MVCAC May 2007

mvcac@lists.osenergy.org

2 participants
8 discussions

Action for Sustainability
by Duane330＠aol.com 31 May '07

31 May '07

EPA TO HOST PHILADELPHIA ENERGY EFFICIENCY INITIATIVE [EPA-Region 3]. Philadelphia formally announced its Energy Action Plan for Sustainability, and a new workgroup whose goal is to increase energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in buildings throughout the city. EPA is part of the work group and will host the initial planning event at the regional office on July 18, 19 and 20. EPA collaborated with city officials, the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, and others to make this happen. Cities are responsible for three-quarters of the world's energy consumption, so Philadelphia has a critical role to play in the reduction of carbon emissions and the reversal of climate change. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

EPA Region 3 Updates
by Duane330＠aol.com 31 May '07

31 May '07

EPA'S BIOLOGY TEAM DETERMINING CAUSE OF FISH KILLS The Wheeling Freshwater Biology Team began conducting a 7-day chronic toxicity test on May 15 for eight sites along the _South Branch of the Potomac and Shenandoah Rivers_ (http://www.wm.edu/geology/virginia/rivers/potomac-shenandoah.html) to identify the possible source or cause of the mysterious fish kills occurring there. Recent reports of dead and dying fish in the South Branch of the Potomac River are being investigated as is a substantial fish kill in the Shenandoah River and its tributaries in Virginia. Both states are actively cooperating and conducting research. EPA UPDATES AIR QUALITY WEBSITE EPA has made several air quality maps available depicting the current air quality conditions of the Mid-Atlantic region. The maps use the latest Air Quality Index (AQI) values for ozone and particulate matter, and can be found at EPA's "Air Quality" web page at _http://www.epa.gov/reg3artd/airquality/airquality.htm#currentcond_ (http://www.epa.gov/reg3artd/airquality/airquality.htm#currentcond) . The AQI describes the daily extent of pollution in the air, what associated health effects might be present, and what health effects may be experienced a few hours or days after breathing polluted air. For more information on the AQI visit EPA's AirNow web site at _http://www.airnow.gov_ (http://www.airnow.gov/) . ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Pennsylvania perspectives on powerline
by Duane330＠aol.com 29 May '07

29 May '07

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DeWeese seeks help on fighting high-voltage lines Thursday, April 26, 2007, By Jerome L. Sherman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette WASHINGTON -- Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Bill DeWeese yesterday called on Congress to repeal a federal law that could potentially allow energy companies to bypass state approval for the construction of new high-voltage power lines. At issue is Allegheny Power's plans to partner with Dominion Virginia Power in building a 240-mile, 500-kilovolt transmission line that would extend from Washington and Greene counties to substations in West Virginia and end in northern Virginia. Allegheny Power is seeking approval from Pennsylvania's Public Utility Commission, but the company is also asking the federal government to designate the project as a "national interest electric transmission corridor," or NIETC, meaning construction permits and eminent domain approval could be fast-tracked to circumvent state regulations. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 permits the creation of the electric transmission corridors. "This is an unprecedented usurping of state power," Mr. DeWeese, D-Waynesburg, told a U.S. House committee hearing yesterday. He argued that states have played a central role in approving the building of energy infrastructure "since the invention of the light bulb." He has joined a group of local activists, _stopthetowers.org_ (http://stopthetowers.org/) , in opposing Allegheny Power's Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project, or TrAIL, which would include new substations at the 502 Junction in Dunkard, southern Greene County, and North Strabane, Washington County. They say the project is unnecessary and would mostly benefit energy-hungry areas in New York, New Jersey and elsewhere. But David Neurohr, spokesman for Allegheny Energy, the parent company of Allegheny Power, said the new line is only aimed at local Pennsylvania energy demands, especially in rapidly growing areas of Washington County. He also noted that the project is mandated by PJM Interconnection, which manages electric transmission services of the Mid-Atlantic power grid in 13 states and Washington, D.C. During yesterday's hearing, local officials and activists from Maine, New York, and Virginia joined Mr. DeWeese in expressing concerns about the new federal law, and they seemed to have the sympathy of Democrats who won control of Congress last year. They're considering several bills that would restore some state powers. "As the law is written, a state may have little or no ability to determine whether a transmission line goes through one of its state parks, a historic battlefield, land protected by conservation easements, or private land," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, who chaired the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee hearing. Mr. Neurohr said Allegheny Power is focused on winning Pennsylvania state government approval for its project, even though it is also exploring the option of having the U.S. Department of Energy designate a national interest corridor in the state. "That's a bridge that we'll cross way down the road," he said. Allegheny Power'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 built and paid for by Dominion Virginia Power. Allegheny Power has said it will raise consumer rates to pay for the upgrades. Currently, customers pay 5 percent of their bill for transmission costs. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE FORMAT FOR THE PUBLIC MEETINGS IN JUNE WILL BE AS PRESENTED IN THE FOLLOWING INTERNET WEB SITE: _http://www.energetics.com/NIETCpublicmeetings/_ (http://www.energetics.com/NIETCpublicmeetings/) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< the allegheny front News Analysis: Proposed National Electric Transmission Corridors Raise Questions Ann Murray, Air date: 05/16/2007 OPEN: After the big electrical blackouts a few years ago, the US Department of Energy studied which parts of the country need the most help getting additional power to communities. The DOE has just proposed two National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors. The proposed Mid-Atlantic Area Corridor passes through Pennsylvania and surrounding states. Ann Murray joins me to talk about questions being raised about these power pathways. M: What does the DOE mean by calling these electrical corridors National Interest Electric Transmission corridors? A: The federal government believes these corridors- pathways for electrical transmission- serve the entire country in the sense that electrical power loss affects the national economy. In an effort to speed up development of major energy transmission lines that would help feed an always growing energy demand in the US, the federal government is trying to make the necessary lands available. M: How would the federal government make sure land is available for transmission lines? A: If corridor designations are approved, the DOE would set up a process that lets local governments, industries, individuals, and others haggle over energy transmission corridors for a period of time, then allow the federal or state government to sanction the use of eminent domain if necessary to make sure the corridors work on county, city, and private lands. M: How did the federal government get the authority to condemn land for transmission lines? A: It's the so-called "backstop" siting authority that Congress granted to the agency in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 It gave the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission the right to issue permits for construction of transmission lines and condemn right of way for those transmission lines. Until now, only state regulators and siting authorities possessed this authority. M: Eminent domain is a really controversial approach for securing land. I assume that prospect has raised some hackles? A: Yes, the prospect of government seizing property doesn't sit well with a lot of people including some local governments, people in Congress. The DOE is now taking comments during a public comment period that will run through July 6th. M: I understand that the DOE says because the current electrical grid is aged and stressed, the agency plans to be more assertive about getting these kinds of projects rolling. A: Yes, that right. US Energy Secretary Sam Bodman said in a recent press meeting that the government would take a more aggressive role in energy projects opposed by local groups. I'm quoting here:"The parochial interests that shaped energy policy in the 20th century will no longer work." M: There will be a public hearing in Pittsburgh to talk about the proposed corridor. When will that happen? A: The DOE hasn't announced the exact date but has said that the hearing will take place next month. Hearing are also underway in Washington,DC and New York and on the West Coast. M: The West Coast hearings cover the other proposed corridor? A: Yes, the other corridor is proposed for areas in the Southwest through California, Arizona and Nevada. M: How did the DOE decide where electric transmission corridors are needed? A: The agency did a study in 2005 that looked for areas on the electrical grid that are clogged and need additional pathways to get power. The DOE is charged with doing similar studies every three years. M: Will there be an environmental impact assessment on the land included for the proposed corridors? A: DOE contends that there's no need for an environmental assessment of these corridors, since they don't involve a proposal to build a specific line or any siting decisions. But the agency concedes that an environmental assessment of some type would be needed if a specific line is proposed within a corridor. The National Corridor designations don't necessarily mandate building new lines since the process still allows for other ways of reducing demand like conservation, improved energy efficiency, or locating extra generation close to customers. M: Where does the proposed corridor run through Pennsylvania? A: Through all the counties except in the north central and northwestern part of the state. M: Will the DOE designate other national power corridors ? A: Right now,there aren't any immediate plans to designate a National Corridor anywhere else in the country. M: Could trends in generation of alternative energy have any effect on building transmission lines? A: Trends in decentralized energy could make the need for transmission lines less relevant. Some energy experts predict that energy sources will become smaller and more localized by using solar, geothermal and wind power. M: Thanks , Ann. A: You're welcome, Matthew. More information about the proposed corridors and how to comment are on our web site alleghenyfront.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Power line project has wider relevance New Allegheny Power application asks for another transmission line Sunday, May 27, 2007, By Janice Crompton, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette As protesters and publicists alike gear up for state and federal hearings into plans for a high-voltage power line through Washington and Greene counties, it's become apparent that the consequences of the project could be felt statewide.Allegheny Power submitted an application last month to the state Public Utility Commission, seeking approval for the construction of 37 miles of 500-kilovolt power lines from a substation to be built in North Strabane, called Prexy, to a substation planned for Dunkard, Greene County. It also wants to build three 138-kilovolt power lines that would extend outward from the Prexy station. The project is part of a 240-mile transmission line to extend from Pennsylvania to existing substations in West Virginia and end in northern Virginia. The company has submitted a similar application to West Virginia. The Virginia portion of the line will be built by Dominion Virginia power company. Allegheny's portion of the total project extends about 210 miles at a cost of $820 million, with the total project estimated at more than $1 billion. As part of its review process, the PUC will conduct public hearings to determine if there is a need for additional power in the region and whether Allegheny Power has the best solution. Complaints from ratepayers and property owners are to be submitted to the PUC by Tuesday. The hearings, expected this summer, haven't been scheduled. All those who protest the project may offer comment at the hearings, even if they haven't filed a written complaint. A grass-roots organization that opposes the project, Stop the Towers, plans to fight the plan on two levels. The group, along with the more than 4,000 people who have signed petitions opposing the power lines, will protest the location of the line, which would affect hundreds of property owners. A newly formed legislative branch of the group, called the Energy Conservation Council of Pennsylvania, will litigate the need for the power line and concentrate its efforts on lobbying. Local opposition leaders say it's vital to win the battle with the PUC, especially because of federal intervention, and because other Pennsylvania communities could be facing the same issues soon. "If we don't win this in front of the PUC, we've lost," said Robbie Matesic, executive director of the Greene County Planning and Economic Development Department. If the project is turned down by the PUC, it could kick in a provision in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that allows the federal government to override state and local laws in certain cases. Recently, the U.S. Department of Energy designated a large swath of the northeastern United States., including 50 of Pennsylvania's 67 counties, as a potential "national interest electric transmission corridor," or NIETC. If the designation is approved by the DOE, it clears the way for the federal government to step in. If a state withholds construction approval for more than one year, denies approval, or if too many conditions are placed on construction of electric transmission lines within a NIETC, the federal government can intervene and approve the project. The law also authorizes the taking of private property by eminent domain for rights of way. Efforts to repeal that portion of the Energy Act are under way in Congress, including a bill recently co-sponsored by U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Johnstown, who, like most other public officials in southwestern Pennsylvania, opposes the project. The DOE is planning a public hearing for the Pittsburgh area next month on the NIETC designation. Rebecca Foley, of Jefferson, Greene County, said she and about 20 other Pennsylvania and West Virginia residents chartered a bus to attend a NIETC hearing May 15 in Virginia. She said she spoke briefly to DOE panelists and said they were "visibly moved" by the testimony from people who would be affected by the power line. Greene and Washington county commissioners have said the power line is becoming the most significant grass-roots issue in their memory. "People are concerned about the environmental issues for our children and what government does to property owners," Greene County Commissioner Pam Snyder said. The local power line issue also is seen as a harbinger of several other transmission projects being proposed for the state. The local 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 grid. As part of a longer range 15-year plan, PJM is considering several additional proposals, including a joint venture between Allegheny Power and American Electric Power that calls for a $3 billion, 550-mile, 765-kilovolt transmission "superhighway," beginning at the Amos power station in Putnam County, in western West Virginia. It would travel through Maryland and southeastern Pennsylvania and end in Middlesex County, N.J. AEP also proposed a line closer to home, from Kammer-Mitchell power plant near Moundsville, W.Va., into Pennsylvania to the Prexy substation in North Strabane. From there, the line would traverse Central Pennsylvania to Conemaugh power plant in West Wheatfield, Indiana County, ending near the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Harrisburg. In Ohio, north of the Kammer-Mitchell plant, AEP proposed a line into Western Pennsylvania to the Keystone power plant in Shelocta, Armstrong County, east to the Sunbury Power Plant near Shamokin Dam in Snyder County. PJM spokesman Ray Dotter said the proposals and routes haven't been finalized and only are under consideration. "They are being analyzed," he said. "It doesn't necessarily mean it's going to happen." Local opponents of the project cite concern about property values, quality of life, and health and safety. They have questioned the need for the power lines and the rate increases that will go with it. Allegheny Power says the plan, called the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Project, or TrAIL, is necessary to address power shortages in the East, and to provide additional power to the developing areas of central and northern Washington County, which could begin to experience rolling blackouts and brownouts within a few years if nothing is done. In its application to the PUC, Allegheny Power outlined four reasons the power line was needed, each involving the failure of existing 138-kilovolt lines because of demand. The outages would be widespread, and likely to occur during the early evening hours on hot days. "When it gets to be a hot day, everybody turns on their air conditioners," said David Neurohr, Allegheny Power spokesman. "If the existing 138-kilovolt system goes, the lights will go out," he said. But, Stop the Towers members and local officials have argued that Washington County has more than enough power for years to come, and that the company's intention is to tap local power plants for low-cost, coal-generated energy to ship to the power-strapped Eastern U.S., where energy plants are closing without being replaced. Even though the local plan is outlined in detail in the PUC application, it isn't mentioned at all in the application last year to the DOE, asking that the area be designated as a NIETC. Mr. Dotter said the reason was the DOE was looking at the issue from a regional perspective. The agency is trying to supply power to the East Coast, from New York to northern Virginia, an area which it identified as in "critical" need of more power in a study done last summer. "Everything is tied together," Mr. Dotter said. It's clear that power is no longer a local issue. Planning occurs on a regional level and ,perhaps, the best evidence for its necessity came in August 2003, when a downed tree near Cleveland resulted in a widespread blackout from New York to Canada. "The grid is like a net," Mr. Dotter said. "It pulls everything together." Mr. Dotter said that, while PJM can't force companies to build power plants, it can and does order new transmission lines built to serve power needs wherever necessary. The company has no stake in who builds the lines or how it's accomplished, only that the job gets done. "Whether the line gets built or not, we don't make money. We don't make money, period," Mr. Dotter said. "Our goal is to keep the lights on. We have to look at the needs and make that determination." ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Big Subsidies for Coal proposed..........
by Duane330＠aol.com 29 May '07

29 May '07

Lawmakers Push for Big Subsidies for Coal Process New York Times, May 29, 2007, By _EDMUND L. ANDREWS_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/a/edmund_l_andre… er) WASHINGTON, May 28 — Even as Congressional leaders draft legislation to reduce greenhouse gases linked to _global warming_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/topics/globalwarming/index.html?…) , a powerful roster of Democrats and _Republicans_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/r/republi…) is pushing to subsidize coal as the king of alternative fuels. Prodded by intense lobbying from the coal industry, lawmakers from coal states are proposing that taxpayers guarantee billions of dollars in construction loans for coal-to-liquid production plants, guarantee minimum prices for the new fuel, and guarantee big government purchases for the next 25 years. With both House and Senate Democrats hoping to pass “energy independence” bills by mid-July, coal supporters argue that coal-based fuels are more American than gasoline and potentially greener than ethanol. “For so many, filthy coal is a dirty four-letter word,” said Representative Nick V. Rahall, Democrat of West Virginia and chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee. “These individuals, I tell you, have their heads buried in the sand.” Environmental groups are adamantly opposed, warning that coal-based diesel fuels would at best do little to slow global warming and at worst would produce almost twice as much of the greenhouse gases tied to global warming as petroleum. Coal companies are hardly alone in asking taxpayers to underwrite alternative fuels in the name of energy independence and reduced global warming. But the scale of proposed subsidies for coal could exceed those for any alternative fuel, including corn-based ethanol. Among the proposed inducements winding through House and Senate committees: loan guarantees for six to 10 major coal-to-liquid plants, each likely to cost at least $3 billion; a tax credit of 51 cents for every gallon of coal-based fuel sold through 2020; automatic subsidies if oil prices drop below $40 a barrel; and permission for the Air Force to sign 25-year contracts for almost a billion gallons a year of coal-based jet fuel. Coal companies have spent millions of dollars lobbying on the issue, and have marshaled allies in organized labor, the Air Force and fuel-burning industries like the airlines. _Peabody Energy_ (http://www.nytimes.com/mem/MWredirect.html?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com… ymb=BTU) , the world’s biggest coal company, urged in a recent advertising campaign that people “imagine a world where our country runs on energy from Middle America instead of the Middle East.” Representative Rick Boucher, a Virginia Democrat whose district is dominated by coal mining, is writing key sections of the House energy bill. In the Senate, champions of coal-to-liquid fuels include _Barack Obama_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_obama/i… t-per) , the Illinois Democrat, Jim Bunning of Kentucky and Larry Craig of Wyoming, both Republicans. President Bush has not weighed in on specific incentives, but he has often stressed the importance of coal as an alternative to foreign oil. In calling for a 20 percent cut in projected gasoline consumption by 2017, he has carefully referred to the need for “alternative” fuels rather than “renewable” fuels. Administration officials say that was specifically to make room for coal. The political momentum to subsidize coal fuels is in odd juxtaposition to simultaneous efforts by Democrats to draft global-warming bills that would place new restrictions on coal-fired electric power plants. The move reflects a tension, which many lawmakers gloss over, between slowing global warming and reducing dependence on foreign oil. Many analysts say the huge coal reserves of the United States could indeed provide a substitute for foreign oil. The technology to convert coal into liquid fuel is well-established, and the fuel can be used in conventional diesel cars and trucks, as well as jet engines, boats and ships. Industry executives contend that the fuels can compete against gasoline if oil prices are about $50 a barrel or higher. But coal-to-liquid fuels produce almost twice the volume of greenhouse gases as ordinary diesel. In addition to the carbon dioxide emitted while using the fuel, the production process creates almost a ton of carbon dioxide for every barrel of liquid fuel. Coal industry executives insist their fuel can actually be cleaner than oil, because they would capture the gas produced as the liquid fuel is being made and store it underground. Some could be injected into oil fields to push oil to the surface. Several aspiring coal-to-liquid companies say that they would reduce greenhouse emissions even further by using renewable fuels for part of the process. But none of that has been done at commercial volumes, and many analysts say the economic issues are far from settled. “There are many uncertainties,” said James T. Bartis, a senior policy researcher at the RAND Corporation, who testified last week before the Senate Energy Committee. “We don’t even know what the costs are yet.” The clash between “energy independence” and global warming will break into the open next month. The Senate energy bill, being drafted by Senator Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico, would promote renewable fuels — but not coal-to-liquid fuels — and would require electric utilities to produce 15 percent of their power with renewable fuels by 2020. But coal-state Republicans have vowed to resume their push for coal incentives when the bill reaches the Senate floor, and many Democrats are likely to support them. In the House, Democrats like Mr. Boucher and Mr. Rahall will be pushing in the same direction. But some energy experts, as well as some lawmakers, worry that the scale of the coal-to-liquid incentives could lead to a repeat of a disastrous effort 30 years ago to underwrite a synthetic fuels industry from scratch. When oil prices plunged in the 1980s, the government-owned Synthetic Fuels Corporation became a giant government albatross that lost billions and remains a symbol of misguided industrial policy more than 25 years later. “This is the snake oil of energy alternatives,” said Peter Altman, a policy analyst at the National Environmental Trust, an environmental advocacy group. “The promises are just as lofty and the substance is just as absent as the first snake oil salesmen who plied their trade in the 1800s.” Coal executives contend that the technology for converting coal to “ ultraclean” diesel fuel for use in cars and trucks has been around for decades. Known as the Fischer-Tropsch process, the technology dates to the 1920s. It was used by Germany during World War II and by South Africa during the apartheid era, in both cases because the countries were blocked by international embargoes from buying oil. SASOL, a South African chemical conglomerate, is the world’s largest producer of coal-based liquids and operates a plant that produces 150,000 barrels a day. “Greener and cleaner — we can do it, and we will do it,” said John Baardson, president of Baard Energy, a firm in Vancouver, Wash., that is trying to build a $4 billion coal-to-liquid plant in Ohio. But no company has built a commercial-scale plant that also captures carbon, and experts caution that many obstacles lie ahead. “At best, you’re going to tread water on the carbon issue, and you’re probably going to do worse,” said Howard Herzog, a principal research engineer at the _Massachusetts Institute of Technology_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/m/massach…. html?inline=nyt-org) and a co-author of “The Future of Coal,” a voluminous study published in March by M.I.T. “It goes against the whole grain of reducing carbon.” The M.I.T. team expressed even more skepticism about the economic risks. It estimated that it would cost $70 billion to build enough plants to replace 10 percent of American gasoline consumption. The study estimates that the construction costs for coal-to-liquid plants are almost four times higher than the costs for comparable petroleum refineries, and it argues that cost estimates for synthetic fuel plants in the past turned out to be “wildly optimistic.” In a new report last week, the Energy Department estimated that a plant capable of making 50,000 barrels of liquefied coal a day — a tiny fraction of the nearly 9 million barrels in gasoline burned daily in the United States — would cost $4.5 billion. But the Energy Department also estimated that such a plant could produce a 20 percent annual return if oil prices remain about $60 a barrel. Coal executives say that they need government help primarily because oil prices are so volatile and the upfront construction costs are so high. “We’re not asking for everything. All we’re asking for is something,” said Hunt Ramsbottom, chief executive of _Rentech Inc._ (http://www.nytimes.com/mem/MWredirect.html?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com… &symb=RTK) , which is trying to build two plants at mines owned by Peabody Energy. But coal executives anticipate potentially huge profits. Gregory H. Boyce, chief executive of Peabody Energy, based in St. Louis, which has $5.3 billion in sales, told an industry conference nearly two years ago that the value of Peabody’s coal reserves would skyrocket almost tenfold, to $3.6 trillion, if it sold all its coal in the form of liquid fuels. Coal industry lobbying has reached a fever pitch. The industry spent $6 million on federal lobbying in 2005 and 2006, three times what it spent each year from 2000 through 2004, according to calculations by _Politicalmoneyline.com_ (http://politicalmoneyline.com/) . Peabody, which has quadrupled its annual lobbying budget to about $2 million since 2004, recently hired _Richard A. Gephardt_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/richard_a_geph…) , the Missouri Democrat who was House majority leader from 1989 to 1995 and a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1988 and 2004, to help make its case in Congress. One of the most vociferous champions of coal-to-liquid fuels is the Southern States Energy Board, a group organized by governors from 16 states. Last year, the group published a study, which cost $500,000, that concluded that coal-to-liquid fuel could and should replace almost one-third of imported oil by 2030. As it happens, the coal industry supplied much of the financing for the study and subsequent marketing. Peabody Energy contributed about $150,000 and the National Mining Association added $50,000, officials at the Southern States Energy Board said. The inducements under discussion would not only subsidize up to 10 coal-to-liquid plants, but also guarantee a minimum market through long-term contracts with the Air Force and minimum prices for at least some producers. “There is financial uncertainty, which is inhibiting the flow of private capital into the construction of coal-to-liquid facilities,” said Mr. Boucher, who supports most of the proposals and is drafting portions of the energy bill. In addition to construction loan guarantees, Mr. Boucher would protect the first six liquid plants from drops in energy prices. If oil prices fell below about $40 a barrel, the government would automatically grant loans to the first six plants that make coal-based fuels. If oil prices climbed to $80 a barrel, companies would have to pay a surcharge to the government. But the most important guarantee, many coal producers said, is the prospect of signing 25-year purchase contracts with the Air Force. The Air Force consumes about 2.6 billion gallons a year of jet fuel, and Air Force officials would like to switch as much as 780 million gallons a year to coal-based fuels. Air Force officials strongly support the idea of extremely long contracts, but others at the Defense Department worry that the military could be left holding the bag for years if oil prices dropped significantly. For Mr. Boyce, chief executive of Peabody Energy, there is no reason to be timid. “If America has the will to be one of the great energy centers of the world,” he told an industry conference last year, “we have the resources right under our feet.” ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

2nd of 3 state journal articles
by Paul Brown 15 May '07

15 May '07

GLOBAL WARMING COMES TO COAL COUNTRY: THE PROSPECTS If West Virginia doesn’t act aggressively to stop global warming and species extinctions, the best we can hope for is that we’ll revert to an impoverished hillbilly state, with a wrecked environment. At worst, if global anti-warming action is inadequate, our children and grandchildren will experience the worst times our species has encountered. Global warming and mass extinctions aren’t diseases in themselves, they’re symptoms. The disease is avoidable, harmful human behavior. We’re consuming resources and laying waste to our planet faster than it can heal. The richer countries, especially the US, are consuming and polluting far beyond a sustainable rate. The poorer countries are consuming far less per capita, but their populations are exploding and they aspire to consuming as much as we do. Result: carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, habitat destruction, and fisheries depletion are skyrocketing, with no end in sight. The rest of the educated world knows this, but the US is in denial. We should be leading the anti-warming effort, but instead the Bush administration suppresses scientific findings and tells us to keep on shopping - and driving SUVs. CO2 takes around 150 years to clear from the atmosphere. That means it would take decades to stop global warming even if we stop burning carbon today. And warming now causes more warming: Melting ice decreases reflection of sunlight (albedo) and increases absorption and heating. Thawing tundra is releasing methane, a greenhouse gas twenty times as potent as CO2. In 20 - 50 years, this self-reinforcing effect may take off explosively, beyond our power to stop. Yet greenhouse gas emissions are increasing. The only prudent course is to stop emissions in 10 years and try to reduce atmospheric CO2 and increase albedo as quickly as possible. Nuclear power isn't an option, because we've never figured out what to do with the waste, and that waste could end up killing or maiming us. Nuclear, like carbon, energy is far more expensive than our electric bills suggest because of enormous subsidies and hidden costs. Our military enterprise is mostly devoted to securing our access to other people's oil. Renewables are cheaper than those subsidized costs. As for coal, there's no way to burn it without producing CO2, and there's no way to sequester all the CO2 we produce. Sequestration would make carbon energy far more expensive than renewables. Wind and sun alone would provide more energy than we need once the generating capacity is in place. They have to be sited responsibly. It will take more than 10 years to install that capacity, meaning there will be less energy per capita for awhile, meaning we’ll need to ration energy the way we rationed gasoline in WWII. Our economy will be radically changed, with big winners and big losers. Will West Virginia be a leader in this radically changed economy? Paul Brown is a professor of physiology at West Virginia University and author of Notes from a Dying Planet, 2004 - 2006. Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512

1 0

State Journal op eds
by Paul Brown 09 May '07

09 May '07

1st of 3: GLOBAL WARMING COMES TO COAL COUNTRY: THE SYMPTOMS Winter in West Virginia lasted less than two months this year. That could just be a fluke, but globally, eleven of the last twelve years have been the hottest on record, with later winters and earlier springs. There are severe droughts out West, with whole forests dying. Forest fires are worse and more frequent. It’s the same for much of the world. The US is producing less food. Not a fluke: for five out of the last six years the world has produced less food than was consumed, depleting food reserves. We hosted some Katrina evacuees last September; severe weather and floods have increased around the world and the numbers of refugees from these disasters are climbing. Also, due to global warming and habitat destruction, we’re undergoing the Earth’s sixth mass extinction. Our global fisheries will be wiped out by mid-century. Island countries are being submerged by rising seas, and the Dutch are developing floating architecture. The denial industry, funded by the fossil fuel industry, says the current warming is just another routine fluctuation caused by variations in solar energy reaching Earth. Although there are cyclic variations in solar irradiance of Earth, they can’t account for this much warming. We know from radioisotope analyses of annual ice layers in Greenland and Antarctica that temperatures are the highest in more than 600,000 years. Our species is only 120,000 years old, so we’ve never experienced this before. Over all that time, carbon dioxide (CO2) and temperature have varied in parallel. Carbon isotope analysis of tree rings, which provide a sample of atmospheric CO2 over the life of a tree, shows that today’s excess carbon above preindustrial levels is millions of years old - the age of carbon in fossil fuels. There’s no other source of ancient carbon (such as volcanic eruptions) that can account for it. We know from satellite studies how much heat is trapped by atmospheric CO2. Quantitative studies show that the amount of fossil fuel we’ve burned since the industrial revolution accounts for the excess CO2, and the excess CO2 accounts for the warming. Over 2500 scientists from all over the world on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are unanimous in their conclusion that our fossil fuel use is behind global warming. Ice all over the world is melting, including Arctic and Antarctic ice that hasn’t melted since before we appeared on Earth. Increasing energy consumption is causing greenhouse emissions to skyrocket. We have little time left to turn this around, before Earth becomes a wholly different planet - probably without any people. If we had responded appropriately to the 2001 IPCC report, we could be turning this around by 2010, at lower cost than the Iraq war, brought to us by - you guessed it - the fossil fools running our state and national governments. Now it will be much more expensive or impossible. Some states, those that are switching to renewable, non-carbon energy sources, will do relatively well. States that stick with carbon fuels will do poorly, because soon there will be no demand for carbon. Which way do you think West Virginia will go? Paul Brown is a professor of physiology at West Virginia University and author of Notes from a Dying Planet, 2004 - 2006. Paul Brown Physiology Department West Virginia University Health Sciences Center Morgantown, WV 26506 (304) 293 - 1512

1 0

AE TrAIL power line, et al.
by Duane330＠aol.com 05 May '07

05 May '07

Upcoming meetings that you should consider attending, as action is needed on these: 1. AE TrAIL power-line meeting – Tomorrow, Sunday, May 6th, at the Triune-Halleck Fire Hall, on Halleck Road off WV 73 South (Smithtown Road). Start time: 2 pm. Host: Halleck Community Association. 2. MonValley Clean Air Coalition -- Monday, May 7th, at the home of Martha and Larry Schwab, 3333 Collins Ferry Road, Morgantown. Start time: 7 pm. Info: Duane Nichols, 599-8040. Topics include: Longview power plant, Ft. Martin scrubbers, and AE TrAIL power line. 3. Sierra Club -- Thursday, May 10th, at the WVU Mountainlair, 7 pm. Matt Keller "WV Wilderness Coalition". Info: Jim Kotcon, 594-3322. 4. AE TrAIL power-line meeing – Wednesday, May 16th, at the Monongalia County Courthouse, Court Room #1. Start time: 7 pm. Host: Mon. County Commission. The WV Consumer Advocate (Public Service Commission) Billy Jack Gregg to participate. 5. Mon. County Farmland Preservation Board – Thursday, May 17th, Mon. County Courthouse, Room 202 (Second Floor). The meeting is open to the public. For information on the proposed 500,000 volt transmission line, see the following: _www.stopthetowers.org_ (http://www.stopthetowers.org) _www.laurelrunwatershed.org_ (http://www.laurelrunwatershed.org) _www.alleghenypower.com/TrAIL/TrAIL.asp_ (http://www.alleghenypower.com/TrAIL/TrAIL.asp) ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.

1 0

Revenue bonding authority for Longview
by Duane330＠aol.com 01 May '07

01 May '07

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Power plant project gets $600 million April 20, 2007, Charleston Gazette, By Sarah K. Winn, Staff writer. The West Virginia Economic Development Authority committed Tuesday to help fund a $600 million construction project at the Longview Power Plant in Monongalia County. At Tuesday’s monthly meeting, the authority gave preliminary approval for possible future revenue bonds for Longview Power LLC, the plant’s developer. The resolution allows Longview to begin developing solid waste disposal and recycling facilities at the plant, said Cam Siegrist, counsel for Longview. The Internal Revenue Service requires the resolution so Longview can use future bond funds to pay for expenses accrued now, said David Warner, WVEDA’s executive director. The company likely will come back over the next few years to request revenue bonds from the authority, Siegrist said. Also, the authority approved a $75 million bond for additional work on Appalachian Power’s Mountaineer Plant in Mason County, which began in 2005. In other financial allocations, the authority gave preliminary approval for two nearly $800,000 7-year loans-one to Merrick Engineering, Inc., in Clarksburg and another to Tramco Services, Inc., in Shrewsbury. Merrick, which manufactures hangers and closet accessories, plans to purchase and install injection-molding equipment at its Clarksburg manufacturing facility. Tramco, an electrical motor repair and machine shop, will finance a 6.5-acre site and renovate about 30,000 square feet of manufacturing space to create a new facility in Campbells Creek. The authority also gave final approval for a $5 million loan to Recycle West Virginia LP and approved a high-growth business investment tax credit of up to $50,000 to William P. Zitter of Huntington. Also, at the authority’s June meeting, the authority will be given updates on the uncompleted projects funded by the Economic Development Grant Committee two years ago. Currently, $182 million of the $225 million allocated has been spent, and the projects risk losing the money if not completed by Dec. 31. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Charleston Daily Mail ____________________________________ State agrees to issue bonds to fund power plant _George Hohmann_ (http://www.dailymail.com/contactEmail.php?rid=87) , Daily Mail business editor, Friday April 20, 2007 The West Virginia Economic Development Authority has given preliminary approval for the issuance of up to $600 million in tax-free bonds to help finance portions of the Longview Power Plant near Morgantown. The state Public Service Commission granted permission to build the $1 billion coal-fired plant last year. The Economic Development Authority bonds would help finance parts of the plant such as air and water pollution control systems. Thursday's vote is the first step in issuing bonds. The plant's developers would have to come back to the authority at least two more times before bonds could actually be issued. The bonds would be backed by revenue from the power plant and would not be an obligation of the state. Also on Thursday, the authority took the final step toward issuing up to $75 million in tax-free bonds to help pay for parts of the scrubber Appalachian Power Co. has installed on its Mountaineer power plant in Mason County. The authority agreed in 2004 to issue up to $567.4 million in bonds for the project. It had issued $50.3 million in bonds last year. The scrubber went into operation in February. Also at the meeting, the authority gave final approval for a $5 million loan to Recycle West Virginia Limited Partnership of Princeton. The company plans to purchase 14 acres in an inactive rail yard known as the Princeton Roadway Shop and refurbish the five buildings on the site. The company will use the low-interest state loan to purchase and install a shredder and related equipment in a 56,000-square-foot building on the site, according to a project summary provided by the authority. In other action, the authority gave preliminary approval to: A $787,500 loan to Tramco Services Inc., doing business as Kanawha Electric & Machine Co. Tramco acquired the assets of Kanawha Electric in 2002. The Kanawha Electric operation will move from Shrewsbury to a 6.5-acre site at Campbells Creek. Kanawha Electric will renovate existing buildings at Campbells Creek and will erect a new building for its motor repair and machining operation. A $787,378 loan to Merrick Engineering Inc. to purchase and install injection-molding equipment at its Clarksburg plant. Merrick is a manufacturer of hangers and closet accessories. Also on Thursday, the authority: Agreed to sell 7.44 acres in the Three Springs Business Park near Weirton to Wal-Mart. David Warner, the authority's executive director, said, "Our acres are just part of the property to be bought by Wal-Mart." He said the retailer plans to build a super center adjacent to the general office complex previously occupied by Weirton Steel Corp. Amended a lease it has with Bombardier to add a 21,000-square-foot building at the Harrison-Marion Regional Airport in Bridgeport. Bombardier repairs and refurbishes aircraft at the airport. Received a report that showed $181.6 million or 81 percent of the $225 million in grants approved by the West Virginia Economic Development Grant Committee has been disbursed. A total of $2.6 million was disbursed to 14 projects during March. Agreed to extend the deadline for completion of the marina portion of the West Virginia Public Theater & Marina project in Morgantown from Dec. 31, 2006, to Dec. 31, 2007. The city received a $13.9 million grant for the project from the West Virginia Economic Development Grant Committee in 2003. As of March 31, the city had spent $5.2 million. State Commerce Secretary Kelley Goes, who chaired the meeting, said the status of all of the grant committee projects will be reviewed at the authority's June meeting. Decided to wait until next month before determining whether it will renew or re-bid its legal contracts with the law firms of Spilman Thomas & Battle and Bowles Rice McDavid Graff & Love. Granted state tax credits to William Zitter of Huntington under the High Growth Business Investment Tax Credit. This credit, passed by the Legislature in 2005, is designed to encourage investment in potentially high-growth research and development businesses in the state. Zitter is investing in Vandalia Research Inc., a spin off of Marshall University research. Vandalia is involved in the synthesis of DNA sequences. State law does not require the development authority to reveal how much in tax credits is given. A taxpayer can receive no more than $50,000 in credits a year. The authority said it approved credits for Zitter of more than $1 but not more than $50,000. Agreed to allow Blue Sky Brands Inc. of Martinsburg to change how it uses a loan previously approved by the authority. The company had planned to use the loan proceeds to move a call center. It will now use the proceeds to buy racks and conveyor systems, Warner said. Agreed to extend previously approved loan commitments to Tech-Seal Products Inc. of Wheeling; Mountain State Log Homes Inc. of Ireland, W.Va.; The K Group Limited Liability Co. of Roanoke, Va.; and the Huntington Industrial Corp. for InfoCision Management Corp. Agreed to extend its commitment to insure $3 million of a loan the First National Bank of Ronceverte has made to the Western Greenbrier Co-Generation Limited Liability Co. of Rainelle from April 30 to Aug. 31. Acting as the West Virginia Certified Development Corp., the board members also extended two $300,000 loan commitments to Western Greenbrier Co-Generation to Aug. 31. Western Greenbrier Co-Generation is planning to build a $215 million power plant in Rainelle. ************************************** 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 May 2007