Maryland Legislative Preview

Maryland Legislative Preview

In this episode, CCAN helped pass the most ambitious climate legislation in the American South, the Virginia clean Economy Act. Sadly, we did not fare as well across the Potomac in Maryland. However, advocates in 2021 are optimistic that this is the year that Maryland will pass sweeping climate legislation. This episode is the recording of CCAN’s legislative preview event for Maryland. Our phenomenal organizers were joined by Maryland delegates, Paul Pinsky, Lorig Charkoudian, and David Frasier-Hidalgo, where they outline their goals for 2021.

Read the full transcript below.

Charles Olsen  0:01  

Hi, my name is Charlie Olsen and this is the Upside Down podcast from the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. In this episode in 2020, CCAN helped pass the most ambitious climate legislation in the American South, the Virginia Clean Economy Act. Sadly, we did not fare as well across the Potomac in Maryland. However, advocates in 2021 are optimistic that this is the year that Maryland will pass sweeping climate legislation. This episode is the recording of CCAN’s legislative preview event for Maryland. Our phenomenal organizers were joined by Maryland delegates, Paul Pinsky, Lorig Charkoudian, and David Frasier-Hidalgo, where they outlined their goals for 2021.

Mike Tidwell  0:42  

Thank you, and welcome everybody. Again, I’m Mike Tidwell, director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network and Chesapeake Climate Action Fund, and welcome to this Maryland legislative preview call for the year 2021. And boy, doesn’t that sound good for 2021. Good riddance to the battle year of 2020. But in the year 2021, we can be sure to expect two things. One is that climate impacts will continue, we’re going to continue to see more rain bombs, the kind of rainstorms that we’re seeing to entertain events are almost routine. Now, in the DC area, more sea level rise, more heat waves are in our futures. So the climate impacts are not going to go away even as the calendar year turns over to 2021. The other thing that is going to continue is that Maryland can and must continue its leadership on clean energy policies to combat climate change, even during the challenges of the pandemic. And I’ve been really proud for the last 18 years as a Marylander. To work with the delegates and senator you’re going to hear tonight with members of the General Assembly who’ve passed amazing legislation in the last two decades, to clean up our coal plants to ban fracking to incentivize and mandate solar energy and offshore wind. And you’ll hear more of that. We need to do more. We’ve pushed the planet outside its comfort zone. And now we have to push ourselves outside our own comfort zones in terms of what is politically possible and what we’re willing to do as activists and volunteers. So I’m looking forward to it. So I want to begin tonight by thanking the legislative champions who you’re going to hear tonight. In a moment you’ll hear from Senator Paul Pinsky of District 22 in Prince George’s County, he and delegate Dana Stein of District 11 in Baltimore County are sponsoring one as he can action funds, top priorities, and Tony. And that’s the climate solutions now Act, which you’ll hear more about shortly. Then you’ll hear from my dear friend, delegate David Fraser Hidalgo of District 15. In Montgomery County who is sponsoring Senator Ben Kramer District 19. Also in Montgomery, the climate crisis in Education Act, a bill that I think is one of the most fascinating pieces of legislation and perhaps one of the most timely bills, both in terms of climate, and in terms of the budget health of our state. And I’m looking forward to hearing David talk about that. Then finally, you’ll hear from my state delegate, Laurie Turkuaz, of District 21, garment county about her excellent and long overdue bill called the Public Service Commission, climate and labor tests. She’s also sponsoring that bill with Ben Kramer, Senator Ben Kramer of District 19. All of these leaders are climate hawks, they go the extra mile. They’re obsessed and committed to climate change, just like all of us on this call, and where would we be without these legislative leaders? So I want to thank them in advance. But it’s going to be a tough year. We all know that. COVID is here. We’re in a recession. There’s budget issues. It’s hard. It’s hard time to push forward on these bills. But we can do it. I know we can. But we can’t do it alone. One nonprofit and legislative leaders can’t do it. You on this call you the voters, us the citizens, you the activists are that link to get us over the top. I just want to say one quick thing about COVID and all the challenges that we’re going to face. I was on a call earlier today where a member of the city council of Ann Arbor, Michigan, said all of the following in Ann Arbor, Michigan in November 2019, that city declared a climate emergency. Then COVID came and they still stuck to their guns. And they came up with a climate action plan on March 30. As the stock market was falling and unemployment was going up, they came up with a Climate Action Plan proposing a billion dollars in investments to fight climate change over the next 10 years. And then in May 2020, the Ann Arbor City Council passed a bill that authorizes these investments during again code Good time, so it can be done. There are inspiring stories out there. And I know that Maryland is going to do the same in 2021, while simultaneously working with the new Biden administration. So the goal tonight, hopefully is to give you some facts you didn’t know, hopefully to inspire you a little bit. But ultimately, the goal tonight is to move you to help us pass the bills. You’re going to hear about turnout tonight, help us get ready, get ready to make calls, get ready to send emails, attend virtual lobby days. And I would finally issue the last issue, I would be remiss if I didn’t encourage you to join the 16th annual sea cam polar bear plunge on February 13. That’s my last plug. Go to keep winter cold. org, we’re going to do it virtually a climate Bucket Challenge. It’s going to be great, keep winter cold.org. And now I’m going to hand it over to our Maryland policy director Jamie DeMarco.

Jamie DeMarco  5:52  

Thank you, Mike. And I am going to introduce the incredible Chairman Paul Pinsky, who is part of the very origin story of climate policy in Maryland, from the very beginning, he has been are one of our strongest champions, and we are so grateful to have a leader like him, as the chair of the education health and Environmental Affairs Committee. Chairman Paul Pinsky was instrumental at the hip to passing the Healthy Air Act years ago. And that remains one of if not the strongest legislation of its kind. And he voted for the original renewable portfolio standard in Maryland. And in the year since there’s not been a single climate bill that’s passed without tremendous support from Chairman Paul Pinsky. And we are now incredibly thrilled that he is our sponsor for the climate solutions now act. I’m going to turn it over to Chairman Paul Pinsky.

Paul Pinsky  6:44  

Thank you, Jamie. And thank you, Mike. For the last four or five years, Mike and I have served on the Maryland climate commission. But I have to tell you, we’ve done it with a great deal of frustration. We have heard a lot of talk, but very little action. The administration has prepared a plan, which is so ephemeral, you couldn’t figure out what the plan is. And that’s actually helped drive the climate solutions now

Paul Pinsky  7:11  

And I want to thank CCAN for helping shape this bill. There are a lot of groups and grassroots groups working on it. But see, Ken has been instrumental in helping shape the many aspects of it, let me very briefly talk about the bill. It calls for a 60% reduction in greenhouse gas by 2030. That means in the next nine years, it calls for us being carbon neutral by 2045. And besides those broad 30,000 feet things, it wants to hold the administration’s feet to the fire. You know, they’ve talked about doing this and doing that, but they haven’t done it. The bill calls for planting 5 million trees by 2030. And we know how they capture carbon dioxide. It calls for the whole state fleet of cars to become zero emissions vehicles. You know, they’ve used money to talk about infrastructure and charging stations, but they haven’t spent $1 on leading by example. And we think by 2030 every automobile under the state auspices should have zero emissions there. You know, energy efficiency, we know it can save a lot of money, a lot of energy. We upped that number by 50% from 2% to 3% in energy efficiency. We’ve also learned Mike talked about inspiring stories. The Empire State Building is an amazing inspiring story of the greening of the Empire State Building. They put a multi million dollar effort. And some great thinkers, environmentalist said we will recapture your money in five or seven years. If you do this, now, they have increased energy efficiency by 40%. Their new elevators create energy. We can do that here in Maryland. So we actually are calling for new building standards for large renovation for office buildings, residential and for new construction, and not just for the state for the private sector as well. If they aren’t willing to do these efforts, and it won’t be a loss of money, it’ll actually be a savings to the business community. They don’t build, you know, they have to show energy efficiency and energy savings. You know, we have to encourage fuel switching to clean energy. You know, the governor’s plan says that road widening will reduce greenhouse gases. I mean, that’s nuts. You know, they say if you expand roads, cars will idle less, but we know there’ll be 1020 50,000 additional cars. So they are, you know, their effort is very misguided. But this legislation in front of us does a lot of things. It changes how we look at nothing. They said it to me 100 year life cycle, we say because of work of scientists and Mike and other people see can it could be a 20 year horizon. You know, they measure methane coming from landfills. Well, we now have airplanes that can capture atmosphere that are much more accurate. We are going to transform the state, but we need you. as Mike said, It’s a unique session, we’re going to have virtual hearings, people won’t be allowed in the building. So we need a massive upsurge. We need hundreds upon hundreds of people to confront every legislator to say, Are you on board? You know, there shouldn’t be a time when you have a conversation and send an email, can we count on your vote, because you won’t be there to see them in the hallway, we have to put pressure, we have to make people a little uncomfortable, but also to show them this benefits and state. You know, Mike mentioned a lot of the issues that the flooding etc. The biggest problem that’s starting to develop is saltwater intrusion. I mean, it is really our farms on the eastern shore, who are creating foodstuffs. So we have new additional allies, we think in the farming community. So we have to bring everyone together to do this. But we need you and again, I want to thank all of your staff for their great contribution. But this isn’t going to happen from a great speech on the floor by Paul Pinsky. It’s going to happen by hundreds and 1000s of people demanding a change. I think we can do it. We’re counting on you. Thank you.

Jamie DeMarco  11:32  

Thank you very much, Chairman. We really appreciate that. Next, we’re going to hear from delegate David Fraser-Hidalgo and let me tell you, there is no one in Annapolis who speaks about climate change with more passion than delegate David Frasier doggo. I think that’s a big statement. But I think it’s true. I mean, a lot of us when you talk about climate, we talk about co-benefits. We talked about all these other benefits that are going to come with climate action. When delegate David Frazier, it also talks about climate change. He reminds us that we are in a visceral existential fight for our lives. And in order to survive, we need to mobilize all we have to reduce emissions as quickly as humanly possible. He stood up for the clean energy jobs act when no one else would. And without him that legislation would not have passed. And delegate David Fraser Hidalgo, channels, all of that ambition into this bill, the climate crisis and Education Act. I’ll let him talk about it more.

David Fraser-Hidalgo  12:31  

Well, thank you. Thank you, Jamie. I will try to do you justice. So the carbon pricing bill that I have, I have it along with Senator Ben Kramer, we’ve had it for three years now. And before I get into the meat of the bill, but I want to kind of talk a little bit about what Senator Pinsky alluded to, and that is, we are going to have a session. Last session was crazy the way just kind of imploded in the end. And now this session, we have a little bit better idea of what it’s going to look like on the House side, we’re going to be broken up into two sections, the annex section, which is going to be in the house office building, and then the general state house, we’ll have the other half of the Maryland State delegates, and we’re going to go in on January 13 for a few hours to get session going and then everybody will be home. You know, Senator Pinsky, myself delegate Chuck Cooney, and all of the delegates and senators will be, most of them will be working from home they will be. So exactly what that and what Jamie said earlier, it’s going to be a little harder to get a hold of people. So you’re going to have to be really creative. And you’re going to have to be diligent and you’re going to have to work really hard because we can’t and I can’t tell you how much we need your help. So on the carbon bill itself, as most of the people on this call know that there is approximately $100 billion, depending on how you define it, that are given away every year to the fossil fuel industry in the form of grants and tax credits and incentives for them to go out and dig holes in the ground to pull up dead dinosaurs. So what what this bill does is it says okay, well, if you’re going to burn all those dinosaurs, if we’re going to to burn all those fossil fuels, and pollute the earth and cause global warming and cause climate change, and do all the things that one of the things that are Pinsky said about the rising sea levels out on the eastern shore, that doesn’t, that doesn’t even take into consideration all the the whole west coast of this country burning to the ground or, you know, the violent storms that we have. Now, if that’s not enough for you. Just think about all of those costs for burning fossil fuels, all those costs, that doesn’t include the kids going into the emergency room for asthmatic attacks or premature births, or any of those things. So the totality and extra totality of all of those things together need to be paid for and they shouldn’t be just paid for by US citizens and the taxpayers. They should be paid for when you do business. So if you’re going to buy a gallon of gas and burn it, you shouldn’t be paying two bucks per gallon. You should be paying a lot more than that. If you’re new You’re paying a lot more than that you’re paying two to three times that. And for generations for over 100 years, we really haven’t been to security, the oil industry hasn’t really been paying the total cost of doing business. And so when we talk about leveling the playing field, which is what they often say, when we talk about electric vehicle tax credits, when we talk about solar tax credits, when we talk about wind turbines and generating renewable energy, when they, when they talk about that, they said, We just want a level playing field we’re against, it shouldn’t be any tax credits. And then my comment to them is okay, well then give back your 100 million dollar $100 billion a year, every year, the tax credits that will have a lengthy playing field, I usually add a couple of adjectives in my head, but I hold those back. I don’t say them publicly. And so that’s essentially what this bill does. I mean, the carbon bill, which I’ve been working on, Pete’s on the call, he has been working for years with Climate Exchange. And, and, and when she can, and Mike and everybody, it’s just a bit of big effort. Last year, we had the best hearing we’ve ever had, it was a really good hearing, we had, I think close to 70. co sponsors 65, or six co sponsors, we had a great bill hearing on the House side last year, and then kind of, you know, as the hearing was going on delegate recruiting I was talking with her earlier today. And she has, you do know that as you are in the middle of your hearing, the governor was shutting everything down, everything was shutting down in the middle of your hearing. So with COVID, we had a great bill hearing that brought a lot of great advocates to the table. And we hope to do that again this year. I don’t know what is going to happen this year with COVID, I think that there’s going to be a small number of bills that have to do with balancing the budget that get passed. And some of the bigger lifts, I don’t know how leadership is going to look at them, because they don’t want a lot of Florida debate. Everybody’s worried about COVID. So anything that’s controversial, that’s going to get a lot of Florida bait is going to be harder, it’s just going to be harder this year.

But with that said, it’s a great opportunity for us to push forward on this bill. And one of the great things about this bill is it generates hundreds of millions of dollars to the state and that and the big part of the bill makes sure that those people and lower income earners get rebated and get made home. So we don’t worry about necessarily the low income earners, this is really going after those folks that can afford to pay for it. And to some degree, it’s going to be put back on the backs of the fossil fuel industry. So depending on how the final bill comes out, it’s a 47 page bill, it’s very complicated, and there are so many things that can change in the middle of it. But that’s that’s it, I mean, it’s just really an attempt to kind of level the playing field. So people know what when they stick that pump, you know, into their car, and they pump gasoline in or when they burn natural gas at home or methane at home. Or when they, you know, turn on their heat they’re actually thinking about a little bit where that electricity is coming from, we just really have to, we really have to transition yesterday as quickly as you possibly can toward the electrification of the grid through renewables. And we can do that. And that’s what this bill really helps to do. And I think that’s the big part of it is it just gets people thinking about what they’re doing. And there’s really not a, there’s really not a downside to it. So with that, I will stop and let us go the rest of the way. And then I’m happy to answer any questions at the end if anybody has any. Thank you very much.

Emily Frias  18:36  

Yeah. So we kind of jumbled our order a little bit. And we skipped going to ask Senator Pinsky. And then we will do a question for delegate Fraser Hidalgo. So Senator Pinsky. The question I have is, so in your recent op ed, you mentioned the need to center black and brown communities and our conversation about climate change. Can you speak a little bit more about how the climate solutions bill will address those points?

Paul Pinsky  19:08  

Thank you for that question. And as soon as I finish trying to cover the bill, there’s so many parts to it. I realized I didn’t talk about environmental justice. Yes, I’ve been an environmental justice commission for 10 years or more. But I have to tell you, it’s more that IT has been ignored. It’s been dismissed, and the Department of Environment has not paid any attention to it. Now, we’re told the administration is going to reinvigorate it and pay more attention. Well, we think people have to be accountable. So actually, in our bill and the climate solutions now act, we set up 345 charges to the new revamped commission. We say they have to define disproportionately affected communities, these poor black and brown communities, they have to talk about how much spending is going on there or not. and develop a tool to start using a lens To see how policy actually affects those communities, we also require the new commission to look at spending in those communities to make up for the lack of effort, the lack of focus over the many, you know, in urban areas, it’s been a total dismissal and it has to change. We think it can’t just be swept under the carpet, you know, we do some other things we say, of the 5 million trees 10% have to be in urban communities to, to have tree cover to capture carbon dioxide. But more than that, we have to use a lens every day, in every issue on the environment and beyond the environment. So as much as we can, and there’ll be other environmental justice bills, there’s a workforce that will come up with a restructuring of the condition, but we think they can’t dance anymore, they have to do something concrete. So we have a large section of the bill that will hold them accountable. Because it’s been way too long. It’s been over time where there has to be a better focus. You know, asthma, and other illnesses are affecting the black and brown community in Baltimore, Prince George’s and other areas. There’s been a lot of the facilities, the coal fired power plants have been around Baltimore, Baltimore County, North Adelanto County, and those communities have been affected, you know, and their cumulative effects as well. So it is a major part of our bill, I’m glad you asked that question. I was on the phone today on a zoom call with Dr. Jacoby Wilson, who’s a professor at Maryland, and has done a lot of work on this. So we’re going to ensure that no one is left behind. And in fact, those that have been left behind addressed first.

Emily Frias  21:52  

Thank you so much for your answer. All right. Our next question is for delegate Fraser Hidalgo. And the question is, can you speak to the fiscal note for the climate crisis in Education Act? Just what is that looking like? Has it changed from last year? What do you expect to see?

David Fraser-Hidalgo  22:13  

So we don’t have the fiscal note back, it’s probably going to be similar to that of what it was last year, and I’m not particularly concerned with the fiscal note, because it’s very, very positive for the state. So it’s not like the state has to lay out tons of money or, you know, millions of dollars in order to make sure this goes in the staff set. It’s just going to be so much. I mean, the benefit of the bill is that there’s going to be, you know, three to $500 million that starts to come in within a few years. So the, the issue with the bill isn’t the fiscal note is as much as it is, it is convincing leadership that the climate crisis is not now the climate crisis isn’t tomorrow, the climate crisis has been going on for, you know, 50 years or 40 years, at least, the oil companies very well know, their scientists very well knew, by the 1970s, what was going on, and they continue to do things anyway. So it’s just really getting people up to speed on this is real, and we can’t wait. And we have to elevate crisis issues, the climate crisis issues to the same level that we talk about when we talk about education. So there are big things that Annapolis we talk about, that are the big drivers in Annapolis education, public health care, public safety, those kinds of things. And quite frankly, the environment needs to be up on that same level not below not an afterthought. It needs to be on the same level as the other things if, if not higher, and the a lot of environmental justice is addressed in in my villas, as well and delegate Stein was on a briefing call that we did the latino caucus in the black caucus in the Asian American Pacific Islander caucus did a briefing a few about a month and a half ago. And it was only on environmental justice. It was a great, great briefing.

Jamie DeMarco  24:01  

Thank you delegate. Next we’re going to hear from delegate Charkoudian and delegate Charkoudian, as I think most of us on this call know is a force in this world like nothing I have ever encountered before. When the Maryland clean energy jobs act was on the ropes in 2019. We weren’t sure if it was going to pass. She was rightfully chosen to represent it on the floor and her brilliant defense of the bill ensured that it was passed. Just in her first term as a state delegate. She has built a reputation and positioned herself at the very center. She is sort of the center node of climate policy. in Annapolis. There’s some legislators who love to dive into the details of policy, some who love the politics of policy. delegates are comedians and are the rare legislator who masters both and I can’t speak enough about her reputation, not just today. I was talking to a delegate, who said when delegates are kuhnian brings me a bill and asks for my co sponsorship. I don’t have Have you read it, I just signed up, because I know that she only brings good bills. And that’s the kind of reputation she’s built for herself. And I think that is represented in the bill. She’s sponsoring the Public Service Commission climate test, Bill, and I’ll let her talk about it more.

Lorig Charkoudian  25:17  

Wow, that is what my mother wrote for you, Jamie, thank you, I am honored to be here. I’m honored to be here with ckn, who I have so much respect for and and with all of you and I see faces and names that I know are crucial to really getting good climate legislation through in Annapolis. And, I’ll just give a shout out. Also, before I get started, for the polar bear point, I gotta think of something really creative. Mike, I don’t know what we’re gonna do this year. But my daughter and I have done the polar bear plunge for like the last nine years together. So we’re good. So I can’t recommend it enough. And I’m sorry, we can’t do it together. So my bill this year is for the Public Service Commission to have to consider climate and labor in their decision making. And what’s wild about this bill is as I talked to people about it, if you don’t know the Public Service Commission makes decisions related to and regulating the utilities in the state. So this includes making decisions about new energy generation facilities. It also includes decisions about rate setting and rate making, mergers, pipelines, so all kinds of energy decisions and regulatory decisions related to energy are made by the Public Service Commission. And when I tell people that the Public Service Commission is required to consider things like localized environmental issues, they’re required to consider the economy of the state at reasonable rates. But they are not required to consider climate in their decision making. People are stunned. And it is wild to me that in 2020, with the crisis that we’re in, we somehow still are at a place where our Public Service Commission doesn’t have to consider climate and their decision making. And in case anyone was wondering if maybe we didn’t have it in statute, but they believed and understood that they were supposed to consider it in their decision making. We had a chance two years ago to find out that No, in fact, in a decision, and many of you, I see some Howard County folks on here, who were active in the in the fight on the the transition of the crane plant, to natural gas facility, and in the complaint made the case that actually climate change would affect the plant itself. So it wasn’t that the plant would affect climate change, although that was true as well, but the climate change would affect the plant. And the judge ruled and the commission backed up explicitly that the Commission is not required to consider climate change in their decision making. So in case we had any doubts about it, now we know for sure, so that led to us putting this bill together. And what the bill says is, basically they have to consider climate change. And there’s a couple of different places where this is important. I think it’s important, certainly in the cpcm process, which is the certificate for public CPC convenience in need, which is the decision making around the placement and the rules around the actual generation facility. So that’s considering climate change in deciding to authorize a new natural gas plant, or considering climate change in the decision making around a utility scale solar project. And so in both of those you want climate to be considered in one case, it would be sort of a reason to slow down or have to mitigate a project and the other it would be a reason to move it and move it faster along.

But also in every decision that’s made, and that’s really important, because for example, there was a merger, folks may be aware that the Washington gas Alta gas merger that occurred a couple years ago, the Public Service Commission approved the merger, and the Hogan administration and the Maryland energy administration asked that part of that merger be that 30 million $30 million be set aside for a natural gas expansion fund. Yes, in 2018, a natural gas expansion fund that is now being used to promote natural gas and this pipeline on the eastern shore. And the Public Service Commission authorizes that. And so again, it’s one of those things where in every decision they make that means in mergers, also they need to consider climate change. And so again, it would be a case where, where people too, and people did push against that particular merger decision. But that component of state statute would have required that the Public Service Commission consider that in a merger. So those are just a few very specific examples. But when we look at all of the decisions the Public Service Commission makes, it’s really important that climate is front and center. The other thing that this bill does is it requires that the Public Service Commission consider labor and I think folks know that we really need to be if we’re going to have a green sustainable, healthy, just future, equitable future. We’ve got To do that with environmentalists and labor unions working hand in hand with environmental justice communities, and really keeping labor, family sustaining wages, environmental justice, equity, and reduction of greenhouse gases, making sure we’re building policies where all of those are intertwined and linked. And so it’s really important that when we’re looking at the institutions that are going to build this green future, that they are considering climate, and that they’re considering labor and labor standards. And so this bill really gives us a chance to put those together in the same bill highlight and work in partnership with C can is a lead on this year, a club is supporting this, and laina labor union. This is one of their priority bills this year, as well. And so, it’s a really important partnership. And it’s, you know, we’re not always on the same page. But whenever we can be on the same page, and the more we can work together to build that green, sustainable family sustaining wages, economy, we need to be doing that. And this bill is a great opportunity to highlight that. So I’m really excited to be bringing this bill, I look forward to working with all of you in Annapolis, even if it’s virtually in Annapolis, and then hopefully celebrating together in person over the summer, or fall next year.

Emily Frias  31:22  

Great, thank you so much. So we have some good questions here. If this bill is passed in this upcoming session, might it have an impact on the Del Mar pipeline and the Chesapeake utilities project?

Lorig Charkoudian  31:41  

I think the short answer is, is it Yes, I suspect it would in some ways. I don’t know that it would stop it. Just because that’s the approvals have kind of come through already through a variety of sources. And people know that that’s been an obscure kind of and run around the state’s climate policy. But I think that there will be some decisions related to that project that will have to go to the Public Service Commission. And so it could influence to some extent how that plays out.

Mike Tidwell  32:16  

I also want to give a plug to another bill that we’re not talking about a lot tonight, that Lord’s gonna be sponsoring and that’s the Community Choice energy bill that would allow our county Montgomery County as a pilot to basically control its electric electrical destiny by taking control of our grid. And it’s the top priority of our county of 1.1 million people to meet his climate reduction goals, which are frankly beyond even what Maryland’s doing. And so I want everyone to keep a lookout for Lawrenceville Community Choice energy, a really, really important paradigm shifting bill, so we want to support that as well.

Jamie DeMarco  33:00  

I want to thank our three sponsors, I know that your time is really valuable. So thanks for answering questions each and don’t feel like you need to stay on if you feel like you need to drop off. Anthony, if you could share a screen, I’m just gonna run through the bills we just heard about and go over the provisions in them one more time to make sure it sticks. So climate solutions now. It requires us to reduce our emissions 60% by 2030, and net zero emissions by 2045. It requires that a certain percentage of all state funds going forward be spent on climate change, and go to underserved frontline communities. And that percentage will be decided by the Commission on Environmental Justice and sustainable communities. This is a pivotal piece of the bill. This is going to make it illegal not to invest in underserved frontline communities. This is modeled off of the New York bill, the New York climate leadership and community Protection Act, which is widely considered the gold standard of environmental justice policies around the country at the state level. This also creates a workgroup to protect fossil fuel workers and enact a series of policies that will reduce emissions immediately like planting 5 million trees. And two thirds of all the funds that go to plant those trees will be spent in urban communities that have been historically redlined. We know when these oppressive heat waves come they’re killing people. And they’re killing people and heating islands where there are no trees disproportionately. Also zero emission vehicles, reductions in existing buildings, everything. Chairman Pinsky talked about the public service Service Commission climate test that’s a lorex bill, this is not in the order of sponsors. So it’s just keeping you on your toes, making sure you’re paying attention, and it requires the Public Service Commission to consider climate change when deciding whether to approve a project or merger. Just consider that that’s all it does, and also requires companies applying for energy prices. At the Public Service Commission to disclose the benefits they would give to their workers. This is a key place where we are building an ally ship with labor. When we’re with labor, we’re strong when we’re against labor, we lose. And so we need to find every opportunity we can to work alongside labor. And the climate crisis and Education Act invests hundreds of millions of dollars every year into clean energy, climate resiliency, and just transition. It also puts $350 million a year into public education. Because we know this is an intersectional fight between public education, and disparities and public education are one of the greatest drivers of racial disparities across the board. It also raises these funds directly from shareholders while protecting consumers and giving every marylander a rebate. And that is our quick summary. I’m going to turn it over to Anthony to talk about our pipeline work. Great,

Anthony Field  35:54  

Thank you so much, Jamie. And again, thank you to the three legislators that were able to join us again. We understand your time is valuable and very appreciative to have three leaders here on the call on discussing such important pieces of legislation tonight. So for those of you don’t know me, my name is Anthony field I use he him his pronouns, and I am the campaign lead for C. Cannes no new fossil fuels campaign, working on issues such as advocating for stronger landfill methane regulations, making sure methane is adequately evaluated within our state, stopping retiring coal fired plants from converting the gas fighting gas infrastructure and brand new wind on the eastern shore and other possibly proposed infrastructure as they come up a number of things that were talked about by all three legislators on the call today, and I’ll have parts within the pieces of legislation that we’re discussing. But today, I want to touch on one specific issue. And that is the issue of the Eastern Shore pipelines and where we’re at on that front. So for those of you who do not know, there are two proposed pipelines on the eastern shore, the Del Mar pipeline, seven miles of pipelines shown on the left image here in yellow, and 11 miles of pipeline, called the Chesapeake utilities project, shown in red here on the right. Both of these pipelines cross multiple wetlands and waterways, both will impact air quality to the communities and threaten the land that they live on. Both will saddle already overburdened communities with a pipeline we know that the state should not be advocating for in light of our climate commitments and our emission goals. Both are being pushed through as part of Governor Hogan’s plan to invest millions into expanding fracked gas, which is what delegate lorig was referring to with the 30 over $30 million. It is worth noting that when requesting applications for energy sources, the state only requested applications from gas companies, only one company applied, that was Chesapeake utilities. They were selected. And then the Maryland environmental service stated that the process was both exhaustive and competitive. We obviously know that that was not true. If nothing else, taking away the community’s opportunity of a thorough vetting of alternatives is a grave injustice. So take one more look at this map and the path here. And on this screen, you are seeing the census tracks from a spatial analysis that was conducted, showing that the project will run through majority minority and low income communities. on this call. We’ve already talked about the issue of environmental justice multiple times. And here we are seeing, again, a specific example of environmental justice concerns when we’re talking about climate, but also fossil fuel infrastructure. Specifically, there are only four of the 41 mile study area tracks within this area that are not ej eligible. ej eligible means that more than 30% of the residents are minorities, and or 20%, or more live in poverty. Make no mistake, this pipeline will further burden these communities by endangering their water, land, air quality and health. And this pipeline is an environmental justice issue. On December 2, the Maryland Board of Public Works chose to ignore the many and justices in approving a key permit for the Del Mar pipeline, which is again one of two pipelines.

Leading up to that vote a lot happened in the recent months and I want to cover some of the things here. So as mentioned just now a commission study uncovered troubling environmental justice issues. The Maryland State NAACP chapter added the pipeline’s to their list of environmental justice priorities and local chapters took a stance in opposition. CCAN with the help from our partners with the Maryland chapter of Sierra Club and the local Wicomico environmental trust released a white paper outlining concerns about the economics of these pipelines. We know that investing in pipelines and gas infrastructure is a gamble at best with multiple companies facing bankruptcy and pipeline projects failing all across the nation. Something new that we discovered was that the Acting Director of the Maryland environmental service stated that therefore the decision to forego applications from renewable energy sources was based on a 2012 Request for Information report, where almost a decade ago they determined that renewables wouldn’t be adequate. But a lot has changed in the years since that, and I think it’s absolutely ridiculous that the decision to forego alternatives was based on such an old report. Additionally, the Maryland climate commission or the Commission on climate change, released their 2020 report calling for the state to reach net zero emissions by 2045. And for the state government to consider environmental justice impacts during project planning. I hope you’re seeing a trend here. There is a lot of talk about environmental justice, and that’s because it’s largely been ignored and underappreciated in the past. Additionally, over 700 letters were sent by Eastern Shore residents urging the Maryland Board of Public Works to reject the pipeline’s that’s over 700, specifically from people that are from the communities that this pipeline will impact. So as mentioned, on December 2, the Board of Public Works held a hearing where they voted three to zero to approve a key permit for the Del Mar pipeline. What does this mean? Well, it means that the Board of Public Works ultimately ignored the multiple issues raised by CCAN partner organizations around the state and most importantly, they ignored concerns from residents of the local communities I call the shore home, it means that this fight is not over. And we know that we will not give up. See, Ken will continue to fight and organize against the pipeline, including the upcoming vote for the Chesapeake utilities portion, which is expected to come in the early months of January. I anticipate around March or so we will do everything we can to stand with the local communities and amplify their voices. This is their land, their health on the line. And we want to be sure that we are doing everything we can to advocate for them. It was clear since the beginning that this would be a fight. And I NRC can in the hundreds of concerns Eastern Shore residents will stop fighting. I think it’s worth mentioning that at this hearing many supporters of the pipeline, including the Lieutenant Governor Rutherford, who chaired the hearing, had the talking point that only western shore elitists and big green organizations were posted this pipeline, and we were trying to keep and take away the choice of these communities to use gas. And I think that is a grave. That is willfully ignoring the hundreds of Eastern Shore residents and locals that have put their blood sweat and tears into fighting this pipeline, and who are just very concerned about the health and well being of their communities and their land. And I think the Lieutenant Governor stating that and the supporters of the pipeline stating that was entirely disrespectful to those members. And I also want to mention that there were a number of people in line to comment at that Board of Public Works hearing, including elected officials that were not called upon to speak on behalf of the eastern shore. And I can’t tell you enough how disappointed I am in the way the state has been conducting themselves with regards to the process of this energy infrastructure and the approval process and the hearing process of these pipelines. And I think the eastern shore has been given the cold shoulder often in the past and they deserve better. So what’s next, and how can you get involved? So I only touched on one major issue this evening. And that was Eastern Shore pipeline. But there are many important things that we are working on simultaneously within our new fossil fuels campaign. And I urge everyone to follow a link in the chat that I’m about to put in to sign up for one of the action teams listed here. There’s five major action teams focusing on different issues across the state, methane, the eastern shore pipelines, the Potomac pipeline and the rockwool power plant, public health and environmental justice and of course, no new fossil fuels legislation, which is including the climate crisis and Education Act and the PSE climate test. joining these teams will allow you to keep up to date on everything that’s going on within those issues, but also provides you with opportunities to

act and support our fights for those issues. So please stay engaged, stay informed, and continue helping us advocate for fossil fuel free, Maryland. Thank you very much, everybody. And now I’m going to go ahead and hand it over to Emily.

Emily Frias  44:45  

Thank you so much, Anthony. And go ahead and put that link in the chat for the new fossil fuels teams. Definitely a really important way to fight to stay engaged. Alright, so I’m going to Keep my slides very short so that we have time to get to several questions. I’m just going to go over quickly, how you can stay involved. So we have a number of events lined up for the legislative session that you should mark your calendars for right now. The next one is going to be next Tuesday. That’ll be our letter writing party for climate solutions. Now, we will be watching, we’ll be writing letters and watching a year without a Santa Claus, which is about characters, you’re not familiar with the stop motion animation film from the 70s. And it is about an unseasonably warm Christmas. So very fitting for climate activists, then on the world holiday break, and then well, we’ll, we’ll all have very little time, after the holidays before the legislative session starts on January 13, that Wednesday, is the first day of session. So really coming up quickly. So throughout the session, what we’d like you to do is call email and tag legislators regularly. But especially before the vote, we will be sending you actions. So please make sure that you’re paying attention to your inbox, as well as communicating with us through our smaller channels to make sure that you’re staying aware of when it’s time to really reach out to your legislators. Then, on the week of the 25th, we will be having our lobby week for the climate crisis in Education Act, which is working with our partners on that campaign. So lobby week is obviously going to be a little different this year, we would normally have this one Bobby day. But this year, we’re putting an emphasis on having virtual meetings. So we’ll be walking you through that process, the more that we learn, and hopefully, we’ll have a lot of success in reaching out to our legislators. And then the week of the 22nd of February, we’ll be having our lobby week for the climate solutions bill and the PSC climate test. So the reason that we’ve split up these two lobby weeks is that both the climate crisis and Education Act is a very complicated bill. So is the credit solutions bill. So we wanted to give both bills and equal shots of really, really showcasing what they have to offer in our lobby meeting. So that is why we made that decision. Hopefully, there’s enough time in between that you’ll be able to attend both. And then at the end of March and early April, if our bill has still not moved, our bills have still not moved, we are planning to have some safe in person actions. But we are, you know, we’re it’s hard to plan too far ahead on those things. So we will keep you informed. Okay, so how to stay involved. Stay in touch with Anthony and the no new fossil fuels kit campaign by signing up for an action team, we just sent you that link, you can stay in touch with me and the climate solutions campaign by joining our slack workspace, which I will share in the chat link to join. Or you can email me directly at Emily at Chesapeake comet.org to be added to our smaller Google group. And if you need help with Slack, if you’re new to slack, it is a tool that is used by so many and has been used successfully by so many political campaigns during the elections. And it’s a great way to stay in touch instantaneously with other concerned citizens and concerned volunteers. And if you’re not as familiar, we have done training on slack. We have great training on our website, visit our volunteer resource page. Or honestly, if you have a lot of questions and you really, really want to use a tool, please email me directly. I do occasionally have office hours to be able to explain these tools to folks.

Unknown Speaker  49:03  

Okay.

Emily Frias  49:05  

So with that, we are going to take a few questions. I hope that wasn’t too quick. I’m also going to share our event and our link to our climate solutions slack. And while folks go ahead and join that, I’m going to ask myself to read out a question that we got earlier. So this question was about the carbon pricing bill. And the question was, does this still have any elements? That would be a non-starter for republicans? And how do we address that?

Jamie DeMarco  49:52  

Anthony, do you want to take that ticket?

Anthony Field  49:55  

Oh, feel free Jamie.

Jamie DeMarco  49:57  

Um, you know, Republican In Maryland have a tendency to surprise us. Governor Hogan surprised us when he expressed his strong support for the fracking ban even when democratic leadership wasn’t there yet. And, you know, last year, when we passed the climate solutions act out of committee, two republicans surprised us by voting for it. And that really surprised us there, too. We think this is a really good bill. I don’t think there’s anything in it that will make all republicans flee from it. I think a lot of the extreme ones are not going to be gravitated towards this. But we don’t give up on republicans but at CCAN we’re not necessarily counting on them to vote for this bill. Luckily, we’ve got super majorities of Democrats in both the House and the Senate. We do want Governor Hogan to sign it. So if this bill passes, then if any of these bill pass, then you should be making sure you should be looking after the calling campaign to Governor Hogan to make sure that he doesn’t veto it. Great question. Mike, did you want anything? Anything? 

Emily Frias  51:13  

Okay. The next question is about the PSC climate test. Does the climate and labor test have binding language? Or is it just to consider these things? Like what? What is it that they’re going to be bound to do by the skill?

Jamie DeMarco  51:37  

The labor piece is really binding. If you’re applying, you have to fill this out. This is information that has not been disclosed in the past, and has to be disclosed now under this law. So that’s really finding the climate peace is a considered peace. It’s not saying you have to reject every single pipeline, or every single fossil fuel project. But it’s saying consider climate change. And we know that if we can consider climate change there, then we can win on the merits. We lose right now at the Public Service Commission, because they say we explicitly do not consider climate change. We’re like, it’s gonna destroy the climate. And they’re like, the legislature has not asked us to consider climate change among the list of things that they have asked us to consider. So we are not going to consider that. So this is getting into the debate. And then we are going to have to win the debate at the Public Service Commission.

Emily Frias  52:31  

Great, thank you. And then the final question on the climate solutions now, Bill. So what is different about this bill there, there was a bill last year the climate solutions act, what is different this year? That wasn’t in the bill last year.

Jamie DeMarco  52:53  

This bill is very similar to the bill last year, one of the biggest differences is the tree portion. Last year, we introduced a bill and just said to plant 5 million trees. This year, we said it’s not enough to just plant trees, we need to plant trees, where they’re needed most in communities that don’t have access to green space, and are hurt because of that. And so we added this environmental justice provision making sure that two thirds of all the money spent planting these trees is planted in urban underserved areas that have been historically redlined. That’s one of the biggest differences. A lot of the other provisions are the same. There’s some other pieces like it that require new large buildings with lots of roof space to be solar ready. And that wasn’t in there before. And obviously, a lot of the years have been changed, because we’re one year later now. But for the most part, it’s the same bill. Jamie, if I could add, Yes, Senator,

Paul Pinsky  53:51  

Among the people who helped shape the bill, we call on the architects. And they played a very good role progressive architects across the state. So a lot of the language around either new construction or large renovation or building in schools is more nuanced. And we brought in the experts. So you know, sometimes you take language from another bill, or you do a 30,000 foot statement. But we actually got some of the experts who’ve done some kind of visionary activity. So there are a number of pieces of Bill where it’s more subtle, it’s more nuanced, that we think can apply to the state of Maryland, and really move our environment forward. And at the same time, in many cases, the business community should benefit not lose. So look, well, some of them oppose the bill. Absolutely. But we think we can also make an argument that a strong dynamic environment is also good for the business community. So we touch the trees that Jamie said, ensuring that some percentage goes to the urban area. So, you know, the other fact is that we continued working on the bill in the mid February last year. As someone who was responsible, it probably wasn’t ready for primetime. We spent the summer in the fall with a lot of environmental experts trying to get this right. We think it’s a great bill, we can go put us in the top tier nationally in the top three, or maybe five bills in the country in terms of the omnibus approach to the bill. So a lot of the same, some changes.

Emily Frias  55:37  

Thank you so much. There’s one we don’t have time for many more questions. There’s one that’s very easy to answer that I see in the chat. There’s a 60% emissions reductions goal including only electricity or all emissions, I believe it is all emissions.

Emily Frias  55:57  

And with that, we are right at eight, eight o’clock. So thank you so much to everyone who joined. We had a wonderful turnout for this event and are always honored as the organizer to see that. So thank you, thank you, also to our legislators, and to everybody who joined, we really hope that you stay in touch with us and we can end the session with a number of wins. So thank you, and have a wonderful night.

Charles Olsen  56:31  

Thanks for listening to Upside down. This podcast is produced by me, Charlie Olsen. with incredible support from the entire CCAN staff. Check out the show notes for links to all the things discussed in this episode. If you want to know more about how you can get involved with CCAN and the climate fight, check out our website at chesapeakeclimate.org. If you want to get in touch with us, follow us on instagram and twitter @CCAN. And if you enjoy the work we do, why don’t you share it with your friends. Sharing the show is a super easy way to help spread the word about the work we’re doing in the fight for bold climate actions. Thanks again for listening. We’ll see you next time.

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.

Governor Hogan’s Plans to "Kick-Start" a Gas Expansion Across Maryland

While other states and cities are moving away from powering homes and buildings with gas—a potent climate pollutant—Maryland Governor Larry Hogan plans to spend $6.5 million this year in his effort to “kick-start” a gas expansion across Maryland. This $6.5 million is a portion of the $30 million his Administration can spend on expanding gas infrastructure after he negotiated the terms of a settlement allowing a Canadian company to acquire a local gas supplier.

Among the projects his Administration is backing: a new, 11-mile pipeline providing gas to two state-run facilities on the Eastern Shore. In repowering these state facilities, the Hogan Administration foreclosed the possibility of any other type of energy source by only requesting applications for gas. The government should be leading the way towards zero-emission buildings, especially when it comes to state facilities, not putting its thumb on the scale for gas.  

“Natural” gas is primarily made up of methane, an extremely potent greenhouse gas. It’s 86 times more potent than carbon dioxide at trapping heat in the atmosphere. Methane leaks during production and transportation and gas heaters themselves are inefficient. As a result, a leading scientist concludes that it may actually be better for the climate to heat your home with coal or oil than with gas. In an era of rapid climate change, we cannot wait to replace all of these polluting fossil fuels with electricity powered by clean sources like wind and solar.

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, electric alternatives exist for all major energy end uses in buildings. Space heating, water heating, and cooking account for the vast majority of direct fuel usage. Electric technologies exist, and are in use today, that can supply all of these end uses.In 2017, Hogan signed a ban on fracking for gas in Maryland, saying that his administration had “concluded that possible environmental risks of fracking simply outweigh any potential benefits.” Since signing that ban, however, the Hogan Administration has continued to call gas “a bridge fuel” and has worked consistently to kick-start a gas expansion across the State.

Read the white paper here

Activists Rally Against Governor Hogan’s Fracked-Gas Plans Ahead of MEA Meeting

Groups Slam MEA Process for Public Input on Fracked-Gas Plans as “Broken”

BALTIMORE, MD — Today, dozens of concerned Maryland residents rallied to protest Governor Hogan’s plans to “kick-start” fracked-gas infrastructure in Maryland. The rally took place just before the Maryland Energy Administration (MEA) held its fourth and final public meeting on Hogan’s plan to spend $30 million in state funds on expanding fracked-gas infrastructure across the state.

The coalition rallied before going inside to make public comments. They also delivered a letter signed by five advocacy organizations opposing Hogan’s gas plans and a letter of grievances about the MEA process, saying they were “deeply frustrated” with how the process was handled, as well as a petition signed by more than 300 residents urging the administration not to spend state money on new fracked-gas infrastructure.

Patrick Grenter, Associate Director for Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels Campaign, stated: “Maryland’s own climate change website says that ‘Maryland is among the states most vulnerable to climate change.’ Given this, why would the state move forward with plans to invest millions in gas infrastructure? Marylanders don’t want this frack-fueled plan, which would lock us into decades of fossil fuel infrastructure while we’re in a climate crisis. Any investment in new fossil fuel infrastructure is incompatible with the State’s public commitment to fighting accelerated climate disruption.”

Months after Governor Larry Hogan signed a statewide fracking ban in 2017, he announced his intention to “kick-start” a fracked-gas expansion across Maryland. The Governor has launched his fracked-gas expansion even as scientists confirm that gas is essentially as harmful to the climate as coal. Despite this, he wants to spend $30 million in state money on this new fracked-gas infrastructure.

As part of AltaGas’s acquisition of local gas supplier Washington Gas, Hogan negotiated a settlement wherein AltaGas would place $30 million into the state’s Strategic Energy Investment Fund, which the state would then spend to assist gas companies in the construction of more fracked-gas pipelines all across Maryland. The agreement also opens the door for AltaGas passing $70 million onto ratepayers to do the same.

 “This plan is in direct contrast to one of SEIF’s main missions, which is to ‘address global climate change concerns,’” said Anthony Field, Maryland Grassroots Coordinator at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “Investing in fracked-gas is a bridge to climate disaster. If Hogan truly wanted to address climate change, he would focus on cleaning up our existing leaky pipelines as we move towards clean and sustainable sources of energy such as wind and solar.”

Under the terms of the agreement, “MEA shall use such funds in its discretion for the purpose of promoting the expansion of natural gas infrastructure . . . in Maryland.” Under Senate Bill 52, Hogan’s Maryland Energy Administration is required to develop a plan for spending the $30 million in state funds. In developing this plan, MEA was required to hold at least four separate public meetings across the state by the end of the year. More than 70 concerned Marylanders have turned out to the first three meetings, despite poor notice and planning.

The meetings were inaccessible, poorly advertised, and lacked transparency, environmental organizations argued in a letter delivered to MEA today. The letter continues:

“The process, as it is now, is broken. It seems geared at checking a box rather than giving the public a meaningful opportunity to weigh in and help inform MEA’s future plans. The meetings provided further evidence that this Administration is bent on expanding gas infrastructure, no matter the effect on the climate and no matter what the public wants.”

Annie Bristow of Frack-Free Frostburg stated: “The entire lifecycle of fracked gas must be considered from a public health perspective – from air and water pollution at extraction to end use air pollution in homes and businesses.  Expansion of fracked gas pipelines in Maryland would increase risks to the health and safety of Marylanders, financially incentivize fracking of our neighbors in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, and fail to address the public health threat from climate change.”

Ruth Alice White stated: “Extending the use of gas in Maryland is counter to the Maryland’s commitment to move dramatically reduce Maryland Greenhouse gases, totally counter to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act’s purpose.  We can’t be implementing new gas infrastructure designed to last 30 years or more when we are striking desperately to reduce emissions.  We know fracked gas leaks at every stage in extraction and piping.  The gas is methane which is 84 times worse than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas over a 20 year period.  We need to move rapidly to clean and renewable wind and solar.”

Tracy Cannon of the Eastern Panhandle Green Coalition stated: “Citizen and environmental groups in the Eastern Panhandle of WV were thrilled to learn that Maryland’s Board of Public Works blocked the Potomac Pipeline, which would have carried fracked gas to polluting industrial development in our counties.  We find it contradictory that Maryland would now support spending $30 million on fracked-gas infrastructure.  We would like to look to Maryland as an example of what a green state can be.  This is disappointing.”

MEA has made access to these meetings extraordinarily difficult, giving the public very little notice, scheduling them during the workweek, even holding one at a location that required attendees to apply for a parking pass 48 hours in advance. Despite this, more than 70 concerned Marylanders have spoken out against Hogan’s fracked-gas expansion plans in person and more than 300 more have signed a letter in opposition.

CONTACT:
Denise Robbins, Communications Director, denise@chesapeakeclimate.org, 240-630-1889
Anthony Field, Maryland Grassroots Coordinator, anthony@chesapeakeclimate.org, 301-664-4068

###

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network is the oldest and largest grassroots organization dedicated exclusively to raising awareness about the impacts and solutions associated with global warming in the Chesapeake Bay region. For 16 years, CCAN has been at the center of the fight for clean energy and wise climate policy in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. For more information, visit www.chesapeakeclimate.org

National Park Service Decision Clears a Hurdle for Potomac Pipeline Construction but Company Still Lacks Access to Complete Route

Environmental Groups Vow to Continue Fight

WASHINGTON, DC — This week, the National Park Service determined that the fracked-gas Potomac Pipeline would have no significant impact on the C&O Canal National Historical Park, despite the clear threat it poses to the region, the Potomac River, and the climate. This decision could clear the way for the pipeline company Columbia Gas to request permission from federal regulators to begin construction on its controversial pipeline, despite not having access to all the land along the route. A federal judge last month threw out a case brought by Columbia attempting to seize through eminent domain a Maryland-owned public park to build its pipeline. Columbia is appealing that decision but the company’s likelihood of success on appeal is highly uncertain.

In response, Anne Havemann, General Counsel, CCAN, stated: 

“Columbia Gas has taken risk after risk with this pipeline, starting with its proposal to run it through unstable terrain under the Potomac River — the source of drinking water for 6 million people. Not to mention the risk of investing in fracked-gas infrastructure at a time when the science and public opinion are clear that we need to move rapidly away from fossil fuels in order to stave off the most catastrophic effects of climate change. Columbia would be taking a further risk if it begins to build this pipeline without access to all the land along the route.

“We urge Columbia to listen to Maryland residents and elected officials and give up on this dangerous pipeline. At the same time, we will continue to pursue all legal avenues to stop the project.”

##

Patrick Grenter, Senior Campaign Representative in Maryland for the Sierra Club’s Beyond Dirty Fuels Campaign, said:

“Not only has Maryland banned fracking, they have rejected an attempted land grab for this specific fracked gas pipeline. This is a dirty, dangerous project that threatens the health of Maryland’s water, people, and communities and we are going to fight it every step of the way. Columbia Gas should listen to Marylanders and put this zombie pipeline to rest once and for all.”

Brent Walls, Upper Potomac Riverkeeper, stated:

“Whether through pressure from the Trump administration or giving in to industry’s ‘it’s safe’ rhetoric, it is a shame that the National Park Service failed to recognize the potential environmental issues with this pipeline.”

##

CONTACT:

Denise Robbins, Communications Director, denise@chesapeakeclimate.org, 608-620-8819
Anne Havemann, General Counsel, anne@chesapeakeclimate.org, 202-997-2466

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network is the oldest and largest grassroots organization dedicated exclusively to raising awareness about the impacts and solutions associated with global warming in the Chesapeake Bay region. For 16 years, CCAN has been at the center of the fight for clean energy and wise climate policy in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. For more information, visit www.chesapeakeclimate.org 

Offshore Wind Energy is a Breeze: Environmental & Wildlife Impacts

By Chloe Taylor, Katrina Vaitkus, Zachary Felch, Justin Stacey, Miranda Mlilo, Amanda Speciale, Katie DeVoss

Chloe Taylor, Katrina Vaitkus, Zachary Felch, Justin Stacey, Miranda Mlilo, Amanda Speciale, Katie DeVoss

Who we are:
We are a group of University of Maryland students majoring in Environmental Science and Policy. For our senior capstone project, we are researching the impact of offshore wind energy to help CCAN prepare for the upcoming public comment period for the proposed Ocean City US Wind Project. We will be creating a series of blog posts to provide information about different aspects of offshore wind and its impacts on greenhouse gas emissions, the economy, and wildlife. This is the last of our three part series.

Although offshore wind is relatively new technology, there is significant evidence proving that offshore wind farms do have a positive impact on the local environment. The negative impacts caused by offshore wind farms are short-lived, as seen at multiple European offshore wind farms such as Horns Rev, Nysted, and Egmond aan Zee. Many scientists currently studying the environmental impacts of offshore wind have found that there is a net positive environmental effect resulting from the existence of these farms.

Environmental Impacts
The development of the offshore wind farm in Ocean City, Maryland will cause some immediate negative impacts from physical disturbance of the local habitat as well as noise pollution both above and below the surface of the water. However, multiple studies conducted on several active European offshore wind farms (Offshore Wind Farm Egmond aan Zee, Horns Rev) have shown that most, or all, of these negative side effects subside over time, eventually becoming negligible. These studies have also shown that there are many positive environmental impacts which occur as a result of the introduction of the wind farm into the ecosystem. These can include, but are not limited to, creation of habitat for wildlife species, increased total biomass, and increased biodiversity.
Although there will be significant modification of the local environment, this will create room for growth in both species richness and diversity. Sites typically chosen for wind farms have naturally occurring sandy sediments. In order to support the wind turbines, large rocks will be introduced to build up the foundation and to increase stability of the monopiles. These large substrates create new habitats for many species of fish and invertebrates. Thus, despite initial disturbance, operating wind farms are capable of supporting many organisms. Benthic communities and aquatic vegetation have found the large substrates around the monopiles to be particularly useful as sites for colonization.
Some images from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Earth Observatory have shown sediment plumes resulting from the flow of water around the monopiles of wind turbines carrying disturbed fine-grained sediments with the current. These plumes can be up to 30 meters wide and several kilometers long. However, increased turbidity in the waters near operating wind farms has proven to subside and to have negligible impacts on local wildlife. After five full years of operation, Egmond aan Zee wind farm in the Netherlands showed zero negative impact on the benthic communities within the wind farm site resulting from increased sediment flow.

Marine Species Impacts
Marine organisms face several negative impacts from the creation of wind farms including increased noise pollution. However, the benefits that come from the creation of the wind farm outweigh the negative effects. The noise levels created by fully operational offshore wind farms have shown minimal long-term disturbance of organisms within the local area, however knowledge on this topic is lacking and requires further study over longer periods of time. However, the most dramatic noise pollution occurs during pile driving, but it is not a long-term impairment. One Dutch study showed an increase in the detection of dolphins inside the wind farm area as opposed to outside sampling sites. This same study also reported the return of seals to the area following completion of construction.
According to a study conducted by the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, the noise generated by an active turbine may be audible to marine mammals from just over 40 miles away. Ongoing research explains methods that can be used to significantly reduce the impact of noise on the surrounding environment.
Following the construction of wind farms, each turbine may support marine wildlife on a large scale. Each wind turbine is able to support up to four metric tons of shellfish that attracts other marine wildlife to the area, similarly to that of an artificial reef. The wind farm will then attract a wide range of organisms to the area due to the newly available habitat and resources. The higher abundance of smaller organisms will attract larger predatory organisms to the wind farm and create a healthy marine ecosystem that may not have been as abundant or productive pre-construction.
The increased biodiversity provides marine mammals with high food availability, encouraging them to return to the area in higher abundances than pre-construction. The increase in food availability resulting from the physical structures of the turbines will provide an overall benefit to marine organisms and their ecosystem.

Avian Species Impacts
The proposed wind farm in Ocean City will be positioned in the path of the Atlantic Flyway, a major migration pattern for birds along the east coast of North America. Birds that fly along the Atlantic Flyway may include the bald eagle, golden-winged warbler, and piping plovers. This causes fear that there will be increased bird strikes during the annual migration. There have been several studies to quantify the estimated rate of impact of the proposed wind farm in Ocean City, which has proven to be minimal. In fact, wind farms cause fewer bird deaths than other anthropogenic factors. One of these studies found that, “wind farms and nuclear power stations are responsible each for between 0.3 and 0.4 fatalities per gigawatt-hour (GWh) of electricity while fossil-fueled power stations are responsible for about 5.2 fatalities per GWh.” This data was collected from land based wind farms, where the abundance of birds and bats is much higher than on the coast. As such, the strikes from offshore wind farms would be much lower comparatively to the land farms and other types of energy production. Another study conducted at an offshore wind farm called Horns Rev located in the North Sea found minimal bird collisions with the turbines based on observation and modeling.
Furthermore, few species fly far enough off the coast for the wind farm to interfere with their normal flight pattern. Local bird species who do not necessarily use the Atlantic Flyway for their migration were found to be in higher abundance near the wind farms because of the higher localized biodiversity. Cormorant and seagull populations actually increased in the wind farm area. Additionally, the birds inhabited the area for longer periods of time than previously measured and would nest on the turbines. Birds that are migrating along the Atlantic Flyway are likely to have few strikes and perhaps even use the wind farm for an intermediate point for rest and a source of nutrition. The presence of a wind farm in this area would provide a beneficial site for resting, socialization, and foraging.

Conclusion
Based on findings and information from currently active wind farms, the overall environmental impact of offshore wind in Ocean City will be positive. The area will experience a decrease in carbon emissions resulting from increased biodiversity because of creation of new habitat and food sources, as well as increased total biomass. While wildlife may be negatively affected during construction and servicing of turbines, these effects tend to be short-lived and have shown minimal or no long-term negative impacts on behavior or physiology of species present. Current knowledge of offshore wind has provided a lot of insight into the potential issues which may be faced during construction and implementation, making it possible to anticipate and preemptively act to mitigate any negative effects. Thus, serious environmental harm can be avoided while taking advantage of the benefits of clean energy.

SIGN THIS PETITION TO THE BUREAU OF OCEAN ENERGY MANAGEMENT URGING THEM TO APPROVE OFFSHORE WIND IN MARYLAND!

Learn More: Bringing Offshore Wind to Maryland

Offshore Wind Energy is a Breeze: Economic Benefits

By Chloe Taylor, Katrina Vaitkus, Justin Stacey, Zachary Felch, Amanda Speciale, Katie DeVoss, and Miranda Mlilo
Who we are:

Left to right: Chloe Taylor, Katrina Vaitkus, Zachary Felch, Justin Stacey, Miranda Mlilo, Amanda Speciale, and Katie DeVoss

We are a group of University of Maryland students majoring in Environmental Science and Policy. For our senior capstone project, we are researching the impact of offshore wind energy  to help CCAN prepare for the upcoming public comment period for the proposed Ocean City US Wind Project. We will be creating a series of blog posts to provide information about different aspects of offshore wind and its impacts on greenhouse gas emissions, the economy, and wildlife. This is the second of our three part series.

There seems to be a common misconception that offshore wind energy might hurt Ocean City’s economy. This could not be further from the truth! In fact, research suggests that an offshore wind farm may actually bolster very important sectors of the economy such as tourism, real estate, and job creation.
Tourism and Real Estate
Many polls have surveyed beachgoers and gathered data about their vacationing preferences after the theoretical construction of offshore wind turbines. The results were generally positive for offshore wind, and showed either no change in beach preferences, or an increased likelihood that tourists would visit the area. For example, one Goucher poll from fall 2017 surveyed Marylanders to find out how the proposed offshore wind project would impact whether they choose Ocean City as a vacation destination. Out of 671 Marylanders, 75% of people said that the offshore wind farm would make no difference about where they choose to vacation. Additionally, 12% said that the presence of a wind farm might make them more inclined to visit, out of curiosity and interest.
This sentiment was further emphasized by Jessica Willi, Executive Director of the Block Island Tourism Council who stated that after the construction of the Block Island offshore wind farm, “We’ve definitely seen more people on the island that have come just to see the wind farm; we’ve had businesses sprout up on the island, boats taking people out just to see the wind farm.”
Additionally, a French study found that turbines will bring an increase in biodiversity and wildlife. This will expand the tourism market, bolstered by the desire to view, learn about, and interact with wildlife through activities like observational boating and diving around turbine foundations!
Furthermore, it is unlikely that there will be any negative impacts on real estate prices. While there is no existing data regarding real estate impacts from offshore wind farms, there are studies from onshore facilities located close to homes indicating that real estate will not be affected. Since offshore wind farms are located several miles off of the coast and have negligible visibility, data showing no effect from turbines located close to homes onshore would likely support a lack of impact for offshore turbines far from homes and other properties.  In fact, benefits from tourism and lower electricity costs might even increase property values.
A 2013 study by Ben Hoen and colleagues found no statistical evidence that wind turbines affected nearby home prices in either the post-announcement/pre-construction or post-construction period. They found that while sale prices might temporarily decrease following the announcement of construction, labeled the “anticipation effect,” these decreases will wear off following construction.
Job Creation
US Wind plans to invest millions of dollars into Baltimore’s industrial and manufacturing sector. This substantial investment into the local economy is the root of the job opportunities for the city from the offshore wind project. Revitalization of the manufacturing industry could lead to the creation of hundreds of jobs in the greater Baltimore area, contributing to the 3,580 jobs the Public Service Commission of Maryland has required US Wind to create in the state. At every step of the process, employment opportunities abound. Skilled workers from numerous disciplines are essential to upgrade the facilities at Tradepoint Atlantic (at Sparrows Point) and other locations. An independent study for the Department of Energy forecasts the creation of up to 600 jobs and 33 million dollars in compensation during this stage alone. After the improvements are complete, over 150 tradespeople will likely be employed at the fabrication facility constructing steel jacket foundations — these jobs will continue even after the Maryland offshore wind project is complete as the East Coast’s offshore wind industry grows. Such professions can pay over 20 dollars an hour.
Not only does Baltimore stand to gain significant employment opportunities, so does Ocean City. As the closest city to the project, there is a unique chance to participate in the construction and upkeep of the wind turbines. Specialized workers from crane operators to electricians may be called on to help in the construction of the turbines while receiving payment upwards of 25 dollars an hour on average, if not more. Perhaps the most interesting job prospect is the chance to become employed as wind turbine service technicians. With a lifespan of 25 years, the turbines will require constant check ups and maintenance by locally-based technicians. Community colleges and technical schools are the key to getting a foot in the door with a 2-year degree or 1-year certification in the field. With a 96% job outlook in the coming years, the time is now to enter the profession.
Economic Benefits in Maryland
This project will also generate millions of dollars for Maryland’s economy, providing more jobs and emerging business investments. Maryland created the Maryland Offshore Wind Business Development Fund to encourage future project development. US Wind is required to contribute $6 million to this fund between 2017-2019, which will help other businesses emerge and profit within this novel industry. US Wind has pledged to invest 26.4 million dollars in upgrades to the Tradepoint Atlantic port facility, and an additional 51 million dollars in another steel facility, further solidifying their commitment to the local economy and job growth. US Wind is required to spend at least 19% of total development and construction costs within Maryland. Their studies estimate this in-state expenditure to be $610 million during development and construction, and another $744 million (valued in 2017 dollars) in the operation phase. This offshore wind farm will provide millions of dollars to the state’s economy and help advance business interests.
In addition to these state benefits, Marylanders do not need to fear exorbitant electricity costs. There may be some concern over how the state will offset the costs to build the project, such as raising the price of electricity. However, Maryland law prohibits residential rates from exceeding an additional $1.50 per month (valued in 2012 dollars) through 2040. For businesses and other non-residential payers, this increase is less than 1.4% annually. While this is a small increase, it is still advantageous to build the wind farm, as it helps the state comply with its renewable energy standards. Additionally, the cost of electricity should decrease over time as this project encourages future offshore wind projects in the pipeline. In one National Renewable Energy Laboratory study, they found the cost of electricity in the mid-Atlantic will decrease through 2027 with the installation of offshore wind projects currently in the pipeline. Compared to 2015 prices, the data reflect a 41-52% cost reduction in 2027 per megawatt hour to the mid-Atlantic! Thus, constructing this project will only have small rate increases to Maryland ratepayers, but will decrease future regional energy costs while meeting our renewable energy goals.
In conclusion, offshore wind has the potential to increase tourism and property values in Ocean City. The project will create jobs, stabilize electricity rates, and increase Maryland’s Taylor x revenue. Stay informed, get involved, and let our government know that you support offshore wind in the state of Maryland!
SIGN THIS PETITION TO THE BUREAU OF OCEAN ENERGY MANAGEMENT URGING THEM TO APPROVE OFFSHORE WIND IN MARYLAND!

Learn More: Bringing Offshore Wind to Maryland

Offshore Wind Energy is a Breeze: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions

By Chloe Taylor, Katrina Vaitkus, Justin Stacey, Zachary Felch, Amanda Speciale, Katie DeVoss, and Miranda Mlilo
Who we are:
We are a group of University of Maryland students majoring in Environmental Science and Policy. For our senior capstone project, we are researching the impact of offshore wind energy for CCAN to help prepare for the upcoming public comment period for the proposed Ocean City US Wind Project. We will be creating a series of blog posts to provide information about different aspects of offshore wind and its impacts on greenhouse gas emissions, the economy, and wildlife. This is the first of our three part series.

Chloe Taylor, Katrina Vaitkus, Justin Stacey, Zachary Felch, Amanda Speciale, Katie DeVoss

Greenhouse gas emissions are the most significant driver of climate change. These emissions increase atmospheric temperature, correlating to climate change events such as sea level rise and increased frequency of extreme weather. Not only do these emissions create climate change, but they also pose serious public health risks, specifically to those with poor respiratory health, due to their contribution to air pollution and air quality.
Renewable energy is a solution to combat the problems from greenhouse gas emissions. Supporting renewable energy initiatives and projects can decrease greenhouse gas emissions by millions of tons per year. Currently in the state of Maryland, we emit 59 million metric tons of carbon dioxide a year, and 17 million metric tons of these alone are from the energy sector. Despite this high number, only 10% of energy generated is renewable. The offshore wind project proposed off of the coast of Ocean City, Maryland may be the solution we are looking for. Not only will it help decrease Maryland’s total emissions by millions of metric tons per year, but it will encourage more renewable energy development.
Currently, wind energy accounts for 1.4% of renewable energy in Maryland, from 191 MW of onshore wind, providing for 49,000 homes. The offshore wind project proposes 250MW of wind power, therefore this could more than double the amount of wind power Maryland uses. American Wind Energy estimates that in 2017 wind energy avoided a total of 189 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions in the US , reducing 11% of all US power emissions. In addition to carbon dioxide emission displacement, wind also avoided 188,000 tons of sulfur dioxide and 122,000 tons of nitrogen oxide emissions. This major cut alone prompted an estimated $8 billion in public health savings due to better air quality and less pollution.
The offshore wind project could bring many benefits to the state of Maryland and help to decrease emissions on both the state and global scale. Shifting towards renewable energy is important not only for protecting our environment, but also for protecting our own health. Stay informed, get involved, and let our government know that you support offshore wind in the state of Maryland!

Sign this petition to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management urging them to approve offshore wind in Maryland!

Pictures Retrieved From:
https://www.publicdomainpictures.net/en/hledej.php?hleda=pollution
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/5/25/17393156/offshore-wind-us-massachusetts-rhode-island-zinke
http://www.uswindinc.com/our-projects/

Learn More: Bringing Offshore Wind to Maryland

Creating a Clean Energy Future by Eliminating Trash Incineration

By Jackie Apel
Rockville, Maryland
In light of the Maryland Department of Energy’s new rule requiring waste incinerators in the state to reduce their harmful air pollution, this is an excellent time to consider ways for Baltimore and other cities to manage their waste disposal processes. The Baltimore City Council has issued a resolution to improve upon its Solid Waste Management Master Plan, asking consultants to bid on a contract to develop a new plan. These new resolutions and limits on emissions are important first steps towards reducing air pollution, but environmentalists have expressed concerns that these steps do not go far enough to adequately address our clean air problems.
Residents who live near incineration facilities are all too familiar with the dirty air that they breathe each day. Recently, I heard testimony from a resident of Baltimore who recounted how many of her neighbors had been exposed to dangerous chemicals as well as air from the BRESCO incinerator, and had developed lung cancer as a result. While it is encouraging that the incinerators are taking steps to lower their output of nitrogen oxides, it is also a known fact that incinerators tend to be placed near, and disproportionately impact, lower income communities of color. A recent scientific study by The American Chemical Society reported that nitrogen oxides directly contribute to respiratory diseases like asthma and COPD; lung cancers; heart disease; birth defects, and developmental problems in children, with impacts to the brain and nervous systems. Nitrogen dioxide is a hidden health hazard, and particulates can become airborne and travel long distances, with microscopic particles penetrating deeply into the lungs. During the recent Supreme Court confirmation hearing, we also heard testimony from a teenager who suffers with asthma about the dangers of air pollution, and its consequences for human health, and the importance of not revoking our environmental regulations. Many are rightfully concerned as we watch the Trump Administration move in a fateful direction, away from regulation of harmful toxins, to allowing companies to proliferate pollution of our air and water. Combined, there are many sources of air pollution that affect our health on a daily basis, as well as contribute to climate change.
What can we do to minimize our trash pollution and create a cleaner environment? Maryland can begin by passing the Clean Energy Jobs Initiative, which would phase out incineration as a Tier 1 source in the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard. Improving our technology and limiting emissions will help, but we also need to look at the whole picture of waste management— from product design to disposal—and find ways to move towards a “zero waste” plan like Oakland, California has done, where 1,000 jobs were created. Pollution costs the U.S. billions in healthcare, and is adversely affecting our planet’s weather. We need to embrace new ways of thinking about waste disposal, and do everything we can to limit our toxic air. We can do this sooner rather than later, by following a zero waste and clean energy plan!
Submit a comment today! Urge the MDE to lower pollution from Baltimore’s incinerator.

Breaking: Lawmakers announce steps to combat Hogan’s fracking hypocrisy

Maryland Legislators Announce Steps to Combat Governor Hogan’s Efforts to Expand Fracked-Gas Pipelines and Combustion in Maryland

New documents show how Gov. Hogan is collaborating with TransCanada and others to ship large amounts of fracked gas into and across MD, violating the spirit of  the state’s fracking ban.
Maryland assembly members announce possible legislative steps and other plans to stop costly leaking gas pipelines instead of Hogan’s major buildout plan for fracked-gas infrastructure across the state.
 
ANNAPOLIS, MD– Environmental leaders and legislators today sharply criticized Governor Larry Hogan’s multi-pronged effort to build fracked-gas pipelines in Maryland at the expense of the environment and consumers. During a telephone press call, two state senators offered an alternative pathway that involves repairing existing leaky gas pipelines in Maryland in a way that would help consumers, create jobs, and protect the climate. Environmental leaders, meanwhile, specifically reiterated their strong opposition to efforts by Hogan and TransCanada to build a controversial fracked-gas pipeline across Maryland and under the Potomac River.

Click here for a downloadable version of the “Hogan’s Fracking Hypocrisy” factsheet

Today’s press conference took place two days before hundreds of concerned activists plan to take part in the first-ever “citizen encirclement” of Gov. Hogan’s mansion, in a show of solidarity and opposition to TransCanada’s Eastern Panhandle Expansion Project, better known as the “Potomac Pipeline.” This unprecedented protest Thursday will be the culmination of nearly a year of opposition to this pipeline across Maryland, West Virginia, and Washington, D.C.

Since signing a ban on fracking in 2017, Governor Hogan has worked consistently to undermine the spirit — if not the letter — of the law. For months, his administration has been actively negotiating with controversial Canadian oil and gas companies to ship large amounts of fracked gas into and across Maryland. In December his Administration explicitly called this gas, produced in neighboring states using the dangerous fracking drilling method, a “valuable resource” with “environmental benefits” . The Administration also announced its ambitious plans to “kick-start a natural gas expansion…throughout Maryland.”
The Chesapeake Climate Action Network and the Potomac Riverkeeper Network recently uncovered how Governor Hogan has been collaborating with Canadian companies to promote fracked-gas pipelines. This includes his proposal to use settlement money from the forthcoming merger between Washington Gas and Calgary-based AltaGas to construct fracked-gas pipelines at the expense of Maryland ratepayers.  Governor Hogan has proposed a virtually unprecedented settlement wherein the state of Maryland would spend $33 million in settlement money to assist gas companies in the construction of more fracked-gas pipelines all across Maryland. The settlement – which must be approved by the Maryland Public Service Commission later this year — also requires that AltaGas spend an additional $70 million (which could be charged to ratepayers) to promote pipeline construction and other fracked-gas infrastructure in the state.
During the call, Senator Richard Madaleno (D-18) and Senator Paul Pinsky (D-22) proposed taking the $100 million that Hogan wants to give to the fracked gas industry and instead investing it in workers to repair leaky pipes throughout the state, similar to legislation already passed in New Jersey and Massachusetts.
Senator Richard Madaleno (D-18) stated: “While Governor Hogan collaborates with Canadian companies to push dangerous fracked-gas pipelines where people don’t want them, Maryland’s existing pipelines are leaking climate-warming methane into our atmosphere. It’s clear we need to stop new fracked-gas infrastructure like the Potomac Pipeline from endangering the people of Maryland. We can bring jobs and environmental benefits to the state by instead focusing on rebuilding and repairing our current gas infrastructure and transitioning to renewable energy.”
Senator Paul Pinsky (D-22), who is a member of Governor Hogan’s Maryland Climate Commission stated: “Governor Hogan is putting all Marylanders at risk with his plan to aggressively expand fracked-gas infrastructure across the state. We need to work to protect the people of Maryland, not the bottom-line of Canadian gas companies.”
Documents also show that Governor Hogan collaborated with TransCanada to allow the Canadian gas company to carry out a dangerous drilling method called “Horizontal Directional Drilling” without oversight from the Maryland Department of Environment. And despite repeated pleas from groups ranging from the Potomac Riverkeeper Network to the Chesapeake Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Hogan administration refuses to follow a standard set by Virginia and other states when it comes to reviewing impacts to water quality from fracked-gas pipelines.
Mike Tidwell, Executive Director of Chesapeake Climate Action Network, who is also a member of the Maryland Climate Commission, stated: “The Governor has launched this gas expansion effort while saying he supports the Paris Climate Agreements, even as scientists confirm that fracked gas is essentially as harmful to the climate as coal. As for clean-energy substitutes to gas, the Governor vetoed a 2016 General Assembly law expanding wind and solar power and other renewable energy sources to make up 25% of the state’s grid. Governor Hogan is trying to drag us back to the dark ages on climate.”
Brent Walls, Upper Potomac Riverkeeper, stated: “It’s hypocritical for Governor Hogan to take a stand against fracking and push so hard for fracking infrastructure — and it’s absurd for him to do so with such careless disregard for the safety of his constituents. The Potomac Pipeline was just the beginning. We need a new direction for the state of Maryland, one that leads us away from outdated gas infrastructure and towards a truly sustainable energy future.”
CCAN concluded that “Hogan’s commitment to gas infrastructure is a major threat to the state’s energy policy, a potential harm to consumers, and it creates serious legal uncertainty under NAFTA.”

CONTACT:
Denise Robbins; Chesapeake Climate Action Network; denise@chesapeakeclimate.org; 608-620-8819
Brooke Harper; Chesapeake Climate Action Network; brooke@chesapeakeclimate.org; 301-992-6875