- EC - lists.cheatlakeclear.org

Fw: Vote in MTR poll
by Frank Young 09 Aug '11

09 Aug '11

Currently showing 63 percent "No". Let's make it 90 percent! ----- Original Message ----- From: Vernon Haltom To: FOM, List ; MJSlist, MJSlist Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 10:59 PM Subject: [fom] Vote in poll "Should surface mining be allowed on Coal River Mountain?" Vote NO at http://wowktv.com/ -- Vernon Haltom Executive Director, Coal River Mountain Watch 304-854-2182 www.crmw.net

1 0

Fwd: We. Must. Stop. This.
by James Kotcon 08 Aug '11

08 Aug '11

Long, but interesting call to action. "Essentially game over" for the climate. That's what climate scientist James Hanson calls the proposed Keystone XL pipeline -- which would carry oil out of Canada's vast tar sands oil fields to Texas, where it will be refined, then burned across the globe, dealing a catastrophic blow to our chance of returning earth to a stable climate. See the rest below. JBK >>> "Elijah Zarlin, CREDO Action" <act(a)credoaction.com> 8/6/2011 10:19 AM >>> Tell President Obama: Stop the Keystone XL pipeline. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230956&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=20 Pres. Obama alone has the power to stop this massive blow to our climate. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230956&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=21 Clicking here will automatically add your name to this petition to President Obama: "The tar sands represent a catastrophic threat to our communities, our climate, and our planet. President Obama, you have the final word. You do not have to negotiate with Congress or industry. We urge you to demonstrate real climate leadership by rejecting the requested permit for the Keystone XL pipeline." http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230957&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=23 Automatically add your name: http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230957&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=24 Learn more about this campaign http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230956&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=26 Dear James, "Essentially game over" for the climate. That's what climate scientist James Hanson calls the proposed Keystone XL pipeline -- which would carry oil out of Canada's vast tar sands oil fields to Texas, where it will be refined, then burned across the globe, dealing a catastrophic blow to our chance of returning earth to a stable climate. This project requires a presidential permit to start building -- and it is President Obama's decision alone to grant or deny that permit. He will make the decision as soon as September. Tell President Obama: Stop the Keystone XL pipeline. Click here to automatically sign the petition. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230957&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=27 The Alberta tar sands are a carbon bomb. The 3rd largest oil field in the world, the difficult extraction and transportation of the tar sands oil ultimately produces up to three times the carbon emissions of traditional oil. (And extreme environmental devastation along the way.)1 The Keystone XL pipeline is the fuse to this bomb -- a highway to swift consumption of this dirty, dangerous crude. As if that wasn't enough, it poses a massive spill risk in the six states along the pipeline route, including over the Ogallala Aquifer which provides up to 30% of our nation's agricultural water. We. Must. Stop. This. Tell President Obama: Stop the Keystone XL pipeline. Click here to automatically sign the petition. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230957&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=28 Twenty leading climate scientists have just sent a letter to President Obama urging him to deny the permit. And from August 20th to September 3rd, there will be a massive, historic, daily sit-in outside the White House where more than 1500 people, including CREDO staff, have already signed up to risk arrest in peaceful protest. (For more about the sit-in, see below.) The administration's previous decisions on climate do not inspire confidence that they will deny the permit. Just this week, the administration approved offshore oil drilling in the Arctic. They have opened vast new areas to coal mining, and late last year, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton even said that she was "inclined" to approve Keystone XL. But President Obama still has the final word. He does not have to negotiate with Congress or industry. As his State Department reviews the permit, the decision -- which could have a devastating impact on the livability of our nation, and our world -- is entirely in his hands. We've lost too many climate fights already. We need a massive, historic show of pressure to make sure we don't lose this one. Please sign the petition and read below for other ways to get involved. Tell President Obama: Stop the Keystone XL pipeline. Click here to automatically sign the petition. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230957&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=29 Thank you for fighting for an oil-free future. Elijah Zarlin, Campaign Manager CREDO Action from Working Assets http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=11&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=30 1. "Keystone XL Pipeline http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230958&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=31 ," Friends of the Earth -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Because this fight is so important, leading climate activists including Bill McKibben, Naomi Klein and climate scientist James Hansen are organizing a historic, daily series of peaceful protests between August 20th and Sept. 3rd. The CEOs and Directors of nearly 30 leading Environmental Organizations, including CREDO's Michael Kieschnick and Laura Scher, are urging people to participate http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230959&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=32 .. More than 1500 people from across the country, including CREDO staff, have already signed up to join the sit-in outside the White House and risk arrest. Please read the invitation letter below for more information. If you would like to sign up to join the protest, and possibly be arrested, click here to sign up. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230961&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=33 Dear Friends, This will be a slightly longer letter than common for the internet age -- it's serious stuff. The short version is we want you to consider doing something hard: coming to Washington in the hottest and stickiest weeks of the summer and engaging in civil disobedience that will quite possibly get you arrested. The full version goes like this: As you know, the planet is steadily warming: 2010 was the warmest year on record, and we've seen the resulting chaos in almost every corner of the earth. And as you also know, our democracy is increasingly controlled by special interests interested only in their short-term profit. These two trends collide this summer in Washington, where the State Department and the White House have to decide whether to grant a certificate of 'national interest' to some of the biggest fossil fuel players on earth. These corporations want to build the so-called 'Keystone XL Pipeline' from Canada's tar sands to Texas refineries. To call this project a horror is serious understatement. The tar sands have wrecked huge parts of Alberta, disrupting ways of life in indigenous communities -- First Nations communities in Canada, and tribes along the pipeline route in the U.S. have demanded the destruction cease. The pipeline crosses crucial areas like the Ogallala Aquifer where a spill would be disastrous -- and though the pipeline companies insist they are using 'state of the art' technologies that should leak only once every 7 years, the precursor pipeline and its pumping stations have leaked a dozen times in the past year. These local impacts alone would be cause enough to block such a plan. But the Keystone Pipeline would also be a fifteen hundred mile fuse to the biggest carbon bomb on the continent, a way to make it easier and faster to trigger the final overheating of our planet, the one place to which we are all indigenous. As the climatologist Jim Hansen (one of the signatories to this letter) explained, if we have any chance of getting back to a stable climate "the principal requirement is that coal emissions must be phased out by 2030 and unconventional fossil fuels, such as tar sands, must be left in the ground." In other words, he added, "if the tar sands are thrown into the mix it is essentially game over." The Keystone pipeline is an essential part of the game. "Unless we get increased market access, like with Keystone XL, we're going to be stuck," said Ralph Glass, an economist and vice-president at AJM Petroleum Consultants in Calgary, told a Canadian newspaper last week. Given all that, you'd suspect that there's no way the Obama administration would ever permit this pipeline. But in the last few months the administration has signed pieces of paper opening much of Alaska to oil drilling, and permitting coal-mining on federal land in Wyoming that will produce as much CO2 as 300 powerplants operating at full bore. And Secretary of State Clinton has already said she's 'inclined' to recommend the pipeline go forward. Partly it's because of the political commotion over high gas prices, though more tar sands oil would do nothing to change that picture. But it's also because of intense pressure from industry. The US Chamber of Commerce -- a bigger funder of political campaigns than the RNC and DNC combined -- has demanded that the administration "move quickly to approve the Keystone XL pipeline," which is not so surprising -- they've also told the U.S. EPA that if the planet warms that will be okay because humans can 'adapt their physiology' to cope. The Koch Brothers, needless to say, are also backing the plan, and may reap huge profits from it. So we're pretty sure that without serious pressure the Keystone Pipeline will get its permit from Washington. A wonderful coalition of environmental groups has built a strong campaign across the continent -- from Cree and Dene indigenous leaders to Nebraska farmers, they've spoken out strongly against the destruction of their land. We need to join them, and to say even if our own homes won't be crossed by this pipeline, our joint home -- the earth -- will be wrecked by the carbon that pours down it. And we need to say something else, too: it's time to stop letting corporate power make the most important decisions our planet faces. We don't have the money to compete with those corporations, but we do have our bodies, and beginning in mid August many of us will use them. We will, each day, march on the White House, risking arrest with our trespass. We will do it in dignified fashion, demonstrating that in this case we are the conservatives, and that our foes -- who would change the composition of the atmosphere are dangerous radicals. Come dressed as if for a business meeting -- this is, in fact, serious business. And another sartorial tip -- if you wore an Obama button during the 2008 campaign, why not wear it again? We very much still want to believe in the promise of that young Senator who told us that with his election the 'rise of the oceans would begin to slow and the planet start to heal.' We don't understand what combination of bureaucratic obstinacy and insider dealing has derailed those efforts, but we remember his request that his supporters continue on after the election to pressure his government for change. We'll do what we can. And one more thing: we don't just want college kids to be the participants in this fight. They've led the way so far on climate change -- 10,000 came to DC for the Powershift gathering earlier this spring. They've marched this month in West Virginia to protest mountaintop removal; a young man named Tim DeChristopher faces sentencing this summer in Utah for his creative protest. Now it's time for people who've spent their lives pouring carbon into the atmosphere to step up too, just as many of us did in earlier battles for civil rights or for peace. Most of us signing this letter are veterans of this work, and we think it's past time for elders to behave like elders. One thing we don't want is a smash up: if you can't control your passions, this action is not for you. This won't be a one-shot day of action. We plan for it to continue for several weeks, till the administration understands we won't go away. Not all of us can actually get arrested -- half the signatories to this letter live in Canada, and might well find our entry into the U.S. barred. But we will be making plans for sympathy demonstrations outside Canadian consulates in the U.S., and U.S. consulates in Canada -- the decision-makers need to know they're being watched. Twenty years of patiently explaining the climate crisis to our leaders hasn't worked. Maybe moral witness will help. You have to start somewhere, and we choose here and now. If you think you might want to be a part of this action, we need you to sign up here. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230961&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=34 As plans solidify in the next few weeks we'll be in touch with you to arrange nonviolence training; our colleagues at a variety of environmental and democracy campaigns will be coordinating the actual arrangements. We know we're asking a lot. You should think long and hard on it, and pray if you're the praying type. But to us, it's as much privilege as burden to get to join this fight in the most serious possible way. We hope you'll join us. Maude Barlow -- Chair, Council of Canadians Wendell Berry -- Author and Farmer Tom Goldtooth -- Director, Indigenous Environmental Network Danny Glover -- Actor James Hansen -- Climate Scientist Wes Jackson -- Agronomist, President of the Land Insitute Naomi Klein -- Author and Journalist Bill McKibben -- Writer and Environmentalist George Poitras -- Mikisew Cree Indigenous First Nation Gus Speth -- Environmental Lawyer and Activist David Suzuki -- Scientist, Environmentalist and Broadcaster Joseph B. Uehlein -- Labor organizer and environmentalist -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Share on Facebook Post to your wall http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230962&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=36 Tweet this Post to Twitter http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230967&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=38 References Visible links .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230956&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=20 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230956&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=21 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230956&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=22 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230957&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=23 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230957&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=24 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230957&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=25 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230956&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=26 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230957&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=27 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230957&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=28 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230957&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=29 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=11&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=30 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230958&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=31 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230959&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=32 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230961&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=33 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230961&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=34 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230962&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=35 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230962&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=36 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230967&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=37 .. http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=230967&id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx&t=38 ________________ To remove yourself (James Kotcon) from this list, please visit our subscription management page at: http://act.credoaction.com/s?i=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx To change your email address or update your contact info, please visit: http://act.credoaction.com/subscrip/coa.html?id=25349-2577149-5IfUfNx

1 0

WSJ.com - Gas Drilling Bringing Jobs to Pennsylvania, but How Many?
by diapalino 02 Aug '11

02 Aug '11

You have received the following link from diapalino(a)gmail.com ******************** If you are having trouble with any of the links in this message, or if the URL's are not appearing as links, please follow the instructions at the bottom of this email. Title: WSJ.com - Gas Drilling Bringing Jobs to Pennsylvania, but How Many? This article will be available to non-subscribers of the Online Journal for up to seven days after it is e-mailed. Copy and paste the following into your Web browser to access the sent link: http://www.emailthis.clickability.com/et/emailThis?clickMap=viewThis&etMail… Copy and paste the following into your Web browser to SAVE THIS link: http://www.savethis.clickability.com/st/saveThisPopupApp?clickMap=saveFromE… Copy and paste the following into your Web browser to forward this link: http://www.emailthis.clickability.com/et/emailThis?clickMap=forward&etMailT… ******************** Email pages from any Web site you visit - add the EMAIL THIS button to your browser, copy and paste the following into your Web browser: http://www.emailthis.clickability.com/et/emailThis?clickMap=browserButtons&…" ********************* Instructions: ----------------------------------------- If your e-mail program doesn't recognize Web addresses: 1. With your mouse, highlight the Web Address above. Be sure to highlight the entire Web address, even if it spans more than one line in your email. 2. Select Copy from the Edit menu at the top of your screen. 3. Launch your Web browser. 4. Paste the address into your Web browser by selecting Paste from the Edit menu. 5. Click Go or press Enter or Return on your keyboard. ********************

1 0

WSJ.com - Left for Extinct, a Steel Plant Rises in Ohio
by diapalino 02 Aug '11

02 Aug '11

You have received the following link from diapalino(a)gmail.com ******************** If you are having trouble with any of the links in this message, or if the URL's are not appearing as links, please follow the instructions at the bottom of this email. Title: WSJ.com - Left for Extinct, a Steel Plant Rises in Ohio This article will be available to non-subscribers of the Online Journal for up to seven days after it is e-mailed. Copy and paste the following into your Web browser to access the sent link: http://www.emailthis.clickability.com/et/emailThis?clickMap=viewThis&etMail… Copy and paste the following into your Web browser to SAVE THIS link: http://www.savethis.clickability.com/st/saveThisPopupApp?clickMap=saveFromE… Copy and paste the following into your Web browser to forward this link: http://www.emailthis.clickability.com/et/emailThis?clickMap=forward&etMailT… ******************** Email pages from any Web site you visit - add the EMAIL THIS button to your browser, copy and paste the following into your Web browser: http://www.emailthis.clickability.com/et/emailThis?clickMap=browserButtons&…" ********************* Instructions: ----------------------------------------- If your e-mail program doesn't recognize Web addresses: 1. With your mouse, highlight the Web Address above. Be sure to highlight the entire Web address, even if it spans more than one line in your email. 2. Select Copy from the Edit menu at the top of your screen. 3. Launch your Web browser. 4. Paste the address into your Web browser by selecting Paste from the Edit menu. 5. Click Go or press Enter or Return on your keyboard. ********************

1 0

Fwd: EPA REFUSES TO STUDY RISKS OF COAL ASH USES IT ENDORSES
by Jim Sconyers 02 Aug '11

02 Aug '11

coal ash in cattle feed? Eeeeewww! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Russ Maddox <russmaddox(a)yahoo.com> Date: Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 3:29 PM Subject: EPA REFUSES TO STUDY RISKS OF COAL ASH USES IT ENDORSES To: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE(a)lists.sierraclub.org http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1499 For Immediate Release: July 18, 2011 Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337 *EPA REFUSES TO STUDY RISKS OF COAL ASH USES IT ENDORSES * — Scientists Told Agency Does Not Want Safety Concerns Raised about Coal Ash Washington, DC — The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency prevents its scientists from examining health risks of coal combustion wastes being added to consumer, agricultural and commercial products even though the agency promotes these practices as safe, according to documents released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). Despite a scathing Office of Inspector General (IG) report earlier this year taking the agency to task for failing to complete a single safety review on the 60 million tons of coal ash and other combustion wastes entering the U.S. marketplace each year, EPA indicates that it has no intention of doing any risk assessments in the near future. In a June 16, 2011 reply to the IG, EPA Assistant Administrator Mathy Stanislaus stated that while “protection of human health and the environment is a critical prerequisite to promoting the beneficial use of coal combustion residuals…we do not yet have a timeline for developing the evaluation process regarding the beneficial use” of coal wastes. He indicated EPA will wait until it finalizes regulations governing coal ash (2013, at the earliest) before considering dangers of how coal ash is actually used. “EPA just gave its IG the middle finger,” said PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that most all of the safety information on coal ash in products comes from the industry. “Thanks to EPA, Congress and the public have no idea which, if any, applications of coal ash are safe or environmentally benign.” Compounding this data gap, IG investigative materials PEER obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show EPA scientists’ safety concerns about coal ash are routinely “steamrolled” and ignored. Scientists could not even get the answer to the basic question of “What’s in this stuff?” For example – - EPA gave an award to a company that sold coal ash in cement “by putting the mixture into plastic bags and selling it to customers at Home Depot” despite knowing of a prominent study finding that particulate matter in these wastes “caused a morbidity and mortality spike in humans”; - Some coal combustion wastes have radiation levels comparable to those at Superfund sites but no warnings are issued for people living close to where these wastes are stored or used; and - Officials downplayed scientific recommendations against including combustion wastes in agricultural products, such as livestock feeders and soil treatments. “It is disturbing that EPA applauds consumers being sold bags of toxic waste,” added Ruch, noting that although EPA shut down its formal partnership with industry to promote coal ash reuse in mid-2010 under pressure from both PEER and the IG, it continues to push coal ash as a “beneficial use” through other programs. “EPA claims to be a science-based agency but it is bending over backward to ensure that its decisions about coal ash occur in a science-free zone.” ### Read the EPA response to the IG<http://peer.org/docs/epa/7_18_11_EPA_reply_IG.pdf> Look at the IG report and how EPA continues to promote coal ash <http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1469> See how EPA prevents scientists from asking or answering questions <http://peer.org/docs/epa/7_18_11_EPA_sci_suppression.pdf> View the array of products containing coal ash<http://www.peer.org/campaigns/publichealth/coalash/everywhere.php> Examine push to use coal ash in agricultural products despite questions<http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1266> <http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1499#top> Contact PEER <http://www.peer.org/about/contact.php> Tell-a-Friend<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/823/t/3694/tellafriend.jsp?tell_a_frie…> Your Privacy <http://www.peer.org/about/privacy.php> Ph: (202) 265-7337 • Fax: (202) 265-4192 • email: info[at]peer.org all content © peer.org 2011 website by puffinworks <http://www.puffinworks.com/> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE list, send any message to: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

2 1

Fwd: 8 coal-burners closed Fwd: Ontario Waves Bye-Bye To Coal Fired Power Generation
by James Kotcon 28 Jul '11

28 Jul '11

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jane Feldman <feldman.jane(a)gmail.com> Date: Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 11:19 AM Subject: 8 coal-burners closed Fwd: Ontario Waves Bye-Bye To Coal Fired Power Generation To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)lists.sierraclub.org Hi,all - THIS is what today's technology and today's grid can do. It looks like a feed-in-tariff led the way. Jane --- Ontario Waves Bye-Bye To Coal Fired Power Generation by Energy Matters [image: Coal fired power generation phaseout - Ontario Canada] Ontario, Canada's most populated province, has seen a boom in renewable energy jobs, with 20,000 employed in the sector. It's not such a rosy picture for the coal industry though, with coal fired power generation in Ontario slated to go the way of the dodo by 2014. Ontario's Ministry of Energy says the province's Green Energy Act is on track to create 50,000 clean energy jobs by 2012 and coal usage for the first six months of 2011 was 94 per cent lower than for the same period in 2003. According to Ontario's recently released 2011 Progress Report<http://www.ontario.ca/en/initiatives/progressreport2011/index.htm>, eight coal fired power generation units have been closed already and two more will close later in 2011. Thanks to initiatives such as feed-in tariffs, renewable energy is rapidly replacing fossil fuels. To date, over 2,000 medium and large-scale feed in tariff projects have been announced, representing enough electricity each year to provide the power requirements for around 900,000 homes. Ontario's government says it will be one of the first places in the world and the first in North America to cease coal-fired power generation totally. It has set a goal of eliminating coal entirely by 2014. It believes shutting down coal will save Ontario's health care system CAD$3 billion annually and in relation to emissions, will be the equivalent of taking up to 7 million cars off the roads. The Ministry predicts that by 2018, 10.7 gigawatts of clean renewable electricity from wind<http://www.energymatters.com.au/renewable-energy/wind-energy/> , solar <http://www.energymatters.com.au/renewable-energy/solar-power/> and bio-energy will be operational; producing enough electricity for 2 million households. Residents of Ontario are also becoming more energy efficient, saving 1,700 megawatts of electricity through conservation - which is the equivalent of taking half a million homes off the grid. Ontario's clean energy economy has generated more than $20 billion in new private-sector investment. The province's energy plan will rebuild 70 per cent of its electricity infrastructure over the next 2 decades. While Ontario's commitment to renewables and the end of coal is admirable; its continuing love affair with nuclear power has been criticised. Nuclear power has been part of Ontario's energy mix since the 1960's and currently provides more than half of the power used by Ontarians every day. ### - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the TOIYABE-ENERGY-TF list, send any message to: TOIYABE-ENERGY-TF-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/ -- Jane Conservation Chair, Southern Nevada Group of the Sierra Club Energy Chair, Toiyabe Chapter of the Sierra Club - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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

5 4

Public hearing report from Clarksburg
by James Kotcon 28 Jul '11

28 Jul '11

It was standing room only, with over 800 in attendance. 115 people spoke with comments limited to 90 seconds, so it was 11:30 PM before we finished. Several other area Delegates attended, but again, no one from the State Senate. Del. Tim Manchin chaired and indicated the Senate was tied up in re-districting meetings, but was there "in spirit" Industry did pull out the stops, as a lot of people had the "Natural Gas" stickers on their shirts. They got in early, and 22 of the first 24 speakers were from industry. But they also mostly left early, which prompted some complaints from those landowners speaking near the end, but a number from the pro-regulation side also left early, so I am not sure that was a valid complaint. The pro-regulation side ended up with 64 speakers, the industry reps had 49, and 2 were so unclear, convoluted and confused that I could not tell which side they were on. My final count for the three hearings is 74 pro-industry, 136 pro-regulation, 10 unclear. The tally should probably be even higher because most of the pro-industry reps said they supported a clean environment and "reasonable" regulations, but always emphasized jobs, which I interpret as code for "No More Regs" because they always insisted they were already doing a great job. JBK

1 0

Gazettee discovers Tomblin weakened Executive Order
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 28 Jul '11

28 Jul '11

http://wv4mom.org/content/charleston-gazette-discovers-tomblin-weakened-exe… -Jonathan

1 0

Fwd: FW: [fom] Manchin's millions from coal
by Jim Sconyers 26 Jul '11

26 Jul '11

Read it and weep. In the U. S. Senate, this is not a conflict of interest! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Vivian Stockman <vivian(a)ohvec.org> Date: Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 1:12 PM Subject: FW: [fom] Manchin's millions from coal To: Jim Sconyers <jimscon(a)gmail.com> Great quote!**** ** ** *From:* fom-owner(a)lists.riseup.net [mailto:fom-owner@lists.riseup.net] *On Behalf Of *Vernon Haltom *Sent:* Tuesday, July 26, 2011 1:01 PM *To:* FOM, List *Subject:* [fom] Manchin's millions from coal**** ** ** Just in case anybody had any doubts about why Manchin doesn't mind MTR killing us: http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/07/26/26greenwire-sen-manchin-maintains-l… -- Vernon Haltom Executive Director, Coal River Mountain Watch 304-854-2182 www.crmw.net**** ** ** -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

2 1

Re: [EC] In Beckley paper: Money to Sierra Club prompts boos
by Jim Sconyers 26 Jul '11

26 Jul '11

Translation: "Coal now, coal forever! And to hell with the consequences!" On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Vivian Stockman <vivian(a)ohvec.org> wrote: > July 22, 2011 **** > Money to Sierra Club prompts boos<http://www.register-herald.com/local/x202401951/Money-to-Sierra-Club-prompt…> > **** > > By Mannix Porterfield Register-Herald Reporter<http://www.register-herald.com> > **** > > > http://www.register-herald.com/local/x202401951/Money-to-Sierra-Club-prompt… > **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > An industry leader joined a union chief and political luminaries in West > Virginia in a sustained chorus of boos directed Thursday at billionaire New > York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s hefty gift to an environmental group bent on > wiping out the coal industry. > > Bloomberg disclosed he handed a $50 million donation to the Sierra Club > from his own pocket for use in the group’s quest to shut down coal mining > the two consider an environmental hazard. > > His action triggered a swift and predictable response in coal-rich West > Virginia. > > “The next time the lights go out, the people in New York City will all know > exactly whom to blame — their mayor, Michael Bloomberg,” Rep. Nick Rahall, > D-W.Va., said from his Capitol office. > > Bloomberg said his gift would enable the Sierra Club to close as many as > one-third of America’s oldest coal-fired power plants by 2020. > > Acting Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin weighed in on the latest controversy involving > the industry, calling coal “the most stable, cost-effective means of meeting > the energy demands of our country and the world.” > > “With the use of our natural resources here in West Virginia, our country > becomes more energy-independent,” Tomblin said. > > Tomblin helped break ground on the new Willow Island hydro-electric project > near Saint Marys. > > “The fact, however, that we are looking for other sources of energy — and > developing clean coal technologies — does not mean that our country can > afford to no longer use coal,” the governor said. “Coal must be a part of > any realistic solution to meet our growing demand for energy.” > > Given the size of the charitable gift that could be spent on hiring lawyers > to challenge coal production and power plants alike, Bill Raney, president > of the West Virginia Coal Association, said the industry must view > Bloomberg’s threat seriously. > > “It sends a terrible message to coal miners and families that depend on > coal, not only in West Virginia but across this country,” Raney said. “It > has provided energy to make steel and power throughout the history of this > country. Now, all of a sudden, he’s made a lot of money doing something, and > he wants to put it into something that sounds pretty shallow, pretty > selfish.” > > Raney noted the mercury hovered at 100 degrees in both New York and > Washington, D.C., and was 97 in Charleston, and questioned how Bloomberg > would act if the electricity suddenly stop-ped with a lack of coal. > > “Let’s assume he takes all the coal generation off the grid,” he said. “If > he accomplishes quickly what he wants to do, I’m wondering what he’s going > to do?” > > The industry has been in a roiling feud with the Obama administration over > its Environmental Protection Agency’s approach to mining permits, and Raney > said coal operators must brace themselves for a well-heeled assault by the > Sierra Club in a bid to stop coal plants and force others to retreat from > remodeling plans. > > “They’ll just be flinging grenades, is what I think,” he said. “It’s simply > not fair to the people who have made a living trying to provide energy in > this country. It’s just like he thumbed his nose at it. It doesn’t make a > lick of sense.” > > Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., found it disappointing that Bloomberg launched > an attack on coal, rather than work to achieve a balance between production > and environmental concerns. > > “Coal not only built this country, but it built the skyscrapers of New York > City, and, without coal, the lights of that city would be dark and its > economy would be devastated,” the senator said. > > “I have said from day one, and will say until my last breath, that there > has to be a balance in our country between the environment as well as our > economic and national security, which are threatened by this country’s > addiction to foreign oil.” > > Sen. Richard Browning, D-Wyoming, pointed to a time when the lights indeed > went out in the Big Apple, in a major blackout that crippled much of the > eastern seaboard. > > And with one of the worst heat waves to ever paralyze much of that region > now in sway, Browning said coal takes on an even more critical role in > supplying the energy to keep the air conditioners humming. > > “Can you imagine what it would be like today without electricity right now, > as far as air conditioners go?” > > If coal weren’t being burn-ed to supply energy needs, he said, those swept > up in the heat would be at nature’s mercy without benefit of relief. > > “That’s not the kind of leadership that I would want to set for the people > I represent, to advocate something that’s going to be detrimental to their > way of life,” Browning said. > > Browning said he considers himself both an environmentalist and a realist. > > “In today’s life, we need to make electricity, and the only feasible way to > do that at this point is with coal,” the senator said. “There will come a > day we can do better with coal. We’re all trying to achieve that today.” > > Browning pointed to research in progress in both Pittsburgh and West > Virginia University aimed at cleaning up the use of coal. > > “We all want to have cleaner coal, and we’re getting there,” he said. “In > the meantime, we can’t stop using it until we get an alternative.” > > The Sierra Club says it has applied the brakes to more than 150 new > coal-fired power plants in recent years through the use of the courts and > local action. > > “If we are going to get serious about reducing our carbon footprint in the > United States, we have to get serious about coal,” Bloomberg said in making > his announcement. > > “Coal is a self-inflicted public health risk, polluting the air we breathe, > adding mercury to our water and the leading cause of climate disruption.” > > Republican gubernatorial nominee Bill Maloney vowed to take on Bloomberg, > the Sierra Club, President Obama “and anybody else who attacks one of the > pillars of our state’s economy.” > > “I’m convinced that when you get elected to office, there must be some > magic potion they feed you that causes you to become completely detached > from reality and lose touch with regular people,” he said of Bloomberg. > > “This is just another example of career politicians with half-baked ideas > that would devastate our economy.” > > United Mine Workers President Cecil Roberts likewise decried Bloomberg’s > gift, saying that it would throw miners out of work and plunge them deeper > into the throes of a recession. > > In some parts of Appala-chia, the union executive said, mining jobs provide > the only decent incomes that allow workers to sustain a solid, middle-class > lifestyle. > > Moreover, he suggested, there is a measure of hypo-crisy to the > environmental cause trumpeted by groups such as the Sierra Club. > > “I suspect that many of their members and supporters spend thousands of > dollars every year on automobiles, computers, smart phones and other goods > made in China, India and other countries, which are rapidly building > economies more robust than ours by using more and more coal as their chief > source of energy,” he said. > > “I would also point out that China is swiftly becoming the world’s leader > in developing carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology, which will meet > the goal of reducing and eventually eliminating greenhouse gas emissions > when commercially applied to coal-fired power plants.” > > Delegate Randy Swartz-miller, D-Hancock, suggested Bloomberg not try to run > for office in West Virginia because his vote total would be scant. > > “That is, if he didn’t get run out of the state first,” Swartzmiller said. > > “Just have to wonder if someone that rich is smart enough to know what > truly powers that little switch that makes the lights come on.” > > — E-mail: mannix(a)register-herald.com**** > > [image: http://w.sharethis.com/chicklets/email.gif]**** > > ** ** > -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

2 1

Re: [EC] In Beckley paper: Money to Sierra Club prompts boos
by James Kotcon 25 Jul '11

25 Jul '11

I think we need to attack the short-sighted leaders who think of coal first, and deny the reality of global warming, especially during this year of unprecedented weather. Manchin ran his campaign by literally shooting at the Cap-And-Trade bill, which would have included the subsidies for Clean Coal and the economic incentives needed for CCS. West Virginia's political leaders do not have any plans for developing a transition to a post-coal future, and are therefore blind to the possibilities and are locking us into ever-increasing dependence on an industry doomed to run out, and sooner than they imagine. Projections show a 40 % decline ion coal produciton in WV within 5 years, yet they continue to talk as if coal is the future of West Virginia's economic development. I believe we need to respond soon. It will expose us to a lot of attacks, but it will also position us as credible leaders on the issues. I think we need a press release, or even a press conference by Monday. Whaddya Tink? JBK >>> Jim Sconyers 07/23/11 8:43 AM >>> Translation: "Coal now, coal forever! And to hell with the consequences!" On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Vivian Stockman <vivian(a)ohvec.org> wrote: July 22, 2011 Money to Sierra Club prompts boos By Mannix Porterfield Register-Herald Reporter http://www.register-herald.com/local/x202401951/Money-to-Sierra-Club-prompt… An industry leader joined a union chief and political luminaries in West Virginia in a sustained chorus of boos directed Thursday at billionaire New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s hefty gift to an environmental group bent on wiping out the coal industry. Bloomberg disclosed he handed a $50 million donation to the Sierra Club from his own pocket for use in the group’s quest to shut down coal mining the two consider an environmental hazard. His action triggered a swift and predictable response in coal-rich West Virginia. “The next time the lights go out, the people in New York City will all know exactly whom to blame * their mayor, Michael Bloomberg,” Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., said from his Capitol office. Bloomberg said his gift would enable the Sierra Club to close as many as one-third of America’s oldest coal-fired power plants by 2020. Acting Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin weighed in on the latest controversy involving the industry, calling coal “the most stable, cost-effective means of meeting the energy demands of our country and the world.” “With the use of our natural resources here in West Virginia, our country becomes more energy-independent,” Tomblin said. Tomblin helped break ground on the new Willow Island hydro-electric project near Saint Marys. “The fact, however, that we are looking for other sources of energy * and developing clean coal technologies * does not mean that our country can afford to no longer use coal,” the governor said. “Coal must be a part of any realistic solution to meet our growing demand for energy.” Given the size of the charitable gift that could be spent on hiring lawyers to challenge coal production and power plants alike, Bill Raney, president of the West Virginia Coal Association, said the industry must view Bloomberg’s threat seriously. “It sends a terrible message to coal miners and families that depend on coal, not only in West Virginia but across this country,” Raney said. “It has provided energy to make steel and power throughout the history of this country. Now, all of a sudden, he’s made a lot of money doing something, and he wants to put it into something that sounds pretty shallow, pretty selfish.” Raney noted the mercury hovered at 100 degrees in both New York and Washington, D.C., and was 97 in Charleston, and questioned how Bloomberg would act if the electricity suddenly stop-ped with a lack of coal. “Let’s assume he takes all the coal generation off the grid,” he said. “If he accomplishes quickly what he wants to do, I’m wondering what he’s going to do?” The industry has been in a roiling feud with the Obama administration over its Environmental Protection Agency’s approach to mining permits, and Raney said coal operators must brace themselves for a well-heeled assault by the Sierra Club in a bid to stop coal plants and force others to retreat from remodeling plans. “They’ll just be flinging grenades, is what I think,” he said. “It’s simply not fair to the people who have made a living trying to provide energy in this country. It’s just like he thumbed his nose at it. It doesn’t make a lick of sense.” Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., found it disappointing that Bloomberg launched an attack on coal, rather than work to achieve a balance between production and environmental concerns. “Coal not only built this country, but it built the skyscrapers of New York City, and, without coal, the lights of that city would be dark and its economy would be devastated,” the senator said. “I have said from day one, and will say until my last breath, that there has to be a balance in our country between the environment as well as our economic and national security, which are threatened by this country’s addiction to foreign oil.” Sen. Richard Browning, D-Wyoming, pointed to a time when the lights indeed went out in the Big Apple, in a major blackout that crippled much of the eastern seaboard. And with one of the worst heat waves to ever paralyze much of that region now in sway, Browning said coal takes on an even more critical role in supplying the energy to keep the air conditioners humming. “Can you imagine what it would be like today without electricity right now, as far as air conditioners go?” If coal weren’t being burn-ed to supply energy needs, he said, those swept up in the heat would be at nature’s mercy without benefit of relief. “That’s not the kind of leadership that I would want to set for the people I represent, to advocate something that’s going to be detrimental to their way of life,” Browning said. Browning said he considers himself both an environmentalist and a realist. “In today’s life, we need to make electricity, and the only feasible way to do that at this point is with coal,” the senator said. “There will come a day we can do better with coal. We’re all trying to achieve that today.” Browning pointed to research in progress in both Pittsburgh and West Virginia University aimed at cleaning up the use of coal. “We all want to have cleaner coal, and we’re getting there,” he said. “In the meantime, we can’t stop using it until we get an alternative.” The Sierra Club says it has applied the brakes to more than 150 new coal-fired power plants in recent years through the use of the courts and local action. “If we are going to get serious about reducing our carbon footprint in the United States, we have to get serious about coal,” Bloomberg said in making his announcement. “Coal is a self-inflicted public health risk, polluting the air we breathe, adding mercury to our water and the leading cause of climate disruption.” Republican gubernatorial nominee Bill Maloney vowed to take on Bloomberg, the Sierra Club, President Obama “and anybody else who attacks one of the pillars of our state’s economy.” “I’m convinced that when you get elected to office, there must be some magic potion they feed you that causes you to become completely detached from reality and lose touch with regular people,” he said of Bloomberg. “This is just another example of career politicians with half-baked ideas that would devastate our economy.” United Mine Workers President Cecil Roberts likewise decried Bloomberg’s gift, saying that it would throw miners out of work and plunge them deeper into the throes of a recession. In some parts of Appala-chia, the union executive said, mining jobs provide the only decent incomes that allow workers to sustain a solid, middle-class lifestyle. Moreover, he suggested, there is a measure of hypo-crisy to the environmental cause trumpeted by groups such as the Sierra Club. “I suspect that many of their members and supporters spend thousands of dollars every year on automobiles, computers, smart phones and other goods made in China, India and other countries, which are rapidly building economies more robust than ours by using more and more coal as their chief source of energy,” he said. “I would also point out that China is swiftly becoming the world’s leader in developing carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology, which will meet the goal of reducing and eventually eliminating greenhouse gas emissions when commercially applied to coal-fired power plants.” Delegate Randy Swartz-miller, D-Hancock, suggested Bloomberg not try to run for office in West Virginia because his vote total would be scant. “That is, if he didn’t get run out of the state first,” Swartzmiller said. “Just have to wonder if someone that rich is smart enough to know what truly powers that little switch that makes the lights come on.” * E-mail: mannix(a)register-herald.com -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

6 5

Re: [EC] Delegates Schedule Public Hearings on Gas Drilling
by James Kotcon 23 Jul '11

23 Jul '11

I suggested this to a Committee staffer last Thursday night, and he implied that just was not realistic. We will need more than one person saying it Monday nioght to have an impact. I think I will make the point that the landscape has changed since March. At the end of the regular session, the issue being debated was whether or not to regulate. Now, the issue is whether the regulate, or ban Marcelus fracking. And the momentum for a ban will increase if there is not comprehensive regulation imposed before more fracking gets done. Unless the Legislature gets serious about comprehensive rules, the controversy will continue to grow, as will demands for a permanent ban. A moratorium on new permits and a comprehensive bill imposing emergency rules on existing permits are the only way to demonstrate that the Legislature is serious and is proceeding in a logical manner to develop the industry responsibly. JBK >>> Jim Sconyers 07/22/11 11:57 PM >>> I agree - the more the delay, the more drilling gets done fast before regulation, and their mess becomes a fait accompli. On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 8:54 PM, John Garlow <ecomodjag(a)gmail.com> wrote: The problem with Earl Ray's emergency is that it really must not be an emergency since even if the DEP does come up with any meaningful regulation and enforcement system, and even if the house comes up with 2 million to pay for monitoring and inspections, it will take about a year to get "ramped up" according to DEP. So, the drilling and fracking will continue on for at least another year with the blessing of the state and the who knows what might happen to the environment attitude. This is similar to the days when anyone could dig a hole in their bank for coal that left us with lots of yellow boy streams and clean up costs. I want to keep pushing hard for a moratorium since the lack of control of this industry has already been called an emergency. Since this is a valuable national resource, it should be regulated in terms of how it is used. Companies should disclose their end consumer. Perhaps this should be coupled with conversion programs from gasoline to compressed gas vehicles. Why should we risk our environment so that a few people can make money selling our gas to China? I want to keep pushing the word "emergency" as used by the gov. He needs to take action and be a leader. He is already being attacked by Mahoney for lack of leadership saying something should have been done years ago. Is he going to stand up for WV's environment or bend to China's desire for our gas? John Garlow On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 12:03 PM, James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> wrote: The WV4MoM discussed this last night, and we agree that it needs to have a good turnout, preferably at all three hearings. Chuck, can you start contacting folks in the Northern Panhandle and Clarksburg areas? The Upshur County group should also get out, as Clarksburg is pretty close. I have a call in to get more details as to the format, but this is a great opportunity, and we need to start preparing ASAP. I suspect that there will be an opportunity for a few invited speakers, but whether this will be an open opportunity for everyone to speak is not clear. Two key themes will be: 1) Follow the Money. If industry says they support "Responsible Regulation" does that mean they will withhold campaign contributions from legislators that block "Responsible Regulation"? I suspect that the Doug Facemire's of the Committee will change their tune pretty quickly if industry says they will, but I also suspect that "Responsible Regulation" will turn out to be code words for "Do Nothing". If we can demonstrate to the Legislature that the industry propaganda actually means "Continue poisoning the water", we may sway a few votes, in spite of the industry campaign contributions. And when the industry says they want decisions based on facts and not "emotionalism", we need to point out that it is the industry "experts" that have let their pursuit of profits blind them to real science, and their greed that creates the emotional disconnect with reality. 2) Discredit the claims that fracking is safe and has never contaminated ground water. I am putting together news accounts of well contamination, spills, and violations to demonstrate that the industry claims that they are clean do not match reality. For example, PA-DEP identified seven cases of gas migrating into ground water for every 1000 wells in 2010. They issued over 1000 citations for violations of environmental protection rules between 2008 and August 2010. But WV-DEP has only 15 inspectors for 59,000 wells, so drillers here know they are unlikely to ever get an inspection. It is certainly true that some wells can be drilled without problems, and that some companies are doing a better job than others. That is why we need real regulations, to rein in the rogue operators and put everyone on a level playing field. If we can couple this demonstration that real problems exist, that industry experts are distorting the facts, and that the industry is in denial, with an assertion that strong regulations mean we can have both gas drilling and clean water, we will win. JBK >>> "Chuck Wyrostok" <wyro(a)appalight.com> 7/16/2011 9:57 AM >>> FYI, folks.c Chuck Wyrostok Sierra Club Outreach Organizer Toll free 877 252 0257 E: outreach(a)marcellus-wv.com www.marcellus-wv.com _____ From: Julie Archer [mailto:julie@wvsoro.org] Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 9:31 AM To: undisclosed-recipients: Subject: WV-SORO Update: Delegates Schedule Public Hearings on Gas Drilling Delegates Schedule Public Hearings on Marcellus Drilling The House members of the legislature's Select <http://www.legis.state.wv.us/committees/interims/committee.cfm?abb=marcellu s> Committee on Marcellus Shale have announced they will hold three public hearings on drilling issues to get input on how problems and concerns related to natural gas drilling should be addressed. In media reports, Delegate Tim Manchin, House chairman of the committee said, "The committee members have heard much about both the potential benefits and problems associated with the Marcellus Shale development - what we are now looking for are suggestions on measures that should be included in a new state law that encourages efficient development of the resource while addresses local and environmental concerns." The hearings are set for Wheeling on July 21, Morgantown on July 25, and Clarksburg on July 27. The times and locations will be announced early next week. We'll send out more details once they become available. They will also be posted on the Legislature's website, www.legis.state.wv.us. The entire Select Committee met earlier this week, and heard presentations from a variety of experts and interest groups including WV-SORO. The full committee plans to reconvene and hold three working meetings during the August interim meetings of the legislature (August 1-3). Also this week, Senator President Earl Ray Tomblin, acting as Governor, signed an executive <http://www.governor.wv.gov/Documents/20110713150559476.pdf> order directing the Department of Environmental Protection to develop rules to regulate Marcellus Shale gas drilling. The plan is a positive first step, but is no substitute for legislative action which is needed to address the problems surface face in their dealings with the drillers. You can read Tomblin's press release and the executive order here <http://www.governor.wv.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/Pages/GovernorAnnouncesMa rcellusShaleRegulation.aspx> . We have posted links to a number of news stories related to the Select Committee meetings and Tomblin's announcement at www.wvsoro.org. -- Julie Archer WV Surface Owners' Rights Organization 1500 Dixie Street Charleston, WV 25311 (304) 346-5891 (304) 346-8981 FAX www.wvsoro.org _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

Re: [EC] Delegates Schedule Public Hearings on Gas Drilling
by James Kotcon 22 Jul '11

22 Jul '11

The WV4MoM discussed this last night, and we agree that it needs to have a good turnout, preferably at all three hearings. Chuck, can you start contacting folks in the Northern Panhandle and Clarksburg areas? The Upshur County group should also get out, as Clarksburg is pretty close. I have a call in to get more details as to the format, but this is a great opportunity, and we need to start preparing ASAP. I suspect that there will be an opportunity for a few invited speakers, but whether this will be an open opportunity for everyone to speak is not clear. Two key themes will be: 1) Follow the Money. If industry says they support "Responsible Regulation" does that mean they will withhold campaign contributions from legislators that block "Responsible Regulation"? I suspect that the Doug Facemire's of the Committee will change their tune pretty quickly if industry says they will, but I also suspect that "Responsible Regulation" will turn out to be code words for "Do Nothing". If we can demonstrate to the Legislature that the industry propaganda actually means "Continue poisoning the water", we may sway a few votes, in spite of the industry campaign contributions. And when the industry says they want decisions based on facts and not "emotionalism", we need to point out that it is the industry "experts" that have let their pursuit of profits blind them to real science, and their greed that creates the emotional disconnect with reality. 2) Discredit the claims that fracking is safe and has never contaminated ground water. I am putting together news accounts of well contamination, spills, and violations to demonstrate that the industry claims that they are clean do not match reality. For example, PA-DEP identified seven cases of gas migrating into ground water for every 1000 wells in 2010. They issued over 1000 citations for violations of environmental protection rules between 2008 and August 2010. But WV-DEP has only 15 inspectors for 59,000 wells, so drillers here know they are unlikely to ever get an inspection. It is certainly true that some wells can be drilled without problems, and that some companies are doing a better job than others. That is why we need real regulations, to rein in the rogue operators and put everyone on a level playing field. If we can couple this demonstration that real problems exist, that industry experts are distorting the facts, and that the industry is in denial, with an assertion that strong regulations mean we can have both gas drilling and clean water, we will win. JBK >>> "Chuck Wyrostok" <wyro(a)appalight.com> 7/16/2011 9:57 AM >>> FYI, folks.c Chuck Wyrostok Sierra Club Outreach Organizer Toll free 877 252 0257 E: outreach(a)marcellus-wv.com www.marcellus-wv.com _____ From: Julie Archer [mailto:julie@wvsoro.org] Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2011 9:31 AM To: undisclosed-recipients: Subject: WV-SORO Update: Delegates Schedule Public Hearings on Gas Drilling Delegates Schedule Public Hearings on Marcellus Drilling The House members of the legislature's Select <http://www.legis.state.wv.us/committees/interims/committee.cfm?abb=marcellu s> Committee on Marcellus Shale have announced they will hold three public hearings on drilling issues to get input on how problems and concerns related to natural gas drilling should be addressed. In media reports, Delegate Tim Manchin, House chairman of the committee said, "The committee members have heard much about both the potential benefits and problems associated with the Marcellus Shale development - what we are now looking for are suggestions on measures that should be included in a new state law that encourages efficient development of the resource while addresses local and environmental concerns." The hearings are set for Wheeling on July 21, Morgantown on July 25, and Clarksburg on July 27. The times and locations will be announced early next week. We'll send out more details once they become available. They will also be posted on the Legislature's website, www.legis.state.wv.us. The entire Select Committee met earlier this week, and heard presentations from a variety of experts and interest groups including WV-SORO. The full committee plans to reconvene and hold three working meetings during the August interim meetings of the legislature (August 1-3). Also this week, Senator President Earl Ray Tomblin, acting as Governor, signed an executive <http://www.governor.wv.gov/Documents/20110713150559476.pdf> order directing the Department of Environmental Protection to develop rules to regulate Marcellus Shale gas drilling. The plan is a positive first step, but is no substitute for legislative action which is needed to address the problems surface face in their dealings with the drillers. You can read Tomblin's press release and the executive order here <http://www.governor.wv.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/Pages/GovernorAnnouncesMa rcellusShaleRegulation.aspx> . We have posted links to a number of news stories related to the Select Committee meetings and Tomblin's announcement at www.wvsoro.org. -- Julie Archer WV Surface Owners' Rights Organization 1500 Dixie Street Charleston, WV 25311 (304) 346-5891 (304) 346-8981 FAX www.wvsoro.org

4 3

Report from Wheeling Marcellus hearing
by James Kotcon 22 Jul '11

22 Jul '11

The Select Committee on Marcellus held their first public hearing in Wheeling last night. About 150-200 attended, and 34 people spoke. Attending were at least four House members of the Committee, as well as one State Senator. Also attending were about 4-5 other legislators from the northern panhandle region. Industry reps got there early and were 9 of the first 12 speakers. Almost all spoke mostly about jobs and economic development, very few raised specific suggestions for legislation, or even stated they opposed regulation. ALL of the last 20 speakers supported stronger regulations, and had numerous suggestions for specific issues that need to be addressed. I mention this because the tv cameras left after the first half and probably did not convey that calls for regulations outnumbered industry people by over 2-to-1. Two people (of the 34 who spoke) gave statements so convoluted and confusing that I could not figure out what side they were on, or what they wanted. So my count is 10 pro-industry, 22 pro-regulation, and two unclear. The only substantive comment from industry was when Mike McCowan of IOGA said they "would SUPPORT reasonable INCREASES in fees". (Perhaps the key word there is "reasonable"). Lots of concerns were expressed about water and air pollution, several people objected to forced pooling, a couple raised safety issues, explosions, property rights issues, or concerns about foreign exports of gas. Recommendations for future hearings next week. 1) Keep your points focused. The chair allowed only 2 minute per person, and everyone almost always ran out of time to say very much. I recommend writing out some key points and do a practice with a stop watch to make sure you get in the key statements. ( I hate it when I have a really powerful finish planned and never get to use it because I run out of time, it just leaves the whole presentation with a weak, dangling end.) If the Morgantown crowd is even bigger, the time allowed will likely be cut proportionately. 2) Show up early. I recommend at least one hour before the start if you want to speak early. We were there 40 minutes early, and there were already 18 speakers signed up ahead of me. 3) Coordinate who says what. With only 120 seconds to speak, it is important to avoid wasting valuable seconds repeating a point that has already been made a dozen times. Practice your statement with a stop watch. 4) Write out specific suggestions for rules, as this is more likely to get included into a bill than vague statements of support or opposition to drilling generally. Even if you don't have time to say everything, written comments are more easily incorporated into a bill by Committee staff. 5) Practice your statement with a stop watch. Jim Kotcon

1 0

Bloomberg gives $50 M to SC
by Jim Sconyers 21 Jul '11

21 Jul '11

Awesome! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michael Brune and Robin Mann, Sierra Club < membership.services(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:53 AM Subject: Congratulations! You're Making History! To: jimscon(a)gmail.com View a web version of this email.<http://action.sierraclub.org/site/R?i=Rnl09JkC9Y-xR7WfqVVU5A..> [image: The Sierra Club] Dear Jim, As the Sierra Club's Executive Director and President, we've had many opportunities to communicate with you about the work we all do together as America's largest grassroots environmental organization. Today we're thrilled to announce that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's Bloomberg Philanthropies, in recognition of our efforts nationwide, has provided a donation of $50 million to accelerate the Sierra Club's history-making fight against coal and to support America's clean energy future<http://action.sierraclub.org/site/R?i=Nqxj0K6CPkVvjWlYceoRag..>. We can all celebrate this as a game-changing new start for the most important environmental campaign of the 21st century and a watershed moment for our Sierra Club. Every one of you -- from those working with the Angeles Chapter on cleaning up ports to those protecting Vermont's beautiful rivers and streams -- can take pride in, and will benefit greatly from, this contribution Bloomberg Philanthropies is giving this major donation to our Beyond Coal campaign because of the Club's remarkable success in working with allies and local communities to stop more than 150 new coal plants. Mayor Bloomberg believes that people coming together in communities across the country to end America's use of this dirty, 19th-century fuel is the single biggest step we can take to improve public health, combat the pollution of our water and air, and address climate disruption. Those of you who have worked tirelessly for years to confront the fossil fuel industry can rest assured that this investment will lead to important new victories. We will quickly build our grassroots activism across the country to retire existing coal plants and confront coal's corrupting influence on American politics. We will rapidly increase our support of the innovative energy technologies that are already generating new jobs and building the foundation for future prosperity. We're confident, too, that this ringing endorsement of our organization will attract new members and supporters and encourage new donations to increase the success of all the critically important work we do in every one of our chapters from Alaska to Florida, and in all of our conservation campaigns, from protecting Arizona's deserts to taking young people hiking on the Appalachian trail. You'll be hearing more about this exciting announcement in the media and in an upcoming call. We look forward to answering your questions and hearing your thoughts about how we can build on this moment to become bigger, stronger, and more successful in our mission to explore, enjoy, and protect the planet. Thank you again for helping to make this incredible announcement possible. Today, we encourage everyone to show your appreciation for this donation and support for our united efforts by pledging to end coal and usher in a new clean-energy future<http://action.sierraclub.org/site/R?i=zWqgLT_HFXaCEPoiMWnGvw..>. Onward! Michael Brune, Executive Director Robin Mann, President Sierra Club [image: Share this page on Facebook]<http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?pub=johnmuir&s=facebook&url=http%3A//ac…>[image: Share this page on Twitter]<http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?pub=johnmuir&s=twitter&url=http%3A//act…>[image: Share this page with other services]<http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?pub=johnmuir&url=http%3A//action.sierra…> Update My Profile<http://action.sierraclub.org/site/R?i=hRGunUFTpIIh0d4cbP3QWA..>| Manage My Email Preferences<http://action.sierraclub.org/site/CO?i=AlIAYYLrdMwE-phzBDbwhUMBlZmbGgHO&cid…> | Update My Interests<http://action.sierraclub.org/site/R?i=1xwZBJ4cPF73u6uCfDtkyg..> | Unsubscribe <http://action.sierraclub.org/site/R?i=rxjAtq6MqNy0P5uNM1-HRQ..> Sierra Club 85 Second St. San Francisco, CA 94105 -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

IS SHALE GAS A PIPE(LINE) DREAM?
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 21 Jul '11

21 Jul '11

Is Shale Gas a Pipedream? Billions for Infrastructure Needed Ken Silverstein <http://www.energybiz.com/author/ken-silverstein> | Jul 21, 2011 [image: Share/Save]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.energybiz.com%2Fart…> <http://www.energybiz.com/article/11/07/shale-gas-pipedream?utm_source=2011_…> Don't get starry-eyed over all that projected shale-gas. It's one thing to dig it out. It's another to transport it. And at least one trade group says that massive amounts of investment must now go into creating the pipelines that would carry that fuel. That's a huge task. But add in the concerns of community organizations that fear such development would not just disrupt their local ecologies but also increase the dangers from pipeline accidents. While that angst is legitimate and must be addressed by pipeline companies, shale-gas has the potential to supply energy here for the next century. "The good news is that the natural gas industry has a proven track record of constructing and financing this level of infrastructure," says Don Santa, chief executive of the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America.<http://www.ingaa.org/15391.aspx> Santa's organization commissioned ICF International<http://www.ingaa.org/Foundation/Studies/7828/9115.aspx?layoutChange=Print&C…>to review the country's anticipated pipeline infrastructure needs in a world where unconventional forms of gas such as shale gas are expected to make up two-thirds of the total natural gas mix by 2035. It makes a few assumptions that range from a price of $4-$7 per million Btus as well as an increase of 1.3 percent in the expected electricity demand per year for at least a decade. To get there, the United States and Canada will require an average yearly investment of $8.2 billion, or $205 billion over the next quarter century. Santa notes that the industry has invested $8 billion during a three year period from 2006 to 2010 -- a "strong indication" that it will continue to make the necessary capital allocations if the regulatory environment permits. By 2030, the U.S. and Canada will need approximately 29,000 to 62,000 miles of additional natural gas pipelines as well as 370 billion to 600 billion cubic feet of additional storage capacity, says the study. If the country does not to rise to the challenge, it would create supply disruptions and price volatility would increase. But developers are hard-pressed to invest if the impediments to construction are too onerous and there is not enough gas to keep the new lines filled to capacity. Developers also want to make it easier for gas distributors to enter into long-term contracts that help pay for the lines. Regulators are, largely, sympathetic. They are concerned about potential energy shortages and any subsequent rolling blackouts. To cope, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission<http://www.ferc.gov/industries/gas/indus-act/pipelines.asp>is trying to get all regulatory agencies to coordinate their schedules and reviews. The goal is not to subvert the permitting process but rather, to streamline it. "To meet the growing demand for natural gas, the Commission must continue to respond quickly when companies propose to expand and construct needed pipelines and related facilities," says FERC. "The Commission has expedited the certification of natural gas pipelines by having Commission staff actively participate in projects (that pre-file)." More conciliation The first step for developers is to determine whether new pipelines are needed and whether the price of natural gas supports construction such that companies can obtain firm contracts to finance them. The next step is to propose a route the line will take. Overall, there still must not be any significant affect on either the natural habitat or the landowners who lease their rights-of-way. Those precautions will inevitably lead to the rerouting of any pipeline system, although in some cases the federal government may exercise its right of eminent domain. Under the best of circumstances, the opposition to new construction is intense. The process to get the permits and to overcome the environmental and zoning questions is lengthy and expensive. And in the aftermath of a gas pipeline explosion that killed 7 people in Northern California a couple years ago, the outcry for reforms has magnified. "The American public is apprehensive about natural gas pipelines - and understandably so," says Santo, with the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America. "One accident is too many. Still, despite recent accidents, pipelines are the safest way to transport energy -- safer than rails or roads -- according to the U.S. Department of Transportation." Generally, the need for new gas supplies and the infrastructure to carry the gas remains a top priority. Achieving a consensus among stakeholders is key. Shale-gas producers are at the heart of this debate and have been asked to be more conciliatory and share the chemicals they are using to drill. Likewise, the pipeline developers that will transport the fuel must acquiesce to safety and environmental concerns. Only then can the natural gas sector fulfill its promise. EnergyBiz Insider has been named Honorable Mention for Best Online Column by Media Industry News, MIN. Ken Silverstein has also been named one of the Top Economics Journalists by Wall Street Economists. Follow Ken on www.twitter.com/ken_silverstein energybizinsider(a)energycentral.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

2 1

Fwd: E&E Daily: Industry showers members of Congress with contributions
by Jim Sconyers 20 Jul '11

20 Jul '11

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Lisa Evans <levans(a)earthjustice.org> Date: Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:01 AM Subject: E&E Daily: Industry showers members of Congress with contributions To: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE(a)lists.sierraclub.org Environment and Energy Daily story on political contributions from the coal industry, highlighting McKinley- author of the House coal ash bill. COAL: Industry showers members of Congress with contributions (07/20/2011) Manuel Quinones, E&E reporter Coal-related companies have spent tens of millions of dollars in campaign donations and lobbying to push back against what many industry leaders and lawmakers call the Obama administration's war on coal. The industry's allies in Congress are fighting back -- with rhetoric and legislative attempts to handcuff environmental regulations. In a recent hearing on legislation to regulate the disposal of coal ash and pre-empt U.S. EPA rulemaking, Rep. David McKinley (R-W.Va.) spoke about the economic benefits of the American coal industry and warned against "further attacks in this war on coal." "It's gotta stop," he said. McKinley is not only one of coal's most ardent and vocal supporters, he has also emerged as one of the top recipients of industry donations. The congressman has received more than $200,000 in electricity and coal-related contributions so far this year, according to figures compiled by the Environmental Integrity Project. McKinley's take, EIP says, is much higher than other heavy hitters on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, including Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) with $96,650 and Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) with $51,250 in electricity- and coal-related contributions. McKinley raised a total of $300,455 in the second quarter of 2011 and more than twice that so far this year, with the help of donations from the political action committees of energy giants Koch Industries Inc., Arch Coal Co., Consol Energy Inc. and Alpha Natural Resources Inc. Alpha CEO Kevin Crutchfield, who recently led his company's purchase of Massey Energy Co., gave McKinley $1,000 in April. "I'm going to defend the coal industry all across America," McKinley said. "Twenty-five of our states make coal, mine it and ship it to the 48 that burn it. And I think it's time we stand up for those jobs." Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) has also been a top coal industry supporter, ushering legislation through the House this month to undercut EPA's crackdown of mountaintop removal mining pollution in Appalachia. This year, he has received $2,000 from the National Mining Association's COALPAC, $7,500 from the United Mine Workers' Coal Miners PAC and and $2,500 from Arch's ARCHPAC. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) is touting his support for coal as part of his campaign to secure re-election in 2012. Like Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), Manchin has become one of coal's top backers in the upper chamber of Congress. And the industry is rewarding him handsomely this year -- he received $5,000 from the NMA's COALPAC, $3,500 from the UMW and $2,500 from Peabody Energy Corp.'s PEABODY PAC. Like Rahall and McKinley, Manchin has received plenty of donations from coal burning utility PACs. Dominion Resources Inc. has poured $3,500 into the senator's coffers, American Electric Power Co. Inc. has provided $5,000, and the Edison Electric Institute has chipped in $2,500. Manchin is the only Democratic senator to have received money this year -- $5,000 -- from Koch Industries' KOCHPAC, which tends to favor conservative contenders. The National Mining Association has also been generous with Ohio Republican Reps. Bob Gibbs and Bill Johnson, two freshmen from coal country who have blasted EPA's Clean Water Act oversight of coal mining operations. Both lawmakers have received several thousand dollars from the NMA's COALPAC and MINEPAC. Mining PAC dollars have flowed as well to McKinley, Upton, House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) and Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.). Shimkus -- who this month helped broker a bipartisan agreement on coal-ash disposal, which the industry supports and EPA opposes -- received $3,500 from ARCHPAC and $5,000 from Exelon Corp. Watchdogs cry foul Overall, between January and May of this year, Alpha's ALPHAPAC doled out $120,500, the NMA's COALPAC and MINEPAC $143,000 combined and the Edison Electric Institute $217,000. While lawmakers insist campaign donations do not influence their vote, watchdog groups like EIP see a direct correlation between campaign donations and the hostility many lawmakers show for increased regulation. "No doubt the Congressmen receiving these large sums are sincere in their support for legislation that coal interests want so badly," the EIP said in its report. "But are politicians who raise such large sums of money from coal the best qualified to rewrite regulations that affect the industry?" In another new report, Polluting Democracy: Coal Plays Dirty on the Hill, Greenpeace listed 15 lawmakers -- including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.) and Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.), a presidential candidate -- who are in particular supporters of the fossil fuel energy industry. Almost all of them have also been top recipients of industry dollars, the report said. "We must urge our representatives to let EPA do its job," said Greenpeace senior legislative representative Kyle Ash, "by protecting us from dangerous toxins produced by coal-fired power plants." Lobbying dollars flow For the industry and its supporters, EPA is going beyond its mandate by working on numerous, burdensome regulations that will cost thousands of American jobs. As a result, companies and associations are spending big dollars to make sure lawmakers know what's at stake. When it comes to lobbying Congress, the National Mining Association has spent more than $1 million this year, AEP more than $5 million and Edison Electric Institute roughly $4 million, according to the latest numbers, which are sure to increase when new quarterly lobbying disclosure reports come due today. Lisa Evans Senior Administrative Counsel Earthjustice 21 Ocean Ave. Marblehead, MA 01945 T: (781) 631-4119 F: (212) 918-1556 www.earthjustice.org *please consider the environment before printing The information contained in this email message may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you think that you have received this email message in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the message and any attachments. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE list, send any message to: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

Fwd: FYI - PJM Reform and Coal Retirements in your state
by James Kotcon 16 Jul '11

16 Jul '11

Attached is a report on reforms to the regional planning process used by PJM to predict electricity demand. The report discusses issues related to energy efficiency, renewables, and the shut down of old coal-fired plants to illustrate the need for reform of the planning process used to determine the need for transmission lines like PATH. I recommend reading this report, it is long but worthwhile, as we will need to understand some of these issues as we move forward with plans for our overall energy campaigns. One aspect I found most striking was the concept of "Reliability Must Run" contracts. For example, several old dirty plants like Albright or that must install scrubbers or shut down (under the new rules EPA finalized last week). These would normally be shut down as it is not cost effective to install scrubbers on such old plants. But PJM could order them to stay open under an RMR contract and install scrubbers at ratepayer expense if PJM determines that they are needed for reliability purposes. Such RMR contracts would keep old dirty plants on line longer, raise consumer costs, reduce the incentives for renewables, and distort the market signal that utilities need to plan properly. So including energy efficiency and renewables in the PJM planning model is important to avoid the needless expense of installing scrubbers on plants that are not cost-effective. I am not sure we need to go to this level of detail for our public meetings, but we certainly need more people who understand the implications of this as we develop energy campaigns. Enjoy! Jim Kotcon >>> Jim Sconyers <jimscon(a)gmail.com> 7/16/2011 10:08 AM >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Craig Segall <Craig.Segall(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 4:56 PM Subject: FYI - PJM Reform and Coal Retirements in your state To: nancymoore.desierra(a)gmail.com, gwynjones(a)aol.com, jack.darin(a)sierraclub.org, dmaidenberg(a)gmail.com, alicehowell(a)insightbb.com, ron.henry(a)mdsierra.org, awoiwodesc(a)earthlink.net, jeff.tittel(a)verizon.net, vkloepfer(a)suddenlink.net, sierrabob(a)oh.rr.com, jeff.schmidt(a)dejazzd.com, kdpendleton1(a)aol.com, glenbesa(a)gmail.com, jimscon(a)gmail.com Cc: Mark Kresowik <Mark.Kresowik(a)sierraclub.org>, Josh Stebbins <Josh.Stebbins(a)sierraclub.org> Hi all, For those of you I haven't yet had the chance to work with, let me introduce myself: I'm one of the attorneys on the national law staff, where I work mostly on greenhouse gas and regulatory issues. As part of that work, I've been focused lately on PJM (www.pjm.com) which, as you likely know, is the regional transmission grid operator for much of the mid-Atlantic and midwest. I'm writing because PJM is working on reforming its processes to allow it to better handle both the ramp-up of clean energy measures and the retirement of a large chunk of old coal generation. Because PJM covers your states, I want to make sure that you know what Mark Kresowik, of the coal campaign, Josh Stebbins, in the law program, and I are up to as we work on these issues. Basically, PJM's existing transmission planning process does not allow it to react nimbly to coal plant retirements or to new clean energy opportunities -- which could delay both of them, and add to ratepayer costs. PJM has launched a reform process, through its Regional Planning Process Task Force (the RPPTF) -- see http://pjm.com/committees-and-groups/task-forces/rpptf.aspx for more -- that would help fix many of these problems. To succeed, PJM must move its reforms through a series of internal committees this fall, which are dominated by generation interests, and then file its proposed changes with FERC this December. We're closely monitoring the process, and are working with national allies, including the Project for a Sustainable FERC, NRDC, Earthjustice, Audubon, and the Piedmont Environmental Council, to advocate for useful reforms. As part of that work, we commissioned an expert report on transmission reform, which we've shared with each of the PJM state's utility commissions and ratepayer advocates. I'm attaching that report and a short memo summarizing its recommendations. We'd, of course, appreciate any help you can offer in generating positive state pressure on PJM to keep moving down the path to reform. I will certainly keep you informed as PJM moves forward, and can schedule a call to discuss possible grasstops organizing options if you are interested -- just drop me a line. Chees, Craig Craig Holt Segall Associate Attorney Sierra Club Environmental Law Program 50 F St NW, Eighth Floor Washington, DC, 20001 (202)-548-4597 (202)-547-6009 (fax) Craig.Segall(a)sierraclub.org CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL COMMUNICATION/WORK PRODUCT This e-mail, and its attachments, may contain privileged and confidential attorney-client communications and confidential attorney work product. If you received this e-mail inadvertently, please notify me and delete all versions on your system. Thank you. -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

FW: [ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS] Fw: Agenda Item 5: Energy Policy Documents for Board
by Grubb, Karen 15 Jul '11

15 Jul '11

From: National Hydrofracking Team [mailto:ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS@LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG] On Behalf Of Jessica Helm Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 12:36 PM To: ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Subject: [ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS] Fw: Agenda Item 5: Energy Policy Documents for Board Jessica Helm 631 219 6449 helm_jessica(a)yahoo.com ~~Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell~~ - Edward Abbey ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: David Scott <david.scott(a)SIERRACLUB.ORG> To: BOD-OPEN(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Sent: Thu, July 14, 2011 7:44:32 PM Subject: Agenda Item 5: Energy Policy Documents for Board Colleagues, I will be offering the following motion on the July 25 board call: “The board of directors adopts the proposed revisions to the Energy Resources Policy. The following policies are sunsetted because they have been superseded by the new comprehensive policy: Energy Promotion – May 2-3, 1970; Energy Conservation – January 20-21, 1973; Energy Research & Development – January 12-13, 1974; Solar Energy – April 1-2, 1976 [which itself superseded an earlier policy on this subject of Dec. 13-14, 1975; Solar Energy – February 3-4, 1979; Energy Conservation & Research – July 21-22, 1979; Building Energy Conservation – July 21-22, 1979; Global Warming – May 7-8, 1988” I am attaching the following documents with this message, which is also attached: • Energy Policy Rewrite (sent June 29th) • Cover letter for energy policy, sent June 29th • “The BoD sunsets the following policies…” • ECL-Bioenergy explanation for the Board These documents will all be posted on the Board documents site. Regarding the policies to be sunsetted, Gene Coan pointed out that these are now redundant and were superseded by the 2006 Energy Resources Policy – this is really just a housekeeping measure. Regarding the new, revised policy, a great deal of work has gone into these proposed amendments. I urge you to read them over so that you can raise any questions or concerns before the July 25th call. The comments we received fill nearly 100 pages. If anyone wants that entire file, you’re welcome to read them – just contact either Bruce Hamilton or me and we’ll get them to you. But it’s a big file. The June 29th cover letter briefly explains the rationale for the proposed revisions. The board has received two recent messages about the proposed revisions. One message concerns the forest bioenergy language. Some activists would like less restrictive language to allow for ecological restoration projects. The attached “ECL-Bioenergy memo” responds to this concern, which gets into our member-adopted policy opposing commercial logging on federal lands. A second message, from Alan Carlton, Ed Mainland and Jim Stewart, requests an additional comment period. I will be sending you a response to that message in the next few days. The many comments we received were read thoughtfully and closely. This revision process began last year, and revisions have already been discussed by the board once. Both Mike and Bruce Hamilton have been involved, along with two volunteer campaign leaders and other Club energy experts. The most substantial changes are in the transitional fuels section. Again, if you have questions or concerns, please email them to the board list or feel free to contact any members of the drafting team, who are listed on the June 29th cover letter. I look forward to our discussion on the 25th. Dave - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the BOD-OPEN list, send any message to: BOD-OPEN-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This email list is associated with the Hydrofracking Team on the Sierra Club's Activist Network. Join the Hydrofracking Team at http://sc.org/frac. This list is open to the public and subscribers are not moderated. Please be aware that information you share may be forwarded to or read by others beyond this list. To unsubscribe from the ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS list, send any message to: ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS-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

Tomblin's Executive Order
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 14 Jul '11

14 Jul '11

Attached is Tomblin's executive order concerning gas drilling. -Jonathan

6 10

Robert Kennedy, Jr. Accepts Post on DEC Fracking Panel
by Frank Young 14 Jul '11

14 Jul '11

"Because of the reckless conduct of the industry over the past several years, as well as my growing concerns about the greenhouse gas impacts associated with shale gas extraction and about the potential for the investment and infrastructure required by aggressive natural gas exploitation to divert resources away from the development of alternative fuels, I have changed my thinking and have asked members of the industry to stop using any statements I may have made in the past in support of natural gas. My position now is that I oppose moving forward with permitting of all new horizontal hydrofracking activities until more responsible leadership emerges within the industry, best practices are required by law, and state and federal regulatory agencies have the staff and resources to provide reliable oversight."- Robert F. Kennedy (underlined emphasis added- F.Y.) ----- Original Message ----- From: Judith Cartisano To: ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 11:01 AM Subject: [ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS] Robert Kennedy Jr. Robert Kennedy, Jr. Accepts Post on DEC Fracking Panel View more images on our Flickr site Will advocate for rigorous environmental protections On Friday, July 1, 2011, NYS Department of Environmental Conservation announced its new recommendations regarding limits to be placed on high-volume hydraulic fracturing in New York State, including a ban on hydrofracking in the New York City and Syracuse watersheds, over primary aquifers and on state lands. In addition, DEC Commissioner Joe Martens announced the formation of an Hydraulic Fracturing Advisory Panel charged with developing recommendations to ensure proper oversight and enforcement with respect to hydraulic fracturing activities and mitigation of impacts to local governments and communities. Commissioner Martens asked Robert Kennedy, Jr., as the President of Waterkeeper Alliance, to be a member of the panel, along with several industry representatives, as well as representatives from other environmental organizations including NRDC and the Environmental Defense Fund. Governor Cuomo has assured Kennedy that his goal is to have DEC put in place the most rigorous regulations in the 50 states governing shale gas extraction activities in New York. In addition, the Governor and Commissioner Martens want to make certain that oversight and enforcement is adequately funded by the industry itself. Having been invited to play an inside role in guiding the State's efforts to put adequate protections in place to ensure that hydraulic fracturing will be done safely and responsibly in New York, Kennedy decided that he would be in the strongest position to negotiate on behalf of protecting the environment as a member of the panel. "I felt that it would be counter-productive and chicken-hearted for the Waterkeeper Alliance to sit on the sidelines and allow an industry-dominated panel attempt to influence the development of a less than fully protective regulatory framework, and then lob bombs at the final work product." Kennedy is committed to playing an active and forceful role on the panel to make certain that voices speaking for the environment and in particular, for our precious water resources, are heard, and to ensure that the best possible regulations and financial assurances are part of the regulatory protocols. This role is consistent with the position on the natural gas industry that Kennedy has taken since this spring, when he re-examined his support for natural gas as a reasonable substitute for the destructive practice of mountain top coal mining. "Because of the reckless conduct of the industry over the past several years, as well as my growing concerns about the greenhouse gas impacts associated with shale gas extraction and about the potential for the investment and infrastructure required by aggressive natural gas exploitation to divert resources away from the development of alternative fuels, I have changed my thinking and have asked members of the industry to stop using any statements I may have made in the past in support of natural gas. My position now is that I oppose moving forward with permitting of all new horizontal hydrofracking activities until more responsible leadership emerges within the industry, best practices are required by law, and state and federal regulatory agencies have the staff and resources to provide reliable oversight." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This email list is associated with the Hydrofracking Team on the Sierra Club's Activist Network. Join the Hydrofracking Team at http://sc.org/frac. This list is open to the public and subscribers are not moderated. Please be aware that information you share may be forwarded to or read by others beyond this list. To unsubscribe from the ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS list, send any message to: ACTNET-FRAC-NEWS-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

Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order
by DSGJr＠aol.com 14 Jul '11

14 Jul '11

Maloney fired the first salvo with his interview with Ry Rivard in the Daily Mail. The acting governor fired back with his executive order. I see the press conference as the third salvo. He began by blasting the EPA (again) over the Spruce permit, and blasted them again later in responding to a reporter's question. And he assembled a bunch of legislators and industry officials to surround him at the podium. Maloney has fired back, charging the acting governor is not showing leadership. This will probably escalate by itself. But Chuck's idea of providing Maloney with the Sierra Club position paper is not a bad one. In the interview Maloney gave to Ry, he has already come close to supporting some of it. don In a message dated 7/13/2011 9:47:27 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, fyoung(a)mountain.net writes: Is there a way to bait them into engaging in a political game of "out Marcellus" one another? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck Wyrostok" <wyro(a)appalight.com> To: "'Jim Sconyers'" <jimscon(a)gmail.com>; "'James Kotcon'" <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> Cc: <DSGJr(a)aol.com>; <ec(a)osenergy.org>; <jbc329(a)earthlink.net> Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:41 PM Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order I'm thinking we should send our position paper to Maloney to give him an complete picture of what's needed...c Chuck Wyrostok Sierra Club Outreach Organizer Toll free 877 252 0257 E: outreach(a)marcellus-wv.com www.marcellus-wv.com -----Original Message----- From: Jim Sconyers [mailto:jimscon@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 12:13 AM To: James Kotcon Cc: ec(a)osenergy.org; wyro(a)appalight.com; DSGJr(a)aol.com; jbc329(a)earthlink.net Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order I'd say this is classic co-opting. On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:12 PM, James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> wrote: > Thank you Jonathon. Not sure how you got this, but it makes interesting reading. > > At first glance this seems like a major step forward, but the cynic in me read it again. > > * Nothing in here requires permits for or limits air emissions. > > * Nothing requires a permit for water withdrawals. This order give the operator the authority to submit a plan, and as long as the plan meets the methods approved by DEP, DEP can not deny or reject a plan submitted by the operator. > > * Nothing prohibits on-site burial of pit wastes. It says pits can be "managed on site in a manner otherwise approved by the Secretary of the WVDEP", and DEP currently approves on-site burial? > > So I am wondering if it is time to blast this proposal as too little, too late, and a prescription for continued outrage among citizens and uncertainty for industry. It is a classic example of Tomblin's continuing failure to provide leadership. > > JBK > >>>> Jonathan Rosenbaum <freesource(a)cheat.org> 7/12/2011 4:10 PM >>> > Attached is Tomblin's executive order concerning gas drilling. > > -Jonathan > > > _______________________________________________ > EC mailing list > EC(a)osenergy.org > http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec > -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last. _______________________________________________ EC mailing list EC(a)osenergy.org http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec

2 1

Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order
by John Christensen 13 Jul '11

13 Jul '11

Sounds like a plan....see how strict they will go to get elected and how much they will attempt to protect our water and air as an afterthought -----Original Message----- >From: Frank Young <fyoung(a)mountain.net> >Sent: Jul 13, 2011 9:47 PM >To: Chuck Wyrostok <wyro(a)appalight.com>, 'Jim Sconyers' <jimscon(a)gmail.com>, 'James Kotcon' <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> >Cc: DSGJr(a)aol.com, ec(a)osenergy.org, jbc329(a)earthlink.net >Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order > >Is there a way to bait them into engaging in a political game of "out >Marcellus" one another? > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Chuck Wyrostok" <wyro(a)appalight.com> >To: "'Jim Sconyers'" <jimscon(a)gmail.com>; "'James Kotcon'" <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> >Cc: <DSGJr(a)aol.com>; <ec(a)osenergy.org>; <jbc329(a)earthlink.net> >Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:41 PM >Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order > > >I'm thinking we should send our position paper to Maloney to give him an >complete picture of what's needed...c > >Chuck Wyrostok >Sierra Club Outreach Organizer >Toll free 877 252 0257 >E: outreach(a)marcellus-wv.com >www.marcellus-wv.com > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Jim Sconyers [mailto:jimscon@gmail.com] >Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 12:13 AM >To: James Kotcon >Cc: ec(a)osenergy.org; wyro(a)appalight.com; DSGJr(a)aol.com; jbc329(a)earthlink.net >Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order > >I'd say this is classic co-opting. > >On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:12 PM, James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> wrote: >> Thank you Jonathon. Not sure how you got this, but it makes interesting >reading. >> >> At first glance this seems like a major step forward, but the cynic in me >read it again. >> >> * Nothing in here requires permits for or limits air emissions. >> >> * Nothing requires a permit for water withdrawals. This order give the >operator the authority to submit a plan, and as long as the plan meets the >methods approved by DEP, DEP can not deny or reject a plan submitted by the >operator. >> >> * Nothing prohibits on-site burial of pit wastes. It says pits can be >"managed on site in a manner otherwise approved by the Secretary of the >WVDEP", and DEP currently approves on-site burial? >> >> So I am wondering if it is time to blast this proposal as too little, too >late, and a prescription for continued outrage among citizens and >uncertainty for industry. It is a classic example of Tomblin's continuing >failure to provide leadership. >> >> JBK >> >>>>> Jonathan Rosenbaum <freesource(a)cheat.org> 7/12/2011 4:10 PM >>> >> Attached is Tomblin's executive order concerning gas drilling. >> >> -Jonathan >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> EC mailing list >> EC(a)osenergy.org >> http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec >> > > > >-- >Jim Sconyers >jimscon(a)gmail.com >304.698.9628 > >Remember, Mother Nature bats last. > > >_______________________________________________ >EC mailing list >EC(a)osenergy.org >http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec > > John Christensen Mountain View Solar and Wind LLC 410-499-4873 cell 304-258-4733 office

1 0

Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order
by John Christensen 13 Jul '11

13 Jul '11

As a certified garbage crazy this thread is exciting to me and I have forwarded most of this to Clint Hogbin who is also very interested. In Berkeley County we have a project to change the local waste stream to a waste to fuel facility and we are working hard to get our siting plan update approved, I am on that board with Clint. My fear is that with less than normal supply coming in to LCS they will solicit this type of business to make up the difference and more, trouble for our aquifer will result, I'm afraid. I included Clint on this reply and hope we add him to the discussion from now on. JB -----Original Message----- >From: Beth Little <blittle(a)citynet.net> >Sent: Jul 13, 2011 8:14 AM >To: 'Frank Young' <fyoung(a)mountain.net>, ec(a)osenergy.org >Cc: wyro(a)appalight.com, DSGJr(a)aol.com, jbc329(a)earthlink.net >Subject: RE: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order > >Frank, I don't doubt that they have not been classified as hazardous, >because of all the exemptions gas development has from federal laws. That's >the problem. And I seriously doubt that a regular landfill has the >capability of testing for some of the nasties they contain, especially the >NORMs. Granted, a landfill is better than buried on site, but the landfill >in Greenbrier Co has leachate that goes into the Greenbrier River. > >-----Original Message----- >From: ec-bounces(a)osenergy.org [mailto:ec-bounces@osenergy.org] On Behalf Of >Frank Young >Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 10:20 PM >To: ec(a)osenergy.org >Cc: wyro(a)appalight.com; DSGJr(a)aol.com; jbc329(a)earthlink.net >Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order > be >Beth, > >By what legal determination are these drilling cuttings "hazardous >materials"? Somehow I doubt that they have been legally determined to be >hazardous materials. > >I think I'd rather see them taken to a legal landfill than disposed of on >site by the usual "fold the liner into the hole and bury" method. > >Frank > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Beth Little" <blittle(a)citynet.net> >To: "'James Kotcon'" <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu>; <ec(a)osenergy.org> >Cc: <wyro(a)appalight.com>; <DSGJr(a)aol.com>; <jbc329(a)earthlink.net> >Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 8:29 PM >Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order > > >> Furthermore, Leslee and I are trying to track down the facts behind >> hearing >> that the Greenbrier landfill is taking cuttings from wells in Greenbrier >> Co. >> Leslee said she heard they have a permit. If it's a permit from the DEP, >> then they are allowing hazardous materials in regular landfills. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ec-bounces(a)osenergy.org [mailto:ec-bounces@osenergy.org] On Behalf >> Of >> James Kotcon >> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:12 PM >> To: ec(a)osenergy.org >> Cc: wyro(a)appalight.com; DSGJr(a)aol.com; jbc329(a)earthlink.net >> Subject: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order >> >> Thank you Jonathon. Not sure how you got this, but it makes interesting >> reading. >> >> At first glance this seems like a major step forward, but the cynic in me >> read it again. >> >> * Nothing in here requires permits for or limits air emissions. >> >> * Nothing requires a permit for water withdrawals. This order give the >> operator the authority to submit a plan, and as long as the plan meets the >> methods approved by DEP, DEP can not deny or reject a plan submitted by >> the >> operator. >> >> * Nothing prohibits on-site burial of pit wastes. It says pits can be >> "managed on site in a manner otherwise approved by the Secretary of the >> WVDEP", and DEP currently approves on-site burial? >> >> So I am wondering if it is time to blast this proposal as too little, too >> late, and a prescription for continued outrage among citizens and >> uncertainty for industry. It is a classic example of Tomblin's continuing >> failure to provide leadership. >> >> JBK >> >>>>> Jonathan Rosenbaum <freesource(a)cheat.org> 7/12/2011 4:10 PM >>> >> Attached is Tomblin's executive order concerning gas drilling. >> >> -Jonathan >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > >----- >No virus found in this message. >Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1516/3760 - Release Date: 07/12/11 > John Christensen Mountain View Solar and Wind LLC 410-499-4873 cell 304-258-4733 office

1 0

Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order
by John Christensen 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

I always thought that it was considered haz mat by what was in it or potentially in it, no requirement to test the flowback or cuttings to determine the toxicity before disposing... -----Original Message----- >From: Frank Young <fyoung(a)mountain.net> >Sent: Jul 12, 2011 9:19 PM >To: ec(a)osenergy.org >Cc: wyro(a)appalight.com, DSGJr(a)aol.com, jbc329(a)earthlink.net >Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order > >Beth, > >By what legal determination are these drilling cuttings "hazardous >materials"? Somehow I doubt that they have been legally determined to be >hazardous materials. > >I think I'd rather see them taken to a legal landfill than disposed of on >site by the usual "fold the liner into the hole and bury" method. > >Frank > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Beth Little" <blittle(a)citynet.net> >To: "'James Kotcon'" <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu>; <ec(a)osenergy.org> >Cc: <wyro(a)appalight.com>; <DSGJr(a)aol.com>; <jbc329(a)earthlink.net> >Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 8:29 PM >Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order > > >> Furthermore, Leslee and I are trying to track down the facts behind >> hearing >> that the Greenbrier landfill is taking cuttings from wells in Greenbrier >> Co. >> Leslee said she heard they have a permit. If it's a permit from the DEP, >> then they are allowing hazardous materials in regular landfills. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ec-bounces(a)osenergy.org [mailto:ec-bounces@osenergy.org] On Behalf >> Of >> James Kotcon >> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:12 PM >> To: ec(a)osenergy.org >> Cc: wyro(a)appalight.com; DSGJr(a)aol.com; jbc329(a)earthlink.net >> Subject: [EC] Fwd: Tomblin's Executive Order >> >> Thank you Jonathon. Not sure how you got this, but it makes interesting >> reading. >> >> At first glance this seems like a major step forward, but the cynic in me >> read it again. >> >> * Nothing in here requires permits for or limits air emissions. >> >> * Nothing requires a permit for water withdrawals. This order give the >> operator the authority to submit a plan, and as long as the plan meets the >> methods approved by DEP, DEP can not deny or reject a plan submitted by >> the >> operator. >> >> * Nothing prohibits on-site burial of pit wastes. It says pits can be >> "managed on site in a manner otherwise approved by the Secretary of the >> WVDEP", and DEP currently approves on-site burial? >> >> So I am wondering if it is time to blast this proposal as too little, too >> late, and a prescription for continued outrage among citizens and >> uncertainty for industry. It is a classic example of Tomblin's continuing >> failure to provide leadership. >> >> JBK >> >>>>> Jonathan Rosenbaum <freesource(a)cheat.org> 7/12/2011 4:10 PM >>> >> Attached is Tomblin's executive order concerning gas drilling. >> >> -Jonathan >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> EC mailing list >> EC(a)osenergy.org >> http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec > > John Christensen Mountain View Solar and Wind LLC 410-499-4873 cell 304-258-4733 office

1 0

New Report Reveals Toxic Air Near Natural Gas Operations
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

http://wv4mom.org/content/new-report-reveals-toxic-air-near-natural-gas-ope… -Jonathan

1 0

Fwd: FW: Teleconference - Drilling in an Abandoned Field: Hydrofracking in the Absence of Federal Regulation, Thurs. July 14
by Paul Wilson 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: DAVID E ORTMAN <deortman(a)msn.com> Date: Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 12:40 AM Subject: FW: Teleconference - Drilling in an Abandoned Field: Hydrofracking in the Absence of Federal Regulation, Thurs. July 14 To: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS(a)lists.sierraclub.org FR: David E. Ortman, Seattle, WA While NG fracking is not exactly coal, members on this listserve or others may be interested in this ABA program on Thursday. It doesn't specifically say you have to be an attorney or a member of the ABA to listen in. ------------------------------ To: deortman(a)MSN.COM Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 17:30:00 -0500 From: irr(a)americanbar.org Subject: Teleconference - Drilling in an Abandoned Field: Hydrofracking in the Absence of Federal Regulation, Thurs. July 14 - Section Home <http://www.americanbar.org/groups/individual_rights.html> • - Contact Us<http://www.americanbar.org/groups/individual_rights/contact_us.html> Drilling in an Abandoned Field: Hydrofracking in the Absence of Federal Regulation This panel will consider the legal landscape and environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing ("hydrofracking"), the use of horizontal drilling and high-volume fluid injection to free up natural gas found in shale and other deposits. The process makes drilling in places such as the Marcellus shale region feasible but introduces a number of regulatory challenges. For the process to work, millions of gallons of water must be piped or transported to well sites. Similar amounts of wastewater, containing hydrocarbons and proprietary chemicals, must be handled. Much of the wastewater remains below the surface where it can migrate into aquifers. Residents must endure noise, vibrations, lower property values, and air pollution from gas leaks, flaring, and truck exhaust. Hydrofracking is largely exempt from federal environmental laws, leaving the states to fend for themselves. This panel, composed of experts with many years of experience regulating and litigating hydrofracking-related issues, will discuss the New York and Pennsylvania experiences with this form of natural gas extraction. We will draw lessons from their struggles with environmental review, zoning, preemption, enforcement, and other practices. Their experience will be of use to environmental attorneys working in any of a growing number of states that has decided to consider or approve the use of hydrofracking in local communities. Speakers include: - *Al Appleton<http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/individual_rights/appleto…> *, Senior Advisor, The Cooper Union<http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/individual_rights/appleto…> - *Kate Hudson<http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/individual_rights/hudson_…> *, Watershed Program Director, Riverkeeper, Inc.<http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/individual_rights/hudson_…> - *Gregg Macey<http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/individual_rights/macey_b…> *, Brooklyn Law School<http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/individual_rights/macey_b…> - *Jeff Zimmerman<http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/individual_rights/zimmerm…> *, Zimmerman & Associates<http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/individual_rights/zimmerm…> THURSDAY, JULY 14, 2011 2:00 P.M. Eastern ** To join the 90 minute call please dial 1-877-317-0419 and reference the "Hydraulic Fracturing Call" or "Conference ID 80530313" ** The ABA is not seeking CLE credit for this program, you will not receive CLE credit for listening to this program. This message was sent to deortman(a)msn.com. Your e-mail address will only be used within the ABA and its entities. We do not sell or rent e-mail addresses to anyone outside the ABA. Update your profile<http://apps.americanbar.org/abanet/common/MyABA/home.cfm>| Unsubscribe<http://apps.americanbar.org/unsubscribe.shtml?email=deortman@msn.com>| Privacy Policy <http://www.americanbar.org/utility/privacy.html> American Bar Association | 321 N Clark | Chicago, IL 60654 | 1-800-285-2221 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS list, send any message to: COAL-CAMPAIGN-ALERTS-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle

1 0

Re: [EC] Interim Committee meetings
by DSGJr＠aol.com 09 Jul '11

09 Jul '11

Here is the agenda as I know it from staff. Meeting begins Tuesday evening at 6 PM and will go as long as they can. Then will continue on Wednesday at noon. 1. Presentation on tax revenues from Marcellus by Mark Muchow of Dept. of Revenue 2. Presentation on economic benefits of a cracker plant by Keith Buredette of Econ Development Office 3. Standard presentation on horizontal drilling and fracking by someone from WVU 4. Presentation by Don Garvin (whoever he is) 5. Presentation by two Morgantown city council members 6. Presentation by Dave McMahon And, yes, Sconyers, you are always paranoid. But that's not a bad thing! don garvin In a message dated 7/9/2011 3:22:33 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, jimscon(a)gmail.com writes: Am I paranoid? Neither meeting of the Marcellus select committee has an agenda posted. On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 1:21 PM, James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> wrote: > The Interim Committee schedule is out. Looks like some meetings start as early as 9 AM Monday. > > The Select Committee on Marcellus is scheduled to meet Tuesday at 6 PM, and again Wednesday at noon. > > Others of interest include > > Monday > 10 AM. Joint Commission on Economic Development. Update on Marcellus gas "cracker" plants. House Gov Org. Room 215 E > > 11 AM. Joint Commission on Water Resources. Senate Judiciary Room. 208 W. The agenda posted is from 2010, but I expect it may be worth covering. > > 2 PM. Finance Sub Committee B. Senate Finance room. Funding Issues Regarding Marcellus Shale. > > 3 PM. Judiciary Subcommittee C. Senate Judiciary Room Revision of rule-making procedures. > > Tuesday > 6 PM. Select Committee on Marcellus. Senate Judiciary > > Wednesday > 10 AM Legislative Rule-Making Review. Senate Judiciary. No on-line agenda yet, the posted one is from January. > 11 AM. Joint Judiciary Committee. House Chamber. Review of Supreme Court election finance decision. > 12:00 Noon. elect Committee on Marcellus. Senate Judiciary > > There may be other interesting things happening, but these ought to be a good start. > > JBK > > > > > _______________________________________________ > EC mailing list > EC(a)osenergy.org > http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec > -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

1 0

Interim Committee meetings
by James Kotcon 09 Jul '11

09 Jul '11

The Interim Committee schedule is out. Looks like some meetings start as early as 9 AM Monday. The Select Committee on Marcellus is scheduled to meet Tuesday at 6 PM, and again Wednesday at noon. Others of interest include Monday 10 AM. Joint Commission on Economic Development. Update on Marcellus gas "cracker" plants. House Gov Org. Room 215 E 11 AM. Joint Commission on Water Resources. Senate Judiciary Room. 208 W. The agenda posted is from 2010, but I expect it may be worth covering. 2 PM. Finance Sub Committee B. Senate Finance room. Funding Issues Regarding Marcellus Shale. 3 PM. Judiciary Subcommittee C. Senate Judiciary Room Revision of rule-making procedures. Tuesday 6 PM. Select Committee on Marcellus. Senate Judiciary Wednesday 10 AM Legislative Rule-Making Review. Senate Judiciary. No on-line agenda yet, the posted one is from January. 11 AM. Joint Judiciary Committee. House Chamber. Review of Supreme Court election finance decision. 12:00 Noon. elect Committee on Marcellus. Senate Judiciary There may be other interesting things happening, but these ought to be a good start. JBK

2 2

Re: [EC] Interim Committee meetings
by DSGJr＠aol.com 09 Jul '11

09 Jul '11

Don't forget the air rules, Jim. "The public hearing for all air quality rules will take place at 6 p.m. on July 11 in the Dolly Sods Room at DEP’s Charleston headquarters, 601 57th Street S.E., Charleston, WV 25304. The comment period will begin on June 10 and end at the conclusion of the hearing." don In a message dated 7/9/2011 12:21:35 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, jkotcon(a)wvu.edu writes: The Interim Committee schedule is out. Looks like some meetings start as early as 9 AM Monday. The Select Committee on Marcellus is scheduled to meet Tuesday at 6 PM, and again Wednesday at noon. Others of interest include Monday 10 AM. Joint Commission on Economic Development. Update on Marcellus gas "cracker" plants. House Gov Org. Room 215 E 11 AM. Joint Commission on Water Resources. Senate Judiciary Room. 208 W. The agenda posted is from 2010, but I expect it may be worth covering. 2 PM. Finance Sub Committee B. Senate Finance room. Funding Issues Regarding Marcellus Shale. 3 PM. Judiciary Subcommittee C. Senate Judiciary Room Revision of rule-making procedures. Tuesday 6 PM. Select Committee on Marcellus. Senate Judiciary Wednesday 10 AM Legislative Rule-Making Review. Senate Judiciary. No on-line agenda yet, the posted one is from January. 11 AM. Joint Judiciary Committee. House Chamber. Review of Supreme Court election finance decision. 12:00 Noon. elect Committee on Marcellus. Senate Judiciary There may be other interesting things happening, but these ought to be a good start. JBK

1 0

Re: [EC] Interim Committee meetings
by DSGJr＠aol.com 09 Jul '11

09 Jul '11

I always attend the Forest Management Review meeting -- it's Monday at 9 AM. The Water Resources Meeting at 11 AM Monday has been canceled and rolled into the Select Committee meetings. don In a message dated 7/9/2011 12:21:35 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, jkotcon(a)wvu.edu writes: The Interim Committee schedule is out. Looks like some meetings start as early as 9 AM Monday. The Select Committee on Marcellus is scheduled to meet Tuesday at 6 PM, and again Wednesday at noon. Others of interest include Monday 10 AM. Joint Commission on Economic Development. Update on Marcellus gas "cracker" plants. House Gov Org. Room 215 E 11 AM. Joint Commission on Water Resources. Senate Judiciary Room. 208 W. The agenda posted is from 2010, but I expect it may be worth covering. 2 PM. Finance Sub Committee B. Senate Finance room. Funding Issues Regarding Marcellus Shale. 3 PM. Judiciary Subcommittee C. Senate Judiciary Room Revision of rule-making procedures. Tuesday 6 PM. Select Committee on Marcellus. Senate Judiciary Wednesday 10 AM Legislative Rule-Making Review. Senate Judiciary. No on-line agenda yet, the posted one is from January. 11 AM. Joint Judiciary Committee. House Chamber. Review of Supreme Court election finance decision. 12:00 Noon. elect Committee on Marcellus. Senate Judiciary There may be other interesting things happening, but these ought to be a good start. JBK

1 0

Fwd: The Pulse: Global warming worsens asthma and respiratory illnesses
by James Kotcon 08 Jul '11

08 Jul '11

Some fascinating tidbits from The Union of Concerned Scientists. I am especially intrigued by their approach to the questions of whether the floods, tornados and other severe storms are caused by Global Warming. While one can never ascribe single weather events, or even a single year of weather, to "climate" change, the models all predict, and the weather trends all show, that increasingly severe storms are coming. The powerful storms of 2011 are "the new normal", and it is going to keep getting worse. JBK >>> Union of Concerned Scientists <action(a)ucsusa.org> 7/7/2011 6:33 PM >>> ***************************** Union of Concerned Scientists The Pulse: Facts You Need from Experts You Trust http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=0GQWYnO4d3TK4Nu6BRZ0_g.. ***************************** Dear James, A new UCS report reveals that global warming threatens public health and increases health care costs by exacerbating ground-level ozone--the primary component of smog. "Climate Change and Your Health: Rising Temperatures, Worsening Ozone Pollution," explains how climate change-induced ozone increases are likely to result in millions of additional respiratory illnesses and thousands of more hospitalizations due to serious breathing problems in 2020. And what will all these health-related impacts cost? Approximately $5.4 billion. The good news is that both ozone pollution and climate change are fundamentally caused by the same activities--human beings burning fossil fuels--and we have ready-to-roll solutions for this problem. To check out our new report online, visit: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=jSKHvaaOe4IV5Z54-Ee3wA.. -Karla SCIENCE IN ACTION Tell Congress: Global warming could take our breath away. Unchecked global warming could lead to more serious respiratory illnesses like asthma and cost us billions in health costs. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is working right now to draft new regulations that would help protect us from the dangerous effects of global warming. Send a message to your members of Congress today urging them to let the EPA protect our health and save us money by reducing global warming emissions. Click Here to Take Action: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=GWvmnyyVs21uz9lafdi9GQ.. LINKS FOR YOU: :: UCS ticker shows the enormous amount of money the Clean Air Act has saved the country from 1970 through today. http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=3ggdhWSDKi8tDUTDqYMz2w.. :: USA today: UCS warns climate change could increase breathing problems and health costs. http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=sK-Pk6aQr8oVo3vOyzXWog.. :: New Climate Hot Map shows effects of global warming around the world. http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=dNQ9d7U9xDDkCvSsq3lq-A.. :: Don't miss your chance to win a carbon-neutral trip for two to research climate change in Brazil! Embark on our Climate Hot Map Scavenger Hunt today. http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=n-f4DpSedy8G8liT_eGo4A.. ASK THE SCIENTIST: How much ozone depletion has occurred over the past two decades, and to what degree are more harmful UV rays now reaching Earth? --K. Roumph, Fremont, NE. Answered by Peter Frumhoff, Ph.D., Director of Science & Policy Earth's ozone layer, high in the atmosphere, which had thinned significantly by the 1980s and early 1990s, has actually stabilized over the past two decades. Its recovery is uneven and complicated by global warming, but overall, a scientific and political success story averted a much more serious threat from ultraviolet radiation, or UV rays. When ozone is created near Earth's surface, however, it's called ground-level ozone and this type of ozone is a human health irritant and component of smog. Unfortunately, warmer temperatures increase ground-level ozone. Therefore, unlike its high-flying counterpart, ground-level ozone is cause for mounting concern. MORE: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=wCmsNt8XyW6Dki7E8ajnOg.. Do you have a question for UCS scientists? Submit your question today: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=-xTWrNlMu6qgDymCIV2qnA.. THIS JUST IN Reality in a warming world: Powerful storms become the new normal. This past spring, the United States experienced some of the worst extreme weather ever-and its effects were devastating for communities across the country: Massive flooding, monster wildfires, severe drought, and historic tornadoes. How much of this can be attributed to global warming? A lot of it, but not all of it, according to UCS climate scientists. MORE: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=WrZBoKj0oL66dMo_5mp2Xg.. GREENTIPS For many, reducing environmental harm is a guiding principle in life. But what about in death? Since green burial practices are not yet widespread, here are factors to consider when looking for a suitable final resting place. http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=K4Psf6w9FYP1R1BuFO8XTQ.. FEED: THE FOOD AND ENVIRONMENT ELECTRONIC DIGEST :: UCS joins lawsuit against the FDA on antibiotics. http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=BHQ5cyrbpJlHc5MuEysf6w.. :: New report says we waste one third of our food! http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=iCXYAxgIaChBhxNVgLaNWA.. :: Antibiotic-resistant superbug pops up in British milk. http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=6R5B_3iVPRnX8HTIjtALaQ.. :: Farmers markets beat grocery stores on organic prices http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=-JtJJn8oFNkiUfK74TpG5Q.. MORE: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=_zUpfyv7fNKHbXy91vx5Ng.. DRIVING CHANGE NETWORK: :: 2011 UCS Hybrid Scorecard just released! http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=rMelBrAutX0o0rN5Bps7Ug.. :: Secretary of Transportation responds to UCS activists. http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=kc7hpda9_TfuSmIsr5f_4Q.. :: Google estimates 90 percent of vehicles on the road by 2030 could be hybrids or EVs. http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=EU0-M7wvg4cScsozhS5umQ.. MORE: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=KAFOaKWCaA92XNpVVcS4hQ.. THANK YOU Your commitment as a member of UCS ensures that scientific facts inform decisions that affect our environment, our health, and our security. Make a Donation: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=1yno6ScFwow655CLMmOPTw.. STAY CONNECTED TO UCS: You Tube: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=hU1G7UmDO-U1Yc99Frg2Ew.. RSS FEED: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=q7eEjwFG5RP1KuS7cnukNg.. Facebook: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=oJn3dRK5I7lG19JNvq1xTw.. Twitter: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=2YyhAQRZjSOpO64OrYjQLw.. MySpace: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=x5kzKbC8WDTdJlAKgz6eKA.. ****************************** The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS is a 501(c)(3) organization. All gifts are tax deductible. You can be confident your donations to UCS are spent wisely. http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=K4Zj08I9wL9gRy6AJht3kg.. Union of Concerned Scientists 2 Brattle Square Cambridge, MA 02138-3780 Phone: 800-666-8276 Fax: 617-864-9405 Email: ucsaction(a)ucsusa.org www.ucsusa.org Forward this email: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=aZTccRvyTyzYwxhlzYzkdw.. Sign up: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=z77y9Xea2VNEX6JMLvXrxQ.. About UCS: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=hvnBFX7ok3Z6jXAmgneJPA.. Privacy policy http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=2dzam12DKIuwmkt_9ouo0Q.. Unsubscribe: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/CO?i=0i09s49kwMqqRUL9C8jGYL9DrUlF8wDR&cid=1786 Update your profile: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=wVMKlMQNFB23f-elOtF_vA.. Add UCS to your address book: http://action.ucsusa.org/site/R?i=0Kvz4azgCRDb1sizukjO_w..

1 0

Fwd: Fracking fluids foul national forest
by Paul Wilson 07 Jul '11

07 Jul '11

fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Bruce Hamilton <Bruce.Hamilton(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:14 PM Subject: Fracking fluids foul national forest To: CONS-AWL-RESILIENT-HABITATS(a)lists.sierraclub.org *Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility News Release (** www.peer.org* <http://www.peer.org/>*)* For Immediate Release: July 6, 2011 Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337 *FRACKING FLUIDS POISON A NATIONAL FOREST *— New Study Details Changes in Soil Chemistry and Devastation of Trees and Plants Washington, DC — A new study has found that wastewater from natural gas hydrofracturing in a West Virginia national forest quickly wiped out all ground plants, killed more than half of the trees and caused radical changes in soil chemistry. These results argue for much tighter control over disposal of these “fracking fluids,” contends Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The new study by Mary Beth Adams, a U.S. Forest Service researcher, appears in the July-August issue of the peer-reviewed Journal of Environmental Quality. She looked at the effects of land application of fracking fluids on a quarter-acre section of the Fernow Experimental Forest within the Monongahela National Forest. More than 75,000 gallons of fracking fluids, which are injected deep underground to free shale gas and then return to the surface, were applied to the assigned plot over a two day period during June 2008. The following effects were reported in the study: - Within two days all ground plants were dead; - Within 10 days, leaves of trees began to turn brown. Within two years more than half of the approximately 150 trees were dead; and - “Surface soil concentrations of sodium and chloride increased 50-fold as a result of the land application of hydrofracturing fluids…” These elevated levels eventually declined as chemical leached off-site. The exact chemical composition of these fluids is not known because the chemical formula is classified as confidential proprietary information. “The explosion of shale gas drilling in the East has the potential to turn large stretches of public lands into lifeless moonscapes,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that land disposal of fracking fluids is common and in the case of the Fernow was done pursuant to a state permit. “This study suggests that these fluids should be treated as toxic waste.” For the past twenty-five years, the Forest Service has not applied any environmental restrictions on private extraction efforts, even in wilderness areas. As a result, forests, like the Monongahela, which sits astride the huge Marcellus Shale gas formation, have struggled with many adverse impacts of widespread drilling. By contrast, the nearby George Washington National Forest (NF) has recently proposed to ban horizontal drilling, a practice associated with hydrofracking, due to concern about both the ecosystem damage and also the huge amount of water required for the fracking process. Two subcommittees of the House of Representatives will hold a joint hearing this Friday to examine the George Washington NF’s singular pro-conservation stance. “Unfortunately, the Forest Service has drilled its head deeply into the sand on oil and gas operations harming forest assets,” Ruch added, noting the National Wildlife Refuges also lack regulations to minimize drilling impacts. “The Forest Service needs to develop a broader approach than asking each forest supervisor to cast a lone profile in courage or cowardice.” -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle

1 0

Oil and Hydraulic Fracking
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 05 Jul '11

05 Jul '11

Argentina Hopes for a Big Payoff in Its Shale Oil Field Discovery By CLIFFORD KRAUSS<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/clifford_kraus…> Published: July 4, 2011 Just east of Argentina’s Andean foothills, an oil<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/energy-environment/oil-petroleu…>field called the Vaca Muerta — “dead cow” in English — has finally come to life. Michael Stravato for The New York Times Extracting oil from shale formations in South Texas. Enlarge This Image An oil field called Vaca Muerta came to life. In May, the Argentine oil company YPF announced that it had found 150 million barrels of oil in the Patagonian field, and President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner rushed onto national television to praise the discovery as something that could give new impetus to the country’s long-stagnant economy. “The importance of this discovery goes well beyond the volume,” said Sebastián Eskenazi, YPF’s chief executive, as he announced the find. “The important thing is it is something new: new energy, a new future, new expectations.” Although there are significant hurdles, geologists say that the Vaca Muerta is a harbinger of a possible major expansion of global petroleum supplies over the next two decades as the industry uses advanced techniques to extract oil from shale and other tightly packed rocks. Exploration of similar shale fields has already begun in Australia, Canada, Poland and France. Indian and Chinese oil companies are investing in pilot projects that, if successful, could make their countries significant oil producers, possibly reshaping energy geopolitics and stemming future price rises. Ukraine and Russia are also thought to have sizable shale fields of oil and gas, as do many North African and Middle Eastern countries. “The potential is huge, on the order of hundreds of billions of barrels of recoverable reserves,” said Michael C. Lynch, president of Strategic Energy and Economic Research, a consulting firm, who is preparing a report on global shale oil. Similar fields in North Dakota and Texas are already beginning to gush oil. The techniques used to extract it include hydraulic fracturing, in which high-pressure fluids are used to break up shale rock to release the oil, and horizontal drilling, which allows drillers to tap thin layers of oil-filled shale that are sandwiched between layers of other rock. Oil experts caution that geologists have only just begun to study shale fields in much of the world, and thus can only guess at their potential. Little seismic work has been completed, and core samples need to be retrieved from thousands of feet below the surface to judge how much oil or gas can be retrieved. Skeptics also say that even if oil is found in many of these fields, some may not be recoverable using current technology. Hydraulic fracturing, known as fracking, has drawn significant opposition in the United States and France because of concerns that the fluids used can pollute groundwater. Also, the process requires vast amounts of water, a problem since many of the fields are in dry regions. Another barrier to widespread exploitation of oil shale is that few companies have the expertise and experience to do the work. Chinese and Indian oil companies are investing in joint shale ventures in the United States and other countries in part so they can learn the new exploration and drilling techniques. The search for oil in tight rocks began in the United States about three years ago, and the potential for oil has been found from Texas to Michigan, California to Ohio. Domestic oil production from shale has grown to more than half a million barrels a day since 2009 and could reach three million barrels a day by 2020. Oil companies are speculating that the early successes in the United States can be duplicated around the world. Exploration for gas from shale began a couple of years ago in China and around Europe, particularly Poland, and experts say some of those fields have oil potential as well. “It could potentially be a game changer,” said Fadel Gheit, a managing director and senior oil analyst at Oppenheimer & Company. “We are going to see much wider distribution of oil reserves, to the benefit of the whole world. It could rerank countries, in which the very needy might become self-sufficient. Countries like Canada and Australia could potentially become the new Saudi Arabia for energy.” Argentina certainly has high hopes for shale oil from the southern Patagonian province of Neuquén. The 150 million barrels of recoverable shale oil found in the Vaca Muerta represents an increase of 8 percent in Argentina’s reserves, and the find was the biggest discovery of oil in the country since the late 1980s. Oil experts say the Vaca Muerta is probably just a start for Argentina, long a middle-ranked oil producer. Mr. Lynch noted that YPF had explored only 100 square miles out of 5,000 square miles in the whole shale deposit, and other oil companies working in the area had not announced any discoveries yet. Argentina has long struggled to meet its own oil and gas needs, and energy price controls and other economic policies have dissuaded oil companies from making major investments there. That is now changing, with the French oil company Total and the American companies Apache, Exxon Mobil and EOG Resources making major investments in Argentine shale fields. “Argentina certainly has the chance of becoming a significant oil exporter,” said Mark G. Papa, chief executive of EOG, which pioneered oil shale drilling in the United States and recently acquired access to 100,000 acres of Argentine shale. So far, nearly all of the oil exploration in the shale fields in Argentina and elsewhere has been pursued with traditional vertical wells. Plans are just beginning for horizontal drilling. Some experts caution that the fast advance of oil production from shale in the United States is no guarantee of similar successes abroad, at least not in the near future. Aubrey K. McClendon, chief executive of Chesapeake Energy, a major domestic shale oil and gas producer, said that production would be constrained by the small number of companies with shale expertise and limits on access imposed by some countries. “I am pretty confident that during the next 10 years the best oil volume growth story in the world will be the U.S.,” he said in an e-mail message. But he added, “I believe there’s shale oil and tight sand oil to be found all over the world.” One of the big potential winners is China, which has at least two shale pilot projects exploring for oil and gas. BP and Royal Dutch Shell are already working with the Chinese, and several other international companies are seeking shale opportunities in the country. The Chinese are working alone on some projects. “China will probably be able to grow fast because of the single ownership of the resources,” said Bob Fryklund, vice president for global exploration and production analysis at IHS Cera, an energy consultant firm. Mr. Fryklund said it was still early to know how big global oil production from shale would become. But he noted that oil companies had already taken the potential seriously enough to invest billions of dollars in initial exploration projects. “Tight oil is the new revolution in oil production, and it’s not just the U.S.,” Mr. Fryklund said. “It’s worldwide.” -- 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

Is gas the new "Nuclear"?
by James Kotcon 05 Jul '11

05 Jul '11

>>> Betty Wiley <betty.w304(a)gmail.com> 6/25/2011 9:47 PM >>> Web pressure on gas By Mike Benard (guest columnist) Published: June 24, 2011 Mike Benard, founder of Spectra Energy Watch, is a former gas leaseholder in Bedford County. Technology and the Internet are doing to the energy industry what they did to the music and photo industries. They are collapsing the status quo and the industry is rattled by what it understands is a shift in power. At a natural gas industry symposium, GasMart 2011, worried voices were reported by an industry publication, NGI's Shale Daily. David Ciarlone of Alcoa said: "I clearly remember how a promising energy technology, the nuclear industry, lost the confidence of the public and billions of dollars that had been invested were abandoned. Without significant changes, shale gas, like nuclear power, could be more remembered for promises made than hopes realized." Three indicators characterize this shift: n Rise of public opinion via a global "neighborhood watch" - It isn't just the energy industry that is global. Property owners and citizens worldwide know about "gaz de schiste" in France and the National Assembly vote there to prohibit hydraulic fracturing. Australia's Frackman has his own Facebook page. n Rise of the transparent culture - It is increasingly damaging to corporate brands for gas/oil companies to pretend the industry's drilling, storage and pipeline practices have no adverse affects on health, environment and the communities in which they operate. n It's personal - Every student of social media knows that "authenticity" is the watchword. Today's global, wired challenge to the energy industry is motivated by personal testimony. The Times-Tribune account of Bradford County resident Crystal Stroud's compelling testimony about the adverse health effects of drilling is but the latest example. And such personal testimony is much more credible than slick TV ads sponsored by the industry. While the energy industry ramps up spending for more lobbying and legal firewalls, it struggles to understand why the status quo is collapsing. There are three reasons: n The energy industry speaks in absolutes that were not seriously challenged until recently. n The industry characterizes citizen opposition as left-wing environmental wackos and even extremists. It ignores its trampling on property rights, which offends conservatives. n The industry demonstrates it is not capable of living up to its own published principles such as environmental protection, accountability and transparency. (After seven months, the Marcellus Shale Coalition cannot explain what its second guiding principle means it will do at the well site.) Even Texas is no longer a sanctuary for the energy industry. The Dallas Morning News recently editorialized: "Local governments across North Texas are sounding alarms about the possibility of increased air pollution, groundwater contamination, noise and declining property values coinciding with drilling companies' push into urban areas. "These concerns are not overblown. ... But the industry's tendency has too often been to deny, deflect and use judicial bullying to get its way." To return to the comparison with the nuclear industry, the shale gas fracking industry is radioactive in terms of public trust. And it achieved this distinction the old fashioned way - it "earned" it. Read more: http://thetimes-tribune.com/opinion/editorials-columns/guest-columnists/web…

1 0

Fwd: Republican Bill Maloney urges Marcellus shale regulations - Charleston Daily Mail
by James Kotcon 04 Jul '11

04 Jul '11

>>> Mark Blumenstein <markb(a)mountain.net> 7/4/2011 8:26 AM >>> July 4, 2011 8:23:53 AM EDT - Republican Bill Maloney urges Marcellus shale regulations by Ry Rivard Daily Mail Capitol Reporter CHARLESTON, W.Va. - Republican gubernatorial candidate Bill Maloney said West Virginia's leaders need to pass new Marcellus shale regulations to protect communities, state roads and the environment and to give legal certainty to the industry. "We need to come up with the exact rules and do it because there's a lot of investment being held back right now," Maloney said in a Friday telephone interview. He provided his first extensive comments on one of the state's most pressing issues. Maloney said he supports raising permit fees for Marcellus well sites so the Department of Environmental Protection has enough money to hire the oil and gas inspectors it needs. He also said the state can do more to make sure communities near gas wells benefit from severance taxes, something he feels has not happened enough in the coalfields. State lawmakers have tried and failed to come up with regulations for what many expect will be a natural gas boom in West Virginia. Maloney wasn't too critical of the Legislature, although he said it might have lost an opportunity to pass regulations sooner because of "the inactivity of all parties involved." He said there was a lack of leadership by acting Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin, the Democrat Maloney faces in the Oct. 4 general election. "I got to give Joe Manchin credit, at least he would lead on something like this," Maloney said. Tomblin began acting as governor by virtue of being president of the state Senate in mid-November, following former Gov. Manchin's departure for the U.S. Senate. Maloney said there's already a "great blueprint" for a new law in a recent deal that gas company Northeast Energy struck with the Morgantown Utility Board. City officials were concerned because Northeast's well is near a public water supply. To get gas from the Marcellus, companies use a water-intensive technique known as hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," to free gas from shale rocks. In a three-page memo to assuage the city's worries, Northeast promised to pressure-test wells to prevent blowouts and to take extra steps to prevent spills of frack water, which is laced with chemicals. The company also promised to detail how it disposed of the frack fluid that returns to the surface after it has been shot deep into the earth. But the City Council remained concerned and - mostly because officials in Charleston had repeatedly failed to act - voted last month to ban fracking in and around Morgantown. Maloney said the city's total ban was "driving him crazy." "People are afraid to work with anybody from Morgantown because of that deal," he said. Maloney earned his fortune in the coal mineshaft drilling business. He also has drilled water wells and invests in oil and gas interests. He said he is not invested in Marcellus shale wells. "We need to protect property owners, we need to protect residents, we need to protect health and safety, we need to protect communities - but you need to do it in a logical manner," Maloney said. He said there are valid concerns about dangers to the environment, but "if the well is constructed properly, there's never been a case of contamination." "The real environmental concern is when you pump in all this frack fluid and they then flow back like two-thirds of that, and when they're flowing back, you've just got to avoid spills and make sure it's contained," Maloney said. "You've got to have controls in place to make sure that water wasn't dumped in a creek or isn't being taken somewhere it's not supposed to be taken." He also said any rules should make sure gas rigs or trucks hauling water aren't allowed to tear up state roads without the state being reimbursed. He said there could be some limits on how loud operations can be within earshot of communities. "You don't want to see roads ruined by all the truck traffic, the dust, the noise," Maloney said. He said it's probably not wise to burden Marcellus shale regulations with anything about the controversial practice known as "forced pooling," which lets companies extract gas from beneath a large tract of land even if they can't agree to a lease with all of the mineral rights owners. Wrangling over a forced pooling provision stalled gas regulations earlier this year in the state House of Delegates. More Articles in State News 1 | 2 | Next Page »

1 0

Fwd: NEWS ADVISORY: Milestone Passed - Renewable Energy Overtakes Nuclear Power
by James Kotcon 04 Jul '11

04 Jul '11

This is great news! JBK >>> Kenneth Bossong <sustainableenergy_news(a)yahoo.com> 7/3/2011 10:38 AM >>> SUN DAY CAMPAIGN 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite #340; Takoma Park, MD 20912 301-270-6477 x.11 sun-day-campaign(a)hotmail.com News Advisory RENEWABLE ENERGY REACHES MILESTONE DOMESTIC PRODUCTION SURPASSES NUCLEAR AND CLOSES IN ON OIL RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY EXPANDS BY 26% REACHES 13% OF NET U.S. ELECTRICAL GENERATION For Immediate Release: Tuesday - July 5, 2011 Contact: Ken Bossong, 301-270-6477 x.11 Washington DC – According to the most recent issue of the "Monthly Energy Review" by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), renewable energy has passed a milestone as domestic production is now greater than that of nuclear power and is closing in on oil. During the first quarter of 2011, renewable energy sources (biomass/biofuels, geothermal, solar, water, wind) provided 2.245 quadrillion Btus of energy or 11.73% of U.S. energy production. More significantly, energy production from renewable energy sources in 2011 was 5.65% more than that from nuclear power, which provided 2.125 quadrillion Btus and has remained largely unchanged in recent years. Energy from renewable sources is now 77.15% of that from domestic crude oil production, with the gap closing rapidly. Looking at all energy sectors (e.g., electricity, transportation, thermal), production of renewable energy, including hydropower, has increased by 15.07% compared to the first quarter of 2010, and by 25.07% when compared to the first quarter of 2009. Among the renewable energy sources, biomass/biofuels accounted for 48.06%, hydropower for 35.41%, wind for 12.87%, geothermal for 2.45%, and solar for 1.16%. Looking at just the electricity sector, according to the latest issue of EIA’s "Electric Power Monthly," for the first quarter of 2011, renewable energy sources (biomass, geothermal, solar, water, wind) accounted for 12.94% of net U.S. electrical generation - up from 10.31% during the same period in 2010. Non-hydro renewables accounted for 4.74% of net U.S. electrical generation. In terms of actual production, renewable electrical output increased by 25.82% in the first three months of 2011 compared to the first quarter of 2010. Solar-generated electricity increased by 104.8%, wind-generated electricity rose by 40.3%, hydropower output expanded by 28.7%, and geothermal electrical generation rose by 5.8%. Only electricity from biomass sources dropped - by 4.8%. By comparison, natural gas electrical output rose by 1.8% and nuclear-generated electricity increased by only 0.4% while coal-generated electricity dropped by 5.7%. “Notwithstanding the recent nuclear accident in Japan, among many others, and the rapid growth in energy and electricity from renewable sources, congressional Republicans continue to press for more nuclear energy funding while seeking deep cuts in renewable energy investments,” said Ken Bossong, Executive Director of the SUN DAY Campaign. “One has to wonder ‘what are these people thinking?’” # # # # # # # # The U.S. Energy Information Administration released its most recent "Monthly Energy Review" on June 28, 2011. It can be found at: http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly. The relevant charts from which the data above are extrapolated are Tables 1.2 and 10.1. EIA released its most recent "Electric Power Monthly" on June 9, 2011; see: http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html. The relevant charts are Tables ES1.B, and 1.1.A. ======================= 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

Natural gas prices set to jump with exports
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 04 Jul '11

04 Jul '11

Interesting article. http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_741745.html

4 7

Fwd: Statewide Antifracking rally--July 11, Charleston
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 02 Jul '11

02 Jul '11

Everyone from around the state is invited to attend this event. Goal is 1000 people strong. Mt Party candidate Bob Baber will be attending. FB event page: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=250055288343466 -Jonathan -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Statewide Antifracking rally--July 11, Charleston Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 22:53:42 -0400 From: Nancy Ganz <suncrestna(a)gmail.com> To: nbandana(a)aol.com ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: *South Park Association of Neighbors MorgantownWV* <spanwv(a)yahoo.com <mailto:spanwv@yahoo.com>> Date: Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 4:29 PM Subject: Fw: Statewide Antifracking rally--July 11, Charleston To: spanwv(a)yahoo.com <mailto:spanwv@yahoo.com> FYI --- On *Wed, 6/29/11, Candace Jordan /<44ace(a)live.com <mailto:44ace@live.com>>/* wrote: From: Candace Jordan <44ace(a)live.com <mailto:44ace@live.com>> Subject: Statewide Antifracking rally--July 11, Charleston To: "Candace" <44ace(a)live.com <mailto:44ace@live.com>> Cc: cashkathy(a)gmail.com <mailto:cashkathy@gmail.com> Date: Wednesday, June 29, 2011, 7:46 PM Hello. I am writing on behalf of WV4MoM (West Virginia for a Moratorium on Marcellus). We are having a statewide rally in Charleston on July 11 around the topic of Marcellus Shale drilling and fracking in West Virginia. We hope that in addition to sending representatives to this very important demonstration, your organization will spread the word to your community members and encourage them to attend. We are at a crucial turning point in the battle against Marcellus, and your presence on July 11 is critical, as the interim legislature will meet that day. We need to send them a strong message that this a statewide concern. Please share the information below with all of your contacts and your social media pages. I have attached a Word document that can be printed and used as a flyer. We will be sending further information regarding speakers, agenda, and transportation over the next few days. If you have any questions, please feel free to email us at frackinquestions(a)gmail.com <mailto:frackinquestions@gmail.com> We also have a Facebook group called Stop the Fracking in Morgantown Industrial Park. Please address questions about carpooling to wv4momcarpool(a)gmail.com <mailto:wv4momcarpool@gmail.com> Thank you in advance for your support, and we hope to see you at the Capitol! Best, Candace Jordan WV4MoM Morgantown IT’S TIME TO STAND TOGETHER AND LET OUR VOICES BE HEARD! COME TO A STATEWIDE RALLY TO SUPPORT *MORATORIUM ON MARCELLUS (MOM)* Date: Monday, July 11, 2011 Time: 10:00 am to 2:00 pm Where: Charleston, West Virginia, State Capitol Building Why: We are at a crucial turning point in the battle against Marcellus. Our presence on July 11 is critical, as the interim legislature will meet that day. If you can do only one thing to stop the Marcellus madness, show up at this rally. Contact your representatives and make appointments to see them that day, and make July 11 a day to lobby againstMarcellus. *EVERYONE IS WELCOME! HELP MOM!* We’ll have speakers, music, and a chance to meet others throughout West Virginia who want to stop Marcellus drilling and fracking. *SPEAK UP FOR MOM!* *This event is sponsored by WV4MOM (West Virginia for a Moratorium on Marcellus). *More messages about an agenda, speakers, transportation, and parking will follow this one. For more information contact frackinquestions(a)gmail.com <http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=frackinquestions@gmail.com>

1 0

FW: [MarcellusGasInfo] NJ Assembly and Senate ban fracking
by Beth Little 30 Jun '11

30 Jun '11

Easy for them to do - they don't have any Marcellus shale. From: marcellusgasinfo(a)googlegroups.com [mailto:marcellusgasinfo@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Kim Knight Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 10:45 PM To: ShaleShock; shaleshockcny CNY; marcellusgasinfo(a)googlegroups.com Subject: [MarcellusGasInfo] NJ Assembly and Senate ban fracking The NJ Senate banned fracking with a vote of 33-1 and the NJ Assembly banned it with a vote of 58-11. It is now down to whether the governor, Chris Christie, will sign it. Article: http://www.newsday.com/news/region-state/nj-lawmakers-pass-ban-on-gas-drilli ng-technique-1.2994891 Kim -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MarcellusGasInfo" group. To post to this group, send email to marcellusgasinfo(a)googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to marcellusgasinfo+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/marcellusgasinfo?hl=en This listserv is managed and owned by the Binghamton Regional Sustainabiliy Coalition (BRSC) For our email list policy, visit For BRSC email list policy, visit http://groups.google.com/group/marcellusgasinfo/files _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1388 / Virus Database: 1516/3735 - Release Date: 06/30/11

1 0

Re: [EC] [wvec-board] E-Council Green Jam-Tues. Oct. 4th
by Frank Young 30 Jun '11

30 Jun '11

Thank you for the notice, Greg. That is the evening of special election day- October 4th. We could look at it as a victory party, or as an occasion to cry in our beer- whichever the election returns indicate. Frank ----- Original Message ----- From: Carroll, Greg B To: dsgjr(a)aol.com ; clrank2(a)gmail.com ; fyoung(a)mountain.net Cc: wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com ; ec(a)osenergy.org ; wyro(a)appalight.com ; djsoeder(a)yahoo.com Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 10:55 AM Subject: [wvec-board] E-Council Green Jam-Tues. Oct. 4th Dear Folks , I wanted to make sure I got the right date out. NOT the 2nd but the 4th of Oct. That’s a Tuesday evening. The benefit will be at the Empty Glass in Charleston, Food –Music-Fun…after work from 6 to 10…..many local musicians! Please pass the word. Long time away but good to start in advance. Greg From: wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com [mailto:wvec-board@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of dsgjr(a)aol.com Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 3:10 PM To: clrank2(a)gmail.com; fyoung(a)mountain.net Cc: wvec-board(a)yahoogroups.com; ec(a)osenergy.org; wyro(a)appalight.com; djsoeder(a)yahoo.com Subject: Re: [wvec-board] Gas drilling hazardous waste landfill in Preston County? Actually, I have heard rumors that the other landfills in the area that DEP has authorized to receive this waste are none to happy about this new proposed landfill -- They don't want the competition! Like everything else in this world, it's all about the money. Don Garvin In a message dated 6/24/2011 12:15:35 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, clrank2(a)gmail.com writes: Yes, Frank. This has been and is a hot button issue for Friends of Cheat, the PA-WV watershed COMPACT, Upper Mon River Assoc. and all the Dunkard Creek, Sierra and other folks in northern WV where the bulk of the horizontal marcellus drilling is happening -- especially the two in Morgantown near the water intake... and the two in the Dunkard Creek watershed.... Chesapeake and others have already reduced or eliminated entirely the drilling pits and have been catching the drilling muds, etc in open truck beds (don't know the official terminology for them) and taking them to other already existing landfills ----- ... Dan may be aware of the attitudes of these landfill operators, but with the growing amount of waste generated by the drilling in these northern WV Counties i'm sure they can see their projected capacity quickly being stressed or stretched to the limits and welcome this new project to relieve pressure on their limits. .... Needless to say others in the communities are none too happy... Cindy ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Frank Young <fyoung(a)mountain.net> wrote: This would seem to indicate public acknowledgement of serious waste disposal issues related to the by-products of shale gas drilling. ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Buckley To: Frank Young ; Gordon Jones ; gary singleton ; John Gorrell ; Mike Reese Cc: Rick Buckley Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 11:30 AM Subject: Landfill in Preston County I guess this issue did not go away. This is what I had mentioned last evening regarding creating a landfill in Preston County related to Marcellus drilling. (see attached) __._,_.___ Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1) Recent Activity: Visit Your Group MARKETPLACE Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now. Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use. __,_._,___

1 1

Re: [EC] ash for Thursday
by Jim Sconyers 28 Jun '11

28 Jun '11

OK - How about instead I make up a handout: Coal Ash Top Ten Toxics Arsenic Selenium Cadmium Lead Mercury Jim et al - next five please. We have that for the media and to present to McKinley, along with a statement of our concerns...? Also - I'll have several signs for folks - unless you want to make your own. On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Petra&John Wood <pbjmwood(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jim - as I said in my earlier email, I have no access to getting fly > ash. sorry - petra > > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Jim Sconyers <jimscon(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Petra - can you get some actual ash for the Thursday event please? >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Jim Sconyers <jimscon(a)gmail.com> >> Date: Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:07 AM >> Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: Tr-Ash Talk: W.V. Rep. McKinley Sells Out >> Constituents >> To: Jim Sconyers <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com> >> Cc: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu>, ec(a)osenergy.org, Nicole Good >> <nicolegood.wv(a)gmail.com>, Gwen Jones <gwenjones23(a)yahoo.com>, >> Petra&John Wood <pbjmwood(a)gmail.com> >> >> >> Folks - >> >> We're on for Thursday at 11:00 AM. >> Basic outline: >> Picket on sidewalk in front of the building, work with media if they >> come, then go inside to give our gifts of real coal ash to Congressman >> McKinley. We'll be sending a media alert later today - it is attached. >> >> Come on down - it'll be fun! >> >> <Sally - the time is now definite, so please send the request to Mon >> Group for folks to participate whenever you're ready - thanks.> >> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Jim Sconyers <jim_scon(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> > Can you join us for this on Thursday? We need numbers - you can speak if >> > you >> > like, but that is not required. Hold a sign, be one of the number >> > distressed >> > about McKinley on coal ash protection. >> > >> > Jim Sconyers >> > jim_scon(a)yahoo.com >> > 304.698.9628 >> > >> > Remember: Mother Nature bats last. >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > From: Jim Sconyers <jimscon(a)gmail.com> >> > To: James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> >> > Cc: ec(a)osenergy.org; Nicole Good <nicolegood.wv(a)gmail.com>; Gwen Jones >> > <gwenjones23(a)yahoo.com>; Petra&John Wood <pbjmwood(a)gmail.com> >> > Sent: Mon, June 20, 2011 4:56:57 PM >> > Subject: Re: [EC] Fwd: Tr-Ash Talk: W.V. Rep. McKinley Sells Out >> > Constituents >> > >> > Does 11:00 Tursday work? Or do we need to move to 10:00? >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 4:23 PM, James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> wrote: >> >> I agree tomorrow is too short notice. I have one meeting Thursday >> >> afternoon, but could possibly do things in the morning or at noon. >> >> >> >> JBK >> >> >> >>>>> Jim Sconyers <jimscon(a)gmail.com> 6/20/2011 4:15 PM >>> >> >> Folks - I don't see how we can do this tomorrow - haven't sent >> >> anything to media yet, they need at least 24 hours. >> >> >> >> How about we set it for Thurs 11:00? I know the mark-up may have >> >> already happened by then - or it may not. If not, we're fine. If it >> >> has, we blast him for what he did, not for what he's about to do. >> >> >> >> Feedback? >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Jim Sconyers <jimscon(a)gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >>> Here's what I think we need if we want to make this happen. >> >>> People - critical mass would be 4 - 5, more is good. >> >>> Signs - I can make 2 - "McKinley to Citizens: Kiss My Ash" "Coal Ash >> >>> in Our Air and Water - What the Health?" >> >>> Baggie of coal ash for each person >> >>> >> >>> A "plan" >> >>> The Morgantown office is staffed 9 - 5 M - F. >> >>> We go there, picket in front of the building (can anyone describe >> >> it, >> >>> location, sidewalk, etc.?) >> >>> Meet media in front if they show. I would say 11 AM - -? >> >>> Talk to media - what happened (is about to happen), why we're >> >>> concerned, story line being northern WV is epicenter of massive ash >> >>> dumping, yet McKinley wants to stop the EPA from protecting or >> >> health >> >>> through commonsense - or ANY - regulation of toxic coal ash. Who is >> >>> McKinley serving in Washington? Sure isn't the people of his >> >> district. >> >>> >> >>> Media alert - needs to go out within an hour or two of now. >> >>> >> >>> Can at least 4 - 5 commit to doing this? >> >>> >> >>> I can. >> >>> >> >>> Please use reply all..... >> >>> >> >>> Sally = please forward to Mon Group. >> >>> >> >>> 709 Beechurst Ave., Suite 14B >> >>> Morgantown, WV 26505 >> >>> Phone: 304.284.8506 >> >>> Hours: M-F: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m >> >>> >> >>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 3:31 PM, James Kotcon <jkotcon(a)wvu.edu> >> >> wrote: >> >>>> Note: The markup (on McKinley's bill) was rescheduled for next >> >> Tuesday, >> >>>> June 21 at 4 p.m. Actions Tuesday morning? >> >>>> >> >>>> JBK >> >>>> >> >>>>>>> Jim Sconyers <jimscon(a)gmail.com> 6/17/2011 3:24 PM >>> >> >>>> Jim - >> >>>> I think we need to do something. This worthless SOB needs some >> >>>> consequences. What can we do? How about picketing his Morgantown >> >>>> office and getting media there? Or.......? >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> >>>> From: Raviya Ismail <rismail(a)earthjustice.org> >> >>>> Date: Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:13 AM >> >>>> Subject: Tr-Ash Talk: W.V. Rep. McKinley Sells Out Constituents >> >>>> To: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE(a)lists.sierraclub.org >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Here is our latest Tr-Ash Talk blog: >> >>>> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://earthjustice.org/blog/2011-june/tr-ash-talk-w-v-rep-mckinley-sells-o… >> >> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Emily Enderle >> >>>> Tr-Ash Talk: W.V. Rep. McKinley Sells Out Constituents >> >>>> Congressman’s district is home to largest coal ash pond >> >>>> >> >>>> Here we go again. >> >>>> >> >>>> Some of our elected leaders are once more maneuvering to block >> >>>> much-needed health protections against coal ash. Rep. David >> >> McKinley >> >>>> (R-WV) has sponsored a bill that would broadly remove federal >> >>>> authority for any regulation of coal ash ever. This bill, if >> >> enacted, >> >>>> also would conveniently protect his business interests. In April, >> >>>> Politico exposed Rep. McKinley’s business interest in ensuring >> >> that >> >>>> coal ash is not regulated. Rep McKinley owns the largest >> >> engineering >> >>>> firm in West Virginia and his company uses coal ash in concrete, as >> >>>> fill for roads and other uses. >> >>>> >> >>>> Rep. McKinley also represents a district that has the largest coal >> >> ash >> >>>> pond in the nation, and his bill goes against what he promised West >> >>>> Virginian Curt Havens, veteran and constituent. Havens was at the >> >>>> Energy and Commerce hearing in April, when Rep. McKinley said, >> >> about >> >>>> prior coal ash threats, "I want to make sure that never happens >> >> again >> >>>> to another family in America." (Those comments start at minute >> >> marker >> >>>> 2:26:26.) Again, business interests are coming before the interest >> >> of >> >>>> protecting public health. >> >>>> >> >>>> During the House budget negotiations February frenzy, Rep. McKinley >> >>>> sponsored amendment 217 that would have prohibited the EPA from >> >> using >> >>>> any of their funds to move forward with the health protective >> >> Subtitle >> >>>> C regulation. Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL) introduced amendment 10, >> >>>> trying to achieve the same thing. It’s no surprise that both >> >>>> congressmen are heavily supported by the energy sector. >> >>>> >> >>>> During his 2010 campaign Rep. McKinley received $43,300 from energy >> >>>> companies, and $22,751 of that came from mining interests, >> >> according >> >>>> to the Center for Responsive Politics. >> >>>> Rep. McKinley’s current effort to stop the regulation of this >> >> potent >> >>>> waste, H.R. 1391, would “amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to >> >>>> exempt >> >>>> fly ash waste, bottom ash waste, slag waste and flue gas emission >> >>>> control waste generated primarily from the combustion of coal or >> >> other >> >>>> fossil fuels from regulation as hazardous waste under such Act.” >> >>>> >> >>>> H.R. 1391 was scheduled to be marked up in the Environment and >> >> Economy >> >>>> subcommittee of Energy and Commerce this morning. The markup had to >> >> be >> >>>> rescheduled for next Tuesday, June 21 at 4 p.m. due to a drafting >> >>>> error. The bill, as written, couldn’t have been much worse and >> >>>> it’s >> >>>> doubtful there will be any improvements as they fix the drafting >> >>>> error. >> >>>> >> >>>> Rep. McKinley and the bill supporters will continue to put public >> >>>> health at risk. Further, they will undermine the public coal ash >> >>>> rulemaking currently underway that generated a record-breaking >> >> 450,000 >> >>>> comments. This is a tragic example of how some elected officials >> >> bow >> >>>> to dirty polluters rather than heeding the concerns of their >> >>>> constituents. >> >>>> >> >>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To >> >>>> unsubscribe from the COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE list, send any message >> >> to: >> >>>> COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check >> >> out >> >>>> our Listserv Lists support site for more information: >> >>>> http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> -- >> >>>> Jim Sconyers >> >>>> jimscon(a)gmail.com >> >>>> 304.698.9628 >> >>>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> EC mailing list >> >>>> EC(a)osenergy.org >> >>>> http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Jim Sconyers >> >>> jimscon(a)gmail.com >> >>> 304.698.9628 >> >>> >> >>> Remember, Mother Nature bats last. >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Jim Sconyers >> >> jimscon(a)gmail.com >> >> 304.698.9628 >> >> >> >> Remember, Mother Nature bats last. >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Jim Sconyers >> > jimscon(a)gmail.com >> > 304.698.9628 >> > >> > Remember, Mother Nature bats last. >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > EC mailing list >> > EC(a)osenergy.org >> > http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Jim Sconyers >> jimscon(a)gmail.com >> 304.698.9628 >> >> Remember, Mother Nature bats last. >> >> >> >> -- >> Jim Sconyers >> jimscon(a)gmail.com >> 304.698.9628 >> >> Remember, Mother Nature bats last. > > -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

3 2

Fwd: Hydrofracked: One man's quest for answers about natural gas drilling
by Paul Wilson 28 Jun '11

28 Jun '11

fyi, paul ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: High Country News <enewsletter(a)hcn.org> Date: Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 4:29 PM Subject: Hydrofracked: One man's quest for answers about natural gas drilling To: pjgrunt(a)gmail.com View in a browser window<http://whatcounts.com/dm?id=E61606FADDB7639A154B815D5C014BF6B42BD6281DE2FE61> [image: High Country News Commons] Subscribe to the Magazine<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FED:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Renew<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FEE:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Donate Now<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FEF:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Feedback<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF0:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> [image: Better World Club - Get 6 Months Membership FREE]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF1:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…><http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FED:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> The Magazine<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF2:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Topics<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF3:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Blogs & Opinion<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF4:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Jobs & Classifieds<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF5:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Conferences<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF6:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Hydrofracked: One man seeks answers [image: Hydrofracked: One man's quest for answers about natural gas drilling and water contamination]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF7:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> In many ways, it's a sad story: The groundwater a Wyoming couple relies on to sustain their little farm suddenly turns foul. So landowner Louis Meeks embarks on a six-year crusade to discover how it happened, suspecting that nearby natural gas wells are somehow involved. He battles corporations and federal and local governments and alienates many of his neighbors, yet today his water is still contaminated. There's no justice in sight. But Meeks has accomplished something important: He and other activists have drawn attention to the possible risks of hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking." When a gas or oil well is fracked, chemicals and water are injected deep underground to fracture rock formations and release gas and oil. The industry insists that fracking is safe. But some of the chemicals used in the process are carcinogenic. And though fracking is used in many thousands of gas and oil wells from the Southwest to New York state, there's never been a comprehensive scientific study of its possible impacts on drinking water. That is now changing, thanks to people like Meeks and determined staffers within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA is finally launching the first real study of the risks posed by fracking. So the saga of Louis Meeks is not just sad; it also offers hope. Determined citizens can make a difference. Read about Meeks' quest for justice<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF7:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…>in a *High Country News* collaboration with the nonprofit news organization * ProPublica*<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF8:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> . *FEATURES* [image: Encountering a California condor takes one writer back in time]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF9:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Encountering a California condor takes one writer back in time<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF9:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> An interaction with a rare vulture sparks reflections on dinosaurs and extinction. [image: States work conservation into trust lands management]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FFA:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> States work conservation into trust lands management <http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FFA:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Urban sprawl helps spur new efforts at compromise in managing state trust lands. View the latest issue »<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FFB:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> [image: RSS]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FFC:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> RSS »<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FFC:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> <http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FFD:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Listen to* ProPublica* reporter Abrahm Lustgarten discuss new research into the relationship between fracking and water contamination in our latest *High Country Views*<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FFE:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…>podcast . [image: High Country Views]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FFE:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Also available via our RSS feed<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FFF:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…>and through iTunes<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778000:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> . *WRITERS ON THE RANGE* [image: Why the Southwest is burning]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778001:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Why the Southwest is burning<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778001:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> This season's wildfires are caused by three things: Climate change-induced drought, bureaucratic blindness and old-fashioned human folly. [image: Subscribers only]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778001:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> [image: ORV riding needs on-the-ground enforcement]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778002:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> ORV riding needs on-the-ground enforcement<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778002:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Reckless, illegal off-road vehicle riding is a serious problem, but better law enforcement -- rather than road closures -- is the way to solve it. [image: Monster wildfires have become the new normal]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778003:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Monster wildfires have become the new normal<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778003:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Wildfires cannot be entirely prevented by logging or anything else, but small-scale prescribed burns can help make them less destructive. [image: Subscribers only]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778003:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> More Writers on the Range »<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778004:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> [image: Blog RSS]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778005:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> RSS »<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778005:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> *BOOK REVIEWS* [image: A review of Permanent Vacation]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778006:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> It's not just a job, it's an adventure: A review of *Permanent Vacation*<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778007:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> The 20 essays in this collection take us into the wacky and wonderful lives of some of the many people who work in the country's national parks. [image: A land of subtle beauty: A review of Llano Estacado] <http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778006:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> A land of subtle beauty: A review of *Llano Estacado*<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778006:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> The photos and essays gathered in this collection of photographs and essays celebrate the austere beauty of a vast dry landscape. More Book Reviews »<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778008:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> *FROM THE BLOGS* The GOAT Blog The wacky world of immigration<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778009:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Reform still distant but the debate seems at least a little more human The Range Blog Throw away the old playbook<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=377800A:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Tribes and counties are better off working together as neighbors. The GOAT Blog Spotties get a new plan<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=377800B:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> The feds draft a new recovery plan for the Mexican spotted owl. The Range Blog To Drill or Not to Drill is Not the Only Question<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=377800C:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> We may worship the derrick less than polls and reporting suggest More from the blogs »<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=377800D:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> [image: Blog RSS]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=377800E:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> RSS »<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=377800E:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> [image: Follow us on Tumblr]<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=377800F:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Follow *High Country News *images and musings on Tumblr<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=377800F:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> . *Comment of the week* Big surprise. This guy makes money as a consultant from dam owners and those proposing new dams. More dams are not the answer, at least not main stem dams. *Matt S.* on Siltation expert: we need more dams<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778010:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> *FEATURED SPONSORS* San Francisco Herb and Natural Food Co.<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778011:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> Herbs, spices and tea blends both bulk and packaged www,herbsspicetea.com.com<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3778011:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…> High Country News 119 Grand Avenue PO Box 1090 Paonia, CO 81428 We appreciate your feedback! Please, send us your comments and suggestions<http://wc4.net/t?r=1873&c=2631826&l=58707&ctl=3777FF0:E61606FADDB7639A154B8…>. Want off the list? remove me from the list<http://wc4.net/u?id=E61606FADDB7639A154B815D5C014BF6B42BD6281DE2FE61> This email was sent to: pjgrunt(a)gmail.com ©2011 High Country News. Feel free to forward this newsletter. -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle

1 0

LOE: Natural Gas and Greenhouse Gasses
by Jonathan Rosenbaum 27 Jun '11

27 Jun '11

The quick: http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00025&segmentID=4 <http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00025&segmentID=4> The long ..... In the Stop the Fracking in Morgantown Industrial Park Facebook Group Jeff Young initiated a discussion about the recent MIT report, http://web.mit.edu/mitei/research/studies/natural-gas-2011.shtml . He said, This is important reading for anyone who wants a serious, broader view of the environmental implications of the gas boom. Key findings are that we could cut the country's greenhouse gas emissions from the power sector by 20% simply by switching from coal to existing natural gas plants. There would also be enormous benefits in reducing mercury, SOx, NOx and other pollutants. As one could easily predict, the discussion became very long, and Jeff recently deleted it. Early in the discussion I introduced him to the Tyndall Study, http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/shalegasreport to provide another perspective. And this is the result: http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00025&segmentID=5 <http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00025&segmentID=5> On a side note: Some of you probably remember how in the past I have spoken about the MIT report, John Deutch, the DOE, and Cheniere. :) Note: In the same LOE show there is also a discussion about injection induced earthquakes: http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00025&segmentID=4 <http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00025&segmentID=4> -Jonathan

1 1

Low hanging fruit in energy conservation = to all electric use of state of MD for one year.....year in and year out
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 26 Jun '11

26 Jun '11

Atop TV Sets, a Power Drain That Runs Nonstop By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/r/elisabeth_rose…> Published: June 25, 2011 Those little boxes that usher cable signals and digital recording capacity into televisions have become the single largest electricity drain in many American homes, with some typical home entertainment configurations eating more power than a new refrigerator and even some central air-conditioning systems. Todd Heisler/The New York Times A new study has found that some home entertainment systems eat more energy than refrigerators or central air-conditioning systems. Multimedia Comparing Energy Use - Green: A Blog About Energy and the Environment<http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/?ref=us> There are 160 million so-called set-top boxes in the United States, one for every two people, and that number is rising. Many homes now have one or more basic cable boxes as well as add-on DVRs, or digital video recorders, which use 40 percent more power than the set-top box. One high-definition DVR and one high-definition cable box use an average of 446 kilowatt hours a year, about 10 percent more than a 21-cubic-foot energy-efficient refrigerator, a recent study found. These set-top boxes are energy hogs mostly because their drives, tuners and other components are generally running full tilt, or nearly so, 24 hours a day, even when not in active use. The recent study, by the Natural Resources Defense Council <http://www.nrdc.org/energy/files/settopboxes.pdf>, concluded that the boxes consumed $3 billion in electricity per year in the United States — and that 66 percent of that power is wasted when no one is watching and shows are not being recorded. That is more power than the state of Maryland uses over 12 months. “People in the energy efficiency community worry a lot about these boxes, since they will make it more difficult to lower home energy use,” said John Wilson, a former member of the California Energy Commission who is now with the San Francisco-based Energy Foundation. “Companies say it can’t be done or it’s too expensive. But in my experience, neither one is true. It can be done, and it often doesn’t cost much, if anything.” The perpetually “powered on” state is largely a function of design and programming choices made by electronics companies and cable and Internet providers, which are related to the way cable networks function in the United States. Fixes exist, but they are not currently being mandated or deployed in the United States, critics say. Similar devices in some European countries, for example, can automatically go into standby mode when not in use, cutting power drawn by half. They can also go into an optional “deep sleep,” which can reduce energy consumption by about 95 percent compared with when the machine is active. One British company, Pace <http://www.pace.com/global/>, sells such boxes to American providers, who do not take advantage of the reduced energy options because of worries that the lowest energy states could disrupt service. Cable companies say customers will not tolerate the time it takes to reboot the system once the system has been shut down or put to sleep. “The issue of having more efficient equipment is of interest to us,” said Justin Venech, a spokesman for Time Warner Cable. But, he added, “when we purchase the equipment, functionality and cost are the primary considerations.” But energy efficiency experts say that technical fixes could eliminate or minimize the waiting time and inconvenience, some at little expense. Low-energy European systems reboot from deep sleep in one to two minutes. Alan Meier, a scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, said of the industry in the United States, “I don’t want to use the word ‘lazy,’ but they have had different priorities, and saving energy is not one of them.” The Environmental Protection Agency has established Energy Star standards<http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=find_a_product.showProductGr…>for set-top boxes and has plans to tighten them significantly by 2013, said Ann Bailey, director of Energy Star product labeling, in an e-mail. The voluntary seal indicates products that use energy efficiently. But today, there are many boxes on the list of products that meet the Energy Star standard<http://www.energystar.gov/ia/products/prod_lists/set_top_boxes_prod_list.pdf>that do not offer an automatic standby or sleep mode. “If you hit the on/off button it only dims the clock, it doesn’t significantly reduce power use,” said Noah Horowitz, senior scientist at the natural resources council. Energy efficiency is a function of hardware, software, the cable network and how a customer uses the service, said Robert Turner, an engineer at Pace, which makes set-top boxes that can operate using less power while not in active use. Sometimes energy efficiency can be vastly improved by remotely adjusting software over a cable, Mr. Turner said. In this way, Pace reduced the energy consumption of some of its older boxes by half. Cable boxes are not designed to be turned completely off, and even when in deep sleep mode, it takes time to reconnect and “talk” with their cable or satellite network, though that time is highly variable depending on the technology. Mr. Wilson said he routinely unplugged his set-top boxes at night and waited only 45 seconds for television in the morning. But Dr. Meier said that when he tried to power down his home system at night, it took “hours” to reboot because the provider “downloaded the programming guide in a very inefficient way.” Cable providers and box manufacturers like Cisco Systems, Samsung and Motorola currently do not feel consumer pressure to improve box efficiency. Customers are generally unaware of the problem — they do not know to blame the unobtrusive little device for the rise in their electricity bills, and do not choose their boxes anyway. Those devices may cause an increase of as little as a few dollars a month or well over $10 for a home with many devices. In Europe, electricity rates are often double those in the United States, providing greater financial motivation to conserve. Cisco Systems, one of the largest makers of set-top boxes, said in an e-mail that they would offer some new models this year that would cut consumption by 25 percent “through reduced power used in ‘on’ and standby states.” There will be no deep sleep or fully “off” setting. But Cisco said that taking advantage of the potential energy savings for a box would also depend on “how it is operated by the service provider.” Cable and satellite providers will have to decide whether the boxes can automatically go to standby, for example, and whether customers will be able to adjust their own settings. Currently, providers often do system maintenance and download information at night over the cable, so an ever-at-the ready cable box is more convenient for them. Cable companies can become Energy Star “partners” if they agree to install or upgrade boxes so that 25 percent to 50 percent of the homes they serve have “energy star qualified” equipment. The E.P.A. merely encourages providers to use units that can automatically power down at least partly when not in use. But as of Sept. 1, typical electricity consumption of Energy Star qualified products would drop to 97 kilowatt hours a year from an average of 138; and then by the middle of 2013, they must drop again to 29 kilowatt hours a year. Companies have fought the placement of the “Energy Star” seal on products and the new ambitious requirements, which may still be modified before enacted. Mr. Wilson recalled that when he was on the California Energy Commission, he asked box makers why the hard drives were on all the time, using so much power. The answer: “Nobody asked us to use less.” The biggest challenge in reducing energy use is maintaining the rapid response time now expected of home entertainment systems, Mr. Turner said. “People are used to the idea that computers take some time to boot up,” he said, “but they expect the TV to turn on instantly.” -- 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

Natural Gas Industry Doubts About Shale Gas
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 26 Jun '11

26 Jun '11

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/us/26gas.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&gwh=D91… Drilling Down Insiders Sound an Alarm Amid a Natural Gas Rush Jennifer Pitts/The Journal Record, via Associated Press, left; Mark Peristein for The New York Times “It's time to get bullish on natural gas," said Aubrey K. McClendon, left, chief executive of Chesapeake Energy. "This could have profound consequences for our local economy," said Deborah Rogers, a committee member at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. By IAN URBINA<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/u/ian_urbina/ind…> Published: June 25, 2011 - - Natural gas companies have been placing enormous bets on the wells they are drilling, saying they will deliver big profits and provide a vast new source of energy for the United States. Multimedia Interactive Feature <http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…> Documents: Leaked Industry E-Mails and Reports<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…> Graphic Overestimating Natural Gas Production Graphic Sweet Spots, but Not Many Drilling Down *Natural Gas Investments* Articles in this series will examine the risks of natural-gas drilling and efforts to regulate this rapidly growing industry. Complete Series »<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/us/series/drilling_down/index.html> Enlarge This Image Brandon Thibodeaux for The New York Times Ministers, pastors and deacons of Fort Worth churches. Dozens of black churches in Fort Worth signed gas leases. But the gas may not be as easy and cheap to extract from shale formations deep underground as the companies are saying, according to hundreds of industry e-mails and internal documents<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>and an analysis of data from thousands of wells. In the e-mails, energy executives, industry lawyers, state geologists and market analysts voice skepticism about lofty forecasts and question whether companies are intentionally, and even illegally, overstating the productivity of their wells and the size of their reserves. Many of these e-mails also suggest a view that is in stark contrast to more bullish public comments made by the industry, in much the same way that insiders have raised doubts about previous financial bubbles. “Money is pouring in” from investors even though shale gas is “inherently unprofitable,” an analyst from PNC Wealth Management, an investment company, wrote to a contractor in a February e-mail<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>. “Reminds you of dot-coms.” “The word in the world of independents is that the shale plays are just giant Ponzi schemes and the economics just do not work,” an analyst from IHS Drilling Data, an energy research company, wrote in an e-mail on Aug. 28, 2009<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>. Company data for more than 10,000 wells in three major shale gas formations raise further questions about the industry’s prospects. There is undoubtedly a vast amount of gas in the formations. The question remains how affordably it can be extracted. The data show that while there are some very active wells, they are often surrounded by vast zones of less-productive wells that in some cases cost more to drill and operate than the gas they produce is worth. Also, the amount of gas produced by many of the successful wells is falling much faster than initially predicted by energy companies, making it more difficult for them to turn a profit over the long run. If the industry does not live up to expectations, the impact will be felt widely. Federal and state lawmakers are considering drastically increasing subsidies for the natural gas business in the hope that it will provide low-cost energy for decades to come. But if natural gas ultimately proves more expensive to extract from the ground than has been predicted, landowners, investors and lenders could see their investments falter, while consumers will pay a price in higher electricity and home heating bills. There are implications for the environment, too. The technology used to get gas flowing out of the ground — called hydraulic fracturing, or hydrofracking — can require over a million gallons of water per well, and some of that water must be disposed of because it becomes contaminated by the process. If shale gas wells fade faster than expected, energy companies will have to drill more wells or hydrofrack them more often, resulting in more toxic waste. The e-mails were obtained through open-records requests or provided to The New York Times by industry consultants and analysts who say they believe that the public perception of shale gas does not match reality; names and identifying information were redacted to protect these people, who were not authorized to communicate publicly. In the e-mails, some people within the industry voice grave concerns. “And now these corporate giants are having an Enron moment,” a retired geologist from a major oil and gas company wrote in a February e-mail<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>about other companies invested in shale gas. “They want to bend light to hide the truth.” Others within the industry remain optimistic. They argue that shale gas economics will improve as the price of gas rises, technology evolves and demand for gas grows with help from increased federal subsidies being considered by Congress. “Shale gas supply is only going to increase,” Steven C. Dixon, executive vice president of Chesapeake Energy, said at an energy industry conference in April in response to skepticism about well performance. *Studying the Data* “I think we have a big problem.” Deborah Rogers, a member of the advisory committee of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, recalled saying that in a May 2010 telephone call to a senior economist at the Reserve, Mine K. Yucel. “We need to take a close look at this right away,” she added. A former stockbroker with Merrill Lynch, Ms. Rogers said she started studying well data from shale companies in October 2009 after attending a speech by the chief executive of Chesapeake, Aubrey K. McClendon. The math was not adding up, Ms. Rogers said. Her research showed that wells were petering out faster than expected. “These wells are depleting so quickly that the operators are in an expensive game of ‘catch-up,’ ” Ms. Rogers wrote in an e-mail on Nov. 17, 2009, to a petroleum geologist in Houston, who wrote back that he agreed. “This could have profound consequences for our local economy,” she explained in the e-mail. Fort Worth residents were already reeling from the sudden reversal of fortune for the natural gas industry. In early 2008, energy companies were scrambling in Fort Worth to get residents to lease their land for drilling as they searched for so-called monster wells. Billboards along the highways stoked the boom-time excitement: “If you don’t have a gas lease, get one!” Oil and gas companies were in a fierce bidding war for drilling rights, offering people bonuses as high as $27,500 per acre for signing leases. The actor Tommy Lee Jones signed on as a pitchman for Chesapeake, one of the largest shale gas companies. “The extremely long-term benefits include new jobs and capital investment and royalties and revenues that pay for public roads, schools and parks,” he said in one television advertisement about drilling in the Barnett shale in and around Fort Worth. To investors, shale companies had a more sophisticated pitch<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>. With better technology, they had refined a “manufacturing model,” they said, that would allow them to drop a well virtually anywhere in certain parts of a shale formation and expect long-lasting returns. For Wall Street, this was the holy grail: a low-risk and high-profit proposition. But by late 2008, the recession took hold and the price of natural gas plunged<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>by nearly two-thirds, throwing the drilling companies’ business model into a tailspin. In Texas, the advertisements featuring Mr. Jones disappeared. Energy companies rescinded high-priced lease offers to thousands of residents, which prompted class-action lawsuits. Royalty checks dwindled. Tax receipts fell. The impact of the downturn was immediate for many. “Ruinous, that’s how I’d describe it,” said the Rev. Kyev Tatum, president of the Fort Worth chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Mr. Tatum explained that dozens of black churches in Fort Worth signed leases on the promise of big money. Instead, some churches were told that their land may no longer be tax exempt even though they had yet to make any royalties on the wells, he said. That boom-and-bust volatility had raised eyebrows among people like Ms. Rogers, as well as energy analysts and geologists, who started looking closely at the data on wells’ performance.* * In May 2010, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas called a meeting to discuss the matter after prodding from Ms. Rogers. One speaker was Kenneth B. Medlock III, an energy expert at Rice University, who described a promising future for the shale gas industry in the United States. When he was done, Ms. Rogers peppered him with questions. Might growing environmental concerns raise the cost of doing business? If wells were dying off faster than predicted, how many new wells would need to be drilled to meet projections? Mr. Medlock conceded that production in the Barnett shale formation — or “play,” in industry jargon — was indeed flat and would probably soon decline. “Activity will shift toward other plays because the returns there are higher,” he predicted. Ms. Rogers turned to the other commissioners to see if they shared her skepticism, but she said she saw only blank stares. *Bubbling Doubts* Some doubts about the industry are being raised by people who work inside energy companies, too. “Our engineers here project these wells out to 20-30 years of production and in my mind that has yet to be proven as viable,” wrote a geologist at Chesapeake in a March 17 e-mail<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>to a federal energy analyst. “In fact I’m quite skeptical of it myself when you see the % decline in the first year of production.” “In these shale gas plays no well is really economic right now,” the geologist said in a previous e-mail to the same official on March 16<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>. “They are all losing a little money or only making a little bit of money.” Around the same time the geologist sent the e-mail, Mr. McClendon, Chesapeake’s chief executive, told investors, “It’s time to get bullish on natural gas.” In September 2009, a geologist from ConocoPhillips, one of the largest producers of natural gas in the Barnett shale, warned in an e-mail to a colleague<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>that shale gas might end up as “the world’s largest uneconomic field.” About six months later, the company’s chief executive, James J. Mulva, described natural gas as “nature’s gift,” adding that “rather than being expensive, shale gas is often the low-cost source.” Asked about the e-mail, John C. Roper, a spokesman for ConocoPhillips, said he absolutely believed that shale gas is economically viable. A big attraction for investors is the increasing size of the gas reserves that some companies are reporting. Reserves — in effect, the amount of gas that a company says it can feasibly access from its wells — are important because they are a central measure of an oil and gas company’s value. Forecasting these reserves is a tricky science. Early predictions are sometimes lowered because of drops in gas prices, as happened in 2008. Intentionally overbooking reserves, however, is illegal because it misleads investors. Industry e-mails, mostly from 2009 and later, include language from oil and gas executives questioning whether other energy companies are doing just that. The e-mails do not explicitly accuse any companies of breaking the law. But the number of e-mails, the seniority of the people writing them, the variety of positions they hold and the language they use — including comparisons to Ponzi schemes and attempts to “con” Wall Street — suggest that questions about the shale gas industry exist in many corners. “Do you think that there may be something suspicious going with the public companies in regard to booking shale reserves?” a senior official from Ivy Energy, an investment firm specializing in the energy sector, wrote in a2009 e-mail<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>. A former Enron executive wrote in 2009<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>while working at an energy company: “I wonder when they will start telling people these wells are just not what they thought they were going to be?” He added that the behavior of shale gas companies reminded him of what he saw when he worked at Enron. Production data, provided by companies to state regulators and reviewed by The Times, show that many wells are not performing as the industry expected. In three major shale formations — the Barnett in Texas, the Haynesville in East Texas and Louisiana and the Fayetteville, across Arkansas — less than 20 percent of the area heralded by companies as productive is emerging as likely to be profitable under current market conditions, according to the data and industry analysts. Richard K. Stoneburner, president and chief operating officer of Petrohawk Energy, said that looking at entire shale formations was misleading because some companies drilled only in the best areas or had lower costs. “Outside those areas, you can drill a lot of wells that will never live up to expectations,” he added. Although energy companies routinely project that shale gas wells will produce gas at a reasonable rate for anywhere from 20 to 65 years, these companies have been making such predictions based on limited data and a certain amount of guesswork, since shale drilling is a relatively new practice. Most gas companies claim that production will drop sharply after the first few years but then level off, allowing most wells to produce gas for decades. Gas production data reviewed by The Times suggest that many wells in shale gas fields do not level off the way many companies predict but instead decline steadily. “This kind of data is making it harder and harder to deny that the shale gas revolution is being oversold,” said Art Berman, a Houston-based geologist who worked for two decades at Amoco and has been one of the most vocal skeptics of shale gas economics. The Barnett shale, which has the longest production history, provides the most reliable case study for predicting future shale gas potential. The data suggest that if the wells’ production continues to decline in the current manner, many will become financially unviable within 10 to 15 years. A review of more than 9,000 wells, using data from 2003 to 2009, shows that — based on widely used industry assumptions about the market price of gas and the cost of drilling and operating a well — less than 10 percent of the wells had recouped their estimated costs by the time they were seven years old. Terry Engelder, a professor of geosciences at Pennsylvania State University, said the debate over long-term well performance was far from resolved. The Haynesville shale has not lived up to early expectations, he said, but industry projections have become more accurate and some wells in the Marcellus shale, which stretches from Virginia to New York, are outperforming expectations. *A Sense of Confidence* Many people within the industry remain confident. “I wouldn’t worry about these shale companies,” said T. Boone Pickens, the oil and gas industry executive, adding that he believes that if prices rise, shale gas companies will make good money. Mr. Pickens said that technological improvements — including hydrofracking wells more than once — are already making production more cost-effective, which is why some major companies like ExxonMobil have recently bought into shale gas. Shale companies are also adjusting their strategies to make money by focusing on shale wells that produce lucrative liquids, like propane and butane, in addition to natural gas. Asked about the e-mails from the Chesapeake geologist casting doubt on company projections, a Chesapeake spokesman, Jim Gipson, said the company was fully confident that a majority of wells would be productive for 30 years or more. David Pendery, a spokesman for IHS, added that though shale gas prospects had previously been debated by many analysts, in more recent years costs had fallen and technology had improved. Still, in private exchanges, many industry insiders are skeptical, even cynical, about the industry’s pronouncements. “All about making money,” an official from Schlumberger, an oil and gas services company, wrote in aJuly 2010 e-mail<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>to a former federal regulator about drilling a well in Europe, where some United States shale companies are hunting for better market opportunities. “Looks like crap,” the Schlumberger official wrote about the well’s performance, according to the regulator, “but operator will flip it based on ‘potential’ and make some money on it.” “Always a greater sucker,” the e-mail<http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4…>concluded. Robbie Brown contributed reporting from Atlanta. A version of this article appeared in print on June 26, 2011, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Insiders Sound an Alarm Amid a Natural Gas Rush. -- 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

Conrad Volz on the problems of extraction for energy
by Beth Little 25 Jun '11

25 Jun '11

This starts out as an exposure of contamination of water with drilling waste, but toward the end, he indicts mtr and talks about environmental justice and how WV is paying the cost of providing energy for everyone else. It is long, but extremely moving in its depth. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWwjWFcCIgY <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWwjWFcCIgY&feature=youtube_gdata_player> &feature=youtube_gdata_player

1 0

FYI - China blends Imported coal to meet local environmental standards....A Green Solution, or the Dark Side to Cleaner Coal?
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 25 Jun '11

25 Jun '11

[image: The New York Times] June 14, 2011 A Green Solution, or the Dark Side to Cleaner Coal? By KEITH BRADSHER<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/keith_bradsher…> LIANYUNGANG, CHINA — The six massive silos standing beside this industrial port in northeastern China hold seemingly contradictory promises: They could help improve the quality of China’s polluted air, but they might also contribute to faster global warming<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/topics/globalwarming/index.html?…>. The silos, which are scheduled to start operation in July, are designed to blend cleaner-burning imported coal<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/coal/index.h…>with China’s own high-polluting domestic coal, which is contaminated with sulfur and dust. Coal blending will produce a mixture that will help electric utilities meet China’s steadily tightening environmental regulations. It will also increase the efficiency of coal-fired plants by slightly reducing the quantity of coal needed. Burning less coal means less greenhouse gases emitted. But critics argue there is a darker side to cleaner coal. “Anything that makes coal more cost effective, like blending, which is only enabling China to burn more coal, is bad news for the global struggle against carbon emissions,” said Orville Schell, the Arthur Ross director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society in New York. The Chinese government’s decision this month to import more coal in order to lessen power outages — and control rising coal prices — ensures that blending will increase rapidly. Industry executives are quick to tout the practice’s environmental benefits. Blending “is a sound solution to reducing greenhouse gas and pollutants emissions from coal-fired power plants,” said Howard Au, the director and chairman of Petrocom Energy Ltd., which owns the blending facility here. But environmentalists worry that by reducing the amount of sulfur and dust emitted from burning coal, blending makes coal more acceptable in the short-term and stalls the conversion to cleaner or renewable fuels. They say coal blending strengthens the case for companies — and countries — that want to continue to rely on coal for decades. “Does it help with acid rain? Yes,” said Allen Hershkowitz, a specialist in Appalachian coal fields at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group based in New York. “It hurts us when it comes to global warming.” Coal remains a particularly dirty form of electricity generation when it comes to producing climate-changing gases. The global warming calculus for coal blending is less clear. Blending makes it easier to feed a power plant with exactly the right coal mixture at which its boilers work most efficiently. This means the plant can burn less coal and emit less greenhouse gas. How much less — and how does that improvement compare with switching to other fuels — varies a lot depending on the power plant and the coal it burns without blending. Better operating efficiency at the power plant helps offset the cost of blending, which can add up to 4 percent to the price tag of the coal. China does not just have an ancient civilization, it also has a lot of very old coal. Much of it has been tightly compressed over millions of years. That has pluses and minuses. Chinese coal releases a lot of heat when burned and has very little moisture left, two very desirable features, according to coal traders. But Chinese coal deposits also contain a lot of sulfur as well as so-called fly ash — dust that is not combustible and contributes to particulate air pollution. China also has some deposits of young coal which has fairly low heat content and requires blending before it can be burned. China has the third-largest coal reserves, after the United States and Russia, and consumes more coal than any other country. It accounted for nearly half the 7.3 billion metric tons burned around the world last year. Four-fifths of China’s reserves, however, do not comply with the country’s standards for industrial use, according to the government-run China Coal Research Institute. Complicating matters, the China’s environmental regulators have signaled plans to reduce further the allowable levels of sulfur. China led the world last year in clean energy investments, with $54.4 billion, according to a study by the Pew Charitable Trusts. But coal is still China’s dominant energy source, accounting for 73 percent of electricity capacity. Because coal-fired plants run day and night — while alternatives like wind turbines<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/w/wind_power/i…>and hydroelectric<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/h/hydroelectri…>dams only run when enough wind or water is available — coal accounted for 83 percent of electricity generation last year. China has led the world in recent years in the construction of high-efficiency coal-fired power plants. These plants heat water to higher temperatures and pressures than earlier designs, so that less coal is burned to produce the same kilowatt-hours of electricity. But the newer power plants need coal of a precise makeup, making it even harder for China to rely exclusively on domestic coal fields. To meet the needs of the new plants, China has gone on a twin binge of importing coal and buying coal mines abroad. Wood Mackenzie, the global energy consulting company, predicts that Indonesia will be the world’s fastest-growing exporter of coal in the next five years because of Chinese demand. While coal blending facilities may provide a short-term environmental benefit, they also make it possible for countries like China to plan on consuming a lot more coal for decades into the future. People have been blending coal for more than a century, often in surprisingly simple ways. Richard Elman, the chairman of the Noble Group, one of the world’s largest commodity companies, is skeptical of newer blending technologies. He says bulldozers have been roughly mixing different grades of coal at power plants and mines for years. A single coal mine may have different qualities of coal in different seams, and will often stir them together with bulldozers before shipment so as to provide a mixture that better meets the customer’s specifications, he said. In the United States, big engineering companies like Bechtel and the Roberts & Schaefer subsidiary of KBR have been designing elaborate systems of conveyer belts that take coal arriving by rail and barge and distribute it to various stockpiles, blending it along the way. The most elaborate approach, developed in Europe and put into effect here, is to build a series of silos, each containing a different grade of coal. A large conveyor belt and scales are mounted underneath the silos. Coal from each silo is sprinkled onto the conveyor belt, then the mixture is dropped into rail cars, ships or a storage yard. “It’s not easy for this new technology to be accepted, so I’m using my network because I believe this would be good for the country,” said Li Anqing, the retired top administrator of Lianyungang’s big coal port, who is now the general manager of the operation here. Bob Williams Jr., the vice president for sales and marketing at Roberts & Schaefer, said that using specially built silos for blending coal is an unusually expensive approach, and would barely be considered except at large coal ports. But Mr. Au said that the blending cost per ton using silos, about $5, had not changed for the last several years. By contrast, coal prices have doubled in the past five years, to $130 a ton in China for coal with high heat content. So blending costs have halved as a percentage of the overall cost of coal. That reduction in relative costs, combined with tighter regulations in China aimed at reducing acid rain, have increased its attractiveness. “Blending didn’t make sense prior to 2003 as prices of coal were low,” Mr. Au said. But now, Petrocom is making plans for dozens of coal-blending facilities in China, to accommodate a flood of imports that could last for decades.

1 0

Fw: Cumulative impacts, aggregation for Marcellus pipelines
by James Kotcon 25 Jun '11

25 Jun '11

This is a pretty major issue, and I think the Army Corps is on the right track. JBK >>> "Donald C. Strimbeck" <dcsoinks(a)comcast.net> 6/25/2011 4:23 AM >>> Army Corps of Engineers, Marcellus Shale firms spar Marcellus companies worry new permitting rules may delay pipeline projects Premium content from Pittsburgh Business Times - by Anya Litvak Date: Friday, June 24, 2011, 6:00am EDT The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is butting heads with some Marcellus Shale companies who say the agency’s latest permit rules will delay pipeline projects. The federal agency, which regulates construction that involves dredging or filling of U.S. waters, has issued a clarification on how projects, such as pipelines that cross such waters, should be evaluated on their environmental impacts. The Corps says the clarification, which defines what constitutes a single project big enough to require the agency’s approval, won’t have an impact on how the Corps functions and is meant to be a guide to applicants. Yet, some in the Marcellus Shale industry are convinced the agency’s approach will mean more projects will fall under its scope and more of them will be delayed because of it. “Under the new (standard) they’re saying everything from the wellhead to the transmission line is a single project,” said Rob McHale, manager of environmental regulatory affairs at MarkWest Liberty Midstream & Resources LLC, a division of Denver-based MarkWest Energy Partners LP. McHale said the staffing constraints at the Corps and at other agencies required to review pipeline projects, such as the Pennsylvania Historic and Museum Commission, will mean, “the timing (of permits) will slow significantly.” But Wade Chandler, Pennsylvania permits chief for the Corps’ Baltimore District, which processes two-thirds of Marcellus activity applications in the state, cautions that if there are more permits coming his way, it’s because there’s simply more activity in the Marcellus shale. “Our scopes are limited to our permit areas,” which have not changed, Wade said. “We’re not expanding anything else.” WHAT MAKES A PROJECT Since 1988, the Army Corps, which regulates impacts to rivers, streams and wetlands, has allowed the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to unilaterally issue permits for projects whose impact to such waters is limited to less than 250 feet. If the impact is more than that, the application must be sent to the Corps for approval before the DEP can permit it. This program, which is revised every five years, is starting a new iteration July 1, with the definition of what constitutes a single project now spelled out in a newly added definitions section to make sure each permittee and regulatory agency is administering the law the same way. Whether a gas pipe will be judged as a single and complete project depends on the Corps’ new standard of whether it has independent utility: That is, would it be built even if other pipelines around it weren’t? According to Mark Haibach, vice president of ecological services with Civil & Environmental Consultants Inc., some Corps districts considered each stream crossing as a single and complete project, so a pipeline crossing five streams would be counted as five projects, with each one’s impact judged against the 250-foot threshold. Other districts, especially those in the area of the Marcellus within the past year, have treated all five crossings as part of a single project, summing up impacts and thereby making more projects fall under the Corps’ domain. The Army Corps’ new guidance makes it clear that regulators should consider as a single project all stream crossings that fit into a single pipeline project. INDUSTRY CONCERNS Currently, MarkWest’s stream crossing projects that don’t reach the 250-foot threshold get a DEP permit within 45 to 60 days, according to McHale. Those that need Army Corps approval take 60 to 75 days for MarkWest, though McHale said other companies have complained of longer waiting periods. MarkWest has had only a handful of projects go through the Corps review thus far, but McHale expects that number to jump once everything is consistently evaluated as a combined impact. For CONSOL Energy, getting a pipeline permit takes between nine months to a year, according to Katharine Fredriksen, vice president for environmental strategy and regulatory affairs, because many of its projects go through exceptional quality waters and require a more in-depth review. “Right now, pipelines are really the biggest bottleneck to actually getting Marcellus gas to market,” she said. The increased activity in general and what Fredriksen described as the Corps’ “expanded role” in pipeline projects will cause further delays, she said. Last year, testifying before the state’s House Republican Policy Committee, Ted Wurfel, Chief Oil & Gas’ environmental, safety and regulatory affairs manager, spoke on behalf of the industry, saying the “Marcellus Shale Coalition believes the DEP should return to … considering individual stream crossings as single and complete projects consistent with the applicable regulations.” “There’s always some difference in the way individual Corps districts will implement regulations,” Haibach said. But if the new permit program will cause the Corps to review more projects, it will be following a trend already in motion, he said. “For the last year, the Corps kind of reacted to the Marcellus Shale activity and the increase in project activity by increasing their scrutiny of projects,” he said. “Especially on pipeline projects, they’ve been opting to review projects more frequently.” Not everyone is convinced the Corps’ regulation will cause problems. The issue may be less about the actual permitting time lines than a general “sense that this is an attempt to federalize gas collection projects,” said Tom Johnston, assistant VP for environmental services with Harrisburg-based engineering group Skelly and Loy Inc., who dismissed the sentiment. “I don’t know that this is going to add as much burden to the gas companies as the gas companies think it is,” he said.

1 0

Fwd: US House committee delays markup on coal ash bill to seek more support
by Jim Sconyers 24 Jun '11

24 Jun '11

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Blair John <ecoserve1(a)aol.com> Date: Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:37 AM Subject: US House committee delays markup on coal ash bill to seek more support To: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE(a)lists.sierraclub.org US House committee delays markup on *coal* ash bill to seek more support<http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&q=http://www.platts.com/RSSFeedDetailedNews/…> Platts Introduced by David McKinley, a West Virginia Republican, the bill would require EPA to conform to its 2000 finding that *coal combustion* residuals, commonly called *coal* ash, do not warrant regulation as a hazardous substance under subtitle C of the*...* See all stories on this topic »<http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&q=http://news.google.com/news/story%3Fncl%3D…> Check out the Valley Watch website at: *http://valleywatch.net*<http://valleywatch.net/> *John Blair* "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Mahatma Gandhi *800 Adams Avenue* *Evansville, IN 47713* *812-464-5663* *** In accordance with title 17 U. S. Code, Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior general interest in receiving similar information for research and educational purposes. * * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE list, send any message to: COAL-COMBUSTION-WASTE-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 -- Jim Sconyers jimscon(a)gmail.com 304.698.9628 Remember, Mother Nature bats last.

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC