- EC - lists.cheatlakeclear.org

Re: [EC] Transmission tax
by Grubb, Karen 29 May '08

29 May '08

I had a call from a reporters about this (Walt Williams of the WV State Journal). I talked to him and Bill and gave Walt Bill's phone number. I also received an email from Emily Corio asking for information, and I gave her Bill's and Jim's email. I did not know about Jim Ellars or why we wanted him to take the stand. Hi Karen, I found your name on a Sierra Club Web page about the proposed Allegheny Power transmission line. I think the WV Sierra Club is an intervenor in this case, and I'm wondering if I can get some information about the Club's position and intentions for the hearing on the joint stipulation agreement this Friday. I understand that the WV Sierra Club wanted to Jim Ellars to take the stand Friday but that was rejected. Why Ellars and what now? Thanks, Emily Corio Senior Producer West Virginia Public Broadcasting Morgantown, WV 26508 (304) 284-1459 (o) (304) 284-1454 (f) ecorio(a)wvpubcast.org ________________________________ From: ec-bounces(a)osenergy.org [mailto:ec-bounces@osenergy.org] On Behalf Of Jim Sconyers Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 11:37 AM To: James Kotcon; william.depaulo(a)gmail.com; ec(a)osenergy.org Subject: Re: [EC] Transmission tax Looks like grandstanding, doesn't it? Can it be taken seriously? - Rate reductions for West Virginia's citizens so that they will pay less, not more, for the power they will receive from the line. Are we receiving juice from this line? I thought it was just to pass power through to the East. - Free electricity for all landowners who are affected by the placement of the line. How do you force the company to give free juice? Or are the landowners going to forward their electric bills to Charleston? Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 ----- Original Message ---- From: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> To: william.depaulo(a)gmail.com; ec(a)osenergy.org Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2008 10:56:05 AM Subject: [EC] Transmission tax Below is the Governor's press release regarding his proposal to impose a transmission tax if TrAIL is approved. The first line specifically states that the Governor's Office released this proposal in a response to the Sierra Club FOIA. My question is : "Does the Governor have any other details of this proposed tax? Would it apply only to TrAIL, or to all transmission from the state? If it is specific to TrAIL, would it not violate the Interstate Commerce Clause of the US Constitution? The line would originate in PA and end in VA, so how could one state impose a tax on the privilege of electrons crossing the state, especially if the power is generated in Ohio or PA, not WV? If it applies to all transmission lines, why should other existing transmission companies pay a tax just because TrAIL is being installed? This proposal raises so many questions that I do not know where to begin or how to respond, but you can be sure that these questions will be asked tomorrow, if not at the hearing, then by reporters afterward. Would it be appropriate to request more info on this from the Governor's Office? JBK May 23, 2008 GOVERNOR PLANS TO PROPOSE TRANSMISSION TAX IF TRAIL LINE IS APPROVED Manchin says he wants to protect interests of all West Virginians Contact: Lara Ramsburg, 304-558-2000 CHARLESTON, W.Va. - In response to a Freedom of Information Act Request from the Sierra Club of West Virginia, the Governor's Office has released information on a proposed transmission tax that Gov. Joe Manchin intends to pursue should either the federal government or the state Public Service Commission approve the TrAIL Line project. "This is something I have been thinking about and discussing for some time, primarily because of the possibility of the federal government superseding any decision that may be made on the state level," Manchin said. In May 2007, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued an order interpreting the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to say that the FERC had the power to issue a permit for construction of a new power line even if a state lawfully denied a site transmission application. "If the line goes through, I want to do all that I can to make sure that we have a plan in place that will provide a benefit to the communities affected, and the state as a whole, for providing a key piece of America's energy infrastructure." The governor's proposed plan comprises four components: - Rate reductions for West Virginia's citizens so that they will pay less, not more, for the power they will receive from the line. - Extra revenue for the counties that house the line. - Extra revenue for the state that will allow it to provide additional services to all its citizens. - Free electricity for all landowners who are affected by the placement of the line. "If the TrAIL line is approved, either by the PSC or the federal government, we will stand ready to make sure that our citizens aren't taken advantage of and instead receive a benefit from its placement in West Virginia," Manchin said. # # # _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

2 1

Fwd: Stopping Munis from building coal: Lansing BWL proposed plant
by Paul Wilson 29 May '08

29 May '08

would longview be an appropriate example? If so fwd info to Anne. thanks, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Anne Woiwode <Anne.Woiwode(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Wed, May 28, 2008 at 3:57 PM Subject: Stopping Munis from building coal: Lansing BWL proposed plant To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-FORUM(a)lists.sierraclub.org Lansing, Michigan's municipal power company has just announced plans to build a new 250 MW coal plant at the state's capital. We are looking for examples of successful fights in other munis to oppose coal plant proposals. Please share your examples with Anne Woiwode at anne.woiwode(a)sierraclub.org Thank you Anne Woiwode, State Director Sierra Club Michigan Chapter (517) 484-2372 . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-CAMPAIGN-FORUM list, send any message to: COAL-CAMPAIGN-FORUM-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-6975

1 0

TrAILCO Proceeding
by William DePaulo via YouSendIt 29 May '08

29 May '08

Hello from William, Message from william.depaulo(a)gmail.com: FOIA documents from Gov Manchin's office You have 1 file(s) called <a href='http://download.yousendit.com/75047E1C66C31A22'>MANCCHIN FOIA.zip</a> from william.depaulo(a)gmail.com waiting for download. You can click on the following link to retrieve your file. The link will expire in 14 days and will be available for 500 number of downloads.. Link: http://download.yousendit.com/75047E1C66C31A22 Do not reply to this automatically-generated email. If you have any questions, please email us at paidsupport(a)yousendit.com ----- File too big for email? Try YouSendIt at http://www.yousendit.com YouSendIt 1919 So. Bascom Avenue, 3rd Floor Campbell, CA, 95008

1 0

Transmission tax
by James Kotcon 29 May '08

29 May '08

Below is the Governor's press release regarding his proposal to impose a transmission tax if TrAIL is approved. The first line specifically states that the Governor's Office released this proposal in a response to the Sierra Club FOIA. My question is : "Does the Governor have any other details of this proposed tax? Would it apply only to TrAIL, or to all transmission from the state? If it is specific to TrAIL, would it not violate the Interstate Commerce Clause of the US Constitution? The line would originate in PA and end in VA, so how could one state impose a tax on the privilege of electrons crossing the state, especially if the power is generated in Ohio or PA, not WV? If it applies to all transmission lines, why should other existing transmission companies pay a tax just because TrAIL is being installed? This proposal raises so many questions that I do not know where to begin or how to respond, but you can be sure that these questions will be asked tomorrow, if not at the hearing, then by reporters afterward. Would it be appropriate to request more info on this from the Governor's Office? JBK May 23, 2008 GOVERNOR PLANS TO PROPOSE TRANSMISSION TAX IF TRAIL LINE IS APPROVED Manchin says he wants to protect interests of all West Virginians Contact: Lara Ramsburg, 304-558-2000 CHARLESTON, W.Va. – In response to a Freedom of Information Act Request from the Sierra Club of West Virginia, the Governor’s Office has released information on a proposed transmission tax that Gov. Joe Manchin intends to pursue should either the federal government or the state Public Service Commission approve the TrAIL Line project. “This is something I have been thinking about and discussing for some time, primarily because of the possibility of the federal government superseding any decision that may be made on the state level,” Manchin said. In May 2007, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued an order interpreting the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to say that the FERC had the power to issue a permit for construction of a new power line even if a state lawfully denied a site transmission application. “If the line goes through, I want to do all that I can to make sure that we have a plan in place that will provide a benefit to the communities affected, and the state as a whole, for providing a key piece of America’s energy infrastructure.” The governor’s proposed plan comprises four components: - Rate reductions for West Virginia’s citizens so that they will pay less, not more, for the power they will receive from the line. - Extra revenue for the counties that house the line. - Extra revenue for the state that will allow it to provide additional services to all its citizens. - Free electricity for all landowners who are affected by the placement of the line. “If the TrAIL line is approved, either by the PSC or the federal government, we will stand ready to make sure that our citizens aren’t taken advantage of and instead receive a benefit from its placement in West Virginia,” Manchin said. # # #

1 0

Re: [EC] Old Dominion Sierran
by James Kotcon 29 May '08

29 May '08

There is also a really cool article on "How Green Is Your Computer." JBK >>> Regina Hendrix <regina1936(a)verizon.net> 05/28/08 9:59 PM >>> Take at look at the front page article re wind energy siting in the Mid-Atlantic in the May-June issue of Old Dominion Sierran. http://virginia.sierraclub.org/newsletter/ODSMay-Jun-web.pdf Regina _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

1 0

Old Dominion Sierran
by Regina Hendrix 28 May '08

28 May '08

Take at look at the front page article re wind energy siting in the Mid-Atlantic in the May-June issue of Old Dominion Sierran. http://virginia.sierraclub.org/newsletter/ODSMay-Jun-web.pdf Regina

1 0

Re: [EC] Coal Front Group Feels the Heat
by Paul Wilson 28 May '08

28 May '08

Coal Front Group Feels the Heat<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=hwDFfYcTXJcWCcZ%2Ba3…> Source: Facing South, May 22, 2008 Americans for Balanced Energy Choices<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=qK2g5oqr3V6tR7Nuzq8R…>(ABEC) -- a coal and power industry front group -- is busy organizing opposition to America's Climate Security Act of 2007<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=BGwNwDfCseliCbZnrBZ3…>proposed by Senators Joe Lieberman<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=b5xfOev3PDd3CFUHraBt…>and John Warner<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=60K6ovjV5PE9j2I4NpiA…>. The Institute for Southern Studies (ISS) reports that Pete MacDowell, an activist with the NC (North Carolina) Waste Awareness and Reduction Network, received a phone call from ABEC asking if he would put his name to a fax to Lieberman and Warner opposing the bill. Asked whether ABEC was an environmental group, the caller said "yes" and denied it had any links to power utilities. In response to ISS's revelation, Steve Gates from ABEC's parent group, American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=hp%2Fhg%2Fyr4K3ZMQaK…>, stated that "one new staff member -- who is no longer working on this project -- decided to 'wing it' when asked some questions that were off her script. This staff person clearly should have answered 'Yes' when asked if ABEC was related to the utility industry." -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-6975

1 0

Re: [EC] [Fwd: [fom] AEP scrubbers - one heads up for northern WV residents]
by Jim Sconyers 27 May '08

27 May '08

I thought northern WV was not suitable for MTR - is that wrong? Jim Sconyers jim_scon(a)yahoo.com 603.969.6712 ----- Original Message ---- From: Regina Hendrix <regina1936(a)verizon.net> To: ec(a)osenergy.org Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 3:49:03 PM Subject: [EC] [Fwd: [fom] AEP scrubbers - one heads up for northern WV residents] Well, this is not good news. Regina -----Inline Attachment Follows----- Just wanted to give a heads up on something that is related to a big part of my thesis. The new scrubber installations at AEP plants will do what the AP article at http://www.redorbit.com/news/business/1402498/scrubbers_to_clean_john_amos_… says, it will shift state demand for coal from southern counties to northern ones. Over the past two years the number of northern strip-mines has declined, but the amount of production and # of employees per mine have increased, suggestion an expansion in size of northern strip-mines. So if you know of anyone up there living near coal seams, might wanna give them a heads up about this as it will surely cause an increase in stripping and MTR up there. Not to mention the other consequences coming from scrubber installation/operation and disposal of the by-products, which surely will be more than the "harmless gypsum" that this article suggests. Of course, the shift isnt going to reduce MTR in the southern counties all that much, if at all. Only about 22% of coal produced in WV is burned in WV, and obiously much of that is from southern counties, so in my estimate, this will result in no more than a 5% shift of MTR production to northern mines, or about 2.5 million tons. Of course, that is significant in one major sense. 2.5 million tons approximates the annual production of a medium size MTR mine if I'm not mistaken. So, one mountain saved given current consumption and export conditions. Those were rough calc's, dont quote me on those. if the coal is to be produced, its better that production is spread evenly across the state. the point is still to reduce the consumption of coal and get an outright ban on MTR. I've pasted the supporting quote for all of this below. -- Rory Shifting Coal Demand Another outcome of the national push to scrub is a shift in demand from more expensive, lower sulfur central Appalachian coal to less expensive, higher sulfur northern Appalachian coal - or, in West Virginia, from southern to northern coal. Amos's scrubbers will go into operation during the coming two years: unit 3, the largest, in January 2009, unit 2 the following spring and unit 1 in spring 2010. The plant currently burns up to 8 million tons of coal a year, most of it from Boone County. Once the scrubbers are up and running, AEP will have the option of shifting to a less expensive coal. -- "Animals suffer and their screams fill the air. Forests are being destroyed. Mountains are ripped open for the metals streaming in their veins. And man cherishes and celebrates those who do the greatest of damage to nature and humanity." - Leonardo Da Vinci (1500)

2 1

Sierra FOIA to Gov Manchin re TrAILCo
by William DePaulo via YouSendIt 27 May '08

27 May '08

Hello from William, Message from william.depaulo(a)gmail.com: The attached documents were produced Friday, May 23, 2008 in response to the FOIA request of the Sierra Club. By letter dated May 27, 2008 the Sierra Club has requested a Vaughn index of unspecified documents withheld as exempt. You have 1 file(s) called <a href='http://download.yousendit.com/F22EFC9B6BC4BB99'>MANCCHIN FOIA.zip</a> from william.depaulo(a)gmail.com waiting for download. You can click on the following link to retrieve your file. The link will expire in 14 days and will be available for 500 number of downloads.. Link: http://download.yousendit.com/F22EFC9B6BC4BB99 Do not reply to this automatically-generated email. If you have any questions, please email us at paidsupport(a)yousendit.com ----- File too big for email? Try YouSendIt at http://www.yousendit.com YouSendIt 1919 So. Bascom Avenue, 3rd Floor Campbell, CA, 95008

1 0

[Fwd: [fom] AEP scrubbers - one heads up for northern WV residents]
by Regina Hendrix 27 May '08

27 May '08

Well, this is not good news. Regina

1 0

2 week vacation!!!
by Barbara Fallon 22 May '08

22 May '08

I feel like I am cheating or something. I am going to be on vacation for two weeks. So, I will pick up the fundraising ball when I return. Sorry, no computer on the remote island to which I am heading....

1 0

Re: [EC] New Coal Small Grants Program
by Grubb, Karen 22 May '08

22 May '08

I sent it to Barbara. ________________________________ From: Barbara Fallon [mailto:brbr_fallon@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2008 12:39 PM To: Grubb, Karen Cc: ec(a)osenergy.org Subject: Re: New Coal Small Grants Program I am looking into this grant. I need the clubhouse login account and password. Anybody out there have it? ----- Original Message ---- From: "Grubb, Karen" <Karen.Grubb(a)fairmontstate.edu> To: Barbara Fallon <brbr_fallon(a)yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 5:45:57 PM Subject: FW: New Coal Small Grants Program Would our work with TrAIL and PATH qualify us for this grant? -----Original Message----- From: Announcements from the National Coal Campaign team. [mailto:COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG] On Behalf Of Alice McKeown Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 4:24 PM To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Subject: New Coal Small Grants Program The National Coal Campaign is pleased to announce a new small grants program for 2008. Please see the link below for further details including eligibility and how to apply. Projects must align with the following primary goals of the National Coal Campaign: prevent the construction of a new fleet of coal-fired power plants in the United States, divert investments into clean energy alternatives, retire or replace existing coal plants, prevent the construction of coal-to-liquids plants. Grants for mining related projects will be available under a different program coming soon. http://clubhouse.sierraclub.org/conservation/energy/coal/coal-resources. aspx Applications will be accepted on a rolling basis and all funds must be spent by the end of the year. If you have any questions, please email coal grants program volunteer coordinator Verena Owen at baumling(a)aol.com Many thanks, Alice ________________________________ Alice McKeown Sierra Club National Coal Campaign tel: 202.675.6271 fax: 202.547.6009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS list, send any message to: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp

1 0

Re: [EC] New Coal Small Grants Program
by Barbara Fallon 22 May '08

22 May '08

I am looking into this grant. I need the clubhouse login account and password. Anybody out there have it? ----- Original Message ---- From: "Grubb, Karen" <Karen.Grubb(a)fairmontstate.edu> To: Barbara Fallon <brbr_fallon(a)yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 5:45:57 PM Subject: FW: New Coal Small Grants Program Would our work with TrAIL and PATH qualify us for this grant? -----Original Message----- From: Announcements from the National Coal Campaign team. [mailto:COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG] On Behalf Of Alice McKeown Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 4:24 PM To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Subject: New Coal Small Grants Program The National Coal Campaign is pleased to announce a new small grants program for 2008. Please see the link below for further details including eligibility and how to apply. Projects must align with the following primary goals of the National Coal Campaign: prevent the construction of a new fleet of coal-fired power plants in the United States, divert investments into clean energy alternatives, retire or replace existing coal plants, prevent the construction of coal-to-liquids plants. Grants for mining related projects will be available under a different program coming soon. http://clubhouse.sierraclub.org/conservation/energy/coal/coal-resources. aspx Applications will be accepted on a rolling basis and all funds must be spent by the end of the year. If you have any questions, please email coal grants program volunteer coordinator Verena Owen at baumling(a)aol.com Many thanks, Alice ________________________________ Alice McKeown Sierra Club National Coal Campaign tel: 202.675.6271 fax: 202.547.6009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS list, send any message to: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp

1 0

Blair Mountain Nomination Website
by Regina Hendrix 20 May '08

20 May '08

Hello friends: Check this one out: http://www.friendsofblairmountain.org/index.html I knew they were doing a website but I didn't imagine how informative, graphic and extensive it would be. Regina P.S. Vivian/Paul, how about putting a link on the OVEC and WVSC website?

1 0

Fwd: E-News Bulletin 05/19/08
by Paul Wilson 20 May '08

20 May '08

Check out the Sustainable Building law in Minnesota. Seems I remember this was on the list of E-Councils Renewable Energy campaign. There is a link to the MN bill. Now we just need a champion in the WV legislature! cheers, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Architecture2030 <info(a)architecture2030.org> Date: Mon, May 19, 2008 at 9:01 PM Subject: E-News Bulletin 05/19/08 To: pjgrunt(a)gmail.com [image: Architecture 2030] <http://www.architecture2030.org/home.html> [image: The 2030 Challenge]<http://www.architecture2030.org/2030_challenge/index.html> [image: The 2010 Imperative]<http://www.architecture2030.org/2010_imperative/index.html> [image: 2030 Research Center]<http://www.architecture2030.org/current_situation/cutting_edge.html> [image: Regional Solutions]<http://www.architecture2030.org/regional_solutions/homeowners.html> [image: News + Resources] <http://www.architecture2030.org/news/news.php> · About Us <http://www.architecture2030.org/about.php> · Contact Us <info(a)architecture2030.org> · Subscribe <http://www.architecture2030.org/subscribe.php> · FAQs <http://www.architecture2030.org/news/faqs.html> · 2030 E-News <http://www.architecture2030.org/news/e-news.html> · Home <http://www.architecture2030.org/home.html> The 2030 Challenge<http://www.architecture2030.org/2030_challenge/index.html> The 2010 Imperative <http://www.architecture2030.org/2010_imperative/index.html> Research Center <http://www.architecture2030.org/current_situation/cutting_edge.html> Regional Solutions<http://www.architecture2030.org/regional_solutions/homeowners.html> News/Resources <http://www.architecture2030.org/news/news.php> [image: Architecture 2030 E-News Bulletin 4] "Now that global warming is a recognized crisis, our nation can focus on solutions. More and more cities, states, firms and businesses are adopting and implementing the 2030 Challenge targets." -Edward Mazria Major Victory in the Midwest The Minnesota Sustainable Building 2030 Bill The Architecture 2030 Challenge is now law in the state of Minnesota. On May 8, Governor Tim Pawlenty signed the Minnesota Sustainable Building 2030 bill, which requires that buildings receiving state funding meet energy efficiency targets of the 2030 Challenge with a 60% reduction in 2010, 70% in 2015, 80% in 2020 and 90% in 2025. Minnesota proponents of the Architecture 2030 Challenge testified in support of the bill to the Minnesota Senate and House Energy Committees. Architecture 2030 would like to thank Perkins+Will, The Weidt Group, Studio 2030, Minnesota Center for Energy and Environment, the University of Minnesota Center for Sustainable Building Research, LHB Architects, Architectural Alliance, the Green Institute, Indigenous Environmental Network and the many other individuals and organizations whose efforts helped secure this historic legislation. Minnesota now joins the ranks of California, Illinois, Dallas, Santa Barbara, Richmond, the Federal Government and others who are working to implement the 2030 Challenge targets. The Minnesota Sustainable Building 2030 Bill was authored by Representative Bill Hilty and Senator Yvonne Pretner Solon and co-authored by Senators Scott Dibble, Dave Senjem, Ellen Anderson and Julie Rosen and Representatives Brita Sailer, Kate Knuth, Alice Hausman, Bob Gunther, Matt Dean, Linda Slocum, Maria Ruud and David Bly. View the Sustainable Building 2030 bill online (SF 2706<http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us/departments/scr/billsumm/summary_display.…>and HF 3401<https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/bldbill.php?bill=H3401.0.html&sessi…> ). National Wildlife Federation Bestows Top Honor to Edward Mazria At their annual awards banquet in Keystone, Colorado last Saturday, the National Wildlife Federation awarded Architecture 2030 founder, Edward Mazria, with their most prestigious honor: the National Conservation Achievement Award. Mr. Mazria received this accolade in the Special Achievement category for his seminal work on the Building Sector's role in global warming. The National Wildlife Federation's Conservation Achievement Awards have been presented annually since 1965. Recipients in 2007 included Vice President Al Gore, author and activist Bill McKibben, environmental champion Laurie David and California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Download the Architecture 2030 press release here<http://www.architecture2030.org/pdfs/NWF_release.pdf>. Innovative Company Offers Free Software to Support the 2010 Imperative Integrated Environmental Solutions is offering a free software license for their <Virtual Environment > to any school signed on to the 2010 Imperative. For more information, read the official IES press release here<http://www.iesve.com/content/default.asp?page=s62&newsid=2960&back=s596> . May 19, 2008 FREE Subscribe Unsubscribe <http://www.architecture2030.org/subscribe.php> [Printer Friendly version<http://www.architecture2030.org/news/printerfriendly/news_051908.pdf> ] [image: Highlights] Read The 2030 Blueprint The 2030 Blueprint study gives a comparative analysis of three approaches to addressing climate change – building energy efficiency, 'clean' coal (with carbon capture and sequestration) and nuclear power – while laying a new roadmap for solving the global warming and US economic crises. Read it now <http://www.architecture2030.org/pdfs/2030Blueprint.pdf> Watch the Face It Webcast The Face It webcast is available for viewing at our website. Watch it now <http://www.architecture2030.org/faceit/webcast.php> Adopt The 2030 Challenge Choose to have your firm/organization listed as an official adopter, and describe your progress (obstacles/successes) as you implement The Challenge. Sign up here <http://www.architecture2030.org/2030_challenge/index.html> Adopt The 2010 Imperative Choose to have your school listed as an official adopter, and describe your progress (obstacles/successes) as you implement The Imperative. Sign up here <http://www.architecture2030.org/2010_imperative/index.html> · · · Go to the News/Resources <http://www.architecture2030.org/news/index.php>section of our website to get the latest news updates on issues regarding climate change and the building sector. · · · Comments and suggestions for future Architecture 2030 E–news issues should be sent to: info(a)architecture2030.org Architecture 2030 607 Cerrillos Road Santa Fe, NM 87505 www.architecture2030.org Having trouble viewing this email? - Click here to view an online version. <http://www.architecture2030.org/news/news_051908.html> Help us spread this important news by sending this E-News Bulletin to a colleague or friend. ------------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail was sent to pjgrunt(a)gmail.com because you are subscribed to at least one of our mailing lists. If at any time you would like to remove yourself from our mailing list, please feel free to do so by visiting: http://www.architecture2030.org/listmessenger/public/unsubscribe.php?g=1&ad… -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-6975

1 0

Nuclear power in the wings
by duane330＠aol.com 19 May '08

19 May '08

Carbon Caps May Give Nuclear Power a Lift By REBECCA SMITH, Wall Street Journal, May 19, 2008; Page A4 As Congress debates whether to limit carbon-dioxide emissions, one of the most vocal supporters of such legislation -- the nuclear-power industry -- is poised to reap a multibillion-dollar windfall if restrictions take effect. Some nuclear operators are already forecasting how much their profits could increase under various versions of greenhouse-gas legislation that are under consideration. Among the nuclear operators that stand to profit most are Exelon Corp., FPL Group Inc., Constellation Energy Group, Entergy Corp., FirstEnergy Corp., NRG Energy Inc. and Public Service Enterprise Group Inc. Carbon limits could usher in a period of "supernormal profits" for nuclear operators in markets where rates are deregulated and have more ability to rise, says Hugh Wynne, utilities analyst for Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. But he warns that profits, if perceived as excessive, run the risk of inciting a public backlash, perhaps including calls for a windfall-profits tax. Congress is considering several measures that would impose a so-called cap-and-trade system, which would limit the amount of carbon dioxide companies are allowed to emit. Lawmakers this summer are expected to take up a bill sponsored by Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I., Conn.) and John Warner (R., Va.) that initially gives the power industry about half the allowances it needs and requires generators to purchase the remainder on an open market or cut emissions. Nuclear operators stand to gain from greenhouse-gas legislation in two ways. For starters, their plants don't spew carbon dioxide, so they would not have to buy emissions allowances, giving them a competitive advantage over competitors that burn fossil fuels. In addition, a cap-and-trade system would probably push up wholesale electricity prices in deregulated markets, as coal- and natural-gas-burning utilities jack up prices to recover the additional cost of allowance purchases. In deregulated markets, generators with the highest costs set the market price, so lower-cost nuclear operators could enjoy the higher prices charged by coal- and gas-burning utilities without the higher costs. In states that didn't deregulate their electricity markets, nuclear plants mostly are part of regulated utilities and furnish electricity to utility customers at prices tied to their underlying costs, eliminating the opportunity for such profit. Chicago-based Exelon, the nation's biggest nuclear-plant operator by output, could reap as much as $2 billion a year in added earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, says Mr. Wynne. His calculation assumes that the cost of carbon emissions would be $25 per million metric tons of emissions, an allowance price typical in Europe. Exelon has not released its own profit estimates. Executives agree that carbon legislation would burnish earnings, but they say the benefit would be less than $2 billion. They say higher profits are fair because they recognize a multibillion-dollar investment Exelon has made in nuclear power and could fund new plants. "We have invested in a low-carbon fleet and our rates reflect that," said Elizabeth "Betsy" Moler, executive vice president at Exelon. "Our rates are higher than rates for coal utilities." New Orleans-based Entergy -- which is seeking regulatory approvals to spin off six nuclear plants into the nation's first stand-alone nuclear-power company, dubbed Enexus Energy Corp. -- says an allowance price of about $30 could net the new company $600 million a year of added profit. FPL Group, Juno Beach, Fla., calculates its potential boost in earnings, before certain expenses, at $130 million to $727 million, depending on allowance prices and how much electricity is sold. The money would come from FPL's unregulated generation unit, which has interests in three nuclear plants and renewable-energy installations, such as wind farms, not its regulated Florida utility. For Baltimore-based Constellation, higher profits from its nuclear plants would be partly offset by higher costs for its coal-fired units. Even so, it estimates gross profit would rise by more than $225 million a year, if carbon emissions cost $25 a ton. Penalizing carbon emissions would improve the economics of nuclear-power development. A study by the Congressional Budget Office, released this month, concluded that nuclear plants could make electricity more cheaply than any other form of power generation if carbon allowances cost $45 apiece. Opinions differ about how quickly a cap-and-trade system could cause wholesale electricity prices to rise or what allowances would cost. The intent of the Lieberman-Warner bill is to cut greenhouse-gas emissions to 65% below 1990 levels by 2050. Nuclear-plant owners aren't the only ones that stand to benefit. Natural-gas-fired generators would benefit if they sell electricity where coal-fired plants set prices. That is because gas plants release only about half as much carbon dioxide as coal plants and would need fewer allowances, so their profit margin would widen. Utilities are lobbying Congress to influence the allowance-allocation method adopted. Exelon favors an approach under which government officials would sell or allocate a greater portion of emissions permits to utilities with retail customers, rather than to power generators that sell wholesale power to utilities. That would help customers of Exelon's two retail utilities, Commonwealth Edison in Chicago and PECO in Philadelphia, since the utility could sell the allowances to generators and use the proceeds to offset higher energy costs for their customers. It would allow prices to rise on the wholesale market, financially rewarding Exelon's nuclear unit. Big coal-burning utilities oppose full auctioning of allowances, saying it could drive up their costs and produce an enormous spike in electricity prices, harming many consumers. Economists generally favor selling allowances rather than giving them away. That is because selling them sends "price signals" to consumers, encouraging conservation and construction of cleaner forms of power generation, helping society achieve permanent greenhouse-gas reductions. "It's not a bad thing to give more money to nuclear operators if you're trying to give them incentive to invest in new nuclear generation," says Greg Gordon, a utilities analyst for Citigroup Investment Research in New York. Under the Lieberman-Warner bill, the Environmental Protection Agency would create 125 billion allowances, enough for all 38 years of the program, commencing in 2012. About 5.2 billion allowances would be available the first year. The number would drop by 96 million each year until only 1.56 billion remained in 2050, the final year of the program. The program is intended to make emissions progressively costlier to drive the market to make permanent reductions. Exelon Chairman John Rowe says the power sector may have to spend as much as $400 billion by 2030 replacing polluting plants with cleaner ones. The sum is nearly equal to the market capitalization of U.S. utilities. Write to Rebecca Smith at rebecca.smith(a)wsj.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> New Wave of Nuclear Plants Faces High Costs By REBECCA SMITH, Wall Street Journal, May 12, 2008; Page B1 A new generation of nuclear power plants is on the drawing boards in the U.S., but the projected cost is causing some sticker shock: $5 billion to $12 billion a plant, double to quadruple earlier rough estimates. Nuclear power is regaining favor as an alternative to other sources of power generation, such as coal-fired plants, which have fallen out of favor because they are major polluters. But the high cost could lead to sharply higher electricity bills for consumers and inevitably reignite debate about the nuclear industry's suitability to meet growing energy needs. Nuclear plants haven't been built in meaningful numbers in the U.S. since the 1980s. Part of the cost escalation is bad luck. Plants are being proposed in a period of skyrocketing costs for commodities such as cement, steel and copper; amid a growing shortage of skilled labor; and against the backdrop of a shrunken supplier network for the industry. The price escalation is sobering because the industry and regulators have worked hard to make development more efficient, in hopes of eliminating problems that in the past produced harrowing cost overruns. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, for example, has created a streamlined licensing process to make timelier, more comprehensive decisions about proposals. Nuclear vendors have developed standardized designs for plants to reduce construction and operating costs. And utility executives, with years of operating experience behind them, are more astute buyers. Now, 104 nuclear reactors are operating in the U.S. Most are highly profitable but that was not the case until fairly recently. For the 75 units built between 1966 and 1986, the average cost was $3 billion or triple early estimates, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Many plants operate profitably now because they were sold to current operators for less than their actual cost. The latest projections follow months of tough negotiations between utility companies and key suppliers, and suggest efforts to control costs are proving elusive. Estimates released in recent weeks by experienced nuclear operators -- NRG Energy Inc., Progress Energy Inc., Exelon Corp., Southern Co. and FPL Group Inc. -- "have blown by our highest estimate" of costs computed just eight months ago, said Jim Hempstead, a senior credit officer at Moody's Investors Service credit-rating agency in New York. Moody's worries that continued cost increases, even if partially offset by billions of dollars worth of federal subsidies, could weaken companies and expose consumers to high energy costs. On May 7, Georgia Power Co., a unit of Atlanta-based Southern, said it expects to spend $6.4 billion for a 45.7% interest in two new reactors proposed for the Vogtle nuclear plant site near Augusta, Ga. Utility officials declined to disclose total costs. A typical Georgia Power household could expect to see its power bill go up by $144 annually to pay for the plants after 2018, the utility said. Bill Edge, spokesman for the Georgia Public Service Commission, said Georgia "will look at what's best for ratepayers" and could pull support if costs balloon to frightening heights. The existing Vogtle plant, put into service in the late 1980s, cost more than 10 times its original estimate, roughly $4.5 billion for each of two reactors. FPL Group, Juno Beach, Fla., estimates it will cost $6 billion to $9 billion to build each of two reactors at its Turkey Point nuclear site in southeast Florida. It has picked a reactor design by Westinghouse Electric Co., a unit of Toshiba Corp., after concluding it could cost as much as $12 billion to build plants with reactors designed by General Electric Co. The joint venture GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy said it hasn't seen FPL's calculations but is confident its units "are cost-competitive compared with other nuclear designs." Exelon, the nation's biggest nuclear operator, is considering building two reactors on an undeveloped site in Texas, and said the cost could be $5 billion to $6.5 billion each. The plants would be operated as "merchant" plants and thus would not have utility customers on the hook to pay for them, as is the case in both Florida and Georgia. Instead, they would have to cover expenses through wholesale power sales. Several things could derail new development plans. Excessive cost is one. A second is the development of rival technologies that could again make nuclear plants look like white elephants. A drop in prices for coal and natural gas, now very expensive, also could make nuclear plants less attractive. On the other hand, if Congress decides to tax greenhouse-gas emissions, that could make electricity from nuclear plants more attractive by raising costs for generators that burn fossil fuels. Nuclear plants wouldn't have to pay the charges because they aren't emitters. Some states are clearing a path for nuclear-power development, even before costs are fully known. They are inspired by a growing fear of climate change. "The overwhelming feeling in Florida is that nuclear power is popular and that's why it's going to go ahead," said J.R. Kelly, head of the Office of Public Counsel in Tallahassee, which represents consumers. "Our main concern is the tremendous cost." In Florida, state officials are allowing utilities to collect money from customers to cover development and construction costs. In the past, regulators typically required utilities to bear the costs until plants were finished. Many utilities said they are watching with interest. Ralph Izzo, chief executive of Public Service Enterprise Group Inc. in New Jersey, said his company may not be big enough to build a nuclear plant, even though it is a nuclear operator. "We're concerned by the rise in construction costs," he said. Write to Rebecca Smith at rebecca.smith(a)wsj.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> • The News: Estimated costs to build the next generation of nuclear power plants have soared to $5 billion to $12 billion a plant. • The Debate: Questions are emerging over the affordability of nuclear power, despite its popularity as an alternative to polluting coal-fired plants. • What to Watch: If Congress taxes greenhouse-gas emissions, nuclear plants, which aren't emitters, will become more attractive. But if coal and natural-gas prices decline, nuclear-plant economics will get worse. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

1 0

Senator McCain’s Climate Record
by Duane330＠aol.com 18 May '08

18 May '08

Senator McCain’s Climate Record Despite John McCain’s pro-environment rhetoric, protester Bret Thompson thinks McCain’s voting record on the environment merits “24 %.” (Photo: Liza Alwes) Republican presidential contender John McCain made it clear he's not like President George Bush when it comes to global warming - the candidate has pledged to limit greenhouse gas emissions. But critics ask why Senator McCain won't do more to support renewable energy. Living on Earth’s Washington correspondent Jeff Young reports from Washington. [Remember Jeff from his days at WV public radio.] Hear the interview at the following web-site: [Living On Earth, NPR] _http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.htm?programID=08-P13-00020&segmentID=3_ (http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.htm?programID=08-P13-00020&segmentID=3) **************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)

1 0

Re: [EC] Fwd: New Coal Small Grants Program
by James Kotcon 17 May '08

17 May '08

I think this is worth a shot, or at least a follow-up call. The testmony in January's TrAILCo hearing made it very clear that the US-DOE specifically requested that utilities and FERC assess "what it would take to move an additional 5000 MW of coal-fired electricity from the Ohio Valley to the East Coast." TrAILCo's testimony is that this line would allow construction of another 4 coal-fired power plants. Even if such plants were not built, the line would expand the capacity factor of existing plants to allow a comparable amount of coal to be burned. Given the lower efficiency of these old dirty plants, expanding thier operation would likely be even worse than building new plants. But a project should focus on building grass-roots support, and holding Manchin accountable, not just legal and expert witness fees. While winning court cases is important, West Virginia desperately needs to expand our base of grass roots volunteers, especiually in the mid-eastern panhandle anbd in the central part of the state (PATH will go from the John Amos plant near Putnam County north through very rural and poorly organized counties in west-central WV.) And while I do not like conspiracy theorists, it is clear from our FOIA that PSC Staff felt substantial pressure due to their perception that Manchin supported the TrAILCo line. TrAILCo began pushing Staff for a settlement shortly after the hearings concluded, yet, as recently as April 7, the PSC cheif engineer said that they had no need to settle and that TrAILCo should withdraw the application. Then April 15, the settlement is announced. Whaddya Tink? JBK >>> Regina Hendrix <regina1936(a)verizon.net> 05/17/08 1:32 AM >>> I still have a hard time understanding why the National Coal Campaign does not recognize that defeating TrailCo and PATH would prevent construction of coal-fired power plants. If we don't build the coal fired power plants in WV, our neighbors to the East will build plants in their area which will most likely not be coal fired. Paul Wilson wrote: > fyi, paul > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *Alice McKeown* <Alice.McKeown(a)sierraclub.org > <mailto:Alice.McKeown@sierraclub.org>> > Date: Fri, May 16, 2008 at 4:23 PM > Subject: New Coal Small Grants Program > To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)lists.sierraclub.org > <mailto:COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS@lists.sierraclub.org> > > > The National Coal Campaign is pleased to announce a new small grants > program for 2008. Please see the link below for further details > including > eligibility and how to apply. > > Projects must align with the following primary goals of the National Coal > Campaign: prevent the construction of a new fleet of coal-fired power > plants in the United States, divert investments into clean energy > alternatives, retire or replace existing coal plants, prevent the > construction of coal-to-liquids plants. Grants for mining related > projects > will be available under a different program coming soon. > > > http://clubhouse.sierraclub.org/conservation/energy/coal/coal-resources.aspx > > > Applications will be accepted on a rolling basis and all funds must be > spent by the end of the year. > > If you have any questions, please email coal grants program volunteer > coordinator Verena Owen at baumling(a)aol.com <mailto:baumling@aol.com> > > Many thanks, > Alice > ________________________________ > Alice McKeown > Sierra Club > National Coal Campaign > tel: 202.675.6271 > fax: 202.547.6009 > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > To unsubscribe from the COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS list, send any message to: > COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG > <mailto:COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS-signoff-request@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG> > > Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: > http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp > > To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: > http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp > > > > -- > Paul Wilson > Sierra Club > 504 Jefferson Ave > Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 > Phone: 304-725-4360 > Cell: 304-279-6975 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > EC mailing list > EC(a)osenergy.org > http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec > _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

2 1

Fwd: New Coal Small Grants Program
by Paul Wilson 17 May '08

17 May '08

fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Alice McKeown <Alice.McKeown(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Fri, May 16, 2008 at 4:23 PM Subject: New Coal Small Grants Program To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)lists.sierraclub.org The National Coal Campaign is pleased to announce a new small grants program for 2008. Please see the link below for further details including eligibility and how to apply. Projects must align with the following primary goals of the National Coal Campaign: prevent the construction of a new fleet of coal-fired power plants in the United States, divert investments into clean energy alternatives, retire or replace existing coal plants, prevent the construction of coal-to-liquids plants. Grants for mining related projects will be available under a different program coming soon. http://clubhouse.sierraclub.org/conservation/energy/coal/coal-resources.aspx Applications will be accepted on a rolling basis and all funds must be spent by the end of the year. If you have any questions, please email coal grants program volunteer coordinator Verena Owen at baumling(a)aol.com Many thanks, Alice ________________________________ Alice McKeown Sierra Club National Coal Campaign tel: 202.675.6271 fax: 202.547.6009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS list, send any message to: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-6975

2 1

TrAILCo Service List
by William DePaulo via YouSendIt 16 May '08

16 May '08

Hello from William, You have 1 file(s) called <a href='http://download.yousendit.com/6D1C49246FB82ECC'>SIERRA FOIA REQUEST.zip</a> from william.depaulo(a)gmail.com waiting for download. You can click on the following link to retrieve your file. The link will expire in 14 days and will be available for 500 number of downloads.. Link: http://download.yousendit.com/6D1C49246FB82ECC Do not reply to this automatically-generated email. If you have any questions, please email us at paidsupport(a)yousendit.com ----- File too big for email? Try YouSendIt at http://www.yousendit.com YouSendIt 1919 So. Bascom Avenue, 3rd Floor Campbell, CA, 95008

1 0

Fwd: Newly revised Coal Questions & Answers
by Paul Wilson 16 May '08

16 May '08

fyi, good talking points on this updated Q&A factsheet on Coal. best,paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Alice McKeown <Alice.McKeown(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Thu, May 15, 2008 at 12:36 PM Subject: Newly revised Coal Questions & Answers To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)lists.sierraclub.org I am pleased to announce that we have revised our coal questions and answers fact sheet. This new version includes a timely update to the question about the FutureGen plant, which was cancelled earlier this year. Please check the new version out on our Clubhouse Headquarters or on our public website: http://clubhouse.sierraclub.org/conservation/energy/coal/coal-resources.aspx http://www.sierraclub.org/coal/faq/ Many thanks, Alice ________________________________ Alice McKeown Sierra Club National Coal Campaign tel: 202.675.6271 fax: 202.547.6009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS list, send any message to: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-6975

1 0

Re: [EC] Proposed SD/MN Coal-Fired Power Plant Dealt Setback
by Paul Wilson 14 May '08

14 May '08

fyi, paul Seems that the Club has been successful in some Transmission line issues. In the States*Proposed SD/MN Coal-Fired Power Plant Dealt Setback *On May 9, two administrative judges in Minnesota recommended against the transmission lines needed<http://action.sierraclub.org/site/R?i=LRYKls9Ru0JvHlVZ8mJihQ..>for the proposed Big Stone II coal-fired power plant on the grounds that "the five regional power companies in a partnership to build the coal-fired plant had not proved the transmission lines were needed and had failed to show that less expensive conservation measures and renewable energy such as wind could not meet any demand for additional electricity." Big Stone II is proposed for Milbank, S.D., just miles from the border with Minnesota. Our North Star chapter has been part<http://action.sierraclub.org/site/R?i=FEGGY4daEEKhUWbx30yDQw..>of a broad coalition fighting the plant. Part of the proposal was a large new transmission line from the plant to the Twin Cities. -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-6975

1 0

DRAFT OF SIERRA CLUB INITIAL BRIEF ON APR 15 PROPOSED SETTLEMENT
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 14 May '08

14 May '08

Please review the attached draft of the brief we will file Friday of this week and forward any comments or suggestions to me no later than COB Wednesday. Tx Bill -- William V. DePaulo, Esq. 179 Summers Street, Suite 232 Charleston, WV 25301-2163 Tel: 304-342-5588 Fax: 304-342-5505 william.depaulo(a)gmail.com www.passeggiata.com

1 1

Fwd: REMINDER: Next Coal Activists Call Wednesday, May 14th (TONIGHT)
by Paul Wilson 14 May '08

14 May '08

fyi, paul ps. note the info on small grants for chapters ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Alice McKeown <Alice.McKeown(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Wed, May 14, 2008 at 9:13 AM Subject: REMINDER: Next Coal Activists Call Wednesday, May 14th (TONIGHT) To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)lists.sierraclub.org A friendly reminder that our next coal activists call will be tonight, Wednesday, May 14. Among other agenda items we will discuss an exciting new local and regional funding opportunity being rolled out by the National Coal Campaign. Bring questions about this and any local issues for our open forum. http://clubhouse.sierraclub.org/conservation/energy/coal/Default.aspx ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Please join the National Coal Campaign for our next monthly coal activist coal on Wednesday, May 14th at 8:00 p.m. eastern. This month we will report back on recent news as well as talk about an exciting new small grants opportunity. As always, please bring any questions you have for our open forum. 866 501 6174 224 0743# Agenda 1. Legal update: Pat Gallagher & Bruce Nilles 2. Mercury news & report back: Pat Gallagher & Ginny Cramer 3. Small grants and how you can apply for funding from the Coal Team: Verena Owen 4. Open Forum Also, please make sure to check out our Coal Headquarters on Clubhouse for any coal-related needs. http://clubhouse.sierraclub.org/conservation/energy/coal/Default.aspx Many thanks, Alice ________________________________ Alice McKeown Sierra Club National Coal Campaign tel: 202.675.6271 fax: 202.547.6009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS list, send any message to: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/ -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-6975

1 0

[Fwd: [fom] BRH editorial: Pouring more money into Co-Gen plant may not be right course]
by Regina Hendrix 13 May '08

13 May '08

FYI

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC