- EC - lists.cheatlakeclear.org

Fw: Breaking: Florida Releases State Climate Plan: Huge Economic Gains, Redefines National Discussion
by Jim Sconyers 16 Oct '08

16 Oct '08

Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Ned Ford <Ned.Ford(a)FUSE.NET> To: CONS-SPST-GLOBALWARM-CHAIRS(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 1:29:55 AM Subject: Breaking: Florida Releases State Climate Plan: Huge Economic Gains, Redefines National Discussion Florida Releases State Climate Plan: Huge Economic Gains, Redefines National Discussion Florida today is releasing its plan of action to address climate change, and the news is good and big. Fifty separate policy recommendations pave the way for Florida to realize $28 billion in net economic savings between now and 2025, and to significantly reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. The report's executive summary, posted today here, calculates that emissions would be reduced 64% from business-as-usual projections by 2025 if all fifty policy recommendations are implemented. That translates into a 51% reduction of emissions below 2005 levels, and a 33% reduction below 1990 levels. The reductions blow past the targets Governor Crist asked the Action Team to hit. Florida's fuel consumption would also decline dramatically and lessen its dependence on both dirty and foreign sources of fossil energy -- a projected total fuel savings of 53.5 billion gallons of petroleum, 200.2 million short tons of coal, and 6.394 billion cubic feet of natural gas during the period of 2009 through 2025. What is particularly noteworthy is that this plan emerges from the Republican stronghold of Governor Charlie Crist's administration, a man who was on the short list for Vice-Presidential nominee. Secretary of Florida's Department of Environmental Protection Michael Sole headed up Crist's Action Team on Energy and Climate Change which produced the plan. He was deputy secretary of the department under former governor Jeb Bush. Kathleen Shanahan, who was Jeb Bush's chief of staff, also served on the Action Team. She also served as Chief of Staff for Vice President-elect Dick Cheney during the 2000 presidential campaign and transition. Also on the action team was Mark Kaplan, who also served in the capacity of Chief of Staff for Jeb Bush when he was governor. Rick Baker, Republican Mayor of St. Petersburg, Florida also helped produce the plan. All 50 recommendations were adopted unanimously by the 27 members of the action team...... rest of the story here: http://solveclimate.com/blog/20081015/florida-releases-state-climate-plan-h… - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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: Plugged In: The Most Energy Efficient States Revealed
by Jim Sconyers 16 Oct '08

16 Oct '08

2008 State Energy Efficiency Scorecard West Virginia tied for 43rd. http://www.aceee.org/pubs/e086.htm Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Sierra Club <global.warming(a)sierraclub.org> To: jim_scon(a)yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 1:39:50 PM Subject: Plugged In: The Most Energy Efficient States Revealed Sierra Club Having trouble receiving our e-mail? Try adding us (global.warming(a)sierraclub.org) to your Address Book. Find out how. View a web version of this newsletter. In this Edition Federal:State Energy Efficiency Ranked, Higher Heating Costs Expected International: China Drops Liquid Coal In the States: UT Coal Plant Back on the Ballot, NM Promotes Clean Energy News and Resources:Green Job Markets, Coal River Mountain, and Ike’s Environmental Toll FederalState Energy Efficiency Rankings Released Earlier this month the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ACEEE) revealed its state rankings on energy efficiency. The 2008 State Energy Efficiency Scorecard rates and ranks state-level action on model energy efficiency policies, programs, and practices. Here are the top ten U.S. states "employing energy efficiency to grow their economies while meeting electricity demand, combating global warming, and contributing to U.S. energy security:" 1. California 2. Oregon 3. Connecticut 4. Vermont 5. New York 6. Washington 7. Massachusetts 8. Minnesota 9. Wisconsin 10. New Jersey Download the report and executive summary on the ACEEE website. ________________________________ International China Drops Coal-to-Liquids Last week, China's National Development and Reform Commission announced that, besides two projects, it is effectively halting all coal-to-liquids projects "due to environmental and economic concerns." The agency calls the technology risky both financially and environmentally. This is a major decision and China is making a tremendous statement -- the same one we've been making about the 10 proposed coal-to-liquid plants in the U.S: Liquid coal is not a viable option for our energy needs. Learn more about liquid coal on the coal campaign website. ________________________________ In the States Utah Coal Plant Back on the Ballot Our state activists are thrilled with last week’s Utah Supreme Court decision to allow a coal-fired power plant issue back on the ballot in Sevier County. A coalition of clean energy groups including our state chapter had fought for a referendum allowing the county’s citizens to vote on permits for new coal-fired power plants in the county. The move was in response to a planned 240-megawatt coal-fired power plant. "A 6th District judge last month halted (the) citizen referendum, saying the initiative intended for the Nov. 4 ballot didn't comply with a new law prohibiting initiatives on changes to land-use ordinances." The Utah Supreme Court disagreed, and said the referendum must go back on the ballot. Now county residents get to vote down this latest coal plant. Congrats, Utah! New Mexico Promotes Clean Energy The Sierra Club is a proud supporter of Dooda Desert Rock (DDR), a Navajo grassroots organization dedicated to stopping the proposed Desert Rock coal-fired power plant in New Mexico. From Oct. 3-5, the Sierra Club helped DDR at the local Shiprock Fair both staffing a booth, helping with a parade, and supporting a music festival. Andy Bessler of the Sierra Club's Tribal Partnerships Program said the time at the booth also garnered them many more signatures on a petition opposing the Desert Rock plant. The parade float featured a wind turbine and many clean energy supporters from three states who are working with DDR. "There was a huge crowd," said Bessler. "I would estimate the crowd along the two-mile parade route packed shoulder-to-shoulder for the full two-mile route at 60,000. DDR hosted a 3-day music festival at the fair as well and educated thousands of local residents about the dangers of building another coal plant in the four-corners region." Congrats! ________________________________ News and Resources -- America’s Hottest Green Job Markets (Forbes) -- The Battle Over Coal River (CNN) -- Hurricane Ike Environmental Toll Apparent (AP) ________________________________ Plugged In, your source for the latest happenings with the Sierra Club's Smart Energy Solutions Campaign. Subscribe to Plugged In. Unsubscribe to Plugged In. View previous editions of Plugged In. Become a Sierra Club Member. Want to keep up with the Sierra Club's latest activities and news? Sign up to receive Sierra ClubInsider, the Sierra Club's flagship e-newsletter sent out twice a month. The Insider provides everything from information on new reports and issues to planning great hiking trips to how you can help change environmental policy. View recent editions of the Insider. Sierra Club | 85 Second St., San Francisco, CA 94105 | sierraclub.org/globalwarming | global.warming(a)sierraclub.org Update My Profile | Manage My Email Preferences | Update My Interests

1 0

Jesse Johnson Fundraiser
by Regina Hendrix 12 Oct '08

12 Oct '08

Ladies and gentlemen, I need your help to publicize the fund raiser event for Jesse Johnson. (See attached.) For the first time ever, I believe, (in WV I'm sure and maybe nationally) the Sierra Club is endorsing a third party candidate. There's such a short lead time that I need my friends to help get the word out. (There's a Word document attached and I will paste the body of the text below just in case anyone has trouble opening it.) Would you mind putting it on your E-mail list serve and asking anyone else who might have a large circle of friends to do the same. I am strongly motivated to help Jesse bring in as large a vote total as possible, especially after attending the hearing before Judge Jennifer Bailey Walker last week. She took the PC and easy way out when she denied Jesse's request for an injunction and ruled for the Broadcast Association and the Clay Center. Attorney Barnett from Jackson & Kelly tried to intimate that we really don't have a campaign going and he tried to belittle our efforts. He intimated that Jesse is not serious and "just craves publicity." Well, we do all "crave publicity" for our issues. Jesse is on the ballot in all 55 counties and he has been waging a statewide campaign on a shoestring. He needs help NOW with funds to get his office open and to get literature printed. He has been traveling statewide--we all know how expensive that is. He has some good plans to bring attention to our issues right before the election. Governor Manchin's arrogance in totally blowing away our issues and ordering those head bashing arrests last March should not be tolerated by any of us. I feel we should have gone back to the Capitol right away. We just couldn't get it together quick enough and several people actually have (or had) serious injuries to deal with after that melee. So here we are in October asked to listen to a "debate" between two candidates who've sold their soul to the coal barons. (I plan to boycott the "debate") Two-thirds of the citizens in WV want to ban mountaintop removal and in Jesse we finally have a candidate who supports us. We need to support him. Thanks for your help. Please call me if you have any questions. I also need a couple of volunteers to help me during the fund raiser event. Regina Hendrix (304) 343-5211 *WV CHAPTER SIERRA CLUB AND CITIZENS ACTION FUND * *are jointly sponsoring a **Jesse4WVGov **Fundraiser **for Jesse Johnson, Mountain Party Candidate for Governor,** on:* * * *Date: Friday, 17 October 2008 * * * *Time: 5:30 – 7:30 p.m.* * * *Location: Citizen Action Group Headquarters, * *1500 Dixie Street, Charleston, WV* * * *Refreshments: WVSC PAC will supply finger foods and wine and music. **Please come out to support the candidate and BYOB and a dessert, if you like.* * * * * WV Sierra Club announced their endorsement of Jesse Johnson (Mountain Party) for West Virginia Governor on October 3 and Citizen Action Fund will be announcing their endorsement at this fundraising event. Our candidates support clean air and water, protection of the mountains and forests and social justice connected to environmental issues, so we need to support them. Electing environment-friendly officials takes money. Jesse needs $$’s for printing, stamps, office supplies, newspaper ads and other expenses incidental to the statewide campaign he has been conducting. In these final weeks he needs your help more than ever. Please come and bring your checkbook or, if you cannot attend, please mail contributions to: *Jesse4WVGov, P. O. Box 814, Charleston, WV 25323.* If you have questions or need directions, please call or email Regina Hendrix at 304-343-5211 or regina1936(a)verizon.net. * * * * *Thi*

1 0

[Fwd: [fom] More from BBC: Surface tension]
by Regina Hendrix 11 Oct '08

11 Oct '08

FYI.

1 0

Re: [EC] Fwd: NEWS ADVISORY: Renewable Electricity Surges by 32%--Provides 11% of U.S. Net Generation
by Jim Sconyers 10 Oct '08

10 Oct '08

And renewables were 11% of the total - awesome! Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ________________________________ From: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> To: ec(a)osenergy.org Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:46:51 AM Subject: [EC] Fwd: NEWS ADVISORY: Renewable Electricity Surges by 32%--Provides 11% of U.S. Net Generation If total electricity sales go up 3 %, while nukes drop 1 %, and renewables increase by 32%, that tells me the marketplace is speaking about the future of energy. Those who think nukes are the way of the future need to pay attention. Enjoy. JBK >>> Kenneth Bossong <sustainableenergy_news(a)yahoo.com> 10/10/2008 11:02 AM >>> SUN DAY Campaign 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite #340; Takoma Park, MD 20912 301-270-6477 x.23 sun-day-campaign(a)hotmail.com Media Advisory U.S. RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY GENERATION SURGES BY 32%; SUSTAINABLE ENERGY ACCOUNTS FOR 11% OF TOTAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY WIND, SOLAR, HYDROPOWER ALL EXPERIENCE DRAMATIC INCREASES AS NUCLEAR POWER’S SHARE DIPS For Immediate Release: October 9, 2008 Contact: Ken Bossong 301-270-6477 x.23 Washington DC -- According to the latest "Monthly Electricity Review" issued by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (October 3, 2008), net U.S. generation of electricity from renewable energy sources surged by 32 percent in June 2008 compared to June 2007. Renewable energy (biomass, geothermal, hydropower, solar, wind) totaled 41,160,000 megawatt-hours (MWh) in June 2008 up from 31,242,000 MWh in June 2007. Renewables accounted for 11.0% of net U.S. electricity generation in June 2008 compared to 8.6% in June 2007. Compared to June 2007, wind power grew by 81.6% in June 2008 while solar and conventional hydropower experienced increases of 42.6% and 34.7% respectively. Geothermal energy also enjoyed a slight increase (0.8%) while biomass (wood + waste) remained relatively unchanged. Renewable energy sources now account for 37% of the non-fossil net electricity generation in the United States. Net electricity generation from non-hydroelectric renewables (i.e., biomass, geothermal, solar, wind) increased by 24 percent to 10,357,000 MWh and now accounts for just under three percent of total net U.S. electricity generation. By comparison, nuclear power’s share of total net U.S. electricity generation dipped from 19.0% in June 2007 to 18.8% in June 2008. Total U.S. net electricity generation increased by 2.9% to 373,632,000 MWh. “The Bush Administration’s own data clearly illustrate which energy options should be the focus of future investment,” said Ken Bossong, Executive Director of the SUN DAY Campaign “The dizzyingly high growth rates that renewable energy sources continue to enjoy - compared to the stagnant figures for nuclear power - strongly argue for directing limited federal energy dollars into sustainable energy technologies.” A summary table prepared by the SUN DAY Campaign based on the data in the EIA report is attached. The full EIA report “Electric Power Monthly” can be accessed at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html # # # # # # # # The SUN DAY Campaign is a non-profit research and educational organization founded in 1993 to promote sustainable energy technologies as cost-effective alternatives to nuclear power and fossil fuels. ========================

1 0

Fwd: NEWS ADVISORY: Renewable Electricity Surges by 32%--Provides 11% of U.S. Net Generation
by James Kotcon 10 Oct '08

10 Oct '08

If total electricity sales go up 3 %, while nukes drop 1 %, and renewables increase by 32%, that tells me the marketplace is speaking about the future of energy. Those who think nukes are the way of the future need to pay attention. Enjoy. JBK >>> Kenneth Bossong <sustainableenergy_news(a)yahoo.com> 10/10/2008 11:02 AM >>> SUN DAY Campaign 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite #340; Takoma Park, MD 20912 301-270-6477 x.23 sun-day-campaign(a)hotmail.com Media Advisory U.S. RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY GENERATION SURGES BY 32%; SUSTAINABLE ENERGY ACCOUNTS FOR 11% OF TOTAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY WIND, SOLAR, HYDROPOWER ALL EXPERIENCE DRAMATIC INCREASES AS NUCLEAR POWER’S SHARE DIPS For Immediate Release: October 9, 2008 Contact: Ken Bossong 301-270-6477 x.23 Washington DC -- According to the latest "Monthly Electricity Review" issued by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (October 3, 2008), net U.S. generation of electricity from renewable energy sources surged by 32 percent in June 2008 compared to June 2007. Renewable energy (biomass, geothermal, hydropower, solar, wind) totaled 41,160,000 megawatt-hours (MWh) in June 2008 up from 31,242,000 MWh in June 2007. Renewables accounted for 11.0% of net U.S. electricity generation in June 2008 compared to 8.6% in June 2007. Compared to June 2007, wind power grew by 81.6% in June 2008 while solar and conventional hydropower experienced increases of 42.6% and 34.7% respectively. Geothermal energy also enjoyed a slight increase (0.8%) while biomass (wood + waste) remained relatively unchanged. Renewable energy sources now account for 37% of the non-fossil net electricity generation in the United States. Net electricity generation from non-hydroelectric renewables (i.e., biomass, geothermal, solar, wind) increased by 24 percent to 10,357,000 MWh and now accounts for just under three percent of total net U.S. electricity generation. By comparison, nuclear power’s share of total net U.S. electricity generation dipped from 19.0% in June 2007 to 18.8% in June 2008. Total U.S. net electricity generation increased by 2.9% to 373,632,000 MWh. “The Bush Administration’s own data clearly illustrate which energy options should be the focus of future investment,” said Ken Bossong, Executive Director of the SUN DAY Campaign “The dizzyingly high growth rates that renewable energy sources continue to enjoy - compared to the stagnant figures for nuclear power - strongly argue for directing limited federal energy dollars into sustainable energy technologies.” A summary table prepared by the SUN DAY Campaign based on the data in the EIA report is attached. The full EIA report “Electric Power Monthly” can be accessed at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html # # # # # # # # The SUN DAY Campaign is a non-profit research and educational organization founded in 1993 to promote sustainable energy technologies as cost-effective alternatives to nuclear power and fossil fuels. ========================

1 0

Jesse4wvgov
by Regina Hendrix 09 Oct '08

09 Oct '08

Pasted in below is the text of a press release just issued by Sierra Club concerning our endorsement of Jesse Johnson for WV Governor. This information was released this morning by Sierra Club National Press Office in Wash. D.C. Oliver Bernstein suggested anyone with press contacts send it around around also. If you have contacts and would like a copy with the logo and header on it, please contact me or Jim Sconyers at the phone numbers listed on the release. I pasted it in because the FOM listing will not accept attachments. (I have already forwarded it to Ken Ward.) Another action that Jesse has asked that we take is to contact Jim Haught at Chas. Gazette (Haught(a)wvgazette.com) and ask him to run the op-eds by Mike Gravel and Charlotte Pritt in the hard copy Gazette. (or contact Haught by phone on 304-348-5199) They have been running the op-eds only in the online version. Also, check out the online versions and make comments, since Gazette keeps track of the hits. Bill Price asks that Sierra Club members contact him on 304-389-8822, if they are able to donate some time to a Sister Chapter Adoption Program sponsored by SC. Bill is serving in Ohio right now to help Barack out in that battleground state and they need more volunteers. Bill has info on the details, such as where do you stay, etc. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 3, 2008 CONTACTS: Regina Hendrix 304-343-5211 or Jim Sconyers 603-969-6712 SIERRA CLUB ENDORSES JESSE JOHNSON FOR WV GOVERNOR Conservation Group Highlights Opposition to Mountaintop Removal, Praises Work to Protect West Virginia’s Environment "We are very pleased to announce today that the Sierra Club WV Chapter endorses Jesse Johnson for West Virginia Governor," said Political Chair Regina Hendrix. "As the only gubernatorial candidate working for a statewide ban on mountaintop removal, we believe his candidacy will give West Virginians a chance to vote for a governor who is dedicated to helping West Virginia’s workers by promoting renewable energy and keeping our state clean.” “Johnson showed how seriously he takes this issue by speaking to tens of thousands of people nationwide during the last year about the harsh realities of mountaintop removal. His plan for the economy proposes tax breaks and incentives for businesses using renewable energy technology and he has urged that citizens be given a dividend from taxes generated from non-renewables such as coal and natural gas. Unfortunately, Governor Manchin’s support of mountaintop removal has kept West Virginia from moving towards a clean energy future that would benefit the economy and the environment.” Mountaintop removal mining is a destructive form of coal mining that has already buried more than 1,200 miles of streams and threatens to destroy 1.4 million acres of land by 2020. The mining poisons drinking water, lays waste to wildlife habitat, increases the risk of flooding and wipes out entire communities. “Johnson shares many of the conservation principles that the WV Sierra Club stands for,” said WV Conservation Chair Jim Sconyers. “He understands the energy crisis, the need to transition from coal to renewable energy, and the looming threat of global - and local - climate change. And he is dead set against taking away West Virginia citizens’ land for the sake of building huge power lines that do not benefit West Virginia in any way.” “The Sierra Club also praises Johnson’s opposition to proposed new electric transmission lines,” said Jim Kotcon, Chair of the WV Sierra Club’s Energy Committee. “These lines would allow private, out-of-state electric companies to take private property from West Virginia citizens primarily so those companies can make exorbitant profits by gouging local electric ratepayers. Unfortunately Governor Manchin supports this bad deal for West Virginia. Is that what Manchin means by "Open For Business"? Instead of supporting environmental destruction and higher taxes, Johnson says he will work to derail these lines. That is what West Virginia needs.” Along with the endorsement, the Sierra Club will lend its volunteer strength to Johnson’s campaign. We look forward to a victory party for the environment on election night and to many years of Jesse Johnson fighting for the environment as Governor of West Virginia." # # # Regina Hendrix

9 16

Re. Gubernatorial debate
by Vernon Haltom 09 Oct '08

09 Oct '08

Here's my revision; please take a look. Michele Crist Executive Director West Virginia Broadcasters Association 140 Seventh Avenue South Charleston, WV 25309-1452 October 9, 2008 Dear Ms. Crist, During the past few weeks your organization has received numerous phone calls, emails, and letters from West Virginia citizens who are concerned about your exclusion of Mountain Party Candidate Jesse Johnson in the upcoming WV Broadcasters-sponsored gubernatorial debate. Your continued refusal to include Mr. Johnson in this debate is a disservice to the public and to the thousands of registered voters that are members of our organizations. It is without doubt a disservice to the many West Virginiatelevision and radio station members that you represent. The Mountain Party is an established and growing political party that has been on the ballot for a number of years now. Three candidates are on the gubernatorial ballot this year. All three should take part in the debate. Excluding Mr. Johnson because of the lower number of Mountain Party members is comparable to excluding Mr. Weeks because of the lower number of Republican Party members. The Mountain Party represents an alternative for West Virginians who feel that the Republican and Democratic parties have no difference on some important issues such as mountaintop removal coal mining. Mountaintop removal has been the subject of hundreds of news stories here in West Virginia and across the nation. In numerous polls, the majority of West Virginians have expressed their desire to see this mining practice end, yet both the Democratic and Republican parties continue to support this form of coal mining. The Mountain Party has taken the position of the majority. Your refusal to include the only party in this state that agrees with the majority on this most important issue is illogical, and some might even say oppressive. At the very least your refusal to include Candidate Johnson discredits your organization and questions your motives. While we do not endorse any candidate or party, we feel an obligation to our members to make sure their concerns are addressed and discussed in the debate. The WV Broadcasters Association may be a privately held organization, but that does not negate your ethical obligation to hold a fair and balanced public gubernatorial debate. We are respectfully asking that you reconsider your position and include Mountain Party Candidate Jesse Johnson in this debate. Yours Truly, On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Judy Bonds <judy(a)crmw.net> wrote: > Wait---one could check the last date to put political letters in the > papers in the Eastern panhandle---not sure if they have the same policy on > political letters. > It might be worth a try to get a letter or 2 in. > Judy > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Vernon Haltom <vernoncrmw(a)gmail.com> > *To:* Judy Bonds <judy(a)crmw.net> > *Cc:* Paul Wilson <pjgrunt(a)gmail.com> ; bo webb <webb.bo(a)gmail.com> ; Tonya > Adkins <4themountains(a)gmail.com> ; Rory McIlmoil <rorygep(a)gmail.com> ; Jesse > Johnson <jesse4wvgov(a)yahoo.com> ; All of FOM list <fom(a)lists.riseup.net> ; > ec(a)osenergy.org > *Sent:* Thursday, October 09, 2008 11:29 AM > *Subject:* Re: [EC] [fom] Jesse4wvgov > > I'm revising the letter, should be done in just a few minutes. > > On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 10:51 AM, Judy Bonds <judy(a)crmw.net> wrote: > >> the debate is Monday---too late for letters to the editor adn papers >> always have a set date that they won't print political letters after during >> an election cycle. >> Judy >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Paul Wilson <pjgrunt(a)gmail.com> >> *To:* bo webb <webb.bo(a)gmail.com> >> *Cc:* Tonya Adkins <4themountains(a)gmail.com> ; Rory McIlmoil<rorygep(a)gmail.com>; Jesse >> Johnson <jesse4wvgov(a)yahoo.com> ; All of FOM list <fom(a)lists.riseup.net>; >> ec(a)osenergy.org >> *Sent:* Thursday, October 09, 2008 10:08 AM >> *Subject:* Re: [EC] [fom] Jesse4wvgov >> >> LTEs would be the most useful form of informing the public. Especially >> with PATH coming thru the Eastern Panhandle and Jesse's opposition to MTR >> and coal industry. So does Jesse have any LTE's we can modify and send to >> local papers?? thanks paul w. >> >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 8:14 AM, bo webb <webb.bo@ <webb.bo(a)gmail.com> >> gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I suggest we as organizations, (because organizations speak for their >>> members, representing thousands of us) to send individual organization press >>> releases out to all media across the state about our concerns, coupled with >>> personal calls from our respective executive directors to WV Broadcasters >>> Ass. and local TV and radio stations news departments. Not an endorsement >>> of Jesse, but demanding an inclusion of Jesse that guarantees a fair process >>> that will bring our issue of mountain top removal to the discussion. The >>> majority of WV citizens oppose mtr, etc. >>> >>> Bo >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:02 PM, Tonya Adkins <4themountains(a)gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> I called the WV broadcaster's association last week to complain, too. I >>>> was given basically the same answer, except the girl I spoke with also said >>>> that they were only including the candidates that would generate the most >>>> viewers...which doesn't even make sense. ...how do they know? I said they >>>> have a responsibility to provide the public with information representing >>>> differing viewpoints...and that Manchin is a republican masquerading as a >>>> democrat, so we now have two republicans debating each other...I also said >>>> it was reprehensible that they are engaging in a form of censorship. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Regina Hendrix <regina1936(a)verizon.net>wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thank you Rory. I hope a lot more people will call. Jesse is being >>>>> locked out of the process and the voters are given no choice, since Manchin >>>>> and Weeks are almost equally bad. >>>>> I have seen nothing in the Gazette on this endorsement, despite it >>>>> being released statewide. I sent it personally to Ken Ward and Jim Haught. >>>>> I also sent it to WV New Service. They usually do radio pieces and I feel >>>>> sure they will do something but I was hoping for news coverage statewide. >>>>> Any ideas, anyone??? >>>>> >>>>> Regina >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Rory McIlmoil wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Just to let everyone know, I called the WV Broadcasters Assn on >>>>>> Wednesday, expressing my concern about them leaving Jesse out of the debate, >>>>>> and about how that undermines the democratic principles that the state and >>>>>> the country are supposed to be based upon, and their response was to tell me >>>>>> that they were a private corporation, and their board had made the decision >>>>>> and that there had been little public outcry about it (so people need to be >>>>>> making more calls!!). I then mentioned to the woman who answered the phone >>>>>> that the Assn was then essentially privatizing our democratic institution, >>>>>> and she had no reply to that. Sounds more like an oligarchy to me. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Regina Hendrix < >>>>>> regina1936(a)verizon.net <mailto:regina1936@verizon.net>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Pasted in below is the text of a press release just issued by >>>>>> Sierra Club concerning our endorsement of Jesse Johnson for WV >>>>>> Governor. This information was released this morning by Sierra >>>>>> Club National Press Office in Wash. D.C. Oliver Bernstein >>>>>> suggested anyone with press contacts send it around around also. >>>>>> If you have contacts and would like a copy with the logo and >>>>>> header on it, please contact me or Jim Sconyers at the phone >>>>>> numbers listed on the release. I pasted it in because the FOM >>>>>> listing will not accept attachments. (I have already forwarded it >>>>>> to Ken Ward.) >>>>>> >>>>>> Another action that Jesse has asked that we take is to contact Jim >>>>>> Haught at Chas. Gazette (Haught(a)wvgazette.com >>>>>> <mailto:Haught@wvgazette.com>) and ask him to run the op-eds by >>>>>> Mike Gravel and Charlotte Pritt in the hard copy Gazette. (or >>>>>> contact Haught by phone on 304-348-5199) They have been running >>>>>> the op-eds only in the online version. Also, check out the online >>>>>> versions and make comments, since Gazette keeps track of the hits. >>>>>> >>>>>> Bill Price asks that Sierra Club members contact him on >>>>>> 304-389-8822, if they are able to donate some time to a Sister >>>>>> Chapter Adoption Program sponsored by SC. Bill is serving in Ohio >>>>>> right now to help Barack out in that battleground state and they >>>>>> need more volunteers. Bill has info on the details, such as where >>>>>> do you stay, etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 3, 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> CONTACTS: Regina Hendrix 304-343-5211 or >>>>>> Jim Sconyers 603-969-6712 >>>>>> >>>>>> SIERRA CLUB ENDORSES JESSE JOHNSON >>>>>> >>>>>> FOR WV GOVERNOR >>>>>> >>>>>> Conservation Group Highlights Opposition to Mountaintop Removal, >>>>>> Praises Work to Protect West Virginia's Environment >>>>>> >>>>>> "We are very pleased to announce today that the Sierra Club WV >>>>>> Chapter endorses Jesse Johnson for West Virginia Governor," said >>>>>> Political Chair Regina Hendrix. "As the only gubernatorial >>>>>> candidate working for a statewide ban on mountaintop removal, we >>>>>> believe his candidacy will give West Virginians a chance to vote >>>>>> for a governor who is dedicated to helping West Virginia's workers >>>>>> by promoting renewable energy and keeping our state clean." >>>>>> >>>>>> "Johnson showed how seriously he takes this issue by speaking to >>>>>> tens of thousands of people nationwide during the last year about >>>>>> the harsh realities of mountaintop removal. His plan for the >>>>>> economy proposes tax breaks and incentives for businesses using >>>>>> renewable energy technology and he has urged that citizens be >>>>>> given a dividend from taxes generated from non-renewables such as >>>>>> coal and natural gas. Unfortunately, Governor Manchin's support of >>>>>> mountaintop removal has kept West Virginia from moving towards a >>>>>> clean energy future that would benefit the economy and the >>>>>> environment." >>>>>> >>>>>> Mountaintop removal mining is a destructive form of coal mining >>>>>> that has already buried more than 1,200 miles of streams and >>>>>> threatens to destroy 1.4 million acres of land by 2020. The mining >>>>>> poisons drinking water, lays waste to wildlife habitat, increases >>>>>> the risk of flooding and wipes out entire communities. >>>>>> >>>>>> "Johnson shares many of the conservation principles that the WV >>>>>> Sierra Club stands for," said WV Conservation Chair Jim Sconyers. >>>>>> "He understands the energy crisis, the need to transition from >>>>>> coal to renewable energy, and the looming threat of global - and >>>>>> local - climate change. And he is dead set against taking away >>>>>> West Virginia citizens' land for the sake of building huge power >>>>>> lines that do not benefit West Virginia in any way." >>>>>> >>>>>> "The Sierra Club also praises Johnson's opposition to proposed new >>>>>> electric transmission lines," said Jim Kotcon, Chair of the WV >>>>>> Sierra Club's Energy Committee. "These lines would allow private, >>>>>> out-of-state electric companies to take private property from West >>>>>> Virginia citizens primarily so those companies can make exorbitant >>>>>> profits by gouging local electric ratepayers. Unfortunately >>>>>> Governor Manchin supports this bad deal for West Virginia. Is that >>>>>> what Manchin means by "Open For Business"? Instead of supporting >>>>>> environmental destruction and higher taxes, Johnson says he will >>>>>> work to derail these lines. That is what West Virginia needs." >>>>>> >>>>>> Along with the endorsement, the Sierra Club will lend its >>>>>> volunteer strength to Johnson's campaign. We look forward to a >>>>>> victory party for the environment on election night and to many >>>>>> years of Jesse Johnson fighting for the environment as Governor of >>>>>> West Virginia." >>>>>> >>>>>> # # # >>>>>> >>>>>> Regina Hendrix >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Kind Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Rory McIlmoil >>>>>> >>>>>> Coal River Mountain Wind Project >>>>>> (w): (304) 854-2182 >>>>>> (h): (304) 854-1937 >>>>>> www.coalriverwind.org <http://www.coalriverwind.org> >>>>>> www.crmw.net <http://www.crmw.net> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> "No problem can be solved from the same consciousness that created it." >>> Albert Einstein >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> EC mailing list >>> EC(a)osenergy.org >>> http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Paul Wilson >> Sierra Club >> 504 Jefferson Ave >> Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 >> Phone: 304-725-4360 >> Cell: 304-279-6975 >> >> > > > -- > Vernon Haltom > Co-director > Coal River Mountain Watch > 304-854-2182 > www.crmw.net > www.coalriverwind.org > www.mountainjustice.org > For a Clean, Just, Sustainable Appalachia > > -- Vernon Haltom Co-director Coal River Mountain Watch 304-854-2182 www.crmw.net www.coalriverwind.org www.mountainjustice.org For a Clean, Just, Sustainable Appalachia

2 1

Re: [EC] from Center for the Media: Coal Burners Invest in Environmental Journalism
by Paul Wilson 09 Oct '08

09 Oct '08

fyi, and please distribute widely. thanks paul Coal Burners Invest in Environmental Journalism<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=dmBwk7bXIN8S2ueT1ObY…> Source: Society for Environmental Journalists website, October 2008 The Society for Environmental Journalists (SEJ), which promotes "excellence in environmental journalism," is gearing up for its annual conference in Roanoke, Virginia in mid-October. As the conference is in the "heart of coal country," numerous sessions will address "the status and future of big coal." Richard Pauli, who writes the NoEnergyTomorrow blog, notes that<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=WqXco8CWdwozJJvLcfuj…>two of the conference's "premier sponsors" are the coal-addicted energy corporations American Electric Power<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=UCFVWeo8UvwvAFEtXmHk…>and Dominion Power<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=a0F2mD9mPOCDdjB5vn%2…>. "It's like seeing a Heart Association 10k race sponsored by a tobacco company," he wrote. In response, SEJ Executive Director Beth Parke stated that the corporate funding is for Virgina Tech, which will host the conference, and not directly for SEJ. Pauli noted SEJ's response, suggesting that "an improved analogy might be that of a track meet being held in a stadium that shows tobacco advertising. It may not be connected to the team, but they have to run below the sign." -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-6975

1 0

Fwd: ABC won't air our ad
by Paul Wilson 09 Oct '08

09 Oct '08

This is a short fun activity. I would expect this from Fox News but surprised that ABC is taking this position. thanks, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Cathy Zoi, The We Campaign <info(a)wecansolveit.org> Date: Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 6:45 PM Subject: ABC won't air our ad To: Paul Wilson <pjgrunt(a)gmail.com> [image: We can solve the climate crisis]<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/vdKr9P/VEsH/> [image: ABC won't air our ad.]<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/OlTh2g/VEsE/> Tell ABC to air the Repower America ad this Friday on *20/20*. Take Action<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/OlTh2g/VEsF/>! Dear Paul, Did you notice the ads after last night's presidential debate? ABC had Chevron. CBS had Exxon. CNN had the coal lobby. But you know what happened last week? ABC refused to run our Repower America ad -- the ad that takes on this same oil and coal lobby. I sent a letter asking ABC to reconsider their decision and put our ad on the air, but still we haven't heard back more than a week later. I think they need to hear from all of us. Can you help? Please send a message<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/OlTh2g/VEsC/>to ABC and tell them to air the Repower America ad this Friday on *20/20*. Just click here: http://www.wecansolveit.org/ABC<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/OlTh2g/VEsD/> We're working to get 100,000 public comments to ABC before *20/20*'s next airing. Our Repower America ad has a clear and simple message -- that massive spending by oil and coal companies on advertising is a key reason our nation hasn't switched to clean and renewable sources for our energy. Here's the script of the ad: *The solution to our climate crisis seems simple. Repower America with wind and solar. End our dependence on foreign oil. A stronger economy. So why are we still stuck with dirty and expensive energy? Because big oil spends hundreds of millions of dollars to block clean energy. Lobbyists, ads, even scandals. All to increase their profits, while America suffers. Breaking big oil's lock on our government ... Now that's change. We're the American people and we approve this message.* You can view the ad on the ABC petition page, here<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/OlTh2g/VEsA/> . As our country faces deep economic problems, we need to be able to have an honest debate about the root causes of our problems. As Al Gore has said, "We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the future of human civilization. And every bit of that has to change." As oil and coal backed groups outspend even major party committees in this political year, it's outrageous that ABC would deny our ad. Let ABC know what you think. Just click here<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/OlTh2g/VEsB/> . Thank you, Cathy Zoi CEO www.wecansolveit.org<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/0nf5jg/VEsO/> WeCanSolveIt.org<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/vdKr9P/VEsP/> | Privacy Policy<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/rcAqm1/VEsHBQ==/> | Subscribe<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/Lhi230/VEsHBA==/> | Unsubscribe<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/dXCzoX/VEsHBw==/> | Contact Us<http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/RhGqkm/VEsHBg==/> | About <http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/m/6faa2f86f8896f6a/v4bSb4/VEsHAQ==/> -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-6975

1 0

FW: TrAIL gets approval from Virginia
by Grubb, Karen 07 Oct '08

07 Oct '08

From: Frank Young [mailto:fyoung@mountain.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 2:33 PM To: WVHCBOARD(a)yahoogroups.com Cc: Bill DePaulo; Jim Kotcon; Grubb, Karen; Duane330(a)aol.com Subject: TrAIL gets approval from Virginia October 7, 2008 Multistate power line gets approval from Virginia By The Associated Press <mailto:> RICHMOND, Va. -- Regulators in Virginia have given the green light to a multistate high-voltage power line proposed for the northern part of the state. In a ruling today, the State Corporation Commission concluded the proposed power line meets standards set by Virginia law and must be approved. As proposed, the line would run from southwestern Pennsylvania across West Virginia to northern Virginia. The 240-mile line is intended to increase electrical supplies to 13 eastern states. In Virginia, the project is proposed by Dominion Virginia Power and Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line company. http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200810070411

1 0

Re: [EC] Walker Machinery AD/PATH
by Grubb, Karen 07 Oct '08

07 Oct '08

They are on my local stations in Fairmont. They show biologists working on streams and with wildlife radio antennas making sure the power lines don't damage the environment. They brag that their towers are darkened steel so they blend in, etc. From: Mary Wimmer [mailto:monwimmer@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 7:49 PM To: Grubb, Karen Subject: Re: Walker Machinery AD I have not seen PATH advertisements. On 10/5/08, Grubb, Karen <Karen.Grubb(a)fairmontstate.edu> wrote: So is PATH. From: Mary Wimmer [mailto:monwimmer@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 8:16 PM To: Jim Sconyers Cc: Michael Price; william.depaulo(a)gmail.com; sallywilts(a)yahoo.com; regina1936(a)verizon.net; matt_keller(a)tws.org; Grubb, Karen; freesource(a)cheat.org; jkotcon(a)wvu.edu; mdavis(a)hsc.wvu.edu; daves(a)labyrinth.net; bill.price(a)sierraclub.org; blittle(a)citynet.net Subject: Re: Walker Machinery AD Coal surely is spending a lot on TV advertising these days -- fancy ads that grab you at first until you realize where they are from -- turns my stomach! On 10/5/08, Jim Sconyers <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com> wrote: Bizarre would be an understatement! What are they smoking over there...??? Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Original Message ---- From: Michael Price <greyhawkwv(a)verizon.net> To: william.depaulo(a)gmail.com; sallywilts(a)yahoo.com; regina1936(a)verizon.net; matt_keller(a)tws.org; monwimmer(a)gmail.com; kgrubb(a)fairmontstate.edu; freesource(a)cheat.org; jim_scon(a)yahoo.com; jkotcon(a)wvu.edu; mdavis(a)hsc.wvu.edu; daves(a)labyrinth.net; bill.price(a)sierraclub.org; blittle(a)citynet.net Sent: Friday, October 3, 2008 8:39:52 PM Subject: Walker Machinery AD This is Walker Machinery's response to their Yes, Coal Clean, Carbon Neutral Coal ! mike YES, COAL. Clean, carbon neutral coal. Science and technology are reengineering coal to be clean and carbon neutral for the 21st Century. This goal and commitment can put thousands of West Virginians to WORK - meaningful and purposeful WORK that respects the environment and strives to diminish and eliminate all types of emissions that may be harmful. This reengineering is well on the path to providing clean, carbon neutral coal that provides meaningful WORK for researchers, scientists, utility technicians, natural resource workers, computer engineers, and yes, coal production ... all high-tech, high-wage WORK opportunities. This rising tide of clean coal will unquestionably lift the quality of life and multiply meaningful, purposeful WORK opportunities for ALL WEST VIRGINIANS irrespective of industry, professional, or consumer economic sectors. The evidence of this WORK commitment can be seen in the vast and urgent research by colleges, universities, private research, think tanks, and governmental entities. All are eager to make coal use clean and carbon neutral. Institutions like Marshall University, West Virginia University, as well as our neighbors at Virginia Tech, Penn State, and the University of Kentucky are expanding opportunities in clean energy and environmental sciences to provide purposeful WORK for their faculties and our students. Additionally, the National Energy Technology Laboratory in Morgantown, W.Va., works tirelessly and successfully to improve coal's continued viability. The overwhelming need for clean, carbon neutral coal in the 21st century will stimulate the migration of our sons and daughters back to West Virginia. That influx of human treasure re-ignites WORK opportunities, reunites families, and revives our state's economy causing a new revolution of infrastructure development and social awareness. While coal opponents selfishly ask West Virginians to "sit out" the nation's greatest energy boom and WORK opportunity of our lifetime, we find this unacceptable and unfair to working families. Furthermore, it is contrary to our mountaineer spirit that seeks to share our resources and work for the greater good of all our country. Coal, which represents 52% of America's electricity production, cannot simply be ignored. Going forward, it is imperative that West Virginians understand that clean, carbon neutral coal is paramount to energy, economic, and national security while providing a healthy and safe environment. Even the most rapid pace of alternative energy development, which we must all support, cannot save us from the present need for expanded and uninterrupted supply of our nation's energy. Clean coal technologies, utilizing integrated gasification and carbon capture and storage, provides honest WORK, a safe, healthy environment, and must be enthusiastically supported by informed and caring West Virginians. Building coal to liquid plants offer WORK of the highest purpose. By expanding WORK into transportation solutions, like coal-to-liquids, West Virginians can lead the nation to lower gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel prices. That puts money in the family budget. This can lessen our dependence on foreign oil through greater fuel diversity and competition ... hallmarks of a free market society. It will strengthen national security. It is important that West Virginians loudly sound the alarm to their leaders at local, state, and national levels to aggressively and generously fund Clean, Carbon Neutral Coal technologies that will KEEP WEST VIRGINIA WORKING. We must say it loud, proud, and often. Especially now, as our economy grows more fragile, West Virginia can ill-afford coal's opponents to deny us our honest day's WORK. It is troubling that coal's opponents, using our courts, have placed benthic macro-invertebrates (bugs) at a higher moral standing than the citizens of West Virginia who need lucrative, dependable WORK. In a desperate attempt to stop coal mining, coal's opponents have artfully and guilefully turned to the judiciary via utilizing the complexities and ambiguities of the Clean Water Act to present a very technical representation of our ecosystem. They present an argument that is extremely debatable among experts yet really defies common sense. It defies science and common sense, in that we are expected to believe, that as rock and dirt are moved to the dry ditches near the tops of mountains, that the benthic macro-invertebrates (bugs) will be destroyed, thus impacting the entire ecosystem and all life as we know it. The mining community, more than any other, is keenly aware of the ecological science involved in the benthic communities' importance in determining the health, structure, and function of streams including headwater. By law and regulation, they protect these relationships through mining design and mitigation. The rains fall and the rainwater flows over and throughout the mining areas perpetually and naturally as always. It is important to note that these creatures have lived and adapted here for millions and millions of years before man. They inhabit almost every square foot of the watersheds across this great globe, within and outside mined areas. This is hardly criteria for extinction or endangered species. Although metamorphosis times vary, (a lifecycle of an egg, nymph, and adult most often lasts less than a year, perhaps more, depending on the insect order), they quickly breed and die naturally sometimes within a day or two. They do not have house payments, car payments or student loans. In truth they quickly re-inhabit the reclaimed and often mined lands to repeat their biological destiny and breed in large quantities we can't imagine. If this logic of coal's opponents would carry forward by the courts, human beings could not build roads, homes, hospitals, schools, cities, or communities for fear of such an ecological Armageddon. As if it mattered, more bugs are killed overwhelmingly by car windshields or "bug spray" than mine sites. Are we on such a destructive path that a human being's right to WORK and moral standing is subordinate to a bug or anything we wish to relate as nature? Is man not part of nature and higher moral standing? Is this judicial perseverance by coal's opponents and subsequent manipulation what it has come to? As any truly informed person knows, an industry that is accused of covering streams that are not streams, with waste that is not waste, in valleys that are not valleys, with bugs having the moral equivalency of human beings in our court system, is distressing and disappointing. It appears that coal's opponents don't really want the public to know they have placed "bug" welfare above that of working West Virginians in Judge Chambers' court, just to stop mining and perpetuate an anti-corporate agenda. Amazingly, the judge agreed with coal's opponents. Sometimes it must be difficult to separate the twists and turns of flawed logic or judicial eloquence from just good common sense. It further makes no sense whatsoever to repeat this judicial "Groundhog Day" movie on mining over and over and over. That's why the Walker Machinery "bug" ads are causing such stir among the anti-coal crowd. It's so ridiculous that it required a "bug character" to do so. Hopefully, a curious public will search beyond the bug character to find out the truth, which has not been fully vetted in the media or by our silent government. The grim consequences and full gravity of this situation has yet to play out. If this case is not overturned on appeal, this state hasn't really seen hard times yet. It's a cruel blow to good people just wishing to WORK ... feeding their families, providing electricity, and national security for our country. Attacking the workers or their employers as enemies of the planet makes no sense at all. Anti-coal forces don't really care. Do you think coal's opponents will support clean carbon neutral coal? No, the anti-coal, anti-growth, anti-business, anti-work crowd won't do that either. They simply ask us to forfeit our paychecks. The coal industry seemingly gets no credit at all for the beautiful reclamation and the truly small footprint of mining across West Virginia's 15 million acres. Reclaiming the land with bushes, grasses, and now hardwood seedlings that will gobble up more carbon dioxide is actually a step toward becoming carbon neutral. Again, no credit. To learn more watch the History Channel's, "Life After People" or search www.history.com <http://www.history.com/> to get a sense of how nature rapidly reclaims her own. Though not meant to trivialize the industry's need for stewardship in any way, this media shows that man's activities are but a blip on a dynamic and ever-changing planet. Our mining activities and all other may become indistinguishable one day. But for now ... coal ... YES, COAL ...clean carbon neutral coal will WORK for West Virginia. Please support this meaningful and purposeful WORK as if our state depended on it ... because it does. Comments may be sent to: comments(a)walker-cat.com

1 0

Fwd: Longview updates
by James Kotcon 06 Oct '08

06 Oct '08

To the Sierra Club Energy committee: Any thoughts on what the articles below might mean? I am not sure what "mezzanine" financing is, or what this means for the future of Longview, but I would agree with Paula's comments "not a good time to be asking for financing". The article implies that "First reserve" now owns 90 % of Longview, does that mean Longview unloaded just in the nick of time? Who would we be dealing with if the plant actually goes on line in 2011? If so, in 2010, the non-profit funding from our air permit settlement comes in? JBK >>> Paula Hunt <pjhunt(a)xemaps.com> 10/5/2008 9:19 AM >>> Hi All, Two things: ********************** I found some photos of Longview... great shots http://good-times.webshots.com/album/565599401uSyMvK They are posted by a GenPower mechanical engineer (so his profile says). He must have a helicopter at his disposal... He posted them late August and last updated them late September. The caption below says, " Aerial Photos of Longview Power Plant and Force Drilling Work Site" What are they drilling Jarrett? Is it to stabilize the surface from undermining? They seem to have a lot of ponds onsite. ******************** The mezzanine financing for Longview is due soon (not a good time to ask for credit!): > Commitments Due In Longview Financing >- 10/03/2008 > >Commitments are coming due in Merrill Lynch's $250 million mezzanine >financing for Longview Power, owner of a 695 MW supercritical >pulverized coal plant under construction in Maidsville, W. Va. > >Ticket sizes were not specified for the debt, which will mature in >February 2015, according to deal trackers, who say the lead has >approached potential investors individually to judge the appetite of >each. Pricing is reportedly 10% fixed plus 4% payment-in-kind. One >deal tracker notes the lead also offered variable rate pricing that >would roughly amount to 10%, but most investors have wanted fixed. >Potential investors reportedly include ArcLight Capital Partners, >Fortress Investment Group, Harbert Power, LS Power, Trust Company of >the West and Union Bank of California. Officials at the firms either >declined comment or did not return calls. Calls to Merrill officials >were not returned. A spokeswoman for First Reserve Corp., which owns >90% of Longview, declined to comment or make an official available, >and calls to GenPower Holdings (10%) were not returned. > >The owners opted for the mezzanine financing after terminating an >auction for 49% of the company (PFR, 8/22). That auction came after >a $450 million mezzanine financing was put on hold last year to test >the waters of an auction. The project is set to come online in the >spring of 2011. It has a five-year PPA for 300 MW with PPL Energy >Plus and the remaining power will be sold into the western PJM market. - paula

3 2

FW: 2009 National Electric Transmission Congestion Study
by Grubb, Karen 02 Oct '08

02 Oct '08

-----Original Message----- From: nietcwebmaster(a)anl.gov [mailto:nietcwebmaster@anl.gov] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 4:45 PM To: Grubb, Karen Subject: 2009 National Electric Transmission Congestion Study ************************************************************ 2009 National Electric Transmission Congestion Study ************************************************************ IMPORTANT NOTE: REGISTRATION REQUIRED FOR 2009 STUDY! ***************************************************** You are receiving this e-mail because you subscribed to the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor e-mail notification list. To receive further e-mail announcements regarding the 2009 Congestion Study, you must visit the 2009 Congestion Study Web site at http://congestion09.anl.gov/index.cfm and subscribe anew for further e-mail notices by entering your e-mail address in the "Subscribe" box on any page on the Web site. The 2009 National Electric Transmission Congestion Study ******************************************************** The Federal Power Act, as modified by the Energy Policy Act of 2005, requires the Department of Energy (DOE) to complete a study of electric transmission congestion every three years. DOE issued the first "National Electric Transmission Congestion Study" (Congestion Study) in August 2006. The Department has now initiated preparations for the 2009 Congestion Study, and seeks comments on what publicly-available data and information should be considered, and what type of analysis should be performed, to identify and understand the significance and character of transmission congestion. See the 2009 Congestion Study Federal Register notice on the 2009 National Electric Transmission Congestion Study Web Site for more information. http://congestion09.anl.gov/documents/docs/FR_Notice_4_June_08.pdf Submitting Comments on the 2009 Congestion Study ************************************************ Persons interested in providing comments concerning the process and congestion metrics for the 2009 Congestion Study may submit written comments by mail, or submit them to DOE electronically using the online comment form on the 2009 Congestion Study Web site. Public comments on the 2009 National Electric Transmission Congestion Study submitted to date by mail, electronically, or at the 2009 Congestion Study workshops, are now available for downloading or browsing on the 2009 National Electric Transmission Congestion Study Web Site: http://congestion09.anl.gov/involve/searchcomment/index.cfm For More Information ******************** For more information about the 2009 Congestion Study, and related public involvement activities, visit the 2009 National Electric Transmission Congestion Study Web Site: http://congestion09.anl.gov/, or contact us by e-mail to: congestion09(a)anl.gov Forward This Message ******************** Please forward this message to any party you feel may be interested in the 2009 National Electric Transmission Congestion Study _________________CONTACTS/SUBSCRIPTIONS_____________________ FEEDBACK -------- To submit feedback, contact the Congestion Study webmaster at congestion09(a)anl.gov PRIVACY POLICY -------------- Our online privacy policy is at: http://www.energy.gov/privacy.htm. SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE --------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe to the Congestion Study e-mail service, go to the following URL: http://congestion09.anl.gov/email/index.cfm. If the above URL is not enabled as a link, please copy it into your browser window to access our E-Mail Services Page. ------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

INCLUDE JESSE
by Regina Hendrix 02 Oct '08

02 Oct '08

In case some of you didn't get this.... Please take a moment and E-Mail these people urging them to include Jesse in this debate which is taking place on the public airways. Regina

1 0

Re: [EC] Fwd: DeWeese Comments
by Jim Sconyers 26 Sep '08

26 Sep '08

Let's talk to them ... can't hurt, can it? Especially with the PA decision(s) in hand. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Original Message ---- From: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> To: ec(a)osenergy.org Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 11:17:11 AM Subject: [EC] Fwd: DeWeese Comments Here is what the Majority Leader of the WV House of Representatives said about TrAILCo. Can we get WV legislators to do something similar? JBK >>> Letty Butcher <multiflora123(a)yahoo.com> 9/25/2008 10:51 PM >>> http://stopaptrail.org/images/DeWeese_Reply_to_Exceptions.pdf _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

2 1

Re: [EC] Fw: TrailCo NMF revised
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 26 Sep '08

26 Sep '08

Holly There has been no decision by the PSC on our Petition for Reconsideration, and the thirty days for an appeal has not yet begun to run. I have attached seven documents relating to the FOIA requests. The first three documents relate to the request to the PSC and consist of: (1) Sierra's April 17 2008 FOIA request, (2) the PSC Commissioners' May 1, 2008 Vaughn index of records withheld by the Commissioners themselves, and (3) the PSC General Counsel's May 2, 2008 transmission of the PSC documents (1128 from staff) and the Vaughn Index from the Commissioners. The last four documents all relate to the FOIA request to Gov Manchin: (4) is the FOIA request itself, (5) is the Governor's initial response, (6) is our letter explaining is some detail the basis for our request for a Vaughn index, and (7) is the Gov's acknowledgement of the request for a Vaughn statement. I believe we should file the suit in both instances. The case against the Governor is straight forward -- a Vaughn statement is necessary to sustain his burden of proof. The PSC case over the documents withheld pursuant to the Vaughn index is obviously harder. The question is not whether they have concealed documents which are not listed on the index. The question is whether the assertion of the claims of exemption in the index are valid, and even if so, whether there are nonetheless reasonably segregable materials that can be released. There is never any certainty in a challenge to an assertion of exemptions, but the failure to seek in camera review by a Court basically licenses the respondent to take aggressive and unwarranted license with limited exemptions. Especially when tied to the duty to segregate exempt from non-exempt, the challenge is warranted. Please call if there are any further questions. Bil On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 12:51 PM, <Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org> wrote: > > Hi Bill, > > Just making sure I didn't miss your message about TrailCo. I haven't > worked on getting authorization for the PUC appeal or the two FOIA cases > because I am waiting for your responses to my questions regarding the FOIA > issues. I want to be sure that the 30-day timer hasn't started on our > appeal of the PUC decision. Did they rule on our motion for reconsideration > yet? > > Holly > > Holly Bressett > Environmental Law Fellow > Sierra Club Environmental Law Program > 85 Second St., 2nd Floor > San Francisco, CA 94105 > (415) 977-5646 (phone) > (415) 977-5793 (fax) > > > *"William V. DePaulo, Esq." <william.depaulo(a)gmail.com>* > > 09/10/2008 12:12 PM > To > Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org > cc > Subject > Re: Fw: TrailCo NMF revised > > > > > Holly > > I am out of town until next Wed and will try to get back to you then with > more detail on the FOIA requests. > > Bill > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:21 AM, <*Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org*<Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org>> > wrote: > > Hi Bill, > > I've been holding off on TrailCo in anticipation of your answers to my > questions below. Jim told me you were at the DNC so this may have gotten > buried in your inbox. Please get back to me when you can. Thanks, > > Holly > > Holly Bressett > Environmental Law Fellow > Sierra Club Environmental Law Program > 85 Second St., 2nd Floor > San Francisco, CA 94105 > (415) 977-5646 (phone) > (415) 977-5793 (fax) > ----- Forwarded by Holly Bressett/Sierraclub on 09/10/2008 09:21 AM ----- > > *Holly Bressett/Sierraclub* > > 08/27/2008 11:00 AM > > To > "William V. DePaulo, Esq." <*william.depaulo(a)gmail.com*<william.depaulo(a)gmail.com> > > cc > "Jim Sconyers" <*jim_scon(a)yahoo.com* <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com>> Subject > Re: Fw: TrailCo NMF revised*Link*<Notes:///882573400081B039/836E2FFC0D1E63358825749F007855E9/B9F0E5BA5FCFAF44882574AC007FA33D> > > > > > > Hi Bill, > > I understand the claim that the Governor's office should have provided a > Vauhgn index but the claim against the commission seems like a stretch. Did > the index identify and describe the documents? Of course, FOIA is not > foolproof but in my experience, it seems like there is nothing else to get > unless we know of specific documents that were witheld and not put on the > index. If you could elaborate on your thinking that would help me > understand what the claim is. If you have statutory cites or case law that > might be best. > > Is your plan to file the FOIA cases right away and then wait for the > decision on reconsideration before filing in state court? When is the > soonest you would want to file the FOIA requests. Sorry, I'm totally > swamped right now and just trying to prioritize things. Let me know if this > should go to the top of my list! > > Holly > > Holly Bressett > Environmental Law Fellow > Sierra Club Environmental Law Program > 85 Second St., 2nd Floor > San Francisco, CA 94105 > (415) 977-5646 (phone) > (415) 977-5793 (fax) > > *"William V. DePaulo, Esq." <**william.depaulo(a)gmail.com*<william.depaulo(a)gmail.com> > *>* > > 08/21/2008 04:13 PM > > To > *Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org* <Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org>, "Jim > Sconyers" <*jim_scon(a)yahoo.com* <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com>>, "Jim Kotcon" <* > jkotcon(a)wvu.edu* <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu>>, "Barbara Fallon" <* > brbr_fallon(a)yahoo.com* <brbr_fallon(a)yahoo.com>>, "WV Chapter Energy > Committee" <*EC(a)osenergy.org* <EC(a)osenergy.org>> cc > Subject > Re: Fw: TrailCo NMF revised > > > > > > > Holly > > Both FOIA requests were filed under the state FOIA which is almost a > verbatim reproduction of the federal statute. In short, we do not have an > option to sue anywhere except in state court. > > PSC - requested all documents pertaining to the April 15, 2008 Joint > Stipulation -- the document in which PSC Staff withdrew its opposition in > exchange for a laundry list of financial and other incentives. > > PSC Staff produced all documents (1100+) responsive to request, as did CAD > (700+). > > The Commissioners produced a relatively small number of documents and > issued a Vaughn index for the balance. Without seeing the docs it is > impossible to assess whether the exemptions asserted -- deliberative > privilege for internal communications -- is validly asserted. > > GOVERNOR - requested ALL documents pertaining to TrAILCo proposal, not > merely those relating to April 15 Joint Stip. Governor produced 1100+ > documents, most relating to tax he wants to impose on the transmission line > if and when built. Importantly, the Gov office refused to produce a Vaughn > index. Without such an index they cannot sustain their burden of proof, as > all documents are presumed non-exempt unless and until an exemption is > asserted and substantiated by an index. > > PSC Appeal -- far and away the biggest matter the PSC did not address was > CO2 emissions. The PSC took the position that the proposed transmission > line was "electron neutral," i.e., that the line didn't "know" where the > moving electron originated. That, of course, is technically true. In West > Virginia it is also totally specious because 97% of the state's electric > energy is generated from coal. And the PSC's August 1 order itself relied > on the economic justification associated with 4 billion dollars of > construction costs for four (4) new IGCC coal plants now on the drawing > boards. > > The PSC also totally ignored the fact that all of the purported economic > benefits associated with the increased use of coal will be converted to > economic leg weights when the impact of a now certain cap and trade system > (or carbon tax of some sort) is adopted next year. > > I want to emphasize that we don't have any slack time on the appeal or > preparation for PATH. TrAILCo's transcript is 3,000 pages long. I lived > thru it live but I still need to serve up the case to the Supreme Court, > because the PSC has intentionally buried all of the evidence in a 183-page > behemoth of a decision issued on August 1. We need to go now. > > Please let me know if you need any additional information. > > Bill > > On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 1:40 PM, <*Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org*<Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org>> > wrote: > > Thanks, Bill. I will need some more information regarding the FOIA > appeals. For example, what did you request and what did you receive and > what was witheld (or can you even tell what was witheld)? Did the agencies > assert any privileges or exemptions? If so, were they lawfully invoked or > do you believe the exemptions are being abused. Are we actually bringing > suit under FOIA, or the state's public records law. If it is FOIA, wouldn't > you want to file in federal court? As for the appeal of the PSC's decision, > you make note that the environmental impacts were not properly considered. > Could you elaborate? What was considered, what was not, and what law are > you relying on? > > Jim, at this point, I am still investigating the legal claims (as you can > see above). I didn't get the sense that we needed immediate approval since > the PSC's decision is not even final yet, and when it becomes final, we have > 30 days. If there is a reason to file sooner, please let me know. It is my > understanding that you are going to be talking with Aaron Isherwood about > how the National Coal Campaign may be able to help with this and the PATH > transmission line. I'll follow up with him if it impacts the Supreme Court > appeal and/or the FOIA appeals. Thanks to you both, > > Holly > > Holly Bressett > Environmental Law Fellow > Sierra Club Environmental Law Program > 85 Second St., 2nd Floor > San Francisco, CA 94105 > (415) 977-5646 (phone) > (415) 977-5793 (fax) > > *"William V. DePaulo, Esq." <**william.depaulo(a)gmail.com*<william.depaulo(a)gmail.com> > *>* > > 08/21/2008 10:01 AM > > To > *Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org* <Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org> cc > "Jim Sconyers" <*jim_scon(a)yahoo.com* <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com>> Subject > Re: Fw: TrailCo NMF revised > > > > > > > > > Holly > > Here is a revised NMF which I hope is responsive to your requests. Please > let me know if you have any additional questions or topics you'd like > fleshed out in more detail. > > All the best, > > Bill > > > > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 3:43 PM, <*Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org*<Holly.Bressett(a)sierraclub.org>> > wrote: > > Hi Bill, > > Jim has attached the new matter form and I'm hoping you can supplement it > with our legal strategy. I'm confused about the FOIA appeals and the > Supreme Court appeal so I was hoping you could separate everything and give > me a clear description of the legal claims. If you are anticipating actual > FOIA lawsuits in conjunction with all of this let me know, it may make sense > to do one authorization for all the legal challenges. Thanks, > > Holly > > Holly Bressett > Environmental Law Fellow > Sierra Club Environmental Law Program > 85 Second St., 2nd Floor > San Francisco, CA 94105 > (415) 977-5646 (phone) > (415) 977-5793 (fax) > ----- Forwarded by Holly Bressett/Sierraclub on 08/20/2008 11:51 AM ----- > > *Jim Sconyers <**jim_scon(a)yahoo.com* <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com>*>* > > 08/14/2008 07:41 AM > > To > Holly Bressett <*holly.bressett(a)sierraclub.org*<holly.bressett(a)sierraclub.org> > > cc > aaron isherwood <*aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org*<aaron.isherwood(a)sierraclub.org> > > Subject > TrailCo NMF revised > > > > > > > > > > > Here is a revised version of our TrailCo powerline NMF. It still needs to > go to our ExCom for certain approval. > > Jim Sconyers* > **jim_scon(a)yahoo.com* <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com> > 603.969.6712 > > Remember: Mother Nature bats last. > > > > > -- > 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* <william.depaulo(a)gmail.com>* > **www.passeggiata.com* <http://www.passeggiata.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* <william.depaulo(a)gmail.com>* > **www.passeggiata.com* <http://www.passeggiata.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* <william.depaulo(a)gmail.com>* > **www.passeggiata.com* <http://www.passeggiata.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

1 0

Fwd: DeWeese Comments
by James Kotcon 26 Sep '08

26 Sep '08

Here is what the Majority Leader of the WV House of Representatives said about TrAILCo. Can we get WV legislators to do something similar? JBK >>> Letty Butcher <multiflora123(a)yahoo.com> 9/25/2008 10:51 PM >>> http://stopaptrail.org/images/DeWeese_Reply_to_Exceptions.pdf

1 0

Re: [EC] Fwd: [MVCAC] Trail Is Dead
by Jim Sconyers 25 Sep '08

25 Sep '08

below Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Original Message ---- From: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> To: ec(a)osenergy.org Cc: Frank Young <fyoung(a)wvhighlands.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 4:16:00 PM Subject: [EC] Fwd: [MVCAC] Trail Is Dead I certainly don't think the title is accurate. Perhaps a better title would be: "Yet another backroom deal to sell out West Virginia". I have not seen the deal, but it seems to me that Allegheny has presented yet another "offer" of using our own money to buy us off, while they still make a profit at our expense. ...and still build it through West Virginia. JBK >>> "Julieann F. Wozniak" <jwozniak(a)windstream.net> 9/23/2008 10:04 AM >>> >Power line plan killed >Allegheny Energy won't put it through Greene, Washington >Tuesday, September 23, 2008 >By Janice Crompton, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette > >Allegheny Energy is abandoning plans for a high-voltage line through Washington and Greene counties, according to the terms of a settlement agreement reached yesterday. > >The agreement between the Greensburg-based utility and Greene County officials halts plans for a controversial 37-mile, 500-kilovolt power line from North Strabane in Washington County, to Dunkard, Greene County. > >In exchange, Greene County commissioners have agreed to support a companion project which includes a new electric substation and a 1.2-mile transmission line from Greene County to West Virginia, where the line would continue 240 miles into Virginia. > >West Virginia has approved the $1 billion project, and Virginia is expected to do so as well. > >Terms of the agreement, hammered out last week, include a payment of $750,000 to Greene County and other provisions from the company, which sought a compromise after two state Public Utility Commission judges recommended against every phase of the proposal due to lack of need and other considerations. > >The agreement may end more than 18 months of bitter feuding that pitted property owners and officials against Allegheny Energy. The terms of the deal are contingent on final project approval by the PUC before Feb. 16, 2009. > >Along with the financial settlement to Greene County, the company has agreed to return easements to the dozens of property owners in both counties who would have been affected by the line, many of whom sued the company in recent months, claiming that the easements, obtained decades ago, were no longer valid. > >The agreement leaves out Washington County officials, who say they were presented with the pact on Friday, then asked to approve it by yesterday. > >Washington County commissioners Larry Maggi and J. Bracken Burns said they were left out of what they call the "backroom deal" and won't support the agreement, although they, too, were offered $750,000 for Washington County. > >They wonder why their counterparts in Greene County have so readily approved the agreement while the PUC judges harshly criticized the plan, calling the 1.2-mile segment in Greene County a profit-driven attempt to ship "cheaper coal-fired generation" along an "energy superhighway" to the east. The judges said they also saw no need for the 36-mile Pennsylvania segment of the line. With language like that, it's unclear whether the PUC will honor the settlement agreement. > >The commission will review the agreement to determine if it's in the public interest, said spokeswoman Jennifer Kocher. > >"It didn't smell right -- the whole deal," said Mr. Maggi, who said signing the agreement would have nullified the argument that the power line isn't needed either regionally or locally. > >"The agreement in essence says that the argument we've advanced for the past two years is wrong," Mr. Burns said. > >Allegheny Energy has said the Pennsylvania portion of the project is needed to avoid local power interruptions in the next few years, but a grass-roots citizens' group and other property owners were able to convince the PUC judges that it wasn't so. > >Other terms of the agreement require Greene County and other local officials to help form a study group to identify potential new alternatives to the high-voltage line, such as demand-side management, energy efficiency programs and physical upgrades to existing lines, including new substations, transmission infrastructure, and possibly up to 10 miles of new 500-kilovolt lines in Washington County. There would be no new lines in Greene County. > >The company also has agreed not to seek federal intervention for the project if the PUC denies its application. According to the Energy Act of 2005, the federal government has backstop authority to approve transmission projects even if they are denied by states. > >Members of the grass-roots Energy Conservation Council of Pennsylvania said they are still reviewing the agreement, of which they also were not a part. > >They have questioned the wisdom of entering into such a pact after the PUC judges gave them good reason to hope that the company's application would be denied. The five-member PUC panel may or may not adopt the recommendations of the judges. > >Mr. Burns said he saw nothing in the agreement that would preclude the company from proposing different high-voltage lines in Washington County. Under such circumstances, it's unfair to taxpayers to enter into such an agreement, he said. > >"My values aren't negotiable and my principles don't have a price tag," he said. >Janice Crompton can be reached at jcrompton(a)post-gazette.com or 724-223-0156. >First published on September 23, 2008 at 12:00 am _______________________________________________ MVCAC mailing list MVCAC(a)cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

1 0

Re: [EC] Fwd: [MVCAC] Trail Is Dead
by Jim Sconyers 25 Sep '08

25 Sep '08

Ditto me! Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Original Message ---- From: Beth Little <blittle(a)citynet.net> To: Jonathan Rosenbaum <freesource(a)cheat.org>; Energy Committee <ec(a)osenergy.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 2:25:22 PM Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: [MVCAC] Trail Is Dead Doesn't sound dead to me; just detoured a little. -----Original Message----- From: ec-bounces(a)osenergy.org [mailto:ec-bounces@osenergy.org]On Behalf Of Jonathan Rosenbaum Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 2:03 PM To: Energy Committee Subject: [EC] Fwd: [MVCAC] Trail Is Dead http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08267/914268-58.stm _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

1 0

Fwd: [MVCAC] Trail Is Dead
by James Kotcon 23 Sep '08

23 Sep '08

I certainly don't think the title is accurate. Perhaps a better title would be: "Yet another backroom deal to sell out West Virginia". I have not seen the deal, but it seems to me that Allegheny has presented yet another "offer" of using our own money to buy us off, while they still make a profit at our expense. JBK >>> "Julieann F. Wozniak" <jwozniak(a)windstream.net> 9/23/2008 10:04 AM >>> >Power line plan killed >Allegheny Energy won't put it through Greene, Washington >Tuesday, September 23, 2008 >By Janice Crompton, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette > >Allegheny Energy is abandoning plans for a high-voltage line through Washington and Greene counties, according to the terms of a settlement agreement reached yesterday. > >The agreement between the Greensburg-based utility and Greene County officials halts plans for a controversial 37-mile, 500-kilovolt power line from North Strabane in Washington County, to Dunkard, Greene County. > >In exchange, Greene County commissioners have agreed to support a companion project which includes a new electric substation and a 1.2-mile transmission line from Greene County to West Virginia, where the line would continue 240 miles into Virginia. > >West Virginia has approved the $1 billion project, and Virginia is expected to do so as well. > >Terms of the agreement, hammered out last week, include a payment of $750,000 to Greene County and other provisions from the company, which sought a compromise after two state Public Utility Commission judges recommended against every phase of the proposal due to lack of need and other considerations. > >The agreement may end more than 18 months of bitter feuding that pitted property owners and officials against Allegheny Energy. The terms of the deal are contingent on final project approval by the PUC before Feb. 16, 2009. > >Along with the financial settlement to Greene County, the company has agreed to return easements to the dozens of property owners in both counties who would have been affected by the line, many of whom sued the company in recent months, claiming that the easements, obtained decades ago, were no longer valid. > >The agreement leaves out Washington County officials, who say they were presented with the pact on Friday, then asked to approve it by yesterday. > >Washington County commissioners Larry Maggi and J. Bracken Burns said they were left out of what they call the "backroom deal" and won't support the agreement, although they, too, were offered $750,000 for Washington County. > >They wonder why their counterparts in Greene County have so readily approved the agreement while the PUC judges harshly criticized the plan, calling the 1.2-mile segment in Greene County a profit-driven attempt to ship "cheaper coal-fired generation" along an "energy superhighway" to the east. The judges said they also saw no need for the 36-mile Pennsylvania segment of the line. With language like that, it's unclear whether the PUC will honor the settlement agreement. > >The commission will review the agreement to determine if it's in the public interest, said spokeswoman Jennifer Kocher. > >"It didn't smell right -- the whole deal," said Mr. Maggi, who said signing the agreement would have nullified the argument that the power line isn't needed either regionally or locally. > >"The agreement in essence says that the argument we've advanced for the past two years is wrong," Mr. Burns said. > >Allegheny Energy has said the Pennsylvania portion of the project is needed to avoid local power interruptions in the next few years, but a grass-roots citizens' group and other property owners were able to convince the PUC judges that it wasn't so. > >Other terms of the agreement require Greene County and other local officials to help form a study group to identify potential new alternatives to the high-voltage line, such as demand-side management, energy efficiency programs and physical upgrades to existing lines, including new substations, transmission infrastructure, and possibly up to 10 miles of new 500-kilovolt lines in Washington County. There would be no new lines in Greene County. > >The company also has agreed not to seek federal intervention for the project if the PUC denies its application. According to the Energy Act of 2005, the federal government has backstop authority to approve transmission projects even if they are denied by states. > >Members of the grass-roots Energy Conservation Council of Pennsylvania said they are still reviewing the agreement, of which they also were not a part. > >They have questioned the wisdom of entering into such a pact after the PUC judges gave them good reason to hope that the company's application would be denied. The five-member PUC panel may or may not adopt the recommendations of the judges. > >Mr. Burns said he saw nothing in the agreement that would preclude the company from proposing different high-voltage lines in Washington County. Under such circumstances, it's unfair to taxpayers to enter into such an agreement, he said. > >"My values aren't negotiable and my principles don't have a price tag," he said. >Janice Crompton can be reached at jcrompton(a)post-gazette.com or 724-223-0156. >First published on September 23, 2008 at 12:00 am _______________________________________________ MVCAC mailing list MVCAC(a)cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/mvcac

1 0

Fwd: [MVCAC] Trail Is Dead
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 23 Sep '08

23 Sep '08

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08267/914268-58.stm

2 2

SCE to Patent Advanced Metering
by Duane330＠aol.com 18 Sep '08

18 Sep '08

GRIDWISE NEWS. Philip Bane, September 11, 2008. Utility Attempts to Patent Advanced Metering _http://www.smartgridnews.com/artman/publish/industry/Utility_Attempts_to_P… nt_Advanced_Metering.html_ (http://www.smartgridnews.com/artman/publish/industry/Utility_Attempts_to_Pa…) In a move that could have worldwide repercussions, one of North America’s largest utilities has filed to obtain U.S. patent rights to broad uses of an advanced metering infrastructure. As you will read, Southern California Edison (SCE) has the best of intentions. Even so, we believe the move may cause some confusion and consternation. We are publishing this early warning to alert you to key points: * What does the patent cover? * What is SCE’s intent? * What are the patent issues? * What are the business issues for utilities and vendors? Note: SCE will hold an industry Web conference September 19th to discuss the pending AMI Use Case patent and proposed non-exclusive worldwide royalty free license that has been shared with the industry for comment. Watch for an SCE press release announcing the Webinar. SCE’s AMI Use Case Patent Filing The United States Patent & Trademark Office defines a patent as a property right granted by the government “to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling the invention throughout the United States or importing the invention into the United States” for a limited time in exchange for public disclosure of the invention when the patent is granted. The SCE application specifies “a method for communicating between a utility and individual customer location ...via the Internet or via an advanced utility meter.” SCE is attempting a business methods patent covering the way the technology is used (not the underlying technology itself). It broadly covers the business use of any and every AMI technology - regardless of the communications platform – and extends to grid operations. We recommend a thorough reading of SCE’s claims. (See link below.) SCE’s Motive and Intent SCE Vice President Paul De Martini is the head of SCE’s Advanced Technologies Group and one of the inventors named in the patent filing. (He and the other inventors have assigned all rights to SCE.) In an exclusive SGN interview, he explained SCE’s intent. The primary goal, says De Martini, is to ensure SCE and the utility industry can freely use AMI systems to empower customers to manage their energy and to improve operational efficiency. SCE decided to file a business methods patent as a defensive measure. SCE and other utilities have previously been subjected to costly claims for patent infringement on non-AMI technology. SCE decided to file the AMI patent to proactively preclude others from claiming that SCE was violating their technology. If it gains a patent, SCE intends extend that protection to the rest of the industry by offering a worldwide nonexclusive royalty-free license to anyone interested. SCE is working with EPRI, UtilityAMI and others associations to vet the license terms. De Martini recently used an EPRI meeting to brief a group of utilities on his patent and licensing plans. According to him and other attendees, those utilities were generally receptive to SCE’s draft terms. EPRI is leading an effort to develop a Smart Grid Open Source Repository as a way to share additional use cases with the industry (over and above those covered by the patent application). Patent Issues We certainly understand SCE’s concerns. The high-tech industry has many skilled, professional and ethical patent professionals. It also has a dark side of ugly patent infringement lawsuits. Firms have been formed solely to buy up obscure patents, then to extort payments from big companies under threat of lawsuit. Even if a company chooses to pay a license fee to avoid the cost of litigation, it opens itself (and the rest of the industry) to future specious claims of technology infringement. As many know, SCE has been a leader in applying technology to utility infrastructure. But applying is very different from inventing or discovering. With this filing, SCE is taking the position that it invented certain uses for an AMI system, such as the ability to use a home area network interface in a meter to send energy information to customers. The patent examiners will now have to determine if that is a valid claim. SGN is not taking a position for or against SCE’s decision to seek a patent, but we are warning that the development of intellectual property in the emerging Smart Grid industry will be controversial and contentious, given that it addresses the heart of a market worth many billions over the next decade. Business Issues If SCE is successful, the entire industry will secure the right to use AMI in the manner claimed, since SCE is willing to grant irrevocable royalty free licenses. But utilities and vendors will have to assess whether a license from SCE will provide sufficient safety. First, they must assess if they can live with SCE’s license terms. If the license terms are satisfactory, they must next determine if there are other areas still unprotected. SCE’s patent application only addresses certain uses for AMI. The situation will be especially problematic for vendors, who must determine what SCE’s patent will mean to their own intellectual property claims. With Wealth Comes Pirates SGN has broadcast the unrivaled economic opportunity for utilities and Smart Grid vendors. (See the link below to How Electronomics Will Make Utility Pros Rich). However, with any economic opportunity comes risk. Although SCE has apparently acted with the best of intentions, its filing highlights the pitfalls facing many utilities and Smart Grid vendors. As SGN highlighted recently in the article The Dangers of Meter Data, North American utilities are dangerously naïve about the upcoming upheaval from data overload, data privacy and lack of security. And about the dangers from unscrupulous patent pirates. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you for or against SCE’s patent claims? _Current SCE Draft License_ (http://www.sce.com/PowerandEnvironment/smartconnect/open-innovation/use-cas…) _USPTO Web site for searching patent applications_ (http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html) (Input Patent Application Number 20080177678) _How Electronomics Will Make Utility Pros Rich_ (http://www.smartgridnews.com/artman/publish/industry/How_Electronomics_Will…) _The Dangers of Meter Data_ (http://www.smartgridnews.com/artman/pu blish/industry/The_Dangers_of_Meter_Data_Part_1.html) **************Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators. (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall00000001)

1 0

Historic announcement, historic alliance
by Duane330＠aol.com 18 Sep '08

18 Sep '08

GE, Google Boost Efforts For Improved Power Grid By _JEFFREY BALL_ (http://online.wsj.com/search/search_center.html?KEYWORDS=JEFFREY+BALL&ARTIC…) , _PAUL GLADER_ (http://online.wsj.com/search/search_center.html?KEYWORDS=PAUL+GLADER&ARTICL… SER=bylineAND) and _JESSICA E. VASCELLARO_ (http://online.wsj.com/search/search_center.html?KEYWORDS=JESSICA+E.+VASCELL… AND) Wall Street Journal, September 18, 2008. _General Electric_ (http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?symbol=GE) Co. and _Google_ (http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?symbol=goog) Inc. said they will jointly ramp up their efforts to prod the U.S. government to upgrade the nation's electrical-transmission lines so that the grid can better accommodate more renewable energy. Both companies sell technology that would benefit from an improved grid. GE has built one of the world's biggest wind-turbine businesses over the past few years, and Google makes computer software it says could help facilitate the introduction of more renewable energy to the U.S. grid. The announcement comes as Congress is considering separate legislation that would open new areas in the U.S. to oil drilling and renew federal tax credits for wind and solar energy that are due to expire at the end of the year. GE Chief Executive Jeffrey Immelt and Google CEO Eric Schmidt called on Congress to continue the renewable-energy tax credits. Wind energy was the second-biggest source of new electrical capacity in the U.S. last year, behind only natural gas, according to the American Wind Energy Association, a trade group. Still, wind power provides only about 1% of total U.S. electricity. Taking into account the benefit of the tax credit, the per-kilowatt-hour cost of wind energy has dropped over the past five years from about 15 cents to about eight cents, Mr. Immelt said, adding: "That makes wind very competitive with coal." But the tax credits have been short term, requiring Congress to renew them frequently. That has led to a boom-and-bust cycle in the wind industry that advocates say has hampered greater growth. Mr. Immelt has largely staked his legacy on GE's clean-energy efforts, a push the company calls "Ecomagination." The company has said revenue from that effort will grow to $25 billion in 2010, up from $6 billion in 2004, with products ranging from hybrid locomotives to wind turbines. Google hopes renewable energy can help it lower the costs of running its data centers, one of its greatest expenses. To that end, the Internet search giant has invested tens of millions of dollars in wind and other renewable-energy technologies. Last year, the company said it would invest hundreds of millions of dollars from its corporate and nonprofit arms in businesses working toward generating cheaper electricity. Beyond the tax credits, Messrs. Immelt and Schmidt said their companies will work together to lobby for government policies to expand the electrical grid to accommodate more renewable energy. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google, GE to work together on green energy _By Elise Ackerman, San Jose Mercury News_ (mailto:eackerman@mercurynews.com?subject=San Jose Mercury News: Google, GE to work together on green energy) Article Launched: 09/18/2008 08:02:46 AM PDT Google and General Electric announced Wednesday that they would work together to push the development of renewable energy. The companies said they would team up to lobby the federal government to modernize the electrical grid and collaborate in the development of technologies for plug-in vehicles and geothermal energy. "We are trying to make renewable energy cheaper than coal energy," Google co-founder Larry Page said at a news conference Wednesday afternoon. The partnership was unveiled at Google's annual Zeitgeist conference, a two-day think-fest where Google's business partners are invited to Mountain View to discuss global issues with leaders such as former vice president Al Gore and Mexican businessman Carlos Slim, as well as celebrities including Leonardo DiCaprio and Forest Whitaker. Against a backdrop of continued financial turmoil, Google's leaders said their business was in good shape and unlikely to experience a direct impact from the current crisis. "The company has a large amount of cash in very boring investments," Chief Executive Eric Schmidt told reporters. As of June 30, Google had $16 billion in cash and securities and other current assets. Schmidt said Google plans to move ahead with a previously announced deal to provide search-advertising services to Yahoo, despite scrutiny by regulators in the United States and Europe. Schmidt said that his company had anticipated there would be objections to the deal, and that it is carefully structured to comply with antitrust regulations. "We have probably not explained it well enough," he said. Advertisers have expressed concern that the pact would lead to an increase in the cost of advertising brokered by Google. Page pointed out that the price of advertising is not set by Yahoo or Google but in an auction where advertisers decide what an ad is worth to them. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< **************Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators. (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall00000001)

1 0

Re: [EC] Fw: Allegheny Energy Files Proposal on Pennsylvania Transmission Project
by Jim Sconyers 12 Sep '08

12 Sep '08

Yes - why not both? Good letter now, more legalistic response soon. Becoming obvious that getting TrailCo to the WV line is critical to the whole proposal. Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 Remember: Mother Nature bats last. ----- Original Message ---- From: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> To: ec(a)osenergy.org Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 12:28:43 PM Subject: [EC] Fw: Allegheny Energy Files Proposal on Pennsylvania Transmission Project Bill, et al. I think we should file a response in PA to let them know that we oppose TrAILCo and their proposed approval of the 1.2-mile segment between the 502 Junction and the WV State Line. We have filed appeals of the WV certificate approval, and a premature approval of the PA segment would bias consideration of our appeals. Further, it would be useful to fully document TrAILCo's behind-the-scenes negotiations and tactics, and their efforts to cut some opponents out of the process, while buying off others with legalized bribes (using ratepayers money to do it), as happened here. I can draft a letter to that effect, if you think it is useful. Alternatively, a formal legal response might be more appropriate. Whaddya Tink? JBK >>> Letty Butcher <multiflora123(a)yahoo.com> 9/11/2008 9:20 AM >>> --- On Wed, 9/10/08, Wojtowicz, Ralph <wojtowicz(a)metsci.com> wrote: From: Wojtowicz, Ralph <wojtowicz(a)metsci.com> Subject: Allegheny Energy Files Proposal on Pennsylvania Transmission Project To: "Wojtowicz, Ralph" <wojtowicz(a)metsci.com>, cesunlight(a)earthlink.net, multiflora123(a)yahoo.com, roecalvert(a)hughes.net, michael(a)troutdesign.com, billgolemon(a)frontiernet.net, bgkessinger(a)comcast.net, kward(a)wvgazette.com, news(a)hampshirereview.com, news(a)moorefieldexaminer.com, news(a)grantcountypress.com, WVBiker98(a)aol.com Cc: mpisciotta(a)citynet.net, bwest(a)pecva.org, thomas(a)theshepherdstownobserver.com, cesunlight(a)earthlink.net, news(a)morganmessenger.com, news(a)dominionpost.com, newsroom(a)therepublicannes.com Date: Wednesday, September 10, 2008, 7:45 PM Please forward. Allegheny Energy Files Proposal on Pennsylvania Transmission Project GREENSBURG, Pa.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 10, 2008--Allegheny Energy, Inc. (NYSE:AYE) announced today that its Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Company (TrAILCo) subsidiary filed a motion with the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission to defer any decision on a portion of its proposed transmission line project, the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line. The request will allow the company to pursue a more collaborative process to explore whether there are new and creative alternatives to the proposed 36-mile portion of the 500 kilovolt line in Greene and Washington counties and related facilities. The company's motion also requests that the Commission timely approve a 1.2 mile section of 500 kilovolt line extending from the West Virginia border to a new substation in Greene County, Pennsylvania known as 502 Junction. This portion of the project addresses critical reliability concerns that could adversely impact the mid-Atlantic region, including Pennsylvania electric customers, as early as 2011. The motion is intended to be considered in conjunction with exceptions filed today by TrAILCo in response to two Administrative Law Judges' recent recommendation that the company's application be denied in Pennsylvania. In its exceptions, TrAILCo also explicitly asks the Commission to reverse the recommended decision of the Judges and approve the 1.2 mile segment between the West Virginia state line and 502 Junction. _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC