tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15868958181158638282024-03-07T22:53:39.747-08:00The EcocrypticMartin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-58902988581312454122013-07-31T06:45:00.003-07:002013-07-31T06:45:53.048-07:00Maine DEP updateMaine Department of Environmental Protection has reversed itself and will schedule a public hearing on proposed changes to the state's clean air standards. No date has been set.<br />
<br />
Environmental groups, legislators, and the general public were outraged when the Portland Press Herald reported yesterday that the state agency had tried to sneak through the changes with no public input. The agency has already been criticized for its lack of transparency, and there have been calls for an investigation into possible ethics violations on the part of its commissioner, a former industry lobbyist.Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-49841054554896538302013-07-30T08:04:00.002-07:002013-07-30T08:04:51.556-07:00At Maine’s DEP, it’s the fox guarding the henhouse<div class="MsoNormal">
What happens when you put an industry lobbyist in charge of
environmental protection? Just take a look at what’s going on in Maine.
According to an article in today’s <a href="http://www.pressherald.com/news/LePage-administration.html">Portland Press-Herald</a>, the state’s
Department of Environmental Protection wants to weaken the state’s clean-air
regulations, and they don’t want anyone to know about it.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
No public hearings have been scheduled, and a notice of a
public comment period was buried in an obscure part of the agency’s website.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At first glance it might seem surprising that an agency
charged with protecting the environment would actually work against it. It only
makes sense when you see the cast of characters involved.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
First, there’s Gov. Paul LePage, perhaps not the brightest
bulb on the tree. Elected in 2010, he immediately released a list of
environmental regulations he wanted to eliminate or weaken. Much like former
Pres. G.W. Bush, he wanted to turn back the environmental clock back a decade
or more. LePage also supported opening up 10 million acres of Maine wilderness
for development.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
To help him in his quest, he appointed Deborah Aho, an industry
lobbyist, as his DEP commissioner. She had previously represented chemical, drug, oil, and
automobile companies. Apparently she continued working on their behalf as
commissioner, failing to enforce existing regulations and making decisions that
would benefit her former clients.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So much so, that a petition was sent to the legislature calling for an investigation into her apparently unethical activities. A bill was filed to look into the allegations, but within
days the legislator who had filed it, withdrew it, saying it needed revisions.
It hasn’t been refiled since.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-80845122372528702392013-07-15T11:56:00.000-07:002013-07-15T11:56:20.025-07:00Northern Pass Rears Its Ugly Head (Again)<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Despite massive public opposition, significantly
over-budget, and three years behind schedule, the CEO of the Northern Pass Project vows the
controversial high voltage transmission line will be built.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">The project is a 180-mile power line that would
bring power from Canada to New England. It first came to the attention of
environmentalists and others when the proposed route was unveiled. The
developers wanted to cut a 100-foot wide swath through the White Mountain
National Forest, with steel pylons towering above the surrounding forest.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Soon, it wasn’t just a few environmental and
conservation interests that opposed it. They were joined by residents and
business interests who were concerned about the impact the project would have
on the region’s tourist industry. They rallied to buy up land and conservation
easements along the route.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">And while it was originally described as bringing
power to New Hampshire, it turned out that New Hampshire doesn’t need it. The
developers were planning to sell it on the New England power grid – but they
don’t want it either. ISO-New England, which manages the New England power grid
opposes the project.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Yet another route was unveiled two weeks ago. It
moves the route a few miles to the east, still through pristine wilderness
areas. None of the opponents have changed their mind. The project is a joint
venture by Northeast Utilities, Hydro-Quebec, and PSNH. All three are privately
held corporations – not public utilities.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“We are ready to move forward,” said CEO Gary Long
when the plan was unveiled. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; line-height: 115%;">The project won’t be starting anytime soon, though
Long predicted it would be operational by 2017. There’s still a host of impact
statements and permit – including a Presidential permit – that will be
required.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-69419764950139363802012-08-11T15:59:00.000-07:002012-08-11T15:59:00.666-07:00Stung by Criticism, Utilities Go on Tree-Cutting Rampage<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
Here in the northeast, we’ve been hit by a succession of “weather events” – ice storms, wind-storms, hurricanes, early snowfall, late snowfall. Each one offered the utility companies serving this area to demonstrate once again that they were completely unprepared. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
In each case, customers in the most advanced country in the world were left without power for weeks at a time. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
They have come in for heavy criticism from citizens and government officials alike.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
Now the utility companies are fighting back – against their customers and their trees, going on a rampage to cut down every standing tree even remotely close to a utility line. They say this is because branches falling on the lines are causing the outages and slowing repairs.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
In Massachusetts, NSTAR last month cut down hundreds of trees in a 100-foot wide, 30-mile long swath. They called a halt only after a howl of protest, according to <a href="http://boston.com/">boston.com</a><a href="http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2012/07/19/nstar_takes_heat_on_tree_removal_policy/">http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2012/07/19/nstar_takes_heat_on_tree_removal_policy/</a> report.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
National Grid has told residents it will soon start a program of “heavy-trimming.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
In Western Massachusetts, Western Mass. Electric has announced a program of “enhanced trimming.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
This could all be avoided by simply requiring all overhead lines to be buried. Almost all other advanced countries do this routinely. Underground, power wouldn’t go out every time a branch falls, or when snow and ice pile up on the lines. There would be no need for clear-cutting people’s property.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
The initial cost would be high, to be sure, and this is what utility companies don’t like. But in the long run, maintenance would less, and there wouldn’t be the high cost of getting power back up after a “weather event.”</div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-18555517609866212262012-08-07T07:56:00.001-07:002012-08-07T07:56:39.013-07:00Victory for the Blackstone: Court backs EPA, Worcester must stop dumping sewage into river<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
Score one for the Blackstone River, and all the people who care about it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals has lifted a stay of enforcement of an EPA order that will force upgrades at the Upper Blackstone Water Pollution Abatement district sewage treatment plant, according to an article in the Worcester Telegram & Gazette.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
The problem is a simple one. The discharge from the plant in Millbury has been violating federal clean water standards for years. While other communities have gradually been coming into compliance, Worcester officials have opposed making the improvements, and fighting the EPA every step of the way.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
They won a temporary victory in April 2011, when they were able to secure a stay of enforcement, claiming that the EPA’s scientific data was flawed. After a year of review, the three-judge panel has sided with the EPA.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
“The district’s responsibility for serious pollution problems in the important waterways in two states is clear, and its challenge to the 2008 permit has no merit,” reads the decision. They also said the District must begin work on complying immediately.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
Despite the body of scientific evidence, and the considered opinion of thee federal judges, City Manager Michael V. O’Brien insists he knows better.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
“We stand firm that the EPA’s science and projected Blackstone River models are hopelessly flawed. We have proven this with our unbiased science.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
Unbiased? O’Brien contends it will cost “hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars” to make the improvements, though the actual cost is pegged at $200 million.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
“Ratepayers will pay double and triple what they pay now,” he said. “The question is to what end?”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
Obviously not someone who cares about the river.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /></div>
<em>Note: I'm coming back to this blog after a long absence. Partly it's been a matter of a busy schedule, partly a matter of thinking about the focus of this blog. My goal here will be to call attention to environmental issues I consider important whether global or local.</em>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-25113347013673313132012-01-30T14:45:00.000-08:002012-01-30T14:45:11.788-08:00NH Senate Denies Eminent Domain for Northern Pass – Or Does It?<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
Under intense public scrutiny, the New Hampshire Senate last week approved a bill that supposedly sets limits on the use of eminent domain to seize property for public projects and excludes using it for privately-funded projects. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
That would seem to exclude the controversial Northern Pass project, a proposed 180-mile transmission line that would bring hydroelectric power south from Canada through the White Mountains to central New Hampshire. Northern Pass is being proposed by a joint effort of Northeast Utilities, NSTAR and HydroQuebec, all private companies.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
The power brought down from Canada is not meant for New Hampshire, but would be sold on the open market.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
Northern Pass had been quietly suggesting they might pursue eminent domain if they ran into property owners unwilling to sell. They have already spent some $4 million buying up land along the route, but ran into a roadblock when the owners of the Balsams Resort in Dixville Notch sold a key parcel to a conservation group instead.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
Opponents of the project packed the visitors gallery during the Senate proceedings, and were cheered by the vote, which they saw as another setback for the developers.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
The celebration might be premature.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
There seems to be a loophole (isn’t there always?) big enough to drive a utility truck through. The bill allows eminent domain to be used for energy projects if it is shown that the project would be beneficial for the environment. And a late amendment puts some of the decision-making powers into the hands of ISO-New England, a power regulator that works closely with the companies involved in the project.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
It might be worth noting that ISO-New England supports the re-licensing of the rickety old Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant, completely disregarding a long list of safety issues. They probably wouldn’t blink twice at ripping a transmission line through some of the most beautiful landscape in New England.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: 68.25pt;">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-198219672666740012012-01-24T15:22:00.000-08:002012-01-24T15:22:51.243-08:00Northern Pass Developers Pushing State To Take Land By Force<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
Ever since the controversy began over the construction of a new transmission line to bring power from Canada into New Hampshire slicing through some of that state’s most scenic landscape, the backers of the project have been quietly lobbying for eminent domain powers to force reluctant landowners along the proposed route to sell.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
The issue gets its first real test tomorrow when the New Hampshire Senate takes up a measure that would amend the state eminent domain law to allow them to do just that.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
Until just a few years ago, eminent domain was only regarded as a last resort by governments when it was necessary to buy land for needed public projects – highways, schools, etc.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
In a case from New London, Connecticut, the Supreme Court under the Bush administration ruled that such a land-taking could be initiated for a private project, if some demonstrable public good resulted. At issue was an old neighborhood in the Fort Trumbull section of New London. Pfizer, the pharmaceutical giant, had indicated had it wanted to build a facility in the New London area.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
A local developer convinced the city government that the Fort Trumbull neighborhood would be a perfect site for Pfizer as well as other businesses that it would attract. The only problem was that the residents didn’t want to sell.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
Using the argument that the project would give a much needed boost to the local economy, the Supreme Court ruled that the homes could be taken by eminent domain. As a result, the residents were bought out, forced to find homes elsewhere. The houses were torn down, the land was bulldozed, and then Pfizer announced it would build somewhere else. Only recently have a few new homes been built on the site.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
The Northern Pass developers had initially argued that the project would bring much-needed electrical power to New Hampshire. It quickly was revealed that New Hampshire had plenty of electrical power, and most of the imported power would be sold on the grid.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
They then changed their argument, saying it would mean up to 1,500 jobs in the Granite State, but a rival power group now says those figures are exaggerated, in reality less than half that number, and most of those would go to specialists who would likely have to be hired from outside New Hampshire.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
As a spokesperson for the Northern Pass developers said, “You have to consider the source.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
That cuts both ways.</div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-77583135124380909032012-01-15T12:50:00.000-08:002012-01-15T12:50:10.420-08:00The Balsams Landscape Has Been Saved!<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Every once in a while the good guys win one.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Society for the Preservation of New Hampshire Forests has reached its goal of raising $850,000 to buy a 5,800-acre parcel of land near the famous Balsams Grand Hotel in Dixville Notch, NH. They made the announcement in a statement yesterday on their website.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The land was considered a key piece on the proposed route of the controversial Northern Pass transmission line project. Developers of the $1.2 billion project – a joint venture of NSTAR and Northeast Utilities <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>have already spent $4 million buying up land for the project, even though it has yet to be approved.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">As an indication of just how important this parcel is to the project, the developers had offered $3 million for this one piece alone. offered $3 million for the same piece of land, but the Tillotson Corporation, owners of The Balsams Grand Hotel and the parcel in question, offered to sell it as conservation land for the lesser amount if the amount could be raised by today (Jan. 15).</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The project would bring electricity from HydroQuebec in Canada to southern New Hampshire, where it would then be sold on the open market. The transmission line would cut a wide swath through parts of the White Mountain National Forest, replacing the famously picturesque landscape with tall steel pylons laced with high-power lines.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Even Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich has checked in on the project, suggesting that the lines should be buried, a notion the developers reject as being prohibitively expensive.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Will the developers have to abandon their plans? They had to abandon an earlier proposed route in the face of heavy local opposition.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Northern Pass officials have not made any comment yet on this latest setback. However, they have been supporting efforts to broaden eminent domain laws to allow land-taking for private projects. There was also an earlier suggestion by company officials that the Tillotson Corporation was obligated to choose their higher bid in the interests of their stockholders.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: 111.75pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Stay tuned.<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-45236964130068180092011-12-29T14:01:00.000-08:002011-12-29T14:01:14.396-08:00Worcester officials cite city parks to defend continued pollution of Blackstone River<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">I was trying to find a short, pithy way of describing the gist of an article that appeared in today’s Worcester (Mass.) Telegram & Gazette.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Here’s the story.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Blackstone River has its source in Worcester and flows through Rhode Island into Narragansett Bay. Since colonial times, residents and businesses have regarded it as their personal sewage system. The passage of the Clean Water act made that illegal, but it didn’t put a stop to it.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Environmental agencies and organizations have worked hard to clean up the river, and a lot of progress has been made. One of the major problems that still exists is Worcester’s wastewater treatment system. The federal Environmental Protection Agency has found that the plant is still discharging nacceptable amounts of sewage of chemicals – especially nutrients – into the river, hampering cleanup efforts downstream.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">In 2008, the EPA issued strict new guidelines and odered the city to make improvements t meet those guidelines. It’s an expensive venture – about $200 million – and an increase in sewage fees amounting to $225 per year per household. Worcester officials have been fighting it every step of the way.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The city is asking for a modification to the guidelines. Environmental groups oppose modifying them, saying the city has been dragging its feet for long enough. The state Department of Environmental Protection recently came down on the side of the city, asking the federal EPA to ease upand compromise. It’s no accident the Lt. Gov. is from Worcester.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">So why should Worcester get a pass on adding pollutants to the river? According to the city manager, it’s because the city has a lot of parks and open space, representing a commitment to conservation and the environment.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The connection is a fuzzy one.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">And to be sure, the city has a lot fewer trees than it used to, ever since it was discovered that it was playing host to an infestation of the Asian Long-Horned beetle. Thousands of trees were cut down, denuding most of the city.</span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-73203213120707666012011-10-23T06:41:00.000-07:002011-10-23T06:41:53.437-07:00Slick media campaign hides the dark side of Northern Pass<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The campaign to approve the billion-dollar plan to bring hydroelectric power from Canada to New England is in full swing. The home page for the project features pictures of all the things we like about New Hampshire, things like pristine lakes and woods. What it doesn’t show are the 140 miles of transmission lines criss-crossing the White Mountains, with 135-foot high steel towers poking up through the trees every few hundred feet.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The information, so-called, talks about how the line will bring “much-needed” energy to the region. The fact is, there is no serious need for additional energy in that area. Much of what will be imported will be sold elsewhere. But just to make sure they have a ready market, the developers of the project, Public Service of New Hampshire and their affiliates also want a 40-year no-bid contract with the state.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">They’re also looking for waivers from several other regulations that they would normally have to comply with.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Despite its name, PSNH is a private company, not a public utility, yet it wants to use eminent domain as a way to force reluctant property owners to give up their land to make way for the transmission lines. They’re also looking for changes in state law to make power drawn from the large-scale hydroelectric plant in Quebec as a “renewable resource” – disregarding the environmental damage that project has caused, and, not coincidentally, making them eligible for millions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The plan is opposed by other energy suppliers as being patently unfair, the tourism industry which fears the effect of a blighted landscape on its industry, and environmental organizations. Their voices are being drowned out by the all-out media blitz by PSNH.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Approval for the project is still some months away, but so confident is PSNH of government approval that they have begun buying up property along the way. And there’s a shroud of secrecy around these purchases – with property owners who have sold land not being allowed to discuss the deals publicly.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: 193.5pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Does it feel as though the fix is in?<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-35467787300413011762011-10-15T08:11:00.000-07:002011-10-15T08:11:30.527-07:00US media AWOL as Perry censors inconvenient truth<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">I’m not sure which is more disturbing – the fact that Texas officials in Gov. Rick Perry’s administration purged all mention of climate change on a 200-page environmental report commissioned by the state, or the fact that it has gone nearly unreported by the U.S. media.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">In a nearly unprecedented move, the scientists who prepared the report have disowned it, demanding that their names be taken off the document. Once Perry’s political hacks got done with it, they wanted nothing to do with it.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">“To me it is simply a question of maintaining scientific credibility,” said Jim Lester, a co-author of the report and vice president of the Houston Advanced Research Centre, in an article in The Guardian.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The report details the risks from rising sea levels, increased droughts, and more severe weather, much of which can be attributed to global climate change.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">In the kind of ignorance reminiscent of the George W. Bush administration, Perry refuses to accept evolution, climate change, and apparently anything else science-related. And so it shouldn’t be too surprising that when this report was submitted to the Texas Commissionion on Environmental Quality, they didn’t like what they read.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The chairman of the commission, Bryan Shaw, a Perry appointee, is fond of calling climate change a hoax. They are not the least embarrassed by the episode, and justify it on political grounds.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Andrea Morrow, a spokeswoman for the agency, said the report was “inconsistent with current agency policy.” </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">And it wasn’t just a matter of expunging a few words, they did away with any data that didn’t support their policy – for instance the fact that sea levels at Galveston Bay are rising five times faster than the previous average as taken out completely.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">But here’s another puzzle. The story has been reported in detail both by the French news service AFP and by the UK paper The Guardian, but not the major U.S. media.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Rick Perry is also running for president. Every statement, every nuance of body language is dissected by the U.S. political media. Why would they ignore something like this? Even he governor’s wife receives more coverage than this.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Shouldn’t people know what kind of governance we can expect if someone like this elected? Didn’t we learn anything from the dark ages of GW Bush?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; text-indent: 0.5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<br /></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-17075470698864725922011-10-02T12:26:00.000-07:002011-10-02T12:26:16.786-07:00PSNH and its dirty coal-burning plant<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">For years, a coal-burning power plant in Bow, NH, has been destroying the aquatic life of the Merrimack River, and the plant’s owners want to continue to do so unhindered. They take exception to a proposal from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that they upgrade their cooling system.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">According to a report by the EPA, the current system <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>- which dates back to the days of unfettered pollution - heats up the habitat around the plant and traps fish in its system.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">“We know that the fish populations have changed dramatically,” said EPA spokesman David Deegan in an article in Friday’s <a href="http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/283001/epa-plant-puts-river-life-at-risk?CSAuthResp=1317583080%3Apb1l4qv8mifref7o1g15ma7p31%3ACSUserId%7CCSGroupId%3Aapproved%3A9DA10140DEA53D69A663721D704BF3FB&CSUserId=94&CSGroupId=1">Concord Monitor</a>. “A lot of the changes we see are fish that want warmer water.”</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The owners, Public Service of New Hampshire, are the same group that wants to cut a gash through the White Mountains to bring electricity south from Canada – not for New Hampshire consumers, but to sell elsewhere. The name is nothing short of misleading - they are not a public entity, but a private corporation, and the only service they’re interested in, is to their shareholders.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Which brings us back to the coal plant – the upgrade is going to cost a lot of money. Thus far, the company has been lucky to keep operating the way it has. They should have been ordered to do this years ago – but during the Bush administration the EPA was ordered not enforce regulations, and so they were able to operate without any interference. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Now that the EPA seems to have woken up from its Rip Van Winkle siesta, PSNH is crying foul. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">“I’m not exaggerating when I’m saying we received very little in reaction and communication to the material we were very frequently providing to the EPA,” said PSNH spokesman Martin Murray.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">He makes it sound as if they were just waiting for the go-ahead on this. Nothing was stopping them from upgrading their system. What’s the problem now?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">This doesn’t even address the need to put an end to coal-burning plants. None other than multi-millionaire and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg – not exactly a ranting, raving radical – has seen the light, and is willing to put his money where his mouth is with a sizeable grant to the Sierra Club to help in its effort to put an end to coal-burning plants.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">
<br /></div>
Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-80584371140672683902011-08-20T14:31:00.000-07:002011-08-20T14:31:39.669-07:00Your Government At Work<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">For some reason I found myself thinking about different news items I’ve come across recently. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Tim DeChristopher is a Utah environmentalist and former wilderness guide. In 2008, the government was auctioning off some oil and gas leases near two national parks. DeChristopher signed up and drove up the bids, winning several of the leases. The problem was he didn’t have any money.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">That really upset the applecart. His prank earned him two years in prison and a $10,000 fine.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Compare this with the BP oil spill last year that killed 11 workers, destroyed the gulf coast economy, and ravaged the environment. BP’s chairman of the board was invited to lunch at the White House, and Republicans apologized to CEO Tony Hayworth for inconveniencing him when he was asked to testify before a Senate committee. The Justice Department is still considering criminal charges. BP is back to drilling in the Gulf.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Vermont Yankee power plant has been leaking tritium for over a year now, and some of it has just been found in the Connecticut River. Strontium, much more dangerous than tritium, has also been found in the soil at the plant, and in fish in the river. A few years ago, one wall of a cooling tower collapsed – not because of an earthquake, tornado, or hurricane, but because it was badly built. That was the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s conclusion.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Given all the problems it has had, Vermont wants the plant shut down when its license expires in March. The owners are suing the state government, saying it has no right to shut them down, and the NRC is helping them prepare their case.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">A year or so ago, fully armed federal agents working for the Dept. of Agriculture raided a gourmet cheese shop and yanked cheeses off the shelf. Why? Because some of the specialty cheeses were allegedly made with raw milk. Agents also raided a family farm and confiscated a young girl’s computer because the farm reportedly allowed people to buy raw milk.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Remember last year’s salmonella outbreak caused by eggs from huge factory farms where millions of chickens are kept in unsanitary conditions? Several hundred people got sick, and possibly some died. The outbreak was first detected in May, but the Center for Disease Control didn’t issue a recall until August. And even though the offending farms were known and identified, no action was taken against the company that owns them. They’re still cranking out eggs the same way they always have.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-65258560505746073852011-08-13T11:04:00.001-07:002011-08-13T11:04:37.566-07:00Shell Reports Another Oil Spill in the North Sea<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Shell Oil Co. is reporting an oil leak at one of its drilling rigs in the North Sea. The company will not disclose the amount of the spill, but says it is now under control. This is not the first time.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Documents that were made public recently showed the company experienced nearly one oil spill a week during <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>a two-year period in 2009-2010.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">This most recent spill couldn’t come a worse time.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The company has been touting improved safety measures and awaiting EPA approval of those measures so that it can go ahead with its plan for drilling in the Arctic. Oil interests have been pressuring the Obama administration to speed things along, on their assurances that nothing can go wrong.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">It is puzzling why the administration has made an about-face on its offshore oil-drilling policy. After promising that no new drilling would take place until it could be done safely, the president has taken a full speed ahead approach just a year after the BP Gulf oil spill.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">It should be noted that all these rigs were built with the same sort of assurances of safety that they’re giving now. Why should anyone believe them?</span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-54441414891846239532011-08-11T13:16:00.001-07:002011-08-11T13:16:39.007-07:00Entergy tries to pull another fast one in Vt. Yankee flap<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The owners of the troubled Vermont Yankee nuclear plant are trying to pull another fast one – this time to avoid paying the cost of closing down the plant – much to the embarrassment of their good friends at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Brattleboro Reformer today reported that Entergy Corp., owners of the 40-year-old plant in Vernon, Vt., have sent a letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission saying that now that the commission has extended the plant’s license for another 20 years, there’s no need to keep the millions of dollars in a decommissioning account as required by the NRC. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The company has notified that it’ll take the money out, and begin re-building the fund over the next 20 years.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The company is acting as though it’s a done deal.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">But wait. The state of Vermont has not approved the license, and it is increasingly unlikely that it will. The whole matter comes before a federal judge beginning next month.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The NRC’s response is that it is by no means certain that the plant will be able to operate after it’s current expiration date of March 2012. In addition to the lawsuit, the NRC cites several other reviews that are being conducted, any of which could have an impact on the plant’s future.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Whether or not the company has the funds to cover the cost of closing the plant has been the source of some controversy. Over the past year, the plant has been put up for sale, attempted to enter into a merger, and tried to form<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>new company bringing together three nucear plants that it operates in the northeast,</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">None of these succeeded, and in particular the plan to form a new subsidiary to operate the northeast nuclear plants was shot down by a New York regulatory agency because they were not convinced the new subsidiary would be able to cover the cost of decommissioning the plants. They saw it as a ploy for Entergy to get out from under the obligation.</span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-15211880056012921882011-08-08T13:28:00.000-07:002011-08-08T13:28:05.795-07:00Conn. Environmental Commissioner Defends Haddam Sweetheart De<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The man supposedly in charge of protecting the Connecticut’s environment has finally broken his silence on a land swap in which a significant parcel of conservation land was given to a group of developers.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Commissioner Daniel Esty spoke to a group of disgruntled Haddam residents demanding to know why he approved the controversial land swap deal. Esty had remained silent throughout the discussion about the deal, and decided to answer questions only after it was a done deal.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">At issue was a 17-acre parcel along the Connecticut River which was purchased by the state Dept. of Environmental Protection for $1.3 million in 2003 with funds meant to preserve important parcels of conservation land. A group of developers who own a banquet facility next door decided it would boost businesss if they could build a small inn or some other attractive business there.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">They offered to swap a piece of land they owned elsewhere in town for the land next door. This was 87 acres of land that these business bozos had bought two years ago for $400,000 for a housing development that went bust. No one was willing to buy it.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Esty claims it’s a good deal - 87 acres for 17 acres – but look at the relative values.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Esty told the group there was no legal restriction to selling it (giving it away would be more accurate) to a private developer. He also defended the swap on the basis of the amount of land the state would acquire.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“The prospect of getting five times as much land was attractive,” Esty is reported to have told the group. Not a word about the importance of preserving important habitat along the river. No consideration for the ecological or environmental value of the land. Only the acreage matters, and the business interests of a few developers. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: 264.75pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">In Connecticut the fox is in charge of the henhouse.<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-79139033459209240922011-08-02T08:21:00.000-07:002011-08-02T08:21:20.160-07:00Is BOEMRE positioning itself to harass offshore wind farms?<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">At first glance it seems like a good idea – regulating worker safety on offshore renewable energy projects.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“We are committed to ensuring that offshore renewable energy development is conducted safely,” said Bureau of Ocean Energy and Management, Regulation and Enforcement director Michael Bronwich, according to a story by <a href="http://upi./">UPI.</a><a href="http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2011/08/02/BOEMRE-reviews-safety-of-offshore-energy/UPI-74091312283414/?spt=hs&or=er">http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2011/08/02/BOEMRE-reviews-safety-of-offshore-energy/UPI-74091312283414/?spt=hs&or=er</a> He was announcing a study on the issue that will be ready a year from now. No sense rushing into things.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">It sounds good. It also sounds like something OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) should be doing. It also adresses only “renewable energy” projects, leaving out things like oil rigs.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">A month before the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded last year, the agency heard complaints about safety issues on the rig. When they asked BP about it, they were assured everything was fine, and so they left it at that. A month later 11 workers were dead and the biggest oil spill in history was under way. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The agency went on to help BP minimize the extent of the spill and the extent of the environmental damage. At that time they were know as the Mining and Minerals Service, but when their cozy relationship with the oil industry was exposed, they decided it was time for a name change.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">To go back to this new initiative.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Agencies and regulations already exist for worker safety. The oil industry has made it abundantly clear that they view alternative energies as their mortal enemy. Pardon me for being cynical, but it sure feels like they’re prodding BOEMRE to make trouble for these emerging sources of energy.</span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-77093852352112872222011-08-01T07:07:00.000-07:002011-08-01T07:07:13.014-07:00Oil Companies Bind & Gag U.S. Scientist over Arctic Oil Drilling<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Figuratively speaking, of course.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">But the fact is that for the past several months the U.S. Interior Department’s Inspector General has been investigating wildlife biologist Charles Monnett for reasons they have yet to reveal. Then last month, he was abruptly suspended and ordered not to speak to the press or his colleagues.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Could he be connected to some terrorist cell, bent on destruction?</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">It doesn’t seem likely. For one thing the government is always happy to parade suspected terrorists out to the news media. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">So what could be so serious that he’s been suspended and no one can talk about why. Lucky for us, his co-workers and the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) aren’t afraid to talk. They say Monnett’s being harassed by the government because he’s making life difficult for the oil companies that want to drill in the Arctic.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Remember all those pictures of distressed polar bears swimming around looking for ice floes to rest on? It generated enough public pressure to get the polar bear declared a threatened species. It Monnett who first noticed several drowned polar bears while he was working on a research project about wales. He and a colleague wrote a short paper speculating that the melting polar ice cap and resulting open water was making it more difficult for polar bears.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">PEER says that the oil industry has been lobbying hard to get the permitting process expedited. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Alaska <a href="http://www.adn.com/2011/04/18/1816335/begich-calls-for-coordinator-to.html">Sen. Mark Begich</a> is clearly on their Christmas gift list. In April, flanked by several oil company executives, he announced that he was filing a bill to create a permitting “coordinator” to do away with pesky oversight by agencies like the Interior Department that gave the oil industry “heartburn.”</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Monnett’s story has been reported in papers like the UK’s <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/28/arctic-scientist-polar-bear-oil">Guardian</a>, but is almost completely absent from the American media.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">I've provided links if you want to read more.</span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-36725629967770636452011-07-13T05:39:00.000-07:002011-07-13T05:39:17.833-07:00Greed Trumps Conservation in Connecticut<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Connecticut Gov. Daniel P. Malloy has signed into law a bill that paves the way for swapping an ecologically-significant state-owned wildlife sanctuary along the Connecticut River for a developer’s unwanted and relatively worthless parcel elsewhere in the state.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Beyond the loss of an important habitat, Gov. Mallory’s thoughtless acceptance of the claim that a developer’s desire to enhance his business interests outweighs the broader but less monetarily quantifiable need to preserve an ecologically important parcel of land, puts all conservation efforts in jeopardy.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The parcel in question is a 17 acre wildlife refuge along the Connecticut River in Haddam, Conn., purchased – with taxpayer money – for $1.3 million in 2003 by the state under a program meant to preserve open space. That would have seemed to ensure that the land would have remained undeveloped. Not so!</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The land sits next door to the Riverhouse banquet facility owned by a group of developers who believe a small inn or something similar would help their business. They just happen to have a parcel of land in another part of town which they bought as part of a previously failed business venture. They paid about $400,000 two years ago for the property. They have been unable to sell it or do anything with it since then.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Then they got the bright idea that they could unload it on the state for the far more desirable property next to their restaurant. They have the backing of the local business community and at least one powerful state legislator. The governor apparently agreed with them.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">There may be a few bumps along the way before the deal is done. For one, independent appraisers need to verify that the swap is a fair deal. At first glance it wouldn't seem so, given the difference in value, but given Connecticut’s well-deserved reputation for political corruption and its abysmal record on environmental issues, I’m not holding out much hope.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-56955007653129499982011-07-07T07:07:00.000-07:002011-07-07T07:07:31.927-07:00Exxon’s latest oil spill just more of the same<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">From those wonderful folks at Exxon (remember the Exxon Valdez?) we have more of the same, but this time they’ve chosen to befoul the Yellowstone River with 42,000 gallons of crude oil. It may not be on quite the same scale as the Alaska disaster, but it reflects that nothing has changed in the 22 years since the Alaskan disaster.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Records indicate that just a few months ago, the company was warned by the Dept. of Transportation that the pipeline that ruptured was not buried deep enough, that it had suffered some corrosion damage, that maps showing the location of shut-off valves were not accurate, and that their reponse plans were completely inadequate.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Not to worry, was the company response. They’ll take care of it first chance they get. In the meantime, they’ll continue operating because nothing had happened yet.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Until last Friday night, that is, when the rupture occurred.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">And their response? Send out a relative handful of people in hazmat suits to pose for photographers, give them a box of extra thick facial tissues to wipe up any oil that washes up on shore, and declare the cleanup is under way.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Meanwhile, people all along the river report getting sick from the fumes, wondering why the cleanup is going so slowly, and wondering how bad will it get.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">No one really knows. All we can do is sit and wait. How much profit do we suppose Exxon made in the time it took to write this?</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; tab-stops: 90.75pt;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-48634028373336308152011-07-04T07:24:00.000-07:002011-07-04T07:24:48.389-07:00Unholy Alliance: Governments and the nuclear industry<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Emails leaked a few days ago show the British government was more concerned with controlling bad public relations for the nuclear industry following the Fukashima disaster than with the safety of its nuclear power plants. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The government had already committed to building several more nuclear plants and wanted to blunt any opposition.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">This morning an explosion and fire was reported at a French nuclear plant. Government officials confirmed there was a minor fire, but made no mention of the explosion, and insisted there was no threat to the public. Local officials were taking no chances. Swimming and fishing were banned from the area near the plant.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The plant near Drome is one of France’s oldest, and was recently given a 10-year license extension, even though 32 safety concerns were revealed last week. Ignoring public concern over nuclear power, President Sarkozy last week pledged an additional $1.5 billion for nuclear power development.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">In Vermont, legislators concerned about the conditions at the aging Vermont Yankee plant in Vernon, Vt., have voted not to approve a 20-year extension of the plant’s operating license. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has teamed up with Entergy Corp., the plant’s owner, in a lawsuit against the state’s action. An Entergy lawyer last week argued in federal court, in part, that the state has no business being concerned with the safety of its citizens, only whether or not the plant can deliver “reliable” power.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Apparently they have a problem with democracy as well. They further argued that when these elected representatives voted against the license extension, they were reacting to the wishes of their constituency.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Two months after the nuclear disaster began at Fukashima (it’s still going on you just don’t hear about it) the nuclear plant operators and the Japanese government had to admit they had been lying about the seriousness of the disaster of the plant.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Regardless of the pros and cons of nuclear power, how can an honest discussion of the issue take place in an atmosphere of lies and cover-ups?</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><br />
</div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-22287138141557263552011-06-29T07:23:00.000-07:002011-06-29T07:23:10.483-07:00Vt. Yankee argues state has no business guarding people’s safety<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">In an argument that defies common sense, attorneys for Entergy Corp., owners of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, argued in federal court in Burlington last week that the state of Vermont has no role in deciding whether or not the plant should continue operating based on safety considerations. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Further, they argued that legislators who have voted against re-licensing were responding to their constituents.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">How out of touch can they get?</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The arguments are summarized in a <a href="http://www.reformer.com/ci_18336735?IADID=Search-www.reformer.com-www.reformer.com">Brattleboro Reformer</a> article last week.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Much of the argument revolves around semantics. Under Vermont law, the state has final say over the relicensing of any nuclear plant in the state. Entergy agreed to abide by this law when it purchased the plant several years ago. But now that the Vermont legislature has voted not to approve relicensing of the troubled plant, Entergy disputes the state’s right to deny licensing. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Their claim is that the state can only base its decision on the “reliability” of the 40-year-old plant, not safety concerns. Entergy argues that only the Nuclear Regulatory Commssion can address safety concerns.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">At this same time, the Associated Press has been running a series of investigative articles showing that the NRC has repeatedly eased up safety regulations in order to bring aging nuclear plants into a semblance of compliance.</span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-27196543494577631182011-06-16T15:30:00.000-07:002011-06-16T15:30:03.705-07:00NRC helping Entergy Corp. in Vermont Yankee lawsuit<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">If anyone doubts that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission isn’t the least bit interested in the interests of the people, an exchange at a Senate hearing this week should remove any doubt. The NRC is squarely in the corner of the nuclear industry and considers the wishes of the people utterly irrelevant.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">NRC staffers are working with the owners of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power plant in their lawsuit against the state of Vermont, and have been meeting with the Justice Department as well to enlist their assistance. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">And the NRC has refused a request by U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders for information regarding a secret meeting of NRC commissioners to discuss the Vermont Yankee situation with the Justice Department.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Sanders later learned that the NRC has voted 3-2 to support Entergy Corp. in their lawsuit claiming that Vermont has overstepped its powers in refusing to grant the plant a license approval to continue operating.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">In Senate hearings this week, NRC chairman Gregory Jaczko conceded that staffers from his agency had met with Entergy Corp officials to discuss the lawsuit. No similar meeting have been held with Vermont state officials or with representatives of any groups opposed to the relicensing. When asked about the secret meeting, Jaczko refused to discuss it.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“We generally like to keep those closed matters, “ he told the senators.</span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-42436693445795581422011-06-14T15:13:00.000-07:002011-06-14T15:13:12.048-07:00Mass. Joins the fight against Entergy & Vt. Yankee<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley has filed a brief defending Vermont’s right to determine the future of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The plant is located within walking distance of the Massachusetts border and has a history of mishaps, most recently a steady stream of leaking radiated water which the plant’s owners seem unable to locate and stop. An investigation into the source of the leaks determined the problems date back to shoddy workmanship when the plant was first built 40 years ago.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Nevertheless, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved a 20-year extension to the plant’s operating license. The current license expires next March, and the plant’ owner’s Entergy Corp., headquartered in Louisiana, has put it up for sale, has tried to negotiate a merger with an Ohio power company, so ar to no avail.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">NRC approval notwithstanding, Vermont has the last say in whether or not the plant can continue to operate. The legislature has already voted to not approve an extension. The matter can still come up in the legislature’s next session.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Entergy agreed to abide by the state’s decision when it bought the plant several years ago. Now, faced with the prospect of a shutdown and an expensive de-commissioning process, the company has changed its tune. It has filed a challenge in federal district court, claiming the state has no such jurisdiction. Entergy is claiming federal law gives the NRC the sole power of approval.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Atty. General Coakley disagrees, saying there is nothing in the Atomic Energy Act that takes away a state’s right to regulate nuclear power within its borders.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Entergy also owns the Pilgrim Nuclear power plant in Plymouth, Mass.,and it too is in the process of seeking a license renewal. It, too, has had its share of troubles, including a recent emergency shutdown that was only explained away as “employee error.”</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The license enewal process has been put on hold until these and other issues have been addressed.</span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1586895818115863828.post-923488404251634172011-06-07T15:00:00.000-07:002011-06-07T15:00:25.253-07:00Conn. DEP strangely silent on Haddam conservation land swap<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The state agency charged with protecting and preserving that state’s environment has yet to issue an opinion on a land swap proposal that would turn over 17 acres of state-owned conservation land to private developers.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">For conservationists, the outcome has far-reaching implications. It casts into doubt the whole concept of preserving ecologically-important land if there is no assurance that protections will last into perpetuity.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The state purchased the parcel, which sits on a bluff above the Connecticut River, for more than $2 million in 2003 for the purpose of preserving the ecologically sensitive tract. Now a group of developers would like to build a hotel-retail complex on the property.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>They propose to give the state 87 acres of land they own a few miles away. They only paid $450,000 for it two years ago, as part of a failed housing development.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The developers have an ally in the legislature who has included the swap in a routine state property conveyance bill. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Now legislators are asking for guidance from the state Dept. of Environmental Protection, but so far none has been forthcoming. The legislature adjourns tomorrow, and many are saying if they don’t hear from the agency, the proposal will be tabled for another year.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">An article in today’s <a href="http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-land-swap-0607-20110606,0,5271519.story">Hartford Courant</a> outlines some of the political infighting surrounding this proposal.</span></div>Martin Lainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01149132488048770305noreply@blogger.com0