Category: Press Releases

City Becomes the First State Capital and 25th U.S. Community to Take Big Oil Companies to Court for Lying About Their Role in Climate Change

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 23, 2021

ANNAPOLIS, MD – The City of Annapolis last night filed a lawsuit seeking to hold major oil and gas companies accountable for lying to the public about their products’ role in climate change and to recover costs associated with sea-level rise, flooding, and other local climate damages that the companies knew their products would cause. 

Annapolis joins 24 other states and localities, including the City of Baltimore, that have turned to the courts to hold companies like Exxon, Chevron, Shell, and BP accountable for ongoing efforts to lie to the public about their role in causing climate change. It is also the fourth community — after Minnesota, Delaware, and Hoboken, New Jersey — to name the American Petroleum Institute as a defendant. 

Mike Tidwell, executive director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, released the following statement: 

“Big Oil knew their products would cause catastrophic climate damages decades ago. Instead of doing the right thing, they continued to lie about it while communities like Annapolis are paying the price. The city’s leaders should be applauded for working to ensure that their residents aren’t stuck with the bill to protect themselves from a problem that Big Oil knowingly caused. 

Richard Wiles, executive director of the Center for Climate Integrity, released the following statement: 

“With this lawsuit, Annapolis joins a growing number of communities across the United States that are turning to the courts to demand that Big Oil companies be held accountable for lying about their leading role in causing climate change. Just like Big Tobacco — another industry that lied to the public to protect their profits — Big Oil should pay for the damage they knew their products would cause.” 

Contact: 

• Mike Meno, Center for Climate Integrity, mike@climateintegrity.org 
• Laura Cofsky, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, laura@chespapeakeclimate.org 

Background on Climate Liability Cases:

Since 2017, 25 communities, including the states of Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Rhode Island; the District of Columbia, and more than a dozen city and county governments in California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, South Carolina, and Washington have brought lawsuits under different claims to hold the oil and gas industry accountable for deceiving the public about climate change. Learn about those cases here.

##

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network is the first grassroots organization dedicated exclusively to raising awareness about the impacts and solutions associated with global warming in the Chesapeake Bay region. For nearly 20 years, CCAN has been at the center of the fight for clean energy and wise climate policy in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.

##

The Center for Climate Integrity, a project of the Institute for Governance & Sustainable Development, launched in 2017 to educate the public and policymakers about the massive costs of coping with the damage attributable to global warming and to support efforts to make climate polluters pay their fair share.

For more information on what ExxonMobil and others in the industry knew about climate change and when, check out the Center for Climate Integrity’s “Smoking Guns” document archive or visit PayUpClimatePolluters.org.

More than 75 Percent of Voters Say They Want a Concrete Plan, Within Six Months, that Will Lead to “Major” Pollution Cuts. Nearly 69 Percent Support Solar Power on Farmland With a Cap.

ROCKVILLE, MD – A bi-partisan majority of Montgomery County voters in Maryland say they are personally concerned about the rising impacts of climate change, with a whopping 94 percent of Democrats expressing concern. In a new poll released today,  voters also say they are eager to see the County Council keep a 2017 promise by adopting — within six months — a plan that will lead to “major pollution cuts.” As a first step, nearly 69 percent of voters countywide support a bill now before the Council to allow a limited number of solar farms on agricultural land in the northern part of the county. 

The poll, conducted by noted Maryland pollster Patrick Gonzales, comes just one day after Montgomery County Executive Marc Elrich released a long-awaited Draft Climate Action Plan for the county. It includes a host of recommendations but no concrete legislative plan to achieve pollution reductions. 

“This poll clearly shows enormous voter support for climate action in Montgomery County — but also growing impatience with the pace of action, “ said Mike Tidwell, director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “The County Executive and Council must do more, and soon, to keep pace with voter expectations as extreme weather pummels our region.”

The Gonzales poll, commissioned by CCAN, shows that a strong 70 percent of Montgomery voters support the County Council’s 2017 declaration of a “climate emergency.” That declaration called for an 80% reduction in climate pollution by 2027, but the Council has adopted no major bills to make this happen in three years. Now 75.1 percent of voters want major action within six months.

More immediately, voters overwhelmingly support a bill, passed by a committee of the County Council last summer, to place a limited number of solar farms in the County’s Agricultural Reserve with certain conditions. But full passage of the bill has not yet occurred. Interestingly, the greatest voter support for the bill comes from the County’s District 1 which contains most of the Ag Reserve.

The poll was conducted by Gonzales Research & Media Services from December 2nd through December 6th, 2020. A total of 325 registered voters in Montgomery County, who indicated that they vote regularly in county elections, were queried by live telephone interviewers, utilizing both landlines and cell phones. The margin of error, per accepted statistical standards, is a range of plus or minus 5.5 percentage points.

“This is a noteworthy poll for Montgomery County with strong results on policy questions,” said Patrick Gonzales. “We asked clear and direct questions that help fill in some of the voter opinion gaps that always exist on key issues, especially at the more local level.”

For the past 35 years, Patrick Gonzales has been widely recognized in Maryland for his ability to conduct unbiased surveys, and analyze the results in an impartial, even-handed manner.

A recap of key findings from the report include:

• Eighty three percent of voters in Montgomery County are concerned about climate change
• By party, 94% of Democrats; 69% of independents; and 51% of Republicans are worried about global warming
• Closer to home, 70% of residents support the resolution the Montgomery County Council unanimously passed in 2017 declaring a climate change emergency
• Further, a supermajority 75% of Montgomery County voters support the County Council adopting a climate solution plan within the next 6 months
• Nearly 69 percent supported a limited number of solar farms in the County’s Agricultural Reserve as long as most of the solar energy powers the homes of low and moderate income residents of the county

Further breakdowns by age, gender, race, district, and political party can all be found within the report. You can download it here.

###

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network is the first grassroots organization dedicated exclusively to raising awareness about the impacts and solutions associated with global warming in the Chesapeake Bay region. For 17 years, CCAN has been at the center of the fight for clean energy and wise climate policy in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.

Contact:
Mike Tidwell, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, mtidwell@chesapeakeclimate.org, 240-460-5838
Laura Cofsky, CCAN, laura@chesapeakeclimate.org, 202-642-9336

CONTACT: 

Laura Cofsky, laura@chesapeakeclimate.org, 202-642-9336
Anthony Field, anthony@chesapeakeclimate.org, 301-664-4068

Advocacy Groups Criticize Maryland Board of Public Works Decision in Wake of Climate Change and Justice Concerns

ANNAPOLIS, MD – Leading environmental and justice groups expressed shock today after members of the Board of Public Works voted 3 to 0 to approve a key permit for the Del-Mar Pipeline to carry fracked gas into the Eastern Shore region of Maryland. The Del-Mar Pipeline is one of the two controversial, dirty-energy pipelines proposed for the region in an era of rapid climate change and environmental justice sensitivity. 

Although Wednesday’s vote does not guarantee the pipeline will be built, it does signal that opponents of the project — including the NAACP and Chesapeake Climate Action Network — are running out of options for fighting it. The Del-Mar pipeline is already under construction in Delaware to carry gas from that state into Maryland. The seven miles of pipeline proposed for Maryland would supply concentrated animal feeding operations, businesses, and residential areas. 

“By approving the Del-Mar pipeline, the Board has elected to ignore numerous climate change and environmental justice concerns,” CCAN’s Maryland campaign coordinator Anthony Field said. “Building this pipeline will set back the state’s climate goals while further burdening vulnerable communities on the Eastern Shore.”

For months, the Hogan Administration has put its thumb on the scale in favor of this project. While studies have shown that there are cheaper and viable alternatives to gas, including electrification and geothermal energy, the State of Maryland didn’t consider any of these options. Instead, it only requested applications for a gas pipeline to supply fracked gas to two state-run facilities.

“The proposed pipeline will produce large quantities of deadly methane that will accelerate global heating,” said John Groutt of the Wicomico Environmental Trust. “The Delmarva Peninsula is the third most threatened area of the country for flooding. Intruding salt water is already destroying productive agricultural land and forests, and this will increase with this project. The same energy could be supplied easily and more cheaply by solar and wind without the harmful side effects.” 

The two proposed pipelines are part of the Hogan Administration’s plans to spend $103 million significantly increasing fracked-gas pipelines and infrastructure in the state. This includes $30.3 million administered by the Maryland Energy Administration’s (MEA) new Maryland Gas Expansion Fund “for the expansion of natural gas infrastructure.” The remaining $70 million is recoverable from MD ratepayers. Read more about it here.

“This is not a smart decision,” Sierra Club Maryland Chapter Director Josh Tulkin said. “Greenlighting another fracked gas pipeline is like throwing more gasoline on the climate crisis. This project undermines the state’s climate goals and contradicts the recommendations of the Maryland Climate Commission, which is led by the Governor’s own Secretary of the Environment.”

As a next step, CCAN will continue to fight the pipeline, including the Chesapeake Utilities portion which is expected to come before the Board in the next couple of months. 

###

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network is the first grassroots organization dedicated exclusively to raising awareness about the impacts and solutions associated with global warming in the Chesapeake Bay region. For 17 years, CCAN has been at the center of the fight for clean energy and wise climate policy in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals today sided with conservation groups and issued an immediate stay of Mountain Valley Pipeline’s stream and wetland crossing permits in southern West Virginia and Virginia. The groups, noting the company’s stated rush to resume construction and the serious environmental harms likely to result, had asked the court for the stay while it considered the merits of their challenge of the water-crossing permits issued by the Corps of Engineers.

The eight groups, represented by Appalachian Mountain Advocates, filed a challenge of the Corps’ reissuance on September 25 of two “Nationwide Permit 12” approvals that would allow MVP, LLC to trench through some 1,000 streams, rivers, wetlands and other water bodies in the two states. The 4th Circuit had rejected the Corps’ first round of permit approvals in 2018.

As noted in the groups’ filings, Mountain Valley Pipeline’s operator recently told its investors that it intends to blast and trench through “critical” streams “as quickly as possible before anything is challenged.”

The court had issued an emergency stay October 16; today’s stay remains in effect until it rules on the groups’ petition to overturn the Corps’ water permits for the MVP project.

The groups filing the challenge include Appalachian Voices, Center for Biological Diversity, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Indian Creek Watershed Association, Sierra Club, West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, West Virginia Rivers Coalition, and Wild Virginia.

Peter Anderson, Virginia Program Manager, Appalachian Voices:
“Communities along the pipeline route have been on edge these past several weeks as the company has moved in heavy equipment and started doing work, so we’re very glad the court pressed pause on this permit while the water-crossing issues are reviewed further.”

David Sligh, Conservation Director, Wild Virginia
“Once again, the court has shown that it sees the dire threat this dangerous and damaging project poses to our precious waters and vulnerable communities. Convincing a court to stay an agency decision requires plaintiffs to convince the judges that they have a good chance to prove their case after full review. Now, we look forward to doing just that — to show conclusively that the Corps of Engineers abdicated its duty to protect us and our resources.”

Anne Havemann, General Counsel, Chesapeake Climate Action Network:
“The companies behind the Mountain Valley Pipeline have proven countless times that they are unfit to build this pipeline safely, with hundreds of violations and thousands of dollars in fines already. They’ve done nothing to prove that future construction won’t result in the same. We applaud the court for standing on the right side of history and issuing this stay.”

Joan Walker, Senior Campaign Representative for the Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels Campaign:
“The MVP has already doubled its timeline and budget, and it’s not even close to being finished. If they were smart, they would quit throwing good money after bad and walk away from this fracked gas disaster like Duke Energy and Dominion Energy did with the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.”

Jared Margolis, senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity:
“This decision will help ensure the pipeline doesn’t keep posing catastrophic threats to waterways that people and imperiled species depend on to survive. Despite the project’s clear failure to comply with the law, Mountain Valley keeps pushing this climate-killing menace. We’ll continue working to ensure this destructive pipeline doesn’t poison waters and threaten communities along its route.”

###

CONTACT: Cat McCue, 434-293-6373, cat@appvoices.org
Denise Robbins, 240-630-1889, denise@chesapeakeclimate.org

Allies Sue EPA Over Failure to Update Inadequate, Decades-Old Standards for Controlling Toxic Emissions

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, October 29, 2020

Washington, D.C. – A coalition of ten environmental organizations today sued the Trump Administration’s EPA over its failure reduce toxic air pollution from industrial flares at petrochemical plants, gas processing facilities, municipal solid waste landfills, and other large industrial sites.

Across the country, thousands of industrial flares burn excess waste gases and release smog-forming volatile organic compounds (VOCs), hazardous pollutants (such as carcinogenic benzene), and other pollutants that threaten the health of people living downwind, which often include communities of color and lower-income neighborhoods.

EPA has not updated two sets of air pollution control standards for industrial flares in decades—34 years and 26 years, respectively—even though the federal Clean Air Act requires the agency to review them at least once every eight years to make sure they adequately protect the public and incorporate improvements in technology.

“It’s been far too long since EPA updated these industrial flare standards, and EPA is well aware of the problem,” said Adam Kron, Senior Attorney for the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP).  “Time and time again over the past decade, EPA has admitted that flares operating under these outdated standards can release many times more toxic air pollutants into local communities than estimated.  This can cause serious harm to public health.”

Joseph Otis Minott, Esq., Executive Director and Chief Counsel of Clean Air Council, said: “There is no excuse for continuing to permit antiquated pollution-controlling technology in new industrial facilities. EPA has a responsibility to protect our air and our health, and it cannot do so while sleeping at the wheel.”

The organizations that filed the lawsuit –– following notices of intent to sue EPA sent on June 11 and August 17, 2020 – are EIP, Clean Air Council, Air Alliance Houston, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Earthworks, Environment America, Environment Texas, Hoosier Environmental Council, PennEnvironment, and Texas Campaign for the Environment. 

Industrial facilities, like chemical manufacturers and natural gas processing plants, use flares as pollution control devices to burn and destroy dangerous organic compounds like benzene in waste gases. However, the flares are only effective as pollution control devices if they are operated correctly.  In a recent rulemaking, EPA estimated that one industry sector’s flares were operating at 90.4-percent efficiency rather than the expected 98 percent, resulting in the flares releasing almost five times the pollution.

For example, operators inject steam into flares to keep them from smoking, which releases soot or fine particle pollution. But they often add far more steam than is needed.  EPA and industry studies have shown that flares that are over-steamed do not burn well, releasing many times more toxic and smog-forming compounds that should have been destroyed during the combustion process.   Additionally, the current standards let operators average their measurements over long, three-hour periods rather than a shorter time, allowing for spikes that depart from proper operation. 

The industrial flares subject to the outdated standards that are the focus of today’s lawsuit include flares at petrochemical facilities, gasoline terminals, natural gas processing plants, compressor stations, solid waste landfills, and other large industrial sites.  These do not include flares at petroleum refineries, for which EPA updated standards in 2015, or flares at oil and gas wells, which have unique standards.

Using outdated standards, industrial flares can release large amounts of air pollution at the local level. For example. For example, in Texas’s Permian Basin, flares from a gas processing plant owned by Oxy USA LLC’s in Gaines County, reported emissions of 136 tons of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in 2017, according to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. 

Quotes from Environmental Organizations:

Environment Texas: “In our Clean Air Act lawsuit against ExxonMobil, an expert on industrial flares testified at trial that illegal flaring emissions from the company’s Baytown petrochemical complex were probably three to four times higher than the amounts ExxonMobil reported — and that testimony went completely unrebutted,” said Luke Metzger, Executive Director of Environment Texas.  “These hidden impacts on surrounding communities are significant, as the reported violations alone already totaled 10 million pounds of harmful chemicals.”

PennEnvironment: “While many people may look back fondly and love the 80s, we’d all agree that technology and the things we know about air pollution have dramatically improved over the past three decades,” said PennEnvironment Executive Director David Masur. “Health based standards from the 80s are in no way acceptable for protecting public health, our communities and our environment today.”  

Chesapeake Climate Action Network: “For too long, fossil fuel companies have been allowed to emit dangerous levels of pollution at industrial facilities that are all too often located in minority communities,” said Anne Havemann, General Counsel at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “Virtually unchecked industrial flaring at these facilities harms the climate, health, and justice, and the EPA must fix its illegally outdated rules as soon as possible.”

Hoosier Environmental Council:  “With a ranking of 43rd in air quality, 41st in health outcomes, and 19th in COVID-19 deaths per capita, there is a great urgency in Indiana to strengthen air quality protections to reduce harm to an already vulnerable population,” said Jesse Kharbanda, Executive Director of the Hoosier Environmental Council. “We urge the EPA to revise the badly out-of-date flare standards; revisions would improve air quality in at least five of six regions of Indiana.”

Texas Campaign for the Environment:  “Industrial flares light up the skies with toxic pollution near the homes, schools and workplaces of many Texans,” said Robin Schneider, Executive Director of Texas Campaign for the Environment. “People rightly fear for the health of their families and neighbors, particularly overburdened communities of color,” said Robin Schneider, Executive Director of Texas Campaign for the Environment.

Earthworks: “The EPA has neglected to properly review the harmful effects of flaring on the health of nearby residents for decades,” said Aaron Mintzes, Senior Policy Counsel for Earthworks. “Optical gas images (OGI) documented in the field show improperly combusing flares and reveal the urgent need for the EPA review this litigation seeks.”

For a copy of the lawsuit, click here.

The Environmental Integrity Project is an 18-year-old nonprofit organization, based in Washington D.C. and Austin, Texas, that is dedicated to enforcing environmental laws and strengthening policy to protect public health.

Clean Air Council is a member-supported environmental organization dedicated to protecting and defending everyone’s right to a healthy environment.

Air Alliance Houston is a non-profit advocacy organization working to reduce the public health impacts of air pollution and advance environmental justice.

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN) is the first grassroots, nonprofit organization dedicated exclusively to fighting global warming in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.

Earthworks is a national nonprofit dedicated to protecting communities and the environment from the impacts of fossil fuels and striving for a just, equitable, and fair transition to clean energy.

Environment America is a national network of 29 state environmental groups that work for clean air, clean water, clean energy, wildlife and open spaces, and a livable climate.

Environment Texas is a non-profit advocate for clean air, clean water, and open space.

The Hoosier Environmental Council is Indiana’s largest environmental public policy organization, working to address environmental justice, protect land and water, and advance a sustainable economy.

PennEnvironment is a statewide, citizen-based nonprofit environmental advocacy group working for clean air, clean water, tackling climate change and preserving Pennsylvania’s incredible outdoor places.

Texas Campaign for the Environment (TCE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to informing and mobilizing Texans to protect the quality of their lives, their health, their communities, and the environment. 

###

Media contact: Tom Pelton, Environmental Integrity Project, (443) 510-2574 or tpelton@environmentalintegrity.org

Justin Wasser, Earthworks, (202) 753-7016 or jwasser@earthworks.org

Activists Call on Board of Public Works to Reject Eastern Shore Pipeline Ahead of Key Decision

Board of Public Works expected to issue or reject key permit in early November 

ANNAPOLIS, MD – Top progressive environmental and justice advocates held a telepress conference today, calling on Governor Hogan and the Board of Public Works to reject the proposed Eastern Shore Pipeline project. The BPW is expected to issue a decision on a key permit for the project in early November. 

Activists also released a new spatial analysis, conducted by GIS expert Stephen Metts, showing that the project runs through primarily majority-minority and low-income communities. The topline finding is that there is a predominance of Environmental Justice (EJ)-eligible census block groups up and down the two proposed projects.  In fact, there are only four of 40 one-mile study area tracts that are not EJ-eligible. There is particularly high risk at the head of the Del-Mar project in the city of Salisbury, which is where the developers are planning to site a “renewable natural gas facility” — using waste from livestock, which is associated with a host of additional health threats. 

READ THE FULL ANALYSIS HERE

Email denise@chesapeakeclimate.org to request a recording of the press conference.

The pipeline is already under construction in Delaware to carry gas from that state into Maryland. The seven miles of pipeline proposed for Maryland would supply concentrated animal feeding operations, businesses, and residential areas. The two “anchor” customers for gas delivery are the Eastern Correctional Institute (ECI) and the University of Maryland Eastern Shore (UMES) in Somerset County. If built, the Del-Mar pipeline would trigger the second pipeline proposed by Chesapeake Utilities connecting the prison to the university. The installation of the Del-Mar pipeline will impact 1,239 square feet of streams and more than 30,000 square feet of wetlands and wetland buffers. It is anticipated to come online in late 2021. 

“Water is essential to human life all over the world, but here in Maryland, it’s an especially important part of our culture and economy,” said Susan Olsen, chair of the Sierra Club’s Lower Eastern Shore Group. “At a time when clean, renewable energy is affordable and abundant, we shouldn’t be building dirty, dangerous fracked gas pipelines. Our state should reject the Eastern Shore fracked gas pipelines — the health of Maryland’s water, economy, and people depends on it.”

The Board of Public Works is expected to decide on the wetlands permit for the Del-Mar pipeline portion in early November, after Governor Hogan’s Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) recommended approval earlier this month. MDE is still reviewing the impacts the Chesapeake Utilities Project will have on the region’s wetlands and a separate decision on that portion is expected in early 2021.

“Putting in this pipeline will damage my campus community and the local community because it is not sustainable,” said Jailynn Britt, student at University of Maryland Eastern Shore and UMES delegate for the MaryPIRG’s climate justice group. “It will create long-lasting problems that affect the water and the air, which in the long run, hurts the people in this already impoverished community. It also will hurt an already small HBCU, which needs more help, not more problems.”

On the call, activists explained how the Hogan Administration has put its thumb on the scale for this project. While studies have shown that there are cheaper, viable alternatives to gas, including electrification and geothermal energy, the State of Maryland didn’t consider any of these options. Instead, it only requested applications for a gas pipeline to supply gas to two state-run facilities. And every contract that Maryland Environmental Services has awarded since the passage of the fracking ban has unduly prioritized fracked gas. Key excerpts from each of the four contracts awarded are linked here.

“We know that the Eastern Shore, which is essentially surrounded by water, is ground zero for climate change in Maryland,” said Anthony Field, Maryland Grassroots Coordinator at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “We also know that the expansion of dangerous gas infrastructure like this is a major step in the wrong direction. Importing fracked gas runs counter to MD’s commitment to climate action.”

This also comes on the heels of a new white paper released by CCAN, the Sierra Club, and the Wicomico Environmental Trust, showing that these fracked-gas pipelines would be an economic boondoggle. The economics of gas are faltering, with hundreds of gas companies expected to declare bankruptcy by the end of next year. These bankruptcies, combined with Maryland’s commitment to tackling climate change through electrification of buildings, raises concerns that investing in new gas infrastructure will lock ratepayers into paying for decades for a product that will not be viable for that long. 

“It is economically foolish to build the very expensive polluting infrastructure of gas pipelines and equipment, which is already outpriced by highly competitive and non-polluting solar and wind,” said John Groutt of the Wicomico Environmental Trust. “The pipelines will become worthless stranded assets within a very few years, leaving Maryland taxpayers to continue paying for it for years to come.” 

The fracked-gas industry is faltering. Companies behind the proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline cancelled the project due to ballooning costs and legal uncertainties. And the Dakota Access pipeline was ordered to shut down for an environmental review.  Meanwhile, in late June, the fracking giant Chesapeake Energy filed for bankruptcy. These setbacks for the industry demonstrate that fracking is a risky investment, for the climate, the environment, and the economy.

These two pipelines are part of the Hogan Administration’s plans to spend $103 million massively increasing fracked-gas pipelines and infrastructure in the state. This includes $30.3 million administered by the Maryland Energy Administration’s (MEA) new Maryland Gas Expansion Fund “for the expansion of natural gas infrastructure.” The remaining $70 million is recoverable from MD ratepayers. Read more about it here.

###

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network is the first grassroots organization dedicated exclusively to raising awareness about the impacts and solutions associated with global warming in the Chesapeake Bay region. For 17 years, CCAN has been at the center of the fight for clean energy and wise climate policy in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.

Controversial Fracked Gas Pipeline Still Lacks Essential Authorizations

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) granted Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC (MVP) permission to resume construction, even though the beleaguered fracked gas project still lacks some necessary authorizations. Industry watchers are growing increasingly skeptical of MVP’s future after a similar fracked gas pipeline, the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, was cancelled as a result of similar permitting and legal challenges. Over a dozen environmental advocacy organizations have opposed MVP’s request.

Planned to run over 300 miles through West Virginia and Virginia, state inspectors have already identified hundreds of violations of commonsense water protections, and MVP has paid millions of dollars in penalties. There are also questions about whether MVP is accurately reporting how much of the project has been completed, with one analysis showing it is only 51% finished. At this time the project is at least $2 billion over budget, two years behind schedule, and developers admit they need two more years to complete the project. 

In response, Sierra Club Beyond Dirty Fuels Senior Campaign Representative Joan Walker released the following statement:

“MVP has violated commonsense water protections hundreds of times and allowing them to resume construction just means putting more communities at risk for an unnecessary pipeline that may never even be built. FERC is supposed to regulate these fracked gas projects, not roll over for them.”

Roberta Bondurant of Preserve Bent Mountain/BREDL said:

“MVP construction crews have yet to traverse the most intense and well known geohazards —steep, in some places, nearly vertical slopes, slip prone soils, karst, and earthquakes— in the height of a global pandemic, during hurricane season —these multiple geohazards make today’s FERC/MVP plan to resume construction maniacal, wholly destructive to land, forest, water and living beings. With such challenges ahead, MVP’s promises to complete by any time in 2021 simply fly in the face of fact. People and places in the path of MVP are not disposable—we won’t be sacrificed for MVP investment returns.” 

Russell Chisholm, Protect Our Water, Heritage, Rights Co-chair said:

“FERC’s dangerous decision is an attempt to rescue MVP from their own mismanagement despite years of delays and documented failures. FERC favors energy policy by force, rewards negligence over the objections of thousands, ignores the evidence of harm to our communities, and shamefully denies climate realities. To do this as the COVID-19 crisis spreads through rural Virginia and West Virginia puts MVP and FERC’s disregard for our safety on full display.”

David Sligh, Conservation Director of Wild Virginia said:

“This is another in a long list of irresponsible decisions by FERC. In allowing construction to proceed while MVP still lacks required permits, the Commission is enabling the corporation’s attempt to rush ahead, heedless of the harm already done and that which is sure to follow if this decision stands. The MVP is still not a done deal and FERC’s collusion with the frackers won’t make it so.”

Jessica Sims, Virginia Field Coordinator with Appalachian Voices said:

“It’s clear that MVP is pulling out all the stops to rush this project through, and FERC is letting them get away with it. The agency ignored the 43,000 people who vigorously opposed this project moving forward, and disregarded the hundreds of water quality violations racked up so far. This pipeline was not needed when it was proposed, and is even less needed now. We will continue fighting to stop it.” 

Anne Havemann, General Counsel at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said: 

“FERC’s decision is unconscionable. Coronavirus is still raging in Virginia and now FERC is allowing fracked-gas companies to push through another health hazard. Tens of thousands of Virginians oppose this pipeline because they know we don’t need it. We will keep fighting it until we win.” 

Jared Margolis, Senior Attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, said:

“FERC is clearly not interested in protecting the public or ensuring that massive fossil fuel pipelines like MVP actually comply with the law. This project is a travesty that should never have been approved, and now it is being allowed to proceed even after devastating environmental harm from construction activities. We will continue to fight this horrible project to protect the people, wildlife and waterways in its path.”

CONTACT: Doug Jackson, 202.495.3045 or doug.jackson@sierraclub.org

###

Environmental advocates deliver massive nationwide petition to Dominion leadership, shareholders

RICHMOND, VA — In the wake of the high-profile cancellation of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, environmental organizations announced that more than 45,000 people signed a petition calling on Dominion Energy to fire Tom Farrell from the company. 

CLICK HERE TO READ THE PETITION IN FULL

“Typically, when a CEO wastes billions of dollars of customers’ money, leads the company in an entirely wrong direction for years upon years, lets down Wall Street and shareholders, that person is let go,” Mike Tidwell, Executive Director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, stated. “It’s long past time for Dominion’s board to give Tom Farrell a pink slip. It’s time to start a new era of truly responsible leadership in one of the country’s largest utilities.” 

Tom Farrell has served as CEO of this utility giant for more than a decade. He was the main cheerleader for the ACP when it was first proposed. He continued pushing for it even as a massive grassroots movement grew in opposition to it, drawing nationwide attention from the likes of former Vice President Al Gore, who called it a “reckless, racist ripoff.” The pipeline was held up for years through delays as permit after permit were thrown out for not holding up. Yet for years, under the leadership of Farrell, Dominion Energy claimed that the ACP was on track, that it would be a great boon for shareholders — which was its primary goal. Eventually, legal complications led to ballooning expenses which made clear that the financial argument didn’t hold up either. 

Dominion Energy recently announced that Farrell would step down as CEO and become Executive Chair of the Dominion Board of Directors. But the company’s new CEO will report to him, and Farrell will still have a heavy hand in planning Dominion’s future. Farrell himself said in response, “I’m not going anywhere.”

The petition states in part: “Farrell has proven himself to be an ill-equipped leader — a business model built on extraction, environmental injustice, and political corruption will not be tolerated.” It is supported by Chesapeake Climate Action Network, 198 methods, Climate Hawks Vote, Corporate Accountability, Daily Kos, and Friends of the Earth Action. 

CLICK HERE TO READ THE PETITION IN FULL

Contact: Denise Robbins, denise@chesapeakeclimate.org, 240-630-1889

###

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network is the first grassroots organization dedicated exclusively to raising awareness about the impacts and solutions associated with global warming in the Chesapeake Bay region. For 17 years, CCAN has been at the center of the fight for clean energy and wise climate policy in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.