MVCAC April 2007

mvcac@lists.osenergy.org

2 participants
8 discussions

Active issues in Mon. County
by Duane330＠aol.com 30 Apr '07

30 Apr '07

Please be reminded of our meeting next Monday at 7 pm at the home of Larry and Martha Schwaub.. ALSO......... 1. The proposed meeting at the Courthouse on Wednesday has been postponed by the County Commission, because Allegheny Energy was unavailable to come out and answer questions on the Allegheny TrAIL 500 kv power line. 2. Tomorrow morning, Tuesday, May 1st, WAJR radio will host a program on the proposed TrAIL power line. The program will include representatives of the Laurel Run Watershed Association, Allegheny Energy, and Billy Jack Gregg, who is the Consumer Advocate of the WV Public Service Commission. This will occur between 9 am and 10 am. You can call on on 291-0041. 3. Please consider attending the "Town Meeting" on Wednesday, May 2nd, at the South Middle School, starting at 7 pm. The topic is the "comprehensive health care reform package" developed by the West Virginians for Affordable Health Care. Our member of the House of Representatives Barbara Evans Fleischauer is supporting this program, as are many other individuals and groups. We cannot have too much support for this activity, to involve shared responsibilities and shared sacrifices. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Meet Monday, May 7th @ 7 pm
by Duane330＠aol.com 25 Apr '07

25 Apr '07

MVCAC.........participants and friends........ Please attend a General Meeting of the........... Mon Valley Clean Air Coalition Location: the home of Larry Schwab, 3333 Collins Ferry Road. Time: 7 pm to socialize with the meeting at 7:30 pm. The Agenda will include the following................. 1. Update on Longview permits and construction activities....... 2. Update on Longview legal action in federal district court......... 3. Update on scrubber construction schedule for Allegheny Energy 4. Consideration of action on Allegheny Energy 500 kv transmission line 5. Activities and options relative to greenhouse gases... 6. Public health information and possible projects... 7. Air quality monitoring and public education projects... 8. Membership and fundraising........... ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Planning for Meeting.........
by Duane330＠aol.com 23 Apr '07

23 Apr '07

To: Participants and Friends of MVCAC MON VALLEY CLEAN AIR COALITION.......... Let's consider a meeting on May 1st, 2nd, 3rd, [Tuesday thru Thursday of the first week of May], or on May 7th (Monday) or May 10th (Thursday). PLEASE TELL ME YOUR AVAILABILITY ON THESE DATES. NOTE: Please direct correspondence and contributions to: MonValley Clean Air Coalition P. O. Box 4679 Morgantown, WV 26504-4679. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

2 1

37th Earth Day.. "inconvenient truth"
by Duane330＠aol.com 22 Apr '07

22 Apr '07

How eager are we to fight global warming? Statewide poll finds most Pennsylvanians see individual efforts as too inconvenient Sunday, April 22, 2007By Don Hopey, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette On this 37th Earth Day, most Pennsylvanians think global warming is an inconvenient truth, but not many are willing to be inconvenienced enough to do anything about it. Seven out of 10 Pennsylvanians agree that global warming exists and is a concern, according to a survey by two Mansfield University researchers released last week, but significantly fewer are willing to do so much as change a light bulb to help address the problem. Instead, they are looking to government or science for solutions, said Tim Madigan, associate professor of sociology at Mansfield University. "Our results suggest that a majority of people in the state are not very committed to taking broad action against global warming," said Mr. Madigan, who along with co-researcher Dr. Janice Purk surveyed 920 Pennsylvanians over the age of 18 about their willingness to take 10 specific steps to reduce global climate change. The survey results do show that the number of people who agree that global warming is occurring is up from 5-in-10 in 1999, to 7-in-10, a significant increase, but the impact on behavioral change has not been as great. The 10 personal actions that people were asked if they do, or would do, were: use compact fluorescent light bulbs, compost kitchen scraps, take reusable bags to the grocery store, buy from environmentally friendly companies, wash dishes by hand, own a hybrid car, purchase a solar power system for their home, allow clothes to air dry, buy a windmill and stop eating meat. If those surveyed were already taking the step, they received a score of two for that item. If they said they would take the step, they received a score of one. Those unwilling to change got a zero for that item. Out of 20 possible points, half of those surveyed scored a six or lower on the "action index," which the researchers created to measure the feasibility of a social solution to global warming. If few people are willing to change their behavior, a social solution is impossible and government action or scientific innovation, or both, will be required. "Since the majority of people are not very willing to change many of their behaviors, and belief in global warming is not strongly related to taking action, the social solution to the problem of global warming does not look very promising," Mr. Madigan said. Slightly more than half of those surveyed said they would use fluorescent light bulbs, take reusable bags to the grocery and buy from environmentally friendly companies. Slightly less than half said they'd feed the composter. Only 41 percent said they'd be willing to drive a hybrid car or install solar panels; 38 percent were willing to wash dishes by hand; 30 percent were willing to stop eating meat. Just 26 percent would let their clothes air dry and 25 percent said they would buy a windmill. Only 13 percent of those surveyed had seen former Vice President Al Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth," and those who had seen it scored less than a point higher than those who had not. "Assuming that Gore's movie had a casual impact," Mr. Madigan said, "it would take many more such movies to change attitudes and behaviors enough to reverse the trends as he calls for in his book and movie." The random telephone survey was done at the end of February and the beginning of March of residents throughout the state and has a 3.2 percent margin of error. ____________________________________ ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Why We Can't Wait
by Duane330＠aol.com 21 Apr '07

21 Apr '07

Climate Change: Why We Can't Wait By James Hansen, The Nation Posted on April 21, 2007 http://www.alternet.org/story/50795/ This is an adaptation of a talk delivered February 26 at the National Press Club. Comments relating to policy are Dr. Hansen's personal opinion and do not represent a NASA position. There's a huge gap between what is understood about global warming by the relevant scientific community and what is known about global warming by those who need to know: the public and policy-makers. We've had, in the past thirty years, one degree Fahrenheit of global warming. But there's another one degree Fahrenheit in the pipeline due to gases that are already in the atmosphere. And there's another one degree Fahrenheit in the pipeline because of the energy infrastructure now in place -- for example, power plants and vehicles that we're not going to take off the road even if we decide that we're going to address this problem. The Energy Department says that we're going to continue to put more and more CO2 in the atmosphere each year -- not just additional CO2 but more than we put in the year before. If we do follow that path, even for another ten years, it guarantees that we will have dramatic climate changes that produce what I would call a different planet -- one without sea ice in the Arctic; with worldwide, repeated coastal tragedies associated with storms and a continuously rising sea level; and with regional disruptions due to freshwater shortages and shifting climatic zones. I've arrived at five recommendations for what should be done to address the problem. If Congress were to follow these recommendations, we could solve the problem. Interestingly, this is not a gloom-and-doom story. In fact, the things we need to do have many other benefits in terms of our economy, our national security, our energy independence and preserving the environment -- preserving creation. First, there should be a moratorium on building any more coal-fired power plants until we have the technology to capture and sequester the CO2. That technology is probably five or ten years away. It will become clear over the next ten years that coal-fired power plants that do not capture and sequester CO2 are going to have to be bulldozed. That's the only way we can keep CO2 from getting well into the dangerous level, because our consumption of oil and gas alone will take us close to the dangerous level. And oil and gas are such convenient fuels (and located in countries where we can't tell people not to mine them) that they surely will be used. So why build old-technology power plants if you're not going to be able to operate them over their lifetime, which is fifty or seventy-five years? It doesn't make sense. Besides, there's so much potential in efficiency, we don't need new power plants if we take advantage of that. Second, and this is the hard recommendation that no politician seems willing to stand up and say is necessary: The only way we are going to prevent having an amount of CO2 that is far beyond the dangerous level is by putting a price on emissions. In order to avoid economic problems, it had better be a gradually rising price so that the consumer has the option to seek energy sources that reduce his requirement for how much fuel he needs. And that means we should be investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies at the same time. The result would be high-tech, high-paid jobs. And it would be very good for our energy independence, our national security and our balance of payments. But a price on carbon emissions is not enough, which brings us to the third recommendation: We need energy-efficiency standards. That's been proven time and again. The biggest use of energy is in buildings, and the engineers and architects have said that they can readily reduce the energy requirement of new buildings by 50 percent. That goal has been endorsed by the US Conference of Mayors, but you can't do it on a city-by-city basis. You need national standards. The same goes for vehicle efficiency. We haven't had an improvement in vehicle efficiency in twenty-five or thirty years. And our national government is standing in court alongside the automobile manufacturers resisting what the National Research Council has said is readily achievable -- a 30 percent improvement in vehicle efficiency, which California and other states want to adopt. The fourth recommendation -- and this is probably the easiest one -- involves the question of ice-sheet stability. The old assumption that it takes thousands or tens of thousands of years for ice sheets to change is clearly wrong. The concern is that it's a very nonlinear process that could accelerate. The west Antarctic ice sheet in particular is very vulnerable. If it collapses, that could yield a sea-level rise of sixteen to nineteen feet, possibly on a time scale as short as a century or two. The information on ice-sheet stability is so recent that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report does not adequately address it. The IPCC process is necessarily long and drawn out. But this problem with the stability of ice sheets is so critical that it really should be looked at by a panel of our best scientists. Congress should ask the National Academy of Sciences to do a study on this and report its conclusions in very plain language. The National Academy of Sciences was established by Abraham Lincoln for just this sort of purpose, and there's no reason we shouldn't use it that way. The final recommendation concerns how we have gotten into this situation in which there is a gap between what the relevant scientific community understands and what the public and policy-makers know. A fundamental premise of democracy is that the public is informed and that they're honestly informed. There are at least two major ways in which this is not happening. One of them is that the public affairs offices of the science agencies are staffed at the headquarters level by political appointees. While the public affairs workers at the centers are professionals who feel that their job is to translate the science into words the public can understand, unfortunately this doesn't seem to be the case for the political appointees at the highest levels. Another matter is Congressional testimony. I don't think the Framers of the Constitution expected that when a government employee -- a technical government employee -- reports to Congress, his testimony would have to be approved and edited by the White House first. But that is the way it works now. And frankly, I'm afraid it works that way whether it's a Democratic administration or a Republican one. These problems are worse now than I've seen in my thirty years in government. But they're not new. I don't know anything in our Constitution that says that the executive branch should filter scientific information going to Congressional committees. Reform of communication practices is needed if our government is to function the way our Founders intended it to work. The global warming problem has brought into focus an overall problem: the pervasive influence of special interests on the functioning of our government and on communications with the public. It seems to me that it will be difficult to solve the global warming problem until we have effective campaign finance reform, so that special interests no longer have such a big influence on policy-makers. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Huge turnout protests powerline in PA
by Duane330＠aol.com 06 Apr '07

06 Apr '07

(http://www.post-gazette.com/pghmap/) (https://ssl.post-gazette.com/placead) (http://classified.post-gazette.com/auto/) (http://www.post-gazette.com/xtras/a1pdf.asp) (http://www.post-gazette.com/aboutpg/emailheadlines/) 650 turn out to protest power line proposal Friday, April 06, 2007, By Janice Crompton, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette More than 600 angry Washington and Greene county residents turned out last night at the Washington County fairgrounds to oppose the construction of a high-voltage power line in their area. The event, organized by the citizen's group "Stop The Towers," also drew a flock of local and state politicians, most of whom vowed to fight the project by Allegheny Energy Inc. The plan involves the Greensburg-based energy company's proposed construction of a 240-mile, 500-kilovolt transmission line, extending from Washington and Greene counties to existing substations in West Virginia, ending in northern Virginia. Also part of the plan is the construction of two substations, including a 502 Junction substation in Dunkard, southern Greene County, which will direct flow northward in Washington County and eastward into West Virginia. The other substation, nicknamed Prexy, will be built along Thomas Ei ghty-Four Road in North Strabane, Washington County. It will include three smaller transmission lines that will branch off into South Strabane, Nottingham and Somerset townships. Allegheny Energy's portion of the line extends about 210 miles at a cost of $820 million, with the total project estimated at more than $1 billion. The smaller portion of the line will be constructed and paid for by Dominion Virginia Power, which serves customers in Virginia. Company officials have said they believed there was a misunderstanding over who would benefit from the new lines. Misconceptions that southwestern Pennsylvania would be providing power for Virginia are incorrect, officials said. But many of the residents who turned out at last night's meeting, and another held Tuesday night by the company, said they don't buy it. "I don't believe that," said Washington County Commissioner Larry Maggi after a company open house Tuesday at the Bentleyville Fire Hall. "They are having problems on the East Coast." Tuesday's event was one of 10 open houses sponsored by Allegheny Energy during recent weeks to explain the company's plans. Although the Mid-Atlantic, from New York to northern Virginia, was identified by the federal government last year as an area in critical need of more power, company officials said power lines in southwestern Pennsylvania will serve electric needs in this area only. A separate line, at the 502 junction in Greene County, will transmit electricity to northern Virginia. Residents said they believed the project would decrease property values and the quality of life, and possibly be a health and safety hazard. They also questioned the company's claim that it owns rights of way along all but two miles of the proposed 38-mile route through Washington and Greene counties. "We are opposed to it," said Mr. Maggi. "We will do whatever we can to stop it. We do not want to lose our country charm." "What do we get out of it? Nothing. We lose," said county Commissioner Diana Irey. U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Johnstown, in a letter made public last night, opposed the power line project for the first time. He is congressman for a large part of the affected area. Wendell Holland, chairman of the state Public Utility Commission, explained PUC procedures to last night's audience and said: "There's nothing like being here. There's nothing at all like coming to the people and listening to what they have to say." The upgrade was mandated by PJM Interconnection, which manages electric transmission services of the Mid-Atlantic power grid in 13 states and Washington, D.C. The proposed line is part of PJM's five-year regional electric transmission plan, meant to address future energy needs at certain points in the grid, such as southwestern Pennsylvania and northern Virginia. If local lines aren't updated to a higher capacity, company officials have said customers in southwestern Pennsylvania can expect rolling blackouts and brownouts by 2011. The existing 138-kilovolt lines aren't large enough to accommodate electricity load growth rates of about 4 percent in central and northern Washington County. Growth rates elsewhere in the region average about 11/2 percent, company spokesman David Neurohr said. PJM has asked Allegheny Energy to make the southwestern Pennsylvania line a priority, said company officials, requesting that the project be completed by 2010 if possible. It will be built even if a line to northern Virginia is not, Mr. Neurohr said. The company is expected to file an application with the PUC soon, as it did in West Virginia last week. If construction permits are denied or not issued within the next year, it could kick in a backstop provided for in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which gives the federal government the right to intervene with construction permits. (http://www.post-gazette.com/popup.asp?img=http://www.post-gazette.com/image…) Bill Pollock, managing director of Energy and Environment Advisory, talks up the business and economic arguments against Allegheny Energy Inc.'s plan to build a high voltage power line through Washington and Greene counties. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Stopaptrail.org, Stopthetowers.org
by Duane330＠aol.com 03 Apr '07

03 Apr '07

Group opposes power line through counties Sunday, March 11, 2007, Pittsburgh PressBy Crystal Ola There's a grassroots campaign under way to stop the construction of a proposed power line that will stretch from Washington and Greene counties through Maryland and West Virginia and into northern Virginia. The face of the campaign is Rich Yanock, a South Strabane resident who is heading a group to halt the plans of Allegheny Energy Inc. to build a section of Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line. In Washington County, the line would pass through North Strabane, South Strabane, Somerset, West Bethlehem and Amwell. The 500-kilovolt transmission line also would require the construction of two new substations -- Prexy, to be built in North Strabane, and 502 Junction, to be built in Dunkard, just northeast of Mount Morris in Greene County. The line and other electric transmission upgrades are expected to cost $1.3 billion. Allegheny Energy's portion will be in excess of $850 million. The project is expected to be completed by 2011. "I oppose this line," Mr. Yanock told a standing-room-only crowd of more than 300 people during an informal Feb. 28 meeting in Emanuel United Presbyterian Church on Route 519 in Somerset. "I'll tell you the truth, this is wrong ... It's up to us to expose it for what it is, not a national defense issue, but a profit issue." Mr. Yanock believes the power line will scar the landscape, lower property values and be a detriment to the health and safety of the residents. He also was at a Feb. 27 meeting of the Somerset Township Board of Supervisors, where more than 100 people attended. Nellie Chester, a resident of the township, said one proposed route would be about three blocks from her home. She's also opposed to the Prexy substation and having to pay higher bills for a project she doesn't believe will benefit anyone locally. "I don't want it in my backyard," she said before the meeting. "We're not getting anything out of it." A final route has yet to be established, although it is expected to be filed with the state Public Utility Commission by the end of March or in early April, said David Neurohr, spokesman for Allegheny Energy. The PUC will hold public hearings on the matter. The line is part of a five-year regional electric transmission plan approved by PJM Interconnection, which manages electric transmission services of the Mid-Atlantic power grid in 13 states and Washington, D.C. Allegheny Power's transmission zone is in PJM's region. Dominion Virginia Power will construct the line within its transmission zone. The line in Allegheny Power's zone will be about 210 miles long and the entire line will be 240 miles long. PJM maintains transmission expansion is needed to address reliability issues. PJM's planning process indicated a new line is necessary to relieve overloading existing West Virginia and Virginia substations. "Throughout the PJM region, the demand for electricity has increased significantly, while the transmission infrastructure has not increased at a proportional pace," according to the TrAIL Web site. "Due to the growth in the demand for electricity, additional transmission lines are needed to improve the grid's reliability and reduce congestion so power can be transferred from where it is generated to where it is needed." Allegheny Energy held open houses last year, including one for Greene and Fayette counties on Dec. 13 and one in Washington County on Dec. 14. Mr. Neurohr said the open houses are proof that the company isn't doing this without letting anyone know. "We did them on our own to involve the public, to solicit information from the public and to inform the public," he said. Mr. Yanock, however, believes Allegheny Energy "dropped the ball on this." Part of his campaign is informing the public about the power line. "You'd be surprised at the widespread ignorance of this project," he said last week. Mr. Yanock didn't attend the open house because he wasn't aware of it beforehand. He heard about it after the fact and began meeting with a small group of 10 people or so. The group is planning to develop an official name and find the best legal structure in order to become an entity recognized by the PUC, he said. Mr. Yanock's first formal step was to ask South Strabane supervisors for an official letter of support. Township Solicitor Thomas Lonich said the township sent a Jan. 24 letter of protest to the chairman and the president of Allegheny Energy, Inc., the state Public Utility Commission, county commissioners and Amwell supervisors. The township didn't receive a response from Allegheny Energy. The letter, based on Mr. Yanock's suggestions, stated the supervisors were unanimous in acting on behalf of township citizens in objecting to and protesting the line crossing through the township. A petition with 24 signatures from a Jan. 9 meeting was included with the letter. The letter also was sent to state Sen. Barry Stout, D-Bentleyville; state Rep. Tim Solobay, D-Canonsburg; U.S. Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Upper St. Clair, and U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter. Mr. Stout and some other local politicians attended the Feb. 28 meeting, where Mr. Yanock urged the crowd to contact legislators for their support. "They are the best allies we have," Mr. Yanock said. "As a matter of fact, we're not asking for help, we're begging for help." The effort has grown from a small group to hundreds of people and is nearing a thousand participants, he said. Petitions are being circulated. Mr. Yanock and his group are planning to hold an even bigger meeting at a large venue, such as the Washington County Fairgrounds. The meeting is tentatively scheduled for April 5. Additional information and maps of proposed routes are available at _aptrailinfo.com_ (http://aptrailinfo.com/) . Mr. Yanock's group also has a Web site, _stopaptrail.org_ (http://stopaptrail.org/) ____________________________________ (Crystal Ola is a freelance writer. ) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Power line gets negative reaction Residents fear impact of Allegheny project Sunday, March 25, 2007, By Lynda Guydon Taylor, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette About 100 people jammed a North Strabane meeting room to object to a power line proposed by Allegheny Energy Inc. The 500-kilovolt line would pass through parts of Washington and Greene counties to provide power to Northern Virginia suburbs, where there's a huge demand for electricity, South Strabane resident Rich Yanock told supervisors Tuesday. "I don't know of any line that large," said Mr. Yanock, who is heading a grassroots campaign against the 210-mile line to be built by Allegheny Power, part of the Allegheny Energy system. The line also involves construction of two substations, Prexy, which would be built in North Strabane, and 502 Junction, to be constructed in Dunkard, northeast of Mount Morris in Greene County. Two informational meetings are scheduled next month -- one on April 3 at the Bentleyville Fire Hall and another April 5 at the Washington County Fairgrounds. Among Mr. Yanock's concerns are that the line will scar the landscape, ruin property values and pose health risks. Although he is neither a doctor nor a scientist, he said, all he's read about health risks indicate that further research is necessary. While a not-in-my-backyard response is typical, Mr. Yanock said "in my opinion, I don't want this line in anybody's backyard." J.R. Morton, a township resident, echoed that sentiment. Those who look at the maps of the proposed routes of the line on the Allegheny Web site at _aptrailinfo.com_ (http://aptrailinfo.com/) , and think they are not affected, should think again, Mr. Morton said. There's still a price to pay. Mr. Yanock said customer rates are expected to increase substantially to allow Allegheny Power to recoup its $820 million cost of building the line. So far, Washington and Greene County commissioners are opposing it and local legislators have expressed concerns, Mr. Yanock said. Although he said he was not telling North Strabane supervisors what to do, he urged them to look into it carefully. A lot of questions remain to be answered. Supervisor Brian Spicer said the April 3 meeting, sponsored by Allegheny Power, is expected to identify where the line will go. At that point, residents and public officials should have a better understanding of the project. Mr. Spicer also said the Public Utility Commission has the ultimate authority to decide about the line. But Mr. Yanock said don't count on it. He believes Allegheny is prepared to appeal and fight to the end. Furthermore, he cited the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which allows a PUC decision to be overridden by the federal government to make sure such corridors receive priority treatment. Under the act, the federal Department of Energy can identify areas experiencing electric transmission constraints or congestion. In addition to information about the line at Allegheny's Web site, there also is data at a Web site, _stopaptrail.org_ (http://stopaptrail.org/) , posted by Mr. Yanock's group. ____________________________________ (Lynda Guydon Taylor can be reached at _ltaylor(a)post-gazette.com_ (mailto:ltaylor@post-gazette.com) or 724-746-8813. ) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Power line plan draws opposition By Steve Ferris, Uniontown Herald-Standard, 03/30/2007, Updated 03/31/2007 FRANKLIN TWP. - More than 300 people attended a meeting Thursday held by the Greene County chapter of a grass-roots organization to rally opposition against Allegheny Energy's plans to construction a high-voltage power line through the Greene and Washington counties. Stopthetowers.org already has the support of the county commissioners from both counties as well as state Rep. H. William DeWeese, D-Waynesburg, in its fight against the proposed 240-mile, 500-kilovolt Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line, or TrAIL. Rick Layton, of the Greene County chapter, said the line would not provide electricity or any other benefits to the county. He said he believes the purpose of the line is to transmit power that is inexpensively generated in the area to east coast cities where it is sold at a high price. "This is about profit, pure and simple," Layton said to the crowd that gathered in the Waynesburg Central High School auditorium. Layton said Allegheny Power is expected to file an application to construct the line with the state Public Utility Commission within a week or two. The line would begin at the Prexy Substation, which Allegheny Power would build in the area of Eighty-Four in Washington County, and take one of three proposed routes to the 502 Junction substation that would be built in Mount Morris. >From there, it would go to an existing substation in Mount Storm, W.Va., and then to a Dominion Virginia Power substation in Loudoun, Va. The anticipated completion date is 2011. Allegheny Power said the line is needed to ensure the stability of the regional power grid and the reliable flow of electricity in the region. The project grew from a June 2006 directive from PJM Interconnection, a regional transmission organization that manages electrical transmission services in all or parts of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Michigan, Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, Kentucky, Indiana, Tennessee and the District of Columbia. Allegheny Power is hosting two open houses to explain and answer questions about the project. The first is in Greene County on Monday from 4 to 7 p.m. at the Jefferson Volunteer Fire Department on Route 188 in Jefferson. The second one is Tuesday from 5 to 8 p.m. at the Bentleyville Volunteer Fire Department on Main Street in Bentleyville. Stopthetowers.org is holding a second opposition rally Thursday at 7 p.m. in Hall No. 1 at the Washington County Fairgrounds. Layton said the line would impact the county in a number of ways and none of them are good. It would decrease property values, result in a rate increase, create huge eyesore in the county rural landscape and possibly cause health problems, said Layton. He said the right of way, which would be 200 feet wide with towers up to 160-feet tall, would be sprayed with herbicides and the county already has a poor air quality rating. Along with the county commissioners and DeWeese, supervisors from several townships have issued letters of opposition to the project, said Layton. Pam Snyder, chairwoman of the Greene County Commissioners, said the board first expressed its opposition in December and has written letters stating their opposition to state and federal officials. "We stand ready to do whatever it takes to keep this power line out of our pristine county," said Snyder. "Lets show them we're not positive they're not going to impact this county any more." DeWeese said his staff and eight "capital" attorneys in Harrisburg are researching the project. He said he met with Allegheny Power officials and he believes profit is the motive behind the line. "They did not have a series of solid and inflexible reasons to build this," DeWeese said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Power transmission line drawing protests Residents in Washington, Greene counties oppose Allegheny Power plans Tuesday, April 03, 2007, By Janice Crompton, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Residents in Washington and Greene counties have mounted a campaign to block plans for a new power transmission line through their neighborhoods, saying it will hurt property values and the quality of life without providing any local benefits. Allegheny Energy Inc. officials, though, say misconceptions about the plan have snowballed and that many residents and municipal officials don't realize the new power line is to transmit power into, not out of, Western Pennsylvania. Allegheny Energy is the parent of Allegheny Power, which provides service to most customers in Washington and Greene counties. Local, county and state officials have signed petitions against the plan, citing concerns about whether such a line is necessary. The Greensburg-based company has held 10 open houses to explain its plan for the Trans Allegheny Interstate Line, commonly referred to as TrAIL. The company's last scheduled meeting is set for tonight from 5 to 8 p.m. at the Bentleyville Fire Hall in Washington County, Company officials said they plan to emphasize details they believe have been misunderstood and reasons why they believe the project is needed. The company wants to build a 240-mile, 500-kilovolt transmission line extending from southwestern Pennsylvania to existing substations in West Virginia and ending in northern Virginia. The final 30 miles of the line will be built and controlled by Dominion Virginia Power. Allegheny's portion of the cost is $820 million, while the total project is estimated at about $1.3 billion. The upgrade was mandated by PJM Interconnection, which manages electric transmission services of the Mid-Atlantic power grid in 13 states and Washington, D.C. The line is part of PJM's five-year regional electric transmission plan, meant to address future energy needs at certain points in the power grid. Grassroots organizations, including _stopthetowers.org_ (http://stopthetowers.org/) , are opposed to the plan, saying the project is a ploy by Allegheny Energy to make profits from outside the region at the expense of local customers. Residents have also expressed concern over rate hikes, and health and safety issues, and claim the company hasn't done all it could to avoid construction of the new lines, which will be supported by 125-foot towers along 200-foot rights-of-way. One of the group's organizers, Richard Yanock of South Strabane, said such large lines are over capacity for local demand, and he said the company has not made clear what it's plans are beyond five years. "We need to understand what the plan is before they put a 500-kilovolt monster into the countryside," he said. The company intends to submit it's plan to the state Public Utility Commission for approval soon, but even if the state opposes the plan or doesn't approve it within the next year, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 gives the federal government the right to intervene with construction permits. The company claims if the new lines aren't approved, the area could see rolling blackouts and brownouts by 2011 due to a growth rate of about 4 percent in central and northern Washington County. Growth elsewhere in southwestern Pennsylvania averages about 1.5 percent, Allegheny Energy spokesman David Neurohr said. The size of the current transmission lines, at 138 kilovolts, isn't large enough to accommodate the additional load. "You can't wait until the well's run dry to figure out where you're going to get your next cup of water," he said. ____________________________________ (Janice Crompton can be reached at _jcrompton(a)post-gazette.com_ (mailto:jcrompton@post-gazette.com) or 724-223-0156. ) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

CO2 in the Clean Air Act
by Duane330＠aol.com 03 Apr '07

03 Apr '07

April 3, 2007, Editorial, New York Times. The Court Rules on Warming It would be hard to overstate the importance of yesterday’s ruling by the Supreme Court that the federal government has the authority to regulate the carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases produced by motor vehicles. It is a victory for a world whose environment seems increasingly threatened by climate change. It is a vindication for states like California that chose not to wait for the federal government and acted to limit emissions that contribute to global warming. And it should feed the growing momentum on Capitol Hill for mandatory limits on carbon dioxide, the principal greenhouse gas. The 5-to-4 ruling was a rebuke to the Bush administration and its passive approach to the warming threat. The ruling does not require the government to regulate greenhouse gases. But it instructs the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its refusal to regulate emissions, urges it to pay attention to the scientific evidence and says that if it takes the same stance, it has to come up with better reasons than its current “laundry list” of excuses. The ruling also demolishes President Bush’s main justification for not acting — his argument that because the Clean Air Act does not specifically mention greenhouse gases, the executive branch has no authority to regulate them. The president has cited other reasons for not acting, including costs. But his narrow reading of the Clean Air Act has always been his ace in the hole. The court offered a much more “capacious” reading of the act, as Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority. The plaintiffs — 12 states and 13 environmental groups — had argued, and the court agreed, that while the act does not specifically mention greenhouse gases, it gives the federal government clear jurisdiction over “any air pollutant” that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger “public health or welfare.” This interpretation was first set forth by Carol Browner, administrator of the E.P.A. under President Clinton, and remained agency policy until Mr. Bush reversed it in 2001. The administration had also argued that the states did not have standing to sue on this issue because they could not show that they would be harmed by the government’s failure to regulate greenhouse gases. The court ruled that the states have a strong and legitimate interest in protecting their land and their citizens against the dangers of climate change and thus have standing to sue. The ruling reinforces state efforts in other ways. California and nearly a dozen other states have adopted their own regulations requiring lower greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. These rules, however, require federal approval, which seemed unlikely as long as the agency could claim that carbon dioxide was not a pollutant — a claim it can no longer make. The E.P.A. had also argued that reducing emissions would require it to tighten fuel efficiency standards, a job assigned by law to the Department of Transportation. The automakers have made much the same argument against California ’s emissions rules. But the court said that the E.P.A. could not shirk its responsibilities just because another department sets mileage standards. The agency is clearly in for some serious soul-searching. The decision was unnervingly close, and some of the arguments in the dissent, written by Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., were cause for concern — especially his comments about the “complexities” of the science of climate change, which is too close for comfort to the administration’s party line. Still, the Supreme Court, for the first time, has said that global warming is a real and present danger. This can only encourage those on Capitol Hill and in the states who are growing increasingly impatient for aggressive action. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

MVCAC April 2007