MVCAC

mvcac@lists.osenergy.org

1014 discussions

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

25 Oct '21

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

1 0

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

22 Oct '21

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

1 0

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

21 Oct '21

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

1 0

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

19 Oct '21

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

1 0

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

15 Oct '21

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

1 0

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

12 Oct '21

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

2 1

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

07 Oct '21

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

1 0

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

04 Oct '21

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

1 0

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

29 Sep '21

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

1 0

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

24 Sep '21

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

1 0

← Newer
1
...
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
...
102
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

MVCAC