New Video Highlights the Advocates Fighting Bomb Trains in Baltimore

Local residents and advocates have been fighting explosive crude oil trains in Baltimore since 2014. From stopping a new crude oil terminal in 2015 to introducing a landmark piece of legislation zoning out all new and expanded crude oil terminals just last month, activists have made great strides in the fight to protect the city from bomb trains.
Watch the short documentary below to learn more about our campaign to stop bomb trains in Baltimore! Check it out! And after you watch, contact your Baltimore City Councilmember and urge them to support the Crude Oil Terminal Prohibition!

The video was made by Travis Edwards in conjunction with our partners at Clean Water Action and features South Baltimore community leaders Rodette Jones, Ann Robinson, and Keisha Allen.

The stunning Virginia election.

Turning the Tide on Dominion’s Power

We at CCAN are bleary-eyed today, reaching for extra coffee to get through the afternoon. But it was worth it last night. Like many of you, we stayed up late watching the final vote counts roll in from the Virginia races.
It’s big news, of course, that the next governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general will all be leaders who take climate change very seriously.
But here’s the real earthquake: Fourteen candidates who won last night had rejected all financial contributions from Virginia’s biggest polluter and climate obstacle Dominion Energy during their campaign. Among the 16 House seats that flipped, 12 were won by candidates who took a pledge to reject Dominion money, as well as District 11 incumbent delegate Sam Rasoul who held his seat. Plus, Lieutenant Governor-elect Justin Fairfax also rejected Dominion’s money, a first for that office.
So on balance, the election was not just a rejection of Donald Trump and his divisive agenda. It was a rejection of Dominion and its radically pro-fossil fuel agenda. That’s the biggest news from last night, by far. 
Ralph Northam, of course, will be the next governor, and we’re excited to work with him. Northam is opposed to offshore drilling for oil and gas in Virginia. But more importantly, he supports using his regulatory authority as Governor to cap carbon dioxide emissions from all power plants in the Commonwealth. Northam will be able to implement such a carbon cap – first proposed by the current Governor Terry McAuliffe – in 2018. We will also never stop pushing for a rejection of the two monstrous fracked-gas pipelines proposed for Virginia that threaten our climate, water, and property rights. Northam will have the authority to reject these pipelines, and he has not made a decision yet.
The re-election of Attorney General Mark Herring is also good news. He’s good on climate issues and we’ll need him to work hard to defend Virginia’s proposed carbon cap against the inevitable lawsuits from polluting industries.
And then there’s the House of Delegates again. Democrats picked up 16 seats in the House to create a 50-50 split with Republicans. We’re a nonpartisan group. We support leaders of all parties who fight climate change, and we were particularly sad to see climate champion, Delegate Ron Villanueva (R-Virginia Beach), lose last night.
But, on balance, last night’s winners are leaps and bounds better on climate issues than the Republicans they’re replacing. With a 50-50 split and with a couple of recounts that could actually give Democrats a slight pro-climate majority, we could finally see passage of CCAN’s top legislative priority for the past three years: The Virginia Coastal Protection Act. This bill would use the revenue generated from any cap on carbon pollution – hundreds of millions of dollars per year – to help the cities and counties of coastal Virginia adapt to appalling flooding already happening there due to climate change. The bill would also invest in energy efficiency and solar power statewide and retrain coal-industry workers in Southwest Virginia.
With a Virginia Senate pretty much evenly divided between the parties, and with Dominion Energy losing political clout, it’s not unrealistic to expect the Virginia Coastal Protection Act could reach the Governor’s desk in the near future. Northam himself is from the coast.
So we should all pause to give thanks. Thank the 13 House candidates who rejected Dominion Energy’s dirty money and WON, thus changing the legislative landscape in Richmond. And send a thank you to Lieutenant Governor-elect Justin Fairfax for doing the same. 
There’s much more work to be done, of course, to hold all our elected officials accountable in the near future. Which means citizens like you will need to stay informed and engaged on energy policies big and small. That’s where we come in. The Chesapeake Climate Action Network has never been more encouraged by the prospect for climate progress in Virginia than we are right now. We will keep you posted on all fronts.
But for now, send that note of thanks. And take a time to celebrate your victory – our victory – in Virginia last night.

Here’s a list of all the candidates who won last night who took Activate Virginia’s pledge to refuse contributions from Dominion:

  1. Justin Fairfax, elected Lieutenant Governor
  2. Del. Sam Rasoul, incumbent winner of District 11
  3. Jennifer Foy, winner of District 2
  4. Wendy Gooditis, winner of District 10
  5. Danica Roem, winner of District 13
  6. Kelly Fowler, winner of District 21
  7. Elizabeth Guzman, winner of District 31
  8. Kathy Tran, winner of District 42
  9. Lee Carter, winner of District 50
  10. Haya Ayala, winner of District 51
  11. Dawn Adams, winner of District 68
  12. Schuyler VanValkenburg, winner of District 72
  13. Debra Rodman, winner of District 73
  14. Cheryl Turpin, winner of District 85

Time to Resist the Potomac Pipeline

Two weeks ago, more than 300 hundred activists joined hand-in-hand on a bridge spanning the Potomac River, uniting West Virginia and Maryland in solidarity against TransCanada’s proposed fracked-gas pipeline under the Potomac.
The power and beauty of this moment brought me to tears and filled me with hope. When we are united, we can fight Big Oil and Gas and truly WIN!
Now that we’ve joined hands, it’s time to roll up our sleeves and stop this pipeline once and for all!
Chesapeake Climate Action Network, alongside other members of the “No Potomac Pipeline” coalition, will be holding community meetings throughout Western Maryland and West Virginia over the next couple weeks. Join us to learn the next steps in stopping the Potomac Pipeline! (Keep reading for meeting location/date details.)
After our historic fracking ban victory, Maryland is once again being threatened by fracked gas. TransCanada — the same company behind the Keystone XL pipeline, and who spilled over 16 thousand gallons of crude oil on South Dakota farmland — is trying to build a pipeline that would transport fracked gas between Pennsylvania and West Virginia. They want to do this with the shortest, cheapest, and most dangerous route possible. The “Eastern Panhandle Expansion” project would cut underneath the Potomac River that serves as the source of drinking water for millions of residents in our state and beyond.
Already, the oil companies are suing landowners to force the pipeline through their farmland. This pipeline would threaten the health of our drinking water and well-being of our communities. It would also deepen our dependence on dirty fossil fuels and fracking for years to come. By trying to force a pipeline through Sleepy Creek, Back Creek, and underneath the Potomac, we know that they are putting our families, our water, and our climate at risk.
We’re not going to let this happen.
Join us at a community meeting to learn how to stop this pipeline. During the meetings, we will talk about ways that we can raise our voices in our local communities, reach out to our neighbors, and make sure that our local elected leaders hear loud and clear that Marylanders say NO to the Potomac Pipeline.
Join us to learn how you can become part of a pipeline-free future for West Virginia and Maryland! Follow the links below to RSVP.
 
Eastern Panhandle: Wednesday, November 1, 6:30 pm in Martinsburg WV
Frederick County: Monday, November 6, 6:30 pm in Frederick MD
Washington County: Wednesday, November 8, 6:30 pm in Hagerstown MD
Western Maryland: Sunday, November 12, 4:00 pm in Frostburg MD

This FERC commissioner rejected the agency's approval for the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley Pipelines

Late last Friday night, FERC issued certificates of approval for both the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley Pipelines. It was a cowardly, horrific move for the agency to dump this news on a Friday night — but we didn’t expect much better from an agency now run by Trump’s fossil-fueled appointees.
However, there is an interesting side to this story. One FERC commissioner, Cheryl LaFleur, dissented with the others on their decision. This is the first time she has dissented on a pipeline application in her many years of service — ever. By contrast, the two commissioners who voted in favor of the pipelines were appointed barely a couple months ago.
Read her dissent below, or download a PDF here, and share widely. Stay tuned — big actions to come.

Statement of Commissioner Cheryl A. Lafleur on Order Issuing Certificates and Granting Abandoment Authority under CP15-554 et al.

“With the increasing abundance of domestic natural gas, the Commission plays a key role in considering applications for the construction of natural gas infrastructure to support the delivery of this important fuel source. Under the Certificate Policy Statement, which sets forth the Commission’s approach to evaluating proposed projects under Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act,the Commission evaluates in each case whether the benefits of the project as proposed by the applicant outweigh adverse effects on existing shippers, other pipelines and their captive customers, landowners, and surrounding communities.1 For each pipeline I have considered during my time at the Commission, I have tried to carefully apply this standard, evaluating the facts in the record to determine whether, on balance, each individual project is in the public interest.2 Today, the Commission is issuing orders that authorize the development of the Mountain Valley Pipeline Project/Equitrans Expansion Project (MVP) and the Atlantic Coast Pipeline Project (ACP). For the reasons set forth herein, I cannot conclude that either of these projects as proposed is in the public interest, and thus, I respectfully dissent.
“Deciding whether a project is in the public interest requires a careful balancing of the need for the project and its environmental impacts. In the case of the ACP and MVP projects, my balancing determination was heavily influenced by similarities in their respective routes, impact, and timing. ACP and MVP are proposed to be built in the same region with certain segments located in close geographic proximity. Collectively, they represent approximately 900 miles of new gas pipeline infrastructure through West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina, and will deliver 3.44 Bcf/d of natural gas to the Southeast. The record demonstrates that these two large projects will have similar, and significant, environmental impacts on the region. Both the ACP and MVP cross hundreds of miles of karst terrain, thousands of waterbodies, and many agricultural, residential, and commercial areas. Furthermore, the projects traverse many important cultural, historic, and natural resources, including the Appalachian National Scenic Trail and the Blue Ridge Parkway. Both projects appear to be receiving gas from the same location, and both deliver gas that can reach some common destination markets. Moreover, these projects are being developed under similar development schedules, as further evidenced by the Commission acting on them concurrently today.3 Given these similarities and overlapping issues, I believe it is appropriate to balance the collective environmental impacts of these projects on the Appalachian region against the economic need for the projects. In so doing, I am not persuaded that both of these projects as proposed are in the public interest.
“I am particularly troubled by the approval of these projects because I believe that the records demonstrate that there may be alternative approaches that could provide significant environmental advantages over their construction as proposed. As part of its alternatives analysis, Commission staff requested that ACP evaluate an MVP Merged Systems Alternative that would serve the capacity of both projects.4 This alternative would largely follow the MVP route to deliver the capacity of both ACP and MVP in a single large diameter pipeline. Commission staff identifies significant environmental advantages of utilizing this alternative. For example, the MVP Merged Systems Alternative would be 173 miles shorter than the cumulative mileage of both projects individually. This alternative would also increase collocation with existing utility rights-of-way, avoid the Monongahela National Forest and the George Washington National Forest, reduce the number of crossings of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail and Blue Ridge Parkway, and reduce the amount of construction in karst topography. Commission staff eliminated this alternative from further consideration because it failed to meet the project’s objectives, in particular that it would “result in a significant delay to the delivery of the 3.44 Bcf/d of natural gas to the proposed customers of both ACP and MVP”5 due to the significant time for the planning and design that would be necessary to develop a revised project proposal.6
“Similarly, in the MVP FEIS, Commission staff evaluated a single pipeline alternative to the MVP project that would utilize the proposed ACP to serve MVP’s capacity needs.7 While this alternative was found to have certain environmental disadvantages, such as the need for additional compression to deliver the additional gas, the EIS acknowledges that this alternative would “essentially eliminate all environmental impacts on resources along the currently proposed MVP route.”8
“I recognize that the two alternatives described above were eliminated from further consideration because they were deemed not to meet each project’s specific stated goals. However, I believe that these alternatives demonstrate that the regional needs that these pipelines address may be met through alternative approaches that have significantly fewer environmental impacts.
 
1. Certification of New Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline Facilities, 88 FERC ¶ 61,227 (1999) (Certificate Policy Statement), order on clarification, 90 FERC ¶ 61,128, order on clarification, 92 FERC ¶ 61,094 (2000); 15 U.S.C. 717h (Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act
provides that no natural gas company shall transport natural gas or construct any facilities for such transportation without a certificate of public convenience and necessity.).
2. See Millenium Pipeline Company, L.L.C., 140 FERC ¶ 61,045 (2012) (LaFleur, Comm’r, dissenting)
3. ACP and MVP filed their applications for approval pursuant to section7(c) of the Natural Gas Act on September 18, 2015 and
October 23, 2015, respectively.
4. ACP Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) at 3-6 – 3-9.
5. Id. at 3-9.
6. Staff also found that this alternative would likely limit the ability to provide additional gas to the projects’ customers, another of the stated goals for the original proposal. Id.
7 MVP FEIS at 3-14.
8 Id

Baltimore’s Chance to Stop the Next Big Oil Train Disaster

As Lac-Megantic Trials Proceed, Baltimore City Council Considers Bill to Stop Bomb Trains

 
On July 6, 2013, a freight train carrying 72 tank cars of crude oil derailed in the small town of Lac-Megantic, Quebec. Many of the town’s residents were gathered at a local bar for a birthday party when the runaway train barreled into downtown. When the train derailed at a sharp curve in the tracks, its highly flammable cargo exploded and wrought devastation.
The crude oil train explosion in Lac-Megantic killed 47 people, orphaned 27 children, destroyed 44 buildings, and left 160 people homeless.
That train was carrying crude oil from the Bakken Shale in North Dakota. Since the fracking boom took off in 2008, there has been a dramatic increase in crude-by-rail shipments in North America. The Bakken crude oil that is transported on these trains is more toxic and explosive than conventional oil. It contains a higher concentration of flammable methane and toxic fracking chemicals. Making matters worse, most of the train cars carrying this oil are outdated DOT-111s that were not designed to carry volatile material like crude oil. When these train cars puncture, they explode.
There have been dozens of crude oil train derailments over the past several years. While the incident in Lac-Megantic was by far the most devastating, communities across the continent have had to face oil spills, fires, and explosions due to crude oil trains. From Mosier, OR to Plainfield, IL to Lynchburg, VA, residents near rail lines live in danger.
Bakken crude oil has traveled through the heart of Baltimore City throughout the fracking boom. Between 2013-2014, over 100 million gallons of crude oil were shipped out of the Fairfield Peninsula in South Baltimore. According to the environmental group Stand, 165,000 Baltimoreans live in the “blast zone” of a potential derailment and explosion. I’m one of those 165,000.
Baltimore’s weak infrastructure is vulnerable, and we have had too many close calls with freight trains in the city. In 2001, a train derailed in the Howard Street tunnel and caused the infamous fire and water main break that effectively shut down the city for a week. In 2013, a coal train exploded in Rosedale that broke windows, shook nearby buildings, and slowed traffic throughout the region. In 2014, the retaining wall on 26th St collapsed, sending parked cars, streetlights, and large chunks of sidewalk onto the CSX tracks below. And in 2016, a train carrying acetone derailed inside the Howard Street Tunnel.
Thankfully, none of these incidents have resulted in the devastation and tragedy that Lac-Megantic faced. But crossing our fingers and hoping nothing bad ever happens is not a solution.
As the price of oil has plummeted, there has been a dramatic decrease in crude-by-rail shipments across the country. We need to ensure that when the next oil boom kicks off, Baltimore doesn’t become the next Lac-Megantic.
At last night’s City Council meeting, Councilmembers Mary Pat Clarke and Ed Reisinger introduced City Council Bill #17-0150 to prohibit the construction of new and the expansion of existing crude oil terminals in Baltimore City. This zoning ordinance will prevent an increase in crude oil train traffic in the city and send a strong signal that Baltimore does not want to be a hub for dangerous, polluting activity like crude oil train traffic. Instead, our city can be a leader in emerging clean energy industries like offshore wind manufacturing. This bill is also an opportunity for the Baltimore City Council to codify a piece of the Climate Resolution passed unanimously in June, which calls for the City to “limit the development and expansion of facilities that handle crude oil.”
This bill is being considered in the midst of the criminal trials in the Lac-Megantic disaster. Though it is clear that lax regulations and unsafe railroad management policies contributed to the tragedy there in 2013, railroad workers are facing exclusive blame for the incident. If the workers are convicted of criminal negligence, the reckless policies and lack of regulatory oversight that caused the disaster will not be changed. The conditions that led to the tragedy in Lac-Megantic will remain the norm across North America, continuing to put communities along rail lines in danger.
In Baltimore, we have an opportunity to make real progress in the fight against dangerous crude oil trains. Contact your City Councilmember and urge them to support the Crude Oil Terminal Prohibition (City Council Bill #17-0150) to protect Baltimore from becoming the next Lac-Megantic.

Momentum is Growing in the Fight against Atlantic Coast & Mountain Valley Pipelines

Note: If you have not already, please read the Summer 2017 Pipeline Fighter installment as part of an ongoing series tracking Virginia’s pipeline resistance movement exclusively on the CCAN Blog Page. 
On September 13 and 14, Virginians from across the Commonwealth made environmental movement history in the state. For two consecutive days of action, the ever-growing coalition in opposition to the Mountain Valley and Atlantic Coast Pipelines gathered at the same time at each of the Commonwealth’s seven Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) offices, spanning every corner of Virginia.
The participants, spanning across the entirety of the Commonwealth, included faith leaders from diverse traditions, landowners, military veterans, Appalachian trail enthusiasts, climate refugees, students, and environmentalists. These groups came together in a never-before seen level of statewide coordination with one unified message: Governor McAuliffe’s DEQ must keep its original promise to the public and conduct site-specific permitting for each of the waterways crossed by these two massive fracked-gas pipelines. 
This would follow the precedent set by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s use of section 401 of the Clean Water Act to to stop the dangerous Constitution pipeline in 2014, a decision upheld by a Federal Appeals Court in August.
At noon on Wednesday, September 13, hundreds of faith and spiritual elders gathered at every single DEQ office in Virginia: Richmond, Abingdon, Woodbridge, Glen Allen, Roanoke, Virginia Beach, and Harrisonburg, where they gathered in an interfaith prayer service. In Roanoke, congregants joined in song, in Richmond participants witnessed a traditional African water libation, to highlight the central role of water, and in Virginia Beach climate refugees fleeing Hurricane Irma in Florida were honored quests in the prayer ceremony. Each ceremony included a moment of silence for those devastated by both Hurricane Harvey and Irma, both of which made landfall in the USA in the weeks and days leading up to the protest.
On September 14 at noon, participants once again gathered at all seven DEQ offices — this time with a different tone. Each location featured a press conference and a rally, where community leaders, landowners, scientists, and doctors called upon the Governor and the DEQ to do their jobs and protect Virginia’s waterways and most vulnerable communities from the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley Pipelines. 
Representatives from each location then delivered a letter to a DEQ agency representative, detailing the specific regional concerns they had with fracked-gas infrastructure projects.
At the DEQ Central Headquarters in Richmond, nineteen people linked hands in front of the main entrance of the door, supported by the cheers and chants of dozens of supporters, as they refused to leave until the pipelines were stopped. The “sit-in” caused the headquarters to functionally be on lockdown for over an hour and half until the activists were all arrested and issued court summons’ on the spot.  
It’s clear that our protests made a real difference. In the days that followed these actions, both North Carolina and West Virginia announced significant setbacks in the permitting process of these pipelines.
Yet inexplicably, the Virginia DEQ has since doubled-down on its proposed timeline — with permits potentially being issued as early as November. 
Now, more than ever, we need to show the Governor and the DEQ that all Virginians of conscience stand as an unwavering united front against these pipelines that would wreak havoc on our water, climate, and most vulnerable communities.
Let your voice be heard TODAY, and call Governor McAuliffe’s office and tell him No ACP, NO MVP, NO PIPELINES.
 

Reflecting on a Summer of Organizing for a Carbon Price in DC

What happens when you put four young college students and recent graduates together for a summer of organizing? You get a dynamic and versatile team of advocates with a strong pool of talents and interests, ranging from English to Environmental Policy, Economics, and Social Justice Organizing. I got to experience this phenomenon firsthand with Andrew, Maria, and Olivia, during my summer as one of the four interns working on the D.C. Put A Price On It campaign.
On a personal note, I moved to D.C. after spending a year in Vermont at graduate school and had very little experience in the city. Working on this campaign exposed me to a completely new level of D.C., outside of the traditional tourist attractions and historical monuments. I got to experience the authentic flavor of the District’s booming neighborhoods, many of which I had never heard of, nor visited before. It feels nearly impossible to dive into the details of what we all accomplished this summer, but I think it’s worth covering some of the most prominent highlights!
Our summer working on Put A Price On It D.C. was kickstarted with a visit to the John Wilson Building to do a lit drop of a Washington Post article that came out in support of carbon pricing as a climate solution.  It provided a wonderful opportunity for us to meet some of the staffers and councilmembers face to face while pitching the campaign!
From that point, myself and the three other interns, Andrew, Maria, and Olivia took to the streets to educate residents about the policy by canvassing across the District. We talked to residents from across the city, including everyone from native Washingtonians to students attending university in D.C.  Canvassing can be hard work at times, but I have to admit that some of the most memorable moments from the summer were from the time I spent talking to D.C. residents. I engaged in some of the most authentic and candid conversations with residents about climate change, justice, and the quirks of the city.
The tedious work of petitioning in the above average heat this summer was made more than worth it by the supportive words and thank yous we received from residents. By the end of the summer, we collected over 800 petitions from D.C. residents by visiting neighborhoods, metro stops, and attending events across the city.
Later in the summer, we gained practical advocacy experience by attending a public hearing with Council Member Cheh. I had the great pleasure of preparing and offering testimony at the hearing in support of the campaign, a first for me. It allowed me to apply my past education in communications and advocacy in a practical real world environment.
Overall, I’m proud of what we were able to accomplish over the past few months as interns on the D.C. campaign. Further, I’m excited to see where our futures take us. Something tells me that the four of us will cross paths in the future. It’s just the nature of this work! Successful advocates know that building lasting relationships is the key to powerful campaigns and coalitions. I hope that we’ll all be able to contribute to each other’s work in the future in one capacity or another. At the very least, we will all be able to look back on our summer as interns for the Price It D.C. campaign and reflect on the key advocacy and organizing skills we developed… And cheer with gusto when The Climate and Community Reinvestment Act is passed by the D.C. Council!
 

The Pursuit of Climate and Social Justice Through Carbon Pricing

What is environmental justice? According to the Environmental Protection Agency, it’s “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.”
Unfortunately, the pursuit of environmental and social justice has been an uphill battle. Harmful environmental practices have taken place disproportionately in low-income communities of color for years — even decades — putting these communities on the front lines of pollution and climate change.
A prime example of this is gentrification of cities, which tailors to the tastes of the upper middle class and pushes low-income residents to the curb. Income inequality between the rich and poor looms as another related and potent issue. In the landmark report “Toxic Waste and Race in the United States,” it was found that race was the predicting factor for waste siting more frequently than income. To add another layer of complication, climate change threatens to exacerbate these issues of injustice.
This particularly concerning in the District of Columbia, one of the most clearly segregated cities in the United States, as highlighted by the Washington Post in 2015. Further, according to a report released by the D.C. Fiscal Policy Institute, income inequality in the District ranks fourth among the fifty largest cities in the United States. To break it down further, the richest 5 percent of Washingtonians make roughly fifty nine times what the poorest 20 percent make. Perhaps more relevant to this discussion, the study also found that D.C.’s lowest-income residents are primarily people of color.
It may come as no surprise that environmental and economic policies have the potential to become regressive, impacting lower income communities disproportionately. Developing policies that take justice issues into consideration is more important than ever. With this in mind, it is critical that the environmental policies that we pursue within the District serve all residents, regardless of race and socioeconomic status.
Luckily, the Healthy Community and Climate Reinvestment Act of D.C. plans to do just that by placing a fee on carbon emissions and rebating 75 percent of the collected revenue back to residents. At its core, this legislation is an effort to curb carbon emissions that contribute to global climate change. However, the fee and rebate model being employed has the potential to correct some other critical injustices occurring in the District as well. In particular, low income residents would see a rebate of about four dollars to every one dollar that they pay through the carbon fee, taking a step toward leveling the playing field between the highest and lowest income residents in D.C.
At the end of the day, climate change is the single issue that unites us all. Put A Price On It D.C.’s progressive approach to address climate change has a unique social justice flavor that is critical in today’s fight for a healthy climate and community.
 

Digging Deeper: How FERC Fails the Public on the Atlantic Coast Pipeline

On July 21, Federal regulators issued a deeply-flawed final environmental review for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP). We know that the pipeline would threaten hundreds of bodies of water, putting the drinking water for thousands of communities at risk. We also know that the Atlantic Coast Pipeline would fuel climate disaster while blocking the transition we urgently need to clean energy and efficiency solutions. It is not surprising that this review from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is completely inadequate, given what we have seen in the past.
But it’s worth breaking down just how FERC gets it wrong on climate change — and what else it completely ignores.

Climate Change

The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) continues to ignore the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. It entirely fails to consider emissions from fracking that this massive pipeline would trigger, and seriously discounts the emissions from burning the natural gas.
FERC concludes that the ACP would emit approximately 30 million tons per year of CO2 equivalent. This number is less than half of the emissions the ACP would actually trigger. A proper analysis by our friends at Oil Change International found that the ACP would cause 68 million metric tons of greenhouse gas pollution per year, which is the equivalent of 20 U.S. coal plants or over 14 million vehicles on the road.
FERC insists, as it has in past analyses, that “the upstream production and downstream combustion of gas is not causally connected [to the ACP] because the production and end-use would occur with or without the projects.”
This claim would be laughable if the consequences of climate change weren’t so severe.
FERC is ignoring its own role in approving all interstate gas pipelines, which are essential for the expanding gas production in the Appalachian basin. Even if you accept FERC’s premise that fracking for gas would occur without the ACP, which we don’t, you can’t ignore the fact that new pipelines generally trigger new fracking. And it’s FERC that approves all new interstate pipelines. A study by Oil Change International found that the Appalachian basin is the region with the greatest potential for growth in dangerous fracking, and developers are eager for pipelines to make high levels of fracking economical. There are currently 19 pipelines proposed in this region being considered by FERC. These pipelines would be a global warming bomb.
For the first time, FERC included a discussion of the Clean Power Plan in its review — but it provided no context or analysis for how the pipeline would impact a state’s goal under the plan. The purpose of the National Environmental Policy Act is to meaningfully inform the public about the consequences of a major federal action before it takes places. Referencing the Clean Power Plan for the first time with no context does not provide meaningful information the public needs to evaluate the ACP and falls short of NEPA.   
The draft analysis included a discussion of why the Council on Environmental Quality’s climate guidance, issued under the Obama Administration, didn’t apply to the ACP. FERC removed that discussion in this final draft. Instead it inserted a footnote discussing Trump’s executive order directing federal agencies to not consider indirect climate impacts in their environmental reviews, such as the increased fracking that would come with the ACP.
These pipelines are meant to last 50 years or more, according to NPR. They are presented as climate-friendly alternatives to coal, but they serve only to lock us into a new form of dangerous fossil fuel instead. Methane, the primary component of natural gas, is 86 times more potent than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period. The ACP would lock us into decades of reliance on fossil fuels when we know we need to move to clean sources of energy, like wind and solar.

Ridgetop Removal

The FEIS does not require Dominion to make any changes to minimize ridgetop removal, period.
Experts studied the draft EIS to find that the construction of this pipeline would result in 38 miles of mountain ridgetop removal.  For perspective, the height equivalent of a five-story building would be erased in places from fully forested and ancient mountains, much of it near the treasured Appalachian Trail.
Despite the outcry and unimaginable impacts from removing miles of ridgetops, not much changed in FERC’s final review. FERC still expects construction of the pipeline to require 125 feet of clearing width in mountainous regions. The agency directly states that “clearing and grading . . . would level the right-of-way surface.”
Furthermore, Dominion has yet to reveal how it intends to dispose of at least 247,000 dump-truck-loads of excess rock and soil—known as “overburden”—that would accumulate from the construction along just these 38 miles of ridgetops. The FEIS, for the first time,  tells us definitively that “excess rock and spoil would be hauled off to an approved disposal location or used a beneficial reuse.” Yet Dominion and FERC still have provided no plan for dealing with this overburden and ensuring that it doesn’t poison our waterways.

Renewable Energy 

The bottom-line is this: In its determination of “need,” FERC fully fails to even consider renewable energy as an alternative to this project.
If Dominion wants to bring more energy to Virginians, it should be focusing on clean energy, like expanding its pilot offshore wind program and opening the door to widespread community solar. The last thing Virginia needs is more natural gas infrastructure.
As Southern Environmental Law Center Senior Attorney Greg Buppert stated, “It’s FERC’s responsibility to determine if this pipeline is a public necessity before it allows developers to take private property, clear forests, and carve up mountainsides. Mounting evidence shows that it is not.”
For our climate and our future, we must stop this pipeline.

Click HERE to see actions you can take right now.

 
Photo at the top from Flickr user cool revolution with a Creative Commons license. 

Three Summer Actions to Stop the Atlantic Coast & Mountain Valley Pipelines

As the companies behind the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) and the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) continue to secure the permits necessary to start construction, the vast social movement that has been built to halt these radical fracked-gas infrastructure projects is rapidly reaching its climax.
Over the past two years, activists, landowners, military veterans, students, Appalachian Trail hikers, indigenous tribes, and others have hammered away at Governor McAuliffe to come out against these pipelines and to direct his Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to conduct rigorous site-specific permitting for each stream crossing. This growing coalition is confident that adopting these measures is the best way to show what experts already know: these pipelines are incompatible with the integrity of Virginia’s waterways and environments, and there is absolutely no way they can be constructed in a way that “protects and enhances Virginia’s environment, and promotes the health and well-being of the citizens of the Commonwealth.”
This follows the precedent set out by Governor Cuomo in New York, who used his authority under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act to stop the dangerous Constitution Pipeline in 2014.
The DEQ is now rubber-stamping permits for the ACP and MVP by mostly deferring to a blanket permit issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers, going back on their original promise in April to conduct site-specific reviews.
Things could never be more urgent, as the authority of the Governor to meaningfully protect Virginians from these pipelines reaches a dead end after water permits are granted by the DEQ. Every day the DEQ’s intentions are becoming clearer, with the agency already releasing draft permits for both the ACP and the MVP. For activists, the summer of 2017 represents the peak of our efforts, and we’re ready to do everything we can to get Governor McAuliffe’s DEQ to take action and protect our water. If the DEQ continues down its current course and issues water permits for these projects, the future of these two pipelines will then reside under the authority of President Trump.
We can’t let that happen. The ACP and MVP would strip the rights of property owners, bisect indigenous lands, traverse water basins that provide water for millions of people, and cumulatively create the equivalent annual greenhouse gas emissions of 46 full-time coal-power plants. Now, more than ever, is the time to let Governor McAuliffe and his DEQ hear the sound of Virginians united against fossil fuel infrastructure and for a clean energy future.

Here are THREE ways you can pressure the DEQ this summer to stop the ACP & MVP:

1. Submit a Public Comment to the DEQ

By submitting a public comment to the DEQ (and encouraging all of your social networks to do the same), you are adding to the resounding chorus of Virginians who emphatically demand that Governor McAuliffe and his DEQ do everything in their authority to protect Virginians from the environmental destruction that these pipelines would trigger.

2. Pack the DEQ Public Hearings with your Neighbors

The DEQ has announced five separate public hearings for these pipelines (two for the MVP and three for the ACP), spanning from August 7th to the 14th. Spread the word about these meetings and organize carpools in your community to show the DEQ and Virginians are united on this issue. Be sure to wear a blue shirt and bring a bottle of water collected from your property to participate in water ceremonies at each one of the hearings. If you need help organizing a ride for these hearings, please email Jamshid Bakhtiari (jamshid@chesapeakeclimate.org) for assistance ASAP.
Here’s the list of upcoming hearings — click through to RSVP:

3. Call Your State Representatives

We need our legislators to stand up for Virginia waterways and communities and tell the DEQ to do the same! We have teamed up with our partners, Appalachian Voices, Bold Alliance and Oil Change International to flood Virginia’s legislators with a series of call-in days. We need you to call your legislator and encourage them to push the DEQ to protect Virginia’s water today!
Those are three things you can do right now. Stay tuned for more from CCAN as we ramp up the pressure.