Category: Press Releases

10th annual Polar Bear Plunge sponsored by the Chesapeake Climate Action Network draws 200+ activists, families, and local leaders to National Harbor, Md.

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md.—On the heels of headlines confirming 2014 was the hottest year on record, more than 200 DC-area residents took an ice-cold “plunge” into the Potomac River on Saturday to call for stronger state and national action on climate change.
The annual “Keep Winter Cold” Polar Bear Plunge, now in its 10th year, raises awareness about the climate crisis while raising funds to support the Chesapeake Climate Action Network’s work for clean energy solutions across Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, DC.

Saturday’s plunge drew local leaders, including Congresswoman Donna Edwards of Prince George’s County, Rev. Lennox Yearwood of the Hip Hop Caucus, along with committed plungers of all ages—from local high school students to Franciscan priests to a Boy Scout venturing crew to Mt. Rainier and Petworth neighborhood groups.
“We’re taking a bold, icy dip into the Potomac River today to light a fire under our leaders to take bolder and bolder action on climate change,” said Mike Tidwell, director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “We have the solutions we need, but we don’t yet see the political will we need, so we’re here today to inspire more of it.”

The year 2014 was the hottest ever recorded on Earth, according to NASA scientists. Meanwhile, this fall the world’s leading scientists warned of “irreversible” impacts to human society and ecosystems if governments at all levels do not act swiftly to reduce planet-heating greenhouse gas emissions.
“350 Loudoun is sponsoring CCAN’s Polar Plunge because of the urgent need to act effectively to reduce carbon emissions,” said Natalie Pien, a member of 350 Loudoun. “CCAN provides the most consistent support to local, grassroots groups like 350 Loudoun.”
From Annapolis to Richmond, CCAN’s 2015 priorities include passing legislation to double Maryland’s reliance on wind and solar power and to generate the first-ever state funds to fight flooding in coastal Virginia communities. At the end of 2014, the group helped pass legislation to close a major loophole in the District’s renewable energy standard, a victory that will incentivize five new utility-scale wind farms across the region.
Each year, non-profit and community organizations across the region partner with the Chesapeake Climate Action Network on the plunge, joining the icy dip and also raising money to support their shared missions.
“DC Sierrans are looking forward to ‘taking the plunge’ to support moving DC off of fossil fuels and onto clean energy solutions,” said Brenna Muller, outreach coordinator at the Sierra Club, D.C. Chapter. “The funds we raise together will support the critical work our organizations are doing to fight climate change and protect the environment.”
“Franciscan Action Network is a co-sponsor of the plunge because addressing the issue of climate justice is central to our mission,” said Fr. Jacek Orzechowski, a Franciscan friar priest and board member of the Franciscan Action Network. “We consider it one of the most pressing moral issues of our time that is intimately connected with other issues such as migration, human trafficking, and the corrosive influence of money in our politics.”
“Employees at Community Forklift fight climate change every day, reducing waste and capturing thousands of tons of carbon dioxide each year,” said Meg Kiernan, Outreach & Education Program Manager at the nonprofit reuse warehouse in Prince George’s County. “When the Forklift Freezers run into the icy water, we want to encourage folks to think about stretching their own comfort zones! Advocating for better policies and changing daily habits will impact us all.”
SPONSORS: The annual plunge is hosted by the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. The event is co-sponsored by 350 Loudoun, Green Neighbors DC, Thomas Jefferson HS Environmental Impact Club, DC Sierra Club, Chesapeake Physicians for Social Responsibility, Community Forklift, All Souls Unitarian Church, Franciscan Action Network, Climate First!.
BUSINESS SPONSORS: Perfect Settings Catering, Zeke’s Coffee, MLJ Event Management, The Green Commuter, Kate Bakes Bars. Waste Neutral, Bobby Mckey’s Piano Bar, Patagonia, Deep Creek Cellars, River Riders, Inc.
Find more information on the 2015 Polar Bear Plunge at www.keepwintercold.org.
View photos at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/chesapeakeclimate/sets/72157650045550650/
CONTACT: Kelly Trout, 240-396-2022, kelly@chesapeakeclimate.org

###

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network is the biggest and oldest grassroots organization dedicated to fighting climate change in Maryland, Virginia and Washington, D.C. We’re building a powerful movement to shift our region away from climate-harming fossil fuels and to clean energy solutions.

Data shows legislation is good for Maryland jobs, economy and climate

Poll released shows strong voter support for action

ANNAPOLIS—Business leaders and advocates today called on Maryland lawmakers to pass legislation to double the state’s use of clean electricity like wind and solar power during the 2015 Maryland General Assembly. During a morning tele-press conference, the leaders emphasized that such a policy would deliver huge jobs and economic gains for Maryland, in addition to dramatically reducing costly global warming pollution. According to polling data also released during the call, over two-thirds of Maryland voters back the proposal, which would require that 40% of the state’s electricity come from renewable sources by 2025.
“There are few sectors in Maryland’s economy that are more promising than the clean energy sector in terms of jobs and growth,” said Maryland Senator Brian Feldman (D-Montgomery), a chief sponsor of the Maryland Clean Energy Advancement Act of 2015. “Solar is bigger than the crab industry now in this state. This legislation helps expand that prosperity with a sound policy that creates investment certainty for businesses and consumers.”
Analysis shows that doubling Maryland’s existing clean energy mandate, called the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), would support nearly 2,000 new jobs per year in Maryland’s solar industry and spur over 20,000 new jobs in the regional wind-power supply chain. Business experts emphasized that, by setting a region-leading 40% clean electricity standard, state lawmakers would establish Maryland as a regional hub for clean energy investment and spur a resurgence in manufacturing and construction jobs.
“Thanks to forward-looking clean energy policies like this, renewable energy is moving into the mainstream for business,” said Stu Dalheim, Vice President at Calvert Investments, a nationally prominent firm based in Maryland. “A majority of the country’s largest companies have clean energy targets and investors are ready for public policies that push further in creating sustainable, home-grown energy jobs that are good for the climate. It just makes sense. This is a good bill for Maryland and the country.”
The polling released today, conducted by the non-partisan, independent firm OpinionWorks, confirmed that broad majorities of Maryland voters back the policy:

• More than two-thirds of Maryland voters—or 69 percent—support raising the state’s clean electricity standard to 40% by 2025, understanding that it would add less than $2 per month to the average home electricity bill.
• By two-to-one, voters are more likely to support an elected official during the next election who votes to double Maryland’s clean energy requirement.
• Further, 70 percent of those polled believe that reliance on fossil fuels is harmful to people’s health.

The Maryland Clean Energy Advancement Act expands a current state law called the Renewable Portfolio Standard, or RPS, which was originally signed in 2004 by Republican Governor Robert Ehrlich. The RPS requires that Maryland electricity suppliers purchase an increasing percentage each year of wind, solar and other forms of renewable energy. The new legislation would gradually accelerate the yearly trajectory of Maryland’s standard to 40% clean electricity by the year 2025. (The current law is 20% by 2022). The proposed expansion bill comes on the heels of California’s announcement Monday that it will set a 50-percent clean power target.
“States with the best renewable energy standards are the states that create the most clean energy jobs,” said Bob Keefe, Executive Director of Environmental Entrepreneurs, a national nonpartisan business group that advocates for smart policies that are good for both the environment and the economy. “These are jobs that pay better than average and can’t be off-shored and are helping both our economy and our environment. Maryland is rife with opportunities for more renewable energy, and there’s no reason places like Massachusetts and New Jersey and North Carolina should be outpacing Maryland in solar and other areas.”
Walt Wunder, president of Aeronautica Windpower, LLC, said: “As an American-owned wind turbine manufacturer with products installed in Maryland, Aeronautica Windpower applauds Maryland’s efforts to expand its use of renewable energy from the wind and sun. We have watched as other states and countries which embrace renewables improve their economy by increasing employment and stabilizing the cost of electricity. Maryland has the renewable resources to be a national leader in this respect, and the 40 percent standard is the way to get there.”
Tommy Landers, Maryland Policy Director for the Chesapeake Climate Action Network and a representative of the Maryland Climate Coalition, said: “We can and must pass legislation in 2015 to double wind and solar power for Maryland. As Maryland moves forward with clean energy, we will move forward on jobs, forward on health, and forward on climate action. That’s why this bill is a top priority of a large and growing coalition of business leaders, environmentalists, faith leaders, public health groups, labor unions, and social justice advocates.”
On January 14, the first day of the Maryland General Assembly session, activists will join Maryland climate, business, labor, and social justice leaders for a 10:30 a.m. rally on Lawyer’s Mall calling for action in 2015 to double Maryland’s clean electricity standard.

• View a summary (PDF) of the OpinionWorks polling released today and commissioned by the Maryland Climate Coalition.
• For more on the jobs and economic benefits of doubling Maryland’s clean electricity, view this fact sheet (PDF).

CONTACT:
Kelly Trout, 240-396-2022, kelly@chesapeakeclimate.org
Tommy Landers, 301-442-0134, tommy@chesapeakeclimate.org

###

For Immediate Release
December 22, 2014
Contact:
Dawone Robinson, 804-767-0372 (cell), dawone@chesapeakeclimate.org
Mike Tidwell, 240-460-5838( cell), mtidwell@chesapeakeclimate.org

Republican Delegate Unveils First-Ever State Legislation to Raise $200 Million Annually for Flooding Adaptation and Climate Mitigation

Hampton Roads Delegate Ron Villanueva joined an at-risk Norfolk resident and an environmental leader in calling on the General Assembly to pass the Virginia Coastal Protection Act in 2015

VIRGINIA BEACH – On a tele-press conference Monday, December 22nd, Delegate Ron Villanueva (R – Virginia Beach) formally unveiled his groundbreaking legislation to protect coastal Virginia from rising sea levels.
Joined by clean energy and flood control advocate Dawone Robinson, Virginia Policy Director for the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, and Norfolk city resident Chris Scanton who has been frequently impacted by recurrent flooding, Del. Villanueva outlined forthcoming legislation called The Virginia Coastal Protection Act.
“It is our job as legislators to protect the safety of our constituents and their property,” started Del. Villanueva. “Rising sea levels fueled by climate change now represent one of the single biggest risks to that safety in coastal Virginia.” Delegate Villanueva continued: “Coastal leaders have been saying for years that we need significant revenues dedicated to addressing this risk. My bill provides a good start and I hope it leads to more solutions to address this problem, both public and private.”
While mayors, Navy officials, and legislators from both parties acknowledge that immediate action and significant money is needed to prepare for the growing impacts of sea level rise on Virginia’s coast, the state currently has no dedicated source of funds to do so. The Virginia Coastal Protection Act would solve this problem by joining Virginia into a market-based system called the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). Virginia’s participation in RGGI would raise $200 million or more annually by the year 2020. The bill specifies that half of the RGGI revenues would be dedicated to fund sea level rise and recurrent flooding adaptation projects in Hampton Roads.
“Living in Norfolk, the second most vulnerable area in the country to sea level rise fueled by climate change, my home and the homes of my friends and family are already at risk,” added Norfolk resident Chris Scanton. “We are living on the front lines, and I appreciate Del. Villanueva’s leadership in introducing this legislation.”
The rate of sea-level rise on Virginia’s coast is close to the fastest in the nation. Coastal residents regularly change their routes to work or school to avoid flooded roads. A recent report by the Union of Concerned Scientists paints a grim picture for the future. According to the UCS, minor tidal flooding driven by sea level rise will be so common by 2045 that it could happen about every other day.
Dawone Robinson, Virginia Policy Director for the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said, “Those who live and visit Hampton Roads know that flooding has become one of the most challenging policy solutions facing coastal Virginia. The Virginia Coastal Protection Act is an urgently needed, must-pass bill for the 2015 General Assembly.”
Del. Villanueva also sits on a newly created special subcommittee tasked with reviewing and developing potential policy options to help Virginia comply with the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed Clean Power Plan. He has described The Virginia Coastal Protection Act and the potential of Virginia joining into RGGI as a practical, cost-effective method of compliance with the federal rules.
“Some experts have stated that a multi-state approach to carbon reductions, like RGGI, is best for ratepayers. I’m interested in starting the conversation and I hope Virginia seriously considers taking this approach,” said Del. Villanueva. “I’m in favor of finding solutions and at the end of the day the problems will still exist if we don’t address them today.”
In addition to funding coastal climate resilience efforts, the bill specifies that the other half of the revenues associated with Virginia’s participation in RGGI would fund economic development in southwest Virginia and clean energy and energy efficiency investments all over the Commonwealth.
“The Virginia Coastal Protection Act is truly a win-win for the entire state,” said Robinson. “The bill provides funding for important programs during a time of harsh state budget cuts and serves as a viable option for Virginia to meet its carbon reduction goals.”
###

Statement from Mike Tidwell, Director, Chesapeake Climate Action Network
Contact: Mike Tidwell, 240-460-5838, mtidwell@chesapeakeclimate.org
“The Chesapeake Climate Action Network applauds New York Governor Anthony Cuomo for today effectively banning the controversial gas-drilling practice of ‘fracking’ in that state. The New York Department of Health has found that fracking is a threat to human and environmental health. As a result, the state’s Department of Environmental Conservation will soon issue a binding declaration prohibiting the practice.
“This is a positive and long-needed policy development for the state of New York and for all US states where fracking is already happening or has been proposed. The state of Maryland, which has been debating for years whether to allow fracking in it’s western counties, should follow New York’s lead and adopt a legislative moratorium preventing the practice here. As New York state has made clear today, there are far too many risks to our water, air, health, and climate to proceed with this radical gas extraction method.”
 For more information and coverage please see:
“Cuomo to Ban Fracking in New York State, Citing Health Risks.” New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/18/nyregion/cuomo-to-ban-fracking-in-new-york-state-citing-health-risks.html
“Gov. Andrew Cuomo To Ban Fracking In New York State.” Huffington Post. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/17/cuomo-fracking-new-york-state_n_6341292.html
“New York bans fracking after health report.” Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/17/us-energy-fracking-newyork-idUSKBN0JV29Z20141217

Statement from Mike Tidwell, Director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network
Contact: Mike Tidwell, 240-460-5838, mtidwell@chesapeakeclimate.org
“The Chesapeake Climate Action Network commends Governor O’Malley and his agency leaders for their work in producing today’s Findings and Recommendations as part of the ‘Marcellus Shale Safe Drilling Initiative.’ CCAN does not believe this report proves the case that fracking can be done with acceptable public health and environmental safety in Maryland. However, there are groundbreaking and feasible recommendations within this report that should be carefully studied and potentially adopted by neighboring states which – unlike Maryland – have already allowed the active drilling process of fracking for shale gas. Indeed, if fully implemented, many of these ‘best management practices’ would limit the harm already being inflicted nationwide by this controversial gas drilling practice.
“In particular, from the perspective of global warming pollution, Governor O’Malley has offered a first-ever rule that would result in ‘zero methane leakage’ from the fracking process. The report today shows that — by combining the best available drilling technology with the purchase of carbon ‘offsets’ — companies now already fracking in other states can, with rigorous enforcement, effectively reduce to zero the destructive release of the potent greenhouse gas methane. Methane leakage from fracking is a major threat to the global climate and is the subject of worldwide concern among scientists and policy makers. Governor O’Malley today has proposed a real solution to this gas leakage threat.
“But for Maryland, CCAN believes that the safest strategy for drilling for gas in the Marcellus Shale is to not drill for that gas at all. With sea-level rise and other impacts of climate change now directly harming Maryland and much of the world, climate scientists say 80 percent of the world’s known reserves of fossil fuels must stay in the ground if we are to have any hope of stabilizing the world’s atmosphere. This includes the Marcellus Shale gas reserve in America’s central Appalachian Mountains.
“Instead of opening Maryland to the drilling of more fossil fuels, state leaders should continue Governor O’Malley’s proven past commitment to carbon-free wind and solar power. Legislation to double the state’s target for clean electricity will be before the General Assembly in 2015. The legislation would set aside 40% of the state’s electrical grid for renewable sources of power, thus doubling such energy in our state by the year 2025.”
To view the full report, click here: http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/Land/mining/marcellus/Documents/Final_Distribution_Draft_11.25.14.pdf
 

In early 2015, the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) will hold hearings on the proposed merger between Exelon Corporation and Pepco Holdings, Inc. (Pepco). The proposed merger would make Exelon—already a top political spender in Maryland and a company with a track record of opposing many clean energy policies—the largest utility company in Maryland and the nation.
The PSC must sign off on the merger before it can proceed, which makes it vitally important that all Marylanders become aware of the facts around this case, and voice their concerns now.
Below is a list of ten facts on the proposed merger and Exelon’s track record that debunk common myths.
Click here to view a printable PDF version of the memo.

---

Fact #1: This merger is NOT a done deal.

It’s a myth that a merger of this type is something that would be hard for the PSC to deny. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, the Maryland PSC has a track record of blocking mergers that threaten the public interest.
In 1997, Pepco attempted to merge with Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. (BGE), but the two companies walked away from the deal after the Maryland PSC ordered that the merged company would have to slash electric rates by hundreds of millions of dollars to protect the public. Similarly, FPL Group (now NextEra) tried and failed to acquire Constellation Energy (owner of BGE) in Maryland in 2006. Also in 2006, a proposed merger between Exelon and Public Service Enterprise Group, a New Jersey-based electric utility, was rejected by that state’s Board of Public Utilities after New Jersey officials determined that “the proposed merger would result in a company that is so large, and controls such a significant segment of the gas and electric generation markets, that it could exert market power to drive up energy prices for all New Jersey ratepayers.”[1]
The market power concerns are just as prevalent now. The merger between Exelon and Pepco would give Exelon control over 23.4% of the transmission service activity within our electricity grid region.[2] It is very plausible that with enough surfacing of the facts, Maryland’s PSC could deny the merger or impose enough conditions that the companies decide to walk away. The most important thing right now is that all concerned Maryland residents and businesses make their concerns clear so that they can be fully considered by the PSC.

Fact #2: Exelon is NOT promising to improve Pepco’s reliability goals.

Pepco has a poor track record when it comes to reliability, and many Marylanders are looking for a change. But it’s a myth that Exelon is proposing to do anything more than Pepco. In their merger application, Exelon stated that the company will be “committing to implement Pepco’s current plan to improve system reliability.” In other words, Exelon will do what Pepco was already planning to do anyway. Pepco Holdings has total assets worth $14.8 billion and the company earned $4.7 billion in annual operation revenue in 2013.[3] Exelon is not bringing new ideas to the table to improve reliability, and if Pepco believes that they need outside help to improve their service, the company can use its significant financial resources to hire consultants and contractors to do exactly that.

Fact #3: Exelon publicly champions ANTI-renewable energy policies.

Although Exelon holds some renewable energy assets, solar and wind power account for only 3.7% of the corporation’s total energy resources.[4] It’s a myth that Exelon considers clean energy a top priority. Publicly, the company champions anti-renewable energy policies. Exelon calls itself a “leading voice against the extension of the Production Tax Credit [PTC],”[5] which is the primary federal incentive for promoting land-based wind energy. The PTC is a reasonable way of keeping wind costs down, and by opposing it, Exelon is helping to shift those costs to states like Maryland that have current renewable electricity goals in place. At the same time, Exelon advocates for anti-free market reforms to support their aging nuclear fleet. In 2014 in Illinois, Exelon lobbyists floated the idea of allowing their nuclear plants in that state, which are 35 years old on average, to receive “clean energy credits” like solar and wind.[6] Such a policy would essentially end support for those renewables in favor of Exelon’s decades-old nuclear fleet, which comprise 52% of its generation assets. Later that year Exelon lobbied for a resolution (HR 1146) that required state agencies to devise state funding mechanisms to keep the company’s unprofitable nuclear stations afloat. The resolution directed state agencies to develop “market-based solutions that will ensure that the premature closure of [Exelon’s] nuclear power plants does not occur and that the dire consequences to the economy, jobs, and the environment are averted.”

Fact #4: Exelon’s proposed “Customer Investment Fund” would SHORTCHANGE Maryland.

It’s a myth that Exelon is promising Maryland a $100 million “customer investment fund,” as touted by some commentators. The $100 million would be spread across Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, and the District of Columbia. Only $40 million would be spent in Maryland, of which $29 million would be spent in the “Pepco” service territory and $11 million would be spent in the Delmarva Power & Light (DPL) territory. Exelon estimates that the money could be spent on bill credits, assistance for low-income customers and energy-efficiency measures, but they do not mention that the proposed $40 million is substantially less than what Pepco utilities already spend on those programs each year.
To put the proposed fund in perspective, Pepco spent $67 million on energy efficiency programs in 2013, including $3.4 million on programs for low-income customers. DPL spent $19 million on energy efficiency programs in 2013, including $2.7 million on programs for low-income customers. Combined, Pepco and DPL spent $86 million on energy efficiency programs in 2013. Pepco and DPL also invested $23 million and $5.7 million respectively in “demand response” programs to decrease energy consumption in their service territories during the highest electricity demand periods.[7] Combined, Pepco and DPL spent $28.7 million on demand response programs in 2013. They invested those funds as part of their EmPOWER Maryland energy efficiency obligations, which are managed by the PSC. Rather than approve the merger and trigger $40 million to be spread across the state, the PSC can and should set nation-leading energy efficiency goals for Pepco, DPL, and Exelon’s subsidiary, BGE, and order them to invest at levels necessary to achieve those goals.

Fact #5: A bigger utility would mean LESS competition—and, potentially, higher rates—for Maryland.

If Exelon merges with Pepco, the Chicago-based corporation would become the largest electric utility in the U.S. It’s a myth that a bigger utility is better for Maryland. The merged utility would provide electricity to over 80% of Maryland ratepayers yet the parent company—Exelon Corporation—would continue to operate the largest fleet of aging nuclear power plants in the country. These nuclear plants have been struggling in recent years due largely to slack energy demand and low electricity rates. This creates a conflict of interest. Exelon would be in charge of keeping electricity rates low for Maryland customers at the same time as their nuclear power plants need to receive higher electricity rates to stay in business. The independent market monitor for PJM, our region’s electricity grid operator, and officials from both Delaware and the District of Columbia have raised concerns that this merger could give Exelon anti-competitive monopolistic power over the electricity market.[8] If this merger is approved, there is a risk that Exelon could use its substantial market power over the regional electric transmission infrastructure to control access to the wholesale electricity market or affect the competitiveness in the wholesale electricity market where the company operates power plants.

Fact #6: Exelon’s track record on efficiency is WORSE than Pepco’s.

It’s a myth that Exelon would do better on energy efficiency. Exelon’s only commitment to energy efficiency in this merger is to “maintain and promote [Pepco’s] existing energy efficiency and demand response programs.” It should be noted that Exelon’s subsidiary, BGE, has a worse energy efficiency track record than Pepco in Maryland. In their 2014 EmPOWER Maryland Energy Efficiency report, the Maryland Public Service Commission projected that the Pepco Holdings subsidiaries, Pepco and Delmarva Power & Light, would achieve 99% and 199% of their 2015 energy savings goals respectively and 96% and 830% of their 2015 peak demand production goals respectively. By contrast, Exelon’s BGE is projected to achieve only 67% of its 2015 energy savings goals and 76% its 2015 peak demand production goals.[9] Similarly, in Illinois, where Exelon is the dominant utility, the company is projected to achieve a dismal 35% to 47% of the statutory efficiency goals in its electricity service territory over the next three years.[10] Exelon has made no specific commitments to improve its performance and its record indicates a lack of commitment to energy efficiency.

Fact #7: The merger could JEOPARDIZE job security for Maryland workers.

It’s a myth that Exelon is promising not to fire employees. While Exelon has committed to no “net” involuntary merger-related job losses of Pepco utility employees for at least two years after the merger, that is very different from saying that they will not fire any Pepco employees. Pepco has 5,000 employees in the mid-Atlantic region. If, for example, Exelon fired 100 lineman after the merger but hired 100 managers, the net number of employees would remain the same (5,000) even though 100 people lost their jobs. Exelon has not made any commitments to retain individual Pepco employees beyond a handful of highly paid executives. Workers are not being promised job security for the next two years, and when the “net employment” commitment period expires, workers will lose even that small token of job protection.

Fact #8: Exelon’s shaky financial footing puts Maryland ratepayers at RISK.

It’s a myth that Exelon would lower rates. For all Pepco’s problems, they are a financially sound company and they do not need a merger to stay afloat. By contrast, Exelon is in a precarious financial position that is overly reliant on an aging and uneconomic nuclear fleet. While Exelon and Pepco have said that they expect the merger to create “synergies” that will create “cost saving opportunities,” they have not identified how those cost savings will be achieved or how those savings will be identified or verified.
Exelon has steadily seen its market value shrink for the last several years, and it is difficult to see how this merger would fundamentally change the company’s risky market position. Exelon Corporation’s shares have declined in value by 30% in the last five years, while shares in Pepco Holdings have risen by 79% over the same period.[11] Fitch Ratings announced a negative warning on Exelon’s credit rating on the day the merger was announced, saying that they “did not consider the acquisition of [Pepco] to meaningfully lessen [Exelon’s] business risk.”[12] If the merger is approved and Exelon’s credit rating declines, Maryland ratepayers could see a rate hike down the line as Exelon faces higher costs of borrowing.

Fact #9: This merger is far different—and RISKIER—than Exelon’s 2012 merger with Constellation.

Exelon did merge with Baltimore-based Constellation Energy in 2012, but it’s a myth that Exelon’s current merger proposal is just a repeat of 2012. The circumstances now are very different. In 2008, Constellation was beset with credit concerns following the Great Recession as the company saw its stock and market value plummet by 56%. The threat of bankruptcy was imminent and the company owned some very risky generation assets. While Pepco is facing challenges in improving reliability and customer service, there is no imminent threat to the company’s financial viability. Pepco stock has increased by 79% in the last five years. This merger is more about Exelon trying to hedge their own risky market position, and should be looked at very differently from the merger that Maryland approved in 2012.

Fact #10: Exelon’s claims on jobs are SHAKY at best.

It’s a myth that this merger would create jobs. In their filing with the PSC, Exelon claimed that the merger will create 6,300 to 7,200 jobs across Maryland. Six thousand of those jobs, though, are expected to come from “enhanced reliability commitments.” Earlier in the application Exelon committed only “to implement Pepco’s current plan to improve system reliability.” So Exelon is committing to create 6,000 jobs by doing what Pepco already said they would do without the merger. Another 1,200 jobs are expected to come from energy efficiency measures through a “customer investment fund.” But Exelon already has energy efficiency programs in Maryland and Illinois, where they run local utilities, and they’re falling short on their statutory goals in both states. Rather than approve this merger, the Maryland PSC can and should set nation-leading energy efficiency goals for Pepco and Exelon’s subsidiary, BGE, and order them to invest at levels necessary to achieve those goals.
For more information please contact:

• James McGarry, Chief Policy Analyst, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, at 240-396-1983 or James@chesapeakeclimate.org
• Tyson Slocum, Energy Program Director, Public Citizen, at 202-454-5191 or Tslocum@citizen.org

---

1.  “Public Advocate and Rate Counsel Oppose Currently Proposed PSEG-Exelon Merger.” State of NJ Division of the Rate Counsel, 26 Apr. 2006. <http://www.state.nj.us/rpa/news/2006/060426_pseg_exelon_merger.html>
2. “Comments of the Independent Market Monitor for PJM.” Before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Docket No. EC14-96-000. 21 Jul 2014. <http://www.monitoringanalytics.com/reports/Reports/2014/IMM_Comment_EC14-96-000_20140721.pdf>
3. Pepco Holdings, Inc. Form 10-K: ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2013. Rep. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 28 Feb. 2014. <http://services.corporate-ir.net/SEC.Enhanced/SecCapsule.aspx?c=62854&fid=9298222>
4. Exelon Corporation. Form 10-K: ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2013. Rep. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 14 Feb. 2014. <http://www.exeloncorp.com/performance/investors/secfilings.aspx>
5. Exelon Corporation. Proc. of Edison Electric Institute Financial Conference. N.p., 12 Nov. 2013. Web. <http://www.exeloncorp.com/performance/investors/events.aspx>
6. Daniels, Steve. “Exelon Warns State It May Close 3 Nukes.” Crain’s Chicago Business. 3 Mar. 2014. <http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20140301/ISSUE01/303019987/exelon-warns-state-it-may-close-3-nukes>
7. Maryland Public Service Commission. The EmPOWER Maryland Energy Efficiency Act STANDARD REPORT OF 2014. Rep. N.p., Mar. 2014. Web. <http://webapp.psc.state.md.us/intranet/Reports/2014%20EmPOWER%20Maryland%20Energy%20Efficiency%20Act%20Standard%20Report.PDF>
8. District of Columbia: “Comments of the Office of the People’s Counsel for the District of Columbia.” Before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Docket No. EC14-96-000. 21 Jul 2014. Delaware: “Protest of the Delaware Public Service Commission.” Before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Docket No. EC14-96-000. 21 Jul 2014.
9. Maryland Public Service Commission. The EmPOWER Maryland Energy Efficiency Act STANDARD REPORT OF 2014. Rep. N.p., Mar. 2014. Web. <http://webapp.psc.state.md.us/intranet/Reports/2014%20EmPOWER%20Maryland%20Energy%20Efficiency%20Act%20Standard%20Report.PDF>
10. Hinman, Jennifer M. “Re: Question about ComEd Energy Efficiency Goals.” Message to James McGarry. 22 Sept. 2014. E-mail.
11. PEPCO Holdings, Inc. (POM) and Exelon Corporation (EXC) Stock Chart, 5-year history. 22 Oct. 2009 – 22 Oct. 2014. <http://www.google.com/finance?q=EXC%2C+POM&ei=zmBOVKCtJcmt8gbXkoDYCw>
12. “Fitch Places Exelon’s Ratings on Negative Watch Following Acquisition Announcement.” Business Wire, 30 Apr. 2014. <http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140430007060/en/Fitch-Places-Exelons-Ratings-Negative-Watch-Acquisition#.VCx8AfldVnY>

Environmental and community advocates file legal papers in controversial project

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Environmental and community groups took the first step late yesterday in a likely legal battle against a controversial liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facility. On behalf of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Sierra Club, Lower Susquehanna Riverkeeper, Patuxent Riverkeeper, and Potomac Riverkeeper the environmental law organization Earthjustice filed a motion for rehearing (PDF) with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), demanding the agency withdraw its approval of an LNG export facility proposed at Cove Point in southern Maryland. The filing positions the groups to sue the agency to challenge FERC’s inadequate environmental review of the project.
Groups also filed a motion for a stay (PDF), urging FERC to halt further construction on the $3.8 billion project. The agency approved the project on September 29 over the objections of opponents who argued the massive facility, proposed by Dominion Resources, will spur air and water pollution from fracking across the mid-Atlantic region and, according to federal data, could contribute more to global warming over the next two decades than if the Asian countries importing the facility’s LNG exports burned regionally sourced coal.
In the days following FERC’s approval, Dominion moved quickly to begin construction on the project, ignoring FERC’s requirement that their construction and emergency plans be made available for community review before requesting to proceed. Additionally, despite public outcry over the potential for a catastrophic explosion at the facility, Dominion filed an updated emergency response plan with FERC but insisted on keeping all of the details of the plan secret from the public — claiming this information, along with other details of their project, is “proprietary.” In statements to the press, Dominion explained that it is planning on building a new evacuation route, but has yet to provide the details to FERC.
“In neglecting to prepare a thorough review of the environmental impacts of Dominion’s controversial project, FERC is prioritizing the desires of a powerful company over the health and safety of the people of Calvert County, Marylanders, and communities throughout the Marcellus shale region,” said Earthjustice Associate Attorney Jocelyn D’Ambrosio, who filed the legal papers on behalf of the coalition. “The public deserves far more from the people tasked with regulating the energy industry. We are demanding that FERC go back and do the necessary review of this project and order Dominion to halt construction in the meantime. If they refuse, they should prepare to defend their reasons in federal court.”
“FERC is once again acting like it’s above the law, effectively hitting the on-switch for Dominion’s bulldozers before groups were able to exercise their legal right to challenge a widely contested ruling,” said Mike Tidwell, director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “Unless FERC hits the pause button on construction at Cove Point, Calvert County residents will face immediate and likely permanent damage to their environment and quality of life, all based on a fundamentally flawed review that could very well be overturned in the courts.”
“My neighbors and I are frankly appalled at the prospect of this project moving full speed ahead without a thorough review of the potentially catastrophic impacts to our community and environment. And the fact that Dominion is concealing its emergency response plan from the public only adds to our concerns and solidifies our belief that they are hiding the truth about the dangers of this project,” said Tracey Eno, a member of Calvert Citizens for a Healthy Community. “We’ve been blatantly ignored by most of our local, state and federal elected leaders. Now the people at FERC are acting as if we, the citizens of Lusby, are inconsequential and expendable. Our only hope could rest in the courts.”
“In its haste to accommodate Dominion’s sense of urgency, FERC simply ignored and failed to consider numerous impacts of this massive construction project to the environment, quality of life and safety of people and communities. We as citizens are not only entitled to raise questions, we are just as entitled to get answers,” said Patuxent Riverkeeper Fred Tutman. “From the outside, it appears as if FERC was plainly designed and predestined to approve this project regardless of its impacts or implications. Citizens are now asking for nothing more than what we were entitled to in the first place: a fair hearing and due consideration of our claims and concerns.”
“FERC cannot allow this project to proceed until FERC addresses fundamental flaws in FERC’s analysis,” said Sierra Club Staff Attorney Nathan Matthews. “Most importantly, the agency failed to consider the simple fact that exporting LNG will mean more drilling and fracking, putting residents of the Marcellus and others at risk of air pollution, contaminated groundwater, and increased climate pollution.”
BACKGROUND:
The Dominion Cove Point project would take gas from fracking wells across Appalachia and liquefy it along the shore of the Chesapeake Bay for export to Asia. The project would be the first LNG export facility built so close to so many homes, the first built in close proximity to Marcellus Shale fracking operations, and a potential trigger of more global warming pollution than all seven of Maryland’s existing coal-fired power plants combined. In spite of this, FERC’s highly limited Environmental Assessment omitted credible analysis of the project’s lifecycle global warming pollution, potentially catastrophic threat to hundreds of nearby residents, pollution of the Chesapeake Bay and risk to the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale, along with all the pollution associated with driving demand for upstream fracking and fracked gas infrastructure.
Dominion’s project has faced and will continue to face significant and widespread grassroots opposition. A coalition of state, national and community groups opposing the project submitted more than 150,000 comments to FERC by the June public comment deadline. In mid-July, more than 1,000 people marched on FERC’s Washington, D.C. headquarters calling on the agency to halt approvals of all LNG export projects, including the Dominion Cove Point facility.
CONTACT:
Kelly Trout, 240-396-2022, kelly@chesapeakeclimate.org
Diana Dascalu-Joffe, 240-396-1984, diana@chesapeakeclimate.org

###

RESOURCES:
Motion for rehearing filed by groups: http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/Request_for_Rehearing.pdf
Motion for a stay filed by groups: http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/FERC_stay.pdf

Governor pledges to catch up to neighboring states in renewable energy and efficiency investments
RICHMOND—Dawone Robinson, Virginia Policy Director at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, had the following statement in response to Governor Terry McAuliffe’s remarks this morning in releasing the Virginia Energy Plan:
“Governor McAuliffe’s emphasis today on investing in energy efficiency and expanding solar power in Virginia are encouraging. Virginia’s vast and untapped renewable energy potential is well documented. We can catch up to our neighbors in clean energy, but only if we finally put the policies in place to harness it. We look forward to working with lawmakers in January to ensure real progress is made.
“However, the plan’s support for expanding fracked gas pipelines is worrisome and in fact contradictory to the governor’s consistent call to address climate change. Rather than supporting Dominion Virginia Power’s titanic gas pipeline, Governor McAuliffe should instead call on Dominion to quickly build safe and reliable offshore wind power in the 112,000 acres the company exclusively leased in September of last year.
“Today Governor McAuliffe spoke passionately about the need to address climate change by catching up to neighboring states in renewable energy and efficiency investments. We hope that in the coming months Governor McAuliffe will show the leadership we need and work toward rapid expansion of renewable energy, rather than compound the impacts of climate change with more fossil fuels like natural gas.”
CONTACT:
Dawone Robinson, 804-767-8983, dawone@chesapeakeclimate.org
Kelly Trout, 240-396-2022, kelly@chesapeakeclimate.org

###