheat Canyon is one of West Virginia’s unique ecological treasures and also a recreation destination. AWP has ignored Fish and Wildlife’s request for endangered species’ surveys in their rush to get out the cut. Now the Service must stop this dangerous project. Sandy Cress of the West Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club said, “The Sierra Club believes that preservation of wildlife is of paramount importance, particularly the protection of endangered species." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For more information contact: Duane Nichols, President, Cheat Lake Environment and Recreation Association, 330 Dream Catcher Circle, Morgantown, WV 26508. Email or phone: _duane330(a)aol.com_ (mailto:duane330@aol.com) , or 304-599-8040. Contributions should be sent to: Donna Weems, CLEAR Treasurer, 320 Dream Catcher Circle, Morgantown, WV 26508, or bring them to the Fund Raiser.

1 0

"An Inconvenient Truth" --- here, now!
by Duane330＠aol.com 23 Jul '06

23 Jul '06

The new movie named “AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH” is playing at the Warner Theatre on High Street here in Morgantown, at least through Friday of this week. This movie includes a rather comprehensive examination of global warming, its causes and effects--- which are profound. Al Gore adds some humor to this documentary that has been a central issue in his life for perhaps 30 years. Believe it, all showings are $4.00 per seat. The schedule for today (Sunday) is 1:15, 3:15, 5:15, 7:20 and 9:15 pm. The length of the movie is 95 minutes. For Monday thru Friday, the times are 5:15, 7:20 and 9:15 pm.

1 0

Global Warming, Sunday at 9 pm
by Duane330＠aol.com 12 Jul '06

12 Jul '06

Discovery Channel visits global warming tipping points across the planet, talks to the world’s leading experts, and examines the latest evidence about global warming in GLOBAL WARMING: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW. Produced by Discovery Channel, the BBC and NBC News Productions, and hosted by award-winning journalist Tom Brokaw, the two-hour special presents the facts and leaves it up to viewers to determine their own opinion about global warming. GLOBAL WARMING: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW premieres Sunday, July 16, at 9 p.m. ET. [http://dsc.discovery.com] The two-hour special will decode the buzzwords and arm viewers with an arsenal of clear definitions and visual depictions to explain the greenhouse effect, carbon dioxide emissions, CFCs, effects on weather and rising sea levels. CGI and cutting-edge climate computer models will help viewers see into the future at a world significantly changed by unchecked global warming. GLOBAL WARMING: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW will take viewers to global warming hot spots where the planet is most affected by climate change - into rushing subterranean rivers deep in Patagonian glaciers, into the drought-stricken Amazon, on coral reefs ravaged by rising ocean temperatures, into a massive Chinese coal mine, and many more. The international team of experts, including NASA’s top climate scientist Dr. James Hansen, and Princeton University professors Michael Oppenheimer and Stephen Pacala, will discuss the current realities of global warming and predict the future of the planet. Many of the experts will address natural warming and cooling cycles going back 600,000 years, and discuss if the present warming trend is unnatural. GLOBAL WARMING: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW will demonstrate how much carbon dioxide the average American family produces and present a graphical timeline of global warming throughout history. Finally, the special will look at technical solutions, both great and small, from giant gas injection rigs in the ocean, to more efficient architecture in cities, to what the average American family can do to slow global warming. Join legendary news anchor Tom Brokaw for a programming event that promises to be thought-provoking, visceral and empowering.

1 0

Fwd: Correction:
by Duane330＠aol.com 10 Jul '06

10 Jul '06

For your information.

1 0

slide show
by Paul Brown 07 Jul '06

07 Jul '06

I've reserved a room that holds up to 85 people, so bring anyone you like. If we like the room, I'll use it for the series of eight public lectures. Title: The Four Horsemen: Overpopulation, Climate Change, Mass Extinctions, and Human Behavior Time: Monday, July 24, 2006, 7 pm. Place: John Jones Conference Center, WVU Health Sciences Center, Rooms 1 - 3. Directions: Come up Medical Center Drive from the traffic light where Patteson becomes Van Voohis, park in the lot at the top of the hill (on the left, opposite the Cancer Center. Take the sidewalk on the downhill side of the Cancer Center (across from the back side of Ruby Hospital), to the first glass doors on your left. Enter, take the first corridor on the right (opposite the newspaper vending machines), then the first glass doors on the right into the Jphn Hones Conference Center. Signs labeled "Four Horsemen" will be taped to the walls to assist you. best regards, Paul Brown Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512

1 0

Meet @ Prete Thurs. 7 pm
by Duane330＠aol.com 04 Jul '06

04 Jul '06

Dear MVCAC participants and friends............ We will meet this Thursday evening at the Prete Building at 7 pm. There are three or four very important agenda items.......... 1. Should we appeal the recent decision of the Public Service Commission which granted Certificates for Siting and Transmission Lines to Longview Power LLC in spite of the fact that the whole operation appears not to be in the public interest? Problems remain regarding unconventional financing, high costs, low taxes, noises, adverse viewshed, threats to historic preservation, and a number of safety and environmental issues (for example, fine particulates and ozone contribute to asthma). If you cannot attend, please send me your comments on this question. 2. Review of plans for public meetings and school related activities to focus on air quality fundamentals, ambient air monitoring, and governmental programs to protect the atmosphere. 3. How and when to transition our organization into a more general and yet goal directed activity to benefit all the people, now and in the future? 4. Should we become involved with carbon dioxide and methane emissions which are the primary "greenhouse gases" responsible for global climate change? [Should we call for some limitations on or guidelines for outside burning which generates carbon dioxide and significant quantities of smoke and fine particulates?] Please tell me of other items you would like to put on the agenda; and, tell me your thoughts on the above agenda should you not be able to attend. Your interest, participation, and/or support are needed and greatly appreciated. Duane

1 0

county commission
by Robert Shumaker 27 Jun '06

27 Jun '06

Hello-this is an inquiry into the possibility of joint action on the makeup of the Mon. County Commission. Do you know if there is any movement afoot, specifically a petition, to increase the size of the Mon. County Commission to make it more representative of the community? Asel K. and Bob Bell have made so many arbitrary decisions not in the interest of a livable environment that I believe the Commission needs to be increased to 5 or 7 members. I originally thought it might be accomplished by petition for placement on the November ballot, but according to the Sec. of State, such a move must be done by petition thru the County Commission. If such a petition has sufficient signatures, then the Con. Commission is required to forward the petition to the State Legislature for action. Ten percent of the registered voters must sign such a petition, which would be about 5000 signatures. It is my understanding that this number could be reached with the proper support from various concerned organizations. Now might be the time to initiate such a drive when we could get commitments from the candidates running for the Legislature to specifically state if they would support or ignore such a petition forwarded to the Legislature from the County Commission. I am not a lawyer, so the above is my interpretation of the appropriate part of the State Constitution that I have copied below. In addition, such a petition needs to be worded properly so that the County Lawyers could not successfully challenge it. I already had a "turn off" from a County Lawyer in attempting to get information about the Commission. I presented this info and suggestion to the WV Interfaith Group. They gave their support to the idea, but they appear to have too much on their agenda to organize such a petition. Here is the appropriate State Code: Art. 9, Sec13 0f the State Constitution entitled "Reformation of County Commissions" The legislature shall, upon application of any county, reform, alter or modify the county commission established by this article in such county, and in lieu thereof, with the assent of a majority of the voters of such county voting at an election, create another tribunal for transactions of the business required to be performed by the county commission created by this article. Whenever a county commission shall receive a petition signed by ten percent of the registered voters of such county requesting reformation, alteration or modification of such county commission, it shall be the mandatory duty of such county commission to request the legislature, at its next regular session thereafter, to enact an act reforming, altering or modifying such county commission and establishing in lieu thereof another tribunal for the transaction of the business required to be performed by such county commission, such act to take effect upon the assent of the voters of such county, as aforesaid. Whenever any such tribunal is established, all of the provisions of this article in relation to the county commission shall be applicable to the tribunal established in lieu of said commission. When such tribunal has been established, it shall continue to act in lieu of the county commission until otherwise provided by law. Acts 1974, S.J.R. 6, ratified Nov. 5, 1974 Are others working on this, and if not, what do you think? Bob Shumaker 304-292-4918

1 0

Meet @Prete--July 6th
by Duane330＠aol.com 24 Jun '06

24 Jun '06

An important meeting of MVCAC will be held at 7 pm on Thursday July 6th at the Prete Building to discuss the status of the Longview applications at the PSC. We will also conduct priority planning activities for the balance of 2006............. Please attend if possible, or submit activities that you are willing and/or interested to perform yet in 2006............ Best wishes, Duane

1 0

HBO Special on Power Plants, Asthma, Children, and Sports
by Paula (Pj) Hunt 23 Jun '06

23 Jun '06

Hi All, Someone told me this HBO special on asthma, power plants, etc. (see below) is really, really good. If any of you have HBO and can record it for me, I would really appreciate it! Apparently it has been and will be showing a few times. I am not sure how accurate this info is: 10:30 a.m. on Saturday June 24; 8:30 a.m. and 8 p.m. on Monday, June 26. For HBO ON DEMAND subscribers, it can be seen 24 hours a day from Monday, June 26 to Monday, July 24 Thanks, Paula ........................................................ LIFE | Tuesday, June, 20, 2006 TV: HBO spotlights Cheshire, Ohio, athletes "Real Sports With Bryant Gumbel" will shine a light on the area at 10 p.m. today with a two-part expose about the impact of pollution from coal-fired power plants on young athletes The HBO show, which has received 17 Sports Emmy Awards in its 11 years, takes an in-depth look at children growing up in the shadow of coal-fired power plants, athletic participation is contingent on the state of their asthma and their ability to deal with pollutants generated by the plants. Correspondent Jon Frankel talked to athletes near the Gallia County, Ohio, town of Cheshire, just north of Gallipolis on the Ohio River, according to Rabia Ahmad, HBO's Media Relations. That town was nearly vacated after homeowners living in the shadow of an American Electric Power coal-fired plant were bought out because of re-occurring problems with emissions. Frankel takes a look at towns across the eastern United States where power plants lacking adequate pollution controls are spewing emissions. He explores the impact of the pollution on children's developing lungs and also looks into the power companies' resistance to the government's call to curb pollution, speaking with two former Environmental Protection Agency investigators and former EPA head Christine Whitman on why federal laws seem to have been enforced laxly and why the application of pollution controls has not been a top priority. The story goes deeper, connecting wealthy business executives and their sizable political endorsements, leading all the way to Washington Other HBO playdates include: 9:30 a.m. and 7 p.m., Thursday, June 22; 10:30 a.m. on Saturday, June 24; 8:30 a.m. and 8 p.m. on Monday, June 26. For more dates, go online at <http://www.hbo.com>www.hbo.com. FROM HBO.com: Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel presents a two part expose on the effects of pollution from coal-fired power plants on young athletes, profiles the baseball-playing inmates of San Quentin prison, and revisits tennis great Martina Navratalova. The June edition of Real Sports will be available to HBO ON DEMAND subscribers 24 hours a day from Monday, June 26 to Monday, July 24.

1 0

Select next meeting date..........
by Duane330＠aol.com 19 Jun '06

19 Jun '06

RE: Next meeting of MVCAC. As you may know, the Public Service Commission must rule on the Longview applications for Siting Certificate and Transmission Certificate on or before Tuesday, June 27th. So, we should meet shortly thereafter. I'll be in Delaware until Thursday, June 29th, and so I could meet that evening at 7 pm at the Prete Building. The other options, June 28th (I could not attend, but a meeting could still be held), or Thursday, July 6th. Please tell me your preference: June 28th, June 29th, or July 6th. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOTE: At 10:15 am this coming Wednesday, June 21st, an agenda item for the Monongalia County Commission is "The Status of the State-Owned Property at Mt. Chateau". This topic was also discussed in a front page story of today's Dominion Post. The State government has an evaluation underway to determine the future of this and other sites, for possible economic development. The following memorandum has been prepared for consideration of the Commissioners, to outline the importance and potential of the Mt. Chateau property. It is my hope that the County Commission will adopt a resolution and write a letter to the Governor in support of the preservation of the Mt. Chateau property as public property. YOU CAN HELP. READ THE FOLLOWING WITH A CRITICAL EYE AND TELL ME HOW TO IMPROVE IT. SEND ME AN EMAIL, AND TELL ME YOU AGREE OR NOT. SEND THIS MESSAGE TO OTHERS. SEND YOUR OWN LETTER TO: Governor Joe Manchin III, 1900 Kanawha Boulevard, East, Charleston, WV 25305. You can phone or fax the Governor at 304-558-2000 (phone) or 558-7025 (fax). The email address is: _Governor(a)WVGov.org_ (mailto:Governor@WVGov.org) Send me a copy of your letter. Thank you for your help at this time, Duane Nichols, CLEAR, 330 Dream Catcher Circle, Morgantown, WV 26508 _duane330(a)aol.com_ (mailto:duane330@aol.com) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: Governor Joe Manchin III, State of West Virginia Date: June 21, 2006 Re: Mt. Chateau Property on Cheat Lake, Monongalia County, WV Cheat Lake was formed and dedicated in 1926 by West Penn Power “for recreation and the providing of an essential service (electricity)”. Yet, access to the full public use of the Lake is severely limited by the natural terrain, which of course helps to make it “wild and wonderful”. Some public access is afforded by Allegheny Energy and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at the Cheat Lake Park and Trail, where again access is severely limited, and at the Sunset Beach where public boating access competes with dock rental usage. The State of West Virginia can take a major step toward increased public access at the Mt. Chateau location, given the existing 13 acres there and the perpetual access to the Lake that remains from the prior land sales and swaps (that were not in the public interest). Monongalia County and the whole State would greatly benefit from any combination of the following uses for the Mt. Chateau property: 1. The continued function of the WV Geologic & Economic Survey at this site. 2. A museum based upon the existing geological specimens there with additions of rocks and minerals from West Virginia. 3. An enhanced information center and environmental studies office, perhaps featuring a nature center and/or a natural history museum. 4. This is an ideal location for a public park with a pavilion, picnic area, playground, dog walk, perhaps with an observation deck, fishing platform, and/or swim deck. 5. Location for a support facility for use of the perpetual legal access to Cheat Lake remaining at the old Mt. Chateau beach, discarded by the State in 1974. 6. There is ample space for public parking unlike any other location around Cheat Lake, in support of any of the above activities. 7. Location for access to Lake and Cheat Canyon for search & rescue operations of stranded or injured hikers, boaters, rafters, hunters, etc. 8. Location for access to Coopers Rock State Forest, as only practical public access to hiking trails from the Cheat Lake and River level. 9. Base station for monitoring of Cheat River water quality, siltation and debris, as well as acid mine water. This is the one location where a possible scheme could be devised for removal of substantial quantities of the debris floating down from the Cheat River watershed, a perennial problem for Lake usage. 10. Of course, the scenic beauty of this land and the surroundings is justification in and of themselves for its preservation and retention as public land. What remains of the former Mt. Chateau State Park has significance to our State far beyond any economic value for private development. Indeed, economic development in Monongalia County is currently at a peak, and our population growth calls out for the State to improve access to Cheat Lake for all our people. Duane Nichols, Cheat Lake Environment & Recreation Association.

1 0

Nemacolin coal-waste burner appeal
by Duane330＠aol.com 19 May '06

19 May '06

4/26/2006 Company continues work on power plant _Bob Niedbala_ (mailto:niedbala@observer-reporter.com) , Staff writer, Washington (PA) Observer-Reporter Wellington Development LLC continues to develop plans to construct a coal waste-fired power plant in Nemacolin, a project now before the state Environmental Hearing Board. The company received an air quality permit for the proposed 525-megawatt plant from the state Department of Environmental Protection in June. The permit, however, was appealed to the Environmental Hearing Board by two individuals and the environmental groups Group Against Smog and Pollution and National Parks Conservation Association. A hearing on the appeal will begin June 6. Oral argument also will be heard Thursday on motions asking the board to rule on whether adequate public notice was given by DEP on its plan approval. Stanley Sears of Wellington Development said the company is preparing for the June hearing and Thursday's argument is standard for this type of proceeding. Numerous motions already have been filed in the case, he said. An attorney for the environmental groups said Thursday's argument would focus on whether DEP provided adequate notice on its plan approval to the general public as well as to federal land management agencies. Attorney Michael Fiorentino of the nonprofit Mid-Atlantic Environmental Law Center said that if the board ruled in the groups' favor on the issue it could require DEP to complete the proper notice requirements. The groups filed the appeal, claiming emission controls proposed for the plant failed to meet requirements of the Clean Air Act, he said. Wellington continues to move forward with other aspects of the project while the appeal is pending, "within the restraints the appeal has placed on us," Sears said. Work continues on the engineering as well as on other permitting requirements, he said. The $800 million plant is expected to burn more than 3 million tons of waste coal annually from the Nemacolin, Isabella, LaBelle and Clyde coal refuse piles. The plant will employ circulating fluidized bed combustion technology to burn the waste coal cleanly, company officials said. It also will have the benefit of cleaning up abandoned coal refuse piles that now are major sources of water pollution. An average of about 900 people are expected to be employed during the three years the plant will be under construction. Once in operation, the plant will provide jobs for about 160 people, the company said.

1 0

Re: [MVCAC] Minutes 5_15_06
by Charles Harris 18 May '06

18 May '06

All: I am concerned that Longview is violating the agreement made with Sierra, TU, and the National Parks group. I cant recall if paying our witness and lawyers was a written part of the agreement itself. If so, what assurance do we have that any of the issues they agreed to in that settlement will be adhered to? Larry Charles L. Harris Professor of Biochemistry West Virginia University School of Medicine 304-293-7749 >>> <Duane330(a)aol.com> 05/16/06 4:28 PM >>> Minutes of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition May 15, 2006 The MVCAC met at 7:00 on May 15, 2006 at the Prete Building with nine participants in attendance. At the beginning of the meeting, John Gever circulated a copy of the MVCAC flyer for comment. He stated that we needed to find a good map that we can put existing power plants on. It should not be too "busy" in the background. Duane indicated that he had a friend who he could consult about this. Duane provided a review of recent events. Initial and rebuttal briefs were filed with the PSC regarding Longview's requests for siting and transmission line certificates. These were prepared by Phil, Bill, Duane, Jim, and Paula. A final decision from the PSC is due June 27. Special thanks go to Paula for her editorial work on the initial brief and to Bill for his editorial work on the rebuttal brief. Jim mentioned that when Sierra Club and Joe Lovett made their settlement with Longview regarding the air quality permit, Longview agreed to pay Joe Lovett 's fees, as well as the fees of Sierra's expert witnesses. Longview was to pay half within 30 days of the settlement and the other half when the plant was built. As of today (many months after the settlement), Longview has provided none of the money. Jim suggested that MVCAC begin a petition drive to request that the County Commission, Board of Education, and Development Authority revoke the PILOT agreement with Longview, since the expert witness from Synapse Energy stated that Longview did not need the PILOT in order to make a profit. There was some discussion of this. Duane suggested that instead of a petition drive, we have a letter writing campaign. Bill was concerned that the agencies in question would argue that this was a binding agreement, and they could not legally rescind the PILOT. After further discussion, Duane proposed that the Executive Committee deal with the issue. Jarrett reported that Longview's storm water permit was still in technical review. He stated that Longview filed a core sample report in 2004, but they left some pages out. After Jarrett noted this omission, Longview sent the remaining pages. Jarrett stated that Longview had filed, as an attachment to its rebuttal brief, a proposed order by the PSC granting the siting and transmission line certificates to Longview. Longview went so far as to put Sandra Squires' stamp on it. Jarrett recently sent a letter to the PSC in protest of these activities. Cindy sent the West Virginia Environmental Council $100 for a group membership. She also sent a check for $4000 to Synapse Energy. This left us with a balance of approximately $630. We still owe Synapse Energy $2900, and Duane asked for ideas for fund raising. Robert Tower has indicated in an email that MVCAC will receive half of the $500 that was made at the Mon Earth concert. [By getting greater publicity for MVCAC and by completing the flyer as an appeal for funds, some additional money may be raised. Additional ideas for fund raising are needed to support our on-going activities.] Don reported that the truck traffic through Morgantown issue will be dealt with at the City Council's Committee of the Whole meeting on May 27 and again in June. Participants provided John with some suggestions for the flyer. He will make the suggested changes and send the final version to Duane. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 pm. Respectfully submitted, Linda Shuster, May 16, 2006.

1 0

Minutes 5_15_06
by Duane330＠aol.com 16 May '06

16 May '06

Minutes of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition May 15, 2006 The MVCAC met at 7:00 on May 15, 2006 at the Prete Building with nine participants in attendance. At the beginning of the meeting, John Gever circulated a copy of the MVCAC flyer for comment. He stated that we needed to find a good map that we can put existing power plants on. It should not be too “busy” in the background. Duane indicated that he had a friend who he could consult about this. Duane provided a review of recent events. Initial and rebuttal briefs were filed with the PSC regarding Longview’s requests for siting and transmission line certificates. These were prepared by Phil, Bill, Duane, Jim, and Paula. A final decision from the PSC is due June 27. Special thanks go to Paula for her editorial work on the initial brief and to Bill for his editorial work on the rebuttal brief. Jim mentioned that when Sierra Club and Joe Lovett made their settlement with Longview regarding the air quality permit, Longview agreed to pay Joe Lovett ’s fees, as well as the fees of Sierra’s expert witnesses. Longview was to pay half within 30 days of the settlement and the other half when the plant was built. As of today (many months after the settlement), Longview has provided none of the money. Jim suggested that MVCAC begin a petition drive to request that the County Commission, Board of Education, and Development Authority revoke the PILOT agreement with Longview, since the expert witness from Synapse Energy stated that Longview did not need the PILOT in order to make a profit. There was some discussion of this. Duane suggested that instead of a petition drive, we have a letter writing campaign. Bill was concerned that the agencies in question would argue that this was a binding agreement, and they could not legally rescind the PILOT. After further discussion, Duane proposed that the Executive Committee deal with the issue. Jarrett reported that Longview’s storm water permit was still in technical review. He stated that Longview filed a core sample report in 2004, but they left some pages out. After Jarrett noted this omission, Longview sent the remaining pages. Jarrett stated that Longview had filed, as an attachment to its rebuttal brief, a proposed order by the PSC granting the siting and transmission line certificates to Longview. Longview went so far as to put Sandra Squires’ stamp on it. Jarrett recently sent a letter to the PSC in protest of these activities. Cindy sent the West Virginia Environmental Council $100 for a group membership. She also sent a check for $4000 to Synapse Energy. This left us with a balance of approximately $630. We still owe Synapse Energy $2900, and Duane asked for ideas for fund raising. Robert Tower has indicated in an email that MVCAC will receive half of the $500 that was made at the Mon Earth concert. [By getting greater publicity for MVCAC and by completing the flyer as an appeal for funds, some additional money may be raised. Additional ideas for fund raising are needed to support our on-going activities.] Don reported that the truck traffic through Morgantown issue will be dealt with at the City Council’s Committee of the Whole meeting on May 27 and again in June. Participants provided John with some suggestions for the flyer. He will make the suggested changes and send the final version to Duane. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 pm. Respectfully submitted, Linda Shuster, May 16, 2006.

1 0

Meet @ Prete 5/15/06
by Duane330＠aol.com 14 May '06

14 May '06

MONVALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION........... MEETING............MONDAY, MAY 15TH, 7 PM. WE WILL MEET AT THE PRETE BUILDING, IN THE 3000 BLOCK OF UNIVERSITY AVENUE, ON THE RIGHT SIDE GOING TOWARD STAR CITY. PLEASE ENTER THE NEXT TO LAST SET OF DOORS ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING FACING STAR CITY. TOPICS / AGENDA............ 1. REVIEW OF RECENT ACTIVITIES.......there is news....... 2. LONGVIEW ACTION PLAN................ the PSC is pondering........ 3. REVIEW OF THE LATEST DRAFT BROCHURE.........J. G. will attend........ 4. UPDATE ON OZONE, NOx, PM2.5, and CARBON DIOXIDE.......... 5. PLANNING FOR NEXT PUBLIC RELATIONS CAMPAIGN...... 6. WORKING WITH THE W.V. ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL......... 7. COME ON TIME, FINISH EARLY........................................

2 1

meets May 15th at 7 pm.
by Duane330＠aol.com 12 May '06

12 May '06

NOTE: THE NEXT MEETING OF THE MON VALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION WILL BE HELD ON MONDAY, MAY 15TH, 7:00 PM AT THE PRETE BUILDING ON UNIVERSITY AVENUE IN SUNCREST [[BE SURE TO VOTE ON OR BEFORE THE PRIMARY ELECTION DAY ON MAY 9TH.]] Below is a portion of the our Initial Brief on the Longview Transmission Line and the remaining four issues regarding the Siting Certificate. Let me know if you have comments or questions at this time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON CASE NO. 03-1860-E-CS-CN LONGVIEW POWER, LLC Application of Longview Power, LLC for a Siting Certificate to Authorize the Construction and Operation of a Wholesale Electric Generating Facility in Monongalia County West Virginia. and CASE NO. 05-1467-E-CN LONGVIEW POWER, LLC Application of Longview Power, LLC for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity Authorizing the Construction and Installation of a 500 kV Electric Transmission Line and to Satisfy Conditional Siting Certificate for Exempt Wholesale Generating Facility in Monongalia, West Virginia INITIAL BRIEF OF INTERVENORS BARBARA J. BORN, ET AL. Respectfully submitted this 22nd day of April, 2006 BARBARA BORN ET AL INTERVENORS By Counsel, PHILLIP D. GAUJOT WV State Bar I.D. No. 1355 IV. SUMMARY West Virginia is open for business, but it should not be open for exploitation. Concerned Citizens believe that the application by Longview Power, LLC, to the Public Service Commission for the permits required to build a coal-fired power plant near Morgantown crosses a line that separates acceptable economic development from the exploitation of West Virginia’s residents and their quality of life. In the preceding sections we have identified many pertinent details of Longview’s applications that support this position. However, the decision by the Public Service Commission to approve or deny Longview’s applications cannot be reduced to a simple weighing of details. The likelihood of the success or failure of the Longview power plant, the realization of true benefits for the residents of Monongalia County and the State of West Virginia, and the broader impact of the Longview power plant on our region’s future depends on more than kilowatts, dollars and decibels. To fully assess the significance of these details requires a careful scrutiny of the company that submitted them in support of its application. Therefore, Concerned Citizens believes the following four themes should be considered along with the technical details presented to the Public Service Commission: 1. Longview is neither a credible nor competent applicant. It is not surprising that Longview failed repeatedly to provide information to the Staff of the Public Service Commission in a thorough and timely manner, given the fact that GenPower has no experience in developing a coal-fired power plant. West Virginians do not deserve to be placed at risk by the blunders of an inexperienced power plant developer. Longview’s, i.e. GenPower’s, incompetence becomes particularly dangerous when coupled with its desire to invest the minimum amount of money and effort in providing a fully developed and complete application to the Commission. The problems created by GenPower’s lack of competence has hindered the Commission’s evaluation of the noise impact. This lack of competence is also evident in GenPower’s failure to provide detailed plans for any substantial part of the Longview power plant and its failure to provide a financial plan to ensure the project’s long-term viability. If Longview could not submit a complete and credible application to the Commission, how can we be confident that it can build a power plant? It is disturbing that GenPower will sell a package of permits to others who will actually build the Longview plant, because we have no opportunity at this point to determine if the new owners will be any more competent than GenPower. 2. Longview, i.e. GenPower, is not a trustworthy applicant. The Commission’s review of Longview’s application is predicated on the honesty and integrity of the information and expert opinion provided by all parties to the Commission. Yet, Longview demonstrated in its attempt to manipulate the testimony of Eldon Ray that it is willing to corrupt the process if it suits Longview. This direct attempt to manipulate testimony casts a long and troubling shadow over all aspects of Longview’s application. Longview’s trustworthiness has also been challenged by the fact that the current owners of Longview (GenPower) may be out of the picture by the time construction of the power plant would actually begin. Bait-and-switch strategies are not a good basis for a corporation to gain the public’s trust, and the departure of Longview’s current owners raises serious concerns about long-term accountability during the construction and operation of the Longview power plant. Longview, i.e. GenPower, has demonstrated that it is nothing more than a broker for a commodity it wishes to create in the State of West Virginia by taking advantage of residents, tax payers, and government permitting agencies for an exorbitant profit. 3. The imbalance between regional economic benefit and Longview’s corporate profit is unfair. A cornerstone of economic development is the willingness of a developer to risk a financial investment to obtain a long-term profit. But, when the public is asked to share in the investment by giving a tax break to the developer, the notion of a fair profit must be given much greater consideration. Longview has failed to demonstrate that a PILOT Agreement is necessary for this project, although it is clear that it will receive excessive benefit from the PILOT. In asking the public for a tax break, Longview has obligated itself to be forthcoming in demonstrating that its profit-taking does not offend the public interest. It has not done so. 4. There is too much uncertainty surrounding this project. Despite requests from Staff of the Public Service Commission and Concerned Citizens, Longview has failed to submit many essential items of information to the Commission for review. The Commission and Concerned Citizens still do not have the final detailed plans and specifications required by the Commission, Longview’s financial viability is still undetermined, and there is no specification of a market for its electricity. The list of missing information goes on and on. This uncertainty in the details makes it impossible to assess the risks, or the benefits, of the Longview power plant to West Virginia. Concerned Citizens respects the interests of the construction workers who have supported the Longview power plant in their quest for more jobs. But the public interest must be viewed more broadly, and we want to remind the Public Service Commission of the many other West Virginians who will not be so lucky as to benefit from Longview. There are the residents of the Fort Martin community who have already endured over 30 years of living next door to the Fort Martin power plant, one of the dirtiest coal-fired power plants in the nation. Now, Longview is asking them to accept more noise, dirtier air, and a further deterioration of their quality of life. Where the residents now see open pasture outside their homes, Longview wants them to accept another noisy, massive, belching power plant as their new neighbor. As difficult as it is to get a good night’s sleep now, Longview wants them to sacrifice more, with an even larger parade of trucks, dust, and incessant mechanical noise that even Longview’s own noise expert (Vince Alaimo) said he would not want as a neighbor. Rather than showing respect for the Fort Martin community and dealing with these issues, Longview has simply tried to buy out the community of Fort Martin, but many have resisted. There is also the next generation of Monongalia County workers who, twenty years from now, will ask us why we invested so much in a 19th century industry when we had so many better opportunities available to us—a growing regional medical center, high-tech research, and a top-class university. The addition of the 8th coal-fired power plant within 30 miles only jeopardizes these opportunities. Will we tell the next generation that short-term jobs were more important than their future? The Public Service Commission has heard from many people who are opposed to the Longview power plant. But, the Commission has not heard from many of the very large group of people most likely to be hurt by Longview—our children and our elderly. They will take in the greatest risk with the air they breathe. Asthma, cardiovascular disease, and premature death are not beneficial to these people. How can we, as a compassionate society, continue to expose our most fragile constituents to such great risks so that others can achieve a short-term gain? West Virginia is open for business, and it has many bright opportunities to pursue. Longview, however, is not one of them. Like a pied piper, GenPower has tempted our community and its leaders during the past 3½ years with promises that the Longview power plant would be good for us. But, we are reminded of the failures of projects developed by GenPower in Dell, Arkansas, and McAdams, Mississippi. Nothing among GenPower’s presentations to the Public Service Commission, or any other entity, has convinced us that we would fare any better than these failed projects. Construction of the Longview power plant is not in the public interest, and it is not a good business for West Virginia. It is nothing more than exploitation by an out-of-state company hoping for a large profit with a minimal investment of money and effort. In so doing, GenPower has displayed contempt for the health, prosperity and welfare of our communities. Put most succinctly—Longview offends the public interest. V. CONCLUSION During the past 3 ½ years we have heard many arguments presented for and against the Longview power plant. The public has been engaged in debate across many venues—public information meetings, public hearings before the Monongalia County Commission and the Monongalia County Board of Education, and two rounds of public and evidentiary hearings before the Public Service Commission. As we near the end of this debate, it is appropriate that the Commission will make the final determination of whether this project should move forward, because it is the Commission that is given the authority by the State of West Virginia to serve as the final arbiter of the most important question of all—whether constructing Longview is in the public interest. An important point of debate has been determining how the impacts of Longview on the public interest should be weighed across our region. It has been very evident in statements made at the Commission’s public hearings and letters submitted to the Commission that most of Longview’s supporters are construction workers who live outside of Monongalia County. These workers would have the good fortune to find temporary construction employment, but live and raise their families at a safe distance from Longview. In contrast, most of the opponents of Longview live in Monongalia County and would have to live with Longview as an unwelcome new neighbor for the next 30 years or more. In weighing the benefits of Longview to the state, region, and county, we believe that the short-term regional benefits of construction employment are outweighed by the long-term negative impact of Longview on the quality of life, the health of the public, and the potential loss of more promising economic development opportunities in Monongalia County. In determining whether Longview is in the public interest, we ask the Commission to give careful scrutiny to GenPower, the company. Although it has wooed many of our local political leaders, Longview, i.e., GenPower has failed to gain the public’s trust. It has shown disrespect to our community and to the Commission in not being forthcoming in answering important questions, and now, after several years of prodding, its application remains incomplete. For the residents of Monongalia County, the final insult has been the large corporate profit that GenPower wants to take away, while it leaves us so little. To approve GenPower’s application would set the standard for approval at such a low level that it would set a bad precedent for the consideration of applications from other power plant developers in the future. GenPower is simply not the right company to develop a new power plant in West Virginia, given the record in these proceedings. For all the reasons set forth above, Intervenors Barbara J. Born, et al., [Concerned Citizens] respectfully request this Honorable Public Service Commission of West Virginia dismiss the Application for a Siting Certificate and the Application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity Authorizing the Construction and Installation of a 500 kV Electric Transmission Line filed by Longview Power, LLC, i.e., GenPower, LLC, on the bases that: (1) Longview offends the public interest in its abuse of our quality of life, health, economic development, and sense of fair profit; (2) Longview refuses to provide essential information needed to demonstrate that its construction and operation could be in the public interest; and (3) Longview (i.e., GenPower) is not a credible developer that can be trusted by the citizens of Monongalia County. The residents of Monongalia County do not want this power plant.

2 1

Not far from Pittsburgh Airport.....
by Duane330＠aol.com 03 May '06

03 May '06

Debate rages over plan to build power plant in Washington County Fix Up or Foul Up? Wednesday, May 03, 2006 Bob Donaldson, Post-Gazette In this view from Beagle Club Road, 600 acres of coal refuse from the former Champion Processing plant loom over the landscape west of state Route 980 in Robinson, Washington County. A power plant, which would burn the gob pile, is proposed for the site. By David Templeton, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette The Beech Hollow Project in Washington County will pollute air and groundwater and take further toll on public health in a state where air quality already ranks among the nation's worst. So environmental activists claim. But the project developer, his consultants and state environmental officials say the coal-fired power plant proposed for Robinson will be one of the nation's cleanest, create jobs, eliminate a square-mile waste pile that's been an environmental puzzle for decades, and open 600 acres to economic development. Both sides squared off last week during a Robinson Township Planning Commission hearing, where 150 people heard Robinson Power Co. LLC officials explain why it is seeking township approval for conditional-use and land-development permits. After the planning commission makes its recommendations following two more public hearings, township supervisors will hold more hearings before voting. But if construction does not begin by Oct. 1, the company's state air-quality permit will expire. "This has been a huge environmental liability," said Ray Bologna, whose family owns the Champion Processing refuse site and created Robinson Power to build the plant. "Today I view the Beech Hollow Project as an environmental cleanup." The Champion Processing refuse dump -- where coal was processed beginning in 1929 -- is the largest gob pile east of the Mississippi River. Over the years, Mr. Bologna has tried to reduce mine-acid drainage by covering part of the dump with sewage sludge to produce ground cover. He currently collects runoff from the site to be treated before it's released into streams. The latest idea -- a power plant fueled exclusively by coal refuse -- has drawn approval from many quarters, the state included. "There are two environmental issues here," state Department of Environmental Protection spokeswoman Helen Humphreys said. "The first is air quality and the emissions issue, but the new plants are much cleaner than the older plants, and the standards for them are higher. But this also removes a gob pile, which was poisoning ground water, and the state did not have taxpayer dollars to pay for it." The 272,000-kilowatt plant would sit alongside the dump near the intersection of Routes 22 and 980. The project would create 700 jobs during construction and 90 permanent jobs, Mr. Bologna said. Power company consultants said the plant would meet all state and federal environmental regulations. It would remove 98 percent of nitric oxide and mercury emissions and 97 percent of sulfur dioxide. Forty grams of mercury would be released into the air per year, below the allowable limit. Nevertheless, Mark Wayner, air-quality program manager for DEP's Southwest Regional Office, said Robinson Power still would have to buy environmental credits from other companies, not only to prevent the region's air quality from diminishing, but to bring improvements. "They won't be adding to any pollutants," he said. "This project should not adversely affect the environment." Nearby residents and environmental activists said the plant would generate air pollution that directly would affect West Allegheny schools just miles downwind. Cathy Lodge, a Robinson resident whose Residents Against the Power Plant group is fighting the plant, also said project details were not advertised properly, company maps lack proper notary seals and other documents were outdated. A plan for a sewage treatment plant recently was voided, she said. "They still don't have all their facts and figures ready to make a formal application," she said. "The public needs full disclosure, and we're not getting it. This is a very serious project with serious implications for this community." Robinson Power presented a slide presentation describing the technology to be used to limit emissions. It also noted that all fly ash produced in the plant would be disposed on site. But nobody from the company stated publicly what its maps reveal -- that in the next 30 years, the plant would replace about 40 million tons of coal refuse with 64 million tons of fly ash, the powdery material high in heavy-metal content that remains after coal is burned. Dr. Barry Sheetz, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Penn State University, said the fly ash would be mixed with lime to produce concrete that would stabilize to prevent hazardous materials from reaching the soil and groundwater. "We really do understand what's going on," he said, claiming the concrete would serve as foundation for development. "We've worked on this a long time." But Mrs. Lodge said she's not convinced. With 64 million tons in question, she said, only a small percentage of toxins released from the fly ash could cause serious groundwater contamination. "It doesn't matter if it is loose or in concrete form: It's in an unlined pit," she said. "I have well water and other residents have well water. They are taking no precautions to protect us." Tom Rathbun of DEP's Office of Mineral Resource Managements in Harrisburg, said the state would do nothing to create a new environmental risk. He said the concrete would not leach toxins, if the ash were processed correctly, and rainwater could not penetrate it. As such, he said, the plan would "cure" the existing coal-refuse problem, which would produce 753,000 pounds of mine acid if the land were left as it is now. Raymond J. Hoehler, an attorney for Robinson Power, said he considered the township application to be complete, except for some anticipated "tweaking." He said the township could not base its decision on environmental issues, which he said, fall under the jurisdiction of the state Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. He and other Robinson Power consultants chose not to respond to most claims that residents and environmentalists made during the hearing. But planning commission members also are demanding more information under the threat that the clock will stop in the permit process if information is not forthcoming. "All we want is to be treated with respect," planning commission member Luke Darragh said. "The plans submitted are inadequate. I along with other members of the planning commission are dumbfounded by the extent of inadequacies in the plans."

1 0

Mon-Earth net plus
by Duane330＠aol.com 29 Apr '06

29 Apr '06

Hello Folks, The 3rd annual Mon-Earth Benefit Concert was last Saturday, April 22. I don't have the final numbers yet, but it looks like we ended up with a modest profit of about $500. Of course, I was hoping for more. And if there was a significantly higher profit, my plan was to email the orgs and request proposals for using the funds. I was then going to bring in my core volunteers and develop a consensus for distributing the money. However, with the profit being relatively small, I have decided to forgo that process and instead just make two equal distributions: one to the WV Highlands Conservancy, who has provided event insurance for the last two years; and one to the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition, whose subgroup CALP, was the initial inspiration for the event. Thank you so much to all of the volunteers who did there jobs in such an effective and friendly manner. I was happy with everybody's efforts. Peace and green dreams, Robert Tower 304 296-7607

1 0

Child Exposure to Pollutants
by Duane330＠aol.com 25 Apr '06

25 Apr '06

The WVU Health Sciences Research Day is this Friday, April 28. There will be a featured guest speaker from Noon-1:00, as described below: --------------------------------------- 12:00- 1:00pm - The featured speaker, Dr. Plopper, Professor at the University of California, will present a special lecture entitled "Early Childhood Exposure to Environment Pollutants * Implications for Lung Disease" in the HSC Auditorium. A reception will follow. Dr. Plopper received his PhD from the University of California and postdoctoral training in electron microscopy at both the U.S. Army Medical Research Laboratory in Denver and the Letterman Army Institute of Research in San Francisco. He is known for his research on respiratory diseases with a special emphasis on asthma and other airway disorders as influenced by environmental oxidant pollutants. His studies have contributed greatly to our understanding of environmental pollutants as agents for triggering disorders of both the cardiovascular and respiratory systems as well as diseases such as cancer. At the national level his efforts have contributed to federal guidelines on limits of tolerance for environmental contaminants as well as regional, state and national strategies to reduce environmental pollution.

1 0

Don't Forget! Mon-Earth Benefit Concert this Saturday!
by Paula (Pj) Hunt 20 Apr '06

20 Apr '06

I hope you can make it this Saturday at 8pm! Bring everyone you know. Come join us for a musical celebration of Earth Day, in support of our local environment, as we present: The Mon-Earth Benefit Concert Saturday, April 22, 2006 8:00pm, (doors open at 7:00pm) The Morgantown High School (in South Park) $10 in advance, $12 at the door Students: $5 in advance, $6 at the door lots of Free Parking! Tickets may be purchased in Morgantown at The Blue Moose, The Bookshelf , The Mountain Peoples Co-Op and both Slight Indulgence locations; in Westover at G's Fitness (across from The Aquarium Restaurant); and in Fairmont at the Book N Bean. The Mon-Earth Benefit Concert helps to raise funds and awareness for the 20 plus organizations who are working to improve our local environment. This third annual concert will feature three unique musical performances: 1. Dulcie Taylor (and her band) from Washington, DC (via South Carolina). Dirty Linen magazine writes "Dulcie Taylor is a gifted writer...she also has a compelling voice she employs with nuance and emotion." Her performances are powerfully direct and down-to-earth. She has won two Washington Area Music Awards and her music has received substantial airplay nationwide. 2. Buddy Mondlock from Nashville, TN Buddy is a very successful songwriter whose songs have been covered by numerous performers including Guy Clark, Janis Ian and Nanci Griffith. He recently toured extensively as part of a trio with Art Garfunkel and Maia Sharp, in support of a recording that the three wrote together. He sings with a gentle passion that draws the listener into the poetic stories that he creates. 3. Rachel Eddy & The Morgantown Rounders The Morgantown Rounders are an Old-Time string band of eclectic proportions. They are traditionalists pushing the envelope of tradition, infusing high-energy square dance exhilaration into a mix of vintage songs. For the first time, the Rounders will be performing in traditional old-time style around one microphone. Local personality, Barbara Walker, will be the emcee. For more details on the performers, tickets, directions to MHS, song samples, staff details and details about the local environmental organizations that this event benefits, visit the website at: <http://www.mon-earth.org/>http://www.mon-earth.org/ Mon-Earth has also joined the MySpace revolution! The ever-expanding online community now has a Mon-Earth Concert blog, complete with songs from this year's performers and event details. If you or your organization are already MySpace members, please ADD us as your friend and encourage others to do so as well. Visit: <http://www.myspace.com/monearth>http://www.myspace.com/monearth Please help spread the word! Peace & harmony, Robert Tower Producer 304 296-7607 <mailto:tower@mon-earth.org>tower(a)mon-earth.org

1 0

BDC Development Forum: Th @ 7 pm
by Duane330＠aol.com 17 Apr '06

17 Apr '06

Balanced Development Coalition’s upcoming Development Forum The Balanced Development Coalition (BDC) is hosting a Development Forum in the Mountaineer Mall Community Room on April 20th, 2006, from 7:00 to 8:30 pm, for candidates of the WV County Commission and the WV legislature. The event is free and open to the public. Light refreshments will be provided. (The Community Room is across from Radio Shack. Enter the Mall between General Glass and Elder Beerman—the Community Room will be on your right) The BDC is an alliance of groups concerned about development, including Farmers And Residents for saving Monongalia County Farms (FARM), Citizens for Responsible Development (CRD), the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition (MVCAC), and West Virginia for Democracy. FARM advocates the adoption of a USDA Farmland Protection Program for Monongalia County. CRD is a grassroots group dedicated to the promotion of responsible development and land use planning in Morgantown and Monongalia County. MVCAC focuses on improving and preserving the quality of the air we breathe. WV for Democracy is a grassroots political action committee supporting progressive candidates and policies. The BDC Development Forum will be moderated by WCLG News Director Dave McClung. The goal of the BDC Development Forum is to foster a discussion of how best to manage growth and development in Morgantown and Monongalia County. Specific development issues that will be focused on include farmland preservation, storm water runoff, air quality, transportation, land-use planning, and tax increment financing (TIF). With the Morgantown region experiencing a period of particularly rapid growth, decisions made now will have a large impact on the future of the region. Thus, issues related to development are very important for this election. Participants in the Forum include candidates for the County Commission and the state legislature. The county commissioners play a key role in managing growth and setting policies that can ensure a high quality of life for local residents. The State delegates and senators have the power to influence WV state code, which provides the legal framework for county level actions. For example, state code provides for specific regulatory mechanisms for the implementation of planning. In addition, state agencies construct infrastructure, such as roads, and regulate activities that affect the environment, including air and water quality. All candidates for the County Commission and the State legislature have been invited to the Forum. So far the following candidates have indicated they will attend: County Commission candidate Betty Wiley, and WV Legislature candidates Barbara Evans Fleishauer, Steven Fumich, Charlene Marshall, and Alex Shook. To provide a context for the Forum, all candidates for the County Commission and state legislature were asked to complete a questionnaire. Responses were received from the following County Commission candidates Asel Kennedy and Betty Wiley, as well as State legislature candidates Robert Beach, Barbara Evans Fleischauer, Cindy Frich, Steven Fumich, and Jim Manilla. The candidate’s responses to the questionnaire indicate that development is a key issue in this election. Most candidates expressed strong support for managing growth, but opinions regarding how to do so varied greatly. If you would like a copy of the candidates' responses, reply to balanceddevelopment(a)yahoo.com. The forum will be a great opportunity to learn about the candidates’ vision for the Morgantown area, as well as a chance to give feedback to the candidates about development issues that are important to the public. The primary election is on May 9, and early voting begins April 19. Citizens for Responsible Development Morgantown WV 599-2938

1 0

Minutes of April 10, 2006
by Duane330＠aol.com 12 Apr '06

12 Apr '06

Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition Monthly Meeting Minutes April 10, 2006 The monthly meeting of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition was held on Monday, April 10, 2006 at the Prete Building. There were nine participants in attendance. Duane provided a Treasurer’s Report on behalf of Deborah, who has stepped down as Treasurer, but will remain as a signatory on the bank account, as Treasurer-II if the need arises. We currently have a balance of $4,613. Paula is maintaining a list of donors. This week, Duane will go to the bank with Cindy, our new treasurer, so that her name can be put on the account. Bill mentioned that in order to remain a public charity, 1/3 of an organization’s donations must come from the public. No single donor can give more than 2% of the total donations. If an organization does not meet this criterion, it is considered to be a private foundation, rather than a public charity. Duane stated that our 501c3 application has been submitted, and we received a postcard from the IRS acknowledging receipt of the application. Duane announced that he was going to request an invoice from the company, Synapse Energy Economics, that provided an expert witness for the PSC hearing last month related to the financial aspects of Longview. He moved that we authorize payment to Synapse of up to $4,000 of their total bill. Paula seconded and the motion passed by consensus. Paula suggested that we might want to send a press release to let the public know that we are still active and that Longview is not a “done deal.” Jim stated that he thought that letters to the editor might be more effective than a press release. Duane asked various participants to write letters to the editor. Duane provided an overview of the events at the PSC hearing regarding the siting and transmission line certificates for Longview. During the public comment period at the beginning of the hearing, 4-5 union members spoke, as did Jarrett and his mother. The proceedings went on for two days, after which Phil requested that the hearings be ended. As a result, rather than testifying in person, the testimonies of our noise expert (Chuck), George Blankenship (expert for Allegheny on transmission issues), and Scott Harvey (expert for Longview on transmission lines) were entered into the record. Phil, Duane, Jim, and Bill are working to finish a brief that is a summary of arguments and evidence regarding the siting and transmission line certificates. It is due at the PSC by April 24. Jarrett is working to determine the status of the Longview air permit, whether it has expired, and perhaps was renewed by the WV-DEP Air Quality Branch. Duane asked the participants whether MVCAC should join the West Virginia Environmental Council. The dues would be $100/year. By consensus, the participants present decided that MVCAC would become a member of the WVEC. Duane circulated a draft copy of the brochure that is being created by Cliff and John. The group agreed that the text was too small and dense and needed to be shortened. In addition, it was felt that the graphic on the front was difficult to decipher. In new business, Bill suggested that, once we had defeated Longview, MVCAC might want to consider partnering with other local groups to have joint meetings. This would reduce the number of meetings that an individual participant had to attend and allow groups to pool resources for speakers, etc. Don brought up the issue of the truck traffic through Morgantown. He said that it was difficult for the city to address this issue, because we do not have home rule in West Virginia. He suggested that participants might want to write to their delegates and senators to ask them to change state law and permit home rule. Robert brought flyers, tickets, and bumper stickers for the Mon-Earth concert to be held on April 22 at Morgantown High School. He is looking for volunteers to help with activities such as ticket sales and putting up flyers. If you are willing to help, you can contact him at tower(a)toweringideas.com. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 pm. Respectfully submitted, Linda Shuster, Secretary. [NOTES: 1. Our mailing address is: MVCAC, P. O. Box 4679, Morgantown, WV 26504-4679. Notice that the zip code is 26504, which is actually in Star City. 2. The tentative date for the next MVCAC meeting is May 15th, to avoid any possible conflicts with activities leading up to the primary election on Tuesday, May 9th.] 3. These same minutes are attached in the Microsoft Word format, without Notes.

1 0

Meeting 7pm Monday--Prete Bldg.
by Duane330＠aol.com 08 Apr '06

08 Apr '06

REMINDER. Important meeting of the MonValley Clean Air Coalition this Monday, April 10th, at 7 pm. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Prete Building is the large building on the right side of University Avenue in the second block after Patterson Drive, while driving toward Star City. Please enter the next the last entrance on the North Side of the Building, while headed thru the parking lot away from University Avenue. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

1 0

Mon-Earth Benefit Concert on April 22!
by Paula (Pj) Hunt 03 Apr '06

03 Apr '06

From: "Robert Tower" <<mailto:tower@mon-earth.org>tower@mon-earth.<mailto:tower@mon-earth.org>org> Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 11:44:10 -0400 Come join us for a musical celebration of Earth Day, in support of our local environment, as we present: The Mon-Earth Benefit Concert Saturday, April 22, 2006 8:00pm, (doors 7:00pm) The Morgantown High School (in South Park) $10 in advance, $12 at the door Students: $5 in advance, $6 at the door Free Parking! Tickets may be purchased at The Blue Moose (downtown), The Bookshelf (next to the Office Depot), G's Fitness (in Westover, across from The Aquarium Restaurant), and at other local retail locations to be announced. This third annual event will feature three unique musical performances: 1. Dulcie Taylor (and her band) from Washington, DC (via South Carolina). Dirty Linen magazine writes "Dulcie Taylor is a gifted writer...she also has a compelling voice she employs with nuance and emotion." Her performances are powerfully direct and down-to-earth. She has won two Washington Area Music Awards and her music has received substantial airplay nationwide. 2. Buddy Mondlock from Nashville, TN Buddy is a very successful songwriter whose songs have been covered by numerous performers including Guy Clark, Janis Ian and Nanci Griffith. He recently toured extensively as part of a trio with Art Garfunkel and Maia Sharp, in support of a recording that the three wrote together. He sings with a gentle passion that draws the listener into the poetic stories that he creates. 3. Rachel Eddy & The Morgantown Rounders The Morgantown Rounders are an Old-Time string band of eclectic proportions. They are traditionalists pushing the envelope of tradition, infusing high-energy square dance exhilaration into a mix of vintage songs. For the first time, the Rounders will be performing in traditional old-time style around one microphone. Local personality, Barbara Walker, will be the emcee. For more details on the performers, tickets, directions to MHS, song samples, staff details and details about the local environmental organizations that this event benefits, visit the website at: <http://www.mon-earth.org/>http://www.mon-earth.org/ Please help spread the word! Peace & harmony, Robert Tower Producer <mailto:tower@mon-earth.org>tower(a)mon-earth.org

1 0

Meet Mon. April 10th
by Duane330＠aol.com 28 Mar '06

28 Mar '06

To: MVCAC participants and friends. Our next meeting will be on Monday, April 10th, at 7 pm. Location: Prete Building in the 3000 block of University Avenue. Please enter the next to last door on the north facing side. Topics: Review of the Public Hearing and the Evidentiary Hearing. Status report on the new brochure. Discussion of the new Ft. Martin scrubbers. Discussion of the proposed new 500 kv Transmission Line of Allegheny Energy. Review of air monitoring in Monongalia County. Consideration of membership in the WV Environmental Council. Establishment of an activities calendar and list of future activities. Duane Nichols, Convener

1 0

Minutes-March 6, 2006
by Duane330＠aol.com 09 Mar '06

09 Mar '06

Minutes: Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition; March 6, 2006 The March meeting of the MVCAC was held at the home of Martha and Larry Schwab on March 6, 2006 beginning at 7:00 pm. There were 12 participants in attendance. Jim Kotcon began the meeting by presenting Phil Gaujot with the West Virginia Environmental Coalition's 2006 Linda Schnautz Environmental Courage Award. This award was well-deserved. There is no question that MVCAC would not be where it is without Phil's expertise and dedication. The minutes from the last meeting were unanimously approved. Duane offered the convener's position to anyone in the group who might like to take it. No one volunteered. He then announced that Deb Fulton will be stepping down as Treasurer. He has asked her to continue for one more month, so that we can find a replacement. Duane provided a Treasurer's report. We currently have balance of approximately $1550. We have applied to the state Sierra Club for reimbursement of $2000 that we spent in 2005. Sierra Club has granted us an additional $2000 for 2006 and will, if we can justify the need, give us an additional $1500, which is a carryover from last year. We also anticipate a $5,000 donor grant again this year. We received $800 in donations from the 600 flyers that we sent out prior to the PSC hearing. We have budgeted monies for the following purposes: $1500 for public education, $3000 for air monitoring, $500 for miscellaneous, and up to $7,000 for expert witnesses. Jim announced that we have entered into an agreement with Synapse Energy Economics to help us with the fight against Longview. According to their web page: "Synapse Energy Economics, Inc. provides research, testimony, reports and regulatory support to consumer advocates, environmental organizations, regulatory commissions, state energy offices, and others." They will provide expert testimony with regard to the issue of the PILOT agreement and the financial viability of the proposed Longview plant. So far, they have mainly been able to testify about what Longview has not provided in the way of documents related to these financial issues. Phil stated that the PSC is permitting Longview to submit many documents in a confidential manner that would not be accessible to the public. Phil petitioned the PSC to be privy to this information. The PSC granted this request, and both he and our expert witness will be able to examine these documents. The PSC's evidentiary hearing regarding the two permits that Longview has requested (siting and transmission line) will begin on Tuesday, March 21 at 9:30 am in Charleston. There will be seating for observers, and there will probably be an initial public comment period. Duane invited members of the group to go. Jarrett reported on the storm water permit that Longview must obtain. They initially applied in November 2005 and then withdrew the application. They applied again, and were assigned a new case number. This has presented some confusion. Jarrett stated that Longview has not given the PSC all of the necessary details that they would need for processing the permit. In addition, they have asked for 2 acres and Jarrett estimates that they would need more like 200 acres. Jarrett noted that Longview did not provide the PSC with information regarding the final route for the transmission line. Also, he is continuing to pursue issues related to the historical significance of the Ft. Martin area with Susan Pierce in the Division of Culture and History. Jarrett mentioned that a total of 11 people spoke in favor of the proposed Longview Power Plant, while 53 spoke against it at the two public hearings that were held last month. John Geever presented a draft of the text that may be included in the tri-fold color brochure that he is developing for us. Duane asked if John could send it to him, so that it could be sent to the entire email list for comment. [This has now been done.] Duane asked for ideas for fund raising. Jim suggested calling people directly, however, we currently do not have phone numbers for the people on our mailing list. In addition, we do not actually have a mailing list, but a series of petitions. Paula suggested that we have a session where people bring their laptops, and we put addresses into a database. Everyone agreed that this was a good idea. Phil asked whether the residents of Ft. Martin had been asked for contributions. They have not been directly approached, and Jarrett said that he would think about how best to proceed with asking them for contributions. Paula wondered if it would be useful to go door-to-door in Baker's Ridge Manor, because those residents are directly affected. Robert Tower is looking for a new venue for the Mon Earth Concert, because the Rosewood has closed. Some suggestions were made, including South Middle School, Eisland Hall, and the Wesley Church gymnasium. Duane suggested that, as an educational activity, we ask a representative from the WV DEP to give a talk about air monitoring in Morgantown. Deb visited the DEP and indicated that they told her that they would provide such a talk. The group agreed that this was a good idea. Duane asked Phil what the next step was in the Longview process, and Phil indicated that we needed to respond to various testimonies by the 14th and the 16th of March. Jim mentioned that the Bush administration is currently asking that states approve a weakening of the current law (the Clean Air Act) for the reduction of mercury over the next 20 years. Coal-fired power plants are the primary sources of mercury pollution. The WV DEP is asking the WV Legislature to adopt these weaker standards. We already have significant mercury levels in our rivers and streams in WV. It initially appeared that the House Judiciary Committee was going to propose stronger standards, but they changed their collective mind. The standards will now go before the Senate, so if you would like to see stronger standards, please contact Senators Oliverio and Prezioso ASAP. For more details and talking points, visit Clear the Air's website at the following url: http://www.cleartheair.org/proactive/newsroom/release.vtml?id=25340 To contact the senators: Michael Oliverio II; E-mail: cglagola(a)mail.wvnet.edu; Business Phone: (304) 292-3339; Capitol Phone: (304) 357-7919 Roman Prezioso; E-mail: cglagola(a)mail.wvnet.edu; Business Phone: (304) 363-7323; Capitol Phone: (304) 357-7961 Duane proposed that we consider becoming an organizational member of the West Virginia Environmental Council. This would provide us with representation on their board and would cost about $100. It was agreed that we would take up this topic at the next meeting. Duane asked Cindy O’Brien to become Treasurer of MVCAC, and she graciously agreed to do so. The group thanked Martha for providing beautiful and delicious food and hospitality. The meeting ended at 8:30 pm. Respectfully submitted, Linda Shuster

1 0

proposed brochure--your input needed
by Duane330＠aol.com 07 Mar '06

07 Mar '06

To: MVCAC Participants and Friends Here is the draft text for the brochure handed out last night at our meeting. We need feedback this week so that Cliff can get going on the design aspects by the weekend. We can continue to tweak the copy during that process but right now we need to know whether the draft reflects the general direction you'd like to go. Also, if there's important information that needs to be included and/or stuff that could be deleted. Based on the discussion we had last night, I'll add a paragraph asking for contributions. The About MVCAC section could include a mention of the air-monitoring plans as well. Cliff will also want several high-resolution photographs and other illustrations. Does anyone in the group have anything like this, or ideas for them? Obvious ones would include photos of the current Ft. Martin plant, the local traffic on Seece Lane, the pristine south branch of Crooked Run which runs thru the plant site, a photo showing the historical connection (Ft. Harrison, the Garlow cemetery, and/or the Ft. Martin church). What else could we use? Please send your responses both to Duane Nichols (_duane330(a)aol.com_ (mailto:duane330@aol.com) ) and John Gever (_jgever(a)nasw.org_ (mailto:jgever@nasw.org) ) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PROPOSED TRI-FOLD COLOR BROCHURE Air. Most of us take it for granted. Especially here in West Virginia, a state of small towns and natural wonder. That's a mistake. * * * Our air is under threat. Recently in the Morgantown area, the air has come very close to violating federal standards for two of the most dangerous pollutants, ozone and microscopic dust particles. These are especially bad for people with lung diseases, such as asthma and "black lung," both of which are far more common in West Virginia than the national average. There is evidence that air pollution aggravates heart disease and other conditions as well. Coal-burning power plants are the worst offenders. There are now seven within a 30-mile radius of Morgantown, which produce X tons of particulates, Y tons of nitrogen oxides (which generate ozone). They also produce Y tons of mercury, an extremely toxic pollutant. At least two new coal-fired electric stations have been proposed for the region: the Longview Power Plant in Maidsville, just north of Morgantown, and GERRP (a "gob" or waste coal burner) in Greene County, Penn. Although these are touted as substantially cleaner than existing power stations, they will add XX tons of nitrogen oxides and YY tons of particulates to current levels levels. Even with tall stacks, much of this pollution settles in the local area. Cars and trucks are another major source of air pollution, including nitrogen compounds and particulates. Their numbers are increasing locally along with the population. National trends suggest as well that people are spending more time in their cars, increasing the amount of pollution per person and per vehicle. Violating the federal standards does more than endanger people's health. There can be serious economic consequences as well. "Non-attainment" of standards may lead to restrictions on federal spending in the affected area. It also makes the region less attractive for tourism and new business. * * * You can help! Individually and collectively, we can make our air clean and safe again. If each of us does a little to reduce pollution, it can make a big difference in local air quality. Drive less. For just one trip each day when you would have used your car, walk or bike instead. Conserve energy at home. Turn off unnecessary lights, electronics and appliances. (A TV cable box in "standby" mode, turned off but not unplugged, may consume nearly 20 watts of electricity.) Fix air leaks around windows and doors. We can also push local, state and federal governments to regulate power-plant emissions and other polluters more effectively. Let your elected officials know -- in person and in writing -- you want cleaner air in the Mon Valley! * * * About the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition We're a partnership of civic organizations, environmental groups and individual citizens concerned about air quality in the Morgantown area. We work together to raise awareness and establish policies to improve the air we breathe. For more information about MVCAC, visit our website at www.monvalleycleanair.org Other online resources include: www.nolongview.org (about the Longview Power project) www.lungaction.org (from the American Lung Association) www.epa.gov/air/data (for actual pollution data)

1 0

Monday 6:30 or 7 pm
by duane330＠aol.com 05 Mar '06

05 Mar '06

To: Participants and Friends of MVCAC. Please attend the regular meeting tomorrow, Monday, March 6th. Come at 6:30 for the social session, with the meeting at 7 pm. Location: Home of Larry and Martha Schwab, 3333 Collins Ferry Road, Morgantown. AGENDA ITEMS.................. flyers (500 to 600 were mailed) for Public Hearing donations generated from flyers ($~750); the Evidentiary Hearing, who is testifying, who wants to go down there, who can drive; and what's our next step (aside from the evidentiary hearings) Mon-Earth Concert, coordination by Robert Tower local air monitoring by WV-DEP and possibly by MVCAC local public seminars on clean air projects economic development on Monongalia County

1 0

Meet March 6th @ Larry's
by Duane330＠aol.com 23 Feb '06

23 Feb '06

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MVCAC to meet at the home of Larry and Martha Schwab, 3333 Collins Ferry Road, on Monday, March 6th. Come at 6:30 for the treats; and, the meeting starts at 7 pm. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paula. Thanks for that very good summary and update on the Hearings. Yes. I think we have a very strong case here; we're on a roll; and we need to get the message out, as much as possible..... Duane 1. West Virginia has more than an adequate number of conventional power plants. If any, the FutureGen plants can have effectively zero emissions. 2. It's time to work on a sustainable society for the future, no increase in carbon dioxide emission that give us the "greenhouse effect". 3. The Longview noise problem looms large for the Ft. Martin community. There is already about one truck per minute on Route 53. 4. The viewshed problem for Longview is now huge; not only is the plant with its 554 foot stack a daytime view spoiler for the residents of Baker's Ridge and others, to be seen from Dorsey's Knob and Cooper's Rock, there is the huge steam plume from the evaporation of 3700 gallons per minute of cooling water. And, the lights of the plant and the lights on the smoke stack will be seen for miles around at night time. There will be "night glow" from this plant located high over the Mon Valley. 5. Won't our electric rates go up due to Longview displacing some of Ft. Martin's power in the dispatch schedule? And, how much extra cost will the Ft. Martin transmission cost become due to the extra congestion on the transmission lines, which are already highly congested? 6. How much of a tax break will Longview receive under the PILOT agreement? These are questions that Longview has been asked by the Public Service Commi ssion. Longview has only said, that we are here only because there is a tax break....... take our tax break away and we'll take our marbles and go home. So, the size of the tax break must be large. Is this fair to Allegheny Energy, who has agreed to install scrubbers a.s.a.p.; is it fair to you and me?

1 0

NOOOO Longview! Hearing, and, What's next?
by paula (pj) hunt 23 Feb '06

23 Feb '06

Sorry it has taken me so long to write this but ..... Dear Everyone, Thank You! Thank you for distributing flyers, passing out stickers, coming to the hearing, and speaking out! I was impressed with how well everyone spoke, I was impressed with the students that turned out and spoke (way to go SSC!). There were a lot of great points brought out. I was also impressed with the number of new faces I saw. Thank you for getting the word out and attending. Here is my take on the whole thing: The administrative law judge, Judge Carter, was very calm and respectful. I guess he was taking good notes -- he sure was writing a lot! Don't believe the Dominion Post: I did not go to the 10 am hearing, but Tim did (as did Duane and Sandy and a few others). The room was half full (about 100 people or less) and maybe, *maybe* half of them were the Union people. From what Tim said, there were probably 7 anti-Longview people for very Longview supporter who spoke. At the 7pm hearing the room was almost full (~200 people) and it appeared that around 3/4 of them were against Longview. Again, there was about a 7 to 1 ratio of speakers against the plant. I wish the Dominion Post would do there "person-on-the-street opinion poll" on Longview! But they know they would not like the answers! So what's next? The Public Service Commission (PSC) is holding an evidentiary hearing (which is like a court hearing) in Charleston. Written testimony was submitted to the PSC in Charleston the same day as the public hearing (Feb 21). The "court" hearing will be in Charleston starting March 21, and will last as long as it takes. People from our side (experts on noise, finances, etc.) will be on the stand, and Longview people and their consultants will be on the stand. [Now we need to raise some $$ for these experts!] Our savior, Phil Gaujot, will argue our side of the case. We cannot lose with Phil on our side. I plan to go down to Chas for at least one day (maybe the fist day?). So let me know if you want a ride down there. Others from this group will be going as well. The Public Service Commission must decide the case by June 27, 2006. This deadline is a statutory deadline and cannot be moved. They have rolled the Siting Certificate and Transmission Line permit into one. so they must decide on both by or on that date. What you can do Write a letter to the Editor of the Dominion Post. Tell the world (or the two people who read the paper) that Longview is not a done deal! You can e mail it to <opinion(a)dominionpost.com> and <newsroom(a)dominionpost.com>. Seriously, the Letters to the Editor is one of the most-read sections of the newspaper. By the way, did you read Ann Turnicky's letter in today's DP? Awesome! Write a letter to the PSC and copy the governor. It is never too late. Details are at the web site: www.nolongview.org Tell everyone you know that Longview is outta here! Longview doesn't have a leg to stand on. Help raise money. We need anything we can get. Send checks to MVCAC, 364 Patteson Dr #188, Morgantown WV 26505. Thanks again. If it weren't for you, construction would have started on Longview a few years ago. Longview is toast! ______________________________________ In closing, I'd like us all to remember the late Holly Rieke. She was a tireless opponent of Longview and a great leader in CALP/MVCAC. I think she is looking down at us and smiling at our achievements right now. - Paula pjhunt(a)xemaps.com www.nolongview.org

1 0

Meetings & Activities..2-21-06
by Duane330＠aol.com 20 Feb '06

20 Feb '06

Dear Participants and Friends...... Tuesday, February 21st at 10 am and 7 pm, the Public Comment Hearings are scheduled at the Erickson Center off Patterson Drive. This will substitute for the MVCAC monthly meeting. The Hearings should be "on topic", which is the 500 kV transmission line running north from the proposed Longview site to a sub-station in Pennsylvania, where it will interconnect with the existing 500 kV line of Allegheny Energy. Adverse electrical interactions could occur between the proposed Longview plant and the Ft. Martin plant on the shared transmission lines, due to voltage control and power line congestion. The competition between Longview and Ft. Martin can be costly to both, and ultimately costly to us, the WV customers for electricity. The remaining issues from the Siting Certificate process, that are still active issues today and "fair game" for the public hearings, are as follows: 1. What is the Longview plant equipment layout, what will it look like up close and far away; will it be safe to Airport traffic with its tall 554 foot smoke stake; and, will the large steam plume from the cooling towers be an obstacle or an eyesore. {"plant layout", "visual perspective", "viewshed issue"} There will be warning lights on the smoke stack and substantial lighting in the rest of the plant, giving rise to "light pollution". 2. What about the noises from the plant, as an annoyance for the Ft. Martin community; what about all the additional car and truck traffic on the local roads, as a source of noise and congestion. 3. What are the risks of financial failure of Longview, who must raise about one billion dollars to build the plant; then, they plan to build and sell immediately, to maximize their payout.......... without "offending" the public interest of the residents of West Virginia. 4. How much will be the tax burden for the Longview plant; will it be fair to Longview; will it be just for the rest of us? [The Payment In Lieu of Taxes [PILOT] scheme of the Mon. County Commission gives Longview a special tax break.] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> P.S. I would propose we have a general meeting of MVCAC on Monday, March 6th, to start preparations for the Evidentiary Hearing to be in Charleston and the Mon-Earth concert......... ....... your comments, please! Happy Presidents' Day. Horray; this month we have three President's Days, the 12th, 20th, and 22nd.

1 0

Re: [MVCAC] "No Longview" Public Hearings Feb 21
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 13 Feb '06

13 Feb '06

I'm forwarding this for Paula. I want to point out to our readers, don't feel shy about sending important attachments like this to the list. I have set a size limit for individual messages at 200k, because this should be comfortable for most people, even for people on 56k lines. However, these two flyers attachments are way under that. Distribute them! Jonathan Candice Elliott wrote: > Please help publicize the two public hearings on the Longview Power > Plant next Tuesday, Feb 21. > One is at 10 a.m., the other is at 7 p.m., both are at the WVU > Erickson Alumni Center. > Also, try to attend one or both and bring lots of friends. > > CE > > > >> Original message from: >> >>> "paula (pj) hunt" <pjhunt(a)xemaps.com> 02/12/06 6:13 PM >>> >> Hi Barb, >> >> I hope it is okay, but I have attached the black and white and color >> versions of the nolongview flyer. We mailed out a bunch the other >> night (500 to 600), but I am looking for people to pass many many >> more out and post them wherever possible. If you need large volumes >> of copies, please let me know and I will get them to you. >> >> I also need you to bring 50 people each to the Hearing! There are >> two public hearings: Tuesday Feb 21, 2006 at 10 am and 7 pm at the >> Erickson Alumni Center. If you could send personal e mails to all of >> your friends and get them to come to the hearing, that would help so >> much. Even if they do not want to speak, we need their presence to >> help offset the many ACT Foundation members that show up at these >> things. I know that you know a lot of people outside of the >> MVCAC/CALP circle of supporters. >> >> Thanks so much, >> Paula >> www.nolongview.org >> www.monvalleycleanair.org >> >> > > Candice Elliott > celliot9(a)adelphia.net > (304) 594-3322 > > 414 Tyrone Avery Rd > Morgantown WV 26508-4199

1 0

Longview Public Hearing; Please Help Us Mail Flyers
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 04 Feb '06

04 Feb '06

Paula said "My apologies for any duplicate mailings, but I am getting messages that my posting to the MVCAC listserve was bouncing back." ..... actually, the listserv has been down since Monday evening, Jan. 30th, because the hosting site it was on went out of business. Since then I've been scrambling around getting technical services working again for several organizations. A little thank-you blurb due to our sponsors is in good order: MVCAC's listserv is now hosted on a server maintained by my company, Free Software PC, LLC, and a big thank-you to the Friends of the Cheat for allowing this list to use their domain name. Please attend the Cheatfest this May 6th in Albright to show your gratitude. Proceed to the IMPORTANT message below. Hi Everyone, It has been announced: the _Longview Public Hearings_ will be */Tuesday February 21, 2006, at 1O:OO .a.m. and 7:OO pm /* */Erickson Alumni Center /* The PSC Order for the hearing is at http://www.psc.state.wv.us/imaged_files/Docket/2006_02/dck20060201165309.pdf *I need your help mailing out flyers to let people know about this! so ....... **/_PARTY AT MY HOUSE!!!! _//This Sunday, Feb 5, at 6pm (or whenever you can get there) /*Beverages, pizza, and *lots* of informational flyers to address and mail. I heard a rumor that there is some sort of football game happening that night. We don't get any TV reception down at the house, sorry. Here is a Map and Directions: http://paulahunt.com/map-with-directions.html Brings some friends! I look forward to seeing you here, Paula */Longview IS NOT a Done Deal! /* www.nolongview.org <http://www.nolongview.org/> (/newly revamped -- check it out/)

1 0

PSC issues Longview schedule
by Duane330＠aol.com 26 Jan '06

26 Jan '06

NOTE: The West Virginia Public Service Commission has this date issued a Scheduling Order in the two Longview cases currently pending before the Commission, viz. Case No. 05-1467-E-CN for a "certificate of convenience and necessity" for a transmission line and Case No. 03-1860-E-CS for those issues remaining from the "siting certificate" application. See the full order via the Internet at the following address, or see the conclusions below the web-site address: _http://www.psc.state.wv.us/orders/default.htm_ (http://www.psc.state.wv.us/orders/default.htm) ORDER IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Trades Council's Petition to Intervene is hereby granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following procedural schedule be used in processing these cases: Statutory Deadline June 27, 2006 (270-day clock) Public Comment Hearings A daytime and an evening hearing shall be held in Monongalia County, on one or more of the following dates: February 2, 3, 9, 10 or 17, 2006, or such other date as the parties agree to, provided the hearings take place prior to February 28, 2006. Direct Testimony: Longview has already filed. All Intervenors, except Staff, file direct and rebuttal testimony to Applicant On or before 4:00 p.m., February 21, 2006. Staff files direct and rebuttal testimony to Applicant and Intervenors On or before 4:00 p.m., March 6, 2006. Longview and all intervenors, except Staff, file rebuttal to Staff and cross- rebuttal to other intervenors On or before 4:00 p.m., March 16, 2006. Evidentiary Hearing Beginning March 21, 2006, at 9:30 a.m. and continuing each weekday thereafter until completed, in the HMC Hearing Room, Public Service Commission Building, Charleston, West Virginia. Initial Briefs On or before 4:00 p.m., April 24, 2006. Reply Briefs On or before 4:00 p.m., May 8, 2006. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Administrative Law Judge Division shall conduct the public comment hearings to take public comment on both of these cases. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the ALJ shall conduct both a daytime and evening public comment hearing in Monongalia County. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the assigned ALJ direct Longview to publish notice of all pending hearings with publication to occur not less than 10 days prior to the public comment hearings. Such notices shall address the contingencies contained in the Commission's August 27, 2004 Order in Case No. 03-1860-E-CS-CN. Additionally, the notice of hearing publication shall be published in both Monongalia and Kanawha Counties. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition to Intervene filed by Barbara J. Born, et al., on November 4, 2005, is hereby granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to intervene filed by Allegheny is hereby granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are hereby required to submit electronic versions of all documents to the following address: _jwatkins(a)psc.state.wv.us_ (mailto:jwatkins@psc.state.wv.us) The documents should be in Microsoft Word, WordPerfect, or other compatible format. Spreadsheets should be in Microsoft Excel, Quattro Pro, or other compatible format. Large objects, such as maps, and other non-text based items need not be submitted in the electronic format if an electronic version of such item is not available. This electronic filing requirement is in addition to the existing Commission filing requirements. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission's Executive Secretary serve a copy of this order upon all parties of record by United States First Class Mail and upon Commission Staff by hand delivery. JJW/klm 051467ca.wpd 051467coma012606.wpd

1 0

RE: [MVCAC] Chamber of Commerce Wellness Committee, Environmental concerns
by Larry Schwab 26 Jan '06

26 Jan '06

Dear Rick, Please do join us. You will be welcome in our home on Collins Ferry Road at our monthly meetings. Thanks for your interest. Larry Schwab -----Original Message----- From: mvcac-bounces(a)cheat.org [mailto:mvcac-bounces@cheat.org] On Behalf Of James Kotcon Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 6:53 PM To: Rick Landenberger; Duane330(a)aol.com; mvcac(a)cheat.org; Bill Reger-Nash Cc: E.C. Parsons Subject: Re: [MVCAC] Chamber of Commerce Wellness Committee, Environmental concerns Rick: Good to hear from you. I certainly endorse your participation. JBK At 01:50 PM 1/25/2006 -0500, Rick Landenberger wrote: >Hi All. I've been sitting in the background, 'listing in' so-to-speak, but >this looks like a good opportunity to become more involved. I'm a strong >advocate of walking / running for health, rehydrating with clean water, >all the while breathing clean air. I have a 12 yr. old son who does the >same; we live in Morgantown (South Park). Perhaps I can start my >involvement by attending the next meeting, to see what's involved, before >committing? > >Rick >------------------------------------------------- > >Rick Landenberger, PhD >West Virginia View Manager >Dept. of Geology and Geography >PO Box 6300, White Hall >West Virginia University >Morgantown, WV 26506-6300 >304-293-5603-4342 (office) >304-216-6976 (cell)- > >>> "Bill Reger-Nash" <wreger(a)hsc.wvu.edu> 1/25/2006 1:28 PM >>> >Folks, > >Thank you for your efforts on behalf of us all. You are doing such >good work. > >I am a member of the Morgantown Chamber of Commerce Vision 2020 >Wellness Committee. A suggestion was make to locate a representative to >our committee who could represent clear air and clean water issues. >Might there be anyone who would be willing to join us? I know how busy >we all are but this is impt. We need to make sure this environmental >perspective is not ignored in our deliberations about health and >wellness. > >We meet monthly from 8-9 am on the third Wednesday of the month at on >the ground floor of the Chamber Office. Let me know if you are >interested, and I will communicate your name to the Committee co-chairs >(Betty Parsons and Kelly Stobbe). > >Be well. > >Bill Reger-Nash > > > >WV Walks - 30 minutes or more daily >Feel the power of half an hour! > >Bill Reger-Nash, Ed.D >Professor of Community Medicine >West Virginia University School of Medicine >Morgantown WV 26506-9190 >Phone: 304/293-0763 >Fax: 304/293-6685 > >Dept. web page: ><http://www.hsc.wvu.edu/som/cmed>http://www.hsc.wvu.edu/som/cmed >BRN's web page: ><http://www.hsc.wvu.edu/som/cmed/wreger/>http://www.hsc.wvu.edu/som/cmed/wr eger/ > > > > > > >>> <Duane330(a)aol.com> 1/24/2006 10:04:57 PM >>> > >Minutes of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition >January 23, 2006 >The January meeting of the MVCAC was held at the home of Larry and >Martha >Schwab on January 23, 2006. There were 13 participants in attendance. >Duane >began the meeting by asking participants to provide updates. Jarrett >stated >that he is still investigating Longview's application for a storm >water >permit. He has also been in touch with the PSC about the current air >quality in >Ft. Martin. Cindy indicated that we cannot be part of the Health >Fair, because >they do not permit private groups to participate. However, we can >have a >table at the Walk for Breath and Life again (we did this last year). >Duane >reported that Cliff and John have been asked to develop a draft flyer. > >Deb provided a Treasurer's report. We currently have a balance of >$1567.00. >Expenditures in 2004 included: $2000 to the Environmental Law Center >at the >University of Pittsburgh to fight the proposed Greene County waste >coal >plant, $500 to attorney Mary Ann Maul for expenses relating to the PSC >noise task >force, $920 to Cliff Harvey for the flyers that are being developed, >and $63 >for the post office box. We received a $50 donation from Joy Easton. >Jim >K. reported that the state Sierra is considering giving us money, but >they >would like to have a detailed budget from us first. He also noted >that we are >close to being out of attainment for small particulates. We will know >by the >end of the quarter. >Larry H. indicated that the EPA is considering a change in the >standards for >the emission of small particulates. According to the Denver Post, more >than >2000 studies have shown that the current standards are not strong >enough. >However, the new standards that EPA is considering are not strong >enough to >reduce the number of premature deaths due to particulate exposure in >several of >the cities that EPA studied. The EPA's proposal would cut the >permissible >daily exposure from the current 65 micrograms per cubic meter to 35 >micrograms >per cubic meter. But the EPA's own scientists recommended a tougher >standard >of 30 to 35 micrograms per cubic meter. Also, the plan would leave the >annual >limit at 15 micrograms per cubic meter, even though the EPA's health >experts >called for tightening the standard to 13 to 14 micrograms per cubic >meter. >California even now limits the yearly exposure to 12 micrograms per >cubic >meter. If you think the standards should be tighter you can write to >the EPA. >Use Docket ID No. OAR-2001-0017 and submit your comments by one of the > >following methods: >Federal e-rulemaking portal: <http://www.regulations.gov>www.regulations.gov >E-mail: a-and-r-docket(a)epa.gov >Facsimile: (202) 566-1741 >Regular Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, >Environmental >Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, >Washington, DC 20460 >Last Tuesday, Duane attended the hearing at the Public Service >Commission >regarding the proposed scrubbers for the Ft. Martin power plant. He >reported >that Commissioner Shaw recused himself from the hearing. Duane was >the only >citizen who made a public comment. All of the other individuals who > >commented were attorneys. In his comments, Duane indicated that the >MVCAC supported >the scrubbers under the conditions stipulated by the PSC's Consumer >Advocate, >Billy Jack Gregg. Duane spoke with Mr. Gregg before the hearing and > >discovered that he had negotiated all of the consumer protection >language that we >had discussed in our MVCAC meetings. The hearings led to something >called a >"stipulation," which is already in writing and includes the >amortization, >scheduling, and other details. A representative for Longview >requested that they >be part of the stipulation, but the Commissioners denied this request. >The >PSC will consider the stipulation and will act on it some time in >April. The >proposed construction period for the scrubbers is 2007-2009. >The public hearing regarding Longview's proposed transmission line >certificate will be held in Morgantown, possibly as early as the first >week in >February. Briefs are currently being prepared. Duane met with >Chuck, our noise >expert, to prepare comments on the noise standards for the proposed >plant, >which is one of the four issues that remain to be addressed if >Longview is to be >awarded a siting certificate (along with a plan for the plant, >financing >information, and property tax information). See Jim Kotcon's excellent >Letter to >the Editor from Friday, January 20 for a cogent discussion of these >issues. >Longview has asserted that it cannot address these issues until it >receives a >siting certificate, but, so far, the PSC has continued to maintain >that >Longview cannot receive a siting certificate until it addresses these >issues. >There will be an evidentiary hearing regarding the transmission and >siting >certificates in March, and we will be intervenors. The statutory >limitation for >PSC to make its final ruling on these permits is June 27. It is not >too late >to submit comments to the PSC. Paula has sent out several emails >with the >contact information. We need to find ways to encourage the public to >come out >to the hearing. >Deb made a report on our application for 501c3 status. In order to >proceed, >we needed to develop a set of Articles of Organization. She presented >a >draft version that she and Duane had created. After some discussion >and minor >revisions, Jim moved that the Articles be accepted. The motion was >seconded by >Paula, and the motion was passed by consensus. The 501c3 application > >requires that a conflict of interest policy be included. Deb >requested that she be >permitted to use the policy developed by the IRS. Jim moved that we >use this >policy. Sandy seconded the motion, and the motion passed by >consensus. >Duane circulated a proposed budget. After some discussion and minor >revisions, Jim moved that the budget be accepted. The motion was >seconded by Larry >S., and the motion was passed by consensus. >Deb announced that the Sundogs program has been launched at Cheat Lake > >Middle School, however, the air quality module has not yet been >developed. >Jim suggested that it was time to mount another fund raising campaign. > >Duane appointed a fund raising committee, consisting of Jim, Paula, >and Donna >Weems (if possible), to develop a fund raising letter and the address >list for >mailing. >Respectfully submitted, >Linda Shuster. >January 24, 2006 >_______________________________________________ >MVCAC mailing list >MVCAC(a)cheat.org ><http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac>http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/ mvcac >_______________________________________________ >MVCAC mailing list >MVCAC(a)cheat.org >http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac ***** Jim Kotcon 304-293-8822 304-293-2872 (fax) 304-594-3322 (home) West Virginia University Division of Plant and Soil Science 1090 Ag. Sci. Bldg., P. O. Box 6108 Morgantown, WV 26506 _______________________________________________ MVCAC mailing list MVCAC(a)cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac

1 0

Important EPA Issue....PLEASE WRITE
by Duane330＠aol.com 26 Jan '06

26 Jan '06

To: Participants and Friends of the MonValley Clean Air Coalition>>> Last month the EPA proposed a cut in fine particulates of 50%, but health and atmospheric scientists say this is not enough to make a difference. In a recent Science magazine article (Science, Vol. 311, p. 27), it is pointed out that in order for significant health improvements to be achieved greater cuts are needed. An outside panel of scientists suggested greater reductions to the EPA, but they did not follow that advice. Here are some facts from that article: (1.) PM 2.5 particles in air, which result from soot from combustion processes, harms health in several ways. It can trigger asthma attacks, and kill individuals suffering from heart and lung disease. (2.) The American Lung Association sued the EPA to reduce these emission particles by the end of 2005. The new standards lower PM 2.5 from 65 to 325 micrograms/cubic meter. This is just under the range recommended by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. (3.) The EPA has studied 9 model cities and showed that a reduction to 15 micrograms/cubic meter would lower PM 2.5 caused deaths by 48%, while the recommended change would reduce the death rate by only 22%. There are three public meetings planned and the Science article said that the EPA will accept public comments until April. You can find information on the American Lung Association, on who to write to..... they have a letter formatted or you can do your own. _http://lungaction.org/campaign/Air_Health_Standards_ (http://lungaction.org/campaign/Air_Health_Standards) Larry (Aka Participant 13) Larry Harris 637 Grand Street Morgantown, WV 26501 304-296-4954 (H) 304-293-7749 (W) _clharris(a)hsc.wvu.edu_ (mailto:clharris@hsc.wvu.edu) NOTE: The Standard Address for EPA Headquarters is: Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Building 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20460 (202) 272-0167

2 1

Re: [MVCAC] Chamber of Commerce Wellness Committee, Environmental concerns
by Rick Landenberger 25 Jan '06

25 Jan '06

Hi All. I've been sitting in the background, 'listing in' so-to-speak, but this looks like a good opportunity to become more involved. I'm a strong advocate of walking / running for health, rehydrating with clean water, all the while breathing clean air. I have a 12 yr. old son who does the same; we live in Morgantown (South Park). Perhaps I can start my involvement by attending the next meeting, to see what's involved, before committing? Rick *------------------------------------------------ Rick Landenberger, PhD West Virginia View Manager Dept. of Geology and Geography PO Box 6300, White Hall West Virginia University Morgantown, WV 26506-6300 304-293-5603-4342 (office) 304-216-6976 (cell)- >>> "Bill Reger-Nash" <wreger(a)hsc.wvu.edu> 1/25/2006 1:28 PM >>> Folks, Thank you for your efforts on behalf of us all. You are doing such good work. I am a member of the Morgantown Chamber of Commerce Vision 2020 Wellness Committee. A suggestion was make to locate a representative to our committee who could represent clear air and clean water issues. Might there be anyone who would be willing to join us? I know how busy we all are but this is impt. We need to make sure this environmental perspective is not ignored in our deliberations about health and wellness. We meet monthly from 8-9 am on the third Wednesday of the month at on the ground floor of the Chamber Office. Let me know if you are interested, and I will communicate your name to the Committee co-chairs (Betty Parsons and Kelly Stobbe). Be well. Bill Reger-Nash WV Walks - 30 minutes or more daily Feel the power of half an hour! Bill Reger-Nash, Ed.D Professor of Community Medicine West Virginia University School of Medicine Morgantown WV 26506-9190 Phone: 304/293-0763 Fax: 304/293-6685 Dept. web page: http://www.hsc.wvu.edu/som/cmed BRN's web page: http://www.hsc.wvu.edu/som/cmed/wreger/ >>> <Duane330(a)aol.com> 1/24/2006 10:04:57 PM >>> Minutes of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition January 23, 2006 The January meeting of the MVCAC was held at the home of Larry and Martha Schwab on January 23, 2006. There were 13 participants in attendance. Duane began the meeting by asking participants to provide updates. Jarrett stated that he is still investigating Longview's application for a storm water permit. He has also been in touch with the PSC about the current air quality in Ft. Martin. Cindy indicated that we cannot be part of the Health Fair, because they do not permit private groups to participate. However, we can have a table at the Walk for Breath and Life again (we did this last year). Duane reported that Cliff and John have been asked to develop a draft flyer. Deb provided a Treasurer's report. We currently have a balance of $1567.00. Expenditures in 2004 included: $2000 to the Environmental Law Center at the University of Pittsburgh to fight the proposed Greene County waste coal plant, $500 to attorney Mary Ann Maul for expenses relating to the PSC noise task force, $920 to Cliff Harvey for the flyers that are being developed, and $63 for the post office box. We received a $50 donation from Joy Easton. Jim K. reported that the state Sierra is considering giving us money, but they would like to have a detailed budget from us first. He also noted that we are close to being out of attainment for small particulates. We will know by the end of the quarter. Larry H. indicated that the EPA is considering a change in the standards for the emission of small particulates. According to the Denver Post, more than 2000 studies have shown that the current standards are not strong enough. However, the new standards that EPA is considering are not strong enough to reduce the number of premature deaths due to particulate exposure in several of the cities that EPA studied. The EPA's proposal would cut the permissible daily exposure from the current 65 micrograms per cubic meter to 35 micrograms per cubic meter. But the EPA's own scientists recommended a tougher standard of 30 to 35 micrograms per cubic meter. Also, the plan would leave the annual limit at 15 micrograms per cubic meter, even though the EPA's health experts called for tightening the standard to 13 to 14 micrograms per cubic meter. California even now limits the yearly exposure to 12 micrograms per cubic meter. If you think the standards should be tighter you can write to the EPA. Use Docket ID No. OAR-2001-0017 and submit your comments by one of the following methods: Federal e-rulemaking portal: www.regulations.gov E-mail: a-and-r-docket(a)epa.gov Facsimile: (202) 566-1741 Regular Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460 Last Tuesday, Duane attended the hearing at the Public Service Commission regarding the proposed scrubbers for the Ft. Martin power plant. He reported that Commissioner Shaw recused himself from the hearing. Duane was the only citizen who made a public comment. All of the other individuals who commented were attorneys. In his comments, Duane indicated that the MVCAC supported the scrubbers under the conditions stipulated by the PSC's Consumer Advocate, Billy Jack Gregg. Duane spoke with Mr. Gregg before the hearing and discovered that he had negotiated all of the consumer protection language that we had discussed in our MVCAC meetings. The hearings led to something called a "stipulation," which is already in writing and includes the amortization, scheduling, and other details. A representative for Longview requested that they be part of the stipulation, but the Commissioners denied this request. The PSC will consider the stipulation and will act on it some time in April. The proposed construction period for the scrubbers is 2007-2009. The public hearing regarding Longview's proposed transmission line certificate will be held in Morgantown, possibly as early as the first week in February. Briefs are currently being prepared. Duane met with Chuck, our noise expert, to prepare comments on the noise standards for the proposed plant, which is one of the four issues that remain to be addressed if Longview is to be awarded a siting certificate (along with a plan for the plant, financing information, and property tax information). See Jim Kotcon's excellent Letter to the Editor from Friday, January 20 for a cogent discussion of these issues. Longview has asserted that it cannot address these issues until it receives a siting certificate, but, so far, the PSC has continued to maintain that Longview cannot receive a siting certificate until it addresses these issues. There will be an evidentiary hearing regarding the transmission and siting certificates in March, and we will be intervenors. The statutory limitation for PSC to make its final ruling on these permits is June 27. It is not too late to submit comments to the PSC. Paula has sent out several emails with the contact information. We need to find ways to encourage the public to come out to the hearing. Deb made a report on our application for 501c3 status. In order to proceed, we needed to develop a set of Articles of Organization. She presented a draft version that she and Duane had created. After some discussion and minor revisions, Jim moved that the Articles be accepted. The motion was seconded by Paula, and the motion was passed by consensus. The 501c3 application requires that a conflict of interest policy be included. Deb requested that she be permitted to use the policy developed by the IRS. Jim moved that we use this policy. Sandy seconded the motion, and the motion passed by consensus. Duane circulated a proposed budget. After some discussion and minor revisions, Jim moved that the budget be accepted. The motion was seconded by Larry S., and the motion was passed by consensus. Deb announced that the Sundogs program has been launched at Cheat Lake Middle School, however, the air quality module has not yet been developed. Jim suggested that it was time to mount another fund raising campaign. Duane appointed a fund raising committee, consisting of Jim, Paula, and Donna Weems (if possible), to develop a fund raising letter and the address list for mailing. Respectfully submitted, Linda Shuster. January 24, 2006 _______________________________________________ MVCAC mailing list MVCAC(a)cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac

1 0

[MVCAC] Chamber of Commerce Wellness Committee, Environmental concerns
by Bill Reger-Nash 25 Jan '06

25 Jan '06

Folks, Thank you for your efforts on behalf of us all. You are doing such good work. I am a member of the Morgantown Chamber of Commerce Vision 2020 Wellness Committee. A suggestion was make to locate a representative to our committee who could represent clear air and clean water issues. Might there be anyone who would be willing to join us? I know how busy we all are but this is impt. We need to make sure this environmental perspective is not ignored in our deliberations about health and wellness. We meet monthly from 8-9 am on the third Wednesday of the month at on the ground floor of the Chamber Office. Let me know if you are interested, and I will communicate your name to the Committee co-chairs (Betty Parsons and Kelly Stobbe). Be well. Bill Reger-Nash WV Walks - 30 minutes or more daily Feel the power of half an hour! Bill Reger-Nash, Ed.D Professor of Community Medicine West Virginia University School of Medicine Morgantown WV 26506-9190 Phone: 304/293-0763 Fax: 304/293-6685 Dept. web page: http://www.hsc.wvu.edu/som/cmed BRN's web page: http://www.hsc.wvu.edu/som/cmed/wreger/ >>> <Duane330(a)aol.com> 1/24/2006 10:04:57 PM >>> Minutes of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition January 23, 2006 The January meeting of the MVCAC was held at the home of Larry and Martha Schwab on January 23, 2006. There were 13 participants in attendance. Duane began the meeting by asking participants to provide updates. Jarrett stated that he is still investigating Longview's application for a storm water permit. He has also been in touch with the PSC about the current air quality in Ft. Martin. Cindy indicated that we cannot be part of the Health Fair, because they do not permit private groups to participate. However, we can have a table at the Walk for Breath and Life again (we did this last year). Duane reported that Cliff and John have been asked to develop a draft flyer. Deb provided a Treasurer's report. We currently have a balance of $1567.00. Expenditures in 2004 included: $2000 to the Environmental Law Center at the University of Pittsburgh to fight the proposed Greene County waste coal plant, $500 to attorney Mary Ann Maul for expenses relating to the PSC noise task force, $920 to Cliff Harvey for the flyers that are being developed, and $63 for the post office box. We received a $50 donation from Joy Easton. Jim K. reported that the state Sierra is considering giving us money, but they would like to have a detailed budget from us first. He also noted that we are close to being out of attainment for small particulates. We will know by the end of the quarter. Larry H. indicated that the EPA is considering a change in the standards for the emission of small particulates. According to the Denver Post, more than 2000 studies have shown that the current standards are not strong enough. However, the new standards that EPA is considering are not strong enough to reduce the number of premature deaths due to particulate exposure in several of the cities that EPA studied. The EPA's proposal would cut the permissible daily exposure from the current 65 micrograms per cubic meter to 35 micrograms per cubic meter. But the EPA's own scientists recommended a tougher standard of 30 to 35 micrograms per cubic meter. Also, the plan would leave the annual limit at 15 micrograms per cubic meter, even though the EPA's health experts called for tightening the standard to 13 to 14 micrograms per cubic meter. California even now limits the yearly exposure to 12 micrograms per cubic meter. If you think the standards should be tighter you can write to the EPA. Use Docket ID No. OAR-2001-0017 and submit your comments by one of the following methods: Federal e-rulemaking portal: www.regulations.gov E-mail: a-and-r-docket(a)epa.gov Facsimile: (202) 566-1741 Regular Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460 Last Tuesday, Duane attended the hearing at the Public Service Commission regarding the proposed scrubbers for the Ft. Martin power plant. He reported that Commissioner Shaw recused himself from the hearing. Duane was the only citizen who made a public comment. All of the other individuals who commented were attorneys. In his comments, Duane indicated that the MVCAC supported the scrubbers under the conditions stipulated by the PSC's Consumer Advocate, Billy Jack Gregg. Duane spoke with Mr. Gregg before the hearing and discovered that he had negotiated all of the consumer protection language that we had discussed in our MVCAC meetings. The hearings led to something called a "stipulation," which is already in writing and includes the amortization, scheduling, and other details. A representative for Longview requested that they be part of the stipulation, but the Commissioners denied this request. The PSC will consider the stipulation and will act on it some time in April. The proposed construction period for the scrubbers is 2007-2009. The public hearing regarding Longview's proposed transmission line certificate will be held in Morgantown, possibly as early as the first week in February. Briefs are currently being prepared. Duane met with Chuck, our noise expert, to prepare comments on the noise standards for the proposed plant, which is one of the four issues that remain to be addressed if Longview is to be awarded a siting certificate (along with a plan for the plant, financing information, and property tax information). See Jim Kotcon's excellent Letter to the Editor from Friday, January 20 for a cogent discussion of these issues. Longview has asserted that it cannot address these issues until it receives a siting certificate, but, so far, the PSC has continued to maintain that Longview cannot receive a siting certificate until it addresses these issues. There will be an evidentiary hearing regarding the transmission and siting certificates in March, and we will be intervenors. The statutory limitation for PSC to make its final ruling on these permits is June 27. It is not too late to submit comments to the PSC. Paula has sent out several emails with the contact information. We need to find ways to encourage the public to come out to the hearing. Deb made a report on our application for 501c3 status. In order to proceed, we needed to develop a set of Articles of Organization. She presented a draft version that she and Duane had created. After some discussion and minor revisions, Jim moved that the Articles be accepted. The motion was seconded by Paula, and the motion was passed by consensus. The 501c3 application requires that a conflict of interest policy be included. Deb requested that she be permitted to use the policy developed by the IRS. Jim moved that we use this policy. Sandy seconded the motion, and the motion passed by consensus. Duane circulated a proposed budget. After some discussion and minor revisions, Jim moved that the budget be accepted. The motion was seconded by Larry S., and the motion was passed by consensus. Deb announced that the Sundogs program has been launched at Cheat Lake Middle School, however, the air quality module has not yet been developed. Jim suggested that it was time to mount another fund raising campaign. Duane appointed a fund raising committee, consisting of Jim, Paula, and Donna Weems (if possible), to develop a fund raising letter and the address list for mailing. Respectfully submitted, Linda Shuster. January 24, 2006

1 0

Minutes of Meeting: Jan. 23, 2006.
by Duane330＠aol.com 25 Jan '06

25 Jan '06

Minutes of the Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition January 23, 2006 The January meeting of the MVCAC was held at the home of Larry and Martha Schwab on January 23, 2006. There were 13 participants in attendance. Duane began the meeting by asking participants to provide updates. Jarrett stated that he is still investigating Longview's application for a storm water permit. He has also been in touch with the PSC about the current air quality in Ft. Martin. Cindy indicated that we cannot be part of the Health Fair, because they do not permit private groups to participate. However, we can have a table at the Walk for Breath and Life again (we did this last year). Duane reported that Cliff and John have been asked to develop a draft flyer. Deb provided a Treasurer's report. We currently have a balance of $1567.00. Expenditures in 2004 included: $2000 to the Environmental Law Center at the University of Pittsburgh to fight the proposed Greene County waste coal plant, $500 to attorney Mary Ann Maul for expenses relating to the PSC noise task force, $920 to Cliff Harvey for the flyers that are being developed, and $63 for the post office box. We received a $50 donation from Joy Easton. Jim K. reported that the state Sierra is considering giving us money, but they would like to have a detailed budget from us first. He also noted that we are close to being out of attainment for small particulates. We will know by the end of the quarter. Larry H. indicated that the EPA is considering a change in the standards for the emission of small particulates. According to the Denver Post, more than 2000 studies have shown that the current standards are not strong enough. However, the new standards that EPA is considering are not strong enough to reduce the number of premature deaths due to particulate exposure in several of the cities that EPA studied. The EPA's proposal would cut the permissible daily exposure from the current 65 micrograms per cubic meter to 35 micrograms per cubic meter. But the EPA's own scientists recommended a tougher standard of 30 to 35 micrograms per cubic meter. Also, the plan would leave the annual limit at 15 micrograms per cubic meter, even though the EPA's health experts called for tightening the standard to 13 to 14 micrograms per cubic meter. California even now limits the yearly exposure to 12 micrograms per cubic meter. If you think the standards should be tighter you can write to the EPA. Use Docket ID No. OAR-2001-0017 and submit your comments by one of the following methods: Federal e-rulemaking portal: www.regulations.gov E-mail: a-and-r-docket(a)epa.gov Facsimile: (202) 566-1741 Regular Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460 Last Tuesday, Duane attended the hearing at the Public Service Commission regarding the proposed scrubbers for the Ft. Martin power plant. He reported that Commissioner Shaw recused himself from the hearing. Duane was the only citizen who made a public comment. All of the other individuals who commented were attorneys. In his comments, Duane indicated that the MVCAC supported the scrubbers under the conditions stipulated by the PSC's Consumer Advocate, Billy Jack Gregg. Duane spoke with Mr. Gregg before the hearing and discovered that he had negotiated all of the consumer protection language that we had discussed in our MVCAC meetings. The hearings led to something called a "stipulation," which is already in writing and includes the amortization, scheduling, and other details. A representative for Longview requested that they be part of the stipulation, but the Commissioners denied this request. The PSC will consider the stipulation and will act on it some time in April. The proposed construction period for the scrubbers is 2007-2009. The public hearing regarding Longview's proposed transmission line certificate will be held in Morgantown, possibly as early as the first week in February. Briefs are currently being prepared. Duane met with Chuck, our noise expert, to prepare comments on the noise standards for the proposed plant, which is one of the four issues that remain to be addressed if Longview is to be awarded a siting certificate (along with a plan for the plant, financing information, and property tax information). See Jim Kotcon's excellent Letter to the Editor from Friday, January 20 for a cogent discussion of these issues. Longview has asserted that it cannot address these issues until it receives a siting certificate, but, so far, the PSC has continued to maintain that Longview cannot receive a siting certificate until it addresses these issues. There will be an evidentiary hearing regarding the transmission and siting certificates in March, and we will be intervenors. The statutory limitation for PSC to make its final ruling on these permits is June 27. It is not too late to submit comments to the PSC. Paula has sent out several emails with the contact information. We need to find ways to encourage the public to come out to the hearing. Deb made a report on our application for 501c3 status. In order to proceed, we needed to develop a set of Articles of Organization. She presented a draft version that she and Duane had created. After some discussion and minor revisions, Jim moved that the Articles be accepted. The motion was seconded by Paula, and the motion was passed by consensus. The 501c3 application requires that a conflict of interest policy be included. Deb requested that she be permitted to use the policy developed by the IRS. Jim moved that we use this policy. Sandy seconded the motion, and the motion passed by consensus. Duane circulated a proposed budget. After some discussion and minor revisions, Jim moved that the budget be accepted. The motion was seconded by Larry S., and the motion was passed by consensus. Deb announced that the Sundogs program has been launched at Cheat Lake Middle School, however, the air quality module has not yet been developed. Jim suggested that it was time to mount another fund raising campaign. Duane appointed a fund raising committee, consisting of Jim, Paula, and Donna Weems (if possible), to develop a fund raising letter and the address list for mailing. Respectfully submitted, Linda Shuster. January 24, 2006

2 1

Monday--Important Meeting
by Duane330＠aol.com 22 Jan '06

22 Jan '06

NOTE: The monthly general meeting of the MonValley Clean Air Coalition will be held tomorrow, Monday, January 23rd at the home of Larry and Martha Schwab. Come at 6:30 for the social session, with the meeting starting promptly at 7 pm. Location: 3333 Collins Ferry Road, on the left going northeast. This is an important meeting, to consider the Ft. Martin scrubbers and the Longview transmission certificate application. Did you see the letter to the Editor of the Dominion Post from Jim Kotcon this past Friday...?

1 0

Write to the PSC regarding net metering
by Linda Shuster 17 Jan '06

17 Jan '06

Hi All, The Public Service Commission is considering net metering. Net metering allows home owners to be reimbursed for any excess electricity they generate from sources such as solar power. There are a variety of good reasons to support net metering. For more information, check out questions and answers on the website below. Although net metering is tied to electric deregulation in some states, a number of states have implemented net metering while still regulating electricity, and the WV legislature is not currently considering deregulation. According to the PSC, there has been little progress on net metering in WV, because there has been no interest. If you would like to support net metering, please write to the PSC. You don't need to send long or technical letters. If you send a letter, be sure to include the case number at the top, which is 02-1495-E-GI-Net Metering. The PSC's address is: Executive Secretary WV Public Service Commission 201 Brooks St. Charleston, WV 25323 For more information: http://www.homepower.com/resources/net_metering_faq.cfm Thanks! Linda ********************************************************

1 0

"farmland preservation"
by Duane330＠aol.com 05 Jan '06

05 Jan '06

NOTE: Farmland preservation............ This coming Wednesday, January 11th, it is anticipated that the Monongalia County Commission will be asked to vote in favor of including our County in the federal "farmland preservation" program, to set up a governing board, and to approve a transfer-tax measure to fund this program. Preston County and many others have already approved such participation. It is proposed that the MVCAC support this effort, given that farmland is known to provide the essential base for naturally clean air and water, given the common "good farming" practices of forest preservation, grassland and wetland utility, and long term commitments to a sustainable society. The following statement is planned for release this coming week. Comments are invited; and, participation in the County Commission meeting at 10 am on January 11th is suggested. "MVCAC" STATEMENT.............. "Farmland preservation has huge implications for achieving a sustainable society that can last for decades, centuries, and thousands of years. Here we are on earth, living under conditions that took hundreds of millions of years to achieve. Yet, species extinction is occurring both due to natural and to man-made causes, the latter of which needs to be recognized and reversed. Also, clean air and clean water depend upon our maintaining trees, pastures, and wetlands. The new book by H. H. Shugart of the University of Virginia, "Tales of An Unbalanced Nature", reveals these lessons in such a dramatic and down-to-earth manner." Duane G. Nichols, Convenor MonValley Clean Air Coalition P. O. Box 4679 Morgantown, WV 26508

1 0

Update-- "news and views".......
by Duane330＠aol.com 23 Dec '05

23 Dec '05

Greetings from the MVCAC.......... 1. Jarrett, Duane and Mary Anne Maul (lawyer) visited the WV Cultural Center yesterday to gather information on the Longview plan to preserve the historical features on or near the Longview site. Recent submissions have been made by Marshall Miller Associates on behalf of Longview, and I suspect that Longview considers their "application" to be complete. 2. We visited the Governor's Office and asked for information on the recently reactivated Public Energy Authority, but found out that it isn't very public at this time. Their stated objective is to promote a FutureGen plant in WV, using integrated gasification with combined cycles and CO2 capture. Another objective is to capture federal dollars for economic development. This would be a fine alternative to Longview, if located well to the west of the current site. 3. We visited the WV Department of Environmental Protection. At the Water and Waste Water Division, we gathered information on the application of Longview for a "storm water" permit. This application is not yet complete; and, when it is complete, it will be advertised in the local newspaper. At the Air Monitoring Division, we picked up a copy of the Annual Monitoring Report for last year and inspected duplicates of the monitoring instruments located at the Morgantown Airport, for (a) sulfur dioxide, (b) particulate matter (PM 2.5), and (c) ozone [in season, not winter] 4. We visited the Public Service Commission and picked up an Annual Report for 2004. Jim Ehlers of the Engineering Division was unavailable to discuss the current activities of the "noise task force". I HOPE TO PREPARE A MORE DETAILED REPORT ON THE CURRENT MVCAC PROJECTS THE FIRST WEEK OF JANUARY. NOTE: Today in the Dominion Post is the corrected announcement for the Longview transmission line certificate application. This announcement will appear again on December 30th, at which time the 30 day clock for additional public comments will start. This same information was sent recently to the MVCAC email list. However, in the newspaper you will see the corrected map of the area in question. MVCAC will likely call a special meeting [working session] to focus specifically on the Longview plant status early in January. The next regular (general) meeting of the MVCAC will be on Monday, January 23rd, at the home of Larry and Martha Schwab, 3333 Collins Ferry Road (Suncrest), Morgantown. The meeting starts at 7 pm. If you can, come over at 6:30 to socialize and enjoy some treats.

1 0

P.S.C. Order RE:Longview
by Duane330＠aol.com 20 Dec '05

20 Dec '05

NOTE: LONGVIEW HAS BEEN ORDERED BY THE P.S.C. TO RESUBMIT ITS TRNASMISSION LINE CERTIFICATE APPLICATION, TO INCLUDE A CORRECTED MAP, ETC. LONGVIEW IS TO REPUBLISH AN ANNOUNCEMENT IN THE NEWSPAPER PROVIDING FOR A 30 DAY COMMENT PERIOD. PREVIOUS PROTEST LETTERS NEED NOT BE RESUBMITTED. NEW PROTEST LETTERS WILL BE ACCEPTED BY THE P.S.C. THE FULL ORDER IS PRINTED BELOW. PLEASE FORWARD THIS NOTE TO ANYONE INTERESTED NOT ON THE MVCAC MAILING LIST. THANK YOU. DUANE. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 051467com121605.wpd PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON At a session of the PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA in the City of Charleston on the 16th day of December, 2005. CASE NO. 03-1860-E-CS-CN LONGVIEW POWER, LLC Application for a Siting Certificate to Authorize the Construction and Operation of a Wholesale Electric Generating Facility. CASE NO. 05-1467-E-CN LONGVIEW POWER, LLC Application of Longview Power, LLC for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity Authorizing the Construction and Installation of a 500 kV electric transmission line and to Satisfy Conditional Siting Certificate for Exempt Wholesale Generating Facility in Monongalia County, West Virginia. COMMISSION ORDER On September 30, 2005, Longview Power, LLC, (Longview or the Applicant) filed an application for a Certificate of Convenience and Necessity pursuant to West Virginia Code § 24-2-11a to construct and operate a high voltage transmission line in Monongalia County. This filing was docketed as Case No. 05-1467-E-CN. The Applicant previously published a Notice of Filing of this application. By a letter dated and filed December 2, 2005 the Applicant noted that the previously published notice contained an error in the map of the area where the transmission line will be located. The Applicant provided a corrected Notice of Filing for use in this matter. By a Commission Order entered August 27, 2004 in Case No. 03-1860-E-CS-CN the Commission conditionally granted Longivew's application for a Siting Certificate, pursuant to West Virginia Code § 24-2-11c, to authorize the construction and operation of an electric wholesale generating facility. Conclusion of Law No. 4 of that Order read as follows: In a future filing, Longview will be required to submit its transmission line application and provide further information which addresses the conditions hereinafter set forth, all of which will be subject to further public hearings and Commission decision. At those future hearings, in addition to presenting an adequate case concerning the proposed transmission line and related issues, the burden is on Longview to demonstrate that it has fully addressed and met the concerns embodied in these conditions. DISCUSSION Case No. 03-1860-E-CS-CN will be reopened for the limited purpose of addressing the contingent aspects of the Siting Certificate and will be consolidated with the transmission line application for the purpose of hearing and decision. Additionally, the Commission shall require Longview to publish the revised Notice attached hereto. Protestants who submitted letters in protest to the previous, incorrect publication will not be required to resubmit their respective letters of protest. All previously submitted letters of protest will be considered applicable to the corrected publication. Likewise, all previous intervenors in Case No. 03-1860-E-CS-CN shall retain their party status and shall be considered as intervenors in Case No. 05-1467-E-CN as well. Finally, the Commission shall issue a subsequent order to address outstanding petitions to intervene as well as to set a procedural schedule for use in these cases. ORDER IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Longview Power, LLC provide notice by publishing a copy of the attached Notice as a Class II legal advertisement in newspapers duly qualified by the Secretary of State, published and of general circulation in Monongalia County, and in Kanawha County, making due return to this Commission of proper certification of publication immediately after publication. ____________________________________ Text Box 2 ____________________________________ IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that anyone desiring to protest or intervene should file a written protest or notice of intervention within 30 days following the second publication date unless otherwise modified by Commission order. Failure to timely protest or intervene can affect your right to protest aspects of these certificate cases or to participate in future proceedings. All protests or requests to intervene should briefly state the reason for the protest or intervention. ____________________________________ IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Case No. 03-1860-CS-CN is hereby reopened for the limited purpose of addressing the contingent aspects of the Siting Certificate. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Case Nos. 03-1860-CS-CN and 05-1467-E-CN are hereby consolidated. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission's Executive Secretary serve a copy of this order upon all parties of record by United States First Class Mail and upon Commission Staff by hand delivery. JJW/klm 051467c.wpd ____________________________________ PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON CASE NO. 03-1860-E-CS-CN LONGVIEW POWER, LLC Application for a Siting Certificate to Authorize the Construction and Operation of a Wholesale Electric Generating Facility. CASE NO. 05-1467-E-CN LONGVIEW POWER, LLC Application of Longview Power, LLC for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity Authorizing the Construction and Installation of a 500 kV electric transmission line and to Satisfy Conditional Siting Certificate for Exempt Wholesale Generating Facility in Monongalia County, West Virginia. [LONGVIEW TO INSERT APPROPRIATE MAP HERE PRIOR TO PUBLICATION] ADDITIONAL NOTICE OF FILING On September 30, 2005, Longview Power, LLC, whose address is 1040 Great Plain Avenue, Needham, Massachusetts 02492-2517 (the Applicant) filed an application for a Certificate of Convenience and Necessity pursuant to West Virginia Code § 24-2-11a to construct and operate a high voltage transmission line in Monongalia County. This filing was docketed as Case No. 05-1467-E-CN. The application and exhibits are available for public inspection at the Commission's offices at 201 Brooks Street, Charleston. Upon its completion, the transmission line will be used by the Applicant to transport electricity to the grid for the competitive wholesale market in West Virginia and other locations. Longview previously published a Notice of Filing of this application. This Additional Notice of Filing is made to correct an error in the map which was included in the previously published Notice of Filing and to provide additional information regarding the above-listed cases. ____________________________________ The Applicant proposes to construct a 500 kV electric transmission line to interconnect its electric generating facility to the Allegheny Power (Allegheny) 500 kV Kammer Fort Martin transmission line near Morgantown, Monongalia County. Longview will construct a new 500 kV Substation in Greene County, Pennsylvania. The Applicant estimates that construction of the transmission line will cost less than fifty million dollars ($50,000,000). Neither the Facility nor the transmission line is a public utility providing service to the public and there will be no impact to West Virginia ratepayers. Rates charged for electricity sold by the Facility will be subject to regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) pursuant to Section 205 of the Federal Power Act. The Applicant intends to file a market-based rate schedule with FERC that will allow sales from the Facility to be at negotiated rates. The Applicant will be the entity responsible for the construction and operation of the transmission lines. The Applicant will enter into an interconnection and operating agreement with PJM which will govern the Facility's interconnection at the new Substation. The Applicant, or the purchasers of the electricity generated by the Facility, will enter into transmission service agreements with Allegheny to govern the transmission of the electricity across Allegheny's facilities. Such transmission of electricity will be subject to the terms of PJM's Open Access Transmission Tariff on file with the FERC. The transmission line will not compete with other utilities and will be for the sole purpose of transmitting the electricity generated at the Facility onto the grid for the wholesale market. The black line on the above map indicates the location of the corridor in which the transmission line will be located. The Applicant asserts it is not a public utility within the meaning of West Virginia Code § 24-2-11 and requests a waiver of the Public Service Commission's filing requirements to provide certain information including proposed rates, project construction costs, project financing and estimates of operating revenues and expenses, and the information required by Tariff Rule 42. Other waivers of information filings are also sought. ____________________________________ Text Box 2 ____________________________________ By a Commission Order entered August 27, 2004 in Case No. 03-1860-E-CS-CN the Commission conditionally granted the Applicant's application for a Siting Certificate, pursuant to West Virginia Code § 24-2-11c, to authorize the construction and operation of an electric wholesale generating facility. Conclusion of Law No. 4 from that Order read as follows: “In a future filing, Longview will be required to submit its transmission line application and provide further information which addresses the conditions hereinafter set forth, all of which will be subject to further public hearings and Commission decision. At those future hearings, in addition to presenting an adequate case concerning the proposed transmission line and related issues, the burden is on Longview to demonstrate that it has fully addressed and met the concerns embodied in these conditions.” Case No. 03-1860-E-CS-CN will be reopened for the limited purpose of addressing the contingent aspects of the Siting Certificate. A copy of the Commission's Order in Case No. 03-1860-E-CS-CN is available from the Public Service Commission. Intervenors granted party status in Case No. 03-1860-E-CS-CN shall retain their party status in the reopened proceeding. Anyone desiring to protest or intervene in these cases must file a written protest or notice of intervention within 30 days following the date of this publication unless otherwise modified by Commission order. Failure to timely protest or intervene can affect your right to protest aspects of these certificate cases or to participate in future proceedings. All protests or requests to intervene should briefly state the reason for the protest or intervention. Protestants and potential intervenors who submitted letters in response to the previous, incorrect publication need not resubmit protests or requests to intervene. All previously submitted letters of protest and petitions to intervene will be considered applicable to the corrected publication. Requests to intervene in these cases must comply with the Commission's rules on intervention set forth in the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. All protests and requests to intervene should be addressed to Sandra Squire, Executive Secretary, P. 0. Box 812, Charleston, West Virginia 25323. If no protests are received within said thirty (30) day period, the Commission may waive formal hearing and grant the application based on the evidence submitted with said application and its review thereof. ____________________________________

1 0

FutureGen and CO2
by Duane330＠aol.com 19 Dec '05

19 Dec '05

_http://www.grist.org/news/muck/2005/12/16/muck/index.html?source=daily_ (http://www.grist.org/news/muck/2005/12/16/muck/index.html?source=daily) Grist Magazine: Coal Reversal Climate campaigners warm to "advanced coal" and sequestration, despite Bush backing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> By Amanda Griscom Little, 16 Dec 2005 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bush administration officials tried their darnedest to derail the international climate-change negotiations that wrapped up in Montreal last week. But in the midst of their bombastic no-no-no-ing, they did offer up one constructive idea -- a $950 million partnership between the U.S. Department of Energy and industry leaders to build FutureGen, a "prototype of the fossil-fueled power plant of the future" -- perhaps hoping it would help redeem their negative image. It didn't work. "It was an inappropriate attempt at distraction," said Greenpeace energy-policy specialist John Coequyt, who attended the Montreal talks, "while [Bush reps] squirmed under pressure from other industrialized countries to provide evidence of some kind of a meaningful or concrete strategy related to climate." Oh, and it wasn't a new idea either. The FutureGen project was first proposed in 2003. The new development being touted this month is simply that the Bushies have brought aboard partners from the energy sector, including American Electric Power, Southern Company, and Foundation Coal, that will collectively contribute $250 million to the project. The bulk of the $620 million that the DOE plans to pony up on its own was allotted in the energy bill that passed this past August. The feds hope to get the rest of the needed money from other energy R&D funds and an unnamed group of "international partners." FutureGen aims to build a soup-to-nuts demonstration facility that would generate virtually zero-emission (yes, zero emission!) electricity from coal -- billed by industry as "clean coal" -- within the next decade. It would use "integrated gasification combined-cycle" (IGCC) power-plant technology that first pressurizes coal to produce a vapor, then filters carbon dioxide and smog-causing pollutants from the gas before burning it. The captured greenhouse gases would then be stored underground where they couldn't contribute to atmospheric warming -- a technique known as "sequestration." "FutureGen would be the first demonstration plant in the world to combine the coal gasification process with carbon capture and sequestration," DOE spokesperson Drew Malcomb told Muckraker. The Winnning Coal It's a far cry from a commitment to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Still, on the face of it, FutureGen sounds pretty good. In recent years, the IGCC concept has garnered support from an increasing number of environmental advocates, who prefer to call it "advanced" or "cleaner coal." These folks say coal can't realistically be phased out within the next couple of decades, so we should be using it more efficiently and cleanly while we transition to renewable energy sources. And they say carbon sequestration could play a key role in making coal more palatable. Like it or not, a future without coal is politically implausible in the near term, says David Hawkins, director of the climate program at the Natural Resources Defense Council:"While as a technical matter we could run the world's economy without coal, as a political matter it is not going to happen fast enough. The fuel's abundance and low cost make it something that most political leaders are unwilling to give up." About 50 percent of the electricity in the U.S. is coal-powered, and coal is the top power source in many fast-developing countries. "We must do everything we can to accelerate our use of renewables, but the renewable-energy future is far too slow in coming to put all our eggs in that basket," Hawkins argues. "We have to start reducing greenhouse gases before we phase out fossil fuels." Coequyt of Greenpeace is far more critical. He's concerned that unresolved questions about sequestration -- including possible leakage from storage reservoirs and acidification of underground water supplies -- are getting lost in all the boosterism. There's also the reality that coal -- whether burned in dirty old plants or gasified in high-tech new ones -- is generally extracted using environmentally harmful methods. "Let's not forget that when you're talking about coal you're talking about mountaintop mining," says Coequyt. He cautions that enviros who support advanced coal "need to clarify their message, because otherwise they are implicitly supporting things they don't really condone." Vision Sequester These concerns are shared by many. Nonetheless, carbon sequestration is getting a lot of attention these days from folks who take the climate challenge seriously. The concept was talked up heavily in Montreal, according to Coequyt. "The emphasis on coal and carbon storage was far more pronounced than the emphasis on solar, wind, and other renewables," he says. "It was all over the place." Some of that interest was driven by a report on carbon dioxide capture and storage released two weeks prior to the Montreal conference by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (This is the same esteemed group that released a widely cited 2001 report stating the consensus of some 2,000 climate scientists that much of global warming is attributable to human activities.) The new report is a whirlwind tour of potential methods for siphoning carbon from fossil-fuel energy sources and stowing it underground or in the oceans. "IPCC has brought a credibility to the steadily growing awareness that advanced coal and carbon sequestration need to be taken seriously," said Jeff Fiedler, a policy specialist with the Climate Center at NRDC, the green group that has been more outspoken than any other in its support for advanced coal. The report was not necessarily a green light, though, Fiedler cautions: "It does raise unresolved technical, economic, and policy-related questions about the technology's viability, but still confirms its potential to be a key component of climate strategy." Among the members of the IPCC review panel for the report was NRDC's Hawkins. He was particularly impressed by data regarding the total capacity of underground reservoirs worldwide that could be used for carbon sequestration -- porous rock into which CO2 could be injected. "The findings show that you could take a very large chunk of the world's CO2 output for the next 100, possibly even 200, years and stow it in these reservoirs," explains Hawkins. "It allows the [sequestration] tool to be a significant player in the effort to cut global warming. Perhaps it could handle as much as a third of the reduction task, but meanwhile we need to work just as hard or harder on the other tools: efficiency and renewables." The day of the FutureGen announcement, the BBC reported that the U.K.'s top science adviser, Sir David King -- a veritable Paul Revere of climate science -- expressed unqualified support for carbon capture and sequestration, saying it's the only way to offset the inevitable surge in coal-burning in China and India. These two major emerging economies have copious coal supplies and are currently building on average at least one major coal-fired power plant every two weeks, according to Hawkins. Back to the FutureGen While experts in a growing number of green groups like NRDC, the World Resources Institute, and the Sierra Club are opening up to the idea of advanced coal and carbon sequestration, that still doesn't translate into an endorsement of the Bush administration's FutureGen plan. Many U.S. activists see it as a costly and slow-moving PR gambit rather than a straightforward bid to advance cleaner energy production. "FutureGen is to advanced coal what the FreedomCAR is to hydrogen," says NRDC's Fiedler, "a fancy demonstration project that amounts to a lot of long-term envisioning and little near-term action." Instead of lavishing nearly a billion dollars on a full-scale prototype with a projected completion date of 2012, Fiedler argues that the funds would be better spent on research into sequestration technology, which is still in early-stage development. "Coal gasification is not the technical challenge right now. There are vendors who will sell you that technology tomorrow. What we don't know is how to make the carbon capture and storage part work," he says. According to DOE's Malcolm, the department has devoted $178 million to carbon-sequestration R&D since 2001, and President Bush has requested an additional $67 million for 2006. Still, critics say, little of this has been spent on the kind of demonstration projects that are necessary to prove the technology. "Rather than do one full-scale facility [with the FutureGen funds]," argues Fiedler, "the DOE should be doing five demonstrations of carbon capture and storage using existing streams of CO2." Indeed, the clock is ticking on advanced-coal and carbon-capture technology -- more so than on other potential climate solutions given the alarming rate at which coal plants are being built in the developing world. But there's still time to preempt the potential damage: according to Fiedler, of the thousands of coal plants that are projected to come online worldwide between now and 2030, two-thirds have yet to be built. By the time 2012 rolls around and the FutureGen project is completed, however, much of this damage will be done. Says Fiedler, "If the Bush administration is serious about proving this technology, they either need to do it now or not bother." - - - - - - - - - - Amanda Griscom Little writes Grist's Muckraker column on environmental politics and policy and interviews green luminaries for the magazine. Her articles on energy and the environment have also appeared in publications ranging from Rolling Stone to The New York Times Magazine. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks to Dan Derber and Don Strimbeck for this update..... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

1 0

Re: [MVCAC] Heads up on Longview Resubmittal
by Barbara Howe 13 Dec '05

13 Dec '05

That sounds like a pretty serious error - wonder where else their maps are wrong "because of an error in the CAD overlay"? Doesn't think sort of sound like the problems Massey Coal was having about the exact location of a facility near a school in southern WV? Just a little error in the scale of the maps, they said, I think??? Barb >>> paula - pj - hunt <pjhunt(a)xemaps.com> 12/13/05 9:05 AM >>> Hi All, Thanks to all of you who wrote the PSC over the last couple of months. Your letters worked! Due some of the comments in those letters and the tireless work of Jarrett, the PSC was alerted to the fact that the transmission line location made no sense. Longview said the location on the map was caused by an error in their CAD overlay, and the PSC has told them they must readvertise the transmission line application and put the new map in the legal ad. *** According to the PSC, if no protests are registered within 15 days after the legal advertisement, Longview could be granted the permit. *** It starts all over from scratch, and our earlier letters will not count toward this newest filing. --- The timing over the holidays will work in their favor, so we really need your help. --- I am sorry to ask you to do this again, but as soon as that legal ad comes out, we need to write protest letters (again). Some of you may still have your old letter on a computer, and you can just change the date and send it again when the time comes. For those of you who wrote them by hand, I am sorry to ask you to write another one, but it is very important. I would have another pizza/letter-writing party, but the holidays make that difficult. I will send out an e mail to this list when the legal ad runs (those of you who read the paper the day it comes out can let me know - I am always behind). I'll include a sample letter in that e mail as well. Thanks so much for your help. If it weren't for all of you, Longview would already have started construction on this power plant. -Paula -------------------- Paula Hunt <pjhunt(a)xemaps.com> --------------------

1 0

Heads up on Longview Resubmittal
by paula - pj - hunt 13 Dec '05

13 Dec '05

Hi All, Thanks to all of you who wrote the PSC over the last couple of months. Your letters worked! Due some of the comments in those letters and the tireless work of Jarrett, the PSC was alerted to the fact that the transmission line location made no sense. Longview said the location on the map was caused by an error in their CAD overlay, and the PSC has told them they must readvertise the transmission line application and put the new map in the legal ad. *** According to the PSC, if no protests are registered within 15 days after the legal advertisement, Longview could be granted the permit. *** It starts all over from scratch, and our earlier letters will not count toward this newest filing. --- The timing over the holidays will work in their favor, so we really need your help. --- I am sorry to ask you to do this again, but as soon as that legal ad comes out, we need to write protest letters (again). Some of you may still have your old letter on a computer, and you can just change the date and send it again when the time comes. For those of you who wrote them by hand, I am sorry to ask you to write another one, but it is very important. I would have another pizza/letter-writing party, but the holidays make that difficult. I will send out an e mail to this list when the legal ad runs (those of you who read the paper the day it comes out can let me know - I am always behind). I'll include a sample letter in that e mail as well. Thanks so much for your help. If it weren't for all of you, Longview would already have started construction on this power plant. -Paula -------------------- Paula Hunt <pjhunt(a)xemaps.com> --------------------

1 0

EPA Action Alert-particulates
by Dfvet＠aol.com 11 Dec '05

11 Dec '05

FYI... Please join us and tell the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set much tougher limits on how much pollution can be in outdoor air. Within the next few weeks EPA will decide how much soot, or particle pollution, is safe to have in the air we breathe. The Clean Air Act requires EPA to set these air pollution health limits, also called standards, at levels that protect public health. The health science clearly shows that the current federal limits on particle pollution are set too high, allowing air pollution that leads to the premature deaths of thousands of Americans each year. EPA needs to set limits that are much tougher to protect against this dangerous outdoor air pollutant. EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson must announce the agency's recommendations for new limits before the end of this year, but he is facing intense political pressure to set the limits at levels that are still too weak to protect all Americans. Send your letter today in support for cleaner air! You can take action on this alert via the web at: http://lungaction.org/campaign/epa_cleanair/xngu774z5bj6mt? Visit the web address below to tell your friends about this. http://lungaction.org/campaign/epa_cleanair/forward/xngu774z5bj6mt? We encourage you to take action by January 1, 2006 Tell EPA We Need Less Air Pollution INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPOND VIA THE WEB: If you have access to a web browser, you can take action on this alert by going to the following URL: http://lungaction.org/campaign/epa_cleanair/xngu774z5bj6mt? Your letter will be addressed and sent to: Administrator Stephen Johnson ----THIS LETTER WILL BE SENT IN YOUR NAME---- Dear [decision maker name automatically inserted here], I am writing to express my concern about one of the most important decisions you will make in your role as the head of EPA: your decision to set the national standards for pollution in the air we breathe. I'm writing to urge you to set the tightest, most protective national standards on particle pollution. Thousands of lives are at stake in your decision. Thousands of scientific studies have found that particle pollution in the air causes serious health problems, including tens of thousands of premature deaths, increased use of asthma medications, missed school days, emergency room visits, strokes, and heart problems. Millions of Americans are at risk from breathing particle pollution, including people with asthma or chronic lung diseases, children, seniors, and those with cardiovascular disease or diabetes. EPA staff scientists and the independent scientific reviewers have recommended much lower limits in the national standards for the smallest, or fine, particles. Given the dangerous health effects, there is no reason to choose anything but the lowest levels recommended by EPA scientists for the fine particles. You should also provide even more protection than your staff has recommended for the limits on the larger, or coarse, particles to protect us from these larger, but still dangerous, particles. Please follow the Clean Air Act and set the national standard at a level that will protect public health. That must be the only consideration. And the science is overwhelmingly clear that the current limits do not provide that protection. For the health of my family and all Americans, I urge you to set standards that will make the air safe to breathe in all of our communities. ----END OF LETTER TO BE SENT---- Sincerely, Edward Petsonk -------------------------------------------------- If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for American Lung Association Action Network at: http://lungaction.org/lungusa/join.html?r=l7qVdxY1NmvSE -------------------------------------------------- This message was sent to elp2(a)cdc.gov. To modify your email communication preferences or update your personal profile, visit your subscription management page at: http://lungaction.org/lungusa/smp.tcl?nkey=xngu774z5bj6mt& To stop ALL email from American Lung Association Action Network, reply via email with "remove" in the subject line, or use the following link: http://lungaction.org/lungusa/remove-domain-direct.tcl?ctx=center&nkey=x ngu774z5bj6mt& *********************************** Powered by GetActive Software, Inc. Relationship Management for Member Organizations (tm) http://www.getactive.com ***********************************

2 1

Tell EPA .......... a.s.a.p.
by Duane330＠aol.com 07 Dec '05

07 Dec '05

Tell EPA We Need Less Air Pollution To: MVCAC............ From: American Lung Association Action Network. CC: Larry Schwab, Deb Fulton, et. al. Please join us and tell the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set much tougher limits on how much pollution can be in outdoor air. Within the next few weeks EPA will decide how much soot, or particle pollution, is safe to have in the air we breathe. The Clean Air Act requires EPA to set these air pollution health limits, also called standards, at levels that protect public health. The health science clearly shows that the current federal limits on particle pollution are set too high, allowing air pollution that leads to the premature deaths of thousands of Americans each year. EPA needs to set limits that are much tougher to protect against this dangerous outdoor air pollutant. EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson must announce the agency's recommendations for new limits before the end of this year, but he is facing intense political pressure to set the limits at levels that are still too weak to protect all Americans. Send your letter today in support for cleaner air! (http://lungaction.org/campaign/epa_cleanair/3g3ne52r5bj6mt?) Send a letter to the following decision maker(s): Administrator Stephen Johnson Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Building 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20460 Below is the sample letter: Subject: Please Set Tough Air Standards Dear Stephen Johnson: I am writing to express my concern about one of the most important decisions you will make in your role as the head of EPA: your decision to set the national standards for pollution in the air we breathe. I'm writing to urge you to set the tightest, most protective national standards on particle pollution. Thousands of lives are at stake in your decision. Thousands of scientific studies have found that particle pollution in the air causes serious health problems, including tens of thousands of premature deaths, increased use of asthma medications, missed school days, emergency room visits, strokes, and heart problems. Millions of Americans are at risk from breathing particle pollution, including people with asthma or chronic lung diseases, children, seniors, and those with cardiovascular disease or diabetes. EPA staff scientists and the independent scientific reviewers have recommended much lower limits in the national standards for the smallest, or fine, particles. Given the dangerous health effects, there is no reason to choose anything but the lowest levels recommended by EPA scientists for the fine particles. You should also provide even more protection than your staff has recommended for the limits on the larger, or coarse, particles to protect us from these larger, but still dangerous, particles. Please follow the Clean Air Act and set the national standard at a level that will protect public health. That must be the only consideration. And the science is overwhelmingly clear that the current limits do not provide that protection. For the health of my family and all Americans, I urge you to set standards that will make the air safe to breathe in all of our communities. Sincerely, your name here ................address, phone number >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ALTERNATIVE APPROACH: See the following web site......... _http://lungaction.org/campaign/epa_cleanair_ (http://lungaction.org/campaign/epa_cleanair) [Best approach is to send your own letter (snail mail).]

1 0

Fwd: Next MVCAC meeting
by Duane330＠aol.com 07 Dec '05

07 Dec '05

Please let me know if you have conflicts or preferences with either of these dates...... MVCAC January meeting on..........Jan. 16th or Jan. 23rd. Thanks, Duane,

1 0

FutureGen coal gasification
by Duane330＠aol.com 06 Dec '05

06 Dec '05

Energy Department Teams With Consortium .............. to Build Model 'Clean-Coal' Plant By JOHN J. FIALKA, Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, December 6, 2005; Page A2 WASHINGTON -- The Department of Energy has signed an agreement with an international consortium to build a $950 million prototype for a new generation of coal-fired power plants that remove pollutants including carbon dioxide and produce hydrogen as well as electricity. The plant, called FutureGen, is scheduled to be built by 2012. If it works, it will further one of the Bush administration's main policy goals: to reduce reliance on imported oil and natural gas by using technology to clean up and increase the use of coal, a fuel the U.S. has in abundance. The agency is set today to announce that a group of eight companies, including major coal and electricity producers, will contribute $250 million toward the project. The plant will produce 250 megawatts of electricity -- the output of a medium-sized power plant -- as well as hydrogen, which could be sold to power future cars and trucks or sent to oil refineries to upgrade petroleum products. And some of the pollutants removed from the coal, which would be gasified, may also be sold as byproducts, according to the agency. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, which cause acid rain and urban smog, can be turned into fertilizers and "soil enhancers," the department stated. The plant will separate carbon dioxide, a gas thought to be one of the major causes of global warming, and inject it into deep underground rock formations. The project will test it to determine if it will remain there indefinitely.< "No other power plant in the world has been built with this capability," says a draft version of the department's announcement, expected today. The companies backing the project, called the FutureGen Industrial Alliance, will pick a site to construct the facility by 2007. The department's goal is to capture 90% of the plant's carbon dioxide once it begins operation and later raise that to 100% using "advanced technologies." DOE projections estimate the plant's cost of cleaning up coal and burying the carbon dioxide will add only about 10% to today's electricity prices. Members of the alliance are American Electric Power, of Columbus, Ohio; Southern Co., of Atlanta; Consol Energy Inc., of Pittsburgh; Foundation Coal, of Linthicum Heights, Md.; Kennecott Energy, of Gillette, Wyo.; Peabody Energy Corp., of St. Louis; China Huaneng Group, of Beijing; and BHP Billiton Ltd., of Melbourne, Australia. China Huaneng is China's largest producer of coal-fired power. BHP Billiton is a major Australian coal producer. Both countries, like the U.S., have huge reserves of coal and depend on them to produce most of their electricity. The technique of gasifying coal has been known and used for decades. The Carter administration launched a $1 billion program in the late 1970s to build a plant near Beulah, N.D., that was designed to produce synthetic methane, a form of natural gas, out of cheap lignite coal. The plant, described as a "coal refinery," was sold by the Reagan administration to a local electric-power company in 1988, when it failed to produce a product that could compete economically with natural gas. The FutureGen plant, according to DOE officials, will "leapfrog" that plant's technology by using less-expensive processes that produce hydrogen to make electricity or to sell as fuel. It will also feature newer and cheaper ways to separate carbon dioxide from other byproducts.

1 0

Minutes of Dec. 5th Meeting
by Duane330＠aol.com 06 Dec '05

06 Dec '05

Minutes Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition (MVCAC) December 5, 2005 The MVCAC met on Monday, December 5 at the Prete Building on University Avenue with 11 members and two guests in attendance. Duane began the meeting by handing out a brochure that was created for the Cheat Lake Environment and Recreation Association (CLEAR) by John Gever and Cliff Harvey. Both John and Cliff attended the meeting. Duane suggested that John and Cliff develop a brochure for MVCAC. John suggested that we decide on a focus for the brochure (e.g., education). Duane recommended that we put some information together and then give it to John and Cliff to develop a "draft" brochure. The group agreed that this was a good idea. We have sent a letter to the Public Service Commission (PSC) requesting to be interveners in the application for a transmission line certificate by Longview Power. Although the PSC has not yet responded, Phil does not anticipate that this request will be denied. Duane suggested that we needed some experts to provide testimony, and Phil stated that would be good if they are recognized experts. Phil will compile a list of questions and send it to the lawyer for Allegheny Power (Allegheny will also be an intervener). Jarrett mentioned that Longview will require a switchyard, and it was not clear who would pay for this. Duane reported that Jarrett's appeal of Longview's air quality permit is being taken to the WV Supreme Court by Mary Ann Maul. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is allowing Longview to build its proposed stack, despite the fact that its height exceeds FAA guidelines. We could appeal this decision, but Mary Ann Maul has suggested that we do not have the time or resources. Jarrett will work with Patrick McGinley at the Law School to use FOIA to obtain documents from the FAA related to this decision. So far, the FAA has not responded to either Jarrett's or Duane's attempts to obtain these documents under FOIA. Jarrett is continuing to monitor Longview's attempts to obtain a storm water permit. The permit must be awarded to the plant owner, however, it is unlikely that Longview will actually own the plant at any time. The PSC has scheduled a hearing on the proposed scrubbers for the Ft. Martin plant on February 22, 2006. Billy Jack Gregg, the consumer advocate, hired a consultant to study the issue. The consultant recommended that some administrative and other costs of the scrubber project come from Allegheny, so that not all of the cost is passed on to the public. The consultant made other important recommendations regarding the procedures to be required of Allegheny Energy. It was decided that MVCAC would support the scrubber project under the strict conditions recommended by the consultant. We are still trying to arrange for air quality monitoring in Mon County. It does not appear that Boggs Environmental will be able to help us any time soon. Deb spoke with someone at DEP who said he would be happy to give us a tour of the monitor at the airport. Deb also stated that the Sundogs program is being launched at Cheat Lake Middle School in the next few weeks. Cindy is working on trying to get us a spot at the annual Health Fair to be held early next year, perhaps by mid February. She suggested that it would be nice to have the brochures completed by that time. John Gever brought up the issue of non-point sources of pollution, such as cars. He suggested that MVCAC become more involved with the Morgantown Transportation Organization. Bobby Mitchell asked whether we might want to become more involved in the effort to re-route truck traffic around town. The group agreed that these were both good suggestions. Duane will work on bringing Bobby together with Bob Bastress, since Bob has taken an interest in the legal aspects of this issue. Others were invited to work on this issue, particularly with City Council. The PSC continues to work on the rules for noise control of electrical power generators through the Noise Task Force that it developed. Duane, Bill and Jarrett went to the first meeting of the task force in Charleston. At that time, the chair of the task force asked that a noise expert be retained to study the issue. The PSC is currently looking for such an expert. Deb reported that we currently have $3,500. Duane suggested that this be the last general meeting of 2005 and that the next meeting be held in mid January. Respectfully submitted: Linda Shuster, December 6, 2005. NOTE from Jim Kotcon.......... Buried in a story on Health cost for PEIA in today’s Gazette: Other legislative priorities, Manchin said, will include continuing to pursue a more businesslike approach to running state government, including restructuring agencies and developing multiyear projections for state revenues and spending. Governor Manchin said he also is determined to bring a coal gasification plant to the state. “We can do it in a cleaner, healthier environment,” he said. “We know we can * the technology is there, and it’s only getting better.”

1 0

Wyona Coleman obituary
by Dennis and Marcia Groce 02 Dec '05

02 Dec '05

Friends - Following is Wyona Coleman's obituary from the Washington Observer-Reporter. As indicated below, Wyona had been a leading environmentalist in Pennsylvania for more than 30 years, doing some of her most significant work on coal mining issues. You may recall that her husband Phil, past chair of the Sierra PA Chapter, has spoken eloquently and effectively at some of the Longview meetings and hearings. Phil is also one of the appellants in the Greene County case we are now pursuing. Wyona Coleman, environmentalist from West Brownsville, dies at 73 <mailto:jrichard@observer-reporter.com>John Richards Staff writer Longtime environmentalist Wyona Coleman, a founding member of Tri-State Citizens Mining Network, died Tuesday at age 73. In the 1970s, Coleman championed the cause of coalfield residents left helpless by an unregulated strip mining industry with little regard for the environment. Coleman and other activists helped in the development of the federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act. Coleman was present in the White House Rose Garden Aug. 3, 1977, when President Jimmy Carter signed the act into law. "She was very much a part of that effort," said Beverly Braverman, chairwoman of Tri-State and a friend and colleague of Coleman's for the past 11 years. "She identified where there was a huge need for people to take a stand and she was not afraid to take a stand." In recent years, Coleman, a West Brownsville resident, focused her attention on longwall coal mining, serving as mining chairwoman for the Pennsylvania chapter of the Sierra Club. She was very active in establishing the organization's Harrisburg office, according to Jeff Schmidt, director of the Sierra Club's state chapter. "Without her involvement we probably wouldn't be working as hard on mining issues," Schmidt said. "She touched a lot of people's lives in a very positive way. She was a force to be reckoned with. And at a time when there weren't a lot of women in the environmental movement in the 1970s." Her determination, relentlessness and passion inspired a younger generation of environmental activists, Braverman said. "Wyona had perseverance in a war that has always been truly difficult. I think just the length of her battle from the 1970s to the current time was an example for newer activists," she said. "One of the things I think she really stood for is you better know that this is going to be a long fight and you better be willing to put in the time and energy and the passion." Among that younger generation is Tri-State administrative director Mimi Filippelli. "She really has been a mentor to many of us younger people who've gotten involved in the movement," Filippelli said. Coleman's ability to influence and incite people to become involved in environmental issues, especially mining issues, was her strong suit, she said. "She was a true environmentalist," said Betsy Mallison, spokeswoman for the state Department of Environmental Protection. "She had the citizens' interests at heart... and certainly we'll miss her input." Among her many accomplishments, Coleman served on the DEP Solid Waste Advisory Committee and helped to negotiate an amendment to provide water replacement, water supply and repairs to structures damaged by longwall mining, Mallison said. Coleman was a driving force behind stricter regulations to protect streams and wetlands from longwall mines, which have drained water wells, streams and wetlands. Under an agreement with the federal Office of Surface Mining, the DEP on Oct. 8 upgraded its water regulations to align coal mining to the same rules that apply to surface industries and construction projects. "As a result of her involvement, the law that is on the books is much stronger than it otherwise would have been," Schmidt said. A 1954 journalism graduate of Southern Illinois University, Coleman worked as a reporter and editor for the Champaign--Urbana Courier, then as an environmentalist. She and her husband, Philip Coleman, moved to the Mon Valley in 1969, where she became librarian at the California Public Library, later serving as library director until her retirement in 2000. Surviving are her husband and her sons, Philip and David Coleman, and daughter Sydney Coleman. A memorial service will be held at 2 p.m. Saturday at California Public Library. In lieu of flowers, the family requests donations to California Public Library, 100 Wood St., California, PA 15419 or the Pennsylvania chapter of the Sierra Club, P.O. Box 663, Harrisburg, PA 17108. Those wishing to send condolences can reach the family at 551 Pittsburgh Road, West Brownsville, PA 15417.

1 0

Meeting: Monday, Dec. 5th @ 7 pm
by Duane330＠aol.com 01 Dec '05

01 Dec '05

Greetings. December is here!!! This is to confirm our MVCAC group meeting for this coming Monday, December 5th, at 7 pm. [John Gever plans to attend, to propose an additional (color) hand-out.] Location: Prete Building. Please use the next to last entrance on the North Side. NOTE: The Prete Building is located on the right side of University Avenue, in the second block after Patterson Drive when headed toward Star City. It's in the 3000 or 3100 block. [I rented a house at 3041 University Avenue for three years starting in 1968, a red brick house owned by a local barber turned developer named Ray DeAngelis. The old red brick house was razed, and now there is a professional building carrying the same address 3041. (We had a fenced back-yard for two daughters, Tanya and Tracy and their dog Tippy.) We had quite a fight over whether the Prete Building would ever be built in the then existing residential neighborhood. Now Jim Prete plans to add another building.]

1 0

CO2 Sequestration in WV
by duane330＠aol.com 25 Nov '05

25 Nov '05

November 25, 2005 U.S. Digs Deep to Solve Emissions Problem The Future of Carbon-Dioxide Storage Might Lie Under West Virginia By JOHN J. FIALKA Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL November 25, 2005; Page A4 Delegates attending next week's international climate-change conference in Montreal will attack the U.S. for pulling out of the Kyoto Protocol, which mandates steep cuts in greenhouse gases. Bush administration officials will respond that they are doing more than critics realize, but the real action lies deep beneath the surface -- in some cases almost two miles straight down. The White House sees technological progress, more than regulation, as the key to limiting carbon dioxide and other emissions believed to cause global warming. A centerpiece of its effort is a 9,200-foot-deep hole in the ground in New Haven, W.Va. The hole, drilled next to a coal-fired power plant, marks the beginning of a Department of Energy experiment to see if CO2 can be safely injected into deep salt water-laden rock formations, where, experts hope, it will be trapped for thousands of years. It's one of seven projects in a $100 million, seven-year federal effort to figure out whether the method of CO2 burial works. "We wouldn't be doing this if we weren't serious," Samuel W. Bodman, secretary of Energy, often explains in defending the Bush Administration's approach to climate change. In addition to the U.S., at least 17 industrial nations and several big energy companies are exploring this process, known as "sequestration." A recent United Nations report said carbon storage techniques could play an important role in limiting greenhouse gas emissions. Carbon-storage is a particularly appealing option for heavy coal-using countries, mainly China, India, and the U.S., which see it as perhaps less threatening to their economic futures than other strategies, such as energy conservation or large-scale conversion to solar and wind power. Storing carbon is a significant piece of President Bush's alternative to Kyoto. Mr. Bush's alternative is a plan to reduce the intensity of U.S. CO2 emissions, measured against economic output, by 18% by 2012. It is linked to another Bush effort, a government-industry initiative to build a prototype for a new generation of clean-burning coal-fired power plants. Beyond those plans, the administration hopes that its incentives for nuclear power, including a new prototype nuclear reactor, will also help cut future CO2 emissions. One goal of the West Virginia experiment is to give Congress and the White House an estimate of how much consumers' electric bills will rise by adding this extra step to generating coal-fired electric power. "This is not going to be free," warns Scott M. Klara, manager of the DOE's sequestration program. The technology exists today to remove CO2 from power plant emissions and pump it into the ground, but in some cases it could raise the cost of electricity by as much as 100%, Mr. Klara explains. The injection program hopes to find ways to push the cost increase down as low as 10% by 2012. Oil companies in Texas and Oklahoma have years of experience injecting CO2 into the ground to stimulate oil production, so pumping it into the newly drilled hole will be the easy part of the experiment. The harder part, Mr. Klara notes, will be figuring out where the CO2 goes amid the complex geology underlying West Virginia. "We have all sorts of tools that, basically, use sound waves and electrical resistance," he explains, to monitor the path of the injected gas, which will be in liquid form because of the pressure at that depth. "It will be something like looking at the sonogram of a baby." Computer models of the underground reservoir predict the gas will be trapped for at least 5,000 years. The utility industry must invest billions of dollars on new power plants that may some day face CO2 regulation. American Electric Power Co., which owns the New Haven plant, plans to build two new coal-fired power plants within the next five years that gasify coal before it is burned. The design makes it cheaper to separate and then bury CO2 emissions. Then, if regulation happens, explains Pat Hemlepp, the company's spokesman, "we won't have to be retrofitting." The odd image of a power plant with a drilling rig boring a hole next to it, he thinks, may become a more familiar and necessary sight in coal country. CO2 disposal may be cheaper in other regions. In southern Illinois, southwestern Indiana and western Kentucky, for example, there are hundreds of old oil wells dug into reservoirs that stopped producing years ago. "We're excited about the prospect that we can get more oil out of these old reservoirs," explains Robert Finley, director of an Illinois state agency that is working with the U.S. Department of Energy on a CO2 injection experiment there. Unlike Texas, where natural CO2 deposits are cheap and available, oilmen in Illinois couldn't inject it into reservoirs to push up more oil because they had no local sources of it. But now they do, explains Mr. Finley, who says his projects will inject CO2 purchased from two new ethanol plants, which generate the gas as part of the process of turning corn into a gasoline additive. Profits from increased oil output, he thinks, could help offset the eventual costs of piping CO2 from power plants to areas where more oil might be produced. In the Southwest, over a thousand miles of CO2 pipelines already serve oil fields, explains Brian McPherson, a professor at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, which is a partner in another Energy Department experiment to use CO2 to enhance recovery from oil and gas fields in Utah. "If we were to use this system and substitute power plant CO2, it would go a long way to reducing U.S. emissions," he explains. The southwestern CO2 pipelines, he thinks, could serve as a prototype for a national system of piping power plant CO2, once the economic and technical hurdles are overcome. However, Canada is more likely to develop such a system first. "We think you are going to see this happen because it can achieve big [CO2 reduction] numbers and will be able to achieve them at reasonable costs," predicts Malcolm A. Wilson, program director for a Canadian government/industry CO2 injection experiment at Weyburn, Saskatchewan. At Weyburn, which is the prototype for the U.S. experiments, technicians are injecting 5,000 tons of CO2 every day to improve the production of older oil wells. The gas is piped from an experimental U.S. coal gasification power plant in North Dakota and technicians and scientists from the U.S., Canada and 16 other nations have deployed an elaborate series of monitors to see whether any of the gas leaks back out of the ground. So far, it hasn't. "I believe we can design subsurface systems that are going to be essentially leak free," explains Mr. Wilson, a geologist. "You're talking huge investments," he notes, but adds that the cost of burying CO2 may prove to be cheaper in the long run than the cost of scaling up alternatives to oil and coal-fired power, such as solar and wind power.

1 0

General Meeting: Dec. 5th
by Duane330＠aol.com 21 Nov '05

21 Nov '05

Greetings to all........... A general meeting has been set for Monday, December 5th, at 7 pm. We are making final arrangements to have this meeting in the Prete Building, in the 3000 block of University Avenue in Suncrest. A number of important agenda items are at hand....... 1. Longview application for transmission line 2. Ft. Martin power plant scrubber financing scheme 3. Proposed power plant construction projects in nearby PA 4. Local air monitoring options for Monongalia County 5. Brochures and other educational and publicity activities. 6. Do you have other topics........... health effects.....

1 0

AE scrubbers
by Duane330＠aol.com 14 Nov '05

14 Nov '05

Scrubbers in the works for power station By Bob Niedbala, Staff writer, Observer-Reporter, Washington, PA November 9, 2005 Allegheny Energy Inc. is developing plans to install scrubbers at its Hatfield's Ferry Power Station and if everything goes as planned, the company could have the equipment in place by 2010. In a presentation to investors Tuesday, Paul J. Evanson, chairman, president and chief executive officer of the company, said the utility has talked to contractors about starting permitting requirements for scrubbers at the Monongahela Township plant. The company expects to make a formal announcement regarding the project during the first quarter of the year, Evanson said. The company in recent years has come under fire for emissions from Hatfield's Ferry. Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future filed suit against the company in January claiming the company failed to address Clean Air Act violations at the plant. The plant also was targeted in June 2004 by Greenpeace activists who climbed one of the plant's two smoke stacks and unfurled a 2,500 square-foot banner. Scrubbers help remove sulfur dioxide and other contaminants from power plant emissions. The equipment is expensive, estimated to cost about $400 million at Hatfield's Ferry, Evanson said in an Internet broadcast to investors. The company had attempted to obtain financial assistance from the state and federal governments to help offset the costs of the scrubbers. "But it's been an uphill battle and to no avail," Evanson said. The most the company can expect is tax-exempt financing for the project, he said. "The good news is, because of the financial condition we're in, we believe we have more than enough cash flow and capacity to do these on our own," Evanson said. The company suffered losses in 2003 and 2004 but began experiencing a turnaround this year. If everything goes as planned, Evanson said, scrubbers could be in place at Hatfield's Ferry by 2010 if not 2009. The company also is moving ahead with plans to install scrubbers at its Fort Martin Power Station in Monongalia County, W.Va. The West Virginia legislature approved a bill in the spring allowing the company to surcharge customers to help cover the costs. The electric industry remains regulated in West Virginia, which offered the opportunity for the utility to seek money for the project from rate payers through a surcharge. The same could probably not be done in Pennsylvania, where the electric industry is deregulated.

1 0

RE: [BULK] - [MVCAC] New coal-fired power plants
by Kotcon, James 02 Nov '05

02 Nov '05

This listing does not include the GenPower facility in McDowell County or Gov. Manchin's "Coal Conversion" plants announced last month. The McDowell County facility is contingent on AEP completing a transmission line which is apparently now under construction, so McDowell may come alive next year. It also lists the AEP IGCC facility as being in either WV or Ohio, but my understanding is that is currently committed to Ohio (although AEP has hinted at building a second facility in WV). On the other hand, they now list the Longview plant as operational in 2010. The earliest version of this listing I saw in 2003 suggested Longview would be operational by 2007, so my congratulations to you all for the three years of victory we have so far experienced. JBK Dr. James Kotcon Interim Program Leader - Organic Agriculture USDA-CSREES Mailstop 2220, Washington, DC 20250 phone: 202-401-4879 Cell: 304-319-2244 fax: 202-401-4888 for overnight carrier: 800 9th St., SW, Room 3344 Washington, DC 20024 -----Original Message----- From: mvcac-bounces(a)cheat.org [mailto:mvcac-bounces@cheat.org] On Behalf Of paula - pj - hunt Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 12:41 PM To: mvcac(a)cheat.org Subject: [BULK] - [MVCAC] New coal-fired power plants Below is a link to a very readable (i.e. mostly cartoons/pictures) report on the resurgence of coal-fired power generation in the US. It includes simple maps and tables. Illinois has 13 plants on the drawing board, and Kentucky has 8. WV has 4 (including Longview), and PA has 7 (plus one that has been cancelled). The Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) tracks new/planned plants and is supposed to update this link every few months. This latest report is dated yesterday: http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/refshelf/ncp.pdf -- Paula Paula Hunt Citizens for Alternatives to Longview Power (CALP) www.nolongview.org _______________________________________________ MVCAC mailing list MVCAC(a)cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac

1 0

New coal-fired power plants
by paula - pj - hunt 02 Nov '05

02 Nov '05

Below is a link to a very readable (i.e. mostly cartoons/pictures) report on the resurgence of coal-fired power generation in the US. It includes simple maps and tables. Illinois has 13 plants on the drawing board, and Kentucky has 8. WV has 4 (including Longview), and PA has 7 (plus one that has been cancelled). The Department of Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) tracks new/planned plants and is supposed to update this link every few months. This latest report is dated yesterday: http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/refshelf/ncp.pdf -- Paula Paula Hunt Citizens for Alternatives to Longview Power (CALP) www.nolongview.org

1 0

Longview heats up: Paula needs YOU on Oct 24th
by paula - pj - hunt 19 Oct '05

19 Oct '05

Hi Everyone, Longview is heating up again and it is time to rally the troops! The next regularly scheduled Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition (MVCAC) meeting on Monday October 24th 6:30 ish will really be a short letter-writing/socializing gathering at Martha and Larry Schwab's house in Suncrest (directions below). Duane is out of town and he left me in charge. Yep, CALP is gearing up again. Longview has filed its transmission-line permit application with the WV Public Service Commission (PSC) and we only have until early November to write comment/protest letters and request a public hearing in Morgantown. The letters will be short and simple. I'll have my letter to the PSC as a sample, as well as a list of major points, so you can easily and quickly craft your own letter. We'll have pens, paper, envelopes, stamps, and something light to eat and drink, so if you come straight from work, you won't starve. You may want to bring your favorite pen and paper, if you have such a thing, and something hard to write on (like a clipboard or magazine or something), since there will likely not be enough table space for all of us. Come around 6:30 if you want to eat. If you have never been to a meeting, or haven't been for a while, this is an excellent opportunity to meet people, eat something, and do something concrete to help get rid of Longview. Plus Larry and Martha are super-nice people and have a really cool house. See ya there! Paula 692-7588 (PS If you are feeling e-mail fatigue, you can log into this listserv and change your settings to receive messages in digest mode (one e mail with all messages daily, if there are messages). You'll need your name and password to do this. These are mailed to you once per month from mailman-owner(a)cheat.org Thanks to Jonathan for the list!! Directions (map below, if I can get this to work right): Address: 3333 Collins Ferry Road, the last driveway on the left before Aspen if you are coming from Morgantown, or coming from Star City, it is the first driveway on the right past Aspen St. To get to Collins Ferry Rd, take University Ave toward Star City. University splits into University and Collins Ferry just past the Eckard drug store (Morgantown side) or Bi-Lo grocery store (coming from Star City) There is a high hedge along the road, so you cannot see the house from the street. There is a really small sign with 3333 and maybe a sign with other addresses (more than one house is on the drive). Larry and Martha's house is the first house closest to Collins Ferry Rd (big white farm house). Park angled against the garage, or along the driveway. Their phone number is 598-0241. My (Paula's) cell number is 692-7588 Please call me if you need better directions or want to carpool with someone. 116744d.jpg

1 0

Meeting: 10-24. <Longview announcement>.
by Duane330＠aol.com 16 Oct '05

16 Oct '05

To: MVCAC members, friends, participants, and others........... The next meeting of the MVCAC will be at 7 pm on Monday, October 24th at the home of Larry and Martha Schwab, 3333 Collins Ferry Road, Morgantown. This will be a special meeting, for the purpose of discussing the Longview Announcement below and to encourage and support letter writing in response to this Announcement. Please bring your own paper, pen and envelope to the meeting! This meeting will be chaired by Paula Hunt, who can be contacted at: _pjhunt(a)xemaps.com_ (mailto:pjhunt@xemaps.com) The Announcement appeared in the Dominion Post on Thursday, October 13th, and is scheduled to reappear this Thursday, October 20th, as a Class II classified advertisement. According to this Announcement only 15 days is provided to respond; so, urgent action is recommended and requested. Areas of concern are whether these high voltage transmission lines will pass near or over metallic objects as conveyor belt systems, train tracks, trucking roads, or near homes or farm animals. There is concern as to whether this is a private project, given the PILOT tax break, to involvement of the County Commission as the owner of last resort, and possible federal and state participation in specific aspects as, for example, the water supply system in Pennsylvania. Since this proposed new plant will share transmission lines with the Ft. Martin and other existing plants, does Longview not need to demonstrate that they have the plant capacity, equipment, and know how to protect the transmission grid system from electrical interactions that could result in outages, brownouts, line failures, or switching control problems. Otherwise this plant will be a burden on the electricity customers of West Virginia. Remaining issues with the "siting certificate" include the noise that the plant will generate, the visibility problem due to the plant being seen from any high location in the County (viewshed problem) and the large vapor plumes generated by the 20 forced draft cooling fans. It remains to be demonstrated whether this proposed Longview plant is financially viable; and, whether there remains a significant demand for the electricity outside of West Virginia. An examination of this Announcement may demonstrate that significant information is not given to the public, that complete information is necessary and more time needed so that each of us as affected citizens can have a sufficiently good understanding as to provide reasonably accurate and complete responses to the PSC. It would then be reasonable to have a public information meeting in Morgantown, and a public hearing to gather appropriate input for the PSC. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 010358 October 13, 20 PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON Entered by the PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA in the City of Charleston on the 7th day of October 2005. CASE NO. 05-1467-E-CN LONGVIEW POWER, LLC Application of Longview Power, LLC, for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity Authorizing the Construction and Installation of a 500 KV electric transmission line and to Satisfy Conditional Siting Certificate for Exempt Wholesale Generating Facility in Monongalia County, West Virginia NOTICE OF FILING On September 30, 2005, Longview Power, LLC, whose address is 1040 Great Plain Avenue, Neeham, Massachusetts 02492-2517 (the Applicant) filed an application for a Certificate of Convenience and Necessity pursuant to W.Va. Code ss24-2-11a to construct and operate a high voltage transmission line in Monongalia County. The applicant and exhibits are available for public inspection at the Commission’s offices at 201 Brooks Street, Charleston. Upon its completion, the transmission line will be used by the Applicant to transport electricity to the grid for the competitive wholesale market in West Virginia and other locations. The Applicant proposes to construct a 500 kV electric transmission line to interconnect its electric generating facility to the Allegheny Power 750 kV Kammer Fort Martin transmission line near Morgantown, Monongalia County. Longview will construct a new 500 kV Substation in Greene County, Pennsylvania. The Applicant estimates that construction of the transmission line will cost less than fifty million dollars ($50,000,000). Neither the Facility nor the transmission line is a public facility providing service to the public and there will be no impact to West Virginia Ratepayers. Rates charged for electricity sol by the Facility will be subject to regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) pursuant to Section 205 of the Federal Power Act. Longview intends to file a market-based rate schedule with FERC that will allow sales from the Facility to be at negotiated rates. The Applicant will be the entity responsible for the construction and operation of the transmission lines. The Applicant will enter into an interconnection and operating agreement with PJM which will govern the Facility’s interconnection at the new Substation. The Applicant, of the purchasers of the electricity generated by the Facility, will enter into transmission service-agreements with Allegheny to govern the transmission of the electricity across Allegheny’s facilities. Such transmission of electricity will be subject to the terms of PJM’s Open Access Transmission Tariff on file with the FERC. The transmission line will not compete with other utilities and will be for the sole purpose of transmitting the electricity generated at the Facility into the grid for the wholesale market. The black dashes on the above map indicates the location of the corridor in which the transmission line will be located. WHEREAS, Longview Power, LLC, asserts it is not a public utility within the meaning of W.Va. Code ss24-2-11 and requests a waiver of the Public Service Commission’s filing requirements to provide certain information including proposed rates, project construction costs, project financing and estimates of operating revenues and expenses, and the information required by Tariff Rule 42. Other waivers of information filings are also sought. Pursuant to ss24-2-11a, West Virginia Code, IT IS ORDERED that the Longview Power, LLC give notice of the filing of said application, by publishing a copy as a Class II legal advertisement, two times in a newspaper duly qualified by the Secretary of State, published and of general circulation in Monongalia County, and in Kanawha County, making due return to this Commission of proper certification of publication immediately after publication. Anyone desiring to protest or intervene should file a written protest or notice of intervention within 15 days following the second publication date unless otherwise modified by Commission order. Failure to timely protest or intervene can affect your right to protest aspects of this certificate case or to participate in future proceedings. All protests or requests to intervene should briefly state the reason for the protest or intervention set forth in the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. All protests and interventions should be addressed to Sandra Squire, Executive Secretary, P. O. Box 812, Charleston, West Virginia 25323. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if no protests are received within said fifteen (15) day period, the Commission may waive formal hearing and grant the application based on the evidence submitted with said application and its review thereof. FOR THE COMMISSION: Sandra Squire Executive Secretary

1 0

Minutes of 9/26/05
by Duane330＠aol.com 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

Minutes - Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition Meeting Date: September 26, 2005 The monthly meeting of the MVCAC was held at 7:00 pm at the home of Martha and Larry Schwab with 13 members and two guests in attendance. The meeting began with a presentation by the first guest, Joe Molnar, who was introduced by Deb Fulton. He is working with the SunDogs program at Cheat Lake Middle School. The SunDogs program "is a hands-on, online, natural resource conservation curriculum for students in grades 4-12 which aims to give the students the knowledge and skills they need to make decisions about energy and conservation." The program was founded by Susan Hermann Gledhill and Jonathan Gledhill of Fairfax, Virginia. Joe described the program and passed around some curricular materials. More information can be found at http://www.sundogsusa.com. Duane asked Joe how we could help, and Joe indicated that there was no clean air module, so MVCAC might be able to contribute to that. He also suggested that we could provide money to help finance the program. Duane provided a brief update about Longview. The FAA gave Longview permission to build a permit that was above stack height standards. Duane stated that we have until October to appeal the FAA's decision. He proposed that we ask attorney Mary Anne Maul to read about the appeal process and determine whether she would be willing to take on the appeal for us. Duane reported that Allegheny Power has permission to design the proposed scrubbers for the Ft. Martin power plant and submit the design to the Public Service Commission. The cost of the scrubbers would be passed on to the consumer, but MVCAC supports this, because our air would be cleaner. The second guest, Patrick Kirby from Boggs Environmental, was introduced by Karen Woodfork. He discussed whether the company would provide air monitoring equipment to MVCAC. He is currently exploring the possibility of retrofitting devices that Boggs currently owns to allow for the measurement of small particulates. Patrick said that if this is not possible, larger particulates (PM 10) could still be monitored. He also stated that Boggs does not own equipment for monitoring ozone, and they would not be interested in purchasing such equipment, because they would not use it. Duane described various monitoring methods, including instantaneous, periodic, and continuous. Both he and Patrick agreed that the first two would be most reasonable for our group, although Patrick indicated that continuous might be possible, depending on how the data were collected. Patrick asked that we come up with a monitoring plan (where, when, what), which will guide the choice of the type of equipment we use. See also: _www.boggsenvironmental.com_ (http://www.boggsenvironmental.com/) Duane presented a tentative budget that he and Deb created. This included the allocation of money to activities such as legal expenses and education. He asked the group to look the budget over and determine whether it was satisfactory, or whether we wanted to move some of the money between the different categories. Paula suggested that more money be allocated to legal expenses. The group unanimously approved the budget with Paula's suggested change. Duane then proposed that we allocate some money to legal expenses related to appealing the permit for the Greene Energy gob plant. Dennis indicated that the money would go toward expenses such as expert witnesses and transcripts. Duane moved that we allocate $2000 to the appeal, Linda seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. See also: _http://www.energyjustice.net/coal/wastecoal/_ (http://www.energyjustice.net/coal/wastecoal/) Based on his correspondence with FERC, Jarrett has determined that there is no energy shortage in WV. He has now sent a letter asking whether there are any shortages in our region. Duane announced that the PSC has formed the task force to create noise guidelines for power plants. There will be two meetings of the task force, and several MVCAC members have been appointed to the task force. Duane discussed the proposed “tax increment financing” or TIF for the Suncrest Town Centre and distributed petitions that he had created that asked the County Commission to deny the TIF and support farmland preservation. He asked that people try to attend the County Commission meeting at 10:30 am on Wednesday, September 28, 2005 to voice their opposition to the TIF. Linda described a program that the city of Indianapolis, IN has developed in response to being out of compliance for ozone levels. The program is called Knozone, and it is designed to reduce ozone emission and to educate citizens about ways they can reduce ozone emission. Their web site includes an air quality index. Don asked for more information to share with the city of Morgantown. The Knozone web site url is: _http://www.knozone.com_ (http://www.knozone.com/) Duane informed the group that the province of Ontario in Canada has conducted a study and determined that coal-fired power generation is more costly than other alternatives when the costs of the health impacts are considered, based upon a cost/benefit study. They have a plan to phase out four of their five coal-fired plants by next year and the fifth within two years. See the following web site: _www.energy.gov.on.ca_ (http://www.energy.gov.on.ca/) Paula announced that an economic development class is looking for someone to do a point-counter point type of presentation regarding Longview. Gen Power is being asked to participate. If anyone is willing to represent our group, please contact Paula. Larry stated that he had written a Letter to the Editor regarding air issues and which appeared in the Dominion Post over Labor Day weekend. Respectfully submitted, Linda Shuster, Secretary, MVCAC [September 28, 2005] Web-sites: _www.nolongview.org_ (http://www.nolongview.org/) And this: _www.monvalleycleanair.org_ (http://www.monvalleycleanair.org)

1 0

(no subject)
by Duane330＠aol.com 28 Sep '05

28 Sep '05

============================================================ Wednesday, September 28, 2005 @ 10:31 AM ============================================================ DEP offers pollution prevention class to help West Virginians save money CHARLESTON – If you would like to learn how to save thousands of dollars and reduce your impact on the environment, the Department of Environmental Protection will provide you with the training – for free! The DEP is sponsoring a one-day workshop presented by A Nurtured World, Inc., a non-profit organization dedicated to a global change in thinking so that people live environmentally sustainable, financially successful and satisfying lives. "Consumer Conservation: More in Your Wallet, Less From the Environment" will be held at the agency’s headquarters at 601 57th Street S.E., Charleston, in the Cooper’s Rock Training Room Tuesday, October 4, 2005. The class will run from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Anyone interested in saving money or protecting the environment may attend. Whether you are knowledgeable about environmental issues or not, this course will be valuable. The only requirements for the course are attending the entire session, active participation and a willingness to examine your personal behavior as it relates to the environment. Attendees will learn the relative effects of consumer versus industrial activities, the types of consumer activities that have the largest impact on the environment, and how to change behavior in a way that makes a difference both for the environment and the pocketbook. Previous participants report having saved an average of $1,500 per year and, in total, reducing energy use by 5,640 KWH per year, reducing fuel use by 252 gallons per year and reducing 11,805 pounds per year of carbon dioxide. The course instructor will be Susan Roothaan, founder and executive director of A Nurtured World, Inc. She has more than 20 years of experience in the environmental field and has taught pollution prevention to thousands of individuals throughout the United States and Mexico. She is a certified ISO14001 Environmental Management Systems Lead Auditor, holds a Masters in Chemical Engineering, and has received numerous awards including the White House Closing the Circle Award for Greening Government. The DEP-sponsored workshop still has space for 40 to 50 more participants. Walk-ins are welcome, but pre- registration is encouraged and appreciated. For more information or to register, contact Greg Adolfson with the agency’s Office of Innovation at (304) 926-0499 ext. 1332 or by e-mail at gadolfson(a)wvdep.org.

1 0

Meet Monday 9/26
by Duane330＠aol.com 21 Sep '05

21 Sep '05

To: MVCAC and friends........ Please attend the September general meeting of the MonValley Clean Air Coalition this coming Monday, September 26th. The social gathering is at 6:30 and the meeting starts promptly at 7 pm. We will meet again at the home of Larry and Martha Schwab, 3333 Collins Ferry Road, Morgantown. Agenda items to include: 1. Status of proposed Longview plant 2. FAA stack height obstruction decision/appeal 3. Status of Ft. Martin plant scrubbers 4. Air quality monitoring in Monongalia county 5. Regional & state environmental activities 6. The CCSJ social justice fair on 9/27 (we are registered) 7. The SunDogs curriculum at the Cheat Lake Middle School 8. Budget considerations.

1 0

maybe Morgantown some day
by Duane330＠aol.com 15 Sep '05

15 Sep '05

2005 STUDENT ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM (SEDP) GRADUATION The EPA Region 3 Student Environmental Development Program (SEDP) held its yearly graduation ceremonies at four locations this summer. Sixteen students graduated in Philadelphia, 14 in Washington, D.C., 75 in Baltimore and 15 in Wilmington. Participating students spent six to seven weeks between July and August learning about communication and public speaking and how to communicate environmental knowledge in their communities. At the graduation, students participated in a group presentation of an environmentally related topic of their choosing and the impact it can have on their lives.

1 0

Next meeting Sept. 26th.
by Duane330＠aol.com 13 Sep '05

13 Sep '05

PLEASE RESERVE MONDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 26TH FOR THE NEXT MEETING OF THE MONVALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION...... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In March, EPA extended the deadline for mercury controls at power plants from 2008 to 2018, and they relaxed the amount of control required. Earlier today the U.S. Senate rejected the motion by Senator Leahy (D-VT) to reverse the March decision of EPA. See the details in the article below. So friends, we are in for a long battle over mercury control. [Scrubbers on the Ft. Martin plant will help with mercury control, of course.] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> U.S. Senate Upholds EPA's Power-Plant Mercury Reduction Rule Sept. 13, 2005. (Bloomberg News Service) -- Christopher Martin in Chicago The U.S. Senate voted today to uphold an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule allowing creation of an emissions-credits trading system to reduce mercury pollution from coal-fired power plants. A majority of fifty-one senators voted to reject a resolution overturning the rule sponsored by Senator Patrick Leahy, a Democrat from Vermont. The rule was adopted by the EPA as an alternative to a proposal under the administration of former President Bill Clinton that would have required plant operators to install controls to reduce mercury emissions. The EPA in March set the first limits on airborne mercury pollution from coal-fired plants, the largest man-made source of the substance. The Bush administration wants to set up industry- supported markets for mercury so that plant operators that don't meet emissions limits can buy credits from those that upgrade their equipment, under a system known as cap-and-trade. Health and environmental groups including the Natural Resources Defense Council Club and Physicians for Social Responsibility joined 13 states in a lawsuit challenging the EPA's decision to remove mercury from a list of toxic substances regulated by the Clean Air Act. That finding would require the installation of equipment to limit emissions. Cost of Controls Power plant mercury emissions were added to the list by former EPA Administrator Carol Browner in 2000, just before the end of Clinton's second term. The EPA removed mercury from the list of toxics when it published the rule in March. Supporters of the cap-and-trade system say the marketplace is the most efficient means to cut pollution. Forcing utilities to upgrade power plants would cost as much as $358 billion over the next three years, raising power prices and harming the economy, according to an estimate by the Energy Department's Energy Information Administration, the supporters note. Opponents of the rule say a cap-and-trade market would lead to ``hot spots'' of contamination near power plants that don't install controls. They want all power plants to install controls. The EPA and the Food and Drug Administration last year recommended that women who could become pregnant, nursing mothers and young children avoid fish with high mercury levels. The department and health groups have said that mercury can damage the nervous systems of infants and children.

1 0

Environmental mercury....
by Duane330＠aol.com 01 Sep '05

01 Sep '05

Protect Americans from mercury pollution by supporting the Leahy-Collins resolution. U. S. Senate Joint Resolution 20, introduced by Senators Leahy and Collins under the Congressional Review Act, would disapprove EPA’s delisting rule and restore integrity to the rule-making process, as explained in the email of Tuesday. If you wish to contact Senators Byrd and/or Rockefeller on this, snail mail letters are the most effective means of gaining their attention, as this can be directly identified as coming from a voting constituent...... _Byrd, Robert_ (http://byrd.senate.gov/) - (D - WV) 311 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-3954 Web Form: _byrd.senate.gov/byrd_email.html_ (javascript:openwindow('http://byrd.senate.gov/byrd_email.html');) _Rockefeller, John_ (http://rockefeller.senate.gov/) - (D - WV) 531 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510 (202) 224-6472 Web Form: _rockefeller.senate.gov/services/email.cfm_ (javascript:openwindow('http://rockefeller.senate.gov/services/email.cfm');)

1 0

Hazardous Air Pollutants [HAPS]
by Duane330＠aol.com 30 Aug '05

30 Aug '05

Please see the information fact sheet below. Just to summarize, we are working to build support for the Senate resolution to overturn the EPA's rules on power plant mercury emissions. The vote on the resolution will take place on or before September 13th, and Senator Byrd is a key vote. I will be holding a news event on the morning of the 8th in Charleston to release the report "Made in the USA" that finds that West Virginia is ranked 7th in the nation for the highest levels of mercury emissions from power plants. Kate Johnson Clear Air & Energy Associate U.S. Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG) 218 D Street, SE Washington, DC 20003 202-546-9707 (p) 202-546-2461 (f) _www.cleanairnow.org_ (http://www.cleanairnow.org) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PROTECT WOMEN AND CHILDREN FROM TOXIC MERCURY POLLUTION In March 2005, EPA finalized a rule that “delists” power plants as a source of mercury and other air toxics subject to strict controls under the Clean Air Act.1 The rule rescinds EPA’s 2000 finding that it is appropriate and necessary to regulate mercury from coal-fired power plants as a hazardous air pollutant2 and removes power plants from a list of sources required to reduce their toxic emissions by the maximum achievable amount. S.J. Res. 20, introduced by Senators Leahy and Collins under the Congressional Review Act, would disapprove EPA’s delisting rule and restore integrity to the rule-making process. Mercury harms human health. Mercury is a potent neurotoxin that can affect the brain, heart, and immune system. Developing fetuses and children are especially at risk; even low-level exposure to mercury can cause learning disabilities, developmental delays, lowered IQ, and problems with attention and memory. EPA scientists estimate that one in six women has enough mercury in her body to put her child at risk should she become pregnant.3 Power plants are the largest manmade source of U.S. mercury emissions.4 Mercury pollution is so pervasive that 44 states have posted mercury-related fish consumption advisories—in half of these states, for every lake and/or river.5 EPA data show that 29% of the mercury deposited in the U.S. comes from U.S. power plants alone, and deposition can be much higher near individual plants, since local sources can account for 50-80% of mercury deposition at hot spots.6 EPA’s mercury rule is an about-face that fails to protect public health. In 1998, after studying health hazards from utility emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), EPA found that power plants were significant emitters of HAPs and that mercury was the HAP of greatest concern.7 In 2000, EPA found that power-plant mercury emissions “are a threat to human health and the environment” and that it was appropriate and necessary to reduce power-plant emissions of mercury and other HAPs to the maximum extent.8 And in 2001, EPA told the electric utilities’ trade association that the Clean Air Act required national reductions in mercury emissions on the order of 90% by December 2007.9 Yet EPA now claims its 2000 finding “lacked foundation,” asserting that “the level of [mercury] emissions remaining after imposition of the requirements of the Act will not cause hazards to public health” and that it is neither necessary nor appropriate to regulate any power-plant HAP emissions.10 This total—and irresponsible— about-face is the result of intense industry pressure and White House manipulation of the rule-making process, as revealed in numerous press reports.11 EPA’s delisting rule is illegal. Under the Clean Air Act, EPA cannot remove power plants from the source list unless it first determines that no industry source emits hazardous air pollutants in amounts that adversely affect public health or the environment.12 EPA did not even try to make this showing and instead simply declared that it was under no obligation to do so.13 Fourteen states—California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Wisconsin—have already filed suit challenging the rule, and numerous public health groups, Indian tribes, and the City of Baltimore have intervened in delisting cases to oppose it. Congress should act to reject the rule now. EPA delisted power plants to avoid setting strict controls for mercury and other air toxics and to clear the way for an industry-backed “cap-and-trade” system that parallels the mercury provisions in S. 131, the latest version of the administration’s “Clear Skies” initiative. The cap-and-trade plan enables power plants to buy and trade mercury “credits” rather than reducing their mercury pollution, which increases the risk of creating or exacerbating hot spots. Moreover, although the plan calls for 70% reductions in power-plant mercury pollution by 2018, the Congressional Research Service has concluded that these reductions may not occur until 2030.14 While the states are likely to win in court, the litigation process is slow. By contrast, Congress can act now to nullify the delisting rule and restore integrity to the rulemaking process. A vote for the disapproval resolution will direct EPA to finalize a rule that complies with the Clean Air Act, reducing toxic air pollution by the maximum achievable amount. It is long past time for power plants to meet this standard, reducing their mercury pollution about 90% by 2008, just as other major sources of mercury have already done. Protect Americans from mercury pollution by supporting the Leahy-Collins resolution. For more information, contact Supryia Ray or Emily Figdor, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, (202) 546-9707. References 1 70 Fed. Reg. 15993 (Mar. 29, 2005). 2 65 Fed. Reg. 79825 (Dec. 20, 2000). 3 Kathryn Mahaffey, Robert P. Cliffner, and Catherine Bodurow, “Blood Organic Mercury and Dietary Mercury Intake: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1999 and 2000,” Environmental Health Perspectives, 112(5): 562-570 (Apr. 2004). 4 65 Fed. Reg. at 79829. 5 Zachary Corrigan, U.S. PIRG Education Fund, Fishing for Trouble, Oct. 2004; West Virginia Fish Consumption Advisories (advisory upgraded to statewide level after publication of Fishing for Trouble), available at _http://www.wvdhhr.org/fish/current.asp_ (http://www.wvdhhr.org/fish/current.asp) . 6 Environmental Defense, Out of Control and Close to Home: Mercury Pollution from Power Plants (2003). 7 EPA, Study of Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions from Electric Utility Steam Generating Units (Feb. 1998). 8 65 Fed. Reg. at 79827. 9 EPA, Presentation to the Edison Electric Institute, 18 Sept. 2001, available at: _http://cta.policy.net/epamercury.pdf_ (http://cta.policy.net/epamercury.pdf) (stating that a MACT standard would require national reductions in mercury emissions of 89, 90, or 98 percent by Dec. 2007). 10 70 Fed. Reg. 15993, Section IV. 11 See, e.g., Tom Hamburger and Alan C. Miller, “Mercury Emissions Rule Geared to Benefit Industry, Staffers Say,” L.A. Times (Mar. 16, 2004). 12 Clean Air Act, § 112(c)(9)(B)(ii). 13 70 Fed. Reg. 15993, Section VIII. 14 Congressional Research Service, Mercury Emissions from Electric Power Plants: An Analysis of EPA’s Cap-and-Trade Regulations (Apr. 15, 2005).

1 0

MVCAC Minutes-8-22-05
by Duane330＠aol.com 27 Aug '05

27 Aug '05

MVCAC Minutes August 22, 2005 The August 22nd meeting of the MVCAC was held at the home of Martha and Larry Schwab with 14 members in attendance. Duane began the meeting by reminding the group about the Media Committee's campaign to have members attend City Council meetings or write letters to the editor. Deb reported on her visit to a City Council meeting. She discussed pulmonary physiology and the effects of ozone and particulates on the respiratory system. Her presentation was well-received. Don Spencer's feedback for our group was that we should develop specific actions that City Council can take. Deb suggested the development of an awareness of air quality on Council and persuading the Dominion Post to publish a daily air quality index. The group discussed the fact that an air quality index is available on-line. The Air Quality Index can be found at: _www.epa.gov/airnow_ (http://www.epa.gov/airnow) Duane announced that the appeal of the Monongalia County Circuit Court's decision to dismiss the lawsuit in regard to the PILOT agreement for Longview Power had been filed by attorney Robert Bastress. Phil Gaujot reviewed the appeal prior to the filing. Duane also announced that Phil would like to represent our group at the Public Service Commission (PSC) regarding the Longview application for a transmission line permit (when it is filed). Karen Woodfork has continued discussion with Boggs Environmental about the air monitoring equipment. They said they would "probably" be interested. Duane and Karen will be meeting about monitoring, and he asked Larry to join them. Jarrett's appeal of the air quality permit issued to Longview Power is still active in the Kanawha County Circuit Court. He provided information from FERC showing that we did not need a 500 kV transmission line. Jarrett also shared a letter dated 12/05/04 that he had obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). It was from the FAA to Longview Power. In it, the FAA indicated that the proposed stack height was an obstruction hazard, that public comment should be solicited, and that, at the time of the letter, the stack should not be built. [See also: _www.oeaaa.faa.gov_ (http://www.oeaaa.faa.gov/) ]. Duane discussed the noise issues related to the proposed Longview plant. The PSC opened up only the noise portion of the siting certificate rules for reconsideration. The PSC ordered the establishment of a task force to further study the noise issue. Duane suggested that those members of our group who have been identified by the PSC as being able to serve on the task force have an opportunity to reply to the PSC this week. Dennis reported on the appeal of the permit for the coal waste burning power plant in Nemacolin (Greene Energy or GERRP). The co-appellants, are the National Parks Conservation Association, Group Against Smog and Pollution (GASP), Phil Coleman (Fayette County resident north of the plant), and Dennis Groce (Fayette County resident south of the plant). They are represented by attorney Tom Buchele of the Pitt Environmental Law Clinic. If you would like to help on the GERRP issue, there are several things you can do. Eventually, the appellants will need money to cover the cost of transcribing depositions and for expert witnesses. And, there are several parks/wilderness areas that would be affected by this plant. These include Shenandoah Nat'l Park, Otter Creek Wilderness, James River Face Wilderness, and Otter Creek Wilderness Area. If you have visited (used) those areas and are concerned about the likelihood of their degradation by the GERRP and if you join GASP, you will have the opportunity, as described by attorney Elizabeth Rosemeyer, to complete an "...affidavit stating when and how you've used the areas, and how long you've been a GASP member. As a declarant, you could be called (although it would be unlikely) to testify at the hearing about what you say in your statement." To learn about GASP and how to join, visit: http://www.gasp-pgh.org/. You can join for as little as $35. Dennis joined GASP last fall and has have found them to be a good organization. They provide timely reminders of relatively local/regional issues. Also, they didn't have to join in the appeal of GERRP, but they have become involved in not only this appeal, but also the appeal of the Beech Hollow plant in Robinson Township. They are also active in creating opposition to other regional proposals. They are sort of focused on Pittsburgh, but the Beech Hollow and GERRP appeals demonstrate that they do respond to a wider base of concerns. Please consider joining GASP for this specific project, and communicate with Liz Rosemeyer if you have used any of the Class I areas. You can contact Dennis for information at: _d_mgroce(a)labyrinth.net_ (mailto:d_mgroce@labyrinth.net) Paul B. read an email from Jim Kotcon to the City Council congratulating them for signing on to the Urban Environmental Accords, which call for cities to develop policies to provide such things as increased access to public transportation, access to safe drinking water, the use of renewable energy, etc. Jim suggested that, while signing on was admirable, Council should also develop initiatives to implement the accords, and he provided a number of examples. Duane reported that Allegheny Energy has applied for permission to sell environmental control bonds to finance the building of scrubbers on the Ft. Martin Plant. [H.B. 2849]. Duane informed the group that we have been invited to join the WV Environmental Council (WVEC). According to their website, their mission is to "facilitate communication and cooperation among citizens in promoting environmental protection in West Virginia, to assist in organizing grass roots groups, to facilitate interaction among established environmental organizations, and to correspond with all appropriate local, state, and federal agencies involved in the management of West Virginia's environment." After some discussion, Bill moved that we join, Paula seconded, and the motion passed without dissent. The WVEC would like us to let them know what our legislative agenda is, as they spend time lobbying in Charleston. One suggestion was that they try to change state legislation that does not allow state agencies to go beyond federal standards for controlling greenhouse gases. Another suggestion was related to the generation of power by private citizens. Currently, state law permits citizens only to break even on selling energy back to the power company. That is, they can sell as much as they use, but they cannot make a profit. Duane announced that the WVEC is having their 17th Annual Fall Conference on 10/16-10/18. For more information, visit their website at: _http://www.wvecouncil.org_ (http://www.wvecouncil.org/) Linda asked Paul B. about what was happening with the university, and his resolution that was passed (without dissent) by the Faculty Senate during the May 9, 2005 meeting. The resolution was: Be it resolved, (1) that the Faculty Senate commit themselves to work together with the administration of West Virginia University to incorporate ecologically sound principles in the construction and renovation of all University property and the operation of University equipment, including vehicles. The objectives of these practices would be to achieve lower costs, reduce or reverse environmental damage, and provide a healthier workplace. Such practices will include, but are not limited to, green architecture (the use of building materials which are environmentally friendly, inexpensive and efficient, and structural designs which take advantage of natural heating and lighting); energy self-sufficiency (through the use of solar power and energy efficiency); recycling; and alternative transportation (such as peripheral parking and shuttle buses, and natural gas-powered vehicles). Be it further resolved, (2) that West Virginia University will work with other entities, including governmental agencies at all levels, businesses, and private citizens, to provide expertise and financial incentives to follow similar practices in the public and private sectors. Be it further resolved, (3) that West Virginia University will develop local expertise within the University, government agencies and the private sector for economical and effective implementation of these practices. Paul indicated that he was going to arrange a meeting with Provost Lang at WVU to discuss the resolution. Peter V. suggested that Paul request the establishment of an environmental law clinic at the WVU Law School. It was also suggested that Paul recommend that an environmental health clinic be established at the medical center. Larry S. acknowledged the contributions of Holly Rieke to our cause, who passed away in late July. Holly was a tireless advocate for causes such as clean air. She will be sorely missed. Paula announced that the Friends of Deckers Creek Carp Fest is scheduled for October 8, and we could have an information table there. We now have an EIN number and will be applying for 501c3 status shortly. The next MVCAC meeting will be held on Monday, September 26 at the home of Martha and Larry Schwab. Arrive at 6:30 for the social half hour. The meeting will begin at 7:00. Respectfully submitted, Linda Shuster, Secretary [August 27, 2005].

1 0

MVCAC meets tonite
by Duane330＠aol.com 22 Aug '05

22 Aug '05

...........friendly reminder..................tonite.... THE NEXT GENERAL MEETING OF THE MONVALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION WILL BE MONDAY, AUGUST 22nd, AT 3333 COLLINS FERRY ROAD IN THE SUNCREST AREA OF MORGANTOWN, AT THE HOME OF LARRY AND MARTHA SCHWAB. GATHER AT 6:30 TO SOCIALIZE AND MEET AT 7 pm.

1 0

City Council report tonight
by Dfvet＠aol.com 17 Aug '05

17 Aug '05

TO: MVCAC I've attached the outline of my presentation to City Council for your review.

2 1

Meet: 22nd at Collins Ferry Road
by Duane330＠aol.com 15 Aug '05

15 Aug '05

THE NEXT GENERAL MEETING OF THE MONVALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION WILL BE MONDAY, AUGUST 22nd, AT 3333 COLLINS FERRY ROAD IN THE SUNCREST AREA OF MORGANTOWN, AT THE HOME OF LARRY AND MARTHA SCHWAB. GATHER AT 6:30 TO SOCIALIZE AND MEET AT 7 PM. DO NOT WAIT TO BE ACTIVE. ........... Duane >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> News Release For Immediate Release: For more information please contact: August 12, 2005 Paula Hunt (304) 692-7588 Morgantown, WV Duane Nichols (304) 599-8040 ______________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ LONGVIEW TAX BREAKS APPEALED TO SUPREME COURT A group of individuals and organizations based in Monongalia County, West Virginia has filed an appeal with the state Supreme Court regarding tax breaks given to the proposed 600 MW coal-fired Longview power plant. Citizens for Alternatives to Longview Power (CALP) was one of the non-profit groups along with other concerned citizens that filed a lawsuit in Monongalia County Circuit Court on October 9, 2003 over the “payment in lieu of taxes” or PILOT agreement signed by Longview Power and Monongalia County officials. That case was dismissed in the Monongalia County Circuit Court on April 12, 2005, and is now being appealed. “The embattled Longview power plant is facing yet another court challenge, this time an appeal of the legality of the lucrative tax breaks offered by the Monongalia County Commission,” said Paula Hunt, a spokesperson for CALP. The appeal states that the PILOT agreement would violate multiple sections of the State constitution including the requirement for equal taxation. Longview has claimed that they cannot build the plant without the tax agreement, and has had repeated delays in their projected start of construction. “We believe the Circuit Court made an error when it dismissed the case before both sides conducted legal discovery,” said Ms. Hunt. “Our legal team of Robert Bastress and Phil Gaujot will impress upon the Supreme Court that this case can only be judged fairly after important facts come to light during the discovery process.” Duane Nichols, the president of the Cheat Lake Environment and Recreation Association, said that “it is just plain unfair for the county to provide a very large tax break to one specific private company, particularly when the electricity is to be sold out-of-state, when the coal may come primarily from Pennsylvania, and when all the environmental impacts will be felt primarily by those already affected by our largest power plant and largest polluter, the Ft. Martin power plant.” “We have found that the PILOT agreement itself is based on a flawed and unconstitutional application of state statutes," said James Kotcon. "It is simply wrong for one out-of-state, for-profit company to get tax breaks that are not open to every other taxpaying business in the County. It’s an issue of tax fairness," asserts Kotcon. “The statute under which the PILOT was offered was intended to apply to publicly-owned projects financed through public bonds for public benefit; not to a private out-of-state company whose primary goal is to maximize its own profits." “It appears that the Longview plant has many problems and this is yet another problem for Longview,” said Jarrett Jamison, a resident of the Fort Martin Community, where the proposed plant would be located. “Construction has been put off due to one delay after another; and Longview has repeatedly failed to finalize the required permits”. The Air Quality Permit is still under appeal in the Kanawha County Circuit Court. The ‘siting certificate’ was approved by the Public Service Commission with a number of conditions on it that have not yet been met; and the ‘ transmission certificate’ has yet to be applied for. The Federal Aviation Administration has yet to approve the smoke stack for this plant, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has required Longview to negotiate rights of way for transmission lines with Allegheny Energy. That is expected to cost Longview over 5 million dollars alone. In addition to CALP, the plaintiffs include the Citizens for Responsible Development, the Cheat Lake Environment and Recreation Association, and more than 50 local residents. Defendants in the action are Longview Power, LLC, the Monongalia County Development Authority, the Monongalia County Commission, the Monongalia County Board of Education, and the Monongalia County Assessor. More information on the project is available at the web sites for Longview Power: _http://www.genpower.net/longview_ (http://www.genpower.net/longview) , and for CALP: _http://www.nolongview.org/_ (http://www.nolongview.org/) .

1 0

Air Monitoring Grants
by Kotcon, James 10 Aug '05

10 Aug '05

EPA AIR TOXICS AMBIENT MONITORING GRANTS Time Sensitive: Letters of Intent Due July 22 EPA is accepting applications for projects designed to assist state and local communities in identifying and profiling air toxics sources, developing and assessing measurement methods, characterizing local air toxics problems, and tracking air toxics reduction activities. Eligible organizations include city, county and state governments, independent school districts, public institutions of higher education, and Native American tribal governments. A total of $6,250,000 will be awarded to approximately 15 applicants. Letters of intent are expected by July 22, 2005. Applications are due August 22, 2005. For more information, see http://fedgrants.gov/Applicants/EPA/OGD/GAD/OAR-EMAD-05-16/Grant.html Dr. James Kotcon Interim Program Leader - Organic Agriculture USDA-CSREES Mailstop 2220, Washington, DC 20250 phone: 202-401-4879 Cell: 304-319-2244 fax: 202-401-4888 for overnight carrier: 800 9th St., SW, Room 3344 Washington, DC 20024 _____ From: mvcac-bounces(a)cheat.org [mailto:mvcac-bounces@cheat.org] On Behalf Of Duane330(a)aol.com Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 8:42 AM To: mvcac(a)cheat.org Subject: [MVCAC] Fwd: Longview story Washington (PA) Observer Reporter article on Longview.....below.

1 0

"Do NOT wait to be active"....
by Duane330＠aol.com 06 Aug '05

06 Aug '05

Woops. My last email omitted the word NOT. So, the full sentence is: "Do NOT wait to be active"......... so consider the following........ INFORMAL MEETING--AUGUST 9TH. We will have a general and informal discussion of MVCAC activities on Tuesday, August 9th, at the Unitarian Fellowship building, 429 Warrick Drive, Morgantown, at 7 pm. This is an opportunity for those who have not been active, or who may have questions, or who simply want to discuss current activities and future plans, to come out and join in. The Unitarian Fellowship building is visible from University Avenue, on the upper side of the road (on the right going north), between main campus and the Law School. It is the shape of the letter A, otherwise known as an "A-frame" building. [Some consider it a "church", others do not.] Duane Nichols 599-8040

2 1

.. the answer is blowing in the wind ...
by Duane330＠aol.com 02 Aug '05

02 Aug '05

THE NEXT GENERAL MEETING OF THE MONVALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION WILL BE MONDAY, AUGUST 22nd, AT 3333 COLLINS FERRY ROAD IN THE SUNCREST AREA OF MORGANTOWN, AT THE HOME OF LARRY AND MARTHA SCHWAB. GATHER AT 6:30 TO SOCIALIZE AND MEET AT 7 PM. DO WAIT TO BE ACTIVE. ........... Duane >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> States ordered to cut power plant pollution Monday, August 1, 2005; Posted: 10:57 p.m. EDT (02:57 GMT) WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration told 28 states Monday it plans to order specific pollution cuts from their power plants, if state officials don't have their own plan by fall of next year for making the air cleaner for people downwind. A new program the Environmental Protection Agency announced in March requires states in the East, South and Midwest, plus the District of Columbia, to reduce power plant pollutants that form smog and soot and drift downwind. The states have until September 2006 to submit plans for achieving the pollution reductions. If they miss that deadline, the EPA said Monday it would write the plans for them. North Carolina and two advocacy groups, Environmental Defense and the Southern Environmental Law Center, sued EPA, saying the state can't meet federal air quality standards if upwind states don't clean up their pollution. Jeff Holmstead, EPA's assistant administrator for air and radiation, said the agency's enforcement proposal would go a long way toward cleaning up the nation's air while ensuring that North Carolina can meet federal standards on time. But EPA's enforcement would only go so far. In North Carolina, for example, the agency says it will only step in to curb soot but not smog. The agency says its analyses show that upwind states don't contribute to smog in North Carolina. "EPA just strengthened its hand to make sure states implement clean air rules on time and on target, but it failed to take the extra steps to fully address the pollution blowing into North Carolina," said Michael Shore, a senior air policy analyst for Environmental Defense. Under the March regulations, by 2015, nitrogen oxide pollution in the 28 states will have to be reduced by 1.9 million tons annually, or 61 percent below 2003 levels. Sulfur dioxide pollution must drop by 5.4 million tons, a 57 percent reduction. EPA says electric utility customers can expect their monthly electric bills to eventually rise by up to $1 to pay the projected $4 billion annual costs to meet the new standards. But it estimates the financial benefits of preventing breathing ailments by cutting nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide are at least 20 times greater. Both chemical compounds contribute to the formation of tiny airborne particles, while nitrogen oxides also lead to smog. Other states affected by the new regulations are Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [... and when will the air and water be clean...... will you help.......]

1 0

Sign Up Sheets
by Sandra Cress 01 Aug '05

01 Aug '05

I have attached the sign up sheets to write a letter to the editor and to attend city council meetings. Thanks to you who have already made and completed the commitment. There are still some slots available for both sheets. Please, look them over and sign up for any space you can fill. When you decide which space you would like to claim, email me and I will tag it as yours. Thank you, Sandy SCress(a)verizon.net

2 1

MVCAC Minutes 7-25-05
by Duane330＠aol.com 26 Jul '05

26 Jul '05

MVCAC Minutes July 25, 2005 The July 25th meeting of the MVCAC was held at St. Paul's Lutheran Church on Patteson Drive, with eleven people in attendance. Duane began the meeting by letting the group know that after a valiant battle, Holly Rieke succumbed to lung cancer on Sunday evening, July 24. Holly was a tireless advocate for the causes in which she believed, such as CALP. We will miss her humor, energy, and determination. Duane completed the paperwork to register MVCAC as a “voluntary association” with the state. We are now official. In addition, he obtained a post office box at the Star City post office. The new MVCAC mailing address is: Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition PO Box 4679 Star City, WV 26504-4679 CALP is also now registered as a “volunteer association” with Paula Hunt as the chairperson of the group. Deb discussed our financial status. She received a financial report from Mary Davis, treasurer of the state Sierra Club. The state Sierra has been managing donations to CALP/MVCAC. Deb has several questions about the report, but Mary is out of town, so she could not clarify these issues. She will contact Mary when Mary returns. Duane suggested that it would be helpful for MVCAC to have its own bank account. By consensus and without opposition, the group agreed that Deb, as our treasurer, should open a bank account. Duane informed the group that we could obtain a tax ID number, which would exempt us from paying state sales tax on purchases. Duane brought up the issue of MVCAC becoming a non-profit 501-c-3 organization. The pros and cons were discussed, and Deb volunteered to research the issue and bring her findings to the next meeting. Duane described the appeal of the Monongalia County Circuit Court's decision to dismiss the lawsuit in regard to the PILOT agreement for Longview Power. Attorney Robert Bastress has agreed to file the appeal with the State Supreme Court of Appeals by August 1. Duane, Bill and Jim have been working with Bob on this. Jarrett provided a report on the CALP committee meeting that was held the second week in July. Jarrett, Paula, and Linda attended. The group discussed the status of the transmission line for Longview Power. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) ruled that Allegheny Power and Longview must negotiate an agreement for Longview to make a connection to the grid across Allegheny Power's property. Longview must pay $5.5 million for the access and another $313,000 for the land. Jarrett has sent a FOIA to FERC requesting any letters from companies that suggested that we need a 500 kV transmission line. Duane indicated that there is already a problem with congestion on the grid and this must be addressed if new companies continue to come on-line. Jarrett also sent a letter to the Office of Homeland Security suggesting that it Longview was built, the location of the two power plants in such close proximity may pose a security threat. Also in regard to Longview, Duane sent a FOIA to the FAA requesting two files related to the stack height issue. Duane discussed the noise issues related to the proposed Longview plant. Longview complained to the Public Service Commission (PSC) that the final rules for the citing certificate for the plant should be revised, because the noise guidelines were too stringent (the rules mandated no increase in the already high noise levels at Fort Martin). The PSC opened up only the noise portion of the certificate for reconsideration. To read the PSC's order, go to the following website: http://www.psc.state.wv.us/orders/2005_07/go2551ch.htm The PSC ordered the establishment of a task force to further study the noise issue. It will be headed by a member of the PSC and will consist of a variety of parties, including GenPower and a number of members of MVCAC. A major concern is that the task force will meet on a week day in Charleston when many our members cannot attend. It was recommended that MVCAC members write letters to the PSC requesting that the task force meet on a weekend or evening in Morgantown, or some location closer to Morgantown than Charleston. Dennis reported on the power plant situation in Pennsylvania. A number of waste coal burning plants have been proposed, because the PA governor and Secretary of Energy want to make it appear as if they are concerned about "alternative energy." There are at least three plants proposed for SW PA. One in Robinson Township has already been permitted, but is being appealed by a group who has retained a lawyer from the University of Pittsburgh's Environmental Law Center. Dennis is involved with the proposed plant in Nemacolin, PA (the so-called GERRP plant). This plant was issued a permit around July 1. [MVCAC is generally in favor of appealing this permit.] Dennis is meeting with the same lawyer from Pitt tomorrow to discuss a possible appeal; however, it is not clear that the lawyer will take the case as he is "stretched thin" with the Robinson Township plant appeal. At the suggestion of Jim K., Dennis has left messages with the PA Sierra Club's air quality person regarding this issue, but he has received no response. Dennis also left a message with the National Parks Conservation Association, but has not heard from them, either. Duane mentioned that there is a proposed waste coal plant in Greenbrier County, WV, and that they have received federal money to be a "demonstration plant." Deb reported that there is a group who is trying to influence the upcoming school board elections, because they are unhappy with how the current board is managing the schools. She suggested that, in light of the fact that the current school board played a major role in trying to bring us Longview, we might want to connect with the group. Cindy said she would find the name of the contact person and pass it on to Duane. Karen has spoken with Boggs Environmental about the air monitoring equipment. Her contact in Morgantown is checking with the corporate administration to determine whether they are interested in a written letter memorandum of cooperation. At the last meeting, Sandy passed around sheets for people to sign up to write letters to the editor or attend city council meetings and discuss clean air. Larry S. attended a city council meeting and spoke there. Bill reported on the air quality training workshop that was held on June 20. Everyone learned a lot, but agreed that a few hours was not long enough. The Speakers Bureau will aim to organize a longer training for the fall. Jim K. has been working on a Power Point presentation for this purpose. The next MVCAC meeting will be held on Monday August 22 at the home of Martha and Larry Schwab. Arrive at 6:30 for the social half hour. The meeting will begin at 7:00. Prepared by Linda Shuster, July 26, 2005.

1 0

Holly Reike......
by Duane330＠aol.com 25 Jul '05

25 Jul '05

> For those who knew Holly Reike and do not know, she passed away Sunday, > July 24, 2005 around 5:15PM at the Monongalia General Hospital. She had > fought the cancer battle. Holly was devoted to the fight against > Longview. She put her all into the Longview fight as she did with any > project she took on. We'll all miss that strong will and mind.

1 0

Re: [MVCAC] Meet Monday 7 pm St. Paul's Lutheran Church
by Paul Brown 22 Jul '05

22 Jul '05

I'm sorry, I refuse to enter churches. paul brown Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512 >>> <Duane330(a)aol.com> 07/22/05 9:42 PM >>> The MVCAC with meet this coming Monday evening, July 25th, at the St. Paul's Lutheran Church on Patterson Drive, 7 pm. If you cannot attend, please send me any information that may be helpful to those who come out. We need the schedules developed by Sandy Cress and others regarding commitments for letter writing and City Council visits. If you have any proposed projects, please send them in so we can discuss them and distribute email info on them to all interested parties. Thanks for your good help. Duane

1 0

Meet Monday 7 pm St. Paul's Lutheran Church
by Duane330＠aol.com 22 Jul '05

22 Jul '05

The MVCAC with meet this coming Monday evening, July 25th, at the St. Paul's Lutheran Church on Patterson Drive, 7 pm. If you cannot attend, please send me any information that may be helpful to those who come out. We need the schedules developed by Sandy Cress and others regarding commitments for letter writing and City Council visits. If you have any proposed projects, please send them in so we can discuss them and distribute email info on them to all interested parties. Thanks for your good help. Duane

1 0

Fwd: Longview story
by Duane330＠aol.com 13 Jul '05

13 Jul '05

Washington (PA) Observer Reporter article on Longview.....below.

1 0

Official address, meeting minutes
by Duane330＠aol.com 05 Jul '05

05 Jul '05

New mailing address: MonValley Clean Air Coalition P. O. Box 4679 Star City, WV 26504-4679 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Minutes MVCAC June 13, 2005 Duane provided a handout with a list of current issues. We began by reviewing these issues. 1. The PILOT agreement for the proposed Longview Power Plant – if we are going to appeal the decision to dismiss the case by Judge Clawges in the WV Supreme Court, we need to do so by August 1, 2005. Phil is recommending that we file an appeal, but he is unable to do it himself at this time. The Legal Committee was to meet with an attorney who might be willing to take this on for us. The group in attendance unanimously agreed that we should undertake this appeal. 2. There will be a public hearing in Charleston at the Public Service Commission (PSC) when Longview applies for a transmission certificate. The conditional siting certificate that was granted to Longview will also be considered at this time. Longview has filed a complaint to the US Federal Regulatory Commission (FERC) charging that Allegheny Energy (owner of the Ft Martin power plant) has not cooperated with them in their attempts to obtain a connection to the high voltage grid system. The Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Interconnection Organization [P-J-M] has intervened on the side of Longview and asked for federal arbitration to settle the matter. 3. There were two appeals of the air quality permit granted to Longview before the Kanawha County Circuit Court, one by the Forks of Cheat Property Owners Association and one by Jarrett Jamison. The appeal of the Forks of Cheat group was rejected last week. The hearing for Jarrett’s appeal is to take place in early July. 4. The PSC has finalized the Rules for Siting Certificates; however, issues remain regarding the permitted noise levels. 5. The proposed Longview smoke stack would be 54 feet above the level permitted by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Longview has applied to the FAA for approval of the stack. A variety of groups and individuals provided comments to the FAA during the public comment period. 6. Allegheny Energy (AE) was granted a permit to construct and operate a “ synfuels” plant at the Ft Martin plant. This would not truly be a synthetic fuels plant, as AE would simply be spraying oil on the coal; however, they would still receive the tax break granted to synthetic fuels plants. 7. AE has applied to the PSC for a rate hike (“environmental charge”) of about $3-$4 per month to each residential electric bill to pay for scrubbers for the Ft Martin plant. Since this would make our air cleaner, Karen suggested that we send a letter to the PSC in support of this increase. The group agreed that this should be done. 8. Alcon LLC of Buckhannon, WV had applied to the WV DEP Division of Air Quality for a permit to construct and operate a batch cement plant. The plant would be located off Bakers Ridge Road near The Madison nursing home and the proposed site of the new University High School on the site of an old surface mine that is unusually dusty. At a public hearing that was held last week attended by twenty local residents and five staff personnel of the Division of Air Quality, no one spoke in favor of the plant. Despite this fact, it looks like the permit will be granted. [The permit was granted (registered) on June 16th. The period of possible appeals is 30 days.] In new business: Duane brought up the issue of registering MVCAC as a not-for-profit with the WV Secretary of State. Linda moved that we should do this, Paula seconded and the motion passed unanimously. Jonathan suggested that we needed a real address. Duane will look into obtaining a PO Box. Martha indicated that she thought it was possible that mail addressed to a PO Box could be delivered to an individual. This way, the mail could be delivered to the current convener, and no one would have the responsibility of checking the PO Box. Sierra Club has earmarked $5,000 for CALP. According to Paul Wilson, president of the WV Chapter, these monies must be used for 501c3 activities. If they are to be used to support litigation, this must be approved by the national Sierra Club. Duane asked Paul if Sierra would support using the funds for the purchase of air monitoring equipment and Paul said “no,” because that is considered a capital expense. Monies for capital expenses come from a different source. Karen has spoken to Boggs Environmental about air monitoring equipment. They would be willing to purchase the equipment to support educational activities if MVCAC will pay maintenance and repair expenses. Duane moved that we empower the Executive Committee to write a letter indicating that we wish to work with them on this endeavor. Larry seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously. Sandy reported on activities of the Media Committee. They established initiatives to: 1. encourage people to attend City Council meetings and speak on air quality issues; and 2. write letters to the editor. Sign-up sheets were passed around, so that members could choose one or both of these activities. Sandy also reported that she is designing a logo for the group. The air training workshop will be held Sunday, June 20 as planned. The location is to be announced. [Training was held at the Cheat Lake Fire Hall.] Paula reported that the CALP Committee met, and the FAA and FERC issues were discussed. Minutes prepared by Linda Shuster, Secretary; and, distributed by Duane Nichols, Convenor. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The next regular general meeting of MVCAC will be on July 25th at 7 pm, at the St. Paul’s Lutheran Church on Patteson Drive in the Suncrest area of Morgantown. Committees are encouraged to meet on Monday, July 11th, or at other convenient times.

1 0

MVCAC meeting announcements
by Duane330＠aol.com 28 Jun '05

28 Jun '05

To: MonValley Clean Air Coalition, a. k. a. CALP. Our Committees are encouraged to meet as appropriate to continue moving forward with our projects and programs. Monday, July 11th, is available for Committee meetings. The next regular meeting of MVCAC will be Monday, July 25th at 7:00 pm. This most likely will be at the St. Paul's Lutheran Church on Patteson Drive. In August, the 8th is available for Committee meetings with a general meeting set for August 22nd at Larry Schwab's home. [[We have a number of activities underway including projects on public relations and information distribution, air quality monitoring, and the appeal of the PILOT agreement, among others.]] [[Let me know if you have new ideas, example materials, questions or other comments. Please take care to limit mailings to the _MVCAC(a)cheat.org_ (mailto:MVCAC@cheat.org) list to only those that merit general distribution.]] Thank you very much. Duane Nichols "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead.

1 0

Sustainable university initiative
by Paul Brown 27 Jun '05

27 Jun '05

Dear Dr. Lang: Larry Hornak tells me you're the administration official I should contact about the resolution I introduced in the Senate, which was approved unanimously. That resolution, as you'll recall, commits the Senate to working with the administration of West Virginia University to make the campus more nearly sustainable, e.g., enhance energy efficiency, make use of renewable resources including energy, and minimize waste and pollution. I'd like your advice on how to go about working together toward this objective. There are several universities which have made considerable progress in this direction, so we could take advantage of their experience and expertise. I would suggest an ad hoc committee of appropriate faculty and administrators, who could put together a multi-year plan and a budget for approval by the Senate and the administration. Last week I introduced a proposed resolution to Morgantown City Council, to sign the multinational Urban Environmental Accords, which have specific targets and timetables for 21 different environmental objectives. I will be meeting with them on July 5 to answer any questions they may have about the resolution and its implications, after which I believe they will discuss, amend, and vote. It seems to me that there could be a natural synergy between the university and the city, for example in the return to use of natural gas vehicles, air quality monitoring at several places around the city and campus, and the use of combined purchasing power to get quantity discounts for the city, university and citizens when purchasing such things as photovoltaic systems for clean electrical power. I should think that the combined efforts of the university, city and local citizens' groups in requesting the legislature to enact incentives such as tax credits for the purchase of low-emission vehicles and renewable energy equipment would be more effective as well. Morgantown and West Virginia University could set a valuable precedent for the rest of the state. If you agree with my reasoning, perhaps it would be appropriate to endorse the adoption of the Urban Environmental Accords. In any event, I'd appreciate your consideration and your thoughts on these ideas. Sincerely, Paul Brown Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512

1 0

RE: [BULK] - Re: [MVCAC] Marion County, Shuck Steel Fabricators Inc., R13-2621
by Kotcon, James 22 Jun '05

22 Jun '05

I did not notice the tons per "month", Good catch Jonathon. 0.17 tons per month does work out to be 2.04 tpy. But if that is PM10, then how can total particulates only be 0.37 tpy? PM10 emissions, by definition, can not exceed total particulate emissions. Here is another little factoid for those interested in math. My car needed an emissions inspection to get registered here in DC. My 10-year old Mazda was emitting 0.65 grams NOx per mile. That works out to around 15 pounds per year, assuming I drive 10,000 miles per year. So the next time someone tells you that the real air pollution problem in Mon County is from all the cars those WVU students bring to campus, you can point out that every one of the 25,000 students on campus would need to be driving eight cars each, 10,000 miles per year, all in Mon County, to equal the 1,700 tpy of NOx emissions that Longview will add. Now there is an issue for the MPO! Imagine the traffic jams! JBK Dr. James Kotcon Interim Program Leader - Organic Agriculture USDA-CSREES Mailstop 2220, Washington, DC 20250 phone: 202-401-4879 Cell: 304-319-2244 fax: 202-401-4888 for overnight carrier: 800 9th St., SW, Room 3344 Washington, DC 20024 -----Original Message----- From: mvcac-bounces(a)cheat.org [mailto:mvcac-bounces@cheat.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rosenbaum Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 2:16 PM To: mvcac(a)cheat.org Subject: [BULK] - Re: [MVCAC] Marion County, Shuck Steel Fabricators Inc., R13-2621 Linda Shuster wrote: > At 12:58 PM 6/22/05 -0400, John Gever wrote: > I agree with John on this. We all receive a ton of emails each day that > we have to sort through. I think we need to be very judicious about > what MVCAC sends out. Perhaps one of our standing committees could > start keeping data on permit applications - perhaps the Monitoring > Committee? I'm glad there is finally some discussion about this issue. One thing to realize is that public comment periods are 30 days long. MVCAC meetings sometimes fall within these periods, but sometimes that isn't the case. If the Monitoring Committee is gathering together at reasonable times apart from MVCAC meetings then we do have timely factual material to work with. I'm not sure that this is presently the case, but I do agree this would be quite useful for our group. I also agree with Jim that we don't have to go after everything, but we shouldn't ignore the little guys either. What we need to establish is who to send this pertinent information to within our group. Let's figure this out at the next meeting. Keep in mind, should we be ignoring public comment periods like Mylans? We need to establish parameters where urgency creates a precedence for public consumption. However, as far as email, there is a technology called filtering that has been around for a long time. For instance, in the case of MVCAC, all email sent "to: mvcac(a)cheat.org" and "cc: mvcac(a)cheat.org" can go into a folder called mvcac - this is what I do. Spending a little time learning how to use filters will give MVCAC members much more of an edge. Jonathan p.s. Jim, that's 2.04 tpy PM10 not 0.17 tpy PM10. > Linda > > >> So does email. Applications for air quality permits are pretty >> frequent and people may develop mail-list fatigue if we get emails on >> each and every one of them. May I suggest restricting these >> broadcasts to those highlighting particular concerns? At the same >> time, I agree it's useful to be aware of the many contributors to >> local air pollution -- a good MVCAC project might be to add up all the >> new sources permitted each year and issue a report. >> >> Just my $0.02. >> >> John Gever >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> MVCAC mailing list >> MVCAC(a)cheat.org >> http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac > > > Linda I. Shuster, Ph.D. website: > http://www.wvu.edu/~speechpa/shust.html > Associate Professor > Department of Speech Pathology and Audiology > PO Box 6122 > 805 Allen Hall > West Virginia University > Morgantown, WV 26506 > Telephone: 304-293-2943 or 304-293-5050 > Fax: 304-293-7565 > _______________________________________________ > MVCAC mailing list > MVCAC(a)cheat.org > http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac _______________________________________________ MVCAC mailing list MVCAC(a)cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac

1 0

Marion County, Shuck Steel Fabricators Inc., R13-2621
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 22 Jun '05

22 Jun '05

This isn't a coal burning plant, but I'd thought I'd share it anyways, because everything adds up: Notice of Comment Period Department of Environmental ProtectiPermit Number: R13-2621 Shuck Steel Fabricators Inc. will have the potential to discharge these regulated air pollutants and associated amounts: 0.17 tons per month particulate matter less than 10 microns; 0.37 tpy particulate matter; 0.01 tpy ethyl benzene; 0.067 tpy xylene; and 1.1 tpy volatile organic compounds. The facility is located in Pleasant Valley, Marion County, WV. Please fax, mail or e-mail any comments on the draft permit to the address below, postmarked on or before July 22, 2005. Comments may include a request for a public hearing. A hearing may be held if DEP finds a significant degree of public interest, or if the hearing would clarify issues. You can view the draft permit, application, and, if available, a fact sheet, all at no cost, at the office below. Call or e-mail to make an appointment. If you would like a copy of any information, copying and mailing costs may apply. DEP Division of Air Quality 601 57th Street, Southeast Charleston, WV 25304 Contact Edward S. Andrews Phone: (304) 926-0499, ext. 1227 Fax: (304) 926-0478 E-mail: eandrews(a)wvdep.org

3 3

RE: [BULK] - Re: [MVCAC] Marion County, Shuck Steel Fabricators Inc., R13-2621
by Kotcon, James 22 Jun '05

22 Jun '05

Yes there are a lot of permits, but it helps to put these in perspective. At 0.17 tpy PM10, we could get one of these a week every week for 10 years and not generate as much particulate as one Longview. And even that pales in comparison to the 1000's of tons per year from Fort Martin. Still given our limited volunteer resources, and the level of effort needed to produce a real change in any permit, we would do well to pick our battles carefully, and concentrate on winning something in each of those we do pick. WV-DEP is already quite willing to ignore anything we say, so we need to be sure we retain credibility and win some of these, rather than develop a reputation as the ones who cry wolf every week and can routinely be ignored. I don't insist on total unconditional surrender from DEP, but I want them to know that when I raise an objection, they have to take another look. My vote is to focus on the "Big Dirties" or the "Dirty Dozen Worst Polluters", those that have a substantial impact on air quality. I would prefer to avoid gaining a reputation as being against every small business expansion or new job that comes to town. If we create a precedent with the big (out-of-state) companies, the nature of regulatory bureaucracies is that they will tend to spread it through the rest of industry. JBK P.S. I also like the idea of having a "Monitoring Committee" produce a summary of sources in Mon County or the region. If we compare these permits to the power plants, or to auto traffic, or diesel trucks, it gives people a perspective that is hard to get from "tons per year". Dr. James Kotcon Interim Program Leader - Organic Agriculture USDA-CSREES Mailstop 2220, Washington, DC 20250 phone: 202-401-4879 Cell: 304-319-2244 fax: 202-401-4888 for overnight carrier: 800 9th St., SW, Room 3344 Washington, DC 20024 -----Original Message----- From: mvcac-bounces(a)cheat.org [mailto:mvcac-bounces@cheat.org] On Behalf Of Linda Shuster Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 1:41 PM To: John Gever; mvcac(a)cheat.org Subject: [BULK] - Re: [MVCAC] Marion County, Shuck Steel Fabricators Inc., R13-2621 At 12:58 PM 6/22/05 -0400, John Gever wrote: I agree with John on this. We all receive a ton of emails each day that we have to sort through. I think we need to be very judicious about what MVCAC sends out. Perhaps one of our standing committees could start keeping data on permit applications - perhaps the Monitoring Committee? Linda >So does email. Applications for air quality permits are pretty frequent >and people may develop mail-list fatigue if we get emails on each and >every one of them. May I suggest restricting these broadcasts to those >highlighting particular concerns? At the same time, I agree it's useful >to be aware of the many contributors to local air pollution -- a good >MVCAC project might be to add up all the new sources permitted each year >and issue a report. > >Just my $0.02. > >John Gever > > > > >_______________________________________________ >MVCAC mailing list >MVCAC(a)cheat.org >http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac Linda I. Shuster, Ph.D. website: http://www.wvu.edu/~speechpa/shust.html Associate Professor Department of Speech Pathology and Audiology PO Box 6122 805 Allen Hall West Virginia University Morgantown, WV 26506 Telephone: 304-293-2943 or 304-293-5050 Fax: 304-293-7565 _______________________________________________ MVCAC mailing list MVCAC(a)cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac

1 0

Urban Environmental Accords
by Paul Brown 22 Jun '05

22 Jun '05

Dear localplanetoids, At the bottom of the front page in today's Morgantown Dominion Post, there's a short article about last night's City Council meeting. Toward the end, there are a few sentences about our Green Morgantown Declaration, which I submitted as a proposed resolution during the public portion of the meeting. I think the tone is quite sympathetic, although it doesn't go into the kind of detail I would have liked. Council will consider discussing the proposal at their meeting of the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, June 28. If they decide to discuss it, I will be invited to attend and answer questions. I'll take along our local expert, Al Ebron, for technical issues. I'll keep you posted on how things go. your servant, Paul Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512

1 0

DEP Notices
by James Wayne Evans 18 Jun '05

18 Jun '05

Hello again, I just sent the e-mail about the DEP notices and realized after sending it that I overlooked identifying myself. Sorry about that. In Solidarity James Evans _____ This mailbox protected from junk email by MailFrontier Desktop from MailFrontier, Inc. http://info.mailfrontier.com

1 0

Latest Public Notices from DEP List
by James Wayne Evans 18 Jun '05

18 Jun '05

From: deponline(a)wvdep.org Subject: DEP Public Notice - Monongalia County - Patriot Mining Company, Inc. - Permit #WV0095311 Hello, I signed-up to the West Virginia DEP Public Notice list today. I came across the following two notices: Notice #1 This Message was sent out on Friday, June 17, 2005 @ 02:53 PM From: deponline(a)wvdep.org Subject: DEP Public Notice - Monongalia County - Patriot Mining Company, Inc. - Permit #WV0095311 Notice of Comment Period Department of Environmental Protection This mailing is to advise the public that we have received an application for reissuance of an Article 11/West Virginia National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit for Patriot Mining Company, Inc., 2708 Cranberry Square, Morgantown, WV 26508, in order to discharge drainage from a reclaimed surface mine and haul road operation in the Waynesburg and Waynesburg ¿A¿ seams of coal. Application for reissuance of NPDES Permit Number: WV0095311 Patriot Mining Company, Inc. plans to discharge into an unnamed tributary of Wades Run and Wades Run of Scotts Run and an unnamed tributary of Robinson Run and Robinson Run of the Monongahela River and is located 2.1 miles west of Maidsville, WV, in Cass District of Monongalia County, Longitude 80° 01¿ 40¿ and Latitude 39° 42¿ 00¿ (Coordinates from USGS Topographic Map). Please fax, mail or e-mail any comments on the draft permit to the address below, postmarked on or before July 17, 2005, or thirty days from the date of publication, and reference the Article 11/WVNPDES permit number shown above. Comments may include a request for a public hearing. If a hearing is requested the comment must state the nature of the issues proposed to be raised in the hearing. A hearing may be held if DEP finds a significant degree of public interest, or if the hearing would clarify issues. DEP Regional Office 105 South Railroad Street, Suite 301 Philippi, WV 26416 Phone: (304) 457-3219 Fax: (304) 457-3440 To view past notices of open public comment periods, please go to www.wvdep.org. Notice #2 This Message was sent out on Thursday, May 12, 2005 @ 12:12 PM From: deponline(a)wvdep.org Subject: DEP Public Notice - Monongalia County, West Virginia University Hospitals Inc. R13-2624 Notice of Comment Period Department of Environmental Protection This mailing is to advise the public that we have prepared a draft air quality permit for West Virginia University Hospitals Inc. to construct and operate two emergency generators located in Morgantown, WV. Permit Number: R13-2624 West Virginia University Hospitals Inc. will discharge the following regulated air pollutants and associated amounts. 0.18 tons per year particulate matter less than 10; 0.34 tpy volatile organic compounds; 1.16 tpy carbon monoxide; 7.72 tpy nitrogen oxides; and 0.30 tpy sulfur dioxide. The facility is located in Morgantown, Monongalia County, WV. Please fax, mail or e-mail any comments on the draft permit to the address below, postmarked on or before June 13, 2005. Comments may include a request for a public hearing. A hearing may be held if DEP finds a significant degree of public interest, or if the hearing would clarify issues. You can view the draft permit, application, and, if available, a fact sheet, all at no cost, at the office below. Call or e-mail to make an appointment. If you would like a copy of any information, copying and mailing costs may apply. DEP Division of Air Quality 601 57th Street, Southeast Charleston, WV 25304 Contact Jerry Williams Phone: (304) 926-0499, ext. 1223 Fax: (304) 926-0478 E-mail: jwilliams(a)wvdep.org You are receiving this because you signed up to receive the mailings. If you wish to be removed from this list, go to the link below to remove your name. I realize the comment period has past for the second notice, but I think it is a good idea to be aware of this as it just adds to the over-all accumulative concentrations of air pollution. _____ This mailbox protected from junk email by MailFrontier Desktop from MailFrontier, Inc. http://info.mailfrontier.com

1 0

RE: [BULK] - [MVCAC] Draft Permit and Evalutation-Fact sheet for Mylan available
by Kotcon, James 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

Thanks Jonathon. The Fact Sheet confirms my previous message. The emissions rate for NOx is approximately 0.10 lb/mmBTU and the only monitoring is to monitor fuel usage and a monthly visual inspection for opacity (look to see if there is visible smoke). The PM10 emissions would make Mylan the fourth largest emitter in Mon County, behind Fort Martin, MEA and Consol's Blacksville prep plant. The application may have some interesting stuff. Even though Mylan proposes "Low-NOx boilers", I think better emissions control is achievable, and it sure seems like better monitoring is needed. JBK Dr. James Kotcon Interim Program Leader - Organic Agriculture USDA-CSREES Mailstop 2220, Washington, DC 20250 phone: 202-401-4879 Cell: 304-319-2244 fax: 202-401-4888 for overnight carrier: 800 9th St., SW, Room 3344 Washington, DC 20024 -----Original Message----- From: mvcac-bounces(a)cheat.org [mailto:mvcac-bounces@cheat.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rosenbaum Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 11:09 AM To: mvcac(a)cheat.org Subject: [BULK] - [MVCAC] Draft Permit and Evalutation-Fact sheet for Mylan available I put both the Draft Permit and Evaluation/Fact Sheet for Mylan's proposed changes at http://freesoftwarepc.com/Members/fspc/mylan/ for download. Jill Harris was prompt about sending me the Fact Sheet by email, and will be mailing me a copy of the application for Mylan Pharmaceuticals. Jonathan _______________________________________________ MVCAC mailing list MVCAC(a)cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac

1 0

Draft Permit and Evalutation-Fact sheet for Mylan available
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

I put both the Draft Permit and Evaluation/Fact Sheet for Mylan's proposed changes at http://freesoftwarepc.com/Members/fspc/mylan/ for download. Jill Harris was prompt about sending me the Fact Sheet by email, and will be mailing me a copy of the application for Mylan Pharmaceuticals. Jonathan

1 0

RE: [BULK] - Re: [MVCAC] Mylan's proposed polliution increase
by Kotcon, James 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

According to the EPA's Toxics release Inventory, Mylan emitted 500,000 pounds per year of dichloromethane through the early 1990's, but reduced this to zero by 1997. They have not reported any emissions of toxics since. It is not clear if this is simply a reporting gap, or whether Mylan actually practices zero-emissions manufacturing. JBK Dr. James Kotcon Interim Program Leader - Organic Agriculture USDA-CSREES Mailstop 2220, Washington, DC 20250 phone: 202-401-4879 Cell: 304-319-2244 fax: 202-401-4888 for overnight carrier: 800 9th St., SW, Room 3344 Washington, DC 20024 -----Original Message----- From: mvcac-bounces(a)cheat.org [mailto:mvcac-bounces@cheat.org] On Behalf Of Dennis and Marcia Groce Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 6:10 AM To: mvcac(a)cheat.org Subject: [BULK] - Re: [MVCAC] Mylan's proposed polliution increase I agree that the sheer quantity of particulate increase is troubling, especially in that location, but I would also want to know more about the content of that particulate. Mylan is dealing with some exotic stuff over there. I find it hard to believe they are sending much of their special chemicals up the stack, but even a little of that can go a long way when it comes to all sorts of reactions - especially in the young and elderly. Asthma could be just one result - and perhaps not the most serious. As Karen pointed out, given the quantity and the location, this should be given a lot of attention. Is Mylan the "dirty, not-so-little-any-longer secret of North Hills"? Very interesting to see how the public officials deal with the goose that lays the golden egg. At 11:04 PM 6/14/2005, Karen Woodfork wrote: >According to my calculations, the amount of increase in particulate matter >proposed by Mylan is approximately 8.5% of that proposed by Longview. >However, Mylan is in a major population center - literally right next to >an elementary school and a residential neighborhood and within a short >distance of two hospitals and two nursing homes. > >Below is the info on the proposal and how to comment: > >--- >Notice of Comment Period >Department of Environmental Protection > >This mailing is to advise the public that we have prepared a draft air >quality >permit for Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. to modify and operate a pharmaceutical >manufacturing facility located in Morgantown, WV. > >Permit Number: R13-2068 > >Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc will increase the potential to discharge these >regulated air pollutants and associated amounts: 27.1 tons per year nitrogen >oxide; 53.6 tpy carbon monoxide; 0.17 tpy sulfur dioxide; 2.8 tpy volatile >organic compounds; and 41.3 tpy particulate matter. The facility is >located in >Morgantown, Monongalia County, WV. > >Please fax, mail or e-mail any comments on the draft permit to the address >below, postmarked on or before June 24, 2005. Comments may include a request >for a public hearing. A hearing may be held if DEP finds a significant degree >of public interest, or if the hearing would clarify issues. > >You can view the draft permit, application, and, if available, a fact sheet, >all at no cost, at the office below. Call or e-mail to make an >appointment. If >you would like a copy of any information, copying and mailing costs may apply. >DEP >Division of Air Quality >601 57th Street, Southeast >Charleston, WV 25304 >Contact Jill Harris >Phone: (304) 926-0499, ext. 1224 >Fax: (304) 926-0478 >E-mail: jharris(a)wvdep.org >_______________________________________________ >MVCAC mailing list >MVCAC(a)cheat.org >http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac _______________________________________________ MVCAC mailing list MVCAC(a)cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac

1 0

RE: [BULK] - [MVCAC] Mylan's proposed polliution increase
by Kotcon, James 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

P.S. The Mylan case would be a good example of how Morgantown could improve air quality, expand economic activity, AND expand investment and jobs for construction workers. More pollution control would mean increased construction and investment. And Mylan is doing well enough financially that they could afford it. It might be worth asking our "friends" at the Affiliated Construction Trades if they would join us on this one. JBK Dr. James Kotcon Interim Program Leader - Organic Agriculture USDA-CSREES Mailstop 2220, Washington, DC 20250 phone: 202-401-4879 Cell: 304-319-2244 fax: 202-401-4888 for overnight carrier: 800 9th St., SW, Room 3344 Washington, DC 20024 -----Original Message----- From: mvcac-bounces(a)cheat.org [mailto:mvcac-bounces@cheat.org] On Behalf Of Karen Woodfork Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 11:04 PM To: mvcac(a)cheat.org Subject: [BULK] - [MVCAC] Mylan's proposed polliution increase According to my calculations, the amount of increase in particulate matter proposed by Mylan is approximately 8.5% of that proposed by Longview. However, Mylan is in a major population center - literally right next to an elementary school and a residential neighborhood and within a short distance of two hospitals and two nursing homes. Below is the info on the proposal and how to comment: --- Notice of Comment Period Department of Environmental Protection This mailing is to advise the public that we have prepared a draft air quality permit for Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. to modify and operate a pharmaceutical manufacturing facility located in Morgantown, WV. Permit Number: R13-2068 Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc will increase the potential to discharge these regulated air pollutants and associated amounts: 27.1 tons per year nitrogen oxide; 53.6 tpy carbon monoxide; 0.17 tpy sulfur dioxide; 2.8 tpy volatile organic compounds; and 41.3 tpy particulate matter. The facility is located in Morgantown, Monongalia County, WV. Please fax, mail or e-mail any comments on the draft permit to the address below, postmarked on or before June 24, 2005. Comments may include a request for a public hearing. A hearing may be held if DEP finds a significant degree of public interest, or if the hearing would clarify issues. You can view the draft permit, application, and, if available, a fact sheet, all at no cost, at the office below. Call or e-mail to make an appointment. If you would like a copy of any information, copying and mailing costs may apply. DEP Division of Air Quality 601 57th Street, Southeast Charleston, WV 25304 Contact Jill Harris Phone: (304) 926-0499, ext. 1224 Fax: (304) 926-0478 E-mail: jharris(a)wvdep.org _______________________________________________ MVCAC mailing list MVCAC(a)cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac

1 0

RE: [BULK] - [MVCAC] Mylan's proposed pollution increase
by Kotcon, James 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

I was unable to open the Draft Permit and Evaluation at the DEP website (go to www.wvdep.org and click on offices, then air quality, then public notices, then NSR, then 2005). It may be a problem with the file, since I could open other permits. You may want to call the staff engineer directly to get more info. This might be a good "case study" for the air training on Sunday. Could someone print out a copy of each and bring it, preferably with a laptop computer? The issue should be "what does Mylan want to do and can they do it cleaner?" What kinds of pollution control are proposed, and are there better technologies? That is a fairly large pollution source to put in next to a school. It would approximately triple the existing emissions from the 3 natural gas fired boilers already there (according to their current operating permit (Title V) available at: http://www.wvdep.org/Docs/8160_R30-06100033%20FMP.pdf Based on the existing permit, the NOx emission rate is around 0.1 lb/MMBTU, which is slightly higher than the BACT of 0.07 lb/MMBTU for a coal-fired plant with Selective Catalytic Reduction (e.g., Longview). Whether a natural gas engine is technically able to meet more stringent NOx standards than a coal-fired plant is a question worth answering. But an additional issue is how those emissions limits are being monitored. In the current permit, the only "monitoring" is to record the amount of natural gas being used, and calculating an estimate of how much NOx is formed. For a source this large, next to a school, a "Continuous Emissions Monitoring System" (CEMS) should be required for all NOx sources. JBK P.S. The DEP webpage also lists for comment an air permit for WVU Hospitals for 2 emergency generators. These would also emit NOx at about 3 tpy each. Dr. James Kotcon Interim Program Leader - Organic Agriculture USDA-CSREES Mailstop 2220, Washington, DC 20250 phone: 202-401-4879 Cell: 304-319-2244 fax: 202-401-4888 for overnight carrier: 800 9th St., SW, Room 3344 Washington, DC 20024 -----Original Message----- From: mvcac-bounces(a)cheat.org [mailto:mvcac-bounces@cheat.org] On Behalf Of Karen Woodfork Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 11:04 PM To: mvcac(a)cheat.org Subject: [BULK] - [MVCAC] Mylan's proposed polliution increase According to my calculations, the amount of increase in particulate matter proposed by Mylan is approximately 8.5% of that proposed by Longview. However, Mylan is in a major population center - literally right next to an elementary school and a residential neighborhood and within a short distance of two hospitals and two nursing homes. Below is the info on the proposal and how to comment: --- Notice of Comment Period Department of Environmental Protection This mailing is to advise the public that we have prepared a draft air quality permit for Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. to modify and operate a pharmaceutical manufacturing facility located in Morgantown, WV. Permit Number: R13-2068 Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc will increase the potential to discharge these regulated air pollutants and associated amounts: 27.1 tons per year nitrogen oxide; 53.6 tpy carbon monoxide; 0.17 tpy sulfur dioxide; 2.8 tpy volatile organic compounds; and 41.3 tpy particulate matter. The facility is located in Morgantown, Monongalia County, WV. Please fax, mail or e-mail any comments on the draft permit to the address below, postmarked on or before June 24, 2005. Comments may include a request for a public hearing. A hearing may be held if DEP finds a significant degree of public interest, or if the hearing would clarify issues. You can view the draft permit, application, and, if available, a fact sheet, all at no cost, at the office below. Call or e-mail to make an appointment. If you would like a copy of any information, copying and mailing costs may apply. DEP Division of Air Quality 601 57th Street, Southeast Charleston, WV 25304 Contact Jill Harris Phone: (304) 926-0499, ext. 1224 Fax: (304) 926-0478 E-mail: jharris(a)wvdep.org _______________________________________________ MVCAC mailing list MVCAC(a)cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac

1 0

Re: [MVCAC] Mylan's proposed polliution increase
by Dennis and Marcia Groce 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

I agree that the sheer quantity of particulate increase is troubling, especially in that location, but I would also want to know more about the content of that particulate. Mylan is dealing with some exotic stuff over there. I find it hard to believe they are sending much of their special chemicals up the stack, but even a little of that can go a long way when it comes to all sorts of reactions - especially in the young and elderly. Asthma could be just one result - and perhaps not the most serious. As Karen pointed out, given the quantity and the location, this should be given a lot of attention. Is Mylan the "dirty, not-so-little-any-longer secret of North Hills"? Very interesting to see how the public officials deal with the goose that lays the golden egg. At 11:04 PM 6/14/2005, Karen Woodfork wrote: >According to my calculations, the amount of increase in particulate matter >proposed by Mylan is approximately 8.5% of that proposed by Longview. >However, Mylan is in a major population center - literally right next to >an elementary school and a residential neighborhood and within a short >distance of two hospitals and two nursing homes. > >Below is the info on the proposal and how to comment: > >--- >Notice of Comment Period >Department of Environmental Protection > >This mailing is to advise the public that we have prepared a draft air >quality >permit for Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. to modify and operate a pharmaceutical >manufacturing facility located in Morgantown, WV. > >Permit Number: R13-2068 > >Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc will increase the potential to discharge these >regulated air pollutants and associated amounts: 27.1 tons per year nitrogen >oxide; 53.6 tpy carbon monoxide; 0.17 tpy sulfur dioxide; 2.8 tpy volatile >organic compounds; and 41.3 tpy particulate matter. The facility is >located in >Morgantown, Monongalia County, WV. > >Please fax, mail or e-mail any comments on the draft permit to the address >below, postmarked on or before June 24, 2005. Comments may include a request >for a public hearing. A hearing may be held if DEP finds a significant degree >of public interest, or if the hearing would clarify issues. > >You can view the draft permit, application, and, if available, a fact sheet, >all at no cost, at the office below. Call or e-mail to make an >appointment. If >you would like a copy of any information, copying and mailing costs may apply. >DEP >Division of Air Quality >601 57th Street, Southeast >Charleston, WV 25304 >Contact Jill Harris >Phone: (304) 926-0499, ext. 1224 >Fax: (304) 926-0478 >E-mail: jharris(a)wvdep.org >_______________________________________________ >MVCAC mailing list >MVCAC(a)cheat.org >http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac

1 0

Mylan's proposed polliution increase
by Karen Woodfork 15 Jun '05

15 Jun '05

According to my calculations, the amount of increase in particulate matter proposed by Mylan is approximately 8.5% of that proposed by Longview. However, Mylan is in a major population center - literally right next to an elementary school and a residential neighborhood and within a short distance of two hospitals and two nursing homes. Below is the info on the proposal and how to comment: --- Notice of Comment Period Department of Environmental Protection This mailing is to advise the public that we have prepared a draft air quality permit for Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. to modify and operate a pharmaceutical manufacturing facility located in Morgantown, WV. Permit Number: R13-2068 Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc will increase the potential to discharge these regulated air pollutants and associated amounts: 27.1 tons per year nitrogen oxide; 53.6 tpy carbon monoxide; 0.17 tpy sulfur dioxide; 2.8 tpy volatile organic compounds; and 41.3 tpy particulate matter. The facility is located in Morgantown, Monongalia County, WV. Please fax, mail or e-mail any comments on the draft permit to the address below, postmarked on or before June 24, 2005. Comments may include a request for a public hearing. A hearing may be held if DEP finds a significant degree of public interest, or if the hearing would clarify issues. You can view the draft permit, application, and, if available, a fact sheet, all at no cost, at the office below. Call or e-mail to make an appointment. If you would like a copy of any information, copying and mailing costs may apply. DEP Division of Air Quality 601 57th Street, Southeast Charleston, WV 25304 Contact Jill Harris Phone: (304) 926-0499, ext. 1224 Fax: (304) 926-0478 E-mail: jharris(a)wvdep.org

2 1

How to monitor DEP public comment periods by email
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 14 Jun '05

14 Jun '05

If you want to monitor DEP's public comment periods, you should join their Mailing List at http://www.wvdep.org/MailingLists.cfm . You can also monitor their archives from the same page. I couldn't help but notice the one pertaining to Mylan at http://www.wvdep.org/MLists2/Archive/index.cfm?ListID=1&MessageID=1195&Type… .. 27.1 tons per year nitrogen oxide; 53.6 tpy carbon monoxide; 0.17 tpy sulfur dioxide; 2.8 tpy volatile organic compounds; and 41.3 tpy particulate matter. Jonathan

1 0

Air Quality Training Session
by Duane330＠aol.com 14 Jun '05

14 Jun '05

ANNOUNCEMENT AIR QUALITY TRAINING SESSION SUNDAY, JUNE 19, 2005 [THIS COMING SUNDAY!] CHEAT LAKE FIRE HALL, TIME: 9 AM TO 12 NOON. WV ROUTE 857 NORTH FROM CHEAT LAKE EXIT ON I-68 Learning Objectives: 1) To become sufficiently knowledgeable that participants can feel comfortable serving as public spokespeople, participate in a speakers bureau, or get interviewed by reporters. 2) To identify gaps and develop plans for an expanded training session later this year. Agenda: 9:00 Introductions 9:10 Basics: What are air pollutants? How are they created? What health effects do they cause? 9:30 Legal: How are air pollutants regulated? How are standards set? How are they monitored and enforced? 10:00 How are pollutants controlled? Common technologies for power plants. 10:20 Break 10:30 What can be done about it? Public involvement processes. Making Effective Comments. 11:00 Frequently Asked Questions 11:30 Putting Knowledge into Practice: Case Study: Practice reviewing a permit. 11:50 Wrap-up and Evaluation. What needs are still unmet? How should we meet them? Noon Adjourn Homework Assignment. Each person registering should bring a list of questions for the FAQ session? The most frequent questions will be covered first. NOTE: Please inform Duane Nichols [duane330(a)aol.com] by this Friday at 5 pm if you have questions or plan to attend on this coming Sunday morning. The MonValley Clean Air Coalition, the Cheat Lake Environment and Recreation Association, and the Sierra Club are participating to offer this training by Jim Kotcon. The Cheat Lake Fire Hall is located approximately one mile north of the Cheat Lake Exit of I-68 on the left side of WV Route 857. [The training session will be upstairs in the Fire Hall. Take care to avoid blocking the access of the fire equipment on the lower level.]

1 0

Monday: 6:30 treats, 7 pm meeting
by Duane330＠aol.com 10 Jun '05

10 Jun '05

See message below for Monday, June 13th. Duane

1 0

Concrete Batch Plant--Bakers Ridge Road
by Duane330＠aol.com 09 Jun '05

09 Jun '05

============================================================ Thursday, June 2, 2005 @ 3:43 PM ============================================================ MORGANTOWN-- A public meeting on a Monongalia County concrete batch plant has been set for June 9 at the Stewartstown Community Building. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. Staff from the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection's Division of Air Quality will be on hand to discuss the Alcon, LLC. general permit registration application G50-B042, and to take comments from the public on the proposal. The agency will consider written and oral comments on the permit modification before making a final permit decision. The general permit registration application to construct and operate a concrete batch plant in Morgantown, W.Va. was received April 6, 2005. DAQ's preliminary evaluation of Alcon's application indicates that the proposed construction will meet all applicable air quality requirements. All written comments on the proposed batch plant must be received by the close of the hearing on June 9. All comments received will be considered by the DAQ director in a final decision on the proposed construction. Copies of the general permit registration application are available for public review at the following addresses. DEP/DAQ North Central Regional Office 2031 Pleasant Valley Rd., Ste. 1 Fairmont, WV 26554 Telephone: (304) 788-1641 Hours M-F 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., holidays excluded West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection Division of Air Quality 601 57-th Street Charleston, WV 25304 Telephone: (304) 926-0499 ext. 1223 Hours M-F 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., holidays excluded Directions to the Stewartstown Community Building are as follows: From I-68; take Exit 7 toward WV-705/Airport/Pierpont Road. Turn left onto CR-857 South for 1.1 miles. CR-857 South becomes US-119 North for 3 miles. Turn right onto Stewartstown Road/CR-65 for 2.3 miles. Stay straight to go onto Stewartstown Road/CR-6/5 for 0.5 miles.

2 1

MVCAC June 13th meeting
by Duane330＠aol.com 03 Jun '05

03 Jun '05

NOTE: The next regular meeting of the MVCAC will be held on Monday, June 13th at 7 pm, at the home of Larry Schwab on Collins Ferry Road. Please plan to attend. Duane

1 0

please unsubscribe me
by Christian Schunn 01 Jun '05

01 Jun '05

please unsubscribe me thx

1 0

Pastureland Parkway Meeting Minutes - Accommodation
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 27 May '05

27 May '05

I'm forwarding the minutes from a special meeting in Morgantown for the Pastureland Parkway that focused on community input for the accommodation of bikes and pedestrians in the project. Bill Reger-Nash, Citizens Advisory Committee for MPO, who arranged the meeting, submitted these minutes attached in PDF format. I sent my own minutes to the monbikeclub and monnbg yahoogroups for people who would like my perspective. Good contacts who were present at the meeting include: William Robinson <wrobinson(a)dot.state.wv.us> - Community Development Specialist for WVDOT (I recommend sending input about ideas for the Pastureland Parkway to him since he works directly with the Department of Transportation and is interesting in firmly establishing bicycle/pedestrian planning within the WVDOT. I have his phone number if anyone wants to call him). Rob Pack <rpack(a)hsc.wvu.ed> - he is working with Bill Reger-Nash on developing a comprehensive master plan for bike/pedestrian accommodation needs that will be presented to the Greater Morgantown MPO. Bill doesn't have an email address, but I'm sure you can give him a phone call. For comments you send directly to William, I recommend cc Rob as well. Chet Parsons <parsons(a)morgantown.com> - Director of MPO. He is the chief engineer at MPO, and needs all the input you can give him that will help him clearly understand and define bicyclist/pedestrian needs in the town of Morgantown. Though the CAC for MPO will ultimately present everyones ideas to the MPO, it wouldn't hurt to email or call him about your concerns since my impression was he really needs to be filled in about more details, for instance, statistics, the actual bicycling community in Morgantown, successful bikeway plans which Morgantown could be modeled after, etc. http://plantogether.org is the main website for MPO. Jonathan Rosenbaum __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

1 0

Urgent message Re: Mon. National Forest
by Duane330＠aol.com 26 May '05

26 May '05

Your Action is Urgently Needed NOW -- to Stop the Monongahela National Forest from destroying a historic recreational trail and critical species habitat --along the beautiful Blackwater River, in the heart of the West Virginia Highlands! Comment Deadline May 31, 2005 The U.S. Forest Service must not be allowed to subsidize private loggers by allowing our most scenic public lands to be destroyed for private gain. Your public comment is urgently needed NOW -- as the Forest Service begins the Environmental Impact Study of this dangerous proposal. _Click here to send an e-mail to the Forest Service._ (http://www.saveblackwater.org/May-Scoping_Comments.htm) _Click here to send an e-mail to the Forest Service._ (http://www.saveblackwater.org/May-Scoping_Comments.htm) Please forward this e-mail to a friend. Please comment now!

1 0

media committee meeting monday may 23 at 7:30 Blu Moose
by Cindy O'Brien 22 May '05

22 May '05

since Duane listed me as the chair of this committee and asked that the committees meet this Monday I'd like to set the time and place so those who can meet will come! Since I will not be able to attend the june MVCAC meeting I am hoping one of the other members of the media committee will come Monday and attend the general meeting. If you are on the media committtee, would you please respond to this message (to me at cobandyo(a)verizon.net) so I have your e-mail address? thanks, cindy o'brien

1 0

Alternative Energy Conference
by Linda Shuster 20 May '05

20 May '05

WVU is sponsoring an alternative energy conference at the Radisson at the end of June. It will focus on the use of wood waste, and it appears to be open to the public. You can find more details here: http://www.nis.wvu.edu/2005_Releases/forestry_conference.htm

1 0

MVCAC committees
by Duane330＠aol.com 18 May '05

18 May '05

MONVALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION Greetings to all participants and friends of the MVCAC. We are trying hard to get a set of committees off and running. Below you will find a draft list of committees and people who may be available to participate. A suggested Chair person is noted. These assignments can be changed should the committee recommend otherwise or if work loads are in conflict with the tasks involved. Please feel free to contact other members of your committee and initiate activities based upon our recent meetings. Minutes of the last two meetings were distributed earlier today by Linda Shuster. Education/Outreach/Media Committee - Cindy O'Brien (Chair), Karen Woodfork, Sandy Cress, Jim Evans Speaker's Bureau - Larry Harris, Deb Fulton, Bill Wonderlin (Chair), Jim Kotcon, Larry Schwab Legal Committee - Bill Wonderlin, Duane Nichols, Jim Kotcon (Chair) Monitoring (air quality) Committee - Karen Woodfork (Co-Chair), Larry Schwab, Dennis Groce, Duane Nichols (Co-Chair) Longview Committee - Jarrett Jamison, Paula Hunt (Chair), Donna Weems, et. al. Advisory Board & Executive Committee: Duane Nichols, Convenor, Paula Hunt, Bill Wonderlin, Jim Kotcon, Linda Shuster, Secretary, Deb Fulton, Treasurer. DUE TO SCHEDULING CONFLICTS, THE NEXT REGULAR GENERAL MEETING OF THE MVCAC WILL BE HELD AT 7 PM ON JUNE 13TH, AT THE ST. PAULS LUTHERAN CHURCH, IF IT IS AVAILABLE. I will be out of town until May 25th. Thanks, Duane

1 0

Support for Our Arguments
by Linda Shuster 18 May '05

18 May '05

Check out this editorial in the Charleston Gazette online. http://www.wvgazette.com/section/Editorials/2005051711/

1 0

MVCAC Minutes
by Linda Shuster 18 May '05

18 May '05

Please find the minutes of the April 11 and May 9 MVCAC minutes attached in pdf form. Linda

1 0

Committees
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 17 May '05

17 May '05

I'm sending this out on behalf of Linda Shuster. - Jonathan --------------------- Below is a list of MVCAC committees as of today. These are not set in stone, and others are welcome to join a committee. However, resignation by those listed is not permitted. Convenor - Duane Nichols Treasurer - Deb Fulton Secretary - Linda Shuster Education/Outreach/Media Committee - Cindy O'Brien, Karen Woodfork, Sandy Cress, Jim Evans Speaker's Bureau - Larry H., Deb Fulton, Bill Wonderlin, Jim Kotcon, Larry Schwab Legal Committee - Bill Wonderlin, Duane Nichols, Jim Kotcon Monitoring (air quality) Committee - Karen Woodfork, Larry Schwab, Dennis Groce Longview Committee - Jarrett Jamison, Paula Hunt Executive Committee (for dealing with emergency issues) - current and former convenors: Duane Nichols, Paula Hunt, Bill Wonderlin, Jim Kotcon, Linda Shuster

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

MVCAC