- EC - lists.cheatlakeclear.org

Re: [EC] [WVaPATH] Re: WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy
by John Christensen 07 Feb '10

07 Feb '10

The net metering bill is officially in the hopper today at 3pm, should come out with a number next week if all goes well. Will advise. Anybody planning on coming down for E-Day on the 24th? John Christensen WV Environmental Council Lobby Team Member 410-499-4873 cell www.wvecouncil.org > [Original Message] > From: Frank Young <fyoung(a)mountain.net> > To: <jbc329(a)earthlink.net>; Art and Pam Dodds <pamelart(a)hughes.net>; James Kotcon <James.Kotcon(a)mail.wvu.edu>; Bill Howley <billhowley(a)hughes.net>; <ec(a)osenergy.org>; John balasko <mjmb(a)westco.net>; Larry <LMWatBullRun(a)yahoo.com> > Cc: <dsgjr(a)aol.com>; <wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com> > Date: 2/4/2010 5:58:11 PM > Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy > > John, 2000 KW (2 megawatts) is the generating capacity of only one single > wind turbine in the typical "wind farms" of today. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Christensen" <jbc329(a)earthlink.net> > To: "Art and Pam Dodds" <pamelart(a)hughes.net>; "Frank Young" > <fyoung(a)mountain.net>; "James Kotcon" <James.Kotcon(a)mail.wvu.edu>; "Bill > Howley" <billhowley(a)hughes.net>; <ec(a)osenergy.org>; "John balasko" > <mjmb(a)westco.net>; "Larry" <LMWatBullRun(a)yahoo.com> > Cc: <dsgjr(a)aol.com>; <wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com> > Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 5:52 PM > Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" > energy > > > > Art and Pam, there is nothing in the bill that promotes large wind farms > > to > > my knowledge. How many KW would those type generators produce? The max > > in > > this bill would be 2000 KW total for industrial applications. > > > > John Christensen > > WV Environmental Council > > Lobby Team Member > > 410-499-4873 cell > > www.wvecouncil.org > > > > > >> [Original Message] > >> From: Art and Pam Dodds <pamelart(a)hughes.net> > >> To: <jbc329(a)earthlink.net>; Frank Young <fyoung(a)mountain.net>; James > > Kotcon <James.Kotcon(a)mail.wvu.edu>; Bill Howley <billhowley(a)hughes.net>; > > <ec(a)osenergy.org>; John balasko <mjmb(a)westco.net>; Larry > > <LMWatBullRun(a)yahoo.com> > >> Cc: <dsgjr(a)aol.com>; <wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com> > >> Date: 2/4/2010 10:42:59 AM > >> Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" > > energy > >> > >> Greetings: > >> > >> The use of solar and wind, which are volatile sources, requires more coal > > to > >> be burned than if they were not in the system at all. This makes the > > waste > >> products such as tires, bio-fuel, methane from coal beds, and trash, more > >> reliable and will reduce the amount of coal used instead of increasing > > the > >> amount of coal used. > >> > >> Residential solar panels and residential small windmills provide energy > > that > >> can be stored in batteries and used when needed, without negative impacts > > to > >> the grid or to the environment. Residential renewables save coal and > > money > >> to the person at the residence by storage of energy in batteries and by > > net > >> metering. HOWEVER, industrial-scale wind turbines require electricity > > from > >> the grid in order to operate properly, require coal-fired plants to > > operate > >> at all times for the required reliable back-up, and require that the > >> coal-fired boilers ramp up and down to keep pace with the volatile wind > >> source. It is important to remember that the generating capacity of the > >> coal-fired or nuclear plants must be maintained at the projected load, > >> regardless of what other volatile sources of energy, such as wind and > > solar, > >> are in the system. > >> > >> Additionally, construction of industrial-scale wind turbines on our > > mountain > >> ridges requires thousands of acres of deforestation, results in habitat > >> fragmentation, causes negative impacts to our water resources due to > >> increased stormwater runoff and decreased groundwater recharge, and > >> slaughters bats and birds (for example, it is estimated that 3,000 bats > > are > >> killed annually at Backbone Mountain alone). The cumulative negative > >> impacts to our water resources by deforestation for transmission lines > > and > >> industrial-scale wind turbines, in addition to the horrid mountain-top > >> removal operations, will create water resource problems that will > > ultimately > >> be irreversible. We strongly advise that you NOT add wording that > > promotes > >> construction of industrial-scale wind turbines. Incentives for SMALL, > >> RESIDENTIAL windmills would help tremendously to reduce the need for > >> electricity from the grid. > >> > >> Pam and Art Dodds > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Larry" <LMWatBullRun(a)yahoo.com> > >> To: <jbc329(a)earthlink.net>; "Frank Young" <fyoung(a)mountain.net>; "James > >> Kotcon" <James.Kotcon(a)mail.wvu.edu>; "Bill Howley" > > <billhowley(a)hughes.net>; > >> <ec(a)osenergy.org>; "John balasko" <mjmb(a)westco.net> > >> Cc: <dsgjr(a)aol.com>; <wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com> > >> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 6:02 AM > >> Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" > >> energy > >> > >> > >> I think that this is an improvement. There are two issues- reducing the > >> need for new plants, and reducing the environmental impact. Does this > > bill > >> address the 1% cap issue? There is no technical reason not to permit a > >> greater percentage than 1%, especially for relatively reliable sources > > such > >> as waste to energy boilers. > >> > >> We might also suggest some way for preferred sources (like those with > > less > >> impact (solar, wind) or those most reliable (WVO diesel, etc)) to > > supersede > >> more traditional sources, too. I can craft some language for that if > >> desired. > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: John Christensen > >> To: Frank Young ; James Kotcon ; Bill Howley ; ec(a)osenergy.org ; John > >> balasko > >> Cc: dsgjr(a)aol.com ; wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com > >> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:07 PM > >> Subject: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" > > energy > >> > >> > >> the new rules we are proposing in Manypenny's bill tba....please advice > > as > >> to any problems > >> > >> John Christensen > >> WV Environmental Council > >> Lobby Team Member > >> 410-499-4873 cell > >> www.wvecouncil.org > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: Frank Young > >> To: James Kotcon;Bill Howley;ec(a)osenergy.org;John Balasko > >> Cc: dsgjr(a)aol.com; wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com; jbc329(a)earthlink.net > >> Sent: 2/3/2010 8:00:11 PM > >> Subject: Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy > >> > >> > >> But Jim, the net metering rules of 2006 or 2007, promulgated as part > > of > >> the PSC's tariff making authority, apply only to generators up to 25 > >> Kilowatt (KW) capacity. Anything beyond 25 KW- which an industrial > > facility > >> using a waste coal or natural gas generator would be, would fall under > > the > >> federal Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA)- which > >> requires utilities to buy power from qualified facility generators at > >> "avoided cost". So the various line capacities and previous year > > aggregate > >> loads do not apply to anything beyond 25 KW anyway. > >> > >> Frank > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: James Kotcon > >> To: Bill Howley ; ec(a)osenergy.org ; John Balasko > >> Cc: dsgjr(a)aol.com ; wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com ; jbc329(a)earthlink.net > >> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 11:04 AM > >> Subject: Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy > >> > >> > >> The original net-metering rules, established around 2007, only > > applied > >> to large utilities, and exempted the small municipal systems and rural > > coops > >> in the state. This new rule would apply to all sellers of electricity, > >> including those smaller systems with <30,000 customers. > >> > >> The new net-metering rules were mandated in the Alternative and > >> Renewable Energy Portfolio Act of 2009, pushed by Gov. Manchin. The > > biggest > >> concern I have is that it extends the net-metering to non-renewable > > sources > >> including various coal, tire-derived-fuels, natural gas, waste coal, and > >> coal-bed methane. Furthermore, it retains the limit of 1 % of the > > utilities > >> aggregate load, and no more than 15 % on any one 3-phase line or 5 % on a > >> single-phase line. I think that means that an industrial facility using > > a > >> waste coal or natural gas generator could preclude net-metering to > >> residences using wind or solar. The more I think about this, the more it > >> seems like a REALLY BIG PROBLEM. > >> > >> While the Governor's bill established the portfolio standard, it is > >> not clear that it was meant to apply to the net-metering program. > >> > >> JBK > >> > >> >>> "John Balasko" <mjmb(a)westco.net> 2/3/2010 10:49 AM >>> > >> > >> > >> This may be the original "net metering order" filed by the > >> Commissioners for all electric utilities. Why don't the currently > > proposed > >> rules apply to all electric utilities and not just those with less than > >> 30,000 customers, and what are the significant differences? In response > > to > >> the case 06-0708-E-GI, several smaller utilities filed net metering > > tariffs > >> with the Commission. Mr. Rodecker filed for the Philipi utility. I'm > > new > >> to this area, but I was told by a friend who has solar panels that excess > >> generation produced by the customer was not paid for by the utility. The > >> currently proposed rules provide for a true-up at the end of each > > reporting > >> period. I'll have to do some more reading. > >> > >> John > >> > >> > >> 06-0708-E-GI 01/26/2007 Order View Document > >> General investigation into net metering, smart metering and > >> interconnection standards set forth in the Federal Energy Policy Act of > > 2005 > >> Commission Final Order that all electric utilities > > providing > >> service are directed to file the net metering tariff on or before > > 2/15/2007; > >> that each electric utility shall inform its customers of the net metering > >> tariff and contact information for those customers interested; that each > >> utility shall file affidavit evidencing notice on or before 4/10/2007; > > etc. > >> Case Final. Removing from open docket. > >> > >> > >> > >> From: Bill Howley > >> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:49 AM > >> To: John Balasko > >> Cc: owner(a)goetc.com ; WVBiker98(a)aol.com ; WVaPATH(a)yahoogroups.com > >> Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] WV Net Metering????? > >> > >> > >> The rules for larger power companies may already be in place. I > > know > >> of quite a few people who have been doing net metering with Allegheny and > >> Appalachian Power for a couple of years now. The rules you note only > > apply > >> to smaller utilities that do not have net metering programs in place. > >> Allegheny has been doing net metering in MD for ten years. They already > >> have programs set up. This rule is specifically for smaller WV > > companies, > >> because they have never had to do net metering before. > >> > >> Del. Mike Manypenny from Taylor County has introduced a bill in the > >> current legislative session that would dramatically expand WV's net > > metering > >> program. Right now, net metering is set up so that any credits you run > > by > >> producing more power than you use disappear in a relatively short time. > >> Manypenny's new bill (I'll get you a bill number soon) allows businesses, > >> homeowners and farmers to become net producers of electricity by > > requiring > >> power companies to actually purchase power from you up to certain limits. > > I > >> believe Manypenny's bill requires power companies to buy power up to 3 > >> megawatt hours per year from businesses and 1 megawatt hour per year from > >> farmers. > >> > >> John Balasko wrote: > >> > >> > >> Thom, Kathy, Donna, Bill, WVPATH > >> > >> I thought you all might enjoy the continuation of this joke that > > we > >> have gotten ourselves into. > >> > >> Is this something that requires lobbying action? > >> > >> > > http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID > > =288733&NotType='WebDocket' > >> > >> GO 258 02/02/2010 Order View Document > >> General Order No. 258 > >> Commission Procedural Order that the Rules Governing > >> Electric Utility Net-Metering Arrangements and Interconnections are > >> promulgated as Commission proposed legislative rules; directing the > >> Executive Secretary to publish a copy of the Notice of Rulemaking in > >> Charleston; directing the Executive Secretary to serve a copy of the > > Notice > >> by electronic mail or by First Class Mail upon all electric utilities > >> operating in WV; directing the Executive Secretary to file a copy of the > >> Rules with the Office of the Secretary of State; establishing a comment > >> period; Initial Comments may be filed on or before 4/4/2010; Reply > > Comments > >> may be filed until 5/5/2010; etc. > >> > >> > >> The way I read the proposed rules Allegheny Power and Appalachian > >> Power would be exempt from net metering because they serve more than > > 30,000 > >> customers. > >> > >> Here is a list of the other generators affected: > >> > >> Black Diamond Power, Elk Power, Union Power, City of New > >> Martinsville, City of Philippi, Craig-Botetourt Electric Coop; Harrison > >> Rural Electrification, Shenandoah Valley Electric > >> > >> > >> Also, "The total rated generating capacity of all customers > >> served > >> under this tariff shall be limited to one percent (1%) of the > >> Company single hour peak load > >> > >> during the previous year. > >> > >> > >> Do you think the legislature will approve the proposed rules????? > >> The whole state and everything in it is controlled by COAL. > >> > >> Why do we allow our metallurgical coal to be shipped to China, > >> India, and Eastern Europe by Consol, Massey, and others. If these > > companies > >> and our "leaders" were so concerned about "national security," the > > shipments > >> would be stopped. > >> > >> John > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> EC mailing list > >> EC(a)osenergy.org > >> http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec > >> > > > > > > >

5 4

New Poll - Americans support clean energy, including cap-and-trade.
by Jim Sconyers 07 Feb '10

07 Feb '10

http://cleantechnica.com/2010/02/06/yet-another-poll-from-yale-shows-wide-s… New Poll - Americans support clean energy, including cap-and-trade. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

WV Net Metering Summary
by John Balasko 06 Feb '10

06 Feb '10

The attachment contains a summary of WV's net metering "rules" as they now stand. I've copied from the site in case you are not able to open the attachment. http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=WV03R&re=1&… West Virginia - Net Metering -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last DSIRE Review: 07/02/2009 Program Overview: State: West Virginia Incentive Type: Net Metering Eligible Renewable/Other Technologies: Photovoltaics, Landfill Gas, Wind, Biomass, Hydroelectric, Fuel Cells, Small Hydroelectric Applicable Sectors: Commercial, Residential Applicable Utilities: All utilities System Capacity Limit: 25 kW Aggregate Capacity Limit: 0.1% of utility's total load participation (utility tariff provision) Net Excess Generation: Credited to customer's next bill at retail rate REC Ownership: Not addressed Meter Aggregation: Not addressed Authority 1: West Virginia PSC Order, Case No. 06-0708-E-GI Date Enacted: 12/12/2006 Authority 2: West Virginia PSC Order, Case No. 06-0708-E-GI Date Enacted: 1/26/2007 Authority 3: HB 103 Date Enacted: 06/02/2009 Date Effective: 07/01/2009

1 0

Good news from the SEC; Usable graph on energy taxes, not good on nuclear
by James Kotcon 05 Feb '10

05 Feb '10

Two recent news items worth paying attention to. 1) The Securities and Exchange Commission voted on Jan. 27 to require all publicly traded companies to project and disclose to stockholders their vulnerabilities to climate risks. (Wonder what Massey Energy's report will say? Will they tell their stockholders the truth, or regurgitate the Blankenship bloviations?) http://solveclimate.com/blog/20100129/sec-decision-requiring-disclosure-cli… 2) The Obama Administration's proposed budget would close tax loopholes for fossil fuel companies estimated at $36 Billion. Rep. Shelly Capito is crying about how awful it is, and Jay Rockefeller thinks this is "not the year to do it". This article has a good graphic representation of tax subsidies for various energy resources. http://solveclimate.com/blog/20100201/obama-budget-erases-fossil-fuel-subsi… JBK

2 1

Fw: Mountaintop Mining Briefing on Capitol Hill
by Frank Young 05 Feb '10

05 Feb '10

Clean Water Network News CWN is the largest national coalition in the country working to protect ALL of the waters of the U.S., including the nation's Great Waters, rivers, streams, lakes, bays, estuaries, coastal areas and wetlands. February 5th, 2010 Don't miss this upcoming Congressional Briefing! Mountaintop Removal Mining and Its Impacts on Water Quality and Human Health Hosted by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin and Senator Lamar Alexander Tuesday February 9th, 2010 1:00 PM to 2:00 PM 406 Dirksen (EPW Hearing Room) Speakers: Dr. Margaret A. Palmer: Director, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science Dr. Emily S. Bernhardt: Assistant Professor, Duke University Keith N. Eshleman: Professor, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science Michael Hendryx: Director, West Virginia Rural Health Research Center and Associate Professor, West Virginia University Dr. A. Dennis Lemly: Professor, Wake Forest University Dr. Orie Loucks: Professor, Miami University Summary: Over the past thirty years, there has been a significant increase in mountaintop removal mining to extract coal and other minerals. This briefing will examine the impacts of mountaintop removal mining on water quality and human health in the Appalachia region and how it affects the quality of life for residents living in its coalfields. Science magazine recently published an article on the ecological and human health impacts of mountaintop removal mining and valley fills. The authors argue that peer-reviewed research unequivocally documents that mountaintop removal mining causes irreversible environmental impacts and exposes local residents to a higher risk of serious health problems. The lead author of this article, Dr. Palmer, along with several co-authors, will discuss their findings and be available to answer questions. For more information, please contact Sarah Greenberger (sarah_greenberger(a)cardin.senate.gov; 4-4524) or Curtis Swager (curtis_swager(a)alexander.senate.gov; 4-4944). Speaker Biographies: Dr. Margaret A. Palmer Margaret Palmer is Director of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science - Chesapeake Biological Laboratory (CBL) in Solomons, MD. Prior to assuming directorship in 2005, she taught and conducted research for 17 years as a Professor at the University of Maryland in College Park. Palmer completed her M.S. and Ph.D. in Coastal Oceanography at the University of South Carolina and her B.S. in Biology from Emory University. Dr. Palmer's research expertise is riverine science, particularly stream and river restoration. She has more than 100 scientific publications, serves as an editor for the journal Restoration Ecology and published the book The Foundations of Restoration Ecology in 2006. Dr. Palmer has been honored as an AAAS Fellow, an Aldo Leopold Leadership Fellow, a Lilly Fellow, a Distinguished Scholar Teacher, and with an Ecological Society of America Distinguished Service Award. Dr. Emily S. Bernhardt Emily Bernhardt is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Biology at Duke University in Durham, NC. Prior to joining the faculty of Duke, Bernhardt coordinated the National River Restoration Science Synthesis which assessed the status of river restoration projects nationally. Dr. Bernhardt completed her Ph.D. in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology from Cornell University and also holds a B.S. degree in biology from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Bernhardt's research expertise is in watershed biogeochemistry and stream and wetland restoration. Dr. Bernhardt is the recipient of a Career Award from the National Science Foundation and the H.G. Hynes early career award from the North American Benthological Society. Dr. Keith N. Eshleman Keith Eshleman is Professor at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science - Appalachian Laboratory in Frostburg, Maryland. Dr. Eshleman completed his Ph.D. in Water Resources at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and holds a B.A. degree in Environmental Sciences from the University of Virginia and a S.M. degree in Civil Engineering from M.I.T. He has published more than 50 peer-reviewed papers and dozens of technical reports in his career and is co-author of an undergraduate textbook entitled Elements of Physical Hydrology. Eshleman's research interests are in the areas of watershed and wetlands hydrology, groundwater/surface water interactions, biogeochemical processes in upland and wetland ecosystems, hydrochemical modeling, and ecosystem responses to disturbance and land use change. Recent research projects have focused on the hydrological impacts of acid deposition, forest disturbances, and surface mining activities in the Appalachian Mountain region. Dr. Michael Hendryx Michael Hendryx is Director of the West Virginia Rural Health Research Center and Associate Professor in the Department of Community Medicine at West Virginia University. He has also held faculty appointments at Washington State University and the University of Iowa. He completed his M.S. and Ph.D. in Psychology from Northwestern University and completed his B.S. in Psychology from the University of Nevada. Dr. Hendryx's area of expertise is in the public health impacts of coal mining in Appalachia, in terms of both socioeconomic and environmental risks to health. He has more than 90 peer-reviewed publications, several book chapters and numerous scientific presentations at national meetings. Dr. Hendryx has been nominated for the West Virginia University School of Medicine Distinguished Teaching Award, and teaches health policy in the Community Medicine department. Dr. A. Dennis Lemly Dennis Lemly is a scientist specializing in the ecotoxicology of selenium, a trace element pollutant associated with coal mining, coal combustion waste, and other sources. Dr. Lemly completed his M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in Biology from Wake Forest University, where he is a Research Professor of Biology, and received his B.S. from Western Carolina University. He has over 30 years of research experience with this environmental contaminant, and has conducted intensive investigations of numerous cases of selenium pollution, including Belews Lake, North Carolina, where 19 species of fish were eliminated, and Kesterson Marsh, California, where thousands of aquatic birds were poisoned. Dr. Lemly has published 47 research articles on selenium toxicity to fish and wildlife, as well as the reference book Selenium Assessment in Aquatic Ecosystems. Lemly has consulted on selenium pollution issues ranging from power plant waste in Australia to mountaintop removal coal mining in West Virginia. He is Associate Editor of the international research journal Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. Dr. Orie Loucks Dr. Orie Loucks began his career with the Department of Forestry in Canada (1955-1962) and joined the Department of Botany, University of Wisconsin in 1962. He served as Director of the Center for Biotic Systems, Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin, and headed interdisciplinary studies of the impacts of coal-fired electricity generation in Wisconsin. River in central Wisconsin. After joining Miami University in 1989, Dr. Loucks continued studies of air pollution and mining effects on forests in the Ohio Valley. In the mid-1980's Dr. Loucks was a member of the National Academy of Sciences Board on Water Science and Technology, and was U.S. Co-chair of the joint NRC-NAS/Royal Society of Canada study reviewing the 1978 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. Please help Clean Water Network continue to expand and provide key member services to grassroots groups across the country. DONATE to the Network today! Clean Water Network 218 D Street SE Washington, DC 20003 202.547.4208 check out our website at: www.cleanwaternetwork.org Forward email This email was sent to clrank(a)hughes.net by jenniferpeters(a)cwn.org. Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy. Email Marketing by Clean Water Network | 218 D St. SE | Washington | DC | 20003

1 0

Fwd: press release on our West Virginia MTR CWA victory
by Paul Wilson 04 Feb '10

04 Feb '10

kudos to Bill Price! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Cramer, Virginia <virginia.cramer(a)apps.sierraclub.org> Date: Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:39 PM Subject: press release on our West Virginia MTR CWA victory To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)lists.sierraclub.org Good news from West Virginia. - ginny FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 4, 2010 Contact: Virginia Cramer, 804-225-9113 x 102 *Judge Rules Mountaintop Removal Coal Mines Polluting West Virginia Waterways* State’s efforts to help companies avoid penalties are invalid Charleston, WV: A judge has found that Powellton Coal Company has repeatedly violated the law by polluting West Virginia waterways, and has ordered a trial to further investigate scores of additional violations at Powellton’s Bridge Fork mountaintop removal coal mining complex in Fayette County. Among those waterways polluted are the tributaries that feed the Gauley River, a world-class whitewater run and prime tourist destination. The judge’s ruling came in response to a lawsuit brought by Sierra Club and the Ansted Historic Preservation Council. The judge also found that the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) could not act to insulate the coal company from clean water regulations. The WVDEP had issued “modification orders” in an attempt to allow the company to continue polluting. Those orders were ruled invalid. “This is another important step forward in holding Powellton responsible for their clean water violations. Water is our most important resource,” said Katheryne Hoffman, president of the Ansted Historic Preservation Council. “For Fayette County tourism is our economy. If they ruin these waters our future is gone. We have so much to offer and we need to protect that.” “Powellton knows about this pollution, but instead of paying to treat it at the source they just pass the costs along to the public, to the people and communities that rely on these waters for their well-being,” said Jim Sconyers, WV Chapter Chair of the Sierra Club. “They view these violations as just the cost of doing business.” The Ansted Historic Preservation Council and the Sierra Club challenged the Bridge Fork West mountaintop removal coal mine last year, raising serious concerns about the pollution from the mine’s valley fills and its impact on historic sites, local communities and tourist draws in the area. Pollution from the Bridge Fork mining complex has continually exceeded legal limits, leading to high levels of toxic aluminum, manganese and other pollution in nearby waterways. One of these waterways, which feed the Gauley River, is Rich Creek, well known for its trout fishing. “Common sense tells us that dumping toxic aluminum into a renowned trout stream is bad,” said Sierra Club Environmental Justice organizer Bill Price. “We should be protecting these economic drivers, using these sources of tourism to build some much needed diversity into our economy, not sacrificing them to more coal mining.” Aluminum pollution can sicken or kill fish. It can also lead to lower fish populations since eggs and larvae are more sensitive to aluminum pollution than mature fish. The groups are represented in their efforts by Derek Teaney and Joe Lovett of the Appalachian Center for the Economy and the Environment. ### -- Virginia Cramer Associate Press Secretary Sierra Club tel: 804-225-9113 x 102 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS list, send any message to: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp -- 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

1 0

Re: [EC] [WVaPATH] Re: WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy
by Larry 04 Feb '10

04 Feb '10

I think that this is an improvement. There are two issues- reducing the need for new plants, and reducing the environmental impact. Does this bill address the 1% cap issue? There is no technical reason not to permit a greater percentage than 1%, especially for relatively reliable sources such as waste to energy boilers. We might also suggest some way for preferred sources (like those with less impact (solar, wind) or those most reliable (WVO diesel, etc)) to supersede more traditional sources, too. I can craft some language for that if desired. ----- Original Message ----- From: John Christensen To: Frank Young ; James Kotcon ; Bill Howley ; ec(a)osenergy.org ; John balasko Cc: dsgjr(a)aol.com ; wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:07 PM Subject: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy the new rules we are proposing in Manypenny's bill tba....please advice as to any problems John Christensen WV Environmental Council Lobby Team Member 410-499-4873 cell www.wvecouncil.org ----- Original Message ----- From: Frank Young To: James Kotcon;Bill Howley;ec(a)osenergy.org;John Balasko Cc: dsgjr(a)aol.com; wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com; jbc329(a)earthlink.net Sent: 2/3/2010 8:00:11 PM Subject: Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy But Jim, the net metering rules of 2006 or 2007, promulgated as part of the PSC's tariff making authority, apply only to generators up to 25 Kilowatt (KW) capacity. Anything beyond 25 KW- which an industrial facility using a waste coal or natural gas generator would be, would fall under the federal Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA)- which requires utilities to buy power from qualified facility generators at "avoided cost". So the various line capacities and previous year aggregate loads do not apply to anything beyond 25 KW anyway. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: James Kotcon To: Bill Howley ; ec(a)osenergy.org ; John Balasko Cc: dsgjr(a)aol.com ; wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com ; jbc329(a)earthlink.net Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 11:04 AM Subject: Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy The original net-metering rules, established around 2007, only applied to large utilities, and exempted the small municipal systems and rural coops in the state. This new rule would apply to all sellers of electricity, including those smaller systems with <30,000 customers. The new net-metering rules were mandated in the Alternative and Renewable Energy Portfolio Act of 2009, pushed by Gov. Manchin. The biggest concern I have is that it extends the net-metering to non-renewable sources including various coal, tire-derived-fuels, natural gas, waste coal, and coal-bed methane. Furthermore, it retains the limit of 1 % of the utilities aggregate load, and no more than 15 % on any one 3-phase line or 5 % on a single-phase line. I think that means that an industrial facility using a waste coal or natural gas generator could preclude net-metering to residences using wind or solar. The more I think about this, the more it seems like a REALLY BIG PROBLEM. While the Governor's bill established the portfolio standard, it is not clear that it was meant to apply to the net-metering program. JBK >>> "John Balasko" <mjmb(a)westco.net> 2/3/2010 10:49 AM >>> This may be the original "net metering order" filed by the Commissioners for all electric utilities. Why don't the currently proposed rules apply to all electric utilities and not just those with less than 30,000 customers, and what are the significant differences? In response to the case 06-0708-E-GI, several smaller utilities filed net metering tariffs with the Commission. Mr. Rodecker filed for the Philipi utility. I'm new to this area, but I was told by a friend who has solar panels that excess generation produced by the customer was not paid for by the utility. The currently proposed rules provide for a true-up at the end of each reporting period. I'll have to do some more reading. John 06-0708-E-GI 01/26/2007 Order View Document General investigation into net metering, smart metering and interconnection standards set forth in the Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005 Commission Final Order that all electric utilities providing service are directed to file the net metering tariff on or before 2/15/2007; that each electric utility shall inform its customers of the net metering tariff and contact information for those customers interested; that each utility shall file affidavit evidencing notice on or before 4/10/2007; etc. Case Final. Removing from open docket. From: Bill Howley Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:49 AM To: John Balasko Cc: owner(a)goetc.com ; WVBiker98(a)aol.com ; WVaPATH(a)yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] WV Net Metering????? The rules for larger power companies may already be in place. I know of quite a few people who have been doing net metering with Allegheny and Appalachian Power for a couple of years now. The rules you note only apply to smaller utilities that do not have net metering programs in place. Allegheny has been doing net metering in MD for ten years. They already have programs set up. This rule is specifically for smaller WV companies, because they have never had to do net metering before. Del. Mike Manypenny from Taylor County has introduced a bill in the current legislative session that would dramatically expand WV's net metering program. Right now, net metering is set up so that any credits you run by producing more power than you use disappear in a relatively short time. Manypenny's new bill (I'll get you a bill number soon) allows businesses, homeowners and farmers to become net producers of electricity by requiring power companies to actually purchase power from you up to certain limits. I believe Manypenny's bill requires power companies to buy power up to 3 megawatt hours per year from businesses and 1 megawatt hour per year from farmers. John Balasko wrote: Thom, Kathy, Donna, Bill, WVPATH I thought you all might enjoy the continuation of this joke that we have gotten ourselves into. Is this something that requires lobbying action? http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityI…'WebDocket' GO 258 02/02/2010 Order View Document General Order No. 258 Commission Procedural Order that the Rules Governing Electric Utility Net-Metering Arrangements and Interconnections are promulgated as Commission proposed legislative rules; directing the Executive Secretary to publish a copy of the Notice of Rulemaking in Charleston; directing the Executive Secretary to serve a copy of the Notice by electronic mail or by First Class Mail upon all electric utilities operating in WV; directing the Executive Secretary to file a copy of the Rules with the Office of the Secretary of State; establishing a comment period; Initial Comments may be filed on or before 4/4/2010; Reply Comments may be filed until 5/5/2010; etc. The way I read the proposed rules Allegheny Power and Appalachian Power would be exempt from net metering because they serve more than 30,000 customers. Here is a list of the other generators affected: Black Diamond Power, Elk Power, Union Power, City of New Martinsville, City of Philippi, Craig-Botetourt Electric Coop; Harrison Rural Electrification, Shenandoah Valley Electric Also, "The total rated generating capacity of all customers served under this tariff shall be limited to one percent (1%) of the Company single hour peak load during the previous year. Do you think the legislature will approve the proposed rules????? The whole state and everything in it is controlled by COAL. Why do we allow our metallurgical coal to be shipped to China, India, and Eastern Europe by Consol, Massey, and others. If these companies and our "leaders" were so concerned about "national security," the shipments would be stopped. John -------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

4 3

Re: [EC] [WVaPATH] Re: WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy
by John Christensen 04 Feb '10

04 Feb '10

Art and Pam, there is nothing in the bill that promotes large wind farms to my knowledge. How many KW would those type generators produce? The max in this bill would be 2000 KW total for industrial applications. John Christensen WV Environmental Council Lobby Team Member 410-499-4873 cell www.wvecouncil.org > [Original Message] > From: Art and Pam Dodds <pamelart(a)hughes.net> > To: <jbc329(a)earthlink.net>; Frank Young <fyoung(a)mountain.net>; James Kotcon <James.Kotcon(a)mail.wvu.edu>; Bill Howley <billhowley(a)hughes.net>; <ec(a)osenergy.org>; John balasko <mjmb(a)westco.net>; Larry <LMWatBullRun(a)yahoo.com> > Cc: <dsgjr(a)aol.com>; <wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com> > Date: 2/4/2010 10:42:59 AM > Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy > > Greetings: > > The use of solar and wind, which are volatile sources, requires more coal to > be burned than if they were not in the system at all. This makes the waste > products such as tires, bio-fuel, methane from coal beds, and trash, more > reliable and will reduce the amount of coal used instead of increasing the > amount of coal used. > > Residential solar panels and residential small windmills provide energy that > can be stored in batteries and used when needed, without negative impacts to > the grid or to the environment. Residential renewables save coal and money > to the person at the residence by storage of energy in batteries and by net > metering. HOWEVER, industrial-scale wind turbines require electricity from > the grid in order to operate properly, require coal-fired plants to operate > at all times for the required reliable back-up, and require that the > coal-fired boilers ramp up and down to keep pace with the volatile wind > source. It is important to remember that the generating capacity of the > coal-fired or nuclear plants must be maintained at the projected load, > regardless of what other volatile sources of energy, such as wind and solar, > are in the system. > > Additionally, construction of industrial-scale wind turbines on our mountain > ridges requires thousands of acres of deforestation, results in habitat > fragmentation, causes negative impacts to our water resources due to > increased stormwater runoff and decreased groundwater recharge, and > slaughters bats and birds (for example, it is estimated that 3,000 bats are > killed annually at Backbone Mountain alone). The cumulative negative > impacts to our water resources by deforestation for transmission lines and > industrial-scale wind turbines, in addition to the horrid mountain-top > removal operations, will create water resource problems that will ultimately > be irreversible. We strongly advise that you NOT add wording that promotes > construction of industrial-scale wind turbines. Incentives for SMALL, > RESIDENTIAL windmills would help tremendously to reduce the need for > electricity from the grid. > > Pam and Art Dodds > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Larry" <LMWatBullRun(a)yahoo.com> > To: <jbc329(a)earthlink.net>; "Frank Young" <fyoung(a)mountain.net>; "James > Kotcon" <James.Kotcon(a)mail.wvu.edu>; "Bill Howley" <billhowley(a)hughes.net>; > <ec(a)osenergy.org>; "John balasko" <mjmb(a)westco.net> > Cc: <dsgjr(a)aol.com>; <wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com> > Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 6:02 AM > Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" > energy > > > I think that this is an improvement. There are two issues- reducing the > need for new plants, and reducing the environmental impact. Does this bill > address the 1% cap issue? There is no technical reason not to permit a > greater percentage than 1%, especially for relatively reliable sources such > as waste to energy boilers. > > We might also suggest some way for preferred sources (like those with less > impact (solar, wind) or those most reliable (WVO diesel, etc)) to supersede > more traditional sources, too. I can craft some language for that if > desired. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: John Christensen > To: Frank Young ; James Kotcon ; Bill Howley ; ec(a)osenergy.org ; John > balasko > Cc: dsgjr(a)aol.com ; wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:07 PM > Subject: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy > > > the new rules we are proposing in Manypenny's bill tba....please advice as > to any problems > > John Christensen > WV Environmental Council > Lobby Team Member > 410-499-4873 cell > www.wvecouncil.org > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Frank Young > To: James Kotcon;Bill Howley;ec(a)osenergy.org;John Balasko > Cc: dsgjr(a)aol.com; wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com; jbc329(a)earthlink.net > Sent: 2/3/2010 8:00:11 PM > Subject: Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy > > > But Jim, the net metering rules of 2006 or 2007, promulgated as part of > the PSC's tariff making authority, apply only to generators up to 25 > Kilowatt (KW) capacity. Anything beyond 25 KW- which an industrial facility > using a waste coal or natural gas generator would be, would fall under the > federal Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA)- which > requires utilities to buy power from qualified facility generators at > "avoided cost". So the various line capacities and previous year aggregate > loads do not apply to anything beyond 25 KW anyway. > > Frank > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: James Kotcon > To: Bill Howley ; ec(a)osenergy.org ; John Balasko > Cc: dsgjr(a)aol.com ; wvapath(a)yahoogroups.com ; jbc329(a)earthlink.net > Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 11:04 AM > Subject: Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy > > > The original net-metering rules, established around 2007, only applied > to large utilities, and exempted the small municipal systems and rural coops > in the state. This new rule would apply to all sellers of electricity, > including those smaller systems with <30,000 customers. > > The new net-metering rules were mandated in the Alternative and > Renewable Energy Portfolio Act of 2009, pushed by Gov. Manchin. The biggest > concern I have is that it extends the net-metering to non-renewable sources > including various coal, tire-derived-fuels, natural gas, waste coal, and > coal-bed methane. Furthermore, it retains the limit of 1 % of the utilities > aggregate load, and no more than 15 % on any one 3-phase line or 5 % on a > single-phase line. I think that means that an industrial facility using a > waste coal or natural gas generator could preclude net-metering to > residences using wind or solar. The more I think about this, the more it > seems like a REALLY BIG PROBLEM. > > While the Governor's bill established the portfolio standard, it is > not clear that it was meant to apply to the net-metering program. > > JBK > > >>> "John Balasko" <mjmb(a)westco.net> 2/3/2010 10:49 AM >>> > > > This may be the original "net metering order" filed by the > Commissioners for all electric utilities. Why don't the currently proposed > rules apply to all electric utilities and not just those with less than > 30,000 customers, and what are the significant differences? In response to > the case 06-0708-E-GI, several smaller utilities filed net metering tariffs > with the Commission. Mr. Rodecker filed for the Philipi utility. I'm new > to this area, but I was told by a friend who has solar panels that excess > generation produced by the customer was not paid for by the utility. The > currently proposed rules provide for a true-up at the end of each reporting > period. I'll have to do some more reading. > > John > > > 06-0708-E-GI 01/26/2007 Order View Document > General investigation into net metering, smart metering and > interconnection standards set forth in the Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005 > Commission Final Order that all electric utilities providing > service are directed to file the net metering tariff on or before 2/15/2007; > that each electric utility shall inform its customers of the net metering > tariff and contact information for those customers interested; that each > utility shall file affidavit evidencing notice on or before 4/10/2007; etc. > Case Final. Removing from open docket. > > > > From: Bill Howley > Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:49 AM > To: John Balasko > Cc: owner(a)goetc.com ; WVBiker98(a)aol.com ; WVaPATH(a)yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] WV Net Metering????? > > > The rules for larger power companies may already be in place. I know > of quite a few people who have been doing net metering with Allegheny and > Appalachian Power for a couple of years now. The rules you note only apply > to smaller utilities that do not have net metering programs in place. > Allegheny has been doing net metering in MD for ten years. They already > have programs set up. This rule is specifically for smaller WV companies, > because they have never had to do net metering before. > > Del. Mike Manypenny from Taylor County has introduced a bill in the > current legislative session that would dramatically expand WV's net metering > program. Right now, net metering is set up so that any credits you run by > producing more power than you use disappear in a relatively short time. > Manypenny's new bill (I'll get you a bill number soon) allows businesses, > homeowners and farmers to become net producers of electricity by requiring > power companies to actually purchase power from you up to certain limits. I > believe Manypenny's bill requires power companies to buy power up to 3 > megawatt hours per year from businesses and 1 megawatt hour per year from > farmers. > > John Balasko wrote: > > > Thom, Kathy, Donna, Bill, WVPATH > > I thought you all might enjoy the continuation of this joke that we > have gotten ourselves into. > > Is this something that requires lobbying action? > > http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityID =288733&NotType='WebDocket' > > GO 258 02/02/2010 Order View Document > General Order No. 258 > Commission Procedural Order that the Rules Governing > Electric Utility Net-Metering Arrangements and Interconnections are > promulgated as Commission proposed legislative rules; directing the > Executive Secretary to publish a copy of the Notice of Rulemaking in > Charleston; directing the Executive Secretary to serve a copy of the Notice > by electronic mail or by First Class Mail upon all electric utilities > operating in WV; directing the Executive Secretary to file a copy of the > Rules with the Office of the Secretary of State; establishing a comment > period; Initial Comments may be filed on or before 4/4/2010; Reply Comments > may be filed until 5/5/2010; etc. > > > The way I read the proposed rules Allegheny Power and Appalachian > Power would be exempt from net metering because they serve more than 30,000 > customers. > > Here is a list of the other generators affected: > > Black Diamond Power, Elk Power, Union Power, City of New > Martinsville, City of Philippi, Craig-Botetourt Electric Coop; Harrison > Rural Electrification, Shenandoah Valley Electric > > > Also, "The total rated generating capacity of all customers served > under this tariff shall be limited to one percent (1%) of the > Company single hour peak load > > during the previous year. > > > Do you think the legislature will approve the proposed rules????? > The whole state and everything in it is controlled by COAL. > > Why do we allow our metallurgical coal to be shipped to China, > India, and Eastern Europe by Consol, Massey, and others. If these companies > and our "leaders" were so concerned about "national security," the shipments > would be stopped. > > John > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > _______________________________________________ > EC mailing list > EC(a)osenergy.org > http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec >

2 1

Fw: Chief Logan State Park
by Frank Young 04 Feb '10

04 Feb '10

----- Original Message ----- From: johnmcferrin(a)aol.com To: WVHCBOARD(a)yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 11:11 AM Subject: [WVHCBOARD] Chief Logan State Park Chief Logan State Park needs your help. As you know, we have appealed to the Supreme COurt the decision to allow gas drilling in Chief Logan State Park. The Court does not have to review every case. First it takes all the cases and sorts them into three piles: 1. Now worth fooling with. Judge in Circuit Court was obviously right, not interesting issues, whatever. 2. Definitely worth reviewing. 3. Can't decide if it belongs in #1 or #2 so we will let the appellant's lawyer appear and argue that it is worth reviewing. The Court has two dates scheduled for meeting and deciding which pile cases go in--February 11 and March 11. These are private conferences; no open court, public, etc. This is where you come in. The COurt will go into these meetings with a big pile of cases before it. Each one does not get a lot of attention. We need something to get the court's attention, make sure it does not glance at ours, toss it into Pile 1 (not worth fooling with). To do this, we need LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.. The judges read those. When the case comes up in conference, they will remember that this is something that hasa been in the paper, somebody cares about, etc. It helps make sure they pay attention to our case and don't just give it a quick look and toss it into the "not worth fooling with" pile. Our attorney, Tom Rodd, councils subtlety. He worked up there for several years and knows the score. He says that the Court does not like raucous public demonstrations. They would not agree to review a case if they thought that it would mean a hallway full of people dressed in fish costumes, Big Oil hung in effigy on the lawn, chanting, etc. If the letters are so outraged that the Court thinks this is a campaign that might result in a big demonstration, street theater, etc.they will just reject the case. The most useful letters are those which convey the message that this is a big deal, one that somebody on the court or in government needs to look at. Subtle enough so that the COurt does not get the idea that granting this appeal will produce a circus. Letters to the Gazette, the Dominion Post, or any other paper one of the judges might read are helpful. Writing sooner is best just in case our case comes up Feb. 11. Thank you John McFerrin John __._,_.___ Reply to sender | Reply to group Messages in this topic (1) Recent Activity: Visit Your Group Start a New Topic Working since 1967 for the conservation and wise management of West Virginia's natural resources Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest . Unsubscribe . Terms of Use. __,_._,___

1 0

Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy
by DSGJr＠aol.com 03 Feb '10

03 Feb '10

I am simply not sure that is the case, Paul. Mike Manypenny has offered a new net metering bill of his own. We are still trying to sort all this out. Don Garvin, WVEC lobby team In a message dated 2/3/2010 3:44:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, pjgrunt(a)gmail.com writes: so we cannot put up these small windmills? (_http://www.ownyourwind.com/_ (http://www.ownyourwind.com/) ) and get net-metering for individual homes? cheers, paul On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:04 AM, James Kotcon <_James.Kotcon(a)mail.wvu.edu_ (mailto:James.Kotcon@mail.wvu.edu) > wrote: The original net-metering rules, established around 2007, only applied to large utilities, and exempted the small municipal systems and rural coops in the state. This new rule would apply to all sellers of electricity, including those smaller systems with <30,000 customers. The new net-metering rules were mandated in the Alternative and Renewable Energy Portfolio Act of 2009, pushed by Gov. Manchin. The biggest concern I have is that it extends the net-metering to non-renewable sources including various coal, tire-derived-fuels, natural gas, waste coal, and coal-bed methane. Furthermore, it retains the limit of 1 % of the utilities aggregate load, and no more than 15 % on any one 3-phase line or 5 % on a single-phase line. I think that means that an industrial facility using a waste coal or natural gas generator could preclude net-metering to residences using wind or solar. The more I think about this, the more it seems like a REALLY BIG PROBLEM. While the Governor's bill established the portfolio standard, it is not clear that it was meant to apply to the net-metering program. JBK >>> "John Balasko" <_mjmb(a)westco.net_ (mailto:mjmb@westco.net) > 2/3/2010 10:49 AM >>> This may be the original "net metering order" filed by the Commissioners for all electric utilities. Why don't the currently proposed rules apply to all electric utilities and not just those with less than 30,000 customers, and what are the significant differences? In response to the case 06-0708-E-GI, several smaller utilities filed net metering tariffs with the Commission. Mr. Rodecker filed for the Philipi utility. I'm new to this area, but I was told by a friend who has solar panels that excess generation produced by the customer was not paid for by the utility. The currently proposed rules provide for a true-up at the end of each reporting period. I'll have to do some more reading. John _06-0708-E-GI_ (http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/viewCaseForWebViewForm.cfm?Cas…) 01/26/2007 Order _View Document_ (http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityI… NotType='WebDocket') General investigation into net metering, smart metering and interconnection standards set forth in the Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005 Commission Final Order that all electric utilities providing service are directed to file the net metering tariff on or before 2/15/2007; that each electric utility shall inform its customers of the net metering tariff and contact information for those customers interested; that each utility shall file affidavit evidencing notice on or before 4/10/2007; etc. Case Final. Removing from open docket. From: _Bill Howley_ (mailto:billhowley@hughes.net) Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:49 AM To: _John Balasko_ (mailto:mjmb@westco.net) Cc: _owner(a)goetc.com_ (mailto:owner@goetc.com) ; _WVBiker98(a)aol.com_ (mailto:WVBiker98@aol.com) ; _WVaPATH(a)yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:WVaPATH@yahoogroups.com) Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] WV Net Metering????? The rules for larger power companies may already be in place. I know of quite a few people who have been doing net metering with Allegheny and Appala chian Power for a couple of years now. The rules you note only apply to smaller utilities that do not have net metering programs in place. Allegheny has been doing net metering in MD for ten years. They already have programs set up. This rule is specifically for smaller WV companies, because they have never had to do net metering before. Del. Mike Manypenny from Taylor County has introduced a bill in the current legislative session that would dramatically expand WV's net metering program. Right now, net metering is set up so that any credits you run by producing more power than you use disappear in a relatively short time. Manypenny's new bill (I'll get you a bill number soon) allows businesses, homeowners and farmers to become net producers of electricity by requiring power companies to actually purchase power from you up to certain limits. I believe Manypenny's bill requires power companies to buy power up to 3 megawatt hours per year from businesses and 1 megawatt hour per year from farmers. John Balasko wrote: Thom, Kathy, Donna, Bill, WVPATH I thought you all might enjoy the continuation of this joke that we have gotten ourselves into. Is this something that requires lobbying action? _http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityI D=288733&NotType='WebDocket'_ (http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityI…'WebDocket') _GO 258_ (http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/viewCaseForWebViewForm.cfm?Cas…) 02/02/2010 Order _View Document_ (http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityI… e='WebDocket') General Order No. 258 Commission Procedural Order that the Rules Governing Electric Utility Net-Metering Arrangements and Interconnections are promulgated as Commission proposed legislative rules; directing the Executive Secretary to publish a copy of the Notice of Rulemaking in Charleston; directing the Executive Secretary to serve a copy of the Notice by electronic mail or by First Class Mail upon all electric utilities operating in WV; directing the Executive Secretary to file a copy of the Rules with the Office of the Secretary of State; establishing a comment period; Initial Comments may be filed on or before 4/4/2010; Reply Comments may be filed until 5/5/2010; etc. The way I read the proposed rules Allegheny Power and Appalachian Power would be exempt from net metering because they serve more than 30,000 customers. Here is a list of the other generators affected: Black Diamond Power, Elk Power, Union Power, City of New Martinsville, City of Philippi, Craig-Botetourt Electric Coop; Harrison Rural Electrification, Shenandoah Valley Electric Also, "The total rated generating capacity of all customers served under this tariff shall be limited to one percent (1%) of the Company single hour peak load during the previous year. Do you think the legislature will approve the proposed rules????? The whole state and everything in it is controlled by COAL. Why do we allow our metallurgical coal to be shipped to China, India, and Eastern Europe by Consol, Massey, and others. If these companies and our "leaders" were so concerned about "national security," the shipments would be stopped. John __._,_.___ _Reply to sender_ (mailto:mjmb@westco.net?subject=Re:+[WVaPATH]+WV+Net+Metering?????) | _Reply to group_ (mailto:WVaPATH@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re:+[WVaPATH]+WV+Net+Metering?????) Recent Activity: _Visit Your Group_ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WVaPATH;_ylc=X3oDMTJmODI5M2RxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0… HNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzEyNjUyMTIzMzg-) _Start a New Topic_ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WVaPATH/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaDRvZ2VpBF9TAzk3MzU… DQ0MjI5BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTA2MDY4MgRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNudHBjBHN0aW1lAzEyNjUyMTIzM zg-) MARKETPLACE _Going Green: Your Yahoo! Groups resource for green living_ (http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=14kif5mh1/M=493064.13814333.13821539.13298430/D… 60682:MKP1/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1265219538/L=/B=FUUJAUSO5_k-/J=1265212338438872/K=WlH 7ExwsXes2aTQjHtI_8A/A=5922843/R=0/SIG=11ckn2mo6/*http://advision.webevents.y ahoo.com/green/) (http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlaGxyYXU0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI4O… OA--) Switch to: _Text-Only_ (mailto:WVaPATH-traditional@yahoogroups.com?subject=Change+Delivery+Format:+Traditional) , _Daily Digest_ (mailto:WVaPATH-digest@yahoogroups.com?subject=Email+Delivery:+Digest) • _Unsubscribe_ (mailto:WVaPATH-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe) • _Terms of Use_ (http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/) . __,_._,___ _______________________________________________ EC mailing list _EC(a)osenergy.org_ (mailto:EC@osenergy.org) _http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec_ (http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec) -- 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

1 0

Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy
by James Kotcon 03 Feb '10

03 Feb '10

The original net-metering rules, established around 2007, only applied to large utilities, and exempted the small municipal systems and rural coops in the state. This new rule would apply to all sellers of electricity, including those smaller systems with <30,000 customers. The new net-metering rules were mandated in the Alternative and Renewable Energy Portfolio Act of 2009, pushed by Gov. Manchin. The biggest concern I have is that it extends the net-metering to non-renewable sources including various coal, tire-derived-fuels, natural gas, waste coal, and coal-bed methane. Furthermore, it retains the limit of 1 % of the utilities aggregate load, and no more than 15 % on any one 3-phase line or 5 % on a single-phase line. I think that means that an industrial facility using a waste coal or natural gas generator could preclude net-metering to residences using wind or solar. The more I think about this, the more it seems like a REALLY BIG PROBLEM. While the Governor's bill established the portfolio standard, it is not clear that it was meant to apply to the net-metering program. JBK >>> "John Balasko" <mjmb(a)westco.net> 2/3/2010 10:49 AM >>> This may be the original "net metering order" filed by the Commissioners for all electric utilities. Why don't the currently proposed rules apply to all electric utilities and not just those with less than 30,000 customers, and what are the significant differences? In response to the case 06-0708-E-GI, several smaller utilities filed net metering tariffs with the Commission. Mr. Rodecker filed for the Philipi utility. I'm new to this area, but I was told by a friend who has solar panels that excess generation produced by the customer was not paid for by the utility. The currently proposed rules provide for a true-up at the end of each reporting period. I'll have to do some more reading. John 06-0708-E-GI 01/26/2007 Order View Document General investigation into net metering, smart metering and interconnection standards set forth in the Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005 Commission Final Order that all electric utilities providing service are directed to file the net metering tariff on or before 2/15/2007; that each electric utility shall inform its customers of the net metering tariff and contact information for those customers interested; that each utility shall file affidavit evidencing notice on or before 4/10/2007; etc. Case Final. Removing from open docket. From: Bill Howley Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:49 AM To: John Balasko Cc: owner(a)goetc.com ; WVBiker98(a)aol.com ; WVaPATH(a)yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] WV Net Metering????? The rules for larger power companies may already be in place. I know of quite a few people who have been doing net metering with Allegheny and Appalachian Power for a couple of years now. The rules you note only apply to smaller utilities that do not have net metering programs in place. Allegheny has been doing net metering in MD for ten years. They already have programs set up. This rule is specifically for smaller WV companies, because they have never had to do net metering before. Del. Mike Manypenny from Taylor County has introduced a bill in the current legislative session that would dramatically expand WV's net metering program. Right now, net metering is set up so that any credits you run by producing more power than you use disappear in a relatively short time. Manypenny's new bill (I'll get you a bill number soon) allows businesses, homeowners and farmers to become net producers of electricity by requiring power companies to actually purchase power from you up to certain limits. I believe Manypenny's bill requires power companies to buy power up to 3 megawatt hours per year from businesses and 1 megawatt hour per year from farmers. John Balasko wrote: Thom, Kathy, Donna, Bill, WVPATH I thought you all might enjoy the continuation of this joke that we have gotten ourselves into. Is this something that requires lobbying action? http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivityI…'WebDocket' GO 258 02/02/2010 Order View Document General Order No. 258 Commission Procedural Order that the Rules Governing Electric Utility Net-Metering Arrangements and Interconnections are promulgated as Commission proposed legislative rules; directing the Executive Secretary to publish a copy of the Notice of Rulemaking in Charleston; directing the Executive Secretary to serve a copy of the Notice by electronic mail or by First Class Mail upon all electric utilities operating in WV; directing the Executive Secretary to file a copy of the Rules with the Office of the Secretary of State; establishing a comment period; Initial Comments may be filed on or before 4/4/2010; Reply Comments may be filed until 5/5/2010; etc. The way I read the proposed rules Allegheny Power and Appalachian Power would be exempt from net metering because they serve more than 30,000 customers. Here is a list of the other generators affected: Black Diamond Power, Elk Power, Union Power, City of New Martinsville, City of Philippi, Craig-Botetourt Electric Coop; Harrison Rural Electrification, Shenandoah Valley Electric Also, "The total rated generating capacity of all customers served under this tariff shall be limited to one percent (1%) of the Company single hour peak load during the previous year. Do you think the legislature will approve the proposed rules????? The whole state and everything in it is controlled by COAL. Why do we allow our metallurgical coal to be shipped to China, India, and Eastern Europe by Consol, Massey, and others. If these companies and our "leaders" were so concerned about "national security," the shipments would be stopped. John __._,_.___ Reply to sender | Reply to group Recent Activity: Visit Your Group Start a New Topic MARKETPLACE Going Green: Your Yahoo! Groups resource for green living Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use. __,_._,___

3 2

Fwd: New State and Local Victory Tracker
by Paul Wilson 03 Feb '10

03 Feb '10

fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Scott Elkins <scott.elkins(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 4:11 PM Subject: New State and Local Victory Tracker To: CONS-CRP-MEMBERS(a)lists.sierraclub.org *Announcing the launch of the Sierra Club’s new State and Local Victory Tracker* http://clubhouse.sierraclub.org/chapters/tracker/ Every day throughout the country, Sierra Club staff and volunteer activists are working hard and winning victories that improve their communities and make the world a cleaner, greener place. Now, we have a place on Clubhouse where we can recognize, celebrate and learn from our many state and local successes. The new State and Local Victory Tracker is available to all Sierra Club leaders and staff through the intranet Clubhouse site. The Tracker is set up to sort and filter victories by a number of variables, so that it’s easy to see the wins that are important to you. It’s a resource where chapter leaders can learn about proven campaign ideas; communications staff can find stories to share in Sierra Magazine, the Insider and other Club communications; and where everyone in the Club can keep up with the vital conservation work of chapters and groups. You are vital to the success of this new resource. We can’t begin to track all of the victories that Sierra Club activists are winning throughout the country, so we need you to be a part of making this happen. Visit the Tracker at the link below. If your chapter or group has won a victory that creates a positive change in the world, and if you don’t see that victory on the Tracker, let us know about it. A link at the top of the Tracker page will navigate you to the entry form, which takes only a few minutes to complete. After you submit your victory, we’ll confirm the information in your entry, and then post it to the tracker. New victories will be posted every week. Visit the State and Local Victory Tracker today. Learn about the work of your colleagues and friends, share in the celebration, and add your own stories. http://clubhouse.sierraclub.org/chapters/tracker/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-CRP-MEMBERS list, send any message to: CONS-CRP-MEMBERS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp -- 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

1 0

More greenhouse gas reduction than 100 Nukes!
by James Kotcon 02 Feb '10

02 Feb '10

What little know section of the House Cap-And-Trade bill would produce more greenhouse gas reductions than building 100 nuclear power plants? How about a Green Buildings Act? http://solveclimate.com/blog/20090723/oh-those-sexy-building-codes-more-eff… Enjoy! JBK

1 0

Responsible Drilling Alliance- Facebook group
by Frank Young 31 Jan '10

31 Jan '10

Blankhttp://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&ref=nf&gid=113426202282

1 0

John Blair Hunter is on the Surface Mining Committee
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 30 Jan '10

30 Jan '10

I thought this would be useful information to some of you. I spoke to John Blair Hunter tonight and he told me that he was appointed to the seven member Surface Mining Committee by the governor. As many of you know he is the retired WV Senator who wants reform in this industry. In the first ever 2008 WV State Democratic conference, during his last year as a Senator, he put together a resolution that essentially put a ban on MTR, and that was vigorously supported by the WV Young Democratic. It almost passed. Does anyone have a good link to the WV Surface Mining Committee? -Jonathan

1 0

"the mother of all verticals"
by Duane330＠aol.com 30 Jan '10

30 Jan '10

____________________________________ January 29, 2010, 9:47 am Private Equity Is Bullish on Clean Energy By _CEZARY PODKUL_ (http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/author/cezary-podkul/) With strong interest from corporations eyeing the clean energy sector, 2010 could turn out to be a good time for private equity and venture capital firms to pursue investments. “One of the most exciting things about the space now – this applies all the way down the bottom to the early-stage technology firms – is that there is a tremendous amount of strategic interest in this space,” said Hovey Kemp, a private equity lawyer at the law firm _Goodwin Procter_ (http://www.goodwinprocter.com/) , said at the _Dow Jones Private Equity Analyst Outlook 2010_ (http://peaoutlook.dowjones.com/) meeting in New York earlier this week. He added that one could easily put together a long list of “very large corporations” that are paying “very close attention” to the sector, among them networking equipment maker _Cisco_ (http://www.cisco.com/) and electronics manufacturer _Samsung_ (http://www.samsung.com/us/) . “There are buyers out there that are going to emerge here,” he said. For private equity and venture capital firms, which collectively _invested $6 billion into the clean energy sector in 2009_ (http://www.newenergymatters.com/download.php?n=NEF_Q4_Fact_Pack_07_01_2010.… ses) , according to the consulting firm Bloomberg New Energy Finance, this could translate to a variety of selling opportunities as a way of exiting their investments. Investors at the event also saw good reasons to be buyers in the sector. Chris Hearn of the private equity firm _First Reserve Corporation_ (http://www.firstreserve.com/go.asp?Go=!SiteStation&x=TPLGen&ResType=Folder&… PL=HomePage.htm) said long-term electricity needs in the United States would continue to rise, thanks in part to greater use of electric vehicles. Tucker Twitmyer of the clean-energy private equity firm _EnerTech Capital_ (http://www.enertechcapital.com/) , pointed to smart gird technology as an area where investors can get a quick return on their capital. It may take a few years for private equity and venture capital firms to figure it out, Mr. Hovey said, but the clean energy sector could become “the mother of all verticals” for private investors.

1 0

Marcellus info, inc Manchin embrace
by Jim Sconyers 29 Jan '10

29 Jan '10

Pretty disturbing talk by Gov. Manchin - basically, "Marcellus, we love it, everyone come here and get drilling!" Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. --- On Fri, 1/29/10, Donald C. Strimbeck <dcsoinks(a)comcast.net> wrote: From: Donald C. Strimbeck <dcsoinks(a)comcast.net> Subject: Fw: Friday 29 Jan 10. News of interest to Mon river watershed folks. To: "Zack Walko" <zack(a)joehoeffel2010.com>, "William Richardson" <richardson.william(a)epa.gov>, "Werner Loehlein" <werner.c.loehlein(a)usace.army.mil>, "Tom Mroz" <THOMAS.MROZ(a)NETL.DOE.GOV>, "Tom Konchesky" <scmayor(a)comcast.net>, "Steve Garvin" <SGarvin194(a)aol.com>, "Skip Pratt" <Skip.Pratt(a)NETL.DOE.GOV>, "Shanda Minney" <sminney(a)wvrivers.org>, "Scott Mandirola" <Scott.G.(a)yahoo.com> Date: Friday, January 29, 2010, 4:38 AM Don Strimbeck, Sec/Treas Upper Mon River Assoc UpperMon.org Vice Chair, Mon River Rec & Comm Com 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 ----- Original Message ----- From: Donald C. Strimbeck To: Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 4:37 AM Subject: Friday 29 Jan 10. News of interest to Mon river watershed folks. DUNKARD CREEK-29JanY2K10 Washington PA Observer-Reporter Friday 29 January 2010: Forum on water to examine coal, gas production 1/29/2010 3:32 AM By Bob Niedbala, Staff writer niedbala(a)observer-reporter.com The Upper Monongahela River Association will hold a water quality forum in February focusing on the impact of coal and natural gas production on water resources and the investigation into the Dunkard Creek fish kill. The forum will be the 13th sponsored by the organization dealing with water quality issues in the Monongahela River basin. The 12th forum, which was sponsored jointly by the association and Greene County Conservation District and focused on the September fish kill, was held Dec. 3 in Mt. Morris and drew more than 200 people. Barry Pallay, forum program director, said one of the issues for next month's meeting again will be Dunkard Creek. State and federal agencies have been invited to attend to share with the public any new data they have obtained since the last meeting, he said. The discussion also is expected to include an update on the status of other streams with high levels of total dissolved solids. Total dissolved solids have been considered a contributing factor to the growth of the golden algae that is believed to have killed fish and other aquatic life in Dunkard Creek. The other focus of the forum will be to address the impacts of coal mining and the expected increase in natural gas production on the area's water resources, Pallay said. "We want to begin examining coal and gas production and the water and waste disposal needs related to it," he said, adding that, if the watershed is going to see an increase in Marcellus gas drilling, it's important to consider what impacts it may have on water resources. The association began sponsoring its water quality forums in October 2008 in response to reports of problems caused by high levels of total dissolved solids in the Monongahela River, Pallay said. The forums have helped inform the public on issues surrounding water quality in the Mon River basin and brought together the various state and federal agencies involved in enforcing water quality regulations. At next month's forum, a speaker is scheduled to attend from the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, an organization that works to improve water quality in a large portion of the Ohio River basin. The representative is expected to explain what his organization has done to improve water quality in the Ohio River and the lessons it has learned that could apply to the association's efforts. "We really need to look at the watershed as an entire system," Pallay said. This upcoming water quality forum will be held at 6 p.m. Feb. 11 at the Granville, W.Va., Volunteer Fire Department events center, about a mile west of the Star City interchange of Interstate 79. Agencies invited to attend include the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Greene County Department of Economic Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, RAIN Network, W.Va. Water Research Institute and W.Va. Geologic and Economic Survey. In another matter, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Joe Hoeffel will visit the Mt. Morris Community Center at 1 p.m. Saturday to discuss issues related to the Dunkard Creek fish kill. Copyright Observer Publishing Co. ----- Original Message ----- From: Betty Wiley To: Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 8:38 PM Subject: good news for Pennsylvania PennFuture praises Rendell decision to increase DEP’s staff and beef up regulations and inspections of Marcellus Shale drillers Group urges legislators to adopt a severance tax on the drilling without delay HARRISBURG, PA (January 28, 2010) – Jan Jarrett, president and CEO of Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future (PennFuture) today praised the governor’s decision to add 68 new staff to the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and to strengthen regulation of gas drilling to provide better protection of Pennsylvania’s communities and natural resources from damage by natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale formation. “We’re glad that the governor recognizes that Marcellus gas drilling presents a new scale of environmental challenges to the Commonwealth’s natural resources, especially water,” Jarrett said. “This belt and suspenders approach will allow Pennsylvania to take advantage of the economic opportunities the natural gas presents, but update our rules and increase our ability to adequately oversee the drilling. “Citizens across Pennsylvania have cried out for smart regulations and true government oversight of the drilling,” continued Jarrett. “The new staff and the new regulations will go a long way in responding to those concerns. We are pleased that the governor recognized that rules designed to regulate the kind of gas drilling traditionally done in Pennsylvania are not up to addressing the environmental challenges presented by the deep drilling required to get to the Marcellus Shale gas, and moved to modernize our regulations. “But no matter how well regulated, drilling for the Marcellus gas will inevitably do some environmental damage as it depletes a natural resource, and it will impose costs on taxpayers and communities,” continued Jarrett. “That’s why we need to tax the drillers on the gas they pump out from our state, and use that tax to protect and improve our environment. The drilling companies pay such a tax nearly everywhere else they drill, and there is simply no reason not to tax them here. This additional income should not just be added to our general fund, but a major portion should go to the local communities that host the drilling, to our Fish and Boat and Game Commissions, and to environmental protection and conservation of our natural resources. “The governor’s announcements today put us on the right road to grow the economy and protect the environment,” said Jarrett. “We look forward to working with our elected officials to move our state further down that road, protecting our state forests from rampant drilling, and having the drilling companies pay their fair share through a severance tax.” PennFuture is a statewide public interest membership organization, founded in 1998. PennFuture's activities include litigating cases before regulatory bodies and in local, state and federal courts, advocating and advancing legislative action on a state and federal level, public education, and assisting citizens in public advocacy. Working from the premise that “Every environmental victory grows the economy,” PennFuture has successfully advocated for landmark environmental legislation, including passage of the largest-ever environmental funding bond, public investment in green energy and energy savings programs, passage of the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards Act, adoption of the Clean Vehicles Program and adoption of a regulation to protect Pennsylvania’s babies by restricting mercury pollution from coal-fired power plants. PennFuture has staff throughout the state, in Harrisburg, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, West Chester, Doylestown and Wilkes-Barre. The Philadelphia Inquirer called PennFuture the “state’s leading environmental advocacy organization.” Jeanne K. Clark Director of Communications Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future (PennFuture) 425 Sixth Avenue, Suite 2770 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 www.pennfuture.org 412-258-6683 (W) 412-258-6685 (F) For cell phone and text messages: 412-736-6092 ----- Original Message ----- From: Sally Snyder To: Beth Little ; cindy rank ; Donald C. Strimbeck Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 4:31 PM Subject: Fwd: Manchin to IOGA: "Call me if you don't think you're being treated right." Business Thursday January 28, 2010 Manchin says state is 'partner' Governor speaks to hundreds of oil, gas executives gathered for annual meeting by George Hohmann Daily Mail Business Editor Gov. Joe Manchin struck a conciliatory note with the oil and natural gas industry Wednesday, saying, "Markets and competition are tough enough. You don't need to have government make it tougher." Manchin was the keynote speaker at the winter meeting of the Independent Oil and Gas Association of West Virginia. The natural gas industry is being transformed by an increase in supplies from shale formations that have been known for years to contain natural gas. Geotechnical engineers and other specialists have figured out how to drill down into shale and then go sideways to open a much bigger area of the gas-bearing formation. There's talk in the natural gas industry that the Marcellus Shale gas field - known in the business as a "play" - may contain 500 trillion cubic feet of gas. The Marcellus Shale extends from northeast Pennsylvania around Bedford through southwestern Pennsylvania, through the Northern Panhandle of West Virginia and into the central part of the state. It underlies 15 million acres. Instead of worrying about running out of natural gas within 10 years - a prevalent discussion within the industry in the 1970s - the discussion now is about having up to 90 years of proven and potential supply. "I know many of you are from other parts of the country," Manchin said to the nearly 700 industry executives gathered at the Marriott. He was alluding to the fact that several out-of-state companies, including Exxon Mobil Corp. and Norway's StatoilHydro, have snapped up properties in the Marcellus Shale in recent months. "We appreciate you so much," Manchin said. "I'm going into my sixth year as governor, and one thing I've tried to put out there is responsibility, continuity so you know what to expect and how it's going to be delivered," Manchin said. The governor said he's been emphasizing "retail government," which he described as a government that says thank you, meets deadlines and treats you with respect. "You don't go out with a cease-and-desist order, you go out with a helping hand," he said. If a situation isn't corrected then enforcement is appropriate, he said. Companies that are looking for places to expand will find "you're going to have a partner at the end of the day you never bargained for, asked for or even wanted," Manchin said. "It's going to be government. You'd better pick a good partner. If you pick a partner with no vision, no stability, you're going to have problems. That's something we fight every day. The system doesn't think like you do with timelines, deadlines." Although the increase in natural gas supplies has created excitement about what it may mean for jobs and West Virginia's economy, the prospects for expansion bring concerns, too - especially about the treatment of water used in the drilling process. Earlier this month, the state Department of Environmental Protection announced the release of a guidance document and permit addendum that it said is designed to better manage water use and disposal by the oil and gas industry when drilling in the Marcellus Shale. The DEP said the document "addresses the need for well operators to be diligent about protecting the state's waters." Manchin said, "We're working on the water situation. I know this could be your biggest impediment. This is the big thing with the EPA," he said, referring to the federal Environmental Protection Agency. "We're doing everything we can to help you in this industry," he said. "You don't need 'gotcha! government.' How can you do it right if you don't know what must be done? We're trying to get some clarity. We have a company from South Korea in the filtering business. We're talking to everyone we can to find some help." Manchin did not bring up two industry sore points: * Chesapeake Energy, one of the nation's largest natural gas producers, last year canceled plans for a regional office in Charleston after it was surprised by a huge punitive damage award and then found out that West Virginia offers no automatic right of appeal. In his State of the State address earlier this month, Manchin praised the state Supreme Court for working on rules that are intended to ensure the right of appeal. * Pennsylvania, which has a large portion of the Marcellus Shale play and has already attracted industry investment, does not have a severance tax on natural gas. West Virginia does. A recent Penn State study estimated that because Pennsylvania has no severance or property tax, wellhead revenue there is about 11 percent higher. Although Manchin didn't specifically mention the severance tax, he did point out that during his administration the food sales tax, business franchise tax and corporate income tax have been lowered. "For every adjustment for business you have to make an adjustment for consumers," he said. "You have to have a balance." Manchin concluded, "We want you to do well. Call me if you don't think you're being treated right. I want to make sure 'retail government' works for you." He received a standing ovation. Contact writer George Hohmann at busin...(a)dailymail.com or 304-348-4836. ----- Original Message ----- From: Sally Snyder To: John Snyder ; Julie Archer ; Donald C. Strimbeck ; Beth Little ; David McMahon ; Gary Zuckett ; cindyrank Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 4:30 PM Subject: Fwd: ProPublica: Pennsylvania’s Gas Wells Booming—But So Are Spills Message from sender: check it out Pennsylvania’s Gas Wells Booming—But So Are Spills By Sabrina Shankman, January 27, 2010 4:08 pm EST http://www.propublica.org/feature/pas-gas-wells-booming-but-so-are-spills-1… COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Dept. of Environmental Protection Commonwealth News Bureau Room 308, Main Capitol Building Harrisburg PA., 17120 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 01/28/2010 CONTACT: Tom Rathbun, DEP 717-787-1323 Governor Rendell: PA Taking Aggressive Action to Protect Public, Environment as Marcellus Shale Drilling Operations Expands Directs DEP to Hire 68 Additional Staff to Bolster Inspections, Environmental Compliance New Regulations Planned to Improve Well Safety Standards HARRISBURG -- In order to protect Pennsylvania’s residents and environment from the impact of increased natural gas exploration across the state, Governor Edward G. Rendell announced today that the commonwealth is strengthening its enforcement capabilities. At the Governor’s direction, the Department of Environmental Protection will begin hiring 68 new personnel who will make sure that drilling companies obey state laws and act responsibly to protect water supplies. DEP also will strengthen oil and gas regulations to improve well construction standards. These critical upgrades are designed to prevent gas leaks that can pose risks to the public and water quality. “Interest in Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale formation is greater than ever before and as natural gas prices continue to rise, that interest will only increase,” said Governor Rendell. “In fact, the industry has told us that they expect to apply for 5,200 permits to drill in the Marcellus Shale this year -- nearly three times the number of permits we issued in all of 2009. Given these conditions, an extraction tax is gaining widespread support across our state and I will again ask the General Assembly to enact such a levy. It is fair and affordable to drillers. They know it, and so do members of the House of Representatives who voted for it last year. “The actions I am announcing today, however, are about decisive, progressive protections for the people of Pennsylvania. We were able to hire 37 additional inspectors and permitting staff in 2009, but the industry’s projected growth in 2010 means that we need additional inspectors to ensure oil and gas companies follow environmental laws and regulations. As I’ve said all along, we want to encourage the development of this resource because it’s a tremendous economic opportunity for the state, but we will not allow that to happen at the expense of our environment.” DEP performed 14,544 drilling site inspections in 2009 and took 678 enforcement actions against drillers for violations. The 68 additional personnel will be funded entirely from money generated by new, higher permitting fees that were instituted in 2009—the first such increase since 1984. The new fees were put in place with bipartisan support from the General Assembly, industry and environmental organizations. The Governor noted that given the need for these additional health and safety personnel and the dedicated funding source that is independent of the state’s General Fund, these new hires are exemptions to the general hiring freeze he instituted last year. DEP’s work to amend Pennsylvania’s oil and gas regulations will strengthen well construction standards and define a drilling company’s responsibility for responding to gas migration issues, such as when gas escapes a well or rock formation and seeps into homes or water wells. Specifically, he said the new regulations will: • Require the casings of Marcellus Shale and other high-pressure wells to be tested and constructed with specific, oilfield-grade cement; • Clarify the drilling industry’s responsibility to restore or replace water supplies affected by drilling; • Establish procedures for operators to identify and correct gas migration problems without waiting for direction from DEP; • Require drilling operators to notify DEP and local emergency responders immediately of gas migration problems; • Require well operators to inspect every existing well quarterly to ensure each well is structurally sound, and report the results of those inspections to DEP annually; and • Require well operators to notify DEP immediately if problems such as over-pressurized wells and defective casings are found during inspections. “These new draft regulations, which were developed through open meetings with experts in the industry, are designed to give Pennsylvanians peace of mind by bringing our state’s requirements up to par with other major gas producing states or, as in the case of the well casing requirements, to a level that is even more rigorous,” said Governor Rendell. The new regulations will be offered for public comment on Jan. 29 before going through DEP’s formal rulemaking process. Interest in Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale formation has been increasing. One third of the more than 6,200 oil and natural gas drilling permits DEP issued in 2009 were for drilling in the Marcellus Shale. By comparison, only four of the more than 6,000 permits issued in 2005 were for the Marcellus formation. For more information, visit www.depweb.state.pa.us. For Immediate Release: January 28, 2010 Contacts: Lauren Townsend 215-939-7621 Co-Manager Joe Hoeffel 2010 Frank Custer - 215-527-5928 Joe Hoeffel 2010 Eastern PA Press Contact Matt Merriman- Preston - 412-600-3405 Joe Hoeffel 2010 Western PA Press Contact Press Advisory Hoeffel to Hear from Greene County Residents Concerning Environmental Issues Surrounding Dunkard Creek Mt. Morris, January 28, 2010 – Democratic gubernatorial candidate Joe Hoeffel has accepted an invitation from the Friends of Dunkard Creek to hear from concerned residents of Greene County who will talk to him about hardships and concerns as a result of recent environmental disasters, including a massive fish kill along the waterway. Hoeffel will speak to residents about his commitment to protect the health of Pennsylvanians, the beauty of Pennsylvania, and the sustainability of the state’s resources. WHO: Democratic gubernatorial candidate Joe Hoeffel WHAT: Meeting with Greene County Residents Concerning Dunkard Creek WHEN: Saturday, January 30, 2010, 1pm WHERE: Mt. Morris Community Center, 303 Mount Morris Road, Mt. Morris PA 15349 THE STATE JOURNAL Friday 29 January 2010: Report Urges States to Plan Now for decline in Coal Production Posted Thursday, January 28, 2010 ; 06:00 AM | View Comments | Post Comment Some say study fails to portray increasing demand for state's energy. By JIM ROSS For The State Journal The time has come for West Virginia and neighboring states to prepare for a significant decrease in coal production and the economic changes that will come with it. That's according to a report issued last week from Downstream Strategies, an environmental consulting firm based in Morgantown. The report uses projections from the federal government to predict that coal production in the central Appalachian region -- composed of southern West Virginia, western Virginia, eastern Kentucky and eastern Tennessee -- will decrease by half in the next 10 years. "Coal has contributed significantly to local and state economies in central Appalachia, but production has fallen substantially over the last 12 years as other coal basins and sources of fuel have become more competitive," said lead author Rory McIlmoil in a statement released with the study. "This trend is expected to continue as mining costs increase due to the depletion of the lowest-cost coal reserves and as new environmental regulations are implemented. As this happens, local and state economies will need new sources of jobs and revenue to replace coal mining jobs and taxes." The 34-page report says new jobs and tax revenues can be created through development of renewable energy and energy efficiency. Losses from the decline of coal can be recaptured by gains from wind, solar, low-impact hydro and sustainable biomass production and from a strong focus on energy efficiency improvements. Coal production in the region peaked at 290 million tons in 1997, but it fell by about 20 percent to 235 million tons in 2008, according to the report. Central Appalachian coal got a boost in the 1990s from the first phase of the Clean Air Act as electric utilities switched to central Appalachian coal to meet smokestack emission standards. Since then, many coal-fired power plants have installed scrubbers, allowing them to burn coal from other regions, too. The report suggests that states act now to diversify the economy of the central Appalachian region. Among steps it recommends: requiring each state to provide 25 percent of its energy from renewable sources; grants, tax credits, clean energy bonds or low-interest loans to support renewable energy development and manufacturing; implementing and strengthening net metering laws; developing work force programs aimed at providing the skills and knowledge required for renewable energy industries; strong incentives for local ownership of energy development. McIlmoil gave Gov. Joe Manchin a copy of the report this week, and the governor is reviewing it, said Manchin spokesman Matt Turner. Manchin has said he recognizes West Virginia needs to diversify its economy, but he also recognizes that coal "is going to be our primary source of energy as we transition to our fuels of the future," Turner said. The governor wants investments in technology to enable the state to make that transition, but coal will be the dominant energy source for the next 30 years, Turner said. Turner pointed to the Bucks for Brains program that is bringing researchers to the state and with them the promise of new homegrown industries. Steve Roberts, president of the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce, said the report overlooks the fact that all the coal mined in West Virginia is being bought. "We have a history of seeing reports of the rapid decline in the use of coal, and it simply hasn't happened," he said. "The marketplace has a large and growing appetite for coal and electricity. As the national and international economies recover in the future, there will be a larger need for coal." Cal Kent, vice president of business and economic research at Marshall University, also voiced that opinion. Kent said the report is well documented, but it offers little new material. Everyone knows reserves are declining, and central Appalachian coal faces competition from other regions and from alternate energy sources. However, the report ignores the accelerating demand for electricity that will require development of nuclear and alternate sources, Kent said. "There are not enough alternate sources now to replace coal over the next decade or two," he said. Everyone recognizes the need to diversify the state economy, but no one has developed a workable strategy that overcomes severe problems in accomplishing that, Kent said. The state has little developable flat land, particularly in coal-producing counties, he said. Installing the necessary infrastructure and transportation arteries into those areas is expensive and time consuming. The work force is older and less educated than the national average. And the state has a reputation, whether deserved or not, of being an expensive place to do business. That includes the perceived legal environment, he said. Researchers at Marshall and West Virginia University are working on their own study of coal in the state. It focuses on the industry's economic impact. Research has been completed, and the document is in its final edit, Kent said, with release set for mid-February. "Most folks will be surprised to find out how really dependent on coal the West Virginia economy is," he said. North-Central W.Va. is Ground Zero for Surface Mine Coal Ash Posted Thursday, January 28, 2010 ; 06:00 AM | View Comments | Post Comment Updated Thursday, January 28, 2010; 11:05 AM EPA is considering whether material from power plants used in mine reclamation is hazardous. Story by Pam Kasey Email | Bio | Other Stories by Pam Kasey On the eve of a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency decision about regulating coal combustion waste as a hazardous material, mine operators are spreading the substance extensively across north-central West Virginia. The noncombustible part of coal, coal combustion waste (CCW) is what's left when power plants burn coal to make electricity, according to the EPA. It includes fly ash, boiler slag and scrubber residues. Following the December 2008 CCW slurry spill that covered 300 acres in Kingston, Tenn., West Virginians learned of 20 such wet slurry impoundments in this state. But CCW may be disposed of in other ways as well; in the absence of federal regulation, practices differ state by state. In West Virginia, it may be landfilled. It may be recycled: into concrete, for example, or wallboard. Or, when written into a surface mine permit, its combination with coal mine refuse during reclamation may be designated a "beneficial use" by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, according to the Division of Mining and Reclamation's permitting handbook. Meanwhile, one coal company official said his company complies with regulatory standards and he is concerned that increased standards needlessly could increase the cost of energy. CCW and North-Central W.Va. The practice is widespread in north-central West Virginia. The simple idea behind it, according to Jeff Stant, is that the alkaline CCW material neutralizes the highly acidic northern Appalachian coal wastes and prevents acid mine drainage. Stant has studied CCW for two decades and directs the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project's Coal Combustion Waste Initiative. The reality, Stant said, is much more complex. A 2006 National Academy of Sciences study found that CCW contains "metals and other elements, such as arsenic, cadmium, chromium and lead, in quantities that can potentially be harmful to human health or the environment." Stant cited research showing that, rather than offering a beneficial synergy, the chemical interactions between acidic mine refuse and alkaline CCW create ideal conditions for leaching the heavy metals from the ash. "They're creating a more dangerous scenario," Stant said. "They're maximizing risk." A map in the National Academies study shows that north-central West Virginia has by far the highest concentration of CCW mine placement in the country. "Monongalia, Marion and Preston counties, there are 80 or 90 mine dumps there," Stant said. "Pennsylvania has more total mine dumps, about 120, but they're spread over the western half of the state and the eastern anthracite region. Yours are almost all in those three counties." Two Current Permits Currently in public comment are two draft permits in north-central West Virginia that include CCW. In one, for Morgantown-based Patriot Mining Co.'s New Hill West surface mine in the acidic Waynesburg seams, CCW from the Morgantown Energy Associates power plant would be applied during reclamation. Residents John and Petra Wood, scientists who work in Morgantown and moved to nearby Cassville 17 years ago for a more secluded lifestyle, submitted comments on Patriot's Community Impact Statement and its draft Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act permit. The Cassville area has changed, the Woods wrote. "Since 1997, almost 1,100 acres have been surface mined, and permit applications for an additional 580 acres of surface disturbance recently have been submitted for this area," they wrote. "From 1999 to 2007, we estimate that about 6 million tons of CCW have been deposited on seven surface mine permits ... in and around the Cassville community," they wrote, summarizing their review of other permits. "An additional 2.4 million tons of CCW is proposed for (the current permit)." They cited findings by the National Academies and others showing that CCW mine sites leach heavy metals with potential human health effects and that state-mandated surface water and groundwater monitoring typically are insufficient. They also pointed out that CCW has been found to leach dissolved solids, or TDS -- the contaminant that contributed to the death of the fish and mussels on more than 38 miles of Dunkard Creek in their area last fall. "Could the millions of tons of CCW that have been deposited in the Monongahela River watershed in recent years be contributing to TDS loading in the river and its tributaries?" the Woods asked in their comments. "This needs to be investigated, as the Monongahela River is the drinking water source for 850,000 people (and has been) identified by the West Virginia Division of Natural Resources as a high-quality stream." The second permit, for Morgantown-based Coresco LLC, is a surface mining control and reclamation act permit -- but involves no mining. "The proposed Coal Refuse Disposal Area No. 4 will not include coal removal and will strictly be a refuse disposal site," the applicant states. Coresco proposes to combine coal preparation refuse from its local mining operation and CCW from the Hatfield's Ferry, Fort Martin and Longview power plants on a 350-acre site near the Monongahela River. The company would deposit up to 2.8 million tons of material each year for 25 to 30 years to a final height, in one area, of up to 500 feet. The West Virginia chapter of the Sierra Club commented on this permit. "There does not appear to be any beneficial purpose to the disposal of the coal ash and combustion byproducts," the comments read. "We recommend that the beneficial use designation be determined to be inapplicable to this permit, and that a solid waste landfill permit be required, complete with liner, leachate collection and leachate leak detection systems." Stant placed the project in context. "It's a huge, a huge operation," he said. "(The completed project) is like two-thirds of the entire annual national generation of coal combustion waste from all power plants." EPA and OMB A "hazardous" designation from the EPA would trigger the development of a federal disposal standard. Tom Jones, senior mining engineer at Patriot Mining, said he believes the testing that Patriot conducts and that WVDEP requires is sufficient to show that the company's use of CCW is in compliance with existing regulations. A blanket hazardous designation would send CCW to landfills needlessly, he said, and would increase Patriot's costs and, ultimately, the price of electricity. The federal Office of Management and Budget currently is conducting meetings with industry stakeholders. At issue are those additional costs, as well as whether a hazardous designation would cripple re-use -- the destination of 45 percent of CCW in 2008, according to the American Coal Ash Association, mine fills included. Stant believes the designation would stop the use of CCW at mines. "Minimum requirements would have to be met that would force them to isolate the ash from water," he said. "If they did that, that would spell the end of mine filling as we currently know it." Don Strimbeck, Sec/Treas Upper Mon River Assoc UpperMon.org Vice Chair, Mon River Rec & Comm Com 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

3 2

Mine operators in WVa rushing to spread coal ash before it is declared hazardous
by Frank Young 28 Jan '10

28 Jan '10

"NORTH CENTRAL W.VA. IS GROUND ZERO FOR SURFACE MINE COAL ASH" "Mine operators are spreading serious amounts of coal combustion waste in W.Va. before the EPA declares it to be a hazardous material." Pam Kasey reports for the WV State Journal January 28, 2010. http://www.statejournal.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=74194

1 0

Action Alert [Fwd: coal ash disposal]
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 28 Jan '10

28 Jan '10

Earth Justice has declared today National Day of Action on Coal Ash. -Jonathan

1 0

State of Union
by Jim Sconyers 27 Jan '10

27 Jan '10

Nuclear - yes Clean coal - yes Offshore oil - yes Woooowheee! Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

FW: FW: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co
by Grubb, Karen 27 Jan '10

27 Jan '10

Frank, are you still planning to go? From: Frank Young [mailto:fyoung@mountain.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 5:18 PM To: Grubb, Karen Subject: Fw: [EC] FW: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co I don't think this came through the EC list. FYI. ----- Original Message ----- From: Duane330(a)aol.com To: fyoung(a)mountain.net Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 5:04 PM Subject: Re: [EC] FW: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co Jim, Beth, Frank, et al. I will be attending this meeting, if I can locate an original copy of the invitation to provide the context and invitation list. My home territory is Tyler and Wetzel county; I drove thru Wileyville earlier today coming from Paden City back to Morgantown on WV Route 7. I can go representing the TDS Strategy Group. However, this Group has its focus on the Monongahela River. Wetzel County is in the Ohio River watershed, not the Monongahela River watershed. The Marcellus Shale drilling operations in Wetzel county drain mostly into Marshall county then to the Ohio River. It you want to see some of the pictures, go to: www.marcellus-shale.us Let me know if you need a ride from Morgantown................... Duane Nichols >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In a message dated 1/27/2010 11:44:17 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, fyoung(a)mountain.net writes: Beth, Can you give us an idea of what you'd specifically like SC's presence there to be? Ask people to sign a Sierra Club contact sheet? Offer some specific assistance from Sierra Club? If so, what? If I go, I will be going in mostly blind. I do not know any of the people you have mentioned. And other than for the town of New Martinsville (on the Ohio River), I have no familiarity with Wetzel County. But I am a country boy, and so I can find my way to the meeting- wherever it is. But unless I know what you might expect of me there, I would be winging it. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: Frank Young <mailto:fyoung@mountain.net> To: EC(a)osenergy.org Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 11:08 AM Subject: Re: [EC] FW: FW: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co If no one else at all can go, I could. But Friday is usually my day to take care of treasurer stuff at the WVEC office- pay our lobbyists, pay other bills, etc. I could go this one time. But I could not make the commitment to make this an ongoing priority. I have too many of those already. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: Grubb, Karen <mailto:Karen.Grubb@fairmontstate.edu> To: EC(a)osenergy.org Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 10:57 AM Subject: [EC] FW: FW: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co Can anyone make this meeting? I will try, but I will have to take off work to go. ________________________________ From: rhunt(a)ovis.net [mailto:rhunt@ovis.net] Sent: Wed 1/27/2010 10:20 AM To: Grubb, Karen Subject: Re: FW: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co The meeting is Jan 29,1-4 pm at the Wileyville Auction Hall on Rt 7 right on the road. Turn from rt 250 right before Hundred on to Rt 7, Wileyville is in the center of the county..we also have people from Washington Co Pa coming, Bob Donnan, and many families who are desperate for finding help. I bought a Jayco Camper which sleeps 8 so we could have a nice place for people to stay. please let me know..people still are stunned that this could happen in America to a quiet rural community..some driller landsmen were stopping at the store in Littleton last week and were bragging about fooling people..they were on their way to Rock Cave. Let me know, Marilyn Hunt ----- Original Message Follows ----- From: "Grubb, Karen" <Karen.Grubb(a)fairmontstate.edu> To: <rhunt(a)ovis.net> Cc: "James Kotcon" <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> Subject: FW: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:36:52 -0500 >Marilyn, > >I may be able to attend the meeting in Wetzel County. Can >you tell me where and when it is? Beth Little asked if >someone could go to keep us all in the loop. Also Jim >Kotcon, Energy Chair may be able to attend. > >Karen Grubb > >Sierra Club Conservation Chair > >From: Beth Little [mailto:blittle@citynet.net] >Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 8:55 AM >To: 'James Kotcon'; Grubb, Karen >Subject: RE: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co > >The weather is making it look completely impossible for me. > Plus, Caroline's car just broke down. > >The contact for the meeting is Marilyn Hunt 304-775-2484. >We talked for at least an hour, and she said she could >provide overnight accommodations too. > >Also, there is a Penn State webinar on water testing >related to gas drilling tomorrow, 1/27 at noon and 7pm >http://water.cas.psu.edu/webinars.htm ><http://water.cas.psu.edu/webinars.htm> It is being >conducted by Brian Swistock. He is a Cooperative Extension >agent and he came to Monroe Co in 2008 to conduct a public >meeting on Marcellus shale. I was impressed that he was a >straight shooter that was really trying to get information >out to the public. >________________________________ > >From: James Kotcon [mailto:jkotcon@wvu.edu] >Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 8:17 PM >To: Beth Little >Subject: Re: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co > >Both Karen Grubb and I indicated this was a possibility, so >send info to both of us. I will try to go, but this is a >big grant-writing week, plus I am leading the Blackwater >Canyon x-c ski outing the next day, so I am a little iffy. > >JBK > >>>> "Beth Little" <blittle(a)citynet.net> 1/25/2010 7:10 PM > >Hey Jim, Dan Soeder said he thought someone at the ExCom >meeting said they were available to go to the Marcellus >shale gas drilling meeting in Wetzel Co this Friday and >maybe it was you. Yes? Or do you know who? I don't think >I have sent the information to find out where it is. Beth ________________________________ _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec ________________________________ _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

2 1

FW: FW: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co
by Grubb, Karen 27 Jan '10

27 Jan '10

Can anyone make this meeting? I will try, but I will have to take off work to go. ________________________________ From: rhunt(a)ovis.net [mailto:rhunt@ovis.net] Sent: Wed 1/27/2010 10:20 AM To: Grubb, Karen Subject: Re: FW: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co The meeting is Jan 29,1-4 pm at the Wileyville Auction Hall on Rt 7 right on the road. Turn from rt 250 right before Hundred on to Rt 7, Wileyville is in the center of the county..we also have people from Washington Co Pa coming, Bob Donnan, and many families who are desparate for finding help. I bought a Jayco Camper which sleeps 8 so we could have a nice place for people to stay. please let me know..people still are stunned that this could happen in America to a quiet rural community..some driller lansmen were stoping at the store in Littleton last week and were bragging about fooling people..they were on their way to Rock Cave.Let me know, Marilyn Hunt ----- Original Message Follows ----- From: "Grubb, Karen" <Karen.Grubb(a)fairmontstate.edu> To: <rhunt(a)ovis.net> Cc: "James Kotcon" <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> Subject: FW: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:36:52 -0500 >Marilyn, > >I may be able to attend the meeting in Wetzel County. Can >you tell me where and when it is? Beth Little asked if >someone could go to keep us all in the loop. Also Jim >Kotcon, Energy Chair may be able to attend. > >Karen Grubb > >Sierra Club Conservation Chair > >From: Beth Little [mailto:blittle@citynet.net] >Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 8:55 AM >To: 'James Kotcon'; Grubb, Karen >Subject: RE: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co > >The weather is making it look completely impossible for me. > Plus, Caroline's car just broke down. > >The contact for the meeting is Marilyn Hunt 304-775-2484. >We talked for at least an hour, and she said she could >provide overnight accommodations too. > >Also, there is a Penn State webinar on water testing >related to gas drilling tomorrow, 1/27 at noon and 7pm >http://water.cas.psu.edu/webinars.htm ><http://water.cas.psu.edu/webinars.htm> It is being >conducted by Brian Swistock. He is a Cooperative Extension >agent and he came to Monroe Co in 2008 to conduct a public >meeting on Marcellus shale. I was impressed that he was a >straight shooter that was really trying to get information >out to the public. >________________________________ > >From: James Kotcon [mailto:jkotcon@wvu.edu] >Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 8:17 PM >To: Beth Little >Subject: Re: Jan 29 meeting in Wetzel Co > >Both Karen Grubb and I indicated this was a possibility, so >send info to both of us. I will try to go, but this is a >big grant-writing week, plus I am leading the Blackwater >Canyon x-c ski outing the next day, so I am a little iffy. > >JBK > >>>> "Beth Little" <blittle(a)citynet.net> 1/25/2010 7:10 PM > >Hey Jim, Dan Soeder said he thought someone at the ExCom >meeting said they were available to go to the Marcellus >shale gas drilling meeting in Wetzel Co this Friday and >maybe it was you. Yes? Or do you know who? I don't think >I have sent the information to find out where it is. Beth

2 2

Mayor Bloomberg NYC on Marcellus Shale
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 27 Jan '10

27 Jan '10

http://www.cleanskies.com/articles/bloomberg-opposes-nat-gas-drilling-nyc-w… -- William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel: 304-342-5588 Fax: 304-342-5505 william.depaulo(a)gmail.com www.passeggiata.com This electronic mail is intended to be received and read only by certain individuals. It may contain information that is privileged or protected from disclosure by law. If it has been misdirected, or if you suspect you received this in error, please notify me by replying and then delete this message and your reply. These restrictions apply to any attachment to this email.

1 0

Fwd: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] AEP on pilot CCS facility in West Virginia
by James Kotcon 26 Jan '10

26 Jan '10

>>> "dave o'leary" <dave.oleary(a)MDSIERRA.ORG> 1/26/2010 10:23 AM >>> Here is a link to an interview about AEP's pilot CCS facility in West Virginia. I pasted in the link to the full interview, along with a few selected comments from the AEP spokesperson. David O'Leary Chapter Conservation Chair Sierra Club - Maryland Chapter = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = http://www.bgrncol.com/status-report-on-the-operation-of-the-largest-operat… Status Report on the Operation of the Largest Operating Coal-Fired CCS Plant in the U.S. Published on January 25th, 2010 in Interviews American Electric Power, one of the largest electric utilities in the United States, started operating a 20 MW coal-fired Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) plant in September 2009. It is currently the largest facility of its kind in the United States, and the success or failure of this operation will likely have a major impact on the viability of this technology and the future role of coal in the U.S.'s and the world's low carbon emissions future, as well as impact the adoption rates of nuclear and renewables. In this follow-up interview, Nick Akins, the Executive Vice President of Power Generation for American Electric Power (AEP), speaks about the status of the operation and what it means for scale-up timetables and ultimate price and energy penalties that affect the viability of coal-fired CCS. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = The 20-megawatt CCS installation at our Mountaineer Plant in New Haven, W.Va., started capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) Sept. 1, 2009, and we began injecting CO2 into the geologic formations Oct. 1, 2009. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = we are in the range of the 15 to 30 percent energy penalty that we were expecting. It is important to realize that this is a process validation installation, so it is not optimized for efficiency, but rather for flexibility to adjust process conditions. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = We were extremely pleased to be notified Dec. 4, 2009, that we were selected to receive $334 million in funding through the Department of Energy's Clean Coal Power Initiative to scale-up the CCS process at our Mountaineer Plant. We plan to build the 235-megawatt installation of the chilled ammonia carbon capture and storage process at Mountaineer and expect it to be operational in 2015. At this scale, we will capture and store approximately 1.5 million metric tones of CO2 annually. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = We anticipate retrofitting up to 75 percent of our existing 25,600 megawatts of coal-fueled generation with CCS technology by 2025 or 2030. The plants we retrofit will be our largest, most efficient generating units that have already been retrofit to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and mercury. The remaining 25 percent of our existing coal-fired generating fleet likely will be retired. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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 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/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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

Longview Tax Exempt Bonds
by James Kotcon 25 Jan '10

25 Jan '10

Longview has requested a determination by the WV Public Service Commission. that tax-exempt Industrial revenue bonds to be issued by the WV Economic Development Authority "do not offend the public interest". The bonds were approved by the WV-EDA three years ago, but Longview now wants the PSC's blessing because that is a condition written into state law. I propose to submit the attached Letter of Protest objecting to sch a determination. The deadline is Thursday, so let me know if you have any thoughts on this issue. JBK

3 3

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC