Maryland Study Shows that Protecting Our Health Requires Keeping Fracking Out

Children with unexplained nose bleeds. Babies born with birth defects. Workers sickened by exposure to toxic, tiny silica particles. These are just some of the health impacts linked to the fracking already happening in states from Texas to Colorado to neighboring Pennsylvania.
On Monday, the O’Malley administration released a study, prepared by researchers at the University of Maryland, aimed at assessing the potential public health impacts of allowing fracking in Maryland. The findings are alarming and, health experts are saying, only scratch the surface of the harm our communities could face if this volatile, toxic form of drilling were allowed in Maryland.
I’ve summarized below three main things every Marylander should know about this report.
The O’Malley administration is taking public comments on the report through October 3rd, so click here to take action today.

#1 Fracking is likely to cause serious harm to the health of Maryland residents and workers.

The table on the left summarizes the overall “hazard” rating that the UMD researchers assigned to each impact category they considered. Air pollution is one of the major health concerns, along with workers’ safety, the burden on local health care infrastructure, and negative impacts on the mental and social health of communities, for instance through increases in sexually transmitted diseases, crime, traffic injuries, and substance abuse.
Dr. Gina Angiola, a retired obstetrician and board member of Chesapeake Physicians for Social Responsibility, summarized in response, “This report confirms that unconventional natural gas development has the potential to cause both short-term and long-term health impacts, some of which may be irreversible.”
Air pollution is of particular concern because fracking operations emit a variety of toxins linked to cancer, birth defects, and respiratory illnesses. The study underlines that peer-reviewed research is beginning to emerge linking air pollution associated with fracking to “increased risk of subchronic health effects, adverse birth outcomes including congenital heart defects and neural tube defects, as well as higher prevalence of symptoms such as throat & nasal irritation, sinus problems, eye burning, severe headaches, persistent cough, skin rashes, and frequent nose bleeds” (p. xx) among people living within 1,500 feet of gas drilling facilities.
Or, as the Think Progress news headline on the Maryland study summed up, “Fracking in Maryland Would Threaten the Health of Anyone Who Breathes Nearby.”

#2 The Maryland health study only scratches the surface of the risks we could face, leaving more questions than answers.

To add important context, the health study was released as part of a fracking review process initiated by Governor O’Malley in 2011. Through an executive order, the governor placed a defacto moratorium on fracking in Maryland and ordered a series of studies aimed at determining whether or not fracking would pose unacceptable risks to the state’s public health, safety, environment and natural resources. The 2011 executive order originally set a deadline of August 1, 2014 to complete this review; after much delay, a final report is now expected from state agencies this fall. From the start, the process has been compromised by insufficient funding, rushed timelines, and incomplete or flawed studies.
The health study falls clearly into the rushed and incomplete category. Rebecca Ruggles, director of the Maryland Environmental Health Network (MdEHN), said following the report’s release, “Marylanders should not become the next guinea pigs for testing the gas industry’s impact on people. This report should be viewed as Maryland’s first, not last, inquiry into health impacts. The work is not complete.”
For one, the study’s scope was highly limited by insufficient funding and a rushed timeline. For example:

  • The study looked only at potential health impacts in Western Maryland — even though gas basins lie underneath 19 Maryland counties statewide, and the impacts of gas compressor stations and other fracking-related infrastructure could extend statewide.
  • The study didn’t look at the costs of lost work and school days due to illness, or of the increased demand for emergency and other healthcare services.
  • The study didn’t adequately address how our farms, food and livestock would be impacted by potential soil and water contamination.
  • The study didn’t consider the health impacts of worsening climate change – the #1 long-term health threat we all face – due to emissions of methane, a potent heat-trapping gas.

Second, and perhaps even more importantly, health experts, including the study’s authors, caution that medical knowledge on the health outcomes related to fracking is still “extremely limited” (see the summary of limitations on p. 100 of the report).
Comprehensive epidemiological studies of fracking’s health impacts are few and far between, or only in the beginning stages in places where drilling already occurs. Aaron Bernstein, associate director of the Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard University warned in February that scientists “really haven’t the foggiest idea” how fracking impacts public health, primarily because of inadequate research and monitoring to date.
While the University of Maryland study includes 52 recommendations for minimizing the potential health risks of fracking, these recommendations fail to address all of the safety concerns raised by the report. Furthermore, there is little to no scientific evidence proving that recommended steps — such as setting drilling wells back from homes by only 2,000 feet — would be sufficient to protect our health.
Underscoring this point, Dr. Jerome Paulson, MD, director of the Mid-Atlantic Center for Children’s Health & the Environment and a professor of pediatrics at George Washington University wrote in a June letter to Pennsylvania’s Secretary of Environmental Protection, “There is no information in the medical or public health literature to indicate that [unconventional gas extraction] can be implemented with a minimum of risk to human health.”

#3 To protect Marylanders’ health, Governor O’Malley must keep our state’s fracking moratorium in place.

Healthstudyemail“First, do no harm.” It’s a basic tenet of medical practice, and it’s a tenet that Governor O’Malley and his successor in office must apply when it comes to fracking and the health of Marylanders.
Given the alarming emerging evidence on the risks fracking poses to our health, and the many unanswered questions, Governor O’Malley must keep Maryland’s fracking moratorium in place. By doing so, the governor will be keeping his promise to ensure a science-based decision on fracking. As long as we don’t have the full answers we need and deserve on the health dangers, no fracking should happen in Maryland — period. At the bottom of it all, our health is worth far more than the short-term profits of the oil and gas industry.
Click here to submit a public comment on the health study and urge Governor O’Malley to keep our fracking moratorium in place.

CCAN Welcomes Dominion Step Toward First VA Utility-Scale Solar Power

RICHMOND — As reported in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, Dominion has announced that it is considering building 220 megawatts of solar energy in Virginia over five years starting in 2017.
If pursued, this welcome announcement would likely represent a change in course from Dominion’s latest 15-year energy plan proposed to Virginia’s State Corporation Commission, which committed the company to increasing the proportion of clean energy in its mix by less than one percent over 15 years.
Dawone Robinson, Virginia Policy Director at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, had the following statement in response:
“This is Dominion’s first-ever announced plan for building utility-scale solar power in Virginia, and we fully welcome it. After spending years pressing Dominion to make serious investments in solar energy here in Virginia, we’re excited that Virginians could see the benefits of substantial amounts of clean energy from the state’s largest carbon polluter.
“Virginia’s solar potential is substantial, and we urge Dominion to build these solar facilities as quickly as possible, especially given our state is playing catch up with our neighbors. Even if Dominion’s newly announced 220 megawatts of solar power are fully developed by 2021, it will be little more than one third of North Carolina’s current installed solar capacity of 592 megawatts.
“Today’s news serves as an important first step towards what should be a long-term commitment by Dominion to increase development of fossil-free energy technologies. As rising seas increasingly flood our coastal communities due to climate change and Richmond’s asthma rates continue to lead the nation, the health and safety of Virginia’s families depends on replacing toxic fossil fuels like coal and fracked natural gas with abundant, clean and cost-effective energy sources like solar power.”
Contact:
Dawone Robinson, 804-767-8983, dawone@chesapeakeclimate.org
 

Eastern Shore Wind Farm vs. Naval Air Station: Take 2

Eastern Shore Wind Farm vs. Naval Air Station: Take 2

For a second time this year, a proposed wind energy farm on Maryland’s Eastern Shore is being pitted against a nearby naval air station. The ongoing fight between the Patuxent River Naval Air Station (PAX River) and Pioneer Green’s Great Bay Wind Energy Center has been a false choice between military readiness and renewable energy. “Win-win” solutions are readily available, and they should be implemented quickly so that the entire state can enjoy the benefits of clean energy and a thriving economic base.
In both cases, first in the General Assembly and most recently in Congress, legislation has been introduced that would delay the project indefinitely, in effect killing it. At stake is a land-based wind industry on the Eastern Shore, our ability to meet in-state renewable energy goals, and even the state’s leadership on climate change.
With nearly four years and $4 million invested, Pioneer Green’s Great Bay Wind Energy Center project in Somerset County is shovel-ready. The project would bring 25 turbines, nonpolluting electricity to power about 45,000 homes, and hundreds of jobs to one of the state’s most impoverished rural jurisdictions—plus more than $200 million in local investments. Tragically, the most recent attempts in Congress to scuttle this wind project threatens to erase those benefits and put a chill on future investments in the state. A no-go message to industry could also potentially jeopardize an estimated $1 billion in future wind projects on the Eastern Shore.
The ostensible problem is the wind turbines’ proximity to the Patuxent River Naval Air Station (PAX River). Across the Chesapeake Bay in St. Mary’s County, PAX River operates sensitive radar equipment for testing military aircraft. Because impediments to the radar involve spinning — not stationary — blades, Pioneer and the Navy negotiated a solution: turning off the turbines whenever PAX River needed that. A Massachusetts Institute of Technology study indicated that 800 hours per year of such “curtailment” would be a viable solution; Pioneer agreed to turn off the blades 950 to 1,500 hours a year. The stopped turbines won’t give away any top secrets: Wind generators run only 30 percent of the time anyway. More significantly, Pax River often announces its tests, and it launches weather balloons before and after to calibrate radar.
During Take 1 of this controversial fight, the General Assembly passed legislation in April setting a 15-month moratorium on land-based wind farms because of the concern over conflict with PAX River operations. Fortunately, after receiving thousands of emails and letters, Gov. Martin O’Malley vetoed that legislation. “The real threat to Pax River is not an array of wind turbines on the Eastern Shore but rising sea levels caused by climate change,” the governor said. Indeed, to help combat climate change, Maryland has set a goal of supplying 20 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2022. At present, the state is about halfway towards its renewables goal, but reaching the final target and potentially higher future targets will require more on-shore wind. These clean-energy goals helped draw Pioneer to our state.
But in late July, Sen. Barbara Mikulski took new steps to stymie the project, adding language to a defense appropriations bill that would delay it until completion of another MIT study — even though the negotiated agreement already brings PAX River and the Navy back for more discussion as needed when MIT issues its report.
Also in the background have been fears that the wind project could make the PAX installation an easy target for base realignment and closure, or BRAC. But retired Air Force Col. David Belote — who developed the rules for siting renewable energy for the military and worked for two years as a direct report to the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense responsible for overseeing BRAC preparation and execution — has testified that he sees “zero danger” to PAX River and “no reason to move” the base’s sensitive radar equipment. In fact, Col. Belote stated that “Pax River… is unlikely to close as long as [the Department of Defense] owns airplanes and radars and, therefore, conducts radar cross-section testing–the cost to move or duplicate [the testing radar] would be astronomical, and with a curtailment agreement, there’s no reason to move it.”
All of this is not to undermine in any way the vital economic and national security role that PAX River plays in Southern Maryland. Many checks have long been in place to protect Pax River:

  • The Defense Department (DoD) already has to sign off on any project. The Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act of 2011 created a clearinghouse for energy project developers and DoD to work together “to prevent, minimize or mitigate” adverse effects on military operations and national security. By law, the DoD cannot sign off on any agreement that jeopardizes national security. DoD called the Pioneer-Pax agreement a “feasible and affordable mitigation measure.”
  • In 2012, the Maryland General Assembly passed a bill that requires any wind farm within 46 miles of Pax River to get approval from the Public Service Commission. That way, the state can weigh in on economic effects of the project. Pioneer still needs to get the required Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity.

Some say that Pioneer can simply wait for the MIT study to be completed and then begin construction. A key problem with these attempts at delay, however, is that they jeopardize Pioneer’s ability to get federal tax credits. If Pioneer has to wait for the MIT study, its eligibility for the credits would expire. In addition, the project needs to execute a final interconnection agreement with our electric grid operators. Indefinite delay makes that agreement nearly impossible to execute, which means that the project would need to restart that 5 year process. These delays threaten this project and the state’s ability to attract future projects because no business can work with such uncertainty.
In its 2013 assessment of the impact of climate change on military installations, the DoD said, “Climate change will have serious implications for the ability of the Department of Defense to maintain its natural and built infrastructure and to ensure military readiness.” The greater threat to our national security is not a wind farm but climate change — which the wind farm would begin to address.
“Win-win” solutions are available today. The curtailment agreement negotiated between Pioneer and the Navy allows the wind farm to move forward now, and the terms of that agreement will bring the two sides back together after MIT completes its latest study to find a more permanent solution. Federal and state officials should welcome renewable energy projects rather than throw up last-minute roadblocks for companies that have invested much, compromised as needed and complied with every requirement.

21 Groups Call on Sen. Mikulski to Let Maryland Wind Power Project Go Forward

For Immediate Release
August 14, 2014
Contact:
Kelly Trout, 240-396-2022, kelly@chesapeakeclimate.org
Mike Tidwell, 240-460-5838, mtidwell@chesapeakeclimate.org

Environmental and Eastern Shore Leaders Call on Sen. Mikulski to Withdraw Language that Would Kill Somerset Co. Wind Project

Leaders release letter from 21 national and state groups urging U.S. Senator to make a real commitment to clean energy on behalf of Maryland and the nation

ANNAPOLIS — A group of environmental and Eastern Shore leaders today announced an effort to persuade U.S. Sen. Barbara Mikulski to withdraw language she recently inserted into a Defense Appropriations bill that would terminate efforts to build a clean energy wind project in Somerset County.
The leaders released a letter signed by 21 national, state and local environmental and clean energy organizations warning that, for a state that has championed efforts to promote clean energy, the language “would be a huge step back in the progress that Maryland has achieved, and the negative impacts of the bill could reverberate across the country for years to come.” The letter emphasizes, “This bill language sends a signal that wind energy investments are not welcome in Maryland and creates an uncertain business climate that we fear could have ripple effects elsewhere.”
Earlier this spring, both Governor Martin O’Malley and Comptroller Peter Franchot concluded that existing federal and state laws provide adequate protection to the military testing interests at the Patuxent River (PAX River) Naval Air Station. Following the General Assembly session, the governor vetoed legislation that would have blocked the Eastern Shore wind project. That veto cleared the way for construction of the $200 million Somerset County wind farm, and for a wind power industry on the Eastern Shore worth an estimated $1 billion—all now under threat from Senator Mikulski’s language.
The letter reminds Senator Mikulski that the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 requires the wind project developers and the Navy to continue moving forward with good faith negotiations to find a solution that allows the clean energy facility to be built in a way that minimizes the impact on military bases such as PAX River.
The full letter follows below. Key leaders who object to Senator Mikulski’s language released the following statements:
Maryland Senator Jim Mathias, Democrat, Eastern Shore: “This project represents an important opportunity for both economic development and clean energy on the Eastern Shore. I truly believe that all of the science demonstrates that it is possible to craft a win-win agreement allowing the job creation to take place in our community without jeopardizing anything in Southern Maryland. I was so pleased when both Governor O’Malley and Comptroller Franchot, after stepping back and reviewing the research, agreed.”
Mary Ann Peterman, a fourth generation landowner in Somerset County whose property includes active farmland: “Revenue from wind power represents a significant potential source of new revenue for farmers, especially small farmers, on the Eastern Shore. For many, this revenue can represent the difference from being able to maintain their farming lifestyle and the open space of their land, or potentially having to consider alternate development far less friendly to the environment.”
David Belote, retired Air Force Colonel and Former Executive Director of the Department of Defense Siting Clearinghouse, which oversees negotiations between military officials and renewable energy developers, said in written testimony in April 2014: “I see zero danger to the ADAMS mission or to Pax River. Simply put, if the turbines aren’t spinning, there’s no interference to ADAMS. … I’m confident that the Pax River mission is safe, and I’m equally confident that no base commander or Pentagon official would sign an agreement that would endanger a unique, critical capability like ADAMS.”
Mike Tidwell, director, Chesapeake Climate Action Network: “It is disappointing that Senator Mikulski would attempt to use this Washington process to delay Maryland’s determined efforts to expand clean energy. There is a clear potential for a billion-dollar wind industry on the Eastern Shore, and we want our political leaders to work to accelerate that process, not delay or block it. ”
The full text of the letter follows, and is available at: http://chesapeakeclimate.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Letter-to-Mikulski-MD-Wind-Appropriations-Language-8-14-2014.pdf

Center for Biological Diversity ● Chesapeake Climate Action Network ● Chesapeake Physicians for Social Responsibility ● Clean Water Action ● Climate Reality Project ● Credo ● Earthworks Earth Day Network ● Energy Action Coalition ● Environment America ● Environment Maryland Food & Water Watch ● Friends of the Earth ● Green America ● Interfaith Power & Light (DC.MD.NoVA) ● League of Women Voters of Maryland ● Maryland Environmental Health Network ● Midshore Riverkeeper Conservancy ● Public Citizen Energy Program ● Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Maryland ● West/Rhode Riverkeeper. Inc

August 14, 2014
The Honorable Barbara Mikulski, U.S. Senate
503 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC, 20510
Senator Mikulski,
We are writing to express our disappointment with the Senate Appropriations Committee report language that you recently added to H.R. 4870, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2015. We ask that you move to strike that language from the bill as soon as possible.
The language in that bill unnecessarily harms a proposed Maryland wind energy project in Somerset County by directing the Department of the Navy to not execute a memorandum of understanding that would allow the project to move forward. This language would kill a specific wind farm even though serious good faith efforts are underway between the wind developer and the military to execute a “win-win” agreement to avoid impacts to the Patuxent River Naval Air Station (PAX River) radar. By doing so, this language sets Maryland back in its efforts to fight climate change, which is threatening the state with sea level rise, increased extreme weather events, prolonged droughts and numerous other threats to our economy, environment and residents. This language also threatens hundreds of millions of dollars of investment in Somerset County, as well as hundreds of new construction jobs and $44 million in new local tax revenues.
We believe that this language is unnecessary because federal and Maryland state law already provide sufficient opportunities for any specific, localized concerns of the Navy and PAX River to be addressed. In order to ensure that wind energy and other energy infrastructure growth can coexist with America’s national defense system, Congress passed the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011. This law establishes a clearinghouse process where energy project developers and the Department of Defense (DOD) engage with each other with the stated purpose to “protect DOD mission capabilities from incompatible development” in order to “prevent, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts on military operations, readiness, and testing.”
As an added layer of protection, Maryland law provides that any wind farm within 46 miles of PAX River must seek a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity in a proceeding before the Maryland Public Service Commission. This proceeding would look beyond national security implications to actual economic impacts within the state. PAX River, as a party to this proceeding, has the full capability under existing law to present any concerns regarding economic impact to the state. These laws provide ample protection for the critical missions at PAX River.
Maryland is a progressive state with a strong environmental record of leadership. Over the years, the State has championed efforts to promote clean energy, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve local air quality, and grow its green economy. Tragically, this appropriations language would be a huge step back in the progress that Maryland has achieved, and the negative impacts of the bill could reverberate across the country for years to come. This bill language sends a signal that wind energy investments are not welcome in Maryland and creates an uncertain business climate that we fear could have ripple effects elsewhere.
This language undermines the federal and state level processes already in place to protect PAX River, it harms Somerset County, it sets a dangerous national precedent, and it would weaken Maryland’s standing as a national leader on clean energy. We sincerely hope you move to strike this language so that Maryland and the rest of the country can move forward—confidently and responsibly—towards a clean energy economy.
Sincerely,
Maryland Groups:
[bs_row class=”row”]
[bs_col class=”col-xs-6″]
Mike Tidwell
Executive Director
Chesapeake Climate Action Network
Tim Whitehouse
Director
Chesapeake Physicians for Social Responsibility
Andy Galli
MD Program Coordinator
Clean Water Action
Joanna Diamond
Director
Environment Maryland
Joelle Novey
Director
Interfaith Power & Light (DC.MD.NoVA)
 
National Groups:
Bill Snape
Senior Counsel
Center for Biological Diversity
Kenneth Berlin
President and CEO
The Climate Reality Project
Becky Bond
Political Director
Credo
Jennifer Krill
Executive Director
Earthworks
Kathleen Rogers
Director
Earth Day Network
 
[/bs_col]
[bs_col class=”col-xs-6″]
Susan Cochran
President
League of Women Voters of Maryland
Rebecca Ruggles
Director
Maryland Environmental Health Network
Tim Junkin
Executive Director
Midshore Riverkeeper Conservancy
Reverend Lisa Ward, Steve Buckingham
Co-Chairs
Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Maryland
Jeff Holland
Riverkeeper
West/Rhode Riverkeeper. Inc
 
Maura Cowley
Co-Director
Energy Action Coalition
Anna Aurilio
DC Office Director
Environment America
Wenonah Hauter
Executive Director
Food & Water Watch
Ben Schreiber
Climate and Energy Program Director
Friends of the Earth
Fran Teplitz
Policy Director
Green America
Tyson Slocum
Director
Public Citizen Energy Program
[/bs_col]
[/bs_row]

###

Maryland Court Ruling Will Likely Delay Permitting for the Controversial Cove Point LNG Export Facility

See below for the press release from the attorneys at AMP Creeks Council regarding the court decision late Monday

Mike Tidwell, director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, had the following statement in response to Monday’s Calvert County Circuit Court ruling against local zoning exemptions for the proposed Cove Point liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facility:
“For months, the Chesapeake Climate Action Network and our partners have been warning that corporate leaders and elected officials were cutting dangerous corners in the permitting process for the proposed fracked gas export facility at Cove Point in southern Maryland. Thankfully this week a Calvert County circuit court judge agreed with a big part of our argument. Judge James Salmon ruled with the AMP Creeks Council that Calvert County commissioners had illegally exempted mega-company Dominion Resources from a host of local zoning ordinances.
“At a minimum, this ruling will likely cause real delay in the ability of Dominion to begin major construction of this controversial $3.8 billion fossil fuel project. The ruling should certainly give pause to the Wall Street investors that Dominion is seeking to recruit to finance this expensive, risky project. As fracked-gas exports grow increasingly controversial nationwide, we believe the court ruling in Calvert County this week is just the opening step in exposing the truth about this unsafe, climate-harming, and economy-damaging facility.
“On behalf of CCAN’s supporters and concerned citizens nationwide, we congratulate the attorneys at the AMP Creeks Council in southern Maryland for their extraordinary—and now successful—legal work in this case.”
Contact:
Mike Tidwell, 240-460-5838, mtidwell@chesapeakeclimate.org
Diana Dascalu-Joffe, 240-396-1984, diana@chesapeakeclimate.org

###

For Immediate Release
August 11, 2014

Contact:
Kelly Canavan, 301-237-5040, Kelly@ampcreeks.org

The AMP Creeks Council Wins Cove Point LNG Terminal Court Case Against Calvert County

Calvert County, MD – Calvert County Circuit Court Judge James Salmon handed down a decision that has significant implications for the proposed Cove Point LNG export terminal. Judge Salmon found a Calvert County law, passed specifically to clear the way for Dominion Cove Point’s export project, to be in violation of the Maryland Constitution.
The decision was the result of a legal challenge brought by the AMP Creeks Council. AMP Creeks filed suit to contest what it claimed was an attempt by Calvert County to illegally enact a “special law” to fast track Dominion’s pet project.
Judge Salmon ruled in AMP’s favor and specifically stated that “…Ordinance No. 46-13 is invalid for two independent reasons. First, the Ordinance violates the uniformity provision…of the Land Use article. Secondly, the Ordinance constitutes a “special law” that violates the provision of Article III, § 33 of the Maryland Constitution.”
In 2013, the Calvert County Board of County Commissioners and the Calvert Count Planning Commission enacted a text amendment exempting Dominion Cove Point’s LNG project from local zoning. This text amendment exempted Dominion Cove Point’s proposed LNG export facility from local permitting processes designed to protect and safeguard the community.
The AMP Creeks Council’s legal team is still sorting out the implications of this ruling. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has been widely expected to grant Dominion final permits to proceed with the construction of their LNG export terminal.
This ruling may throw a wrench in those works. “This is a remarkable victory for the people of Lusby, Maryland, and folks fighting fracking and LNG exports throughout the Mid-Atlantic region,” said Kelly Canavan, President of The AMP Creeks Council.
This is one three current cases the AMP Creeks Council is pursuing in the matter of the Cove Point project. A related case against Calvert County over the denial of a Public Information Act request is pending, as is an appeal of a Maryland Public Service Commission decision.

###

VIRGINIA SEEKS PUBLIC COMMENT ON EPA’S CARBON REDUCTION PLAN

Virginia’s Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has just wrapped up a series of listening sessions last week, eliciting public feedback on the EPA’s new draft rules for carbon reductions for existing power plants. These rules, known as the Clean Power Plan, or “111(d)” as policy wonks call them, are the signature components of the President’s Climate Action Plan and are designed to make America the leader in the fight against climate change by reducing the nation’s CO2 by 30% by 2030. (In case you’re wondering, 111(d) is the code section of the Clean Air Act which gives the EPA the authority to regulate CO2). Virginia’s specific carbon reduction target is 38% below 2012 levels by 2030.
The DEQ listening session took place in Henrico on Thursday night. Four speakers representing various co-operatives and the VA Chamber of Commerce spoke in opposition of the draft rules, a modest effort and fine showing if it were not dwarfed by the 24 citizens and environmental representatives speaking passionately about the need to support the rules and fight against climate change.
As expected, the dirty polluters spouted the familiar tired arguments: efforts designed to cut carbon pollution would increase rates, reduce jobs, and stymie economic productivity. These arguments fly in the face of numerous studies suggesting that smart investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency can actually provide a cool billion dollars in energy savings for Virginia customers, while adding 21st century jobs and providing a spark to the clean energy economy.
Further, reducing harmful carbon pollution from our environment has the added benefit of improving the public health of the commonwealth’s 8.2 million residents. While Virginia has much to be proud of, its capital city of Richmond winning the Asthma and Allergy Foundation’s “Asthma Capital” award not once but TWICE should be enough to give rule-makers pause.
If that weren’t enough, coal’s pollution has a well-documented disproportionate effect on many minority and other low-income communities. In fact, the NAACP recently released a stunning report highlighting that 68% of blacks in America live within 30 miles of a coal-fired power plant. Our friends at Virginia New Majority provided much-needed and oft-overlooked testimony to this disparity during the Henrico hearing on Thursday.
And oh by the way, rising seas, devastating storms, punishing droughts, and other climate disruptions will be mitigated by reducing carbon pollution in the environment. Added all up and the benefits v. harms of the Clean Power Plan are as lopsided as the 24-4 representation DEQ witnessed at its listening session in Henrico.
DETAILS ON THE CLEAN POWER PLAN
EPA outlined four “building blocks” for states to use in order to meet the carbon reduction goals. These four options are available for states to use and experiment with, allowing each state maximum flexibility in determining which mechanism, and to what extent, the state should use to achieve its goal. The building blocks are:
1)      Heat rate improvements at coal-fired power plants,
2)      Shifting dispatch from coal to natural gas,
3)      Increasing renewable and nuclear generation, and
4)      Increasing demand-side energy efficiency
Building block number two for the state’s consideration, swapping coal for natural gas, is akin to a Vicodin addict swapping the pills for a steady diet of Jack Daniels. Gone is the Vicodin addiction, as well as the pain temporarily, but the long-term effects of severe alcoholism can be equally as damaging, if not more-so, than the initial problem.
Our nation’s longtime dependence on coal has been a danger to climate stability. But a fast switch to natural gas as the solution to the coal dependency is not the answer. Methane leakage from the production, transport, and usage of natural gas accounts for nearly 10% of U.S. greenhouse gas pollution, ranking 2nd behind CO2. Over a 100 year period, methane emissions are more than 20 times more potent of a climate change pollutant than CO2, which makes a switch from coal to gas seem more like a dodge than a direct attempt to solve the climate problem.
Virginia has incredible untapped potential for efficiency, solar, and particularly offshore wind. These resources need to be fully tapped before other options are considered.
TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION
The draft EPA rules were first announced on June 2, 2014 and made official on June 18, 2014. Since then, DEQ has organized listening sessions to provide feedback on the rules. EPA asks that all entities (citizens, businesses, government agencies like DEQ, etc.) to submit comments back to EPA by October 16, 2014.
Thereafter, EPA will develop its final and binding carbon reduction rules to be released in June of 2015. Virginia will have one year, until June 30, 2016, to provide EPA with a detailed State Implementation Plan, outlining how the commonwealth will achieve its carbon reduction goals.
Virginia has the option of achieving the goals on its own, or by joining a multi-state collaboration like the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). If Virginia decides to join RGGI, a collaborative with proven success and one in which CCAN steadfastly urges the state to join, it will have until June 30, 2018 to do so and outline its intention to achieve the goals under the final rules proposed by EPA.
All states have until 2030 to achieve its state-specific carbon reduction goals – until 2032 to ensure the carbon reduction goals are met under three years averages for 2030, 2031, and 2032. CCAN will be there every step of the way to ensure Virginia makes the right decisions for our climate.

Stop Gas Exports Rally Video-Watch and Share!

On July 13th, 2014 over a thousand people converged in Washington DC as part of a growing movement to stop fracked gas exports, and dangerous fracking that fuels climate change.
Dominion’s plan to build a massive $3.8 billion liquefied natural gas export facility at Cove Point on the Chesapeake Bay threatens communities across Maryland and the region with an expanding network of fracking wells and gas infrastructure — all to ship gas overseas at the carbon pollution impact of coal.
Learn more and take action at www.stopgasexports.org.
 

Video Credit: Peter W. Jackson

Congressman Chris Van Hollen Introduces Innovative Bill to Fight Climate Change While Aiding Middle Class Americans

For Immediate Release
July 30, 2014

Environmental and consumer groups hail the ‘Healthy Climate and Family Security Act’ as a needed response to deepening global warming impacts

WASHINGTON, D.C. – At a time of worsening global warming impacts, Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-Md) today introduced the “Healthy Climate and Family Security Act.” The bill is designed to help repair shrinking polar ice caps while at the same time aiding the shrinking American middle class.
The legislation, hailed by environmental and consumer groups, employs a straightforward, common-sense “cap and dividend” approach to tackling global warming. It would place a hard and steadily declining cap on emissions of heat-trapping pollution and rebate 100 percent of the proceeds from pollution permit auctions to U.S. residents, creating a healthier economy and more prosperous middle class.
“Two of the most pressing challenges we face as a country are the need to address the economic costs and public health risks associated with climate change, and to strengthen the middle class. We do both in this bill,” said Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-Md), lead sponsor of the bill. “By capping carbon emissions, selling permits, and returning 100 percent of the revenue to everyone equally, this ‘Cap and Dividend’ approach achieves necessary greenhouse gas reductions while boosting the purchasing power of families across the country. Tackling our problems and moving everyone forward is America at its best. That’s what this bill does, and that’s exactly where we need to be.”
As the planet crosses the danger zone of 400 parts per million carbon in the atmosphere – with droughts and extreme weather and sea-level rise affecting broad parts of the nation – this bill sets a declining cap for carbon dioxide emissions that would start in 2015 and lead to a total emission reduction of 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050. Proceeds from the cap — raised at auction from oil, coal, and natural gas companies — would then be rebated in equal-size shares to every U.S. resident with a social security number. The entire process is simple, fair, and designed to function efficiently over the next several decades it will take to fully “de-carbonize” the U.S. economy.
Under the bill, all Americans will receive a quarterly “dividend” payment as compensation from the roughly 2,500 companies who introduce carbon fuels into the economy. Even accounting for some rise in fossil fuel prices under this policy, the median American household of four will likely receive a net benefit of about $260 per year in the first year. That figure will grow steadily in following years. All lower and middle-income Americans will see a net increase in their annual income.
The bill already has the support of a broad coalition of local, state and national groups representing environmental, consumer, and justice communities.
“Hands down, the Van Hollen ‘cap and dividend’ bill is the strongest strategy to reduce climate pollution ever introduced in Congress,” said Mike Tidwell, director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “Unlike ‘cap and trade’ and many other proposals, this one gets the job done in a way that’s simple, increases family budgets, and is utterly fair to all Americans.”
Original co-sponsors include Congressmen Matt Cartwright (PA-17), Alan Lowenthal (CA-47), Gerry Connolly (VA-11), Earl Blumenauer (OR-03), and Rush Holt (NJ-12).
To view the press release and infographic from Congressman Van Hollen’s office, click here.
Resources:

Contact:
Mike Tidwell, 240-460-5838, mtidwell@chesapeakeclimate.org
Kelly Trout, 240-396-2022, kelly@chesapeakeclimate.org

###

Cove Point: Calvert County Citizens Keep Up the Fight

I joined CCAN’s staff three weeks ago today and since day one I’ve been inspired by the “it ain’t over ‘til it’s over” spirit the community members we have the honor of working with bring to their work. That spirit is nowhere more visible to me than in the work of the Calvert Citizens for a Healthy Community, the citizen group that formed in opposition to Dominion Virginia Resources proposed liquefied natural gas export facility at Cove Point.
CCAN’s Southern Maryland Organizer, Jon Kenney, and I spent Monday in Calvert County, meeting with some of the leaders of CCHC. Inspired by last Sunday’s rally and undeterred by the construction work that has already started on Cove Point Road, CCHC’s leaders are ramping up their call on Governor O’Malley to step in where federal regulators have failed to and order a Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA). A QRA is a basic and customary type of safety assessment that would determine the extent to which an accidental explosion or other catastrophe at the plant could put CCHC’s members and their neighbors in danger.

Water park abutting Dominion's plant.
Water park abutting Dominion’s plant.

The reality of what’s at stake if the Governor ignores the citizens of Calvert County really hit home for me Monday. Jon and I went for a drive through Cove Point Park – a beautiful park that shares a fence with Dominion’s plant. Jon told me that this park – with its two playgrounds, baseball diamonds and crowded water park – is the place where kids in Calvert County go to play. And it shares a fence with the plant. Imagine the horrific scene if there were an explosion like the one that occurred at an LNG facility this spring in Plymouth, Washington.
And I met Leslie Garcia, one of the creative minds behind CCHC. With her husband, Leslie has been putting blood, sweat and tears into renovating their home – a home I had a hard time leaving after an hour, let alone 20 years. They feel like they’ll have no choice but to leave if Dominion wins. They’re in Dominion’s backyard: their home is less than a 5 minute walk from the overlook facing Dominion’s current import platform and a short drive from the plant. Imagine locking the door and walking away from the home you’d hoped to live the rest of your life in because you know that staying is too dangerous.
View from Solomon's Island, looking towards the future site of Dominion's pier.
View from Solomon’s Island, looking towards the proposed site of Dominion’s pier.

Before leaving, we walked along the pier at Solomon’s Island, looking out over the scenic Patuxent River towards the Thomas Johnson Bridge – Dominion plans to build a temporary pier next to the bridge for the loading and unloading of construction materials. And right next to it, one of the largest, most productive, and most beautiful farms in Calvert County – Dominion plans to use the field abutting this farm for the loading and unloading of construction materials coming off of the pier. Imagine the scene.
Construction may have started on Cove Point Road, but that doesn't mean this fight is over.
Construction may have started on Cove Point Road, but that doesn’t mean this fight is over.

As we drove through neighborhoods on our way home, we noticed that a bunch of the old Cove Point lawn signs (“Cove Point: We need answers!”) had started to disappear. The construction work on Cove Point Road has gotten some folks started thinking this fight is over; Dominion has already won.
But the members of CCHC will tell you that it isn’t, that too much is at stake to stop fighting now. Just a few days after our visit, CCHC members traveled to Annapolis to join 52 organizations and residents for a press conference urging the Governor to protect the safety of Calvert County residents and order a QRA. As the fight against Cove Point continues, CCAN will be supporting CCHC at every step – whether that’s on the streets, in the media or in the courts – and what an honor it is for us to do so.

Community Organizing to Stop Cove Point

It was an amazing moment. I was a block away from the march when I could hear “Stop Cove Point!” echoing off the hot pavement in Downtown DC. I ran over to join the 1000+ activists from the Eastern Seaboard as we marched from the National Mall to the headquarters of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC.
As I approached the front of the march, I started recognizing the group of Calvert County residents I’ve been working closest with over the last few months fighting Dominion Resources’ proposed fracked gas facility at Cove Point. One by one, they started to come into focus within the sea of people. Some were holding signs, marching with their children, and carrying creative artwork (which included a huge LNG tanker and giant postcards to FERC).

Activists from the Eastern Seaboard march to FERC headquarters with banners and a prop LNG tanker, "S.S. Dominion Titanic." (Photo: M.Scott Mahaskey/POLITICO)
Activists march with banners and a prop LNG tanker, “S.S. Dominion Titanic.” (Photo: M.Scott Mahaskey/POLITICO)

Some were even holding banners marching next to movement leaders like Tim DeChristopher and Sandra Steingraber. A few months ago, this was probably the last thing these Southern Maryland marchers thought they would be doing on a sweltering day in July.
These people are part of the hundreds of concerned citizens from Southern Maryland that live within a few miles of Dominion Resources’ proposed Cove Point gas export facility. Most of them were first learning about the plant just last fall, whether it was at a town hall, or a discussion with their neighbor while they walked the dog. They formed a group, Calvert Citizens for a Healthy Community (CCHC), which has been courageously fighting off the goliath-like Dominion from relentless propaganda on TV, radio, and print, pushing to stop the plant from tarnishing their idyllic bayside community.
 
CCHC members rally to stop the proposed Cove Point gas export facility. (Photo: Tracey Eno)
CCHC members rally to stop the proposed Cove Point gas export facility. (Photo: Tracey Eno)

The members of CCHC have been integral in making this rally, and this movement, grow so quickly. CCHC has been a big part of the campaign every step of the way. They’ve collected hundreds of public comments, going door-to-door and calling neighbors throughout the community, pointing out the glaring safety and environmental flaws on FERC’s draft environmental assessment of Cove Point. They’ve published dozens of letters in the local paper, held house meetings, Gasland screenings and have lobbied elected officials. They’ve packed public hearings, outnumbering the proponents of the plant and giving passionate testimony. At the rally, we filled an entire bus with Southern Marylanders, and a CCHC member kicked off the rally as an incredible speaker, sharing her story with the large crowd and the media.
Every day, I am inspired by the sheer amount of work and effort the CCHC members have given to this fight; spending endless hours late into the night researching detailed applications and documents, writing countless letters to elected officials and newspapers, attending weekly public meetings, sitting in on panels and sharing their story on national activist conference calls. They can’t stop, and won’t stop, until the job is done and they stop Cove Point from being built.
Southern Maryland residents filled the bus ready to march against Cove Point (Photo: Tracey Eno)
Southern Maryland residents filled the bus ready to march against Cove Point (Photo: Tracey Eno)

It’s been an amazing journey, and, while I know it’s definitely not over, it’s the members of CCHC that give me hope. Not only have we built a formidable grassroots opposition to the proposed project, but have also built a community and network of lifelong friends that can now provide a support structure for each other in the face of such an uphill struggle. I don’t think Dominion had any idea of who they were messing with when they submitted their application to FERC.
While I was marching alongside my friends from Southern Maryland yesterday, I came to the conclusion that without a doubt we will stop Cove Point, and we’ll look back and see that all of the hard work was worth it. At the very least, it will make for a great victory party.