- EC - lists.cheatlakeclear.org

Fwd: Membership
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 12 Aug '09

12 Aug '09

Mark I represented the Highlands Conservancy in the first wind turbine case ever filed with the Public Service Commission in 2005 [CORRECTION 2000], and I represent them (and the Sierra Club) now in proceedings at the PSC relating to AEP/Allegheny's proposed construction of PATH, a high voltage electric transmission line from the John Amos coal-fired electric plant in Winfield to Maryland -- through 225 miles of West Virginia, including vast swaths of forest. I think it is inaccurate to state the Sierra has stated a blanket policy in favor of absolutely any and all wind turbines. There clearly is a strong desire to build them, and as many as possible, but there is no blank check. HC dropped its opposition to the first wind turbine in 2005 [CORRECTION 2000] when the developer agreed to make changes moving the turbines further away from Dolly Sod. See the attached agreement. The Highlands Conservancy has adopted what I regard as an impossible standard for wind turbines, in effect, the exact opposite of blanket approval. HC's requirement that wind turbines demonstrate that they will result in the shut down of some equivalent MW of coal or other fossil fuel plant is just unrealistic, especially in a world where more generation capacity is being built all of the time. The reality is that no wind turbine, in the absence of the authority as the owner of a coal fired plant to shut down the plant, could ever meet that standard. None would be approved, ever, anywhere. Can you show me a single wind turbine project the HC is currently supporting under its recently announced standard? Of any size, in any location? I hope you can. Honestly. Best regards, Bill On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 8:14 PM, Mark Blumenstein <markb(a)mountain.net>wrote: > Thanks Bill for the effort to help me understand the issueI am fully > aware of all You bring to this issue but the relevant point I make and will > repeat > is A Blank policy that all WInd projects are good without close examination > of the details and the effects on individuals and communities will only lead > to a watered down effort . There are thousands of citizens and much animal > life that will be negatively effected by this local Beach Ridge project and > without compensation for property devaluation etc. and will reap nothing > from it except more power for the grid so the Pittsburgh suburbs can > flourish . And the green credits mean more pollution by a dirty industry > that buys or owns them! Yes there are many negative issues you did not > address in your email > I dont care to argue the fine points . > > Just look at the WV Highland Conservancy turn around position on Wind > projects in WV > Their reversal on this is an epic decision for an environmental org of WV > and is very commendable ! > So I would suggest that the WV SC also have a closer l@@K at its position > ALL WIND PROJECTS ARE NOT GOOD and therefore a blanket statement endorsing > these only hurts the membership issue > as in my case and the image of the org. > > Thanks for the consideration > Mark > > On Aug 12, 2009, at 6:29 PM, William V. DePaulo, Esq. wrote: > > But trust me when I tell you that uninformed moral fervor will not deter > the Sierra Club from aggressively pursuing realistic energy and > environmental solutions. > > > > > * > Mark Blumenstein* > > *HC73 BX11 Alderson WV 24910* > > *304 445 7822* > > * * > > * markb(a)mountain.net* > > > > -- 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. -- 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

Re: [EC] Membership
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 12 Aug '09

12 Aug '09

Mark Jim Kotcon is a very polite guy, and both courteous and elegant in his communications. I would rather open your eyes. First, the easy one. Carbon offsets are, by definition, required only of energy generated by sources relying up a carbon based fuel, like coal, petroleum, natural gas, and other fossil fuels (methane, butane, propane, the list goes on). Wind, which is roughly 90% nitrogen and 10% oxygen, has no carbon content. There is no predicate, therefore, for requiring a "carbon" offset. That would be making green energy sources offset the damage caused by other, non-green energy sources. That makes no sense as a matter of public policy. Period. View shed issues are more difficult. They are inherently subjective. What upsets one, pleases another, or may leave them indifferent. I am largely indifferent to wind turbines; I don't think of them as visual phenomena any more than I assess the aesthetics of an Exxon station when I pull into a gas station to fill up my gas tank (lacking as I do an electric car that could be charged at night by electricity generated by a wind turbine or solar panel). It's true, wind turbines frequently, if not always, require trees to be cut down. So does toilet paper, in significantly greater numbers....what did the wise man say? DETOGT (don't even think of going there). If you wanna see a LOT of trees cut down go look at the 10,000 acre wasteland that surrounds Kayford Mountain, 20 miles south of Charleston, the legacy of a fifteen year, ongoing mountain top removal project. At the same time I find the visual image of thousands of 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 year-old soldiers -- returning to the United States in caskets -- upsetting. *Very* god damned upsetting. I blame the fact that we are now engaged in wars in three countries in the Middle East on the fact that the oil companies were able to prevail upon their fraudulently elected lap dogs to embark on a war in Iraq primarily -- if not exclusively -- to control Iraqi oil fields. And that was not done as a "favor" to US citizens; it was the war crime known as aggressive war. I also react negatively (yeah, angry, exasperated, pissed off, pick any phrase you like, they all fit) when serious efforts to end American economic imperialism, and the squandering of environmental resources, are frustrated by misguided efforts -- however well intended -- to obstruct increases in domestically generated, and environmentally sustainable, energy sources. Like wind turbines. There are no risk or cost free choices in life. Either we continue to purchase (and steal) tremendous volumes of foreign crude oil, or we produce energy here in volumes sufficient to substitute for it. Or, even more difficult, we embark on the virtually impossible political task of persuading people to dramatically reduce their life styles. A footnote: China's per capita ownership of automobiles right now is about where the US's per capita ownership was in, buckle your seat belt, 1906. They are not going to accept that as a standard of living; they not about to *reduce* anything. They are going to *increase* vehicular use, geometrically. And there are 1.2 billion Chinese. Ditto for 1 billion residents of India, who in fact have a faster growing population. Either we find a way -- worldwide -- to generate electricity for electric cars, and simultaneously avoid both coal and petroleum, or we're going to be literally underwater. And the population displacements caused by rising sea levels will wreck civilization as we know it. Should we encourage on a wholesale basis conservation in every possible way? Of course, from the use of efficient appliances and cars, to constructing efficient buildings, and lighting them with compact flourescent lights (or better yet, even more efficient by several orders of magnitude, LED's, which hopefully with mass production will drop dramatically in price). Yes, all of these are desperately needed. But energy use is still going to go up, not down, under any realistic scenario. So we have got to find additional energy sources that don't require delivery routes guaranteed by the Pentagon's Central Command, or the generation of unlimited amounts of CO2. If you start out recognizing that 50-55% of electricity in this country is generated from coal, and that a very substantial majority of petroleum is imported, it becomes very difficult to find realistic alternative fuels in any volume that offers relief from either of those problems. Wind and solar, in vast quantities, are the only candidates for substitution, although many serious environmentalists now advocate greatly increased use of nuclear power. Got any thoughts on that alternative? Some advocate greatly increased use of natural gas, which has its own environmental problems related to water use (at least in the largest domestic discovery known as the Marcellus Shale), and only cuts the carbon generation by about half of that generated from coal. But there's lots of it. Wanna punch holes all over Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and parts of Virginia? There are gas exploration companies dying to enlist your support. So don't get me wrong. It's good you're thinking about this stuff, and it's laudable that you make decisions based on principal. But trust me when I tell you that uninformed moral fervor will not deter the Sierra Club from aggressively pursuing realistic energy and environmental solutions. If you want to impact policy -- whether of the US or the Sierra Club -- you need to answer the question of what alternative offers any prospect for relief from our dilemmas. When you find an answer better than wind turbines, call us. We'll waive your dues to get back in. Seeya. Bill -- 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 On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Mark Blumenstein <markb(a)mountain.net>wrote: > Dear JimWithout a plan that mandates a cut in carbon for every Turbine > built > We will only > be just adding a new source of power without reducing the current input > and future inputs of carbon > I can see that a turbine might offset slightly the power needed to generate > but we have no comprehensive plan > that cut emissions as we add generation > AND MY OBJECTION is directly linked to the endorsement of what I see as a > DAMAGING > installation of giant turbines on our southeastern ridges > I THING THE WV SC NEEDS TO BE MORE SELECTIVE IN THEIR ENDORSEMENT > for this is just a shell game for the GREEN CREDITS might just bring us > more pollution > in the future > Mark > > On Aug 12, 2009, at 4:33 PM, James Kotcon wrote: > > Mark: > > I respectfully disagree with your assessment of wind farms. By their very > nature, wind farms generate electricity that offsets carbon emissions. I > am aware of some wind opponents who deny that this is true, but the hard > data make it very clear that wind offsets fossil fuel emissions. While it > is not a 100 % kilowatt for kilowatt offset, it is still one of the least > carbon-emitting sources of energy available. > > I also recognize that the scenic impact is a concern, but that is an issue > that should be handled by county planning ordinances. I would have no > object to a scenic restriction on windfarms if it also applied to coal-fired > power plants, transmission lines, ski resorts and second home development. > But to restrict one type of development, in this case wind, is to > indirectly subsidize fossil fuel power instead. There is no perfect > source of energy, but any objective evaluation would have to conclude that > wind is cleaner than most. > > I also have no objection to compensating the parties affected by energy > generation, but this rule has to be applied to all power sources. As long > as it is required of wind farms but not coal mines or power plants, it > becomes, again, an indirect subsidy for coal and a barrier to the cleaner > sources we claim to want. > > I agree that there are adverse impacts to some birds and bats, but there is > no credible evidence that this has an adverse effect on the "populations". > Until we can compare the effect of a wind farm against the impacts of a > strip mine, there is no basis for singling out one energy source for > additional restrictions, but allow other energy sources to operate without > restriction. > > The Sierra Club would be easily dismissed if we oppose every form of > energy. We need a more rational energy policy to get support from a > majority of Americans. We do not support every wind farm application, but > we also would not be credible if we opposed them all. > > I hope you will reconsider your membership. Feel free to contact me if > you wish to discuss this in more detail. > > Jim Kotcon, Chair > Energy Committee > 304-293-8822 (office) > 304-594-3322 (home) > > P.S. We are currently compiling a subcommittee of Club members to review > additional wind farm permit applications in West Virginia. Let me know if > you are interested in being part of that evaluation. > > Mark Blumenstein <markb(a)mountain.net> 8/12/2009 4:11 PM >>> > > > Since the WV SC has taken a position on wind turbines on our historic > ridges in WV especially without WITHOUT a carbon offset > I will not be renewing my membership. > Wind turbines have their place but cutting down mountaintops and > deforesting ridgetops > and forever changing our historic ridges in eastern WV in site of > farms and families > WITHOUT any compensation to the effected parties is a poor decision > and these poorly located devices are BAT and Migrant Bird Killers > > I believe THE WV & NATIONAL SIERRA CLUB should reevaluate their > position > > If this only reaches the membership committee in this email I wish > for you to pass along > this those that make policy > > Mark Blumenstein > HC 73 BX 11 > Alderson WV 24910 > > ps. I think Whale Wars has shown that action not banners change policy > Stop the Whaling by stopping the Whalers! > > > > Mark Blumenstein > HC73 BX11 Alderson WV 24910 > 304 445 7822 > > markb(a)mountain.net > > > > > > * > Mark Blumenstein* > > *HC73 BX11 Alderson WV 24910* > > *304 445 7822* > > *http://www.markblumenstein.com* > > * markb(a)mountain.net* > > > >

2 1

Fwd: Bruce's Blog: VICTORY: Dynegy Out of the New Coal Business
by Paul Wilson 12 Aug '09

12 Aug '09

fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Nithin Coca <nithin.coca(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 4:48 PM Subject: Bruce's Blog: VICTORY: Dynegy Out of the New Coal Business To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)lists.sierraclub.org *Please comment and Recommend - and forward to your local lists.* Grist - *http://www.grist.org/member/11566/*<http://www.grist.org/member/11566/> Daily Kos - *http://www.dailykos.com/user/Bruce%20Nilles*<http://www.dailykos.com/user/Bruce%20Nilles> Huffington Post - *http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-nilles*<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-nilles> Compass - *http://sierraclub.typepad.com/compass/coal-director/*<http://sierraclub.typepad.com/compass/coal-director/> Opposing Views - *http://www.opposingviews.com/tags/environment*<http://www.opposingviews.com/tags/environment> SF Green - * http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/contribute/sn/persona?plckPersonaPage=Persona… *<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/contribute/sn/persona?plckPersonaPage=Persona…> Climate Crossroads - http://connect.sierraclub.org/post/ClimateCrossroadsBlog/victory_dynegy_out… Also posted on - SE Green, Alltop Green, and Alternet _________________________ Nithin Coca Grassroots Media Coordinator * Sierra Club (o) 415.977.5761 (m) 913.940.1571 nithin.coca(a)sierraclub.org follow me on Twitter - twitter.com/excinit - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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

Fw: re: Media Advisory: Mollohan Schedules Town Meeting
by Jim Sconyers 11 Aug '09

11 Aug '09

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. --- On Tue, 8/11/09, Frank Slider <fslider(a)verizon.net> wrote: From: Frank Slider <fslider(a)verizon.net> Subject: re: Media Advisory: Mollohan Schedules Town Meeting To: "Undisclosed Recipients" <fslider(a)verizon.net> Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009, 1:45 PM FW: Media Advisory: Mollohan Schedules Town Meeting Media Advisory: Mollohan Schedules Town Hall Meeting August 10, 2009 – Congressman Alan B. Mollohan announced today that he will be having a town hall meeting 6:00 PM on Friday, August 14, 2009 at Wheeling Jesuit University, Troy Theater in Swint Hall. He will be available to listen to his constituents on matters that are of concern to them.

1 0

Monday: Transmission Tax on Interim Agenda
by James Kotcon 10 Aug '09

10 Aug '09

The August Legislative Interim committee meetings schedule and agendas were posted very late Friday. The most notable (and important) meeting this month is on Monday, Aug. 10, when Finance Subcommittee B, chaired by Senator Walt Helmick, will take up SCR 57- requesting the Joint Committee on Government and Finance study the proposed new state business and occupation tax on high-voltage electric power transmission lines. The committee will have a presentation on the Governor's proposed transmission line tax from Jonathan Deem, the Governor's General Counsel. The meeting is from 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM in the Senate Finance Committee meeting room. This is an incredible opportunity. Those who are in town for the status hearing should make every effort to get to the Capitol at 4 PM in massive numbers. The Legislature needs to hear about the problems with the Transmission line process, and be told in no uncertain terms that a vote for this tax is a vote to take people homes and farms! Instead of a transmission tax, the PSC siting process needs to be reformed by: 1) Mandate that applicants provide written notification to all affected property owners, 2) Direct the PSC to balance the needs of ratepayers against the need for transmission lines; 3) Direct the PSC to evaluate alternatives to new transmission lines (including demand-side management alternatives) where feasible, less-impacting alternatives exist. 4) Protect designated scenic areas; and 5) Consider indirect as well as direct impacts. Currently, only those property directly crossed by the line are compensated, neighbors suffer real losses, but get nothing. 6) Consider the increased air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from plants producing the electricity to be carried by these lines. Make sure the Legislature knows that phony fixes are not acceptable, and the transmission tax is a fraudulent "bait-and-switch". I suspect that even the Governor knows it is unconstitutional, but it would allow the Governor and the PSC to claim that the line benefits West Virginia, and then, by the time it is challenged in court and tossed out, the line will have been built. I plan to attend the hearing, and urge anyone else to attend. Attached is a draft fact sheet that we put together for our alternative, the PSC Reform Act. Please let me have comments before noon Monday. JBK

1 0

Monday: Transmission Tax on Interim Agenda
by James Kotcon 10 Aug '09

10 Aug '09

The August Legislative Interim committee meetings schedule and agendas were posted very late Friday. The most notable (and important) meeting this month is on Monday, Aug. 10, when Finance Subcommittee B, chaired by Senator Walt Helmick, will take up SCR 57- requesting the Joint Committee on Government and Finance study the proposed new state business and occupation tax on high-voltage electric power transmission lines. The committee will have a presentation on the Governor's proposed transmission line tax from Jonathan Deem, the Governor's General Counsel. The meeting is from 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM in the Senate Finance Committee meeting room. This is an incredible opportunity. Those who are in town for the status hearing should make every effort to get to the Capitol at 4 PM in massive numbers. The Legislature needs to hear about the problems with the Transmission line process, and be told in no uncertain terms that a vote for this tax is a vote to take people homes and farms! Instead of a transmission tax, the PSC siting process needs to be reformed by: 1) Mandate that applicants provide written notification to all affected property owners, 2) Direct the PSC to balance the needs of ratepayers against the need for transmission lines; 3) Direct the PSC to evaluate alternatives to new transmission lines (including demand-side management alternatives) where feasible, less-impacting alternatives exist. 4) Protect designated scenic areas; and 5) Consider indirect as well as direct impacts. Currently, only those property directly crossed by the line are compensated, neighbors suffer real losses, but get nothing. 6) Consider the increased air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from plants producing the electricity to be carried by these lines. Make sure the Legislature knows that phony fixes are not acceptable, and the transmission tax is a fraudulent "bait-and-switch". I suspect that even the Governor knows it is unconstitutional, but it would allow the Governor and the PSC to claim that the line benefits West Virginia, and then, by the time it is challenged in court and tossed out, the line will have been built. I plan to attend the hearing, and urge anyone else to attend. Attached is a draft fact sheet that we put together for our alternative, the PSC Reform Act. Please let me have comments before noon Monday. JBK

1 0

Fwd: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] Summary of allocation of revenues from allowances under climate bill
by James Kotcon 07 Aug '09

07 Aug '09

To: Energy Committee This report identifies the funding allocated by state for energy efficiency in the Cap and Trade Bill (ACES). They estimate that West Virginia would get over $2.7 billion for energy efficiency during the 2012 to 2019 period. This would create an estimated 24,000 jobs. And since each dollar spent on energy efficiency generates three dollars n savings for the consumer, that means the bill saves consumers in West Virginia an estimated $8 billion dollars!!!!! We need to get this story our there. How do we do it? JBK >>> Ned Ford <Ned.Ford(a)FUSE.NET> 8/6/2009 1:52 AM >>> A group called Environment Northeast has developed an analysis of the ASES (climate) legislation which passed the House on Micheal Jackson/Farrah Fawcett day (June 25th). The allocation of allowances to the states for different purposes identifies four areas in which funding will be provided, in hundreds of millions of dollars, to billions of dollars, depending on formulae in the bill. The majority of this money will save three dollars for each dollar spent. Those of you who are meeting with Senators and staff may want to be familiar with this or present the report. It is a huge amount of money. http://www.env-ne.org/resources/open/p/id/895. Both funding levels and estimates of benefits are included. - Ned - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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

Fw: WInd turbines on Allegheny Mtn in VA
by Frank Young 07 Aug '09

07 Aug '09

This communication, just below, is about a wind farm proposed for Highland County, VA- just east of Pendleton County, WV. I have no other information about this proposed wind facility. Frank Young ----- Original Message ----- From: Martinjul(a)aol.com To: dawn(a)brightsideacres.com Cc: wvhcboard(a)yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 1:51 PM Subject: [WVHCBOARD] Re: WInd turbines on Allegheny Mtn In a message dated 8/7/2009 12:26:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time, dawn(a)brightsideacres.com writes: Hello Martin, I am writing to ask you and The Highlands Voice to look into what is going on in Highland County Virginia regarding the county's recent approval of Highland County Wind Development, LLC to erect a 19-tower wind generating facility on Tamarack Ridge (the highest point in Highland County and approximately 1600 feet from the West Virginia line. These 19 towers will each be 400 feet tall, and will be in clear view from the Camp Allegheny Battlefield, which is on the National Register of Historic Places; as well as from multiple sites on County Route 3 (the Old Staunton-Parkersburg Turnpike, which is a National Historic Backway.) Apparently, Highland County's Technical Review Committee simply approved the site plan submitted yesterday, eventhough environmental reviews, impact statements or permits normally required by the federal government have neither been obtained nor formally waived. No photo-simulation to evaluate the visual impact of the turbines on the Camp Allegheny Battlefield and historic surrounds has been conducted. >From everything I have read in The Recorder, the impact of this wind farm on West Virginia has not been considered whatsoever. Perhaps it is a matter for the Department of Interior? Perhaps, if brought to Nick Rahall's attention, a cease and desist order could be issued by a Federal Court? I believe that the Pocahontas County Commission is looking into this as of their meeting yesterday. Do you know Commissioners David Fleming or Martin Saffir? Could The Highland's Voice be of help to them? According to yesterday's Recorder, Highland County Wind Development intends to break ground next week. Please see the link below for articles regarding this issue. Swift action is required to preserve the natural and historic integrity of an historically significant and environmentally pristine area of WV. http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2009/08/06/wind-utility-headed-into-construc… Thank You, Dawn Baldwin "Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, things aren't going to get better, they're not!" From The Lorax by Dr. Suess For The Mountains Julian Martin Vice-President for State Affairs West Virginia Highlands Conservancy www.wvhighlands.org 1525 Hampton Road, Charleston, WV 25314 Contact me(martinjul(a)aol.com) for a trip to Kayford Mountain to see active and so-called reclaimed mountain top removal. Go to www.wvhighlands.org for I Love Mountains t-shirts, hats, I Love Mountains and Friends Of The Mountains bumper stickers and for speakers on environmental issues in West Virginia.

1 0

PSC Procedural Order of August 4, 2009
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 07 Aug '09

07 Aug '09

Dear Mr. Watkins: I am forwarding this email to you for distribution to the Commission, and in response to the Commission's August 4 procedural order. I am forwarding it in advance of the hearing on August 10, in an attempt to convey some thoughts that might assist the Commission in resolving the issues surrounding the manner and level of participation by the 200+ would-be intervenors in the PATH proceeding. I also convey these thoughts now, in advance of the August 10 hearing, so that the idea of breaking the Jefferson County and Ashton Woods groups down into more effective groups can percolate within the Commission before Monday. I recognize that it is possible that the idea, if it has any merit at all, could be lost in the sea of advocates that will appear Monday. I acknowledge that this email does not conform with the requirements of a formal pleading before the Commission, and I do not request that it be accorded any formal status. At the same time, I have copied it by email to counsel for PATH and as many of the Allegheny Energy personnel as I can; I have no email addresses for AEP personnel. Additionally, I have copied other intervenors whose email addresses I know, and by this email request that two persons, Patience Wait and Tom Hildebrand, forward the email to the two large groups whom they are associated with, respectively, Jefferson County intervenors and Ashton Woods intervenors. In light of this dissemination, I would submit that it is not an ex parte communication. I have blind-copied the email to a much larger list in the interest of allowing as many people as possible have the benefit, however minimal, of these thoughts in advance of Monday. I will file a hard copy with the Executive Secretary for service on others as soon as the email list is disseminated. Of the 200+ intervenors, I am advised that fully 140+ are from Jefferson County and 40+/- are from Ashton Woods. Stated otherwise, fully 180 of the 200 intervenors -- no less than 90% -- are by the terms of the August 4 order to be represented by 2 persons. The remaining 20+/- intervenors will be represented, presumably, by 20+/- attorneys or others spokesmen, for a total of 22 representatives. I do not know if the Commission was aware of this statistical breakdown at the time the August 4 order was entered. However, I believe the statistically disproportionate representation of Jefferson County and Ashton Woods intervenors in the total suggests that the Commission might achieve its legitimate objective of making the PATH proceeding manageable in a more effective fashion. Specifically, if the Commission did nothing more than allow the 140+ intervenors from Jefferson County break themselves down into 5 groups, the effectiveness of the representation of the intervenors would increase dramatically, while the incremental burden on the Commission in dealing with the PATH proceeding would be minimal. That is, the number of spokesmen would only increase from 22 to 27. Why would this be more effective for the participants from Jefferson County? Because they are, apparently, themselves geographically diverse. And they will absorb a disproportionate impact in total from the PATH line's passage through their community. For instance, I am advised that there is a geographically segregable group from a neighborhood called "Blue Ridge" which has an interest in the proceeding that is very localized to them, and runs the risk of being lost in the background noise of a pleading, written or verbal, on behalf of 140 people. Similarly, there is another identifiable group interested in the impact not on their residence or business, per se, but on the schools they send their children to. There are undoubtedly other readily identifiable subgroups in the 140 who could rationally be separated from the 140 aggregation and who, as a result, would have a much more effective representation before the Commission, again with a minimal incremental impact on the efficiency of the PATH proceeding. I apologize for not getting this to the Commission earlier, but I have only come by the facts I relate here since August 4. I want to emphasize that I do not represent anyone in their capacity as a resident of Jefferson County or Ashton Woods (although I assume there must be some Sierra Club and/or Highlands Conservancy members in one or both communities, whether or not they have intervened individually). I make these suggestions merely as one lawyer among many with an interest in assisting the Commission achieve its stated goals. I convey these thoughts now only because it strikes me that the disproportionate representation of these two communities in the total intervenor group might be more rationally dealt with in a manner other than aggregation by County, and that the alternative of disaggregating these two large groups can achieve the Commission's stated goal of efficiency while making the intervenors' participation more effective, another goal which the Commission clearly wanted to achieve, within the bounds of practicality, in its August 4 order. Best regards, 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

Fw: MSNBC (Rachel Maddow) on fraudulent coal lobby letter and MTR
by Jim Sconyers 06 Aug '09

06 Aug '09

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. --- On Thu, 8/6/09, aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org <aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org> wrote: From: aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org <aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org> Subject: MSNBC (Rachel Maddow) on fraudulent coal lobby letter and MTR To: "Jim Sconyers" <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com>, "Regina Hendrix" <reginahendrix999(a)gmail.com>, "William DePaulo" <william.depaulo(a)gmail.com> Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 1:25 PM This is a must-see: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#32307765 Aaron Isherwood Senior Staff Attorney Sierra Club Environmental Law Program 85 Second Street, 2d Floor San Francisco, CA 94105-3441 Phone: (415) 977-5680 Fax: (415) 977-5793 CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL COMMUNICATION/WORK PRODUCT This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential attorney-client communications and/or attorney work product. If you receive this e-mail inadvertently, please reply to the sender and delete all versions on your system. Thank you.

1 0

"BLACKOUT" - REVIEW OF BOOK QUESTIONING LONGEVITY OF COAL RESERVES (AND STUDY ON WHICH IT IS BASED)
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 05 Aug '09

05 Aug '09

Review: *Blackout* by Richard Heinberg by Frank Kaminski *Blackout: Coal, Climate and the Last Energy Crisis* By Richard Heinberg 201 pp. New Society Publishers – May 2009. $18.95. Richard Heinberg’s new book *Blackout* tries to demolish current assumptions about the world’s remaining coal endowment: namely, that it is immense beyond belief, barely tapped and will last for centuries to come. Heinberg argues that these assumptions are off-base, misleading and not at all supported by recent studies that suggest global coal production could peak in less than two decades. He warns that an impending shortage of minable coal threatens to plunge our civilization into one final, irreversible Blackout unless we act wisely. Heinberg makes his case well. One of the things that I’ve always admired about his writing is the way he tries to avoid any potential for bias by considering all possible viewpoints and contributing factors with regard to a given issue, even those that might weaken his argument. Nowhere is this even-handed approach more evident than in *Blackout*, where he discusses not only the pessimistic reports on remaining coal reserves, but also those that he considers to be overly optimistic. In short, Heinberg can always be counted on to give us fact without inflammation. And yet, my mind still isn’t quite made up about the book's central thesis. Common sense tells me that it's probably more right than wrong—not only because of Heinberg's sound analysis of the reserves data, but also because imminent declines in oil production will surely place additional pressure on coal supplies, which could hasten coal's peak. But quite a few people within the peak oil community simply aren’t buying this case for a peak in coal production within our lifetimes. According to these skeptics, peak coalers underestimate the ability of emerging technologies to extract a larger proportion of the resource than what is currently considered to be recoverable. On the advice of one such skeptic and personal friend, I spent several days researching innovative coal technologies like underground coal gasification (UCG) and microbial coal prior to writing this review. And, being anything but an energy scientist myself, I still find that I can’t reach a firm conclusion about the degree of promise held by these technologies. Thus, the remainder of this review will focus solely on Heinberg’s analysis of reserves data, rather than on the merits of the various emerging coal technologies. The impetus for *Blackout* came two years ago, with the publication of a report titled “Coal: Resources and Future Production<http://www.energywatchgroup.org/fileadmin/global/pdf/EWG_Report_Coal_10-07-…>.” Authored by a group of independent analysts for Energy Watch Group in Germany, the report analyzed the latest available data on the world’s remaining coal deposits, and came to some sobering conclusions. Above all, it found that our current data on global coal reserves are of very poor quality, since many countries’ reserves figures are woefully out-of-date, having not been updated, in some cases, in several decades. And of the nations that have actually made the effort to update their proven reserves figures, all but two—India and Australia—have revised them substantially *downward* over the past two decades. Some of these downward revisions have been staggering. For example, Botswana, Germany and the United Kingdom have all downgraded their proven reserves by more than 90 percent (Germany’s downgrades were the sharpest, with proven hard coal reserves plummeting by a stunning 99 percent!). Further, the report found that the United States, which we’ve all been told has something like two centuries’ worth of coal left, has in fact *already peaked* in its production of high-quality coal. And even the world’s total in-situ coal resources have been reduced by 60 percent over the past 25 years, from 10 trillion tons of hard coal equivalent to 4.2 trillion tons. The study authors conclude that such drastic reductions are far too significant to simply represent the quantities of coal that have been mined and produced in the time since reserves were last assessed. Instead, they are most likely the result of coal-producing countries having better data now than they once had. And the authors see global coal production peaking, in the best case, in 2025 at 30 percent above present levels of production. Heinberg picked up this story on his *MuseLetter* blog when it first came to light, and it became the basis for a series of essays that he went on to write on peak coal. Over the past two years, the study’s findings have been bolstered by subsequent research carried out by the Institute for Energy (IFE), Caltech Professor David Rutledge and Uppsala University in Sweden, among others. Heinberg draws on all of this research in *Blackout*. The book follows a simple structure. Its first two-thirds are devoted to assessing the reserves of the world’s major coal-producing nations, country by country. This is followed by two brief chapters that deal with the implications of continued coal burning for climate change and the potentialities and limitations of new coal technologies, respectively. Lastly, Heinberg devotes a chapter to three potential scenarios that he believes could be in store for us, depending on how successfully we’re able to rise to the challenges of developing a renewable energy infrastructure and averting catastrophic climate change. I’ve already said all that I think I can about emerging coal technologies. As for the chapter on coal and climate, Heinberg dissects each of the various, differing viewpoints on the implications that continued coal consumption will have for climate change policy—and vice versa—and argues for a “combined approach” to addressing fossil fuel depletion and climate change. This combined approach would ensure that we don’t address each crisis with policies that make the other one worse (as for example by alleviating fuel shortages through the increased use of dirty hydrocarbons like tar sands and shale oil, which would accelerate climate change by ratcheting up carbon emissions). Heinberg also adds his voice to the clamor among leading climate scientists for a global campaign to keep atmospheric CO2 levels to within 350 parts per million (ppm), which is currently deemed the safe upper limit for atmospheric CO2. The three future scenarios that Heinberg foresees are a business-as-usual scenario involving the continued wholesale liquidation of the world’s remaining coal reserves; a clean tech scenario in which we continue using coal as quickly as possible, but mitigate its climate effects through massive investment in carbon capture and storage (CCS); and a scenario in which we successfully transition to a renewable energy infrastructure. The business-as-usual scenario would have the worst environmental consequences out of the three. And the clean tech scenario would entail the worst economic consequences, since it would require tremendous investments in CCS infrastructures on the part of economies already ravaged by skyrocketing coal prices and shortages. The renewable energy scenario would involve the least environmental harm, and it’s also the only one in which we would be able to avert total economic and societal collapse. But Heinberg has no illusions that it will be easy to find the political will necessary in order to make this latter scenario a reality. Heinberg may be right that our modern world is doomed to descent into one great, irrevocable Blackout within our lifetimes barring some unprecedented, coordinated worldwide switch to renewables. On the other hand, it may be that innovative technologies will dramatically increase the total amount of economically extractable coal, bringing on a decades-long glut of the stuff—as well as great peril to our environment. But whichever winds up being the case, Heinberg is certainly right about the need to cut our carbon emissions as quickly as we can, just in case Earth’s climate turns out to be far more sensitive to our emissions than we’re currently able to fathom. I don’t know which side is right in the peak coal debate—but I do know that *Blackout* is an important and timely book. In the form of this compact volume, one of the best and most productive peak oil authors working today has turned his customary scholarship, wisdom, wit and writing prowess to some of the most critical issues now unfolding on our planet. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Editorial Notes ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Frank Kaminski is a member of Seattle Peak Oil Awareness, a connoisseur of post-oil novels and a regular book reviewer for Energy Bulletin. He can be reached at frank.kaminski AT gmail.com. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Original article available here <http://www.seattleoil.com/> -- 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

Fw: Club-wide teleconference - Tuesday, August 4th
by Jim Sconyers 04 Aug '09

04 Aug '09

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. --- On Tue, 8/4/09, Jennifer.Pecota(a)sierraclub.org <Jennifer.Pecota(a)sierraclub.org> wrote: From: Jennifer.Pecota(a)sierraclub.org <Jennifer.Pecota(a)sierraclub.org> Subject: Club-wide teleconference - Tuesday, August 4th To: rickestes_92595(a)yahoo.com, karen(a)karenmerriam.com, jscorbett(a)mindspring.com, jheising(a)usd.edu, kjohnflaherty(a)yahoo.com, katibug1959(a)aol.com, davidhornbecklaw(a)msn.com, wyh(a)xmission.com, puffin(a)mbay.net, ddickson(a)burlingtontelecom.net, fewmit(a)comcast.net, jimdougherty(a)aol.com, jim_scon(a)yahoo.com, marthamdelrio(a)yahoo.com Date: Tuesday, August 4, 2009, 5:42 PM As we work to create a clean energy economy and solve our climate crisis we face incredible opposition from groups funded by Big Oil and Coal. You are invited to join a Club-wide teleconference “Call to Action on Global Warming and Energy” to hear how you can help create the groundswell of support needed to move these priorities forward this year. When: Tuesday, August 4 th at 8:30pm Eastern Number: 866.501.6174 code: 223 9223 Draft Agenda: - Welcome and Context - International and Federal Legislative Action - Administrative Action: Big Picture Campaign - Questions and Answers Hope you can make it!

1 0

Re: [EC] National Trust grant project for PATH
by Frank Young 31 Jul '09

31 Jul '09

To follow up- I have reason to believe that WV Highlands Conservancy could put some of its own matching $$$ into this. And Patience and Keryn have some matching funds already- but I do not know how much. So it would likely be a multi-organizational effort. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: Frank Young To: ec(a)osenergy.org Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 2:28 PM Subject: Fw: National Trust grant project for PATH Jim and all- On last week's call some of us expressed an interest in producing anti-PATH radio / TV spots for airing. A few months ago some of us doing Stop PATH work got a $ 2,000 National Trust grant to produce anti-PATH ad spots for radio / TV airing. This grant must be used to produce spots, not for air time. The grant requires $2,000 of matching funds. Could Sierra Club put some up $$$ to help meet the match requirement, and we work collaboratively on this? We have the $2,000 of National Trust grant monies in hand. But we can't spend it until we have matching $$$$. A natural question might be, "Then who would be managing this"? Currently Patience Wait and Keryn Newman (both eastern panhandle Stop PATH activists who Karen and perhaps others of you know) have been managing it, with me as the liaison with WV Highlands Conservancy- the fiscal agent for the NT grant. And if there are Sierra Club folks with some relevant talent to offer, we would welcome it. Frank Young ----- Original Message ----- From: Keryn Newman To: Patience Wait ; Frank Young Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 9:22 AM Subject: Re: National Trust grant project for PATH My thoughts -- if the Sierra Club is willing to kick in some $$ to match the grant funds, we could get started tomorrow creating the ads. I'd be willing to work with Sierra Club to get this underway. We've been treading very carefully to be sure we do everything within grant guidelines. Someone from the Sierra Club with grant experience could be very helpful in letting us know what/what not to do. Maybe we're being too careful? I dunno... Keryn ----- Original Message ----- From: Patience Wait To: Frank Young Cc: Keryn Newman Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 8:13 PM Subject: Re: National Trust grant project for PATH We're trying to finish raising the matching $2K we have to have on hand before we can start spending it. We have ideas for rebuttal ads - as we read the grant, we can use the funds to create the ads, but not to run them. So if we can get them made, then we can make them available to anyone who is willing to pay for space (or time, if TV or radio). I'll talk to Keryn and see if we can give you a target date when we think we can get to spend it! P. On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Frank Young <fyoung(a)mountain.net> wrote: Re: National Trust grant project for PATH Patience, what is happening on this? Sierra Club is interested in seeing some radio/TV response PSAs to the current barrage of PATH company advertising. I think Sierra may have few $$$ or so to put into it. Could this be a collaborative effort with Sierra Club folks? Or are you and Keryn well along on this on your own? Frank ---- Original Message ----- From: Patience Wait To: Frank Young Cc: Keryn Newman Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 12:58 PM Subject: Re: Grant follow-up Perfect, thank you. And we will be exceptionally cautious! P. On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Frank Young <fyoung(a)mountain.net> wrote: Being as it is all in my name and WVHC, you will not need to sign anything. But what I need you / Keryn to do is take great care to document all needs for disbursements before we write a check(s), and to document all expenses afterward. I cannot over-emphasize the need for adequate documentation. When you see the award letter, you will understand why this is important. I will bring copies of both the award letter and our letter of agreement with the grant requirements to the meeting Saturday- one copy each for you and Keryn. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: Patience Wait To: Frank Young Cc: Keryn Newman Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:42 AM Subject: Grant follow-up Frank - Do you need Keryn's signature as well as mine on the grant paperwork? I'll be at the WVEC meeting Saturday, but Keryn won't; if you're coming, can you bring the paperwork (or a copy) so I can sign it and we can begin identifying what the guidelines are for getting bids on some of the work? There's probably more I ought to say, but I've got to head into town for a 10 a.m. meeting. I'll be back this afternoon if you want to chat. P.

1 0

Fw: National Trust grant project for PATH
by Frank Young 31 Jul '09

31 Jul '09

Jim and all- On last week's call some of us expressed an interest in producing anti-PATH radio / TV spots for airing. A few months ago some of us doing Stop PATH work got a $ 2,000 National Trust grant to produce anti-PATH ad spots for radio / TV airing. This grant must be used to produce spots, not for air time. The grant requires $2,000 of matching funds. Could Sierra Club put some up $$$ to help meet the match requirement, and we work collaboratively on this? We have the $2,000 of National Trust grant monies in hand. But we can't spend it until we have matching $$$$. A natural question might be, "Then who would be managing this"? Currently Patience Wait and Keryn Newman (both eastern panhandle Stop PATH activists who Karen and perhaps others of you know) have been managing it, with me as the liaison with WV Highlands Conservancy- the fiscal agent for the NT grant. And if there are Sierra Club folks with some relevant talent to offer, we would welcome it. Frank Young ----- Original Message ----- From: Keryn Newman To: Patience Wait ; Frank Young Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 9:22 AM Subject: Re: National Trust grant project for PATH My thoughts -- if the Sierra Club is willing to kick in some $$ to match the grant funds, we could get started tomorrow creating the ads. I'd be willing to work with Sierra Club to get this underway. We've been treading very carefully to be sure we do everything within grant guidelines. Someone from the Sierra Club with grant experience could be very helpful in letting us know what/what not to do. Maybe we're being too careful? I dunno... Keryn ----- Original Message ----- From: Patience Wait To: Frank Young Cc: Keryn Newman Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 8:13 PM Subject: Re: National Trust grant project for PATH We're trying to finish raising the matching $2K we have to have on hand before we can start spending it. We have ideas for rebuttal ads - as we read the grant, we can use the funds to create the ads, but not to run them. So if we can get them made, then we can make them available to anyone who is willing to pay for space (or time, if TV or radio). I'll talk to Keryn and see if we can give you a target date when we think we can get to spend it! P. On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Frank Young <fyoung(a)mountain.net> wrote: Re: National Trust grant project for PATH Patience, what is happening on this? Sierra Club is interested in seeing some radio/TV response PSAs to the current barrage of PATH company advertising. I think Sierra may have few $$$ or so to put into it. Could this be a collaborative effort with Sierra Club folks? Or are you and Keryn well along on this on your own? Frank ---- Original Message ----- From: Patience Wait To: Frank Young Cc: Keryn Newman Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 12:58 PM Subject: Re: Grant follow-up Perfect, thank you. And we will be exceptionally cautious! P. On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Frank Young <fyoung(a)mountain.net> wrote: Being as it is all in my name and WVHC, you will not need to sign anything. But what I need you / Keryn to do is take great care to document all needs for disbursements before we write a check(s), and to document all expenses afterward. I cannot over-emphasize the need for adequate documentation. When you see the award letter, you will understand why this is important. I will bring copies of both the award letter and our letter of agreement with the grant requirements to the meeting Saturday- one copy each for you and Keryn. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: Patience Wait To: Frank Young Cc: Keryn Newman Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:42 AM Subject: Grant follow-up Frank - Do you need Keryn's signature as well as mine on the grant paperwork? I'll be at the WVEC meeting Saturday, but Keryn won't; if you're coming, can you bring the paperwork (or a copy) so I can sign it and we can begin identifying what the guidelines are for getting bids on some of the work? There's probably more I ought to say, but I've got to head into town for a 10 a.m. meeting. I'll be back this afternoon if you want to chat. P.

1 0

Fwd: looking for the stop the PATH signs
by Paul Wilson 26 Jul '09

26 Jul '09

Greetings: we now have 500 signs in 5 boxes plus 10 boxes of wire stands (50 per box). We want to keep 100 here in the EP, but can move the rest to Morgantown or other locales. So who needs them and how do we get them out to you?? let me know. Keryn may make a trip to the Aug. 10th hearing in Charleston and that may be a good time. Otherwise I can load up some in my truck and meeting someone, somewhere! cheers,paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: StopPath <stoppath(a)frontiernet.net> Date: Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 9:48 PM Subject: Re: looking for the stop the PATH signs To: Kim Bjorgo-Thorne <bjorgo(a)wvwc.edu> Cc: Paul Wilson <pjgrunt(a)gmail.com> Hi Kim, The Sierra Club just had 500 Stop the PATH signs printed. They are selling them for $3.00 per sign. I currently have them in my garage in Shepherdstown (Jefferson County). How many signs are you looking for? We may be traveling to Charleston on Aug. 9/10 for the intervenors' status hearing and could possibly drop them off on the way, or if you're traveling this way, you're welcome to pick them up. I am copying the WV Sierra Club Rep. on this -- perhaps he knows of some of their folks heading your way. Best regards, Keryn Newman StopPATH/Jefferson Co. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kim Bjorgo-Thorne" <bjorgo(a)wvwc.edu> To: <stoppath(a)frontiernet.net> Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 9:51 PM Subject: looking for the stop the PATH signs Hi there- we live in WV and would like to get some of the Stop the PATH > signs. How would I go about getting those? Thanks for your help! > > Cheers, > Kim > -- > > > > Kim Bjorgo-Thorne, Ph.D. > > bjorgo(a)wvwc.edu <mailto:bjorgo@wvwc.edu> > > Assistant Professor of Environmental Science > > West Virginia Wesleyan College > > 59 College Avenue Box 61 > > Buckhannon, WV 26201 > > (304) 473-8126 > > Environmental Science Website < > http://www.wvwc.edu/aca2/dept/biol/envirosci/> > > > > NTMail K12 - the Mail Server for Education > > -- 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

so sorry!
by Jim Sconyers 22 Jul '09

22 Jul '09

Mea culpa! I can only apologize for screwing up the conference call tonight. I got sidetracked by some things I was working on, and it simply slipped my "mind." I am terribly sorry. I hope we can reschedule soon. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

FW: US Wind Force
by Grubb, Karen 22 Jul '09

22 Jul '09

Here is what Frank Young sent. He is now helping Energy Committee with wind energy issues, so please include him on emails. From: Frank Young [mailto:fyoung@mountain.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 10:44 PM To: Grubb, Karen; kevin fooce Subject: Re: US Wind Force Karen & Kevin, U.S. Wind Force operates under several wholly owned subsidiary corporate names, including Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC . U.S. Wind Force was also the applicant for the Liberty Gap Wind Force wind farm in Pendleton County last year- which Sierra Club opposed- and which was eventually denied by the State Public Service Commission. I will have more time next week to look further into this and another proposed wind farm in the same general area. But a quick search found the following two "initial filing" documents- one by the applicant, the other by an opposing intervener. I will try to research and explain the specific environmental issues at debate in this case when I get back next week. Frank Young ---------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivi tyID=261962&NotType='WebDocket' JACKSON Kelley J ATTORNEYS AT LAW PLLC I600 LAIDLEY TOWER * PO. BOX 553 * CHARLESTON,WESTVlRGlNlA 25322 TELEPHONE: 304-340- IO00 e TELECOPIER: 304-340- I I30 m.jacksonkelly. corn E-Mail: snchambcrs(~iacksonkellv.corn State Bar No. 694 DIRECT TELEPHONE: (304) 340- 12 14 DIRECT TELECOPIER: (304) 340-1 080 March 17,2009 Sandra Squire, Executive Secretary Public Service Commission of West Virginia 201 Brooks Street Charleston, West Virginia 25301 Re: CASENO. 09 -E-CS Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC Application for a Siting Certificate to Authorize the Construction and Operation of an Electric Wholesale Generating Facility and Related Transmission Support Line of Less than 200 kV and Associated Interconnection Facilities in Mineral County, West Virginia. Dear Ms. Squire: Please find enclosed an original and twelve copies of a Siting Certificate Application for the Pinnacle Wind Farm at NewPage in Mineral County, West Virginia ("Application") filed by Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC ("Pinnacle"). In its Application, Pinnacle requests that the Commission grant a Siting Certificate authorizing it to construct, own, and operate an electric generating facility and associated facilities known as the Pinnacle Wind Farm at NewPage ("Project"), to be constructed on Green Mountain, southwest of the City of Keyser, Mineral County, West Virgnia. The Project will consist of up to 23 wind turbines, each with an anticipated nameplate capacity of 2,400 kilowatts (KW), capable of producing a combined total of approximately 55.2 megawatts (MW) of electric power. It should be noted that in my letter of January 30, 2009, advising the Cornmission of the forthcoming filing of this application, it is stated that the Project will consist of 23 wind turbines with a nameplate capacity of 2 MW. The stated total capacity in my prior letter was based on the potential use of 2,500 KW turbines. At this time, only 2,400 KW turbines are available, and that is the capacity of the turbines generally referenced in the Application. Nevertheless, Pinnacle seeks the flexibility to use 2,500 KW turbines should they become available by the time the Project is ready to commence construction. Consequently, the enclosed filing fee, in the amount of $29,000, is based on a total capacity for the Project of 58 MW. The Project also includes the construction of 0.75 miles of 138 kV transmission line to connect the Project to the existing Albright-Black Oak 13 8 kV transmission line. The construction and operation of the Project will provide substantial economic benefits to Mineral County and the State of West Virginia. Pinnacle has previously briefed members of the Commission Staff on the Project and the expected filing of the Application. In addition to its request for a Siting Certificate, Pinnacle also respectfully requests that the Commission waive hearing on the Application if no substantial protest is received and grant such additional authorizations, waivers, approvals, and other relief as may be, necessary to permit Pinnacle to begin construction-related activities of the Project in the first calendar quarter of 201 0. Pinnacle asserts that because it is not a public utility within the meaning of West Virginia Code 5 24-2-1 1 , considerations relevant to the issuance of a certificate of convenience and necessity, such as the need for the Project and the infomation required by Tariff Rule 42, should not be addressed by the Commission. Therefore, Pinnacle requests a waiver of the Public Service Commission's filing requirements to provide certain information, including the utility service rendered, proposed rates, project construction costs, project financing and estimates of operating revenues and expenses, and the information required by Tariff Rule 42 (e.g., statements of net income, operating revenues, depreciation, West Virginia jurisdictional rate base, plant in service and capital structure). In addition, because Pinnacle will not be regulated by the Commission as a public utility following completion of the Project, it requests a waiver of all the Commission's filing and reporting requirements, metering requirements, customer relations, inspections and tests, standards and quality of service, promotional practices, consumer reimbursement program, uniform accounting requirements, and the requirement to allow Commission inspection of books, papers, reports and statements that are specific to regulated public utilities whose practices impact captive ratepayers. In an effort to make the Application and its supporting materials more readily available to the public, Pinnacle will also be forwarding a copy of the Application, including the appendices thereto, to the Keyser Public Library, the Elk Garden Community School, and the Piedmont Public Library. The Application will also be available at the following website: www.uswindforce.corn. Please note the appearance of Chstopher L. Callas and Stephen N. Chambers as counsel to Pinnacle. ------------------------------------- Also: http://www.psc.state.wv.us/scripts/WebDocket/ViewDocument.cfm?CaseActivi tyID=265119&NotType='WebDocket' PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON CASE NO. 09-0360-E-CS PETITION TO INTERVENE OF ALLEGHENY FRONT ALLIANCE The Allegheny Front Alliance ("the Alliance"), pursuant to Rule 12.6 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, respectfully petitions the Commission to intervene as a party in the above-styled case. The Alliance is an organization primarily comprised of residents of the counties of the eastern panhandle of West Virginia. The Alliance seeks to intervene in order to ensure that the Commission and the public receive complete and accurate information regarding the burdens imposed by wind energy development. The Alliance believes that its membership and the State as a whole would be substantially adversely affected by the construction and operation of the project proposed by Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC ("Pinnacle"). Accordingly, the Alliance seeks relief in the form of denial of the application of Pinnacle. ----- Original Message ----- From: Grubb, Karen <mailto:Karen.Grubb@fairmontstate.edu> To: kevin fooce <mailto:fmoose39@hotmail.com> Cc: Frank Young <mailto:fyoung@mountain.net> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 9:48 PM Subject: RE: US Wind Force Frank Young is helping Energy Committee with Wind issues. He may be away from email for a few days, but I suggest asking him. From: kevin fooce [mailto:fmoose39@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 9:36 PM To: Jim Kotcon; Jim Sconer; Jonathon Rosenbaum; Grubb, Karen; Beth Little; Bill DePaulo; Bill Price; Mary Davis; Mike Price; Paul Wilson Subject: I need some info. on US Wind Force "Pinnacle Wind Farm". Anyone know anything about this project! I have looked over the PSC, fish and wildlife, etc. listings but find nothing about the environment besides the view. Kevin Fooce fooce(a)hotmail.com 304-593-2875 EMAILING FOR THE GREATER GOOD Join me <http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=EML_WLHM_GreaterGood>

1 0

Fwd: [WVUSSC] Coal Electricity down 14%, Oil down 27%, wind up 35%
by James Kotcon 22 Jul '09

22 Jul '09

Check out the US-DOEs Energy Information Agency data for electricity generation, April 2008 versus April 2009. Solar - up 2.3 % Hydro - up 18 % Wind - up 34.8 % coal - down 13.9 % Gotta love growth industries JBK >>> Nathan Askins <nate.askins(a)gmail.com> 7/21/2009 11:04 PM >>> http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/tablees1a.html -- Nathan Askins Bachelor of Arts Candidate Multi-Disciplinary Studies: Environmental Protection & Economics and Sustainable Design West Virginia University (724) 561-6349 Morgantown, WV 26501 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SSCWVU" group. To post to this group, send email to SSCWVU(a)googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to SSCWVU+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SSCWVU?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

1 0

Reminder: Energy Committee Conference call 6:30 PM tonight
by James Kotcon 22 Jul '09

22 Jul '09

Conference Call tonight (Wednesday, June 22) at 6:30 PM. Dial 866-501-6174. Conference Code 1005700# Agenda: 1) New Energy Committee members. (Jim Kotcon, Jim Sconyers?) 2) Wind Farms. Several new proposals are before the PSC. I have asked Frank Young to monitor these, but it needs 1-2 more people. 3) Coal-To-Liquids (TransGas Development, LLC in Mingo County). The Club's Environmental Law Program in San Francisco is monitoring this one closely, and will likely want us to intervene. Bill Price has contacts with citizens in Mingo County, but we need 1-2 more volunteers. 4) Carbon Capture and Sequestration (Mason County) Also a CCS Working Group at WV-DEP is preparing rules for CCS facilities, so we should be monitoring both. 5) Fly Ash impoundments. Jim Sconyers and I drafted comments on the Kammer facility, and new federal and state rules are needed. 6) PATH. This is our big one. Bill DePaulo, Jim Kotcon, and at least 2-3 others are needed. I suggest we do one subcommittee on "local organizing", one on "fund raising", and one on "technical experts/legal strategy". Barbara Fallon is doing fundraising on this, and 1-2 more people are needed to make stuff happen on that. 7) Cap and Trade. This federal legislation is the main driver for everything we do, and so far, that anti-cap and trade folks have had all the demonstrations and media attention. We need 2-3 people who will follow up on the bill, lobby Rockefeller and Byrd, and organize local media events in support of whatever we are in support of. The Sierra Club's position is that we support Cap and Trade, but the House bill needs major strengthening. (Note: WVEC has taken the position that the House bill is hopelessly weak and complex, and they support a carbon tax as a quicker, simpler alternative. I don't see it happening, unless the Waxman bill dies.) I got a call from Associated Press Friday, asking for a response from someone in favor of it, because no one except the opponents is saying anything. We are almost invisible in West Virginia. 8) Longview Mitigation Fund. Bill Depaulo, Jim Sconyers and Jim Kotcon. This will take some effort this summer and fall, but it looks like it is a "Go". 9) Landfill gas. Methane recovery facility at the Greenbrier Landfill. Kevin Fooce? 10) Mountaintop removal. Jim Sconyers I have promised that this call will not go beyond 8 PM, so it will be important that we move expeditiously. My primary goal is to assign tasks and get subcommittees started on these issues. So this is not the time for long-winded brainstorming on issues, and if I get too long-winded, someone cut me off. The average time per issue must not exceed 7.5 minutes. JBK

1 0

Energy Committee Conference Call
by James Kotcon 20 Jul '09

20 Jul '09

I have come to recognize that it is time to get several issues organized for the Chapter Energy Committee. How is everyone's schedule for a conference call this week? I propose 6:30 PM, Wednesday evening, but am pretty flexible all week except Tuesday and Thursday night. I propose that we identify major issues, and assign subcommittees of 2-3 people to take the lead on each. That way, no one is working alone, but no one has to do the homework to become the expert on every issue, and 2-3 people is small enough that things can actually get done with a phone call or two. So look over the list of issues and volunteer for the one or two you will be able to commit to. Here are some items to consider: 1) New Energy Committee members. (Jim Kotcon, Jim Sconyers?) 2) Wind Farms. Several new proposals are before the PSC. I have asked Frank Young to monitor these, but it needs 1-2 more people. 3) Coal-To-Liquids (TransGas Development, LLC in Mingo County). The Club's Environmental Law Program in San Francisco is monitoring this one closely, and will likely want us to intervene. Bill Price has contacts with citizens in Mingo County, but we need 1-2 more volunteers. 4) Carbon Capture and Sequestration (Mason County) Also a CCS Working Group at WV-DEP is preparing rules for CCS facilities, so we should be monitoring both. 5) Fly Ash impoundments. Jim Sconyers and I drafted comments on the Kammer facility, and new federal and state rules are needed. 6) PATH. This is our big one. Bill DePaulo, Jim Kotcon, and at least 2-3 others are needed. I suggest we do one subcommittee on "local organizing", one on "fund raising", and one on "technical experts/legal strategy". Barbara Fallon is doing fundraising on this, and 1-2 more people are needed to make stuff happen on that. 7) Cap and Trade. This federal legislation is the main driver for everything we do, and so far, that anti-cap and trade folks have had all the demonstrations and media attention. We need 2-3 people who will follow up on the bill, lobby Rockefeller and Byrd, and organize local media events in support of whatever we are in support of. The Sierra Club's position is that we support Cap and Trade, but the House bill needs major strengthening. (Note: WVEC has taken the position that the House bill is hopelessly weak and complex, and they support a carbon tax as a quicker, simpler alternative. I don't see it happening, unless the Waxman bill dies.) I got a call from Associated Press Friday, asking for a response from someone in favor of it, because no one except the opponents is saying anything. We are almost invisible in West Virginia. 8) Longview Mitigation Fund. Bill Depaulo, Jim Sconyers and Jim Kotcon. This will take some effort this summer and fall, but it looks like it is a "Go". Dos anyone else have other issues that the Energy Committee should be dealing with over the next year? Jim Kotcon 304-293-8822 (office) 304-594-3322 (home) P.S. Jonathon, could you add Frank Young to the EC List-serve? Then send me a current list of who is on this List-serve Thanks. JBK

4 3

Fwd: [GW-ACT-LEADERS] CEC Decision Means U.S.-Wide Rooftop PV Capacity Has Great Relevance to RPS Go
by James Kotcon 20 Jul '09

20 Jul '09

This is a huge decision, with relevance to PATH/TrAILCo and related West Virginia issues. If on-site urban photovoltaics can come in at 9-11 cents per kilowatt (compared to the current cost of 5-6 cents for new coal plants), and if local utilities can avoid the cost of multi-billion dollar transmission lines, new fossil fuel plants are not needed, at least not for peaking power. As carbon emissions costs get factored in (adding 20-50 % to the cost of coal-fired electricity), the challenge for generators will be to decide how to ramp down and phase out existing fossil fuel plants. JBK >>> Edward Mainland <emainland(a)COMCAST.NET> 7/19/2009 8:00 PM >>> Landmark decision: In June California's Energy Commission ruled that PV solar arrays on rooftops and parking lots may now be considered a viable alternative to gas turbine projects. The decision's relevance to RPS goals is clear, according to Bill Powers (see below) who says it has far-reaching implications for renewable energy development in California and the nation. California's investor-owned utilities now will have more difficulty ignoring or neglecting this resource, which Bill estimates nationally as more than one million MW (more than twice the average U.S. electrical load). Utilities no longer can so easily promote more gas peaker plants, large remote solar thermal projects and new transmission lines in wild lands at the expense of distributed power closer to consumers. For CEC, the urban PV alternative is now the potential "first in line" generation resource. Proponents of any new gas-fired generator or large, remote renewable facility arguably must now pass a much more rigorous urban PV litmus test to gain CEC project approval. See below an exchange between Bill Powers and Carl Zichella. See also Bill's attached article in "Natural Gas & Electricity Journal". -- Ed M. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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 To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp

2 1

Re: [EC] Fwd: Wind Research at WVU?
by Jim Sconyers 19 Jul '09

19 Jul '09

Totally garbled...but once you decipher it, sounds fascinating. More juice from less wind, less impact...what's not to like? Wish it had mentioned cost issues. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. --- On Fri, 7/17/09, James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> wrote: From: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> Subject: [EC] Fwd: Wind Research at WVU? To: ec(a)osenergy.org Date: Friday, July 17, 2009, 2:48 PM >>> Nathan Askins <nate.askins(a)gmail.com> 7/16/2009 10:51 AM >>> http://wvutoday.wvu.edu/news/page/7895/ -- Nathan Askins Bachelor of Arts Candidate Multi-Disciplinary Studies: Environmental Protection & Economics and Sustainable Design West Virginia University (724) 561-6349 Morgantown, WV 26501 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SSCWVU" group. To post to this group, send email to SSCWVU(a)googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to SSCWVU+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SSCWVU?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

3 3

Fwd: Wind Research at WVU?
by James Kotcon 17 Jul '09

17 Jul '09

>>> Nathan Askins <nate.askins(a)gmail.com> 7/16/2009 10:51 AM >>> http://wvutoday.wvu.edu/news/page/7895/ -- Nathan Askins Bachelor of Arts Candidate Multi-Disciplinary Studies: Environmental Protection & Economics and Sustainable Design West Virginia University (724) 561-6349 Morgantown, WV 26501 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SSCWVU" group. To post to this group, send email to SSCWVU(a)googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to SSCWVU+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SSCWVU?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

1 0

Manchin on power lines 2006
by Jim Sconyers 14 Jul '09

14 Jul '09

<a friend sent me this> Here are quotes from Governor Manchin's letter to Samuel Bodman, US Dep. Energy secretary, dated 10/3/2006. Let me know if you want a copy. "I am writing to extend my congratulations on your efforts regarding National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors.... and to provide a Governor's perspective on the benefits of such designations. West Virginia is in a unique position. ..we border one of two areas in the nation identified as severely deficient in electric transmission infrastructure. To our north and east, we see regional issues of high energy prices, exacerbated by lack of suitable sites for new generation facilities. To our south and west, and within our own state, we see low-priced generation in existing power plants that have been retrofitted to comply wit. new environmental regulations --- clean coal plants...." NOW REALLY EVEN MORE SICKENING "On May 8 of this year, I attended a celebration of the last line splice on American Electric...Wyoming-Jacksons Ferry 765 kV transmission line....This 90 mile line stretches from West Virginia to Virginia, and provides vital reliability benefits for a significant portion of my state. Due to a number of largely unrelated issues, the line took 13 years to site..........The state of the U.S. electric grid along the urban East Coast is ........a matter of national security. We must move forward with expediency......so siting and construction can begin." Then he says he supports two proposed projects which I believe are PATH and TRAIL. Oh he gives a brief mention of wind. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last.

2 1

Fwd: Friday Festivities!
by James Kotcon 10 Jul '09

10 Jul '09

Looks like I am committed to going. Anyone interested in riding along. I will leave from Evansdale around 5 PM. JBK >>> Sara Lampo <revlis04(a)hotmail.com> 7/10/2009 10:13 AM >>> Hi all! Governor Manchin will be attending a house party tonight at 7:30pm in Aspen Village on Timberline Rd. There will be a peaceful, passive, protest there to show him that the people of Tucker County do not want the HUGE PATH transmission line plowing through WV. It is a great opportunity SO CLOSE TO HOME!!! (This is much easier than traveling to Charleston!) Some people from Morgantown are making the trip down here tonight to join us as well. We are meeting at the Timberline Parking Lot at 7:00pm tonight. We will go to Aspen Village together from there. The MORE PEOPLE, the more impact we can have. No obligations, let's just bring the masses. We have 'STOP THE PATH' yard signs if you're interested. If you have one, bring it to the event tonight. Bring your friends and make it fun! Please call 2 or 3 people to help us spread the word! For Tucker County, sara _________________________________________________________________ Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail®. http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutor…

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC