1,500+ Marylanders to Hogan Administration: Reject the Eastern Shore Pipeline Project

On the Heels of Massive Fracked-Gas Pipeline Shutdowns Nationally, Hogan Administration Considering Approval for a New Pipeline down the Eastern Shore of Maryland

SALISBURY, MD — Today, environmental organizations announced that more than 1,500 public comments were submitted to the Maryland Department of Environment opposing the Del-Mar Pipeline project. As the department considers its recommendation to the Board of Public Works on the project’s application for a Wetlands License, the comments explain how this pipeline would threaten the Eastern Shore’s wetlands ecosystems and contribute to climate change. 

Anthony Field, Maryland Grassroots Coordinator for the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, stated: “This proposed fracked-gas pipeline is a bad bet for Maryland. At a time when the climate crisis is imminent and the fracked-gas industry is failing, expanding fracked-gas expansion is financially and morally irresponsible. The state should invest in a truly clean and safe future for Marylanders, instead of pumping millions into near obsolete infrastructure that fuels the climate crisis while threatening local ecosystems.”

The Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company (ESNG) — a subsidiary of Chesapeake Utilities — wants to build 19+ miles of new pipeline to carry fracked gas from Delaware through Maryland, to connect with another fracked-gas pipeline proposed by Chesapeake Utilities that would bring fracked gas to the University of Maryland Eastern Shore (UMES) and the Eastern Correctional Institution (ECI). These two proposed pipelines would threaten the region’s ecosystems and drinking water supplies, and could cause irreparable damage to the land and climate. 

These comments come just after two massive national fracked-gas pipelines were cancelled or ordered to shut down. 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. 

Susan Olsen, Chair of the Sierra Club’s Lower Eastern Shore Group, stated: “We submitted these comments today to tell our leaders what we’ve been telling them for years: Marylanders don’t want fracking, we don’t want fracked gas, and we don’t want dirty, dangerous fracked gas pipelines. It makes no sense to build unnecessary fracked gas pipelines when we could be investing in the clean, renewable energy sources that are affordable and abundant right now. We banned fracking in 2017, we threw out the Potomac Pipeline in 2019, and we should reject the Eastern Shore Pipeline now.”

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. 

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.

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.

Ahead of Vote, Dozens of Organizations Call on State to Reject Proposed Investments in Controversial Gas Retrofits at State Facility on the Eastern Shore

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Anne Havemann, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, (202) 997-2466

Retrofits are Premature and Would Increase Use of Fossil Fuels, Hurt Maryland’s  Push for More Renewable Energy and Create Health and Safety Risks

Citing climate change, environmental, and public health concerns, 32 environmental organizations are calling on the Maryland Board of Public Works to reject a proposal to invest half a million dollars for retrofits at the Eastern Correctional Institution, which would allow the state facility to begin to convert to burning fracked gas. The Eastern Correctional Institution will be an end-user of two pipelines that have not yet been fully permitted, and these investments are premature. The groups’ overarching concerns stem from plans to expand fracked gas pipelines on the Eastern Shore as part of a project to switch energy production at two state facilities to fracked gas.

The Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company (ESNG) is seeking approval to build 19 miles of new pipeline that would carry fracked gas from Delaware into Maryland. The seven miles of the “Del-Mar” Pipeline to be built in Maryland would connect with a separate 11-mile pipeline proposed by Chesapeake Utilities. 

The Chesapeake Utilities project is designed to provide fracked gas to two state facilities, Eastern Correctional Institution (ECI) and University of Maryland Eastern Shore (UMES), which would both switch their heating systems from other sources to fracked gas as part of this plan. 

The organizations are urging the Board, made up of the governor, state comptroller and treasurer, to halt investments in the project and recommit to renewable energy sources for state institutions. 

“Given that Maryland has banned fracking, it defies our state’s existing energy policy to bring the same public health risks to our residents by way of pipelines,” the letter states. “Moreover, enabling fossil fuel production runs counter to our state’s goals of increasing renewable energy production. We are appalled that the request for proposals put out by the State of Maryland to repower the university and prison foreclosed the possibility of clean energy by only requesting applications for fracked gas. We are equally angered that this proposal to repower with dangerous fracked gas is being touted as a ‘clean alternative.’” 

Click here for a copy of the letter.

UMES and ECI currently use environmentally harmful sources to heat their facilities (UMES relies on propane and oil and ECI relies on burning wood chips). By converting to fracked gas, however, these facilities are trading one harmful source for another. 

The Board of Public Works is expected to consider two contracts totaling $514,250 for planning and engineering of the ECI power plant conversion at its July 1st meeting. 

“With clean, renewable energy affordable and abundant right now, it makes no sense for the state to commit to burning dangerous fracked gas at ECI’s power plant,” said Susan Olsen, Chair of the Sierra Club’s Lower Eastern Shore Group. “Marylanders overwhelmingly prefer investing in clean energy solutions instead of committing to decades of dependence on fracked gas. At a time when Maryland is considering major budget cuts, we should not waste money on climate-disrupting fossil fuel projects.”    

The construction and operation of the Del-Mar Pipeline would impact 1,239 square feet of streams and over 16,000 square feet of wetlands in Maryland. ESNG plans to install its pipeline through at least one older, forested wetland that is vulnerable to construction-related impacts using the destructive “open trench” method of construction. While the specifics of the 11-mile Chesapeake Utilities pipeline are not yet known, similar impacts to our regional water resources are likely. 

“As a kid growing up on the Eastern Shore, I knew there was nothing you could ever offer me that would get me to allow you to poison my marsh,” said Dan O’Hare, President of Wicomico Environmental Trust. “We know pipelines leak. And when they do, they will make our community sick. We will suffer. We know fracked gas is one of the main culprits in causing the waters to rise and destroy our coasts. What value could there possibly be to us to allow this remnant of the dying industrial era to endanger our wetlands, our water, and the health of our community?”

“As someone with a background in environmental studies and marine science, I do not support UMES’s decision to utilize fracked gas as a means to heat the facilities when alternatives were not properly considered,” said Madeline Farmer, a graduate student at the University of Maryland Eastern Shore. “The decision to support a fracked-gas pipeline is inconsistent with UMES’s reputation as one of the most eco-friendly Historically Black Colleges and Universities in the country. As one of the greenest HBCUs, it’s important that we continue to lead the green movement and set an example for other universities across the State of Maryland and the nation.”

The Eastern Shore of Maryland has been called “ground zero” for sea level rise due to climate change. It makes no sense to invest in pipelines that will lock the state into decades of reliance on fossil fuels that contribute to climate change. 

In addition to violating the spirit of Maryland’s renewable energy commitments and fracking ban, the pipelines would also endanger public health. 

“We are concerned that we are being asked to put our environment and public health at risk for a pipeline that we may not have use for in the near future as our state and the country moves towards clean energy,” the letter states. 

The following organizations have signed on to the letter sent to the Board of Public Works:

Chesapeake Climate Action Network

Waterkeepers Chesapeake

Greenbelt Climate Action Network

Manokin River Keepers

Maryland Legislative Coalition

Parkertown Car Care

Maryland Chapter, Lower Eastern Shore Sierra Club

Sierra Club, Maryland Chapter

Earthworks

Talbot County Hunger Coalition

Lower Shore Progressive Caucus

Audubon Maryland-DC

Queen Anne’s Conservation Association

Ridge to Reefs

Talbot Preservation Alliance

Assateague Coastal Trust   

Organization of Environmental States

Wicomico Environmental Trust

ShoreRivers

Howard County Climate Action

Calvert Citizens for a Healthy Community

Takoma Park Mobilization Environment Committee

Baltimore Phil Berrigan Memorial Chapter Veterans For Peace

Clean Air Prince Georges

Wicomico Interfaith Alliance

Wicomico County Creekwatchers

Environmental Justice Ministry Cedar Lane Unitarian Universalist Church

Indivisible Howard County

Harford County Climate Action

The Climate Mobilization, Montgomery County

League of Women Voters of Maryland

Cecil Solidarity

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

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

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

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