- EC - lists.cheatlakeclear.org

FW: PATH application to be filed May 15 (WV)
by Grubb, Karen 12 May '09

12 May '09

Here we go. From: Elena.Saxonhouse(a)sierraclub.org [mailto:Elena.Saxonhouse@sierraclub.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 3:50 PM To: CONS-ELP-TRANS-LINES-FORUM(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Cc: mikeual1(a)aol.com; mellis(a)eslc.org; billhowley(a)hughes.net; urbfarm(a)comcast.net; jkotcon(a)wvu.edu; stillman.susan(a)gmail.com; bart.hodgson(a)verizon.net; thomkat(a)verizon.net; fyoung(a)mountain.net; Grubb, Karen; welsharch(a)yahoo.com; JonFlan(a)aol.com; HollySFlan(a)aol.com; tob4(a)earthlink.net; bahillbilly(a)gmail.com; robinmann(a)earthlink.net; Mary.Bathory.Vidaver(a)loudoun.gov; sallykurtz(a)aol.com; Naomi.lithgowfoidl(a)loudoun.gov; Jack.roberts(a)loudon.gov; Jim.burton(a)loudoun.gov; Tyler.oyler(a)gmail.com; sallywilts(a)yahoo.com; sgrove(a)jeffersoncountywv.org; tprice(a)brandywine.org; overland(a)redwing.net; rklein(a)ceds.org; kengineer(a)rstarmail.com; matthew(a)nearbygalaxy.com; o6redleg(a)aol.com; alana.wase(a)mdsierra.org; Wvbiker98(a)aol.com; Jpfeeney2(a)gmail.com; dgetty(a)milesstockbridge.com; Terry.black(a)erm.com; kbcbab(a)aol.com; jgoodall(a)brandywine.org; william.depaulo(a)gmail.com; jsurkamp(a)comcast.net; g.kreitler(a)comcast.net; bwest(a)pecva.org; rmarmet(a)pecva.org; glenbesasc(a)earthlink.net; mbrownstein(a)edf.org; John Rogers; Chris James; Glen Hooks; overland(a)legalectric.org; wburns(a)burnslegal.net Subject: PATH application to be filed May 15 (WV) Importance: High We received notice from PATH's counsel that they will be filing their application to the West Virginia PSC this Friday, May 15. The application will be available on the PSC web site. Sierra Club plans to intervene in the PSC proceedings in opposition to the line. We expect the Maryland and Virginia applications to follow shortly. If you are interested in receiving further updates/discussion on PATH, and have not yet joined this mailing list, please sign up. That is how I will be communicating with the group going forward (and have been for the last few weeks). To join, please click on this link: http://lists.sierraclub.org/SCRIPTS/WA.EXE?SUBED1=CONS-ELP-TRANS-LINES-F ORUM&A=1 To post to the list, which primarily includes people who attended the strategy meeting in March, you can e-mail cons-elp-trans-lines-forum(a)lists.sierraclub.org. Thanks everyone -- looking forward to working with you to stop PATH. Elena Saxonhouse Sierra Club Environmental Law Program 85 Second St., 2nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 (415) 977-5765 (415) 977-5793 (fax)

1 0

Re: [EC] NYTimes.com: China Outpaces U.S. in Cleaner Coal-Fired Plants
by Jim Sconyers 11 May '09

11 May '09

and I think I recall that they're ahead of us in windpower Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. --- On Mon, 5/11/09, william.depaulo(a)gmail.com <william.depaulo(a)gmail.com> wrote: From: william.depaulo(a)gmail.com <william.depaulo(a)gmail.com> Subject: [EC] NYTimes.com: China Outpaces U.S. in Cleaner Coal-Fired Plants To: ec(a)osenergy.org Date: Monday, May 11, 2009, 7:15 AM E-Mail This #yiv681761702 footer { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10px;color:#000000;} #yiv681761702 td.footer { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10px;color:#000000;} #yiv681761702 a.footer { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10px;color:#000066;} #yiv681761702 font.emailHeader { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;color:#CC6633;font-weight:bold;padding-bottom:4px;} #yiv681761702 bgc1 { background-color:#F5F4F4;} #yiv681761702 td.bgc1 { background-color:#F5F4F4;} #yiv681761702 bgc2 { background-color:#F8F8F8;} #yiv681761702 td.bgc2 { background-color:#F8F8F8;} #yiv681761702 { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;} #yiv681761702 td.bodycopy { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;} #yiv681761702 a.bodycopy { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;color:#000066;} #yiv681761702 small { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:11px;} #yiv681761702 td.small { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:11px;} #yiv681761702 a.small { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:11px;color:#000066;} #yiv681761702 advertisement { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:9px;color:#999999;} #yiv681761702 td.advertisement { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:9px;color:#999999;} #yiv681761702 a.advertisement { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:9px;color:#000066;} #yiv681761702 contextadbg { border-top:1px solid #BFBFBF;border-bottom:1px solid #BFBFBF;margin-bottom:3px;} #yiv681761702 contextadheader { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;color:#98BC61;font-size:11px;font-weight:bold;} #yiv681761702 contextaddisclaimer { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;color:#999999;font-size:10px;padding-bottom:8px;} #yiv681761702 contextadtext { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;color:#000000;font-size:11px;padding-top:8px;padding-bottom:8px;padding-left:11px;padding-right:11px;margin-bottom:3px;} #yiv681761702 contextAdMiscText { font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;color:#000000;font-size:11px;padding-left:11px;padding-right:11px;} This page was sent to you by: william.depaulo(a)gmail.com INTERNATIONAL / ASIA PACIFIC | May 11, 2009 China Outpaces U.S. in Cleaner Coal-Fired Plants By KEITH BRADSHER While Americans debate the use of so-called clean coal, China is mastering the application of the technology. 1. Backlash: Women Bullying Women at Work 2. Frugal Portland 3. Op-Ed Columnist: The American Press on Suicide Watch 4. A Journey Through Darkness 5. Op-Ed Columnist: Put Aside Logic » Go to Complete List Advertisement 500 Days of Summer, starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel. This is not a love story. This is a story about love. Watch the new trailer! Click here to view trailer Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

2 1

NYTimes.com: China Outpaces U.S. in Cleaner Coal-Fired Plants
by william.depaulo＠gmail.com 11 May '09

11 May '09

This page was sent to you by: william.depaulo(a)gmail.com. INTERNATIONAL / ASIA PACIFIC | May 11, 2009 China Outpaces U.S. in Cleaner Coal-Fired Plants By KEITH BRADSHER While Americans debate the use of so-called clean coal, China is mastering the application of the technology. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/11/world/asia/11coal.html?emc=eta1 ---------------------------------------------------------- ABOUT THIS E-MAIL This e-mail was sent to you by a friend through NYTimes.com's E-mail This Article service. For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help(a)nytimes.com. NYTimes.com 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

1 0

Tom Toles on cap-and-trade 5.10.2009
by Jim Sconyers 10 May '09

10 May '09

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/opinions/tomtoles/ Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

Fw: Double Victory: Coal Companies Pay for KY, TN Illegal Mining
by Jim Sconyers 06 May '09

06 May '09

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 304.698.9628 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. --- On Wed, 5/6/09, Oliver Bernstein <oliverbernstein(a)austin.rr.com> wrote: From: Oliver Bernstein <oliverbernstein(a)austin.rr.com> Subject: Double Victory: Coal Companies Pay for KY, TN Illegal Mining To: "'Oliver Bernstein'" <oliver.bernstein(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Wednesday, May 6, 2009, 1:42 PM For Immediate Release – May 6, 2009 Contacts: Oliver Bernstein, Sierra Club, 512.477.2152 Landmark Tennessee , Kentucky Settlements a “Double Victory” for Appalachia Unpermitted Mountaintop Removal Coal Mining Violations Point to Widespread Unlawful Stream Destruction TECO Coal and Appolo Fuels to Pay for Illegal Mining Eastern Tennessee & Eastern Kentucky – Sierra Club, Kentuckians For The Commonwealth (KFTC), Save Our Cumberland Mountains (SOCM) and Tennessee Clean Water Network (TCWN) today announced two settlements over separate legal claims against coal companies that operated mountaintop removal coal mines without permits. Appolo Fuels, Inc. will pay for having destroyed streams at its Jellico mine site in Claiborne County , Tennessee . TECO Coal and subsidiary Clintwood Elkhorn will pay for its illegal coal mining practices in Pike County , Kentucky . Mining companies’ flagrant disregard for the Clean Water Act permitting process, designed to protect the health and safety of waterways and communities, is a problem across Appalachia . The legal actions against Appolo and TECO are part of a larger effort to stop illegal mining throughout Appalachia . The groups will continue to push for increased public involvement and a more open permitting process to prevent future illegal mining. “These settlement agreements send a message to coal companies that they will not get away with illegal mining,” said Mary Anne Hitt, Deputy Director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign. “This taste of justice for Appalachians should help prevent similar destruction elsewhere in the region.” TENNESSEE In the Tennessee settlement, Appolo Fuels, Inc. will pay approximately $120,000 to the Tennessee Parks and Greenways Foundation to protect land in the eastern part of the state. The payment comes in exchange for a commitment from SOCM, TCWN and the Sierra Club to drop their claims against Appolo for the company’s illegal filling of streams in conjunction with the mine. The groups had notified Appolo in June 2008 of their intention to sue over the company’s destruction of streams at its Jellico mine site in Claiborne County , Tennessee without the permits required by law. “We couldn't be happier,” said Cathie Bird of SOCM. “ Claiborne County has been monumentally wrecked by many years of surface mining, and this settlement may help get a little piece of it back.” Officials with the Army Corps of Engineers had earlier confirmed to the coalition that Appolo has been operating outside the law, dumping mining waste into streams, constructing sediment holding ponds in streams, and mining through streams at the Jellico mine site. According to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Appolo illegally disturbed twenty streams at Jellico mine. “The Tennessee Clean Water Network is pleased with the cooperation of Appolo Fuels in redressing their violations of the Clean Water Act and excited at the opportunity to participate in the protection of water resources in northeastern Tennessee,” said Axel Ringe of the Sierra Club Tennessee Chapter and TCWN. KENTUCKY In the Kentucky settlement, Clintwood Elkhorn (a TECO Coal subsidiary) will pay approximately $250,000 to the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Foundation for stream restoration activities in the Levisa Fork watershed. The payment comes in exchange for a commitment from KFTC and the Sierra Club to drop their September 2008 lawsuit against Clintwood Elkhorn for illegal coal mining practices in Pike County . “It's a shame that the state couldn't enforce the law and keep TECO from further destroying our land and steams,” said Doug Justice, a resident of Island Creek in Pike County . “If only the state would do their job we wouldn't be in this mess.” The lawsuit that gave rise to this settlement claimed that Clintwood Elkhorn dumped rocks, dirt and other mining waste into important headwater streams in the Millers Creek watershed without the permits required by law for such dumping. The EPA has 45 days from today to review the proposed settlement. Mountaintop removal mining is a destructive form of coal mining that has already contaminated or destroyed nearly 2,000 miles of streams. The mining poisons drinking water, lays waste to wildlife habitat, increases the risk of flooding and wipes out entire communities. With explosives and bulldozers standing by across Appalachia , it will take tough enforcement and more rule changes and legislation to end mountaintop removal coal mining. The Tennessee groups are represented by Joe Lovett with the Appalachian Center for the Economy and the Environment and attorney Mary Eugenia Lewis. The Kentucky groups are represented by Lovett and by attorney W. H. Graddy. # # # ________________________________________ Oliver Bernstein Sierra Club Deputy Press Secretary 1202 San Antonio St. Austin, Texas 78701 Phone: 512.477.2152 Fax: 512.477.8526 Cell: 512.289.8618 Email: Oliver.Bernstein(a)sierraclub.org www.sierraclub.org

1 0

FW: FW: Governor's Letter Rips Transmission Legislation
by Grubb, Karen 06 May '09

06 May '09

Interesting! From: Patience Wait [mailto:pwaitster@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 11:29 AM To: Bill Howley; John Christianson; Paul Wilson; Beth Anne Boyd; Donna Printz; Thomas and Kathy Hildebrand; Grubb, Karen; Daniel Chiotos; Mike Johnson; doug.kaplan(a)sugarloafconservancy.org Subject: Fwd: FW: Governor's Letter Rips Transmission Legislation I just received this attached letter from PEC - read, savor, and let's figure out how to use it! Patience ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Bri West <bwest(a)pecva.org> Date: Wed, May 6, 2009 at 10:26 AM Subject: FW: Governor's Letter Rips Transmission Legislation To: Malcolm Baldwin <malcolm(a)weatherleafarm.com>, Bart Hodgson < bart.hodgson(a)verizon.net>, Carol Hodgson <carolhod(a)aol.com>, Keith Lawson <lawson20180(a)gmail.com>, Dan Dunlap <mom1110031(a)aol.com>, Bill & Christy Matarazzo <bill_christy(a)msn.com>, bpotthoff(a)verizon.net, adehaan(a)signalcompanies.com, paradefieldfarm(a)aol.com, Jim Crowley < uuplink(a)aol.com>, Casey Chlebowski <casey16(a)verizon.net>, Hanno Rittner <hawnno(a)yahoo.com>, Jeff Pearl <jeffreypearl(a)verizon.net>, Dee Dunn < deedunn(a)rstarmail.com>, tylee ulmer <tylee_ulmer(a)yahoo.com>, JonFlan(a)aol.com, Holly S Flannery <HollySFlan(a)aol.com>, Mike Johnson < MIKEUAL1(a)aol.com>, Judy Randal <circa1791(a)yahoo.com>, owner(a)goetc.com Cc: pwaitster(a)gmail.com, rob(a)pecva.org Hi everyone! I've attached the letter from 10 East Coast governors calling into question the need or wisdom of a 'transmission superhighway'. It's better than I could have written myself, and much more strongly worded that I would have expected. Although they miss the coal-connection, the Governors are now on record saying local generation is a more reliable way to meet power needs than long-distance transmission. I think it would be wise to thank Governor Kaine for signing on, while highlighting PATH as a project that would further disadvantage off-shore wind, energy efficiency, and distributed generation. http://www.governor.virginia.gov/AboutTheGovernor/contactGovernor.cfm Bri

2 1

FW: Power Line Informational Meeting in Buckhannon May 8th
by Grubb, Karen 05 May '09

05 May '09

Please help us publicize this to your friends and family and other lists. _____________________________________________ From: Grubb, Karen Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 8:53 PM To: 'timeswv(a)timeswv.com' Subject: Power Line Informational Meeting in Buckhannon May 8th Media Release- For Immediate Release May 4, 2009 Contact: Karen Grubb by e-mail: Karen.Grubb(a)fairmontstate.edu By Phone: 304-367-4878 or 304-657-0812 Buckhannon Informational Meeting on Power Line Set for May 8th Concerned citizens of Upshur County, along with WV Sierra Club and WV Highlands Conservancy, are sponsoring an informational public meeting about the proposed new large PATH power line. PATH is the proposed Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline (PATH) 765 Kilovolt power line proposed to run 244 miles from American Electric Power's (AEP) John Amos coal fueled power plant near St. Albans, WV, across central and north-eastern West Virginia, including Upshur County, to northeast of Martinsburg, WV, then from there an additional 46 miles to near Frederick, Md. The "PATH" informational public meeting will be held on May 8, 2009 at Kresge Hall in the basement of the Martin Religious Center at WV Wesleyan College in Buckhannon. Enter on either side of the chapel from the rear of the chapel and go downstairs. Desserts, coffee, and conversation will begin at 6:30 PM and the program will start at 7:00 PM. Please join us. At this meeting citizens can learn about PATH, its many costs, proposed routes, and how citizens can take effective action to protect their interests. Speakers, displays and maps will inform citizens and enable them to inform others. For more information contact: Karen Grubb by e-mail: Karen.Grubb(a)fairmontstate.edu , or by phone at 304-367-4878 or 304-657-0812. End of release -30-

1 0

Re: [EC] WV E-Council Legislative Report
by Grubb, Karen 05 May '09

05 May '09

This was sent by Don Garvin specifically to the WVHC and I forwarded from Frank. Of course he appreciates the Sierra Club's support, also! From: Grubb, Karen Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 2:03 PM To: 'WV Chapter Energy Committee' Subject: FW: WV E-Council Legislative Report I don't know if this has already been sent around. WV Legislature Adjourns . . . Sort Of By Donald S. Garvin, Jr. WVEC Legislative Coordinator The 79th session of the West Virginia Legislature - the 2009 session - adjourned at around midnight on Saturday, April 11 (actually, the House of Delegates adjourned at 11:40 PM that evening, leaving a long list of bills still awaiting final action on its calendar). The recent practice has been for both houses to reconvene the following week to take up the state budget. But this year they adjourned until May 26, when they will reconvene, apparently for about ten days, to do the budget, and a host of other things. They have already announced that an abbreviated May Interim Session will coincide with reconvening for the upcoming "Extended Budget Session." And the Governor has announced that he will call a Special Session to coincide with the extended session. At this point, none of the major bills affecting the environment have been signed by the Governor, and the Legislature is sending him small packets of bills for his approval, thereby nullifying the normal 15-day deadline for signing or vetoing a bill. So a final wrap up article from me for the 2009 Session will likely have to wait for the July issue of the Voice. According to the Legislature's web site 2,113 bills were introduced during the 2009 Session, with only 226 of those bills ultimately being passed by both the House and the Senate. Here is a brief summary of some of the environmental bills that made it through the sausage-grinding process, and some that did not. HB 2535, Solar Energy Tax Credit - awaiting Governor's signature. The bill provides a state personal income tax credit of up to $2,000 for the installation of a residential solar energy system, and would also require a "net metering" credit for any excess electricity generated. The bill was sponsored by Del. Bill Wooton (D-Raleigh), with a "same as" bill in the Senate sponsored by Sen. John Unger (D-Berkeley). WVEC lobby team member John Christensen worked hard in lobbying for passage of this bill. SB 40, Repeal of WV Nuclear Power Ban - died early in Senate Energy, Industry and Mining Committee. The bill's chief sponsor was Sen. Brooks McCabe (D-Kanawha), who argued that new generation nuclear power was "safe" and that "nuclear power should be included in the state's energy mix." We felt otherwise. However, look for this issue to be "studied" in upcoming Interims. SB 600, Special Reclamation Fund Tax - awaiting Governor's signature. As proposed, the bill would have extended for five years the 14.4-cent special reclamation tax imposed on each ton of coal mined. The tax is to be used for reclamation of coal mines abandoned after the passage of the federal Surface Mine Control and Reclamation Act. However, coal industry lobbyists were successful in extending the tax for just two years. Everyone knows this fund is totally insufficient to deal with current and future needs. SB 461, Extending Selenium Effluent Limits Compliance Time - awaiting Governor's signature. This terrible bill gives the coal industry a more than two-year extension to comply with water quality standards for the toxic selenium they discharge from their mining operations, in addition to the current 3-year extension already granted to the industry. Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Randy Huffman first said he opposed the bill, but then in the final week of the session changed his tune and said he supported it. Every committee that dealt with this bill was told by committee staff attorneys that the measure did not comply with provisions of both state and federal law for changes to water quality standards, and that the federal EPA would likely not approve the change. Apparently the Legislature was in no mood to consider such trivialities. SB 45, Authorizing DEP Secretary to Sign NPDES Permits - died in House Judiciary Committee. WVEC has successfully opposed this perennial agency proposal for several years now. The federal Clean Water Act clearly states that NPDES permit authority rests with the head of the state water permitting division, in order to comply with conflict of interest provisions of the federal law. SB 753, Limiting Land Development Ordinances - died in House Judiciary Committee. This bill would have prevented counties and municipalities from adopting ordinances to regulate natural resource extraction (such as mining, oil and gas drilling, and timbering). WVEC lobby team member Leslee McCarty worked hard in lobbying against passage of this bill. HB 2931, Removing Timber Severance Tax - awaiting Governor's signature. This bill gives the timber industry a 3-year "holiday" from paying the almost insignificant timber severance tax. The Governor has opposed this in the past. We will have to wait and see how he's feeling this year. Finally, the Governor announced in his State of the State address a series of "major" energy initiatives. Four major bills were introduced. Only one of the four bills successfully passed both chambers. Here's the current status of those bills. SB 297, Alternative and Renewable Energy Portfolio Act - won final approval from the House on the last day of the session, but was sent back to the Senate without all of the House amendments attached. So it's dead for now. The Governor's bill created a phony "Renewable Portfolio Standard" that included lots of "clean coal" technologies and burning waste tires, and lacked any emphasis on implementing energy efficiency measures. SB 375, Office of Coalfield Community Development Master Land Use Plans - died in the House on the final night (I am told it was held hostage over a bill dealing with Sunday liquor sales!). This was the Governor's post-mining land use bill, and is basically another attempt to get around the "approximate original contour" provisions of SMCRA and to promote "clean coal" projects on mountaintop removal mine sites. HB 3000, Transmission Line Tax - died in the House on the last day for bills to pass out of the house of origin. The tax on electricity transmission proposed in this bill was the Governor's excuse for not opposing the construction of the proposed huge TrailCo and PATH transmission lines. Imposition of this tax posed major constitutionality questions. HB 2860, Regulating Sequestration and Storage 0f Carbon Dioxide - awaiting Governor's signature. This bill sets up a beginning regulatory structure for the underground injection of carbon dioxide. It establishes a "carbon sequestration working group" under the supervision of the DEP to further develop the regulations and to tackle issues such ownership of the "pore space" where the CO2 is to be stored and the long-term liability for the storage. WVEC was successful in getting several improving amendments adopted to this bill, including a seat for the environmental community on the working group. It's a sure bet that one or more of these bills that failed to pass in the regular session will be included in the Governor's special session at the end of May. Finally, no matter the ultimate outcome of the 2009 Session, the West Virginia Environmental Council's lobby team again had a respectable presence at the Capitol and made a significant impact on environmental legislation. And we thank the West Virginia Highlands Conservancy for its continued support.

1 0

AEP Carbon Sequestration Permit Issued
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 05 May '09

05 May '09

...am trying to get copy of final permit now. -- 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

1 0

FW: WV E-Council Legislative Report
by Grubb, Karen 04 May '09

04 May '09

I don't know if this has already been sent around. WV Legislature Adjourns . . . Sort Of By Donald S. Garvin, Jr. WVEC Legislative Coordinator The 79th session of the West Virginia Legislature - the 2009 session - adjourned at around midnight on Saturday, April 11 (actually, the House of Delegates adjourned at 11:40 PM that evening, leaving a long list of bills still awaiting final action on its calendar). The recent practice has been for both houses to reconvene the following week to take up the state budget. But this year they adjourned until May 26, when they will reconvene, apparently for about ten days, to do the budget, and a host of other things. They have already announced that an abbreviated May Interim Session will coincide with reconvening for the upcoming "Extended Budget Session." And the Governor has announced that he will call a Special Session to coincide with the extended session. At this point, none of the major bills affecting the environment have been signed by the Governor, and the Legislature is sending him small packets of bills for his approval, thereby nullifying the normal 15-day deadline for signing or vetoing a bill. So a final wrap up article from me for the 2009 Session will likely have to wait for the July issue of the Voice. According to the Legislature's web site 2,113 bills were introduced during the 2009 Session, with only 226 of those bills ultimately being passed by both the House and the Senate. Here is a brief summary of some of the environmental bills that made it through the sausage-grinding process, and some that did not. HB 2535, Solar Energy Tax Credit - awaiting Governor's signature. The bill provides a state personal income tax credit of up to $2,000 for the installation of a residential solar energy system, and would also require a "net metering" credit for any excess electricity generated. The bill was sponsored by Del. Bill Wooton (D-Raleigh), with a "same as" bill in the Senate sponsored by Sen. John Unger (D-Berkeley). WVEC lobby team member John Christensen worked hard in lobbying for passage of this bill. SB 40, Repeal of WV Nuclear Power Ban - died early in Senate Energy, Industry and Mining Committee. The bill's chief sponsor was Sen. Brooks McCabe (D-Kanawha), who argued that new generation nuclear power was "safe" and that "nuclear power should be included in the state's energy mix." We felt otherwise. However, look for this issue to be "studied" in upcoming Interims. SB 600, Special Reclamation Fund Tax - awaiting Governor's signature. As proposed, the bill would have extended for five years the 14.4-cent special reclamation tax imposed on each ton of coal mined. The tax is to be used for reclamation of coal mines abandoned after the passage of the federal Surface Mine Control and Reclamation Act. However, coal industry lobbyists were successful in extending the tax for just two years. Everyone knows this fund is totally insufficient to deal with current and future needs. SB 461, Extending Selenium Effluent Limits Compliance Time - awaiting Governor's signature. This terrible bill gives the coal industry a more than two-year extension to comply with water quality standards for the toxic selenium they discharge from their mining operations, in addition to the current 3-year extension already granted to the industry. Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Randy Huffman first said he opposed the bill, but then in the final week of the session changed his tune and said he supported it. Every committee that dealt with this bill was told by committee staff attorneys that the measure did not comply with provisions of both state and federal law for changes to water quality standards, and that the federal EPA would likely not approve the change. Apparently the Legislature was in no mood to consider such trivialities. SB 45, Authorizing DEP Secretary to Sign NPDES Permits - died in House Judiciary Committee. WVEC has successfully opposed this perennial agency proposal for several years now. The federal Clean Water Act clearly states that NPDES permit authority rests with the head of the state water permitting division, in order to comply with conflict of interest provisions of the federal law. SB 753, Limiting Land Development Ordinances - died in House Judiciary Committee. This bill would have prevented counties and municipalities from adopting ordinances to regulate natural resource extraction (such as mining, oil and gas drilling, and timbering). WVEC lobby team member Leslee McCarty worked hard in lobbying against passage of this bill. HB 2931, Removing Timber Severance Tax - awaiting Governor's signature. This bill gives the timber industry a 3-year "holiday" from paying the almost insignificant timber severance tax. The Governor has opposed this in the past. We will have to wait and see how he's feeling this year. Finally, the Governor announced in his State of the State address a series of "major" energy initiatives. Four major bills were introduced. Only one of the four bills successfully passed both chambers. Here's the current status of those bills. SB 297, Alternative and Renewable Energy Portfolio Act - won final approval from the House on the last day of the session, but was sent back to the Senate without all of the House amendments attached. So it's dead for now. The Governor's bill created a phony "Renewable Portfolio Standard" that included lots of "clean coal" technologies and burning waste tires, and lacked any emphasis on implementing energy efficiency measures. SB 375, Office of Coalfield Community Development Master Land Use Plans - died in the House on the final night (I am told it was held hostage over a bill dealing with Sunday liquor sales!). This was the Governor's post-mining land use bill, and is basically another attempt to get around the "approximate original contour" provisions of SMCRA and to promote "clean coal" projects on mountaintop removal mine sites. HB 3000, Transmission Line Tax - died in the House on the last day for bills to pass out of the house of origin. The tax on electricity transmission proposed in this bill was the Governor's excuse for not opposing the construction of the proposed huge TrailCo and PATH transmission lines. Imposition of this tax posed major constitutionality questions. HB 2860, Regulating Sequestration and Storage 0f Carbon Dioxide - awaiting Governor's signature. This bill sets up a beginning regulatory structure for the underground injection of carbon dioxide. It establishes a "carbon sequestration working group" under the supervision of the DEP to further develop the regulations and to tackle issues such ownership of the "pore space" where the CO2 is to be stored and the long-term liability for the storage. WVEC was successful in getting several improving amendments adopted to this bill, including a seat for the environmental community on the working group. It's a sure bet that one or more of these bills that failed to pass in the regular session will be included in the Governor's special session at the end of May. Finally, no matter the ultimate outcome of the 2009 Session, the West Virginia Environmental Council's lobby team again had a respectable presence at the Capitol and made a significant impact on environmental legislation. And we thank the West Virginia Highlands Conservancy for its continued support.

1 0

State Supreme Court rejects TrAILCo power line case
by James Kotcon 30 Apr '09

30 Apr '09

jkotcon(a)wvu.edu sent you this article ----- April 29, 2009 State Supreme Court rejects power line case ( http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200904290571 ) By The Associated Press P> CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- The state Supreme Court decided Wednesday not to interfere with plans to construct a high voltage power line across northern West Virginia despite arguments that the line would inflict environmental harm and higher utility ... Read more ( http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200904290571 ) -----

1 0

TRAILCO PETITION FOR APPEAL DENIED TODAY
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 29 Apr '09

29 Apr '09

Folks I wanted you to know this as soon as I did. Even though I, and others, felt the argument went well this morning, in fact very well, the clerk's office of the Supreme Court called later to say the petition for appeal had been denied 4-1, Peggy Workman voting to grant. We can talk about why and what, if anything, this means for PATH later. But I wanted you to know this today, like everybody else. 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

1 0

smart grid plans under study
by Duane330＠aol.com 25 Apr '09

25 Apr '09

IT WOULD BE PREMATURE TO CONSTRUCT ELECTRICAL GRIDS ACROSS WEST VIRGINIA IF AND UNTIL NEW DEFINITIONS ARE ESTABLISHED, NEW STANDARDS ARE DEVELOPED, AND THE PLANS FOR NEW ENERGY SOURCES ARE IDENTIFIED. Duane G. Nichols, Ph.D., Consultant on Energy and the Environment. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< NIST announces smart grid plan [www.energyefficiencynews.com/policy/i/2040/] 24 April 2009 The US _National Institute for Standards and Technology_ (http://www.nist.gov/) (NIST) has announced a three-phase plan to develop key standards for a nationwide smart grid to deliver electricity efficiently, reliably and securely. A smart grid is a key component of the Obama Administration’s commitment to moving the US toward energy independence and was awarded funds in the recently passed _American Recovery and Reinvestment Act_ (http://www.recovery.gov/) (ARRA). “The smart grid will create jobs and contribute to the national effort to achieve energy independence and facilitate environmental improvements,” says Patrick Gallagher, NIST deputy director. The 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) charges NIST with the “primary responsibility to coordinate development of a framework that includes protocols and model standards for information management to achieve interoperability of smart grid devices and systems”. NIST will combine part of its own appropriation from ARRA with $10 million from the Department of Energy’s ARRA appropriation to carry out these responsibilities. Interoperability standards are needed to ensure that software and hardware components from different vendors will work together seamlessly, while cyber security standards will protect the multi-system network against natural or human-caused disruptions. NIST plans to engage utilities, equipment suppliers, consumers, standards developers and other stakeholders to reach a consensus on smart grid standards. It will also launch a formal partnership to facilitate development of additional standards to address remaining gaps and integrate new technologies. The final action will be to develop a plan for testing and certification to ensure that smart grid equipment and systems conform to standards for security and interoperability. NIST says that by early autumn 2009 it expects to announce the smart grid architecture, interoperability and cyber security standards priorities, an initial set of standards to support implementation and plans to meet remaining standards needs. For more information: _collaborate.nist.gov/twiki-sggrid/bin/view/SmartGrid/WebHome_ (http://collaborate.nist.gov/twiki-sggrid/bin/view/SmartGrid/WebHome) _www.nist.gov_ (http://www.nist.gov/) _www.recovery.gov_ (http://www.recovery.gov/) Related stories: _NIST and EPRI to develop smart grid roadmap for US (14-Apr)_ (http://www.energyefficiencynews.com/i/2010/) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NIST and EPRI to develop smart grid roadmap for US [www.energyefficiencynews.com/i/2010/] 14 April 2009 The _National Institute of Standards and Technology_ (http://www.nist.gov/index.html) (NIST) and the _Electric Power Research Institute_ (http://www.epri.com/) (EPRI) are to work together on an interim roadmap for the development of a smart grid in the US. As part of the Obama Administration’s energy plans, Congress has given NIST the primary responsibility for coordinating the development of a framework, including protocols and standards, for information management in a smart grid system. EPRI, which is an independent, nonprofit organization conducting research and development activities on the generation, delivery and use of electricity, will help identify issues and priorities for interoperability standards. The organization will also engage with the generation and supply industry to build a consensus on smart grid standards. NIST will develop a three-phase plan to establish standards for a smart grid by the end of the year for submission to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for approval. “The Smart Grid is a cornerstone of national efforts to achieve energy independence, save consumers money and curb greenhouse gas emissions,” commented NIST Deputy Director Patrick Gallagher. “This contract is a significant step in the urgent effort to identify and develop standards that will ensure a reliable and robust Smart Grid.” For further information: _www.nist.gov/index.html_ (http://www.nist.gov/index.html) _www.epri.com/_ (http://www.epri.com/) 14 April 2009 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > **************Check all of your email inboxes from anywhere on the web. Try the new Email Toolbar now! (http://toolbar.aol.com/mail/download.html?ncid=txtlnkusdown00000027)

1 0

Renewables Test IQ of Electrical Grid
by duane330＠aol.com 25 Apr '09

25 Apr '09

Science 10 April 2009: Vol. 324. no. 5924, pp. 172 - 175 DOI: 10.1126/science.324.5924.172 ENERGY: Renewables Test IQ of the Grid, Dan Charles Everybody agrees that tomorrow's electrical grid must incorporate wind and solar power seamlessly. But solving the reliability issue won't be easy ? In the afternoon of 26 February 2008, the winds died down in a stretch of west Texas that's home to thousands of tall wind turbines. Over a span of 3 hours, the turbines' contribution to the state's electricity grid fell by 75%. That 1500-megawatt (MW) drop--equivalent to the output of three midsized coal-burning power plants--coincided with a spike in demand. At 6:30 p.m., the alternating current in the state's transmission lines started to alternate more sluggishly, an ominous signal that the system was approaching collapse. Fortunately, managers of the state's power network had struck a set of agreements with large industrial customers allowing them to cut off power temporarily in exchange for lower rates. Within 10 minutes, about 1200 MW of load was sliced from the sagging electrical grid, and the system stabilized. Texans were blissfully unaware that the state's grid had just dodged a bullet. But the episode was an unsettling reminder that not all electricity is created equal, and that clean energy harvested from nature can complicate the job of keeping the lights on. Such episodes could become more common--and disrupt service--if plans for a massive expansion of wind and solar power are realized. Both sources of energy are variable and relatively unpredictable. Those traits will require the electrical grid to become smarter and more agile, so that it doesn't stumble and collapse when the wind stops blowing or clouds obscure the sun. Calls for a "smart grid" have become routine in Washington, D.C., and President Barack Obama's stimulus package includes $4.5 billion for "smart grid demonstration projects." Utilities, national laboratories, and universities are all gearing up to compete for those funds. One focus is installing "smart meters" in homes that show consumers how much energy they are using. Another involves planning high-capacity transmission lines to bring wind and solar power from the nation's high plains and deserts to its cities, creating an interstate highway for green power. But the most important piece of the renewable-energy puzzle may be finding a solution to its erratic spikes and dips. "Everyone understands the need for transmission," says Arshad Mansoor, vice president for power delivery and utilization at the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) in Palo Alto, California. "Not everyone understands the reliability issue." Dance partners The electrical grid demands exquisite balance. At every instant, the supply of electricity throughout the system--thousands of power plants, substations, and transmission lines--must equal demand. If not, wires overheat, voltage drops, and circuit breakers snap open to protect parts of the grid where supply still matches demand. To keep the system running smoothly, grid managers line up generating capacity ahead of time. Then, as actual demand swells and falls, minute by minute, gas turbines automatically throttle up and down and coal-fired plants deliver more steam to generators. "Utilities have become accustomed to variations in the time frame of minutes to hours," says Loren Toole, an electrical engineer at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. But Toole says the current system isn't nimble enough for wind and solar generators, which can produce surges and drops in electricity within a few seconds or minutes. That variability hasn't caused problems yet for the overall U.S. grid because solar and wind power supply just over 1% of the country's electricity. But many states, including California, New York, and Illinois, have passed laws requiring that at least 20% of their electricity come from renewable sources within a decade or two (see map, below). Congress is drafting a similar requirement for the entire country. Unpredictable power. Over the course of a typical week, the amount of wind energy received by the Bonneville Power Administration reached nearly 2000 MW and fell to almost zero. A study that General Electric prepared for the Electricity Reliability Council of Texas shows the impact on the Texas grid of incorporating 15,000 MW of wind power--four times the amount it now receives. About twice a year, the study predicts, grid managers would see the supply of wind-derived electricity fall by 2400 MW--the equivalent of four or five midsized coal plants--in less than 30 minutes. Power from photovoltaic panels, meanwhile, can drop when clouds come over, only to spike back up a few minutes later. What utilities desperately need, according to industry insiders, is an array of "dance partners"--sources of additional power that can mirror every tricky move from the forces of nature, stepping forward without missing a beat as the winds die down and retreating when the wind picks up. Potential dance partners include equipment for storing large amounts of electricity, bigger transmission networks that allow utilities to draw power from a larger area, and the ability to control demand by turning off appliances in their customers' homes. Several technologies in a future "smart grid" could help manage this dance. They include sensors that monitor the state of high-voltage transmission lines and react instantly when conditions deteriorate. Such technologies already exist, but deploying them on a large scale will cost billions of dollars. Bringing more renewables online may also require more sophisticated analysis of the grid's behavior when power comes from thousands of independently controlled solar panels and wind turbines. Marija Ilic, a specialist on electrical power systems at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, says researchers at universities and national laboratories are leading the way. "Some utilities are just waking up" to the problem, she says. Utilities also need more accurate predictions of the weather. "If I can't forecast the wind accurately, I have no choice but to start a bunch of [coal- or gas-burning] units" to serve as a reserve in case the wind dies, says David Hawkins of the California Independent System Operator (CAISO), which manages that state's electrical system. "If I have to do that, I've lost all the advantages of the green energy." CAISO buys forecasts of its wind power from AWS Truewind LLC, one of a handful of companies selling such a service. "They're getting good," says Hawkins. The day-ahead forecasts--which provide hour-by-hour predictions of a wind farm's power production--used to be off by 40% or more, but "now we're getting errors in the low 20s, heading toward 15 to 17%." The forecasts are continually updated, and "within the hour, we can usually nail it," says Hawkins. The National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, recently got funding from Xcel Energy to develop an "advanced wind-prediction system." Storing power underground The ideal dance partner is hydroelectric power. Dams are giant energy-storage devices, and they can react quickly, releasing exactly enough electricity to balance what the fickle winds deliver. Denmark is able to meet 20% of its electrical demands with wind power, for example, by drawing upon imported hydropower from Norway. Unfortunately, there isn't nearly enough hydropower to go around. EPRI is promoting what it considers the next best thing, storing power in the form of air pumped into underground caverns under high pressure. "Compressed air is one of the few options we have for real bulk power storage," says EPRI's Dan Rastler. Two such facilities already exist in the United States and Germany. EPRI and a consortium of utilities are planning a more efficient and larger one that would drive a standard gas turbine and generate 400 MW of electricity for up to 10 hours. Smaller storage projects are also in the works. The Bonneville Power Administration, a federal agency based in Portland, Oregon, already generates enough wind power to satisfy 20% of its peak demand (see graph), and it's working with CAISO to build a facility that stores energy in spinning flywheels. The flywheels are meant to smooth out small fluctuations in wind power, storing excess electricity from brief gusts of wind and releasing it when the wind turbines slow down. Utilities also have their eye on the batteries of plug-in hybrid vehicles. Those vehicles could become a nightmare for utilities if their owners insist on charging them up after ar riving home from work, when power use is at a peak. "My view is, that's no time to charge customers 6 cents per kilowatt-hour; that's a time to charge 6 bucks!" says David Mohler, who's in charge of "smart grid" efforts for Duke Energy, headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. But under some circumstances, those batteries could be a boon to the electric grid. Managers of the grid could pay vehicle owners for the right to control when the charging occurs and eventually the discharging, too. They could fill up the batteries of plug-in hybrids when electricity is abundant in the wee hours of the morning, then draw on that stored-up power in available vehicles to respond to power shortages in the middle of the day. The two-way communications needed for such a system are part of what is now being called the "smart grid." Such links, allowing utilities to directly control appliances in people's homes, could become one of the most important tools for adapting to variable power from the sun and wind. Florida Power & Light (FPL) Co. has been doing this for years to handle peak demand. Almost a million customers have signed up for FPL's "On Call" program, which allows the utility to turn off their water heaters, pool pumps, and sometimes air conditioners for short periods of time. FPL communicates with control boxes on those appliances with signals sent directly over power lines. In an emergency, On Call can quickly cut FPL's peak energy load by 4%. Many utilities are now experimenting with more ambitious versions of this technology. Duke Energy has outfitted the homes of 32 customers in Ohio with an "energy optimization engine" that allows the utility to manage the most energy-hungry home appliances in the home in exchange for cheaper electricity bills. So far, the utility has only used its power to prevent ovens or water heaters in the same neighborhood from turning on at exactly the same time. The utilities are treading carefully to avoid a backlash from customers who cherish their ability to dry clothes at their convenience. Mohler says utilities could probably use this tool to cut their load by 10% or 20%. "But could we do it without customers noticing? Probably not." Green freeloaders? Christopher DeMarco, an electrical engineer at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, is examining a more subtle feature of green power, namely, its reluctance to perform certain unglamorous but essential functions that keep the grid on solid footing. Old-style power plants, for instance, provide some extra "reactive power" that helps keep voltage stable on the grid. Without it, voltage in an AC system tends to sag. Early versions of wind farms and solar panels did not help to support the voltage. "It costs them money," says EPRI's Stephen Lee. "So independent power producers, including renewable generators, just pump power onto the grid and depend on the transmission company to provide voltage support." That approach may have been okay when renewables were a boutique source of energy. But as their presence grows, grid managers are requiring many of them to provide voltage support. DeMarco says solar and wind power also do little to cushion the grid from shocks such as a power plant shutting down unexpectedly. Traditional power plants do this naturally, he says, through the sheer physical mass of machinery that is rotating exactly in time with the oscillation of the grid's alternating current. This system "has a very nice stabilizing dynamic effect," says DeMarco. If a factory operator somewhere flips a switch and pulls more power from the grid, DeMarco says, the generator responds instantly. "It will slow down slightly, and what was kinetic energy gets converted into electrical energy going out the wire." Solar and wind generators could mimic this response, says DeMarco, but it would require them to reduce their output by a few percentage points and have that power poised to respond instantly to shocks on the grid. Without their cooperation, he predicts, "we are going to run into hard limits on how much renewable generation we can live with, without destabilizing the operation of the grid." DeMarco and his fellow researchers are trying to determine just where those "hard limits" lie. "There is a tendency in some circles to paint renewables as a threat to the grid," says DeMarco, but he thinks the two can work in harmony. "You need to spend a little money to make them compatible with the grid," he explains, "but there's no insurmountable hurdle." The editors suggest the following Related Resources on Science sites:In Science Magazine NEWS FOCUS ENERGY: Students Energized by Power Engineering Dan Charles (10 April 2009) Science 324 (5924), 175. [DOI: 10.1126/science.324.5924.175]

1 0

New E-Mail for Regina Hendrix
by Regina Hendrix 25 Apr '09

25 Apr '09

I will be leaving for Charles Town on Sunday A.M. and my Verizon account will be deactivated on Monday, the 27th. Please reach me at this new address. I will be having access to a computer intermittently so if you need to reach me immediately, please try my cell phone at 304-546-4349. Matt, will you add my new address to the FOM list and cancel the regina1936(a)verizon.net. Thanks. Regina Hendrix

1 1

SIERRA CLUB MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD AT WV SCOA
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 25 Apr '09

25 Apr '09

I attach a courtesy copy of the Sierra Club's motion to supplement the record in connection with the petition for review pending before the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. -- 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

1 0

Gazette Opinion Page
by Regina Hendrix 25 Apr '09

25 Apr '09

Take a look at the write-up on Blair Mountain: http://wvgazette.com/Opinion/Editorials/200904240447

1 0

[Fwd: VOTE! Pass it on...]
by Regina Hendrix 24 Apr '09

24 Apr '09

Another chance to vote, folks. Seems there have been lots of Bushies on this site giving him an F. Ah, yes, they're still out there. Regina

1 0

Fwd: Happy Earth Day from FERC
by James Kotcon 23 Apr '09

23 Apr '09

WOW! JBK >>> Jeff Schmidt <jeff.schmidt(a)sierraclub.org> 4/22/2009 2:51 PM >>> --------------------------- cc:Mail Users----------------------------- ** Remember to DELETE the 'Sender: ...' lines above before REPLYing ** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- Subject: Happy Earth Day from FERC April 22, 2009 No need to build new U.S. coal or nuclear plants -- FERC chairman By NOELLE STRAUB AND PETER BEHR, Greenwire No new nuclear or coal plants may ever be needed in the United States, the chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said today. "We may not need any, ever," Jon Wellinghoff told reporters at a U.S. Energy Association forum. The FERC chairman's comments go beyond those of other Obama administration officials, who have strongly endorsed greater efficiency and renewables deployment but also say nuclear and fossil energies will continue playing a major role. Wellinghoff's view also goes beyond the consensus outlook in the electric power industry about future sources of electricity. The industry has assumed that more baseload generation would provide part of an increasing demand for power, along with a rapid deployment of renewable generation, smart grid technologies and demand reduction strategies. Jay Apt, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University's Electricity Industry Center, expressed skepticism about the feasibility of relying so heavily on renewable energy. "I don't think we're where Chairman Wellinghoff would like us to be," Apt said. "You need firm power to fill in when the wind doesn't blow. There is just no getting around that." Some combination of more gas- or coal-fired generation, or nuclear power, will be needed, he said. "Demand response can provide a significant buffering of the power fluctuations coming from wind. Interacting widely scattered wind farms cannot provide smooth power." Wellinghoff said renewables like wind, solar and biomass will provide enough energy to meet baseload capacity and future energy demands. Nuclear and coal plants are too expensive, he added. "I think baseload capacity is going to become an anachronism," he said. "Baseload capacity really used to only mean in an economic dispatch, which you dispatch first, what would be the cheapest thing to do. Well, ultimately wind's going to be the cheapest thing to do, so you'll dispatch that first." He added, "People talk about, 'Oh, we need baseload.' It's like people saying we need more computing power, we need mainframes. We don't need mainframes, we have distributed computing." The technology for renewable energies has come far enough to allow his vision to move forward, he said. For instance, there are systems now available for concentrated solar plants that can provide 15 hours of storage. "What you have to do, is you have to be able to shape it," he added. "And if you can shape wind and you can effectively get capacity available for you for all your loads. "So if you can shape your renewables, you don't need fossil fuel or nuclear plants to run all the time. And, in fact, most plants running all the time in your system are an impediment because they're very inflexible. You can't ramp up and ramp down a nuclear plant. And if you have instead the ability to ramp up and ramp down loads in ways that can shape the entire system, then the old concept of baseload becomes an anachronism." 'A lot that is still not understood' Asked whether his ideas need detailed studies, given the complexity of the grid, Wellinghoff said the technology is already moving that way. "I think it's being settled by the digital grid moving forward," he said. "We are going to have to go to a smart grid to get to this point I'm talking about. But if we don't go to that digital grid, we're not going to be able to move these renewables, anyway. So it's all going to be an integral part of operating that grid efficiently." The North American Electric Reliability Corp. reported last week on challenges in integrating a twentyfold expansion of renewable power into the nation's electricity networks but did not specifically address whether additional baseload generation would be needed. A spokesperson for NERC did not have an immediate response to Wellinghoff's comments today. Revis James, who directs energy technology assessment for the Electric Power Research Institute, said recently that it is not clear how fast renewable energy can be added without creating reliability issues. "No one knows what the magic number is," he said. "Are we moving too fast? On the policymakers' side, there's a lot that is not still understood about the implications of a large share of renewables." Impact on nuclear power Wellinghoff's statement -- if it reflects Obama administration policy -- would be a huge blow to the U.S. nuclear power industry, which has been hoping for a nuclear "renaissance" based on the capacity of nuclear reactors to generate power without greenhouse gas emissions. Congress created significant financial incentives to encourage the construction of perhaps a half-dozen nuclear plants with innovative designs, and Energy Secretary Steven Chu has promised Congress to accelerate awards of federal loan guarantees for some of these proposals. But a major expansion in U.S. nuclear energy would require a high effective tax on carbon emissions from coal plants, or an extended loan guarantee and tax incentive policy, according to the Congressional Research Service and outside consultants. The leading energy bills before Congress do not provide more loan guarantees. "If expansion of nuclear plants is the nation's policy, then Congress has to recognize that the U.S. energy companies cannot afford to do this alone," said Paul Genoa, policy director for the Nuclear Energy Institute, in a recent interview. "The president needs to show his cards on nuclear energy," said energy consultant Joseph Stanislaw, a Duke University professor. "He cannot keep this industry, which must make investments with a 50-year or longer horizon, in limbo for much longer." "I think [new nuclear expansion] is kind of a theoretical question, because I don't see anybody building these things, I don't see anybody having one under construction," Wellington said. Building nuclear plants is cost-prohibitive, he said, adding that the last price he saw was more than $7,000 a kilowatt -- more expensive than solar energy. "Until costs get to some reasonable cost, I don't think anybody's going to [talk] that seriously," he said. "Coal plants are sort of in the same boat, they're not quite as expensive." Can renewables meet demand? There's enough renewable energy to meet energy demand, Wellinghoff said. "There's 500 to 700 gigawatts of developable wind throughout the Midwest, all the way to Texas. There's probably another 200 to 300 gigawatts in Montana and Wyoming that can go West." He also cited tremendous solar power in the Southwest and hydrokinetic and biomass energy, and said the United States can reduce energy usage by 50 percent. "You combine all those things together ... I think we have great resources in this country, and we just need to start using them," he said. Problems with unsteady power generation from wind will be overcome, he said. "That's exactly what all the load response will do, the load response will provide that leveling ability, number one," he said. "Number two, if you have wide interconnections across the entire interconnect, you're going to have a lot of diversity with that wind. Not all the wind is going to stop at once. You'll have some of it stop, some of it start, and all of that diversity is going to help you, as well." Push for grid modifications But planning for modifying the grid to integrate renewables must take place in the next three to five years, he said. "If we don't do that, then we miss the boat,"Wellinghoff said. "That planning has to take place so you don't strand a lot of assets, a lot of supply assets." Unlike coal and nuclear, natural gas will continue to play a role in generating electricity, he said. "Natural gas is going to be there for a while, because it's going to be there to get us through this transition that's going to take 30 or more years." Chu reiterated before the House Energy and Commerce Committee today that he supports loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants and is working with the White House on the issue. "I believe nuclear power has to be part of the energy mix in this century," Chu said. Chu also noted today that nuclear technology, along with renewables, is an area where the United States has lost its lead. "We are trying to start the American nuclear industry again," he said. Coal currently provides half of U.S. power, while nuclear energy accounts for about 20 percent. Senior reporter Ben Geman contributed. Copyright 2009 E&E Publishing. All Rights Reserved. -- ***************************** Nathan Willcox Energy & Clean Air Advocate PennEnvironment 1420 Walnut Street, Suite 650 Philadelphia, PA 19102 P: (215) 732-5897 F: (215) 732-4599 nwillcox(a)PennEnvironment.org **************************** __._,_.___ Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar . __,_._,___ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To get off this list, send email to: LISTSERV(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Make the message text (not the Subject): SIGNOFF CONS-FRED

1 0

MIC Release in Kanawha Valley
by Regina Hendrix 21 Apr '09

21 Apr '09

http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200904210312 This gives pretty thorough coverage of the August accident and reveals there was another release in September which Bayer didn't report. The citizens only learned of it because two of the employees went to the hospital afterward. Regina

1 0

[Fwd: Re: [fom] WV Public Radio:]
by Regina Hendrix 21 Apr '09

21 Apr '09

I think this is a wonderful idea that Carol has.. What's the best way to go about it? If we had federal primacy, maybe we could learn what and how much is being stored here in Kanawha Valley, that is, besides large quantities of MIC and no one knows how much phosgene. Since DEP has staffing issues we could save the taxpayer some money by having EPA take over. Regina

1 0

Fwd: E&E: 'Propaganda war' over coal escalates ahead of Hill climate debate
by Paul Wilson 21 Apr '09

21 Apr '09

fyi, for those of you who are not on this list. paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Fred Heutte <phred(a)sunlightdata.com> Date: Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 6:22 PM Subject: E&E: 'Propaganda war' over coal escalates ahead of Hill climate debate To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)lists.sierraclub.org 'Propaganda war' over coal escalates ahead of Hill climate debate Anne C. Mulkern, E&E reporter Ads displayed at Washington subway stops and airing on national television call "clean coal" a myth. Tell that to President Obama, his Cabinet secretaries and members of Congress. Five months into an advertising war on coal, the phrase "clean coal" not only endures, it has become political shorthand. Everyone -- from Democratic Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar -- refers to clean coal or clean coal technology. Environmentalists call the "clean coal" rhetoric dangerous, saying it creates complacency about the need to move toward true carbon-free energy. Policymakers, environmentalists say, know that coal remains one of the most polluting sources of energy. The word war over coal is escalating. There are billions of dollars at stake, as Congress moves toward historic legislation that could decide winners and losers in the green energy economy. Already, there are signs of small victories by the coal camp. "To a certain extent, it is a propaganda war," said Kenneth Green, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank. "The coal industry believes the environmental community wants to put it out of business. The environmental groups are afraid the clean coal concept is appealing enough to lawmakers, it will stymie their progress in getting rid of coal." Coal's boosters and its critics are vying to shape public perception about the fuel. For coal, winning the battle could mean securing billions of dollars for years to come. Coal companies want federal money for research on removing and sequestering carbon emissions and to preserve their position as dominant players in the United States' energy supply. Meanwhile, environmentalists are hungry to minimize the role of polluting fossil fuels and capture federal money for wind, solar, other renewable power sources and conservation efforts. Both sides are spending tens of millions of dollars in the fight. A coalition of coal backers spent about $38 million on advertising last year and another $9.9 million on lobbying. That compares with the $93,000 spent annually on lobbying from 2002 through 2007. Groups that say "clean coal" is not economically viable have also escalated their efforts. After coal supporters ran television ads last fall, a coalition of environmental groups joined with Vice President Al Gore's Alliance for Climate Protection and started the Reality Coalition. It began airing ads declaring, "There's no such thing as clean coal." That slogan is based on the fact that no commercial-scale plant exists that removes and sequesters carbon emissions from coal. The Reality Coalition will not reveal how much money it is spending but said its advertising purchases are "competitive" with the coal industry's buys. At the heart of the battle are the phrases "clean coal" and "clean coal technology" that linguists find particularly potent. "The image is 'You can wash it, you can make coal clean,'" said George Lakoff, a University of California, Berkeley, professor of cognitive science and linguistics. "Technology is miraculous. All problems are solved by technology." Since most thought is subconscious, he said, that kind of message seeps in and affects people's attitude. Clean also means good, said Deborah Tannen, a linguistics professor at Georgetown University and author of several books, including "The Argument Culture." She said the coal fight is an example of what she writes about in that book. People get two sides of an argument and do not know which is correct, she said. Who's winning? For now, both sides in the coal fight are claiming the edge. There is evidence the coal industry has made inroads. The phrase "clean coal" made its way into four bills so far this year. Two have become law, including the financial stimulus measure that allocates $3.5 billion for research on clean coal technologies. Even when the phrase "clean coal" is omitted, coal is not left out. "Clean coal" does not appear anywhere in the discussion draft of climate legislation from the House Energy and Commerce Committee. But the rough draft talks about grants for research and development on carbon capture and sequestration, which would be funded through assessments on energy producers. That language came as the result of talks between Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.); Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), who chairs the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming; and Rep. Rick Boucher, (D-Va.), a coal industry supporter. The draft does not designate a dollar amount for those grants. Separate legislation from Boucher proposes about $1 billion annually. "Coal is America's most abundant domestic fuel, and today, coal accounts for more than one-half of the fuel used for electricity generation," Boucher said when he introduced that bill. "Given our large coal reserves, its lower cost in comparison with other fuels and the inadequate availability of fuel alternatives, preservation of the ability of electric utilities to continue coal use is essential." Dealing with coal is necessary because it provides about half of the country's electricity and because China, India and other developing nations will keep using it despite the climate change concerns, congressional aides said. "We can do obviously great things with clean energy, but if we don't figure out coal ... on the global warming side and the economics side, we will potentially lose both those battles," said Eben Burnham Snyder, spokesman for Markey's select committee. Energy Secretary Steven Chu, meanwhile, has issued qualified support for carbon sequestration research. Many see that as a significant shift. In a presentation at University of California, Berkeley, before Obama picked him to lead the Energy Department, Chu said, "Coal is my worst nightmare." "As Secretary Chu has said, we need to transform the way we use and produce energy in this country to end our dangerous dependence on foreign oil and reduce the threat of pollution," DOE spokeswoman Tiffany Edwards said. "We will do that through investments in clean coal technology to reduce our carbon footprint, while also developing the next generation of alternative fuels and renewable energy sources." Chu also has said it will take at least eight years before a research project could show whether carbon capture would be commercially viable. Poll shows movement Those who accuse the coal industry of trying to falsely portray itself as green acknowledge that the phase "clean coal" has slipped into political speech. But they reject the notion that the coal industry is ready to be part of the green energy economy. When you look at the bigger picture of what Congress has done since January, the real push is toward renewable power, said Brian Hardwick, spokesman for the Reality Coalition. The economic stimulus law provides about $80 billion for renewable power programs, incentives, work on an electricity grid and conservation efforts, Hardwick said. Meanwhile, there is $3.4 billion set aside for research and development to see whether it would be commercially viable to capture and sequester coal's carbon emissions. "We're pretty happy with how that balance worked out," Hardwick said of the stimulus. The coal coalition also said it has seen a shift in its direction. In a September 2007 national poll, opinion leaders opposed the use of coal by a margin of 52 to 46 percent, said Joe Lucas, spokesman for the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, or ACCCE, a partnership of industries involved in producing electricity from coal. But when the survey was repeated last October, 72 percent supported using coal and 22 percent opposed, Lucas said. Both sides developed ads they believed would influence voters, journalists and ultimately policymakers. The Reality Coalition hired famed advertising firm Crispin Porter + Bogusky, which had done the "Truth" anti-smoking campaign. The coalition then hired famed movie-director brothers Joel and Ethan Coen, who directed a spot in which a man sprays an air freshener labeled "clean coal." Dirt comes out of the container as a family of four coughs. The strategy called for humor to pull people into a dry, technical subject, said Mary Anne Hitt, deputy director of the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal Campaign. "We hopefully can point out what we consider to be the whole absurdity of clean coal and also engage people on the issue who otherwise might not be paying attention," Hitt said. The coalition also put ads in Washington subway stations featuring a mermaid and space alien holding coal and text declaring, "there's no such thing as clean coal." Obama featured in coal ad But the pro-coal forces have a powerful weapon in their ad effort. Barack Obama, while running for president, spoke about coal at a campaign rally. A coalition representing coal interests repackaged his words into a television ad that is still running. "Clean coal technology is something that can make America energy independent," Obama says in the ad. "This is America. We figured out how to put a man on the moon in 10 years. You can't tell me we can't figure out how to burn coal that we mine right here in the United States of America and make it work." After Obama said those words, the ad wrote itself, Lucas said. Other observers, however, said parsing the president's words shows that he is not saying clean coal exists today. The words in the speech sound as though they were "very carefully calculated, calibrated words, with the judicious use of double negatives. I don't think those words were not chosen judiciously," said Joel Darmstadter, senior fellow at Resources for the Future, nonprofit group that conducts research on energy issues. "Don't tell me that we can't," Darmstadter said, "is different from saying, 'Yes, we can.'" ACCCE designed its ads after using polling and focus groups. The latest ad from the group shows a series of workers and tells viewers how coal powers the U.S. economy, "jobs powered by affordable energy generated by our most abundant fuel, coal, the source of half of our electricity." The ad does not refer to clean coal except for a logo at the end. Hardwick, with the "no such thing as clean coal" ad group, said he believes the ad shows the coal industry knows its "clean coal" ads are not working. And his response to the coal group's latest advertisement indicates where the ad war could be headed. If the industry is going to promote itself as an inexpensive energy source, he said, he will be asking people to consider "the real costs of coal" -- including global warming and natural resources destroyed by mining practices. "As we look to how to build our energy future," Hardwick said, "we have to determine if that's the way we want to go." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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 To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.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

[Fwd: [fom] Mountaintop Removal Mining Comic]
by Regina Hendrix 21 Apr '09

21 Apr '09

Take a look at this one.

3 2

Fwd: Fw: Achieving Aggressive Utility Energy Efficiency Goals
by James Kotcon 17 Apr '09

17 Apr '09

We may be able to use this for appeals challenging "Need" for new power lines. JBK >>> Paula Carrell <Paula.Carrell(a)sierraclub.org> 4/16/2009 3:13 PM >>> NEWS RELEASE Technical contacts: Martin Kushler, 517-655-7037, mgkushler(a)aol.com Dan York, 608-243-1123, dwyork(a)aol.com Press contact: Glee Murray, 202-507-4010, gmurray(a)aceee.org Achieving Aggressive Utility Energy Efficiency Goals: New Study Identifies Top States and Examines Factors Associated with Big Savings Results Washington D.C. (April 16, 2009): The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) today released a new report, Meeting Aggressive New State Goals for Utility-Sector Energy Efficiency: Examining Key Factors Associated With High Savings. This report presents the results of a comprehensive national review of recent accomplishments in utility-sector energy efficiency, and an examination of key factors associated with large savings achievements. In the past few years, high and volatile energy prices, soaring power plant construction costs, and increasing concerns over climate and potential carbon costs have all contributed to a new sense of urgency about the need for energy efficiency, and policymakers in a number of states have responded by setting energy efficiency savings goals at unprecedented levels. The intent of this report is to examine factors that may be important in considering how to achieve those aggressive new goals. Using a combination of expert review and an analysis of actual energy efficiency spending and savings data, the report identifies a set of 14 “top states” in the U.S. in terms of utility-sector energy efficiency accomplishments. The report then goes on to examine and discuss a wide range of factors that could conceivably affect success in this area, and identifies factors that appear to be associated with high levels of energy efficiency savings. The Utilities Program Director and lead author, Dr. Martin Kushler, summarized, “This study is intended to provide an overview of where we have been in terms of utility-sector energy efficiency accomplishments, and to help identify factors that will likely be important in achieving the aggressive new energy efficiency savings goals being established in many leading states.” Senior Research Associate and co-author Dr. Dan York added, “There is no single ‘magic bullet’ solution, but we’ve hopefully identified some elements that can help states develop strategies to meet the energy efficiency challenges they face.” Meeting Aggressive New State Goals for Utility-Sector Energy Efficiency: Examining Key Factors Associated With High Savings is available for free download at www.aceee.org/pubs/u091.htm or a hard copy can be purchased for $30 plus $5 postage and handling from ACEEE Publications, 529 14th St, N.W., Suite 600, Washington, D.C. 20045, phone: 202-507-4000, fax: 202-429-2248, e-mail: aceee_publications(a)aceee.org. About ACEEE: The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy is an independent, nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing energy efficiency as a means of promoting economic prosperity, energy security, and environmental protection. For information about ACEEE and its programs, publications, and conferences, visit http://www.aceee.org. ###

1 0

TRAILCO-PATH -- PJM UPDATED ANALYSIS OF "RELIABILITY" ISSUES PURPORTING TO SHOW NEED FOR TRANSMISSION LINES.
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 16 Apr '09

16 Apr '09

Attached is the PJM April 14, 2009 update of the "reliability" analysis which apparently was the basis for the decision, announced in yesterday's press release from AEP and Allegheny, to move the delivery date for PATH from June 30, 2001 to June 30, 2014. On page 3, the "update" asserts that the "retool analysis continues to demonstrate the need for the [Trail] line by June 2001." However, discussing the 502 Juntion to Prexy portion of the originally proposed Trail line, PJM acknowledges -- on page 11 -- that as part of the settlement which eliminated the 502 Juntion to Prexy portion of the line, the parties to the settlement agreed to come up with an alternative solution to any reliability issues on that portion of the line. And on page 12 of this "update" PJM acknowledges that "the magnitude of the [reliability] violations [along the 502 to Prexy line is] reduced *due to lower load forecasts*." In short, the portion of the Trail line that was cancelled can be fixed on cheaper basis because of the historic change in electric demand -- but we still need to build the rest of it because, mysteriously, it (and it alone) was not affected by the fact that demand for electricity has fallen off the table. Yeah, right, and if you believe that I have a bridge to nowhere ... -- 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

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC