March 2011 - EC - lists.cheatlakeclear.org

Refuting the case for shale gas being better for global warming
by Beth Little 27 Mar '11

27 Mar '11

http://marcelluseffect.blogspot.com/2011/03/shale-gas-wells-have-bigger-carb on.html

1 0

Fw: New Record for German Renewable Energy in 2010
by Jim Sconyers 25 Mar '11

25 Mar '11

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Edward Mainland <emainland(a)COMCAST.NET> To: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Sent: Fri, March 25, 2011 2:16:34 PM Subject: New Record for German Renewable Energy in 2010 New Record for German Renewable Energy in 2010 One-Quarter Million New Solar-Electric Systems Installed New World Record: 7,400 MW of Solar Photovoltaics Installed in One Year Renewable Electricity Penetration More than 30% of Supply on February 7th New Renewables Near 17% of Electricity Supply Renewable Generation Greater than Natural Gas--Closing in on Nuclear March 24, 2011 By Paul Gipe As the nuclear reactor accident at the Fukushima Daiichi plant continues to dominate the world's attention, Germany has quietly broken more renewable energy records. The conservative government of Chancellor Angela Merkel, struggling to stay ahead of public attitudes toward nuclear power in the run-up to regional elections, issued its annual report on the contribution of renewable energy to the German energy market in 2010. Wind turbines, hydroelectric plants, solar cells, and biogas digesters now provide nearly 17% of Germany's electricity. Meanwhile, the German network agency (Bundesnetzagentur) issued its final update on the installation of solar photovoltaics (solar PV) in 2010. The results are nothing short of startling and will add fuel to the heated debate about how countries such as Japan can meet their electricity needs without reliance on nuclear power. In the immediate aftermath of the Japanese nuclear accident, Germany's Merkel closed two reactors permanently, and another five temporarily. She also called on her government to revisit its controversial decision to extend the life of its aging reactors. The reactors at Fukushima Daiichi are 40 years old and their license to operate had been extended by the Japanese government. The reports on the rapid growth of renewable energy in Germany may give Merkel's government the cover it needs to reverse direction on nuclear power, and by doing so reverse its faltering political fortunes. Germany uses an advanced system of feed-in tariffs to pay for renewable energy generation, and has an aggressive target of meeting 39% of its electricity supply with renewable energy by 2020. Its system of advanced renewable tariffs has enabled Germany to exceed its 2010 target of 12.5% by a wide margin. New Renewables Near 17% of Electricity Supply in 2010 The German Ministry for the Environment and Reactor Safety reports that in 2010 renewable energy generated more than 100 TWh (billion kilowatt-hours) of electricity, providing nearly 17% of the 600 TWh of supply. Wind turbines and biomass plants delivered more than 70% of renewable generation. Biogas plants powered with methane from manure alone generated nearly 13 TWh. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp In 2010 renewables generated more electricity in Germany than gas-fired power plants--nearly as much as hard coal--and are fast approaching the contribution of nuclear power. 7,400 MW of Solar PV Installed in One Year Doubling their previous record, the German solar PV industry installed 7,400 MW from nearly one-quarter million individual systems in 2010, according to the finial report by the Bundesnetzagentur. In December alone, Germans installed more than 1,000 MW of solar PV, enough solar capacity to generate 1 TWh of electricity under German conditions. While they represent only half that installed in June 2010, the December installations were 50% greater than total solar PV installed in the USA in 2010 and as much as that rumored to have been installed in Japan last year. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Nearly 700 MW from some 100,000 systems were installed in a size range typical of that installed by German homeowners. An astounding 3,700 MW from more than 135,000 systems were installed in a size range representative of that installed by farmers and other small businesses. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Another 1,700 MW were installed in a size class characteristic of small businesses and large industrial rooftops. Large, multi-megawatt systems comprised 1,400 MW of capacity or nearly one-fifth of total capacity installed in 2010. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Renewable Electricity More than 30% of Supply on February 7th A further sign that renewable energy has come of age as a commercial generating technology, certainly in Germany, is that penetration of wind and solar reached more than 30% of supply on February 7, 2010, according to data posted publicly by Germany's electricity transmission exchange, EEX. The exchange posts online the amount of capacity of conventional generation, wind generation, and solar PV generation delivered to the grid by time of day. On Monday, February 7, 2011, the combined real-time wind and solar generation varied from a high of 32% of supply at midnight to a low of 18% of supply at sunrise. Solar PV generation delivered more than 8,000 MW for the two-hour period from just before noon until 2:00 pm, reaching a peak of nearly 8,500 MW at noon. During the same time period, conventional sources contributed 50,000 MW and wind delivered another 10,000 MW to the network. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp There is 16,500 MW of solar PV capacity now on line in Germany. Solar insolation is weakest in mid winter, and highest in mid summer. The solar industry's February 7th performance bodes well for this coming summer, when solar PV can be expected to break new records. In other observations: • PV produced 13% of supply at noon on February 7, 2011, • Wind reached nearly 1/3 of generation at midnight, • Wind and solar's combined 18,500 MW at noon met 29% of demand, • PV was producing 1/2 of its nameplate in mid winter, and • Wind was producing near its total installed capacity. With the Japanese nuclear calamity fresh in everyone's mind and upcoming elections staring the government in the face, the success of Germany's rapid development of renewable energy may give Chancellor Merkel's conservative government the flexibility it needs to weather the nuclear crisis. It would not be surprising to find the government proposing an even more aggressive pace of renewable energy development than that seen in 2010. -End- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

1 0

Fwd: Nuclear: What You Need to Know
by Paul Wilson 25 Mar '11

25 Mar '11

fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Architecture 2030 <info(a)architecture2030.org> Date: Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:00 PM Subject: Nuclear: What You Need to Know To: pjgrunt(a)gmail.com [image: Architecture 2030]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=0mv6EWcdLZj68g%2Fxr8W…> Architecture 2030<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=bB6PrmvnE%2BKSPoG%2BM…> about us <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=XK247inBtnFAi0Vjq1VkP…> hot topics <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=AtBcJbrn1cvBGvzY2TNYO…> e-news <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=1m9VccphoiGb3sGdZ2JWn…> publications <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=mAch5C7c%2BkCmgmdyWw2…> videos<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=RMqR%2Fb0xggbM8DO%2BK…> faq <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=EYDrB7%2FHfoZWxFmwkaE…> contact <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=1vYho2%2FhSEvvnSmsiAj…> Originally Released: March 22, 2011 Subscribe/ Unsubscribe<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=ymF9qvOWZfKrVpq6tskZw…> Printer Friendly Version<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=6CP4RdW8swpOiOMio9jtl…> Nuclear Energy: Fact Check How Much Does the United States Use? With the nuclear reactor crisis in Japan continuing to unfold, an important discussion has been taking place in the U.S. about the current and future role of nuclear energy and our aging nuclear reactors. We have noticed that in the media, there is sometimes a gap between what is being stated as fact, and what is actually fact. For example, prominent U.S. officials have stated recently, *"We get 20 percent of our energy right now in the United States from nuclear power."* In fact, nuclear power is responsible for 8.6% of total U.S. energy consumption. Twenty point seven percent of total U.S. *electricity consumption*, including electrical energy generation and transmission losses, is attributed to nuclear power. The 20.7%, or 8.39 QBtu, is made up of 2.19 QBtu of electricity delivered to the place of use, and 6.2 QBtu of energy losses from generation (waste heat) and transmission. The following graph illustrates total U.S. energy consumption (delivered energy and electrical energy losses from generation and transmission), total U.S. electricity consumption, and the total U.S. energy consumption attributed to nuclear power: <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=vKNEdO6maKsuEPi03uxhr…> *Assumptions:* Average U.S. nuclear plant efficiency is calculated at 32.6% (Source: EIA [3]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=GQYN8E27vJWR2zEqR13po…> [4]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=oRB3qayuB%2FG6NL4Rw6A…>), and transmission losses at 6.5% (Source:EIA [5]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=ATry0JfAUjlPoKeFXCdPG…>). ------------------------------ More to Know About U.S. Nuclear Energy: - There are 104 nuclear reactors currently operating in the U.S. (Source: NEI) [1]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=nh%2FY8RvUqNRDBIiHgR1…> - The 104 reactors have a net summer capacity of 100,755 MW. (Source: Architecture 2030 & NEI) [2]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=8kcxrHt3lt1DZly%2BTp%…> - Nuclear energy provides 3.1% of total U.S. delivered energy; 8.6% of total U.S. energy consumption is attributed to nuclear energy. (Source: Architecture 2030 & EIA) [3]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=aWwl2SWKud4xQwGUw%2FG…> [4]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=z6Ne4HdBBrdR3nPm3HyqC…> [5]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=jQmRUVjKBqW%2BNKNkuHB…> - Nuclear energy provides 17.1% of total U.S. delivered electricity; 20.7% of total U.S. electricity consumption is attributed to nuclear energy (Source: Architecture 2030 & EIA) [3]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=oomq%2BcnKOIXteMDssme…> [4]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=4YY1Ue31fMQ761W0b%2FU…> [5]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=W%2BAqFUnlSdjhmA7YmIl…> - It takes approximately thirty-seven 1000MW nuclear reactors to produce one Quad (quadrillion Btu) of delivered energy. (Source: EIA, Table 6.1.2) [6]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=%2FadmSaV1WU4uLSLOiyQ…> - The last nuclear reactor to be built in the U.S. was Watts Bar 1 in Tennessee in June 1996 (1,123 MW). (Source: NEI) [1]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=C%2FSCBhfW0TcZIUuNwfH…> - Of the 104 nuclear reactors in the U.S., 4.8% are older than 40 years, 38.5% are older than 35 years, and over half are older than 30 years. (Source: Architecture 2030 & EIA, Table 3) [7]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=Nd5z0X0vb2K2fQHpFT84P…> - Nuclear reactors in the U.S. are licensed to operate for 40 years. Owners can file with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for operating extensions. (Source EIA) [8]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=wKOyglcv%2FuA0Rr4ok1u…> - It costs approximately $300-500 million to decommission a nuclear plant. (Source: NEI) [9]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=ZSN%2B2z6uHODW2LdyfrX…> - There are 13 potential reactors that are currently under review for a new commercial license. (Source: EIA) [10]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=SGjWqBw0UL0OdkwHBc%2B…> - The EIA estimates that the initial capital cost (overnight cost) of a new reactor is $5,339 per kW, or $5.3 billion for a 1000 MW reactor. Financing cost, long construction periods, and escalating costs can push the total cost well above the overnight cost. (Source: EIA, Table 2) [11]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=RM4MhUL92qmGYjQpzAtAq…> - Subsidies for ongoing nuclear reactors range from 0.74 - 4.16 c/kWh for investor owned utilities (IOUs) and 1.53 - 5.77 c/kWh for publicly owned utilities (POUs). Subsidies for new reactors range from 5.01 - 11.42 c/kWh for IOUs and 4.20 - 8.68 c/kWh for POUs. At the higher end of these ranges, the subsidies exceed the value of the energy produced. The subsidies come from a wide range of sources: federal loan guarantees (Title 17 of the Energy Policy Act, EPACT, 2005), accelerated depreciation, subsidized borrowing costs, property tax abatements, depletion allowances for uranium mining, under-priced water for cooling, and production tax credits. In addition, the federal government helps significantly with security, risk, waste, and decommissioning management. (Source: UCS) [12]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=TuEEztkQPgAlD%2FAW3WA…> - The IAEA estimates that approximately 20 percent of nuclear reactors around the world are currently operating in areas of significant seismic activity. (Source: IAEA) [13]<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=znxVnMMAu8O8KI7t9Utyw…> ------------------------------ *Reported by Architecture 2030 Researchers:* *Vincent Martinez* *Director of Research* *Francesca Desmarais* *Principal Researcher* Upcoming talks with Ed Mazria: Washington, DC – April 18 AIA DC / CUA Lecture<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=JEKx4zy%2Fx7cuedfwozK…> 12pm. The Catholic University of America, Koubek Auditorium. $25 members. $40.00 non-members. Free for students and AIA+2030 participants. Registration required. Learn more<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=3RHQNuvLmlNbGCjbZs6OR…> New York, NY – April 20 AIA NY Committee on the Environment / Cooper Union<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=RgDL3aU6W9OYTBIttcl95…> 6:30pm. Cooper Union, Great Hall. Free for AIA members and Cooper Union students with RSVP and Membership ID at the door. $5 for all other students. $15 for general public. Learn more<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=veuoD%2Bxzc6XyndXzliW…> Vancouver, BC – May 26 Royal Architectural Institute of Canada (RAIC) *2011 Festival of Architecture*<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=kss3UjpjLd6RAE4UyiqQt…> 7pm. Simon Fraser University – Djavad Mowafaghian Cinema. Free and open to the public. Learn more<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=YID0Bl5Tr7z%2FuMu0h1X…>(also see below) <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=5QwPaeaYnZZhqt0bHxzpH…> Edward Mazria Inducted as Honorary Fellow of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada, Delivering Convocation Keynote at *2011 Festival of Architecture.*<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=lv7UKps7sNP4N0nJhXnfl…> <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=P5MB%2FZ%2FBDW%2FcBoT…> Sign Up Here.<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=KQgsetW8DHBPNZQmvsqqJ…> <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=Gmr7rEbLlUWm0dCdVZVbt…> The Latest Climate Science From Our Top Scientific Organizations.<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=WfqKJuJInLneYxQ4i%2FX…> . . . For the latest updates from Architecture 2030, go to the Hot Topics<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=z5tcQxOHRPypFkIwaEOd%…>section of our website. . . . Comments and suggestions for future Architecture 2030 E–News issues should be sent to: info(a)architecture2030.org Architecture 2030 607 Cerrillos Road Santa Fe, NM 87505 www.architecture2030.org<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=9A1vaOSfEZNEd76VeLru7…> <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=PHoigPF1HLKGkYr4zLDy5…> <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=Q67WAzZzsP0btrr1NF64Y…> <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=crUl2dMzgAJ4Kb60qfQ0J…> <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=pcZpWUmh3FolDXxgqBOgK…> <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=2YxdkKGTfpllJp2NH%2F5…> Having trouble viewing this email? - Click here to view an online version.<http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=WWax5pJ6bHnorfmfU9S4g…> Help us spread this important news by sending this E-News Bulletin to a colleague or friend. -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle

1 0

Surely We Can Do Better than Nuclear Socialism
by James Kotcon 22 Mar '11

22 Mar '11

I had not heard this statistic before (in the paragraph below), but it sure resonates with Republicans like me. Enjoy. JBK "Vulnerability lessons are not new. After World War II German military leaders pointed out that the U.S. could have ended the War two years sooner by bombing the big coal power plants. Instead the allies were bombing individual industrial sites like steel mills, failing to recognize that the big coal plants powered 80% of Germany’s manufacturing. In contrast, Japan’s electric power was provided by a huge number of small dams that were not attractive targets for attack because no single one was crucial for the power system of the nation." ---------- Forwarded message ---------- ------------------------------ Surely We Can Do Better than Nuclear Socialism<http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DalyNews/~3/ICIEJIYZCAI/?utm_source=feedburn…> Posted: 21 Mar 2011 08:28 PM PDT by Brent Blackwelder They were in the news a half century ago when they were called “too cheap to meter.” Now “absolutely safe” nuclear reactors are once again in the news. As the horrifying scene in Japan unfolds this month, many politicians and media pundits are acting as if the only electricity choice for the U.S. is nuclear reactors or coal power plants. This is a false choice. A sustainable economy requires a sustainable energy supply, one that is not subject to the vulnerabilities of big central energy systems. A steady state economy would run on a decentralized set of renewable energy sources that is clean and resilient. It would be an economy powered by the sun, the wind, the natural heat content of the Earth, and other renewable sources. Advanced designs for where we live and how we travel would be a key part of this energy transformation. For example, buildings would be designed to generate power rather than requiring external energy supplies for cooling and heating. And let’s not forget about conservation – we need to set up the economy such that it uses less energy in the first place. The energy system that would run a steady state economy does not have the severe security problems that plague current systems, nor would it require massive subsidies in the form of liability limits, loan guarantees, externalization of health damages, etc. You don’t have to worry about a solar or wind “spill” contaminating the air, land and water; you don’t need liability caps for a wind farm or for solar collectors on roofs; and finally, you don’t need to bill consumers (instead of stockholders or investors) in advance for a nuclear reactor that may never be completed. The strength and resilience of decentralized power, its superior employment intensity, and the potential for community involvement are all features that make a different energy model very attractive. Various European nations such as Spain, Germany, and Denmark have demonstrated the huge potential of wind and solar power, as has the state of Texas in the case of wind with 9,700 megawatts installed. But look at the powerful forces today pushing nuclear reactor construction in the southeastern U.S. and obstructing the clean energy path of the future. Even after the terrible nuclear meltdown in Japan, two big southern utilities, South Carolina Electric & Gas and Georgia Power, announced that they are not pausing to consider some lessons to be learned before proceeding full speed ahead with four new reactors. To pay for two new reactors at Plant Vogtle, Georgia Power has begun billing its Georgia customers this month for the intended construction. Ironically, the proposed new reactors being billed to Georgia consumers are intended to supply customers in Florida. Consumers and taxpayers are bearing all the risks, not investors. The energy systems used to power the global economy are highly vulnerable to extreme weather events, sabotage, terrorism, and war. The Japanese catastrophe this month certainly brings to mind the nuclear disasters at Chernobyl in 1986 and Three Mile Island in 1979. But the nuclear and fossil fuel industries have supplied many less well-known disasters. A brief review of some of the accidents will accentuate the difference between the polluting energy of today’s economy and the clean energy future that would, by its very nature, avoid these messes: - In July of 1979, at the Navajo community of Church Rock, New Mexico, an earthen dam at United Nuclear Corporation’s uranium mill broke, releasing 95 million gallons of radioactive wastewater into the Rio Puerco. The spill sent contaminants over 100 miles downstream. This unpublicized spill is estimated to have contained over triple the amount of radiation (curies) that the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor released in the very same year. - Last year tornado warnings near Detroit forced the shutdown of the Fermi 2 atomic reactor. This was the same site where a meltdown in 1966 nearly irradiated the Greats Lakes Region. - For much of 2010 the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico was an ongoing saga of futility and despair. - In July of 2007 a major earthquake in Japan badly damaged one nuclear reactor in a complex of nuclear reactors. - In December of 2008 a Tennessee Valley Authority reservoir, which was storing the contaminated ash from one of its power plants, burst and sent a toxic stew of waste 100 times larger than the Exxon Valdez oil spill into a tributary of the Tennessee River. Despite assurances that such dam bursting was unusual and would never happen again, scarcely a month had passed when yet another coal waste reservoir (this one in Alabama) failed and spewed contamination downstream. Vulnerability lessons are not new. After World War II German military leaders pointed out that the U.S. could have ended the War two years sooner by bombing the big coal power plants. Instead the allies were bombing individual industrial sites like steel mills, failing to recognize that the big coal plants powered 80% of Germany’s manufacturing. In contrast, Japan’s electric power was provided by a huge number of small dams that were not attractive targets for attack because no single one was crucial for the power system of the nation. The energy for a steady state economy can be supplied by a huge number of solar panels and wind mills<http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=a-path-to-sustainable-ener…>as outlined by physics professors Jacobson and Delucchi at Stanford University (*Scientific American*, November, 2009) and by many others. It would be a refreshing change to see President Obama propose such an ambitious solar/wind plan in the aftermath of the meltdown in Japan, but he seems content merely to suggest a thorough review of nuclear reactors. Before having to hear how high the costs of renewable energy are, I’ll close with a brief reminder of the government subsidies the U.S. nuclear industry is slated to receive. Here are some components of the $46 billion being offered up over the next 5 years in addition to the cap on liability for any accident: - $22.5 billion in loan guarantees for new reactors; - $12.3 billion in nuclear waste fund liability payments; - $3 billion for mixed oxide activities; and - $1.9 billion for fusion energy. For more details, please see the green scissors report<http://www.greenscissors.com/> . Seeing this list of handouts, one might think that Republican leaders would recoil at what might be termed nuclear socialism. One would think that the Tea Party activists would revolt at the sight of this massive government program to fund something that Wall Street would not touch even before the catastrophe in Japan. You are subscribed to email updates from Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy <http://steadystate.org/> To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now<http://feedburner.google.com/fb/a/mailunsubscribe?k=ddEHy4HeNsHyT2gOSoQyE5N…> . Email delivery powered by Google Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-FICC-INTERNATIONAL list, send any message to: CONS-FICC-INTERNATIONAL-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp -- Conservation Chair, Southern Nevada Group of the Sierra Club Energy Chair, Toiyabe Chapter of the Sierra Club - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

3 2

Fwd: [Justice] Clean Water Advocates Win First Round of Challenge Against Masontown Coal Plant
by James Kotcon 22 Mar '11

22 Mar '11

Another ash dump has to clean up their discharges. This sets a precedent for Albright, and reinforces the Patriot victory. JBK >>> Cindy Rank <clrank(a)hughes.net> 3/22/2011 2:34 PM >>> OF INTEREST ..... cindy FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 22, 2011 Contacts: Raviya Ismail, Earthjustice, (202) 667-4500 (office) or (202) 841-7619 (cell), rismail(a)earthjustice.org Abigail Dillen, Earthjustice, (212) 791-1881 (office), adillen(a)earthjustice.org Lisa Graves-Marcucci, Environmental Integrity Project, (412) 653-4328 (home) or (412) 897-0569 (cell), lgmarcucci(a)environmentalintegrity.org Aimee Erickson, Executive Director, Citizens Coal Council, (412) 257-2223 (office) or (724) 470-3982 (cell), aimee(a)citizenscoalcouncil.org Clean Water Advocates Win First Round of Challenge Against Masontown Coal Plant First step to securing cleaner water for 350,000 people PITTSBURGH, PA – Clean water advocates have won the first round in a legal fight ( http://earthjustice.org/documents/legal-document/pdf/hatfield-s-ferry-judgm… ) over permit limits that would prevent the Hatfield’s Ferry coal-fired power plant from dumping polluted water into the Monongahela River. Allegheny Energy is challenging the limits in an effort to avoid installation of pollution controls that would eliminate wastewater discharges of mercury, arsenic, selenium, and other toxic metals as well as salts and dissolved solids that are currently impairing water quality in the river, which is a drinking water source for more than 350,000 people living south of Pittsburgh. After 40 years of operation without effective controls for air pollution, Hatfield’s Ferry has finally installed a scrubbing system that limits the amount of sulfur dioxide and other pollutants that the plant pumps into the air. However, the company has resisted installing equally effective pollution controls that would limit the amount of contaminated water discharged by the scrubbers. As a result, dangerous pollutants that are no longer going into the air are ending up in the river. “Taking coal waste from smokestacks and dumping it into our rivers makes no sense because coal is no cleaner in our water,” said Aimee Erickson, Executive Director, Citizens Coal Council. “The Citizens Coal Council is committed to working with others around the country to ensure that protecting America’s air from coal burning power plant emissions does not come at the expense of the American people's drinking water.” “We shouldn’t have to choose between air that is safe to breathe and water that is safe to drink,” said Abigail Dillen, Earthjustice attorney. “This decision by Pennsylvania’s Environmental Hearing Board is important because it affirms that Hatfield’s Ferry has to meet all necessary limits to protect water quality in the river.” “This is an important victory, and we applaud the state of Pennsylvania and Earthjustice for defending protective limits on water pollution,” said Lisa Graves-Marcucci, of the Environmental Integrity Project. “While the Hatfield’s Ferry scrubber will help clear the air, the court’s recent decision brings us one step closer to keeping the same pollutants out of the Monongahela River, the most important source of drinking water for communities on its shorelines.” Specifically, Allegheny Energy sought to classify its new scrubber system as an existing source of pollution instead of a “new discharger” - subject to the most stringent pollution control requirements. In rejecting this argument, Chief Judge Thomas W. Renwand wrote: “We specifically reject Allegheny Energy’s contention that its facility does not fall within the definition of a ‘new discharger’ because it discharges at an existing outfall on the Monongahela River…We also agree with the Department and the Interveners that Allegheny Energy’s position cannot be reconciled with either the plain language of the regulations or the overarching intent of the Clean Water Law.” Judge Renwand further stated that Allegheny Energy’s argument “would substantially gut the congressional goal to eliminate pollutant discharges to the waters of the United States as quickly as possible.” Earthjustice, Environmental Integrity Project and Citizens Coal Council joined together to defend protective limits for sulfate and total dissolved solids in the discharge permit for Hatfield’s Ferry, and they are challenging the failure to impose limits on metals such as arsenic and selenium. The first phase of the legal proceedings involves only the sulfate and total dissolved solids limits. If Allegheny is ordered to comply with them, they will need to install pollution controls that eliminate the discharge of heavy metals as well. A copy of the summary judgment: http://earthjustice.org/documents/legal-document/pdf/hatfield-s-ferry-judgm… A copy of the appeal: http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/library/legal_docs/hatsfield-fe…

1 0

Re: [EC] Fwd: [Justice] Clean Water Advocates Win First Round of Challenge Against Masontown Coal Plant
by Jim Sconyers 22 Mar '11

22 Mar '11

Excellent news! Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ________________________________ From: Cindy Rank <clrank(a)hughes.net> To: mbecher(a)appalachian-center.org; jlovett(a)appalachian-center.org; derek_teaney(a)yahoo.com; bluckett(a)appalachian-center.org; adawson(a)appalachian-center.org; mjanes(a)hardynet.com Cc: peter.morgan(a)apps.sierraclub.org; jkotcon(a)wvu.edu; jim_scon(a)yahoo.com; sminney(a)wvrivers.org Sent: Tue, March 22, 2011 2:34:13 PM Subject: Fwd: [Justice] Clean Water Advocates Win First Round of Challenge Against Masontown Coal Plant OF INTEREST ..... cindy FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 22, 2011 Contacts: Raviya Ismail, Earthjustice, (202) 667-4500 (office) or (202) 841-7619 (cell), rismail(a)earthjustice.org Abigail Dillen, Earthjustice, (212) 791-1881 (office), adillen(a)earthjustice.org Lisa Graves-Marcucci, Environmental Integrity Project, (412) 653-4328 (home) or (412) 897-0569 (cell), lgmarcucci(a)environmentalintegrity.org Aimee Erickson, Executive Director, Citizens Coal Council, (412) 257-2223 (office) or (724) 470-3982 (cell), aimee(a)citizenscoalcouncil.org Clean Water Advocates Win First Round of Challenge Against Masontown Coal Plant First step to securing cleaner water for 350,000 people PITTSBURGH, PA – Clean water advocates have won the first round in a legal fight over permit limits that would prevent the Hatfield’s Ferry coal-fired power plant from dumping polluted water into the Monongahela River. Allegheny Energy is challenging the limits in an effort to avoid installation of pollution controls that would eliminate wastewater discharges of mercury, arsenic, selenium, and other toxic metals as well as salts and dissolved solids that are currently impairing water quality in the river, which is a drinking water source for more than 350,000 people living south of Pittsburgh. After 40 years of operation without effective controls for air pollution, Hatfield’s Ferry has finally installed a scrubbing system that limits the amount of sulfur dioxide and other pollutants that the plant pumps into the air. However, the company has resisted installing equally effective pollution controls that would limit the amount of contaminated water discharged by the scrubbers. As a result, dangerous pollutants that are no longer going into the air are ending up in the river. “Taking coal waste from smokestacks and dumping it into our rivers makes no sense because coal is no cleaner in our water,” said Aimee Erickson, Executive Director, Citizens Coal Council. “The Citizens Coal Council is committed to working with others around the country to ensure that protecting America’s air from coal burning power plant emissions does not come at the expense of the American people's drinking water.” “We shouldn’t have to choose between air that is safe to breathe and water that is safe to drink,” said Abigail Dillen, Earthjustice attorney. “This decision by Pennsylvania’s Environmental Hearing Board is important because it affirms that Hatfield’s Ferry has to meet all necessary limits to protect water quality in the river.” “This is an important victory, and we applaud the state of Pennsylvania and Earthjustice for defending protective limits on water pollution,” said Lisa Graves-Marcucci, of the Environmental Integrity Project. “While the Hatfield’s Ferry scrubber will help clear the air, the court’s recent decision brings us one step closer to keeping the same pollutants out of the Monongahela River, the most important source of drinking water for communities on its shorelines.” Specifically, Allegheny Energy sought to classify its new scrubber system as an existing source of pollution instead of a “new discharger” - subject to the most stringent pollution control requirements. In rejecting this argument, Chief Judge Thomas W. Renwand wrote: “We specifically reject Allegheny Energy’s contention that its facility does not fall within the definition of a ‘new discharger’ because it discharges at an existing outfall on the Monongahela River…We also agree with the Department and the Interveners that Allegheny Energy’s position cannot be reconciled with either the plain language of the regulations or the overarching intent of the Clean Water Law.” Judge Renwand further stated that Allegheny Energy’s argument “would substantially gut the congressional goal to eliminate pollutant discharges to the waters of the United States as quickly as possible.” Earthjustice, Environmental Integrity Project and Citizens Coal Council joined together to defend protective limits for sulfate and total dissolved solids in the discharge permit for Hatfield’s Ferry, and they are challenging the failure to impose limits on metals such as arsenic and selenium. The first phase of the legal proceedings involves only the sulfate and total dissolved solids limits. If Allegheny is ordered to comply with them, they will need to install pollution controls that eliminate the discharge of heavy metals as well. A copy of the summary judgment: http://earthjustice.org/documents/legal-document/pdf/hatfield-s-ferry-judgm… A copy of the appeal: http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/library/legal_docs/hatsfield-fe…

1 0

Fw: Fwd: [CONS-FICC-INTERNATIONAL] Surely We Can Do Better than Nuclear Socialism
by Jim Sconyers 22 Mar '11

22 Mar '11

Good reading. Note: Congress LEGISLATED a cap on nuke plant liability. The insurer of nuke plant liability is WE, the PEOPLE, also legislated by Congress. This is old info.... Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Jane Feldman <feldman.jane(a)GMAIL.COM> To: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Sent: Tue, March 22, 2011 1:52:42 PM Subject: Fwd: [CONS-FICC-INTERNATIONAL] Surely We Can Do Better than Nuclear Socialism The article below is a great argument for small generators of clean energy - like real clean, solar, wind, geothermal - and a list of all the reasons to reject nuclear. jane ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Janet McGarry <Zzzpuck(a)aol.com> Date: Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:20 AM Subject: [CONS-FICC-INTERNATIONAL] Surely We Can Do Better than Nuclear Socialism To: CONS-FICC-INTERNATIONAL(a)lists.sierraclub.org This is an interesting newsletter --- the Daly news which refers to the economist Herman Daly. Janet McGarry ________________________________ Surely We Can Do Better than Nuclear Socialism Posted: 21 Mar 2011 08:28 PM PDT by Brent Blackwelder They were in the news a half century ago when they were called “too cheap to meter.” Now “absolutely safe” nuclear reactors are once again in the news. As the horrifying scene in Japan unfolds this month, many politicians and media pundits are acting as if the only electricity choice for the U.S. is nuclear reactors or coal power plants. This is a false choice. A sustainable economy requires a sustainable energy supply, one that is not subject to the vulnerabilities of big central energy systems. A steady state economy would run on a decentralized set of renewable energy sources that is clean and resilient. It would be an economy powered by the sun, the wind, the natural heat content of the Earth, and other renewable sources. Advanced designs for where we live and how we travel would be a key part of this energy transformation. For example, buildings would be designed to generate power rather than requiring external energy supplies for cooling and heating. And let’s not forget about conservation – we need to set up the economy such that it uses less energy in the first place. The energy system that would run a steady state economy does not have the severe security problems that plague current systems, nor would it require massive subsidies in the form of liability limits, loan guarantees, externalization of health damages, etc. You don’t have to worry about a solar or wind “spill” contaminating the air, land and water; you don’t need liability caps for a wind farm or for solar collectors on roofs; and finally, you don’t need to bill consumers (instead of stockholders or investors) in advance for a nuclear reactor that may never be completed. The strength and resilience of decentralized power, its superior employment intensity, and the potential for community involvement are all features that make a different energy model very attractive. Various European nations such as Spain, Germany, and Denmark have demonstrated the huge potential of wind and solar power, as has the state of Texas in the case of wind with 9,700 megawatts installed. But look at the powerful forces today pushing nuclear reactor construction in the southeastern U.S. and obstructing the clean energy path of the future. Even after the terrible nuclear meltdown in Japan, two big southern utilities, South Carolina Electric & Gas and Georgia Power, announced that they are not pausing to consider some lessons to be learned before proceeding full speed ahead with four new reactors. To pay for two new reactors at Plant Vogtle, Georgia Power has begun billing its Georgia customers this month for the intended construction. Ironically, the proposed new reactors being billed to Georgia consumers are intended to supply customers in Florida. Consumers and taxpayers are bearing all the risks, not investors. The energy systems used to power the global economy are highly vulnerable to extreme weather events, sabotage, terrorism, and war. The Japanese catastrophe this month certainly brings to mind the nuclear disasters at Chernobyl in 1986 and Three Mile Island in 1979. But the nuclear and fossil fuel industries have supplied many less well-known disasters. A brief review of some of the accidents will accentuate the difference between the polluting energy of today’s economy and the clean energy future that would, by its very nature, avoid these messes: * In July of 1979, at the Navajo community of Church Rock, New Mexico, an earthen dam at United Nuclear Corporation’s uranium mill broke, releasing 95 million gallons of radioactive wastewater into the Rio Puerco. The spill sent contaminants over 100 miles downstream. This unpublicized spill is estimated to have contained over triple the amount of radiation (curies) that the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor released in the very same year. * Last year tornado warnings near Detroit forced the shutdown of the Fermi 2 atomic reactor. This was the same site where a meltdown in 1966 nearly irradiated the Greats Lakes Region. * For much of 2010 the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico was an ongoing saga of futility and despair. * In July of 2007 a major earthquake in Japan badly damaged one nuclear reactor in a complex of nuclear reactors. * In December of 2008 a Tennessee Valley Authority reservoir, which was storing the contaminated ash from one of its power plants, burst and sent a toxic stew of waste 100 times larger than the Exxon Valdez oil spill into a tributary of the Tennessee River. Despite assurances that such dam bursting was unusual and would never happen again, scarcely a month had passed when yet another coal waste reservoir (this one in Alabama) failed and spewed contamination downstream. Vulnerability lessons are not new. After World War II German military leaders pointed out that the U.S. could have ended the War two years sooner by bombing the big coal power plants. Instead the allies were bombing individual industrial sites like steel mills, failing to recognize that the big coal plants powered 80% of Germany’s manufacturing. In contrast, Japan’s electric power was provided by a huge number of small dams that were not attractive targets for attack because no single one was crucial for the power system of the nation. The energy for a steady state economy can be supplied by a huge number of solar panels and wind mills as outlined by physics professors Jacobson and Delucchi at Stanford University (Scientific American, November, 2009) and by many others. It would be a refreshing change to see President Obama propose such an ambitious solar/wind plan in the aftermath of the meltdown in Japan, but he seems content merely to suggest a thorough review of nuclear reactors. Before having to hear how high the costs of renewable energy are, I’ll close with a brief reminder of the government subsidies the U.S. nuclear industry is slated to receive. Here are some components of the $46 billion being offered up over the next 5 years in addition to the cap on liability for any accident: * $22.5 billion in loan guarantees for new reactors; * $12.3 billion in nuclear waste fund liability payments; * $3 billion for mixed oxide activities; and * $1.9 billion for fusion energy. For more details, please see the green scissors report. Seeing this list of handouts, one might think that Republican leaders would recoil at what might be termed nuclear socialism. One would think that the Tea Party activists would revolt at the sight of this massive government program to fund something that Wall Street would not touch even before the catastrophe in Japan. You are subscribed to email updates from Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. Email delivery powered by Google Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-FICC-INTERNATIONAL list, send any message to: CONS-FICC-INTERNATIONAL-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp -- Conservation Chair, Southern Nevada Group of the Sierra Club Energy Chair, Toiyabe Chapter of the Sierra Club - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS list, send any message to: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

1 0

Re: [EC] PATH Celebration
by James Kotcon 19 Mar '11

19 Mar '11

While it is certainly true that the PATH application was withdrawn "without prejudice" (meaning they can and probably will re-file), it is also important that we celebrate what victories we can. We rarely get a definitive end to issues as the bad guys are famous for simply fading away in a slow, long, drawn-out silence, so even though this one is not over, this is as definitive of a decision point as we are likely to see. Feel free to attend and party down, as we need to make a big noise now. If nothing else, it helps cement our reputation as "giant killers". Keep in mind that the Club's expert witness testimony on need, reliability, and demand side management was a critical turning point in the battle in Virginia, and established this as the key issue ion MD and WV. The more we loudly proclaim the "victory", the better it is cemented in the minds of politicians that the issue is over, and the more credibility they will give us as new issues emerge. I favor holding PATH victory parties in every County in WV, and invite the press. We Done Good. JBK >>> <glnelson1(a)frontier.com> 3/19/2011 11:02 AM >>> This is a premature celebration because path is not out of the utility companies minds. They are just regrouping for another assault for the line. One of the local conservationists here, that fought the path project, tells me they see this withdrawl only as a delaying tactic, and they will return with the same application for this line. Thanks! Gary Nelson ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Sconyers" <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com> To: ec(a)osenergy.org, "Heather Heilman" <heatherheilman(a)yahoo.com>, "Gwen Jones" <gwenjones23(a)yahoo.com>, "Jim Kotcon" <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu>, "Gary Nelson" <glnelson1(a)frontier.com>, "Jim Sconyers" <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com>, "Frank Young" <fyoung(a)mountain.net> Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2011 10:49:35 AM Subject: PATH Celebration Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Doug Kaplan <doug.kaplan(a)sugarloafconservancy.org> To: CONS-ELP-TRANS-LINES-FORUM(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Sent: Sat, March 19, 2011 10:08:18 AM Subject: A Celebration is Required! Join us! All, Many of you have already received our invitation. I am sending it to the Sierra Club disti list as some may not have received our attached invitation. Everyone is welcomed! We especially hope to see many attend from our neighboring states of Virginia and West Virginia. Spread the word. Please see attached invitation for details! Doug Douglas S. Kaplan President Sugarloaf Conservancy www.sugarloafconservancy.org www.nomoretowers.org Description: cid:image001.gif@01CBDCED.3895C390 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-ELP-TRANS-LINES-FORUM list, send any message to: CONS-ELP-TRANS-LINES-FORUM-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

2 1

PATH Celebration
by Jim Sconyers 19 Mar '11

19 Mar '11

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Doug Kaplan <doug.kaplan(a)sugarloafconservancy.org> To: CONS-ELP-TRANS-LINES-FORUM(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Sent: Sat, March 19, 2011 10:08:18 AM Subject: A Celebration is Required! Join us! All, Many of you have already received our invitation. I am sending it to the Sierra Club disti list as some may not have received our attached invitation. Everyone is welcomed! We especially hope to see many attend from our neighboring states of Virginia and West Virginia. Spread the word. Please see attached invitation for details! Doug Douglas S. Kaplan President Sugarloaf Conservancy www.sugarloafconservancy.org www.nomoretowers.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-ELP-TRANS-LINES-FORUM list, send any message to: CONS-ELP-TRANS-LINES-FORUM-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp

1 0

Fw: DAILY UPDATE 18 March 2011. News of interest to Mon river watershed denizens.
by James Kotcon 18 Mar '11

18 Mar '11

You might enjoy the first news story here. JBK >>> "Donald C. Strimbeck" <dcsoinks(a)comcast.net> 3/18/2011 4:31 AM >>> Washington PA OBSERVER REPORTER: Waste hauler accused of illegal dumping 3/18/2011 3:31 AM By Tara Kinsell, Staff writer tkinsell(a)observer-reporter.com WAYNESBURG - A well-known Greene County waste hauler and his corporation were charged Thursday with illegally dumping millions of gallons of wastewater from natural gas drilling, sewage sludge and restaurant grease into streams and mine shafts in a six-county area. After a two-year investigation, the state attorney general's office filed 98 criminal counts against Robert Allan Shipman, 50, of 432 Renner Creek Road, New Freeport, and 77 counts against his company, Allan's Waste Water Service Inc. of 1487 Toms Run Road, Holbrook. "This was a calculated and long-running scheme to personally profit by illegally dumping wastewater, regardless of the potential for environmental damage," said acting Attorney General Bill Ryan. Shipman is accused of orchestrating a scheme to dump waste products into streams, mine shafts and business properties across Allegheny, Fayette, Greene, Lawrence, Washington and Westmoreland counties. Proecutors said the activities took place between 2003 and 2009. Charges include participating in a corrupt organization, criminal conspiracy, theft, forgery, receiving stolen property, pollution of waters, tampering with public records and violations of the Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law, Solid Waste Management Act and Fish and Boat Codes. According to grand jury testimony, Shipman and his company were hired by multiple businesses in the region to haul and dispose of wastewater by-products. Several former employees testified that Shipman instructed them to mix various wastewater products together in what they referred to as a "cocktail" and then dump that mixture at various locations throughout the region. Ryan said the reason behind the cocktail was to conceal the true contents of the wastewater, allowing it to be disposed of in an improper manner, as well as to increase the volume of disposals that were billed to various customers. According to the grand jury, Shipman directed his drivers to falsify manifests so his company could bill customers for the full capacity of their trucks, regardless of the amount of waste actually being transported and disposed of. Agents from the attorney general's office said they identified forged manifests for numerous businesses operating in Southwestern Pennsylvania, including Penneco Oil Co., American Oil and Gas, Luzerne Township Sewage Authority, Menallen Township Sewer Authority, Washington Penn Plastics and others. Ryan said Shipman is accused of stealing in excess of $250,000 from clients as a result of the over-billing practices. April Morris, a former administrative assistant for Shipman's company, told the grand jury she was often instructed by Shipman to shred or discard the customer's copy of the manifest. She said Shipman would then instruct her to complete blank manifests with fraudulent information regarding the quantity of waste hauled, sign drivers' names to the manifests and send the manifests to customers. Testimony by former drivers indicated that Allan's Waste Water was responsible for transporting and disposing of production water from gas wells owned and operated by CNX Gas. According to the drivers, CNX's gas wells began to generate more production water in the summer of 2007 than the company was capable of handling. "It is a lot of information we need to digest," said Shipman's attorney, Christopher Blackwell of Washington. "Our contention has always been that this is a group of disgruntled employees who have made these accusations." Blackwell said it appears the case is going to come down to the credibility of the witnesses who may have "an ax to grind with Allan Shipman." The drivers told the grand jury that Shipman showed them how to leave water valves open at gas wells in order to allow production water to flow onto the ground and into nearby waterways. The drivers said this was typically done after dark or during heavy rains in order to conceal the illegal discharge. Areas where Shipman is alleged to have directed wastewater to be dumped include Green Hill Tank Farm along Rush Run in Greene County, Morris Run Creek and Rush Run. It was further alleged by the former employees that Shipman directed them to dump residual wastewater left in the trucks at the end of the day down a drain at his business. The drain leads to Tom's Run, a tributary of Dunkard Creek. It is also alleged that Shipman directed waste products to be dumped into the Morris Run air shaft at the abandoned Blacksville No. 1 Mine along Morris Run Creek in Brave. Consol Energy is permitted by the EPA to dump production water into the Morris Run shaft via a series of piping inlets. The airshaft leads to a mine pool that ultimately discharges into Dunkard Creek, according to Samuel Harper, DEP Water Management Environmental Program manager, who verified that Shipman and his company were not permitted to discharge waste into that location. The criminal charges filed Thursday carry substantial prison terms upon conviction, along with fines in excess of $1.5 million for Shipman and $1.2 million for his company. Blackwell said the defense is in the process of interviewing drivers from the company who have indicated that Shipman never directed them to do any of the things alleged in the complaint. Blackwell said these witnesses have also said that they never witnessed Shipman illegally dumping anything. "There were a number of documents found in the trucks that Allan was unaware of what the drivers were doing while they were out," Blackwell said. "Maybe the lines at the dumping facilities were so long that they didn't feel like waiting in line there." Christopher M. Capozzi, attorney for Allan's Waster Water Services Inc., had no comment. Shipman is free on $500,000 bail. A preliminary hearing is scheduled for June 6-7 before District Judge Glenn Bates. Copyright Observer Publishing Co. EDITORIAL: 'Proactive' approach, well after the fact 3/17/2011 3:33 AM It's interesting to juxtapose the comments made by Consol Energy and environmental officials when Consol announced that it would pay $6 million to settle claims stemming from hundreds of violations of the Clean Water Act at six of its coal mines in West Virginia, including discharges that resulted in a massive fish kill along Dunkard Creek in 2009. The energy company will pay $5.5 million to the federal Environmental Protection Agency, and another $500,000 to West Virginia agencies in connection with the fish kill, but it is doing so without admitting any liability. One company official talked about Consol's desire to avoid "pointless litigation." By pointless, we have to assume Consol means ligitation from which it no doubt would emerge on the losing side. We doubt the company would make such a payment out of the goodness of its corporate heart. Of course, for an outfit that had revenue of $4.6 billion and profit of $540 million last year, perhaps $6 million is viewed as simply a minor annoyance, a pittance to be paid as a cost of doing business the wrong way, in terms of the environment, all those years. Consol announced that in addition to paying the penalties, it would spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a new water-treatment plant to counter high levels of chlorides discharged from four of its mines in northern West Virginia. In a news release, Consol President Nick Deluliis touted the company's "proactive demonstration" of its commitment to operating in an environmentally friendly manner. Hardly. A proactive approach would have been to install the necessary water-purification equipment before the company's discharges repeatedly fouled the water and wiped out aquatic life along 30 miles of Dunkard Creek. Statements from environmental officials carried a different tone. Shawn Garvin, regional EPA administrator, said, "We are committed to cleaning up the waters of Dunkard Creek and the Monongahela watershed, and holding those who pollute it accountable." And Ignacia Moreno, assistant attorney general for the Environmental and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice, noted that in the settlement, "Consol takes responsibility for its past failures to abide by the terms of its Clean Water Act permits." Consol might not admit liability, but accountability and responsibility will work just fine. Now, if Consol would only drop its appeals and ante up the money needed to repair the dam at Ryerson Station State Park's Duke Lake, which the state Department of Environmental Protection determined was damaged by the company's longwall mining operations in the area. Another "proactive" approach would be much appreciated by the people who have lost the use of that wonderful recreational resource. Copyright Observer Publishing Co. Charleston Gazette Friday 18 March 2011: 19 delegates call for Marcellus permit moratorium March 17, 2011 by Alison Knezevich In the final hours of the legislative session Saturday night, Delegate Mike Manypenny, D-Taylor, was writing to state Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Randy Huffman and collecting signatures from fellow delegates for the letter. With the failure to pass any legislation to regulate Marcellus drilling, Manypenny and others are asking Huffman to issue a moratorium on new permits. Manypenny and Delegate Barbara Fleischauer, D-Monongalia, plan a Capitol press conference tomorrow at 1 p.m. to discuss the proposal. According to the West Virginia Surface Owners’ Rights Organization, the other delegates who signed the letter are: Larry Barker, D-Boone; Anthony Barill, D-Monongalia; Bonnie Brown D-Kanawha; Ray Canterbury, R-Greenbrier; John Doyle, D-Jefferson; Nancy Guthrie, D-Kanawha; Bobbie Hatfield, D-Kanawha; Linda Longstreth, D-Marion; Dale Martin, D-Putnam; Clif Moore, D-McDowell; Don Perdue, D-Wayne; Mary Poling, D-Barbour; Virginia Mahan, D-Summers; Pete Sigler, R-Nicholas; Margaret Staggers, D-Fayette; Joe Talbott, D-Webster; and Danny Wells, D-Kanawha. This entry was posted on Thursday, March 17, 2011 at 7:18 pm and is filed under Environment, House of Delegates. March 17, 2011 House, Senate conferees wrap up state budget work House and Senate budget conferees completed work on the 2011-12 state budget bill (HB2012) Thursday evening -- a bill that designates how state agencies are to spend a total of more than $11 billion for the budget year that begins July 1. By Phil Kabler The Charleston Gazette CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- House and Senate budget conferees completed work on the 2011-12 state budget bill (HB2012) Thursday evening -- a bill that designates how state agencies are to spend a total of more than $11 billion for the budget year that begins July 1. The bill does not include additional funding to hire additional inspectors for new Marcellus Shale drilling sites. On Wednesday, Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin, acting as governor, had requested an additional $2 million for the Department of Environmental Protection budget, in light of the Legislature's failure to pass a bill to regulate Marcellus drilling. However, House Finance Chairman Harry Keith White, D-Mingo, said conferees will recommend that Tomblin submit a supplemental appropriation bill that would direct about $1.05 million of state funds that will be left over when the current budget year ends on June 30 to the DEP. Legislators are expected to vote to approve the 2011-12 spending plan -- and act to correct and re-pass any bills vetoed by Tomblin for technical errors -- Friday. That would mark the first time in recent years that the budget session, which this year started Sunday immediately following the end of the regular session, has not extended into the weekend. White said it helped that the House and Senate versions of the budget bill were relatively similar, and that the Legislature did not pass a lot of bills with new spending initiatives. "When we sat down and looked at the bills, we were really pretty close," he said. Senate Finance Chairman Roman Prezioso, D-Marion, did have to build in about $67 million for pay raises for state and public school employees, judges and the adjutant general. CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- House and Senate budget conferees completed work on the 2011-12 state budget bill (HB2012) Thursday evening -- a bill that designates how state agencies are to spend a total of more than $11 billion for the budget year that begins July 1. The bill does not include additional funding to hire additional inspectors for new Marcellus Shale drilling sites. On Wednesday, Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin, acting as governor, had requested an additional $2 million for the Department of Environmental Protection budget, in light of the Legislature's failure to pass a bill to regulate Marcellus drilling. However, House Finance Chairman Harry Keith White, D-Mingo, said conferees will recommend that Tomblin submit a supplemental appropriation bill that would direct about $1.05 million of state funds that will be left over when the current budget year ends on June 30 to the DEP. Legislators are expected to vote to approve the 2011-12 spending plan -- and act to correct and re-pass any bills vetoed by Tomblin for technical errors -- Friday. That would mark the first time in recent years that the budget session, which this year started Sunday immediately following the end of the regular session, has not extended into the weekend. White said it helped that the House and Senate versions of the budget bill were relatively similar, and that the Legislature did not pass a lot of bills with new spending initiatives. "When we sat down and looked at the bills, we were really pretty close," he said. Senate Finance Chairman Roman Prezioso, D-Marion, did have to build in about $67 million for pay raises for state and public school employees, judges and the adjutant general. New initiatives in the budget also include about $6 million of additional funding for the Public Employees Insurance Agency and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), to expand coverage to include treatment for children with autism spectrum disorders, and $6 million of Lottery revenue for a fund to allow Eastern Panhandle counties to upgrade wastewater treatment facilities under a federal mandate to reduce pollution in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. White noted that, unlike many states, West Virginia's economy has been relatively stable. He said the budget bill does not impose any significant funding cuts, even though the current budget was balanced using about $200 million of one-time federal stimulus funds. "The Senate president and ourselves feel pretty comfortable with the future finances of the state," he said. However, he noted that the state budget is heavily reliant on extractive industries, including production of coal and natural gas, and on gambling. The 2011-12 general revenue budget -- the portion of the budget funded through state tax collections -- will top $4 billion for the first time in state history, an increase of about $250 million. Overall, though, the total $11 billion spending plan will decrease by about 2 percent from the current budget, primarily because of reductions in federal funds. "We've tried to keep it as tight as we can," Prezioso said of the budget plan. Reach Phil Kabler at ph...(a)wvgazette.com or 304-348-1220. New initiatives in the budget also include about $6 million of additional funding for the Public Employees Insurance Agency and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), to expand coverage to include treatment for children with autism spectrum disorders, and $6 million of Lottery revenue for a fund to allow Eastern Panhandle counties to upgrade wastewater treatment facilities under a federal mandate to reduce pollution in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. White noted that, unlike many states, West Virginia's economy has been relatively stable. He said the budget bill does not impose any significant funding cuts, even though the current budget was balanced using about $200 million of one-time federal stimulus funds. "The Senate president and ourselves feel pretty comfortable with the future finances of the state," he said. However, he noted that the state budget is heavily reliant on extractive industries, including production of coal and natural gas, and on gambling. The 2011-12 general revenue budget -- the portion of the budget funded through state tax collections -- will top $4 billion for the first time in state history, an increase of about $250 million. Overall, though, the total $11 billion spending plan will decrease by about 2 percent from the current budget, primarily because of reductions in federal funds. "We've tried to keep it as tight as we can," Prezioso said of the budget plan. Reach Phil Kabler at ph...(a)wvgazette.com or 304-348-1220. Wheeling WV THE INTELLIGENCER: Halt To Drilling Permits Wanted Some lawmakers seek moratorium until new rules are put into place March 18, 2011 - By CASEY JUNKINS Staff Writer WHEELING - A group of West Virginia legislators wants the state's Department of Environmental Protection to stop issuing natural gas drilling permits until new regulations are in place. State Sen. Orphy Klempa, D-Ohio, is not sure such a moratorium on new drilling permits would be worthwhile, however, because the DEP has already issued more than 900 such permits for gas companies to work in the Marcellus Shale. "Having 15 inspectors for 59,000 wells is clearly inadequate. We need to drastically increase the number of inspectors," said Delegate Barbara Evans Fleischauer, D-Monongalia. DEP Secretary Randy Huffman has said his Office of Oil and Gas now has 17 positions for well inspectors, but not all of those jobs may be filled. If there currently are 15 inspectors, that means each would be responsible for overseeing 3,933 wells. Fleischauer and about 20 other legislators have already signed the moratorium request they are forwarding to Huffman. However, none of these legislators hail from the Northern Panhandle. Acting Senate President Jeff Kessler, D-Marshall, said he was unaware of the moratorium request, emphasizing his commitment to see the natural gas industry operate in an effective and safe manner throughout the state. Klempa recognizes the need for action, but said preventing the issuance of more drilling permits would not solve the problem. "I am hearing now that the industry doesn't really need any more permits right now. Now, their problem seems to be that they don't have enough drilling rigs to act on the permits they already have," he said. There are now several well sites established in Ohio County that have recently seen gas rigs in use, including the Didriksen site on Dement Road and the Gantzer site near The Highlands. "I think that after the special primary election, we will be able to have a special session to get this Marcellus Shale legislation done," Klempa said in reference to the May 14 gubernatorial primary election. "I feel we will get some meaningful legislation on this." During the regular legislative session that ended Saturday, senators passed a bill that would have increased horizontal well drilling permit fees from $650 to $5,000. The bill failed to clear the House, however. "We were close to an agreement, but just ran out of time," Fleischauer said. "There was no one thing that de-railed it." The delegate said she does not believe allowing the industry to operate the way it does now is "an alternative worth tolerating." Fleischauer also questions acting Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin's plan to ask the legislators to increase revenues for the DEP as part of a new state spending plan. "Our proposal would have made the drilling companies pay for more inspectors," Fleischauer said. "The governor wants us to direct money that we would already be using for something else to pay for the inspectors. If this industry is going to reap such huge profits, they should have to pay for more inspectors." The governor has also told Huffman to pursue new regulations for these drilling operations, in the absence of legislative action. Tomblin cited Huffman's in-house rulemaking powers and said that "West Virginians deserve a comprehensive regulatory structure" governing this industry." However, Fleischauer does not see this as a real solution. "The regulations as written are the law. The fees to charge for permits are written in the law," she said. Natural gas compressor station worries Fayette residents By Cindy Ekas FOR THE TRIBUNE-REVIEW Friday, March 18, 2011 Fayette County residents expressed concerns about water, soil, air and noise pollution Thursday night at an informational open house for Burnett Oil Co. Inc.'s proposed construction of a natural gas compressor station. The site is on county-owned property in the New Salem area. Evelyn Hovanec, a member of the Fayette County Marcellus Shale Task Force created by county Commissioner Angela Zimmerlink, called the session held at the McClellandtown Volunteer Fire Department informative. "I'm concerned about how the compressor station will affect soil, water and air quality in the future," Hovanec said. "If you look at history, what's taking place now is very similar to what happened with the coal industry in this area. We have to be concerned about protecting the environment for future generations. We also have to concerned about protecting tourism and our natural resources." More than 100 residents who attended the open house were directed to various informational tables where Burnett officials and subcontractors answered questions about the project. Erin Fronczek of 72 E. Main St., New Salem, said she lives across the street from another compressor station that was recently constructed. "No one even told us that the first compressor station was coming," Fronczek said. "We were never even given an opportunity to voice our concerns. At least, we're getting a chance to ask questions and talk about our concerns this time." Burt Walker, engineering manager for Burnett Oil Co. Inc's Canonsburg office, said the proposed compressor station site is about 200 feet south of New Salem Road. He explained that a compressor station takes low pressure natural gas from multiple wells and prepares it for transfer into a transmission pipeline by removing water from the gas and increasing the pressure to match the transmission line pressure. The proposed Shoaf compressor station would have six compressors and water removal equipment. Burnett Oil Co. has reached an agreement with Texas Eastern Transmission Co. to feed gas into its pipeline, Walker said. "This pipeline travels from east to west across Fayette County north of the intersection of Krulock and New Salem Roads," he said. "The natural gas will be transported along the East Coast from Baltimore, Md., to New York City." The proposed location for the compression station was selected specifically because of its distance from homes and other buildings, he said. Walker said there will be vehicles traveling to and from the site while building is under way. "We anticipate this traffic to amount to 20 to 30 vehicles per day," he said. "Construction is expected to last about three to four months. After construction, typically, one vehicle per day will enter the compressor or meter station once construction is complete." Walker said state Department of Environmental Protection prohibits companies from allowing odors to escape from such sites. DEP will conduct periodic inspections of the facilities to ensure that they are within compliance, he said. Zimmerlink attended the open house. Commissioners Vince Vicites and Vincent Zapotosky did not. Murrysville mayor voices Marcellus concerns By Daveen Rae Kurutz MURRYSVILLE STAR Friday, March 18, 2011 Concerns about air and water quality spurred a Murrysville official to ask state legislators for help. Mayor Bob Brooks, after reading a series of articles in The New York Times detailing hazards associated with wastewater from the Marcellus shale fracking process, sent a plea to Sen. Don White (R-41), Rep. Eli Evankovich (R-54) and Rep. Joe Markosek (D-25). In his letter, Brooks requested the legislators take a stand to protect water and air near shale drilling sites. "Air and water are state responsibilities because you are supposed to have access to the expertise," Brooks said in the letter. "Surely, the state can get the money from that industry to police it and protect us. There can be no excuse accepted. You must depend on accountability. It seems to me that 'your responsibility' must be to stop the process until the state gets it fixed." This was not Brooks' first public support of a moratorium on Marcellus shale drilling. Last year, he sent a letter to legislators requesting a two-year moratorium from the state so that the Department of Environmental Protection and other state agencies would have enough time to prepare for shale drilling. "What you've got to do is hold up a little bit," Brooks said. "Then, let the permits get going again. It needs to slow down a bit." Currently, there are no permits issued to drill a Marcellus well in the municipality. Council is reviewing a proposed ordinance that would restrict where drilling occurs in Murrysville; however, that ordinance has been met with a mix of resistance and support from the community. Recent public hearings, as well as regular council meetings, have had numerous resident comments against drilling in the municipality. However, the past few meetings have seen additional residents supporting the ordinance. Brooks said he addressed the state legislators because local officials have no authority to regulate air and water. The state Oil and Gas Act gave that responsibility to state officials. "If people want to put those restrictions or controls or tests on Marcellus shale, they need to go to the state," Brooks said. Evankovich, who serves on the House Environmental Resources and Energy committee, said he has received a lot of information about shale drilling since taking office in January. "The simple truth is we are being presented with a mixture of information, some factual, some emotional," Evankovich said. "We have to separate the two and understand what is going on. We need to make sure this process is being done as safely as possible." Evankovich said he isn't against drilling, but he wants to make sure his constituents and their communities are safe. "I support fixing the industry," he said. "I do not support destroying the industry. We need to make sure what needs to be done and what is being done meet the high standards we set for ourselves." Evankovich said there will be public hearings and many more discussions about the air and water quality near shale drilling. Joe Pittman, White's chief of staff, said the same thing will be coming out of the Senate. Pittman said White has been concerned about the negative impacts drilling could have on water and air quality in the commonwealth. White sits on the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy committee, which is taking a closer look at the New York Times report, which questions the safety of Pennsylvania's water. That committee is planning hearings and reviewing legislation that would institute additional water and air protections, Pittman said. "Sen. White absolutely believes we need to make sure public safety is the number one priority," Pittman said. "If there are pollution issues, they need to be addressed and corrected." But so far, there haven't been major pollution issues, according to DEP. The department reported Monday that tests of water located downriver from treatment plants that handle shale wastewater didn't show dangerous levels of radioactivity. The samples, which were taken in November and December, came from the Monongahela, Conemaugh, Allegheny, Beaver and Tioga rivers, South Fork Ten Mile Creek and the west branch of the Susquehanna River. Daveen Rae Kurutz can be reached at dmclaughlin(a)tribweb.com or 412-856-7400 x8627. ----- Original Message ----- From: Julie Archer To: Beth Little Cc: Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 1:34 PM Subject: Lewisburg drilling resolution, ordinance http://www.register-herald.com/local/x449494771/Gas-drilling-regulations-in… March 17, 2011 Gas drilling regulations inadequate, council says By Tina Alvey Register-Herald Reporter The Register-Herald Thu Mar 17, 2011, 12:03 AM EDT LEWISBURG — State regulations pertaining to the development of the Marcellus shale gas reserves are inadequate, according to a resolution that Lewisburg City Council voted Tuesday evening to send to legislators and the acting governor. In the resolution, city officials expressed their concerns about the lack of protection afforded the state’s water resources, particularly the Greenbrier River watershed, which is the source of water for Lewisburg’s regional system, serving 4,732 customers. “State regulations do not adequately regulate the amount of water that can be withdrawn from aquifers and public bodies of water by Marcellus shale development companies in West Virginia,” the resolution reads. Reference is also made to “contamination from liquid byproducts of hydraulic fracking technologies being released into public bodies of water.” The resolution points to a lack of funding for adequate numbers of inspectors at the state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to monitor the Marcellus developers. “Its not (DEP’s) fault,” Mayor John Manchester said, noting that regulatory legislation proposed but not acted upon this year would have increased permit fees, thereby providing a revenue source for hiring more inspectors. The mayor said DEP currently employs only 19 inspectors, but the state has issued more than 50,000 gas drilling permits. The resolution calls for the governor to call a special session of the legislature to address the regulatory issue in a timely fashion and to declare a moratorium on horizontal drilling permits in the Marcellus shale until adequate regulations protecting water supplies are in place. Acting Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin has shown no inclination to convene a special session on the Marcellus issue, instead calling on legislators to find more money in the budget to hire additional DEP inspectors and instructing DEP Secretary Randy Huffman to formulate new regulations within the department. In a related matter, council approved the second and final reading of an ordinance prohibiting “locating, drilling, equipping or producing of any oil and gas” in any district within the city limits. In other business: Council adopted a general fund budget of $4.37 million for fiscal year 2011-12, as well as a $15,000 coal severance budget. The coal severance revenue is once again being allocated to parks projects and, upon the mayor’s request, $8,000 from contingency funds will be set aside “to allow for projects as they may show themselves” to tout Lewisburg’s recent selection as America’s Coolest Small Town in a Budget Travel magazine contest. Public Works director Mark Carver predicted the Route 219 North sidewalk project will begin in late April or early May. When complete, the sidewalk will link the downtown business district to Wal-Mart. Carver noted interest in recycling is increasing, leading the city to obtain containers from the Greenbrier County Recycling Center in Ronceverte for pre-sorting at the city shop. He also reminded would-be recyclers to wash out containers before depositing them for pickup. — E-mail: talvey(a)register-herald.com Julie Archer WV Citizen Action Group 1500 Dixie Street Charleston, WV 25311 (304) 346-5891 (304) 346-8981 FAX www.wvcag.org From: Beth Little To: Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 9:23 AM Subject: Lawsuit over gas royalties Ah, those gas companies. http://www.timesleader.com/news/ap?articleID=6694922 Don Strimbeck, Sec/Treas Upper Mon River Assoc UpperMon.org MonRiverSummit.org WVU t-shirts & prints - FindHarri.com 109 Broad Street, P. O. Box 519 Granville WV 26534-0519 304-599-7585 (fax 4131) dcsoinks(a)comcast.net

1 0

Re: [EC] [CLEAR] Dunkard Creek Fish Kill Settlement
by James Kotcon 14 Mar '11

14 Mar '11

Major news today on Dunkard Creek. Please recall that the Sierra Club had filed a Notice of Intent to sue ConSol over this one, but did not actually file the lawsuit after EPA got involved. Also note that this Consent Decree is subject to a 30-day Pubic Comment period. Some are wondering why such a massive and prolonged spill resulted in only $500,000 in Natural Resources Damage assessments in Monongalia County. Now if ConSol can spend that kind of money on he headwaters of Dunkard Creek and other streams, do you suppose that Longview/AMDRI might be required to use this technology on their discharges at the Steele Shaft near the mouth of Dunkard Creek? For information on specifics of the consent decree, please review the press release from EPA. It does not have quite the "cheerleading for coal" tone that the DEP press release does. And perhaps if DEP had ben more diligent in their enforcement back in 2007-09, the fish kill might never have happened. Available at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/ab2d81eb088f4a7e85257359003f5339/1… More details, including a link to the Consent Decree (58 pages), are available at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/cases/civil/cwa/consol.html Jim Kotcon 304-293-8822 (office) 304-594-3322 (home) >>> <Duane330(a)aol.com> 3/14/2011 5:46 PM >>> DUNKARD CREEK FISH KILL SETTLEMENT ============================================================ Monday, March 14, 2011 @ 3:07 PM ============================================================ The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection and the state Division of Natural Resources have entered into a proposed settlement with CONSOL Energy in which the company has agreed to pay $500,000 for natural resources damages in Dunkard Creek in Monongalia County. The $500,000 settlement is in addition to a $5.5 million civil penalty the company will pay and nearly $200 million the company will spend on the construction of an advanced water treatment plant to address high levels of chlorides discharged from four of its underground mines in northern West Virginia. Both the civil penalty and the water treatment plant are part of a settlement the company entered into with the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the WVDEP. In September 2009, thousands of fish, mussels and amphibians were killed in Dunkard Creek because of toxins produced by Golden Algae that had begun blooming in the stream. Golden Algae, which is not native to West Virginia’s fresh water streams, is more commonly found in brackish or salty water bodies. Although it was never determined how the Golden Algae was introduced into Dunkard Creek, research indicated that nutrients and high levels of chlorides and dissolved solids can contribute to its growth. “In the days immediately following the fish kill in Dunkard Creek, CONSOL voluntarily worked with the DEP and the EPA to proactively manage their mining operations to minimize the risk of another algae outbreak while at the same time keeping their miners working,” said DEP Cabinet Secretary Randy Huffman. With requirements put in place by the WVDEP to reduce the amount of chlorides and total dissolved solids (TDS) in Dunkard Creek, the Monongalia County stream continues to avoid dangerous algae blooms that can threaten aquatic life. Additionally, the state DNR reports that fish are returning to Dunkard Creek following the massive kill. A fish survey conducted at one station on Dunkard Creek a month following the September 2009 fish kill revealed only four species of fish. By July 2010, sampling revealed 29 species at that same station. In 2005, the same location had 33 species. On Dec. 18, 2009, the WVDEP issued the first of two orders to CONSOL that addressed the company’s mine water management in relation to CONSOL pumping water from its underground mining operations into Dunkard Creek; established Golden Algae monitoring requirements for CONSOL; called for the company to monitor for chlorides, TDS, selenium and specific conductance at various outlets on Dunkard Creek; and set chloride and specific conductance levels for CONSOL discharges. Patrick Campbell, of the WVDEP’s Division of Water and Waste Management, said Dunkard Creek has been free of Golden Algae since January 2010. “Multiple locations on Dunkard Creek have been monitored weekly by the company and periodically by us (WVDEP) since January and nothing has turned up,” Campbell said. “We also sampled 40 other locations around the state last summer and didn’t find Golden Algae, which I think is significant. As far as we can tell right now, this was isolated to Dunkard Creek.” Still, Campbell said the WVDEP would likely monitor for Golden Algae “for the next four or five years or until we get some confidence level that this was an isolated event.” Although it will likely take decades for the mussel population to return, DNR biologists found that fish such as minnows, darters and suckers are returning to Dunkard Creek from tributaries and some reproduction is occurring. “This is a reflection that water quality has improved and is being maintained,” Campbell said. Mining is critical to our state’s economy, but clean water is paramount. The cooperative efforts by all involved are protecting both. According to CONSOL, not one job will be lost, but the plan will result in clean water. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/consol-energy-reaches-ground-breaki ng-clean-water-agreement-with-us-epa-and-west-virginia-dep-117939064.html_ (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/consol-energy-reaches-ground-breakin g-clean-water-agreement-with-us-epa-and-west-virginia-dep-117939064.html)

1 0

Marcellus - Request a special session from the Governor
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 14 Mar '11

14 Mar '11

New Jersey just banned hydraulic fracturing in their state. West Virginia doesn't even keep track of where the millions of gallons of toxic waste water are going. PLEASE take two minutes and call Acting Governor Tomblin's office and leave a message with his secretary (she's very nice) requesting he call a special session to regulate Marcellus Shale gas drilling. 304-558-2000. -Jonathan

1 0

Re: [EC] DP article re: Albright
by Cindy Rank 14 Mar '11

14 Mar '11

1 0

Re: [EC] DP article re: Albright
by Jim Sconyers 14 Mar '11

14 Mar '11

I hadn't seen it - thanks Cindy. Frankly I find this shocking - that a right-wing newspaper would set itself up to refute - in their view at least - the science behind the charges. And it's bizarre that they want to dispute the company's own reported discharges. All the more reason to be glad this is moving ahead to litigation. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ________________________________ From: Cindy Rank <clrank(a)hughes.net> To: mbecher(a)appalachian-center.org; jlovett(a)appalachian-center.org; derek_teaney(a)yahoo.com; mjanes(a)hardynet.com Cc: sminney(a)wvrivers.org; jkotcon(a)wvu.edu; jim_scon(a)yahoo.com; hugh.rogers(a)gmail.com Sent: Mon, March 14, 2011 9:24:11 AM Subject: DP article re: Albright In case you haven't seen this article: Local page 9-A DOMINION POST Monday 14 March 2011: UPDATE Test: Water meets standards Groups say Mon Power is polluting BY MICHELLE WOLFORD The Dominion Post KINGWOOD — Three environmental groups have threatened to file suit against Mon Power over arsenic levels from coal ash dumps near the Albright Power Plant, which the company owns. The groups — West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, W.Va. Rivers Coalition and Sierra Club of West Virginia — claimed in a letter sent to the company in February that those levels are “unlawfully high” in the Cheat River. The groups also claim the company is not reporting selenium discharge with enough accuracy to determine if it violates its DEP permit. On Feb. 22, The Dominion Post collected water samples from the Cheat about one mile upstream from the Albright Power Plant, and a quarter of a mile downstream from the plant. The samples were tested for arsenic and selenium by Reliance Laboratories Inc. of Bridgeport. Results received this week show that the water in the Cheat River meets Water Quality Standards. Neither sample revealed either mineral at a level above the permit restrictions. The samples were not obtained on Mon Power property nor at the same sites where the company checked its discharge. But they were collected before drainage from the coal ash dumps enters the river and after. Numbers provided by the groups, which the state DEP has confirmed are Mon Power’s (then known as Allegheny Power) readings at the Albright plant, indicate the company did exceed its discharge limit for arsenic from July to December of 2010. “Each discharge amount that exceeds permit limits is an unlawful and unpermitted discharge, and therefore, is not shielded from liability” under the Clean Water Act, the groups told the company in a letter, which threatens a lawsuit seeking civil penalties and “for an injunction compelling it to come into compliance with the Act and its permit requirements if no remediation steps are outlined.” According to Kathy Cosco, a spokeswoman for the West Virginia DEP, exceeding permit limits “does not always trigger notices of violation or penalties.” If the DEP notices a pattern of “exceedences,” she said, “the DEP will work with the company to determine what the problem is. If the company can’t get them in line, or if they fail to take steps necessary to rectify the situation, then the agency will start down the path of assessing penalties. “There are instances where the nature or severity of a single violation may result in the assessment of a penalty,” Cosco said. “Generally speaking, however, an individual exceedance reported on a Discharge Monitoring Report would not trigger an enforcement action. The company is expected to take necessary measures to achieve compliance with the permit.” The environmental groups also claim Allegheny Power isn’t accurately reporting selenium discharges into the Cheat River. “From March 2010 through October 2010, Allegheny Energy reported the concentration of selenium in its effluent with only three significant digits — too few for the undersigned, the DEP, or the public to determine whether a violation had occurred.” According to Cosco, “the company has what is a called a variance: A condition that allows the facility a threeyear period during which it may exceed its selenium limits three times before a violation is triggered.” In other words, if the company exceeds the 0.005 mg/l (milligrams per liter) four times in a 36-month period then the exceedence is considered a violation. When the legislature passed this variance, it applied to monitoring that began Jan. 25, 2010, so the permit just completed the first year of the threeyear period. In the letter to Allegheny Energy, the three groups claim Allegheny Energy “has met and possibly exceeded its limit of 0.005 mg/L on at least five separate occasions. ... Because Allegheny Energy is apparently rounding to the nearest part per billion (equivalent to a thousandth of a mg/L), a reported 0.005 mg/L could reflect a discharge with a selenium concentration from 4.51 parts per billion to 5.49 parts per billion.” Testing done on behalf of The Dominion Post showed the selenium level at less than 0.004 mg/L upstreamm and downstream from the plant, which is in compliance with its permit limit. The letter asserts that by rounding off the numbers, the company “has the potential to hide violations of its permits, and is therefore not in accordance with the monitoring and reporting requirements of the Clean Water Act.” “Our concern is that the standards set by DEP to protect human health and the environment are not being met,” said Mike Becher of the Appalachian Center for the Economy and the Environment, who represents three nonprofits. “An additional consideration is that just downstream of this discharge is a trout stream —- Daugherty Run,” he said. Becher said the technology exists to treat pollutants, such as arsenic. “The best result from our perspective is to achieve compliance with the legal limits in the permit.” David Neurohr, an Allegheny Energy spokesman, said the company had no comment “until we can see something a little more definite.” He said he had not seen the letter sent to Daniel C. McIntire, Allegheny’s vice president of Generation Operations.

2 1

CELEBRATING THE "GREEN" FUITURE...on March 17th
by Allan Tweddle 12 Mar '11

12 Mar '11

I goofed... I forgot to give you the date...17th of Irish/March! So...come and hear Charlie speaking of "Celebrating the Green (Energy)" on St. Patrick's Day, and to learn more about Global Climate Change, I urge you to attend a presentation by one of the State's successful and respected native sons who is knowledgeable about the utility industry, Global Climate Change and future trends. Charles E Bayless, Retired President of WV Tech in Montgomery, former CEO of BOTH New Hampshire Power and Light as well as Tucson Electric, will speak at the Engineering Hall on the WV Tech Campus at 1:00 p.m. on Thursday March 17th. (The Engineering Hall is at the West end of the Campus, the closest building on campus to Charleston) Dr. Bayless is an internationally recognized and pragmatic source of experience and knowledge of the electric power industry. He serves on several international Boards including the Ontario Power Authority in Toronto and West Virginia Water in Charleston. He is a double degreed electrical engineer (WV Tech & WVU), with an MBA (Michigan) and a law degree from WVU. Allan

1 0

GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE; CRISIS OR OPPORTUNITY FOR WEST VIRGINIA?
by Allan Tweddle 12 Mar '11

12 Mar '11

Global Climate Change is real and West Virginia needs to step up and participate in correcting this major man made threat to our planet. If you want to learn about the science, and participate in a dialogue as to how we can and must take corrective action, come to one of the most thoughtful and informative presentations you will ever hear on the subject. Please notify all you can about a speech and slide presentation next week that will be well worth you and your colleagues (and members/readership) to attend. As the announcement in the Charleston Daily Mail announced last week; "Charles Bayless, former president of WVU-Tech will speak next week in Montgomery about his belief that global climate change is the greatest danger facing humanity. Bayless will speak at 1:00 p.m. in WVU Tech's Engineering Auditorium. A native of Dunbar, Bayless is a former CEO of Tucson Electric Power, former President and CEO of Illinois Power Co's Illinova Group, an integrated electric and gas utility. (The Engineering building is at the West end of the campus.) Bayless earned a Bachelor's degree in electrical engineering (EE) from Tech, an Masters Degree in EE from WVU, an MBA from Michigan and a Law Degree form WVU. For more information about Bayless Presentation, call Amy Moore [at the College] at (304) 442-3169 On a personal note, I will tell you that I have had the privilege to get to know Charlie Bayless as he has been a member of our emerging company's board of directors and an angel investor. Together, we are building a manufacturing business that will not only cut the carbon footprint of every Boeing and Airbus plane that uses our patent pending system, but we will operate a manufacturing plant whose carbon footprint will be ZERO by 2020. Come, hear and see the truth and science from this global expert, for what I believe, is the critically serious nature of the complex issues of global climate change. And, then you too will be better informed, can think about, and maybe act upon, the many opportunities for innovation to solve humanity's most critical threat in history. Hope to see you there Allan

1 0

WV EQB rules in favor of Sierra Club on conductivity re: NPDES permits
by Frank Young 10 Mar '11

10 Mar '11

Blank Word just coming in this afternoon that the West Virginia Environmental Quality Board has ruled for the Sierra Club in a major permit appeal that put the spotlight on conductivity pollution from strip mines and on the U.S. EPA’s effort to crack down on mountaintop removal. http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2011/03/10/wvdep-ordered-to-set-permi…

1 0

Fw: Released today: A Risky Proposition: The Financial Hazards of New Investments in Coal Plants
by Jim Sconyers 10 Mar '11

10 Mar '11

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: LuCinda Hohmann <LHohmann(a)UCSUSA.ORG> To: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Sent: Wed, March 9, 2011 6:17:03 PM Subject: Released today: A Risky Proposition: The Financial Hazards of New Investments in Coal Plants FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Randy Rieland, 202-331-6959 NEW REPORT WARNS AGAINST INVESTMENTS IN NEW OR EXISTING COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS REPLACING COAL PLANTS WITH CHEAPER, CLEANER, LESS RISKY ALTERNATIVES WOULD SAVE LIVES AND CURB CLIMATE CHANGE EMISSIONS WASHINGTON (March 9, 2011) – The cost of constructing or retrofitting coal-fired electric power plants and the rising cost of coal have made coal power an extremely risky long-term investment, according to a report released today by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). The report, “A Risky Proposition: The Financial Hazards of New Investments in Coal Plants,”also identified a number of other factors that make investing in coal a gamble, including its continuing threat to public health and the environment. “We have a fleet of ancient, dirty coal plants in this country that are increasingly unreliable and long past due for retirement,” said Barbara Freese, a co-author of the report and senior policy analyst for the UCS Climate and Energy Program. “Plant owners have to decide whether to sink more money into retrofitting those old plants or replacing them with much cleaner energy technologies. But even if they retrofit them with the pollution controls available today, the plants will still emit massive amounts of carbon pollution. “Replacing old, dirty coal plants with cleaner, cheaper, less risky alternatives would be a much better bet,” she added. “And it would save lives, protect our health and reduce the emissions that cause climate change.” More than 70 percent of U.S. coal-plant-capacity is already more than 30 years old—the operating lifetime for which coal plants were typically designed—and a third went online before 1970. Some plant operators have announced they will retire old plants. Others are planning to retrofit their plants with modern pollution control technology—which would reduce emissions of several dangerous pollutants, but not carbon. Such investments would not only make it harder to protect the climate, the report concluded, but also expose investors and ratepayers to a host of financial threats. The factors that make coal power such a precarious investment include: · U.S. coal prices are rising and could be driven much higher by soaring global demand, especially from Asia. Spot prices for Appalachia coal spiked dramatically in 2008, largely due to international demand, and those prices are steadily rising again with the global economic recovery. And the price for a one-month contract for coal from Wyoming’s Powder River Basin rose 67 percent between October, 2009 and October, 2010. While western coal has been less exposed to volatile global markets, that situation appears to be changing since major coal producers in the West have announced plans to increase their exports to China and other Asian markets. · Coal prices could also be driven higher by constraints on supply. The amount of economically-recoverable coal reserves may be smaller than previously thought. · Major coal projects face high, unpredictable construction costs. The cost of building a new coal plant in the United States has roughly doubled in the past five years. · The cost advantage coal power traditionally enjoyed over cleaner energy options has largely disappeared when it comes to new plants. Power from new coal plants now costs more than power from new gas plants, wind facilities and the best geothermal sites, and much more than investing in energy efficiency. · Coal power is the largest U.S. carbon pollution source—contributing about one-third of all energy-related emissions and more than the entire surface transportation sector. Coal-fired power plants inevitably will face increasingpressure to dramatically cut emissions to help curb climate change. The cost of generating electricity from new coal plants could increase 11 to 37 percent under a range of carbon prices in the future. · Carbon-capture and storage (CCS) retrofits cannot be counted on to affordably cut emissions. Federal studies show that adding CCS to a new plant could increase the cost of generating electricity 36 to 78 percent, while retrofitting an existing plant could increase its costs by 330 percent. · Federal and state governments are promoting energy efficiency and clean energy sources, which will cut demand for coal power. Twenty-seven states have energy efficiency standards or a standard pending, and several states now require annual reductions in electricity use of at least 2 percent. Twenty-nine states now have a standard requiring utilities to increase their reliance on renewable energy sources, more than doubling since 2004. · Coal plants also face new costs associated with such harmful emissions as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide, which are associated with thousands of deaths annually, and mercury, which threatens the brain development of infants and children. The owners of the most damaging older coal plants have been taking advantage of a legal loophole for decades, Freese pointed out. Clean air legislation and rules put in place in the 1970s did not require existing plants to install pollution control equipment until their next major modification. It was assumed that they would either modify or shut down within a few years. “But coal operators kept these plants running well beyond their expected retirement dates and never installed the pollution controls newer plants were required to use,” Freese said. Even with this loophole, federal air regulations have gone a long way to protect the public health. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, for example, signed into law by George Herbert Walker Bush, prevented as many as 160,000 premature deaths last year alone, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The amendments also were cost effective. According to the EPA, they’ve cost $65 billion to implement, but their overall financial benefit could reach $2 trillion by 2020. “The success of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments shows that requiring coal plants to cut their pollution leads to public health and economic benefits many times higher than the cost for old coal plants to comply with the law,” Freese said. “The amendments have done a lot of good, but we need to do more. Coal plants are still linked to the deaths of thousands of Americans yearly and many other health threats.” Finally, according to the report, the electric power industry could retire many old coal-fired plants without causing reliability problems with the power grid, Freese said. “First, there is a lot of extra generating capacity on the grid right now. And second, energy efficiency and renewable energy investments are reducing the need for coal. It’s a good time to retire coal plants.” ### The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading U.S. science-based nonprofit organization working for a healthy environment and a safer world. Founded in 1969, UCS is headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and also has offices in Berkeley, Chicago and Washington, D.C. For more information, go to www.ucsusa.org. LuCinda Hohmann Midwest Outreach Coordinator Union of Concerned Scientists Midwest Office 1 North LaSalle St, Suite 1904 Chicago, IL 60602 312-578-1750 x12 LHohmann(a)ucsusa.org www.ucsusa.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE list, send any message to: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/

3 3

Please stop complete reading of bills in house.
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 10 Mar '11

10 Mar '11

Ron, Please do not let your conflict with Rich Thompson be grounds to slow down the legislative process by requiring that all bills be read in full. There are important bills that will be put at risk. It's not you who will suffer the outcome if these bills do not pass, but rather the people of WV that you were chosen by to serve as a public servant. Please reverse this decision. Thank-you, -Jonathan

1 1

CNG as a transportation fuel.
by Allan Tweddle 09 Mar '11

09 Mar '11

Professor Carr. Congratulations on the subtle but excellent wake up call that you issued as part of the article that was published originally in the Wheeling Register, and published today in the Charleston Daily Mail. Your comments, as reported, are right on. Natural gas is abundant, relatively less expensive than either gasoline or diesel fuel, and better for the environment and the engines...the only caveat is the cost of the delivery system. There is also an underplayed benefit to compressed natural gas (CNG). It is the cleanest of the fossil fuels, and until we get to an all solar, wind, geothermal and hydrogen economy, it appears to be the most economical fuel for BOTH transportation and power generation. (The recent analysis by Harvard's School of Public Health certainly shed yet another light on the true economics or coal fired power that would, if the real costs were borne by coal, make natural gas the cheapest fuel for power generation as well. But that's another topic.) I am attaching an op-ed that I wrote and was printed in the Charleston Gazette in 2009 when it was announced that the KRT here in Kanawha County was buying hybrid diesel busses. It spells out my background, experience and posture with regard to CNG as a fuel, particularly for dedicated diesel bus and truck fleets. What can we do collectively to start, foster, incite or encourage an acceleration of a transition to CNG? We all have unique perspectives and experience that should get policy maker's attention. Probably too late for this Legislative session, but it takes time to educate the legislators...so I invite your ideas as to how we can bring about change in thinking. Surely the Legislators who will profit from the Marcellus Shale gas will be interested. I am copying three other WVU professors that I know. Dr. Atkinson and I just met last week at the ARPA-E Energy Summit in D.C. His specialty is engine design. Dr. Carl Irwin of the Industries of the Future Office is an old friend who has been a wise counselor to me as I build a manufacturing business that will reduce the carbon footprint of every Boeing and Airbus aircraft. He too was at the ARPA-E Energy Summit. Dr. Kotcon has been quite active in environmental matters in the State, and always offers stimulating and knowledgeable thoughts about cleaning up our energy infrastructure and advocating conservation. And while there are serious environmental issues surrounding the extraction of the Marcellus Shale natural gas, I am sure that environmentally sound practices will eventually be in place that will enable this State to benefit from its vast potential. Getting the State's fleet of school busses BACK on CNG, and all the other diesel engines as well, will surely help the budget shortfall, clean up the air and switch our fuel acquisition sources from those that hate us to our own shores...indeed our own neighbors in this State. I look forward to hearing your good thoughts... Allan Tweddle, CEO & Chairman Composite Transport Technologies Inc. Charleston WV p.s. My company does not have ANY vested direct financial interest in these ideas...I am just an engineer with 50 years of experience in environmental matters and a very concerned grandfather and taxpayer...

1 0

FW: [NoCoal] Coal Free NW takes a giant step f/w
by Beth Little 08 Mar '11

08 Mar '11

See highlighted text. From: nonewcoalplants-bounces(a)energyjustice.net [mailto:nonewcoalplants-bounces@energyjustice.net] On Behalf Of Bruce Nilles Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 10:53 AM To: nonewcoalplants(a)energyjustice.net Subject: [NoCoal] Coal Free NW takes a giant step f/w Dear Friends, In a giant step forward on our path to systematically ending coal use in the United States we just finalized an agreement with WA Gov Gregoire, Trans Alta, and WA senators to close the massive 1460MW coal plant in Washingon State. Notably, the press release below includes our brothers and sisters at IBEW, reflecting how we were able to thread this needle in a way that works for our beyond coal goals and for the workers. This agreement was finalized Friday and passed the state senate late yesterday. House passage will be tough, but should be doable. This latest step forward builds on our successful campaign to lock in closure of the PGE plant in Oregon earlier this year and once this WA legislation is finalized we will have an enforceable timeline and plan to rid the Pacific NW of both of its coal plants. This WA coal plant has been the target of a concerted two-year campaign, with a great group of allies, including Earthjustice, Washington Environmental Council, Climate Solutions, NPCA (who is still vetting this agreement) and NW Energy Coalition. Over the past two years we jump started a statewide discussion about the dangers of coal, and systematically shifted the discussion from a) WA state has a filthy coal plant, to b) should this plant get retired, to c) "when" should this plant be retired? This agreement is all the more remarkable (and made earlier retirement difficult) because Trans Alta spent over $500M in the past decade to install SO2 scrubbers and is one of the newer plants in the US (1972-unit 1, 1973-unit2). The agreement requires the first unit close in 9 years (2020) and second unit in 14 years (2025). In the interim Trans Alta must install Nox controls to mitigate the pollution impacts on downwind communities and the haze pollution in a large number of our most treasured public lands, including Mt. Ranier and North Cascades National Parks. In this agreement we also did something we have never done before - establish a $55M transition fund as a way to help workers and the community get weaned off of coal. While we had hoped for a quicker timeline this schedule provides the workers w/plenty of lead time - that is why IBEW supports this agreement - and gives us time to reconfigure the NW electric grid to replace the largest power plant in the region w/mix of wind, solar and geothermal and minimize the use of natural gas. The Oregon and Washington plants (Boardman and Trans Alta) generate about 15,000 GWH of electricity annually. If this is replaced with wind and solar it will require about 6,000MW of new wind/solar installations over the next 9-14 years. This would represent the largest new clean energy market opportunity that this region has ever seen, given that last year the entire US installed 1200MW of solar and 5,000MW of wind. Step by step we are changing the politics, weakening our opponents in the coal industry, and seeding the country for a serious discussion about combating global warming. Cheers, Bruce ----- Forwarded by Bruce Nilles/Sierraclub on 03/05/2011 05:28 PM ----- From: "Shagren, Karina (GOV)" <Karina.Shagren(a)GOV.WA.GOV> To: "Shagren, Karina (GOV)" <Karina.Shagren(a)GOV.WA.GOV> Cc: Date: 03/05/2011 05:24 PM Subject: Gov. Gregoire announces agreement with TransAlta _____ CHRISTINE O. GREGOIRE Governor STATE OF WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR P.O. Box 40002 • Olympia, Washington 98504-0002 • (360) 902-4111 For Release: Immediate Media Contact: Governor’s Communications Office Date: March 5, 2011 Phone: 360-902-4136 Gov. Gregoire announces agreement with TransAlta Company agrees to transition off of coal, invest in energy efficiency projects and innovative energy technologies OLYMPIA— Gov. Chris Gregoire today announced a proposed agreement has been reached with TransAlta to significantly reduce emissions from the company’s coal-fired power plant in the Centralia area. The agreement was negotiated by TransAlta, the state of Washington and members of the environmental community to ensure a transition to cleaner power while allowing the necessary time to provide economic stability to Southwest Washington. “What a proud day for the Centralia community, and all of Washington state,” Gregoire said. “I congratulate all of the parties involved who worked in good faith, and spent countless hours to achieve this agreement. This compromise promises cleaner air for our future, while providing the necessary time to ensure economic stability, job protection and enough power on the grid to keep our homes and businesses running. I encourage the Legislature to take timely action to ensure this agreement moves forward.” In 2009, Gregoire signed an executive order directing the Department of Ecology to work with TransAlta to establish an agreed order that would apply the greenhouse gas emissions performance standards by no later than December 31, 2025. Today’s agreement moves up the performance standards for one of two boilers to Dec. 31, 2020 and the other boiler on Dec. 31, 2025. “We’re pleased to see all parties agree on legislation that balances the interests of jobs, the economy, energy and the environment,” said Stephen Snyder, President and CEO of TransAlta. “This legislation meets our commitment to a low-carbon future through transition from coal to gas in Washington, significantly reduces our environmental risk and allows us to provide fair shareholder value through favorable long-term contracts while protecting jobs and the economy of the local community.” Senator Phil Rockefeller introduced an amendment which would incorporate the new agreement into SB 5769, which would establish the first coal-free date in law. This amendment includes: * TransAlta will be allowed in the interim to sell coal power under long-term contracts within Washington – which will give the company the financial stability needed to transition to a cleaner source of energy; * The plant’s two coal boilers will meet the state’s emissions performance standard for new and modified power plants, which will require the boilers to shut down. The standard will apply to one boiler on Dec. 31, 2020, and to the other boiler on Dec. 31, 2025 – essentially ending coal-fired power in Washington state in the next 14 years; * In 2013, TransAlta will install additional air pollution control technology to further reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides at the plant. This technology is called selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR). The TransAlta plant is the state’s largest single industrial source of nitrogen oxide emissions. Nitrogen oxides are one of the causes of visibility-limiting regional haze in national parks and on federal lands; and * TransAlta agrees to contribute $30 million in a community investment fund to help with energy efficiency projects, as well as $25 million in an energy technology transition fund, which must be spent on supporting innovative energy technologies and companies in Washington state. “It’s great news that TransAlta and the people interested in the future of the Centralia community and clean air have come together on a proposed agreement,” said Rockefeller. “I congratulate them, but at the same time recognize we have a lot of work ahead of us. The amendment I have prepared will capture the recent agreement in legislative language. Sen. Dan Swecker from Lewis County has signed onto this amendment and I hope others follow. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, the company and the governor to arrive at a final agreement.” “Clean air and water have always been my top priority,” Rep. Marko Liias said, “and this compromise goes a long way towards protecting our environment and preserving good jobs. I’m glad to see TransAlta has agreed to this solution, which will provide $55 million towards the local community and economy.” “This is a giant step forward toward a healthier and safer Washington, free from coal,” said Bruce Nilles, Deputy Conservation Director with the Sierra Club. “We are leaving coal pollution in the past as we continue building the clean energy economy of today. We thank the Governor, TransAlta, Sen. Rockefeller, Rep. Liias, the people of Lewis County and the Environmental Priorities Coalition for their efforts in achieving this historic agreement.” “We are excited to be a part of this solution, which will help Washington transition to a clean energy economy, safeguard public health, and provide a secure economic future for Lewis County. We look forward to working closely with the Legislature to ensure passage of this groundbreaking agreement,” said Rod Brown, President, Washington Environmental Council. “Our priority was maintaining family-wage jobs in the Centralia area,” said Bob Guenther from the Thurston-Lewis-Mason Central Labor Council, IBEW 77. “That’s what every community needs to thrive, and Centralia is no exception. TransAlta provides critical employment opportunities to ensure a strong economy in Southwest Washington, and I’m pleased that our goal of sustaining good jobs was met with this agreement while providing certainty for all involved including the community, labor, the company, the environment and the grid.” # # #

1 0

Marcelus shale Campaign planning meeting
by Beth Little 07 Mar '11

07 Mar '11

This is to make sure I didn't miss anyone on the Energy Committee, so I'm sorry if you get this twice. Monday, Marcy 21 at noon at Jim Kotcon's house (Jim please follow up with some directions). Jonathan, if I missed anyone on the Energy Committee, please let me know and I'll forward this to them. We will be updating our campaign plan based on what has, or most likely hasn't, happened at the 2011 legislative session. We will also discuss the upcoming governor's race. Let us know if you are likely to come. More later..

1 0

Fwd: Wind energy discussion at WVU Law
by James Kotcon 07 Mar '11

07 Mar '11

>>> Walton Christopher Shepherd <waltonchristophershepherd(a)gmail.com> 3/6/2011 8:41 PM >>> Hello colleague: On Monday, March 14 at noon at the Law School, Grant Shuman, a lawyer from Spilman, Thomas and Battle in Charleston will be discussing legal issues surrounding wind energy development in WV that I think you will find interesting. Grant is extremely bright, a native West Virginian, and he has worked on most of the major wind energy cases in WV, both in the court and at the PSC, including on Mount Storm and on the fascinating Beech Ridge case. He has long been an immense value to me personally in understanding the realities of wind development. I hope you can make it! I'll send another reminder between now and then. Have a great week, Chris Shepherd 206.7907 PS: And of course, please forward to any and all that may be interested.

1 0

Re: [EC] Comments on Sierra Club Energy Policy Amendments
by James Kotcon 06 Mar '11

06 Mar '11

The Sierra Club is proposing to revise its Energy Policy. It was first proposed in 2006, and has been amended a couple times, but some of these new revisions are pretty major. This document guides the Club's positions on numerous specific projects, so this basically tells us what we are supposed to support, what we should oppose, and where we have case-specific wiggle room. We are supposed to submit comments by March 31, and the Energy Committee was asked to develop comments for the WV Chapter. Attached is the draft policy with revisions highlighted in yellow. Also attached is the first draft of my comments on these revisions. Some are strictly editorial, but some are substantive policy comments. I propose that the Chapter finalize any comments this week, so that we can circulate them to other entities to gather support for our position. Please let me know if you have any additional thoughts or suggestions. Jim Kotcon 304-293-8822 (office) 304-594-3322 (home) _____ From: Bill Price [mailto:bill.price@sierraclub.org] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 11:39 AM To: 'Gary Nelson'; 'Gwen Jones'; 'Jim Kotcon'; 'Jonathan Rosenbaum'; 'Sally Wilts'; 'Heather Heilman'; 'Jim Sconyers'; 'Paul Wilson'; 'Regina Hendrix'; 'Frank Young'; 'Kevin Fooce' Cc: 'David Muhly'; 'Mark Kresowik' Subject: Comment period on Sierra Club Energy Policy Amendments All, Sierra Club is circulating a set of proposed amendments to the Club's Energy Policy. I've attached a copy of the policy with the revisions highlighted. I wanted to be sure that everyone knew about this and had the opportunity to comment. Please pass along to others that would be interested. <http://action.sierraclub.org/site/R?i=CaUTPF71cLdaiKw-X5yzFA..> Seeking Comments on Energy Policy Amendments At the request of the Board of Directors, we are circulating a set of proposed amendments to the Sierra Club's 2006 Energy Resources Policy for review and 60-day comment period. Read the <http://action.sierraclub.org/site/R?i=fxjP-eQcKaISDN-gS8_buQ..> introduction and proposed amendments, then submit your comments <http://action.sierraclub.org/site/R?i=BLWJBGGlSaALMrKFHXt_5A..> . Bill Price, Sierra Club EJ Program 922 Quarrier Street, Suite 304 Charleston, WV 25311 Cell 304-389-8822 Fax 304-342-3182 Voices from the Mountains-September 25-27th For more information go to www.appalachiarising.org

1 0

Re: [EC] Diane Rehm show on Hydro-fracking
by Paul Wilson 03 Mar '11

03 Mar '11

Greetings: if you are sitting by your computer -in WV- Public Radio's Diane Rehm show will be on Hydro-Fracking this morning at 10am. You can listen at www.wamu.org If you miss the show, it will be posted on their website archives and you can listen after the fact. A lot of NPR affiliates carry the Diane Rehm show, but not WV NPR!! good luck, paul -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle

2 1

NYTimes: Regulation Lax as Gas Wells’ Tainted Water Hits Rivers
by William DePaulo 02 Mar '11

02 Mar '11

From The New York Times: DRILLING DOWN: Regulation Lax as Gas Wells’ Tainted Water Hits Rivers A method to extract more natural gas often produces wastewater laced with toxic substances. http://nyti.ms/gIcm36 Get The New York Times on your iPhone for free by visiting http://itunes.com/apps/nytimes William V DePaulo, Esq 179 Summers Street #232 Charleston WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo(a)gmail.com www.passeggiata.com

1 0

NYTimes: Wastewater Recycling No Cure-All in Gas Process
by William DePaulo 02 Mar '11

02 Mar '11

From The New York Times: Wastewater Recycling No Cure-All in Gas Process Though it has helped the natural gas industry reduce its wastewater, recycling has not eliminated all the hazards. http://nyti.ms/fobxs0 Get The New York Times on your iPhone for free by visiting http://itunes.com/apps/nytimes William V DePaulo, Esq 179 Summers Street #232 Charleston WV 25301-2163 Tel 304-342-5588 Fax 304-342-5505 william.depaulo(a)gmail.com www.passeggiata.com

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC March 2011