# [Federal & State Legal Proceedings for Mountain Valley Pipeline Continue
Month After Month](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/31/federal-state-
legal-proceedings-for-mountain-valley-pipeline-continue-month-after-month/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/DD0FD160-DC8D-4F9C-957A-4CEA023C0F5C-223x300.png)](…
content/uploads/2023/03/DD0FD160-DC8D-4F9C-957A-4CEA023C0F5C.png)
Mountain Valley Pipeline Traverses Incredibly Rough Terrain Crossing Rivers &
Streams
**Court Upholds Virginia’s MVP Water Permit, But Ruling Forthcoming on West
Virginia Approval**
From an [Article by Jeremiah Shelor, Natural Gas
Intelligence](https://www.naturalgasintel.com/court-upholds-virginias-mvp-
water-permit-but-ruling-forthcoming-on-west-virginia-approval/), March 30,
2023
.
.
**The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has upheld a crucial water
quality permit issued to the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) by Virginia state
regulators, keeping the project on track to potentially resume and complete
construction later this year.
However, a forthcoming ruling on a water quality permit issued by the state of
West Virginia could bring fresh setbacks for the embattled 300-mile, 2 million
Dth/d Appalachian natural gas export pipeline, according to analysts.**
In a ruling published Wednesday, the Fourth Circuit denied a petition to
review the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality’s decision to approve
MVP under state water quality standards.
In rebuffing the petition, filed by a coalition of opposition groups, the
Fourth Circuit concluded, in part, that Virginia regulators had “considered a
variety of factors in determining that the construction and operation of the
pipeline would comply” with state water quality standards.
Still, the state-level water quality permit issued to MVP by neighboring West
Virginia may also have to withstand judicial scrutiny in order to keep the
project on track.
**The Fourth Circuit heard oral argument in a case challenging the West
Virginia water quality permit back in October “but has yet to issue a ruling,”
analysts at ClearView Energy Partners LLC said in a note to clients. “We
explained then that we thought it is likely that the court would return the
permit to West Virginia for additional work, but that the real question is
whether the court remands it without vacating it, too.”**
Whether or not the court vacates the West Virginia permit could prove critical
for the timeline of the pending Army Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act
Section 404 permit, which requires the state water-quality approvals to be in
place, the ClearView analysts said.
Information posted to MVP’s federal permitting dashboard indicates the Army
Corps plans to issue the Section 404 permit by late April.
“If a court believes that the agency can resolve the shortcomings in a permit
and would likely arrive at the same decision (in this case approval), the
court can remand the permit” but preserve its legal validity, the ClearView
analysts said. “Most of MVP’s schedule delays have arisen from judicial
challenges that resulted in permits being vacated.”
MVP is a joint venture of EQM Midstream Partners LP; NextEra Capital Holdings
Inc.; Con Edison Transmission Inc.; WGL Midstream; and RGC Midstream LLC.
Project backers have said work on the pipeline is roughly 94% complete and
that they plan to bring the pipeline into service in the second half of 2023.
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/31/federal-state-legal-proceedings-
for-mountain-valley-pipeline-continue-month-after-month/>
# [Drilling & Fracking Threatens Our Allegheny Plateau and Its
Biodiversity](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/29/drilling-fracking-
threatens-our-allegheny-plateau-and-its-biodiversity/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/2EF1F57C-EBEE-46C0-A13A-00B9CB0B2759.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/2EF1F57C-EBEE-46C0-A13A-00B9CB0B2759.jpeg)
Fracking waste disposal in Guernsey County, OH. (These activities are known
risks of creating earthquakes.)
**Protect This Place: Fracking Threatens the Allegheny Plateau in PA, N.W. WV
& S.E. OH**
[Environmental Essay by Lisa C. Lieb, Revelator
Voices](https://therevelator.org/fracking-allegheny-biodiversity/), March 27,
2023
**Let’s Protect This Place: A region historically plagued by industrial
pollution is overwhelmed with unconventional oil and gas development. The
Allegheny Plateau is a lower-lying portion of the Appalachian Mountain Range
that extends from southern and central New York to northern and western
Pennsylvania, eastern Ohio, northern and western West Virginia, and eastern
Kentucky.**
**Why it matters:** The plateau consists of areas of gently sloping hills in
the north and west of the region as well as rugged valleys in the south and
east. It overlies the Marcellus Shale and Utica Shale, sedimentary rock
formations. The region is rich in natural resources, including hardwoods, iron
ore, silica, coal, oil and natural gas.
The abundance of these resources supported development in the region and were
integral to the local steel, glass, rail and extraction industries.
Prior to widespread logging between 1890 and 1920, the area hosted old-growth
forests containing red spruce, eastern white pine, eastern hemlock, sugar
maple, black oak, white oak, yellow birch and American beech.
But the forest’s makeup is now different, favoring oaks, maples, hickories,
American beech and yellow birch. Though fragmented and much less mature than
the old-growth forests, today’s forests continue to play a vital role in
ecosystems, serving as habitats for the federally endangered Indiana bat as
well as locally endangered or at-risk species such as little brown bats,
northern flying squirrels and blackpoll warblers.
The region hosts the Ohio River watershed and confluence, the Allegheny
National Forest in New York and Pennsylvania, and the Wayne National Forest in
Ohio.
**The threat:** Unconventional oil and gas development has boomed in the
region over the past decade. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that the
Marcellus and Utica shale plays contain approximately 214 trillion cubic feet
of recoverable natural gas, making the Allegheny Plateau a lucrative location
for hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking.”
Already more than 13,000 unconventional wells have been drilled in
Pennsylvania. Fracking itself is a resource intense process, requiring between
2 and 20 million gallons of water per well. A 2014 study estimated that in
Pennsylvania, 80% of the water used for fracking comes from streams, rivers,
and lakes, thus potentially altering water temperature and levels of dissolved
oxygen. This water is combined with sand and a mixture of hazardous chemicals,
which may include methanol, ethylene glycol and propargyl alcohol.
Between 20-25% of the water that is injected into the well returns to the
surface. This flowback water often has higher salinity and has been known to
contain barium, arsenic, benzene and radium. While recycling of flowback is
becoming more common, other methods of disposal include underground injection,
application to road surfaces, treatment at public waste facilities, and
discharging it onto rivers, streams and lakes.
Near fracking sites in West Virginia, elevated levels of barium and strontium
were found in feathers of Louisiana waterthrushes, native songbirds who make
their home in brooks and wooded swamps. In northwestern Pennsylvania, crayfish
and brook trout living in fracked streams were found to have increased levels
of mercury. Fish diversity is also reduced in streams that have been fracked.
Fracking consumes land, too. Each fracking well requires 3-7 acres. In
Pennsylvania over 700,000 acres of state forest land are leased or available
for gas production. Well pads, pipelines and other fracking infrastructure
fragment forests, alter their ecology, and reduce biodiversity. Appalachian
azure butterflies and federally threatened northern wild monkshood — purple-
flowering herbaceous perennials found in New York and Ohio — are both
sensitive to forest fragmentation.
In addition to the direct impacts of fracking, the availability of natural gas
in the Marcellus and Utica shale plays attracts petrochemical development to
the region. Shell Polymers Monaca initiated operations in November 2022 at a
newly constructed 386-acre petrochemical complex in southwestern Pennsylvania,
along the Ohio River.
The plant manufactures virgin polyethylene pellets, which will be largely be
used for production of single-use plastic products. In addition to releasing
hazardous air pollutants, volatile organic compounds and particulate matter,
this ethane “cracker” plant will emit 2.2 million tons of carbon dioxide per
year.
The plant’s existence will also fuel fracking in the region; it is anticipated
that it will require between 100 and 200 new wells each year in order to
supply natural gas for its productions. Other petrochemical companies,
including Exxon, PTT Global and Odebrecht, have reportedly been considering
building similar complexes in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia.
**My place in this place:** I was born and raised in the area, and my family’s
roots in southwestern Pennsylvania go back several generations. Some of my
most cherished memories involve Pennsylvania’s forests, rivers and streams. As
a child I loved my family’s summer pilgrimages to our cabin, a rustic building
that had been converted from a one-room schoolhouse in the Pennsylvania Wilds.
At “camp” we fished for yellow perch, smallmouth bass and walleye in the
Sinnemahoning Creek and caught crayfish by hand. We sunned ourselves on the
rocks along the river bank when the water was warm. In the evenings we walked
on quiet, narrow roads in hopes of spotting an eastern elk in a grassy field.
I now live in Beaver County, Pennsylvania, one mile from the Shell cracker
plant. I can observe the plant’s flaring from my kitchen window, which often
creates an ominous orange glow in the night sky. To me the plant doesn’t
symbolize job creation or a rebounding local economy, despite the assertions
of local and state politicians. I see the plant as the perpetuation of a
hopeless dependence on fossil fuels and corporate profit at the expense of
ecological integrity. I worry that fracking and an associated petrochemical
buildout will destroy already fragile ecosystems throughout my home in the
Allegheny Plateau.
**Who’s protecting it now:** There are a variety of environmental groups
located in the region. No Petro PA is an organization that resists fracking
and pipeline development in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia. More locally
the Beaver County Marcellus Awareness Community in western Pennsylvania
opposes fracking and seeks to protect local community members from its harmful
effects.
With the rise of the Shell cracker plant, the group also formed Eyes on Shell,
a community organization that aims to hold Shell accountable for its activity
and advocates for the surrounding communities’ health and safety. These are
just three of the many grassroots organizations working to protect the air,
soil, water, wildlife and communities in the region.
The national organization, FracTracker, also provides extensive data on oil
and natural gas wells, pipelines, legislation and environmental health.
**What this place needs:** Ideally Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia will
follow in the footsteps of New York and institute a ban on fracking in light
of the environmental and health risks associated with unconventional gas and
oil development. However, given their strong ties to the fossil fuel industry,
it is unlikely that this will occur. Banning fracking on public land in the
region, such as in state forests and county parks, in a practical first step
in combatting forest fragmentation and pollution.
At a regional level, regulations should be put in place to protect the water
quality of the Ohio River. The Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission,
a multistate organization working with the federal government, could ban
fracking in the Ohio River Basin in order to protect the river and its
watershed. The Delaware River Basin Commission has successfully prohibited
fracking within the Delaware River Basin; the rules developed by the
commission could be adapted for use by the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation
Commission.
Additional government oversight would help to protect water quality in the
region. Presently fracking is exempt from the Safe Water Drinking Act and
therefore isn’t regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Ending
this exemption could increase water quality and safety within the Allegheny
Plateau.
Increased transparency from oil and gas companies is also required to protect
the region’s water. As of July 2022, California is the only state in the
country that requires full public disclosure of all chemicals used in
fracking. Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio must implement policies that
require full public disclosure of chemicals used in all phases of the fracking
process.
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/29/drilling-fracking-threatens-our-
allegheny-plateau-and-its-biodiversity/>
# [WV Public Service Commission Should Serve the Public
Interest](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/28/wv-public-service-
commission-should-serve-the-public-interest/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/8CED8432-1407-45ED-A88C-16018318915F.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/8CED8432-1407-45ED-A88C-16018318915F.jpeg)
“Climate, Jobs & Justice” are the Three Pillars of the WV Climate Alliance
**The choice and the burden of energy in West Virginia**
From the [Letter to Editor of Perry Bryant, Charleston
Gazette](https://www.wvgazettemail.com/opinion/op_ed_commentaries/perry-
bryant-the-choice-and-the-burden-of-energy-in-wv-
opinion/article_e748f9d9-9db3-5c93-aeef-41be6cb16cf9.html), March 28, 2023
**Last year, Charlotte Lane, chairwoman of the West Virginia Public Service
Commission, wrote an op-ed claiming that burning coal is cheaper than
installing renewables, such as wind and solar. That really depends on what
costs are included, and Lane failed to include the harm that burning coal
causes — costs that renewables don’t incur. Plus, a lot has happened since she
wrote her op-ed.**
Lane’s basic argument is that solar and wind are intermittent sources of
energy while coal is available all the time. The myth of coal’s super
reliability was pierced recently when Standard & Poor’s reported that one of
three coal-fired units at Harrison Power plant and two of three coal-fired
units at John Amos were shut down during part or all of the frigid polar
vortex in West Virginia last December — just when we needed their energy the
most.
Lane also dismissed battery storage as too expensive for storing solar and
wind energy when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing. However,
battery storage technology is rapidly evolving. Form Energy, for example,
recently announced that it is opening a battery manufacturing facility in
Weirton to make batteries that can store, and then discharge, power for 100
hours at a cost of one-tenth of lithium-ion batteries, the type of batteries
utilities currently use. If Form Energy can deliver on its claims, it will
make renewables very reliable at a very reasonable price.
I do agree with Lane that we should consider the cost of battery storage when
comparing the cost of renewables versus the cost of coal. But we also should
consider the cost of the harm that occurs from burning coal.
**These costs are substantial. The West Virginia University College of Law’s
Center on Energy and Sustainable Development found that almost 100 deaths can
be avoided in West Virginia in 2035 by adopting renewable sources of energy,
instead of relying on burning coal for our electricity.**
What’s the cost of these avoidable deaths? And what are the additional costs
associated with global warming caused primarily by burning coal and other
fossil fuels — including increased severity of flooding, longer lasting and
more extreme heat waves, more intense hurricanes, etc.?
**The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has estimated that the social cost
of carbon — that is the total amount of damages from emitting greenhouse gases
into the atmosphere — is $190 per ton of carbon dioxide.**
The five coal-fired power plants under the jurisdiction of the PSC emitted 38
million tons of carbon dioxide in 2021 according to the Energy Information
Administration, and caused $7.2 billion in damage using the social cost of
carbon. The John Amos plant in Putnam County alone emitted 11 million tons of
carbon dioxide in 2021 causing $2.1 billion in damages.
**The social cost and resulting damages from emissions from solar and wind?
Zero. ~ It’s a lot easier to claim that coal is cheaper than wind, solar and
battery storage when you don’t include $7 billion in annual damages that coal-
fired power plants cause with their emissions.**
To be fair to Lane, neither the emergence of Form Energy’s breakthrough on new
battery development nor the EPA’s proposed social cost of carbon was available
when she wrote her op-ed last year.
**West Virginia is at a crossroads.** We can double down on burning coal, with
all its adverse effects, or we can transition to clean energy. For the next 10
years, the federal government will provide tax incentives to partially offset
the cost of utility companies installing solar, wind, geothermal and other
carbon-free sources of energy. This window of opportunity shuts in 2032. After
that, West Virginia utility customers will be stuck with the entire bill for
developing new sources of electricity.
To avoid huge cost increases to consumers, we need leadership from Lane and
West Virginia’s utilities. The choice is theirs. But the cost savings from
adopting clean energy or the true cost of burning coal will be ours.
>>> [Perry Bryant lives in Charleston. He is a co-founder and leader of the
West Virginia Climate Alliance.](https://www.wvclimatealliance.org/)
#######+++++++#######+++++++#######
**SEE ALSO:** [PSC orders audit of Mon Power, Potomac Edison lobbying
expenses](https://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/energy_and_environment/psc-
orders-audit-of-mon-power-potomac-edison-lobbying-
expenses/article_e30e9673-5fa1-5b65-94b8-5752c2fa9c3d.html), Mike Tony,
Charleston Gazette, March 28, 2023
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/28/wv-public-service-commission-
should-serve-the-public-interest/>
# [Pennsylvania Now Has Crypto Mining Problems Including Sustained Noise & GHG
Emissions](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/27/pennsylvania-now-has-
crypto-mining-problems-including-sustained-noise-ghg-emissions/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/7F294E9A-638F-466C-81E3-FBF86FCC6A85.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/7F294E9A-638F-466C-81E3-FBF86FCC6A85.jpeg)
Consuming excess natural gas to run banks of computers, noise from cooling
fans and GHG emissions
**Crypto Mining at Gas Wells Sparks Regulatory Headaches, Outcry in
Northwestern Pennsylvania**
From an [Article by Audrey Carleton, Capital & Main
News](https://capitalandmain.com/crypto-mining-at-gas-wells-sparks-regulato…
headaches-outcry-in-northwestern-pennsylvania), March 22, 2023
.
.
**Before obtaining the required permits, Diversified Energy began installing
cryptocurrency mining infrastructure on one of its thousands of well pads.**
**Longhorn Pad C** is located about half a mile south of a small cemetery and
a little over a mile north of a Methodist church in **Elk County, in
northwestern Pennsylvania**. With a population of around 30,000, this county
sits squarely in the center of the path the Marcellus Shale formation takes as
it curves through the commonwealth.
The lonely well pad houses four natural gas wells that records show were
initially drilled in 2011 but sat inactive for years after that. Now, it also
houses infrastructure designed to mine cryptocurrency, which, according to a
comment filed by the surrounding township’s Board of Supervisors, hums loudly
enough to have solicited numerous noise complaints from residents. Though it
has applied for them, the company behind this operation has yet to receive the
permits it is required by law to construct or operate the engines to power a
cryptocurrency mine.
**“After a recent inspection, the [Department of Environmental Protection] PA-
DEP has determined that Diversified was in violation,” said Tom Decker,
community relations coordinator at the PA-DEP’s Northwest Regional Office, “as
it had installed equipment for its cryptocurrency operations prior to the
issuance of a plan approval issued by the Department.
“The company is required by law to obtain a plan approval from PA-DEP prior to
installation and operation of the air contamination sources,” Decker said.
“Installation of the equipment without a plan approval could lead to
enforcement action by the PA-DEP.”**
The pad is owned by a fossil fuel operator that’s come under fire in recent
years for purchasing tens of thousands of low-producing oil and gas wells
without a clear business motive and for making unrealistic budget projections
that minimize the true cost of plugging, critics say. In doing so, it has
amassed the largest portfolio of old, low-producing wells in Appalachia.
That operator is **Diversified Energy Company PLC** , the parent company to
Diversified Production LLC, which recently applied for a permit with the
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA-DEP) to add five
natural gas-powered engines and one generator to the well pad with the
intention of mining cryptocurrency.
What the operator’s permit application does not disclose is that Diversified
would go on to prematurely install cryptocurrency infrastructure on the pad,
and while the PA-DEP reported that it was not operational on the day of a
March 1 site visit, the department confirmed that the operator had installed
one engine and two trailers holding cryptocurrency mining computers in
violation of environmental law. According to the township that houses the
site, it’s already showing signs of running.
**“We are aware that Diversified Production has installed small engines on the
gas well sites to generate cryptocurrency,” Jay Township’s Board of
Supervisors wrote in a comment to the PA-DEP in January. “We have received
many complaints on the noise disturbance of these engines.”**
The engines will power what’s called wellhead mining, in which a
cryptocurrency data center is powered directly by an oil or gas well. This pad
appears to be the first of its kind in Pennsylvania to go through a formal
permitting process for the practice, which is gaining prominence throughout
the Keystone State, home to hundreds of thousands of abandoned wells and rich
methane stores.
It is not clear when Diversified installed cryptocurrency equipment on the pad
without a permit. A PA-DEP inspection report from June 2022 notes that “the
operator is installing equipment to resume cryptocurrency mining operations
using the production from four producing Marcellus shale wells on the pad.”
Another one filed in August 2022 includes photos of large trailers that,
according to the PA-DEP, currently house cryptocurrency equipment. A PA-DEP
representative told Capital & Main that the department did not learn that the
equipment was installed until mid-February.
**“Given Diversified’s history, this is not a surprise,” said Charles
McPhedran, a senior attorney with Earthjustice and co-author of a comment
opposing Diversified’s cryptocurrency permit application to the DEP. “The
question is whether PA-DEP can make a forceful response to rogue crypto
operators.** ”
This new use for old wells, which has in recent years proliferated in other
major oil and gas states including Texas, could extend fossil fuel production
in Pennsylvania — and threaten to stall progress toward its climate goals,
including an aim to reduce the commonwealth’s greenhouse gas emissions by 26%
below 2005 levels by 2025. The emissions intensity of Bitcoin, which is
“mined” via data centers that can plug into the electrical grid or directly
into energy sources, as Diversified proposes, is larger than that of some
countries. As states grapple with the need to transition from fossil fuels,
environmentalists fear that attaching new cryptocurrency operations to
untapped or otherwise dying energy sources will only extend their life.
Longhorn Pad C appears to be a perfect example, per Capital & Main’s review of
public records relating to the pad.
A handful of environmental groups in Pennsylvania first took note of
Diversified’s proposal in December, when the PA-DEP announced in the state
bulletin its intention to approve the operator’s request, soliciting public
comments on the matter. In January, staff from the Clean Air Council,
Earthjustice and PennFuture filed a comment arguing against issuing the permit
entirely — in part because of discrepancies on the permit application; in part
because of the noise pollution that such data centers are known to cause; in
part because the emissions intensity of cryptocurrency data mining is
threatening to set back decades of climate progress; but primarily because, by
the operator’s own admission, it has unresolved environmental violations at 19
other oil and gas sites.
What the commenters didn’t know at the time was that the operator had jumped
the gun and installed cryptocurrency infrastructure while awaiting the proper
permits. The pad also appears to follow the exact trend environmentalists fear
when it comes to the use of stranded fossil fuel assets for cryptocurrency: It
sat inactive for years before Diversified bought it, saw low production
volumes once online and was primed for cryptocurrency a few months into its
productive life.
**According to the PA-DEP, Diversified acquired Longhorn Pad C in September of
2021 from another prominent Marcellus operator, EQT, with which the company
has been accused of “playing hot potato” with abandoned oil and gas wells.**
EQT was initially permitted for the well pad in 2010, DEP records show. But it
was unproductive for nearly 10 years after being spud (in which the initial
drillings for an oil or gas well are made) in 2011, according to records
reviewed by Capital & Main but compiled by the Capitol Forum, an investigative
news and analysis organization. Per the PA-DEP, the well pad was placed on
“inactive status” for that duration.
After it sat undrilled for all that time, the well pad came online in December
of 2021, according to the PA-DEP, after Diversified acquired it three months
earlier, and was active for about six months before its new owner applied for
permits that would give it a second life as a cryptocurrency mine in May of
2022. The well pad’s production volumes have remained relatively low since
Diversified began drilling from it, totalling less than 90,000 cubic feet of
natural gas for all four wells over all of 2022, Capitol Forum’s records show.
The Internal Revenue Service defines a marginal, or low-producing, natural gas
well to be one that generates less than 90,000 cubic feet per day.
The timing of Diversified’s permit application, coupled with the well pad’s
years of inactivity and recent meager production volumes, could indicate that
it might have otherwise been a good candidate for decommissioning — and has
since been thrown a lifeline.
**“That is Diversified’s business model. They acquire underperforming assets
and try to squeeze as much value out of them as possible,” said Daniel
Sherwood, an editor at the Capitol Forum whose meticulously compiled database
of production and financial records on the fossil fuel industry has also
informed several critical reports by the nonprofit environmental think tank
the Ohio River Valley Institute arguing that Diversified is employing
questionable, potentially climate-threatening business practices.**
“[Diversified] describes its strategy as ‘acquiring low-cost, long-life, low-
decline’ oil and gas wells that previous owners found uneconomic,” an April
2022 report from the Ohio River Valley Institute reads. Should the company
find itself unable to plug these wells, “Taxpayers could be left with a
massive bill for cleaning up the wells that Diversified leaves behind, as well
as an ongoing discharge of climate-warming greenhouse gases.”
Diversified’s installation of a cryptocurrency mine comes as the commonwealth
reckons with its abandoned well crisis. Environmental groups have warned that
the practices of companies like this one, which is buying stranded and low-
producing assets and assuming liability for plugging them based on
questionable calculations, will do little to lessen this crisis. In other
parts of the state, cryptocurrency miners are plugging directly into natural
gas wellheads, old coal mines and former steel plants — could orphaned or low-
producing wells offer Bitcoin a new frontier?
The cryptocurrency industry appears to be positioning itself to solve the
abandoned well crisis by assuming liability for low-producing wells and their
plugging costs — only after using them to mine cryptocurrency via the proof-
of-work (POW) algorithm for the rest of their productive lives. Via the POW
algorithm, application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) miners mint new
“coins” by competing with brute force guessing to solve a mathematical
equation. This process is extremely energy intensive and, critics argue,
wasteful by design.
A small nonprofit lobbying group called the Satoshi Action Fund believes
Bitcoin could, in fact, be an “environmental cleanup machine” for states with
swaths of abandoned wells; by hooking up to wells that are already leaking
methane, a potent greenhouse gas, to power a revenue-generating task, places
like Pennsylvania can begin to take small bites out of their orphaned well
numbers, founder Dennis Porter told Capital & Main.
The organization has drafted sample legislation for states endeavoring to
streamline the process for doing so. Dubbed the Orphaned Well Bitcoin Mining
Partnership Program, the bill — which can be tweaked between states — mandates
that state departments of environmental protection create programs that
partner with Bitcoin miners to offer them liability for the state’s abandoned
wells, as well as federal funds from well-plugging initiatives created by the
2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). The bill has already been
introduced in Oklahoma, Mississippi and Texas.
Environmentalists caution that going this route will only extend the lifeline
of fossil fuel assets that are in desperate need of retirement. In the long
term, they argue, adding cryptocurrency facilities to dying oil wells will
further entrench us in fossil fuel dependency by creating newfound demand for
oil and gas.
“Crypto has the specter of restarting fossil [fuel] in Pennsylvania,”
McPhedran said. “We’re a state that has seen a lot of harmful effects from
coal and gas, and we don’t need a new way to use fossil fuels.”
A Diversified spokesperson told Capital & Main that the company endeavors to
“minimize” its “environmental footprint” while “providing clean energy” to
communities. The company told Capital & Main it believes it is in compliance
with environmental law.
“Diversified takes pride in the responsible stewardship model we have built,
where we focus on improving and managing producing natural gas and oil wells
from acquisition through retirement,” Diversified’s spokesperson said.
**Robert Routh, public policy and regulatory attorney at Clean Air Council,
who co-authored the comment with McPhedran and Rob Altenburg, senior director
for energy and climate at PennFuture, notes that the true volume of
cryptocurrency mining across Pennsylvania has proven difficult to track,
because some miners avert the permitting process entirely, attaching data
centers to wells in remote areas for varying lengths of time without
regulators ever taking note. Perhaps the most famous local instance of this
took place in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania, in January 2022, when a DEP
inspector stopped by a natural gas well site owned by Big Dog Energy only to
find that the company had installed data centers and accompanying generators
on it without authorization.**
“The mobility and the remoteness of some of these operations occurring at well
sites in Pennsylvania makes them and their pollution extremely difficult to
quantify,” Routh says.
But local communities around these sites are beginning to notice. Just 14
miles from Longhorn Pad C, the township of St. Mary’s recently adopted a
zoning ordinance for future cryptocurrency projects that requires all future
mines to be set at least 100 feet from a street or property boundary, to stay
within a maximum sound level and to produce evidence that they won’t adversely
affect the city’s electrical grid or Wi-Fi connections. A zoning officer with
the city told Capital & Main that the City Council was prompted to pass the
ordinance in part in response to Diversified’s cryptocurrency permit
application.
**And in Jay Township, the Board of Supervisors is urging the PA-DEP to
account for noise limitations as it considers permits for Longhorn Pad C.
“What efforts are being made to reduce the unreasonable noise beyond the
property line?” they wrote in their comment.**
The PA-DEP has yet to issue a permit for the well, but if it does, that would
be against the law, argue the comment authors, who believe the operator’s
unaddressed environmental violations would render it ineligible for new
permits under the state’s Air Pollution Control Act. The PA-DEP’s Decker did
not comment on how Diversified’s premature installation of equipment would
affect its pending permit application.
“We can only say that it is a violation and PA-DEP could take enforcement
action in cases where it becomes known,” he said.
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/27/pennsylvania-now-has-crypto-
mining-problems-including-sustained-noise-ghg-emissions/>
# [IPCC Says Fossil Fuels Must Be Closed Down ASAP To Avoid Catastrophic
Events](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/26/ipcc-says-fossil-fuels-must-
be-closed-down-asap-to-avoid-catastrophic-events/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/FBF90FE8-3B44-4060-83A1-426E8EF4C13E-300x273.jpg)](…
content/uploads/2023/03/FBF90FE8-3B44-4060-83A1-426E8EF4C13E.jpeg)
“Keep It In The Ground” where Mother Nature Put It!
**TEN (10) POLICIES FOR LIMITING G.H.G. AND MEETING CLIMATE GOALS**
From an [Article by Joseph Winters, Grist
Magazine](https://grist.org/economics/the-ipcc-says-we-need-to-phase-down-
fossil-fuels-fast-heres-how-the-us-could-do-it/), March 24, 2023
**The IPCC says we need to phase down fossil fuels, fast. Here’s how the US
could do it. A new report lists 10 policies to constrain polluting
infrastructure and achieve key climate goals.**
On Monday, a panel of the world’s top climate scientists released a grave
warning: Current policies are not enough to stave off the most devastating
consequences of climate change. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, or IPCC, climate pollution from the world’s existing coal,
oil, and gas projects is already enough to launch the planet past 1.5 degrees
Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming, and world leaders must abandon up
to $4 trillion in fossil fuels and related infrastructure by midcentury if
they want to keep within safe temperature limits.
Instead, rich countries like the United States are going in the opposite
direction. Just last week, President Joe Biden approved ConocoPhillips’ Willow
Project, a so-called “carbon bomb” that could add some 239 million metric tons
of carbon emissions to the atmosphere, about as much as the annual emissions
from 64 coal-fired power plants.
A new report released this week, “An Economist’s Case for Restrictive Supply-
Side Policies,” argues that bans, moratoria, and similar measures are sorely
needed to keep the United States from extracting more fossil fuels. It
highlights 10 policies that can complement clean energy investments to help
the country achieve the goals of the IPCC while also prioritizing the health
and economic security of America’s most vulnerable communities.
“The IPCC shows that restrictive supply-side measures have to be part of the
policy mix,” said Mark Paul, a Rutgers University professor and a coauthor of
the report. “We actually need to stop extracting and burning fossil fuels,
there’s just no way around it.”
Until quite recently, most American economists and policymakers have focused
on demand-side solutions to climate change — primarily a carbon price that
would leave curbing greenhouse gas emissions up to market forces. Supply-side
policies, on the other hand, are concerned with suppressing the amount of
fossil fuels available for purchase. They come in two flavors: supportive and
restrictive. Supportive supply-side policies include some of the tax credits
and subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act, the climate spending law that
Biden signed last year, which support renewable energy to displace fossil
fuels. Restrictive policies more actively seek to constrain fossil fuel
development.
Some of the most aggressive policies recommended in the new report would use
congressional authority to stop new fossil fuel projects, whether by banning
new leases for extraction on federal lands and in federal waters or by
outlawing all new pipelines, export terminals, gas stations, and other
infrastructure nationwide. Other measures would use economic levers to
restrict fossil fuel development. For example, taxing the fossil fuel
industry’s windfall profits could curtail supply by making oil and gas
production less profitable. Requiring publicly traded companies to disclose
their climate-related financial risks could also accelerate decarbonization by
making polluters without credible transition plans unattractive to investors.
The benefit of these policies, Paul said, is that they can directly constrain
carbon-intensive activities and therefore more certainly guarantee a reduction
in climate pollution. That’s not the case with demand-side policies, where
lawmakers have to hope that consumers’ behavior will lead to less fossil fuel
being produced and burned. (The Inflation Reduction Act included some of these
policies, like consumer subsidies for electric vehicles and other low-
emissions technologies.)
Restrictive supply-side policies in the U.S. can also support international
decarbonization. If the U.S. were to only reduce domestic demand for fossil
fuels while keeping supply high, it could reduce the price of oil, gas, and
coal abroad — incentivizing other countries to use more of those fuels.
That said, not all restrictive supply-side policies are an easy sell. Some,
like nationalizing the fossil fuel industry — which would effectively
neutralize the sector’s outsize political influence and allow it to be
dismantled in an orderly fashion — have not yet entered the political
mainstream. Others, however, are closer to reality, and five have previously
been introduced in congressional bills. The Keep It in the Ground Act, for
example, introduced in 2021 by Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley, from Oregon,
sought to prevent public lands and waters from being leased for fossil fuel
extraction. The 2021 Block All New Oil Exports Act, sponsored by Democratic
Senator Ed Markey, from Massachusetts, proposed reinstating a ban on exporting
U.S. crude oil and natural gas, which was in place for 40 years before
Congress lifted it in 2015.
Philipe Le Billon, a geography professor at the University of British Columbia
who runs a database on restrictive supply-side policies to curtail fossil
fuels around the world, said ending federal subsidies to the fossil fuel
industry is the policy most likely to garner bipartisan political support. “It
would be so easy to say, ‘Come on, you made $200 billion last year, so no more
subsidies,’” he told Grist. The End Polluter Welfare Act, introduced in 2021
by Democratic Senator Bernie Sanders, from Vermont, and Democratic
Representative Ilhan Omar, from Minnesota, sought to do just that, in addition
to stopping public funds from being used for fossil fuel research and
development.
The fossil fuel industry gets somewhere between $10 and $50 billion in U.S.
subsidies every year.
Paul said it’s hard to imagine any of the policies being enacted while the
House of Representatives is under Republican leadership, but he highlighted
the climate-related financial risk disclosure policy as a candidate for
bipartisan support, since it seeks to inform action from investors. “Even the
staunchest capitalist should be on board with this,” he said. Outside of
Congress, the Securities and Exchange Commission, an independent federal
agency that protects investors from financial fraud and manipulation, has
proposed such a policy.
Subnational “fossil-free zones” — areas that are off-limits to some or all
types of fossil fuel development, like oil and gas drilling, gas stations, or
export terminals — could be promising too; they’ve already been declared in
many communities, and they demonstrate how combined demand- and supply-side
interventions could play a role in a more comprehensive fossil fuel phaseout.
To gain momentum for restrictive supply-side policies, Paul said it’s crucial
to educate policymakers about “the actual math” behind U.S. and international
climate goals. Investments in clean energy are a good start, Paul said, but
they’re just “the first bite out of the apple. We need many more bites to
limit emissions and preserve some semblance of a habitable planet.”
###
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/26/ipcc-says-fossil-fuels-must-be-
closed-down-asap-to-avoid-catastrophic-events/>
# [CLIMATE CHANGE IS NOW A CRISIS ~ “Time is Running Out” ~ Let’s Admit
It!](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/25/climate-change-is-now-a-
crisis-%e2%80%9ctime-is-running-out%e2%80%9d-let%e2%80%99s-admit-it/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/F8803F69-0E91-4FF0-9248-3793F51A3863.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/F8803F69-0E91-4FF0-9248-3793F51A3863.jpeg)
Keeling Curve showing how carbon dioxide is accumulating in the atmosphere
**' Time is Running Out,' American Petroleum Institute Chief Said in 1965
Speech on Climate**
From an [Article by Sharon Kelly, DeSmog
Blog](https://www.desmog.com/2018/11/20/american-petroleum-
institute-1965-speech-climate-change-oil-gas/), November 20, 2018
The warning is clear and dire — and the source unexpected. “This report
unquestionably will fan emotions, raise fears, and bring demand for action,”
the president of the American Petroleum Institute (API) told an oil industry
conference, as he described research into climate change caused by fossil
fuels.
**“The substance of the report is that there is still time to save the world’s
peoples from the catastrophic consequence of pollution, but time is running
out.”** ~~~ The speaker wasn’t Mike Sommers, who was named to helm API this
past May. Nor was it Jack Gerard, who served as API’s president for roughly a
decade starting in 2008. **The API president speaking those words was named
Frank Ikard — and the year was 1965, over a half-century ago.**
It was the same year that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. led a civil rights march
from Selma to Montgomery, Muhammad Ali felled Sonny Liston in the first round,
and Malcom X was fatally shot in New York. The first American ground combat
troops arrived in Vietnam and President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the law
establishing Medicaid and Medicare.
It would be another four years before American astronaut Neil Armstrong first
set foot on the moon — and another decade before the phrase “global warming”
would appear for the first time in a peer-reviewed study.
And 1965, according to a letter by Stanford historian Benjamin Franta
published this week in the peer-reviewed journal Nature, was the year that
President Johnson’s Science Advisory Committee published a report titled
“Restoring the Quality of Our Environment,” whose findings Ikard described at
that year’s annual API meeting.
“One of the most important predictions of the report is that carbon dioxide is
being added to the Earth’s atmosphere by the burning of coal, oil, and natural
gas at such a rate that by the year 2000 the heat balance will be so modified
as possibly to cause marked changes in climate beyond local or even national
efforts,” Ikard presciently added, according to excerpts from his speech
published in Nature.
**Text of a speech by American Petroleum Institute leadership on climate
change** ~~~
_“This report unquestionably will fan emotions, raise fears, and bring demands
for action. The substance of the report is that there is still time to save
the world 's peoples from the catastrophic consequence of pollution, but time
is running out.
“One of the most important predictions of the report is that carbon dioxide is
being added to the earth's atmosphere by the burning of coal, oil, and natural
gas at such a rate that by the year 2000 the heat balance will be so modified
as possibly to cause marked changes in climate beyond local or even national
efforts.
“The report further states, and I quote: "..the pollution from internal
combustion engines is so serious, and is growing so fast, that an alternative
nonpolluting means of powering automobiles, buses, and trucks is likely to
become a national necessity.”_
—- Exerpt of API President Frank Ikard’s 1965 speech on climate change and
fossil fuels.
**API Funded Early Research Linking CO2 and Fossil Fuels**
That prediction was based in part on information that was known to the oil
industry trade group for over a decade — including research that was directly
funded by the API, according to Nature.
In 1954, a California Institute of Technology geochemist sent the API a
research proposal in which they reported that fossil fuels had already caused
carbon dioxide (CO2) levels to rise roughly five percent since 1854 — a
finding that Nature notes has since proved to be accurate.
API accepted the proposal and funded that Caltech research, giving the program
the name Project 53. Project 53 collected thousands of CO2 measurements — but
the results were never published.
Meanwhile, other researchers were reaching similar conclusions. Nuclear
physicist Edward Teller became known in 1951 as the “father of the hydrogen
bomb” for designing a thermonuclear bomb that was even more powerful than the
atomic bombs dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Teller warned the oil and gas
industry in 1959 about global warming and sea level rise in a talk titled
“Energy Patterns of the Future.”
“Carbon dioxide has a strange property,” Teller said in excerpts published
earlier this year by The Guardian. “It transmits visible light but it absorbs
the infrared radiation which is emitted from the earth. Its presence in the
atmosphere causes a greenhouse effect.”
A researcher at Humble Oil Co. (now known as ExxonMobil) checked results from
a study of carbon isotopes in tree rings against the unpublished Caltech
results, and found that the two separate methods essentially
**And in 1960, Charles Keeling first published the measurements that became
the famous “Keeling curve” — establishing one of the bedrock findings
connecting climate change to fossil fuels. The CO2 measurements taken by
Keeling back in the late 1950s showed levels of roughly 315 parts per million
(ppm) at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii and rising.**
**Those CO2 levels have since climbed upwards to 410.13 (ppm) on the day that
the Nature letter was published — CO2 levels that scientists knew both then
and now would be dangerously high, as carbon levels in the Earth’s atmosphere
have not been over 410 ppm in millions of years.**
**What the Oil Industry Knew, Then and Now (2018)**
In his 1965 talk, the API’s Ikard described the role of oil and gasoline
specifically in causing climate change. “The report further states, and I
quote: ‘… the pollution from internal combustion engines is so serious, and is
growing so fast,’” he told the API conference, “‘that an alternative
nonpolluting means of powering automobiles, buses, and trucks is likely to
become a national necessity.’”
Three decades later, the API urged a different approach to climate science.
“It’s not known for sure whether (a) climate change actually is occurring, or
(b) if it is, whether humans really have any influence on it,” the API wrote
in a 1998 draft memo titled “Global Climate Science Communications Plan,”
which was subsequently leaked.
It’s worth noting that since 1965, the science connecting climate change to
fossil fuels has grown stronger and more robust. A scientific consensus around
the hazards of climate change and the role that fossil fuels play in causing
it has formed.
“Rigorous analysis of all data and lines of evidence shows that most of the
observed global warming over the past 50 years or so cannot be explained by
natural causes and instead requires a significant role for the influence of
human activities,” the Royal Society explains.
**Today, the API continues to call for further research on climate change —
and expanding the use of fossil fuels in the meantime.** “It is clear that
climate change is a serious issue that requires research for solutions and
effective policies that allow us to meet our energy needs while protecting the
environment: that’s why oil and gas companies are working to reduce their
greenhouse gas emissions,” the API’s webpage on climate change states.
**“Yet archival documents show that even before Keeling published his
measurements,” Franta’s letter published by Nature says, “oil industry leaders
were aware that their products were causing CO2 pollution to accumulate in the
planet’s atmosphere, in a potentially dangerous fashion.”**
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/25/climate-change-is-now-a-
crisis-%e2%80%9ctime-is-running-out%e2%80%9d-let%e2%80%99s-admit-it/>
# [Major Event on the “IRA” @ Public Library in Wheeling,
WV](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/24/major-event-on-
the-%e2%80%9cira%e2%80%9d-public-library-in-wheeling-wv/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/38322C17-C1B4-41FB-
BE3A-BB0D9B1744DA-300x118.jpg)](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/38322C17-C1B4-41FB-BE3A-BB0D9B1744DA.jpeg)
West Virginia is in the Spotlight of transition already
(Click on this image to magnify it)
**To All Local Citizens & Residents Able to Attend**
From the Coalition of Regional Organizations, CCAN, SUN, WV Rivers, CAG, New
Jobs & WV-EE
**How can the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) help YOU save money?** [Join our
FREE event on Saturday, March 25th in Wheeling,
WV](https://www.eventbrite.com/e/ira-roadshow-wheeling-tickets-590196582867).
For nearly two years, we endured the many bumps and roadblocks traversing the
long and winding road that led us to the passage of the Inflation Reduction
Act (IRA). Now this historic climate legislation has the potential to deeply
impact our lives and the world around us by investing in clean energy, energy
efficiency and community development initiatives. But you might wonder…
[How will the IRA actually impact YOUR life? Let us tell
you!](https://www.eventbrite.com/e/ira-roadshow-wheeling-tickets-5901965828…
**Join us Saturday, March 25, at 12:30 PM in Wheeling for an exciting FREE in-
person presentation on how the Inflation Reduction Act can benefit YOU and
your community!**
The IRA is full of unprecedented investments and ambitious climate policies
that can cut climate pollution 40 percent by 2030 and 50 percent by 2035 while
creating hundreds of thousands of family sustaining jobs while advancing
racial, economic and environmental justice. _Are you in?_
Join us March 25 in Wheeling to learn how to sort through this enormous bill
and find out how you can personally save money, make energy efficient updates
to your home, uplift your community and much, much more!
**CCAN will be joining forces with Leah Barbor from Solar United Neighbors,
Morgan King from West Virginia Rivers, Dani Parent from West Virginia Citizen
Action Group, Brandi Reece from WV New Jobs Coalition and Morgan Fowler from
West Virginians for Energy Efficiency to show how individuals, municipalities,
and organizations can benefit from millions of dollars of investments
contained in the Inflation Reduction Act.**
[Click here to RSVP for March 25 and learn how you and your community can
benefit from these investments.](https://www.eventbrite.com/e/ira-roadshow-
wheeling-tickets-590196582867)
**If you want to learn more but can’t make it to Wheeling** , rest assured! We
have many more IRA Roadshows planned for the upcoming months. [Click this link
to learn more about our next stops in Morgantown and
Huntington](https://www.eventbrite.com/e/ira-roadshow-wheeling-
tickets-590196582867).
**Invite everyone you know and we 'll see you there!**
>>> Prepared by Holly Bradley, Federal Team, Chesapeake Climate Action Network
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/24/major-event-on-
the-%e2%80%9cira%e2%80%9d-public-library-in-wheeling-wv/>
# [EXXON knew quite accurately ~ some 45 years ago ~ about the Climate
Crisis!](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/23/exxon-knew-quite-accuratel…
some-45-years-ago-about-the-climate-crisis/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/9F67D019-1B1B-43C8-8F41-5E46C00041B4-300x265.jpg)](…
content/uploads/2023/03/9F67D019-1B1B-43C8-8F41-5E46C00041B4.jpeg)
EXXON knew more and pretended not ….
**Exxon disputed climate findings for years & Its scientists knew better**
From an [Article by Alice McCarthy, Harvard
Gazette](https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/01/harvard-led-analysi…
finds-exxonmobil-internal-research-accurately-predicted-climate-change/),
January 12, 2023
**Research shows that EXXON modeled and predicted global warming with
'shocking skill and accuracy' starting in the 1970s**
GRAPH CITATION ~ Summary of all global warming projections reported by
ExxonMobil scientists in internal documents between 1977 and 2003 (gray
lines), superimposed on historically observed temperature change (red). Solid
gray lines indicate global warming projections modeled by ExxonMobil
scientists themselves; dashed gray lines indicate projections internally
reproduced by ExxonMobil scientists from third-party sources. Shades of gray
scale with model start dates, from earliest (1977: lightest) to latest (2003:
darkest).
Projections created internally by ExxonMobil starting in the late 1970s on the
impact of fossil fuels on climate change were very accurate, even surpassing
those of some academic and governmental scientists, according to an analysis
published in Science by a team of Harvard-led researchers. Despite those
forecasts, team leaders say, the multinational energy giant continued to sow
doubt about the gathering crisis.
In “ **Assessing ExxonMobil’s Global Warming Projections** ,” researchers from
Harvard and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research show for the
first time the accuracy of previously unreported forecasts created by company
scientists from 1977 through 2003.
The Harvard team discovered that Exxon researchers created a series of
remarkably reliable models and analyses projecting global warming from carbon
dioxide emissions over the coming decades. Specifically, Exxon projected that
fossil fuel emissions would lead to 0.20 degrees Celsius of global warming per
decade, with a margin of error of 0.04 degrees — a trend that has been proven
largely accurate.
**“This paper is the first ever systematic assessment of a fossil fuel
company’s climate projections, the first time we’ve been able to put a number
on what they knew,” said Geoffrey Supran, lead author and former research
fellow in the History of Science at Harvard. “What we found is that between
1977 and 2003, excellent scientists within Exxon modeled and predicted global
warming with, frankly, shocking skill and accuracy only for the company to
then spend the next couple of decades denying that very climate science.”**
“We thought this was a unique opportunity to understand what Exxon knew about
this issue and what level of scientific understanding they had at the time,”
added co-author Naomi Oreskes, Henry Charles Lea Professor of the History of
Science whose work looks at the causes and effects of climate change denial.
“We found that not only were their forecasts extremely skillful, but they were
also often more skillful than forecasts made by independent academic and
government scientists at the exact same time.”
Allegations that oil company executives sought to mislead the public about the
industry’s role in climate change have drawn increasing scrutiny in recent
years, including lawsuits by several states and cities and a recent high
profile U.S. House committee investigation.
Harvard’s scientists used established Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) statistical techniques to test the performance of Exxon’s
models. They found that, depending on the metric used, 63-83 percent of the
global warming projections reported by Exxon scientists were consistent with
actual temperatures over time. Moreover, the corporation’s own projections had
an average “skill score” of 72 percent, plus or minus 6 percent, with the
highest scoring 99 percent. A skill score relates to how well a forecast
compares to what happens in real life. For comparison, NASA scientist James
Hansen’s global warming predictions presented to the U.S. Congress in 1988 had
scores from 38 to 66 percent.
**The researchers report that Exxon scientists correctly dismissed the
possibility of a coming ice age, accurately predicted that human-caused global
warming would first be detectable in the year 2000, plus or minus five years,
and reasonably estimated how much CO2 would lead to dangerous warming.**
The current debate about when Exxon knew about the impact on climate change
carbon emissions began in 2015 following news reports of internal company
documents describing the multinational’s early knowledge of climate science.
Exxon disagreed with the reports, even providing a link to internal studies
and memos from their own scientists and suggesting that interested parties
should read them and make up their own minds.
“That’s exactly what we did,” said Supran, who is now at the University of
Miami. Together, he and Oreskes spent a year researching those documents and
in 2017 published a series of three papers analyzing Exxon’s 40-year history
of climate communications. They were able to show there was a systematic
discrepancy between what Exxon was saying internally and in academic circles
versus what they were telling the public. “That led us to conclude that they
had quantifiably misled the public, by essentially contributing quietly to
climate science and yet loudly promoting doubt about that science,” said
Supran.
In 2021, the team published a new study in One Earth using algorithmic
techniques to identify ways in which ExxonMobil used increasingly subtle but
systematic language to shape the way the public talks and thinks about climate
change — often in misleading ways.
These findings were hardly a surprise to Oreskes, given her long history of
studying climate communications from fossil fuel companies, work that drew
national attention with her 2010 bestseller, “Merchants of Doubt.” In it she
and co-author, Caltech researcher Erik Conway, argued that Exxon was aware of
the threat of carbon emissions on climate change yet waged a disinformation
campaign about the problem. Despite the book’s popularity and the peer-
reviewed papers with Supran, however, some continued to wonder whether she
could prove the effect these campaigns had, if they indeed made a difference.
“I think this new study is the smoking gun, the proof, because it shows the
degree of understanding … this really deep, really sophisticated, really
skillful understanding that was obscured by what came next,” Oreskes said. “It
proves a point I’ve argued for years that ExxonMobil scientists knew about
this problem to a shockingly fine degree as far back as the 1980s, but company
spokesmen denied, challenged, and obscured this science, starting in the late
1980s/early 1990s.”
**Added Supran: “Our analysis here I think seals the deal on that matter. We
now have totally unimpeachable evidence that Exxon accurately predicted global
warming years before it turned around and publicly attacked climate science
and scientists.”**
>>> The authors of this research were supported by a Rockefeller Family Fund
grant and Harvard University Faculty Development funds.
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/23/exxon-knew-quite-accurately-
some-45-years-ago-about-the-climate-crisis/>
# [EXXONMOBIL Completes Major Refinery Expansion in East
Texas](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/22/exxonmobil-completes-major-
refinery-expansion-in-east-texas/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/59C0A05F-3120-4E36-BDA4-676BBBD4CA60.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/59C0A05F-3120-4E36-BDA4-676BBBD4CA60.jpeg)
Beaumont, Orange and Port Arthur form the Golden Triangle, the nickname of the
3 towns being the economic powers of East Texas.
**ExxonMobil commissions Beaumont refinery expansion**
.
.
From an [Article by Robert Brelsford, Oil & Gas
Journal](https://www.ogj.com/refining-
processing/refining/article/14291142/exxonmobil-commissions-beaumont-refinery-
expansion), March 16, 2023
.
.
ExxonMobil Corp. has started up its long-planned project to expand light crude
oil processing capacity by 250,000 b/d at ExxonMobil Product Solutions Co.’s
integrated refining and petrochemicals complex along the US Gulf Coast in
Beaumont, Tex.
**Officially in operation as of Mar. 16, the $2-billion Beaumont expansion —
completed on time and within budget despite difficulties posed by outbreak of
the global pandemic following start of project construction in 2019 —
increases the refinery’s overall crude processing capacity to more than
630,000 b/d, the operator said.**
Proposed in 2018 and formally approved in early 2019, the expansion added a
third crude unit and hydrotreaters to accommodate the operator’s growing
Permian light crude production, to which the refinery is linked via pipeline.
ExxonMobil said the Beaumont refinery’s new crude unit also will be well-
positioned to further capitalize on segregated crude from the Permian’s
Delaware basin. Delaware production will be delivered via the ExxonMobil
Pipeline Co.-operated 650-mile, 36-in.Wink-to-Webster (W2W) pipeline that
delivers to Webster, Baytown, and the Enterprise Crude Houston Oil terminal,
in addition to providing connectivity to Texas City and Beaumont.
An ExxonMobil spokesperson told OGJ the Beaumont refinery also has completed
connecting pipeline additions at the site to accommodate the expansion’s
increased intake and offtake of crude and finished products, respectively.
“ExxonMobil maintained its commitment to the Beaumont expansion even through
the lows of the pandemic, knowing consumer demand would return and new
capacity would be critical in the post-pandemic economic recovery,” said Karen
McKee, president of ExxonMobil Product Solutions.
“The new crude unit enables us to produce even more transportation fuels at a
time when demand is surging,” McKee said, noting the recent expansion adds the
equivalent capacity of a medium-sized refinery.
Technip Energies (formerly TechipFMC PLC) provided engineering, procurement,
and construction (EPC) of four units added as part of the expansion—including
an atmospheric pipe still, kerosine hydrotreater, diesel hydrotreater, and
benzene recovery unit—while KBR Inc. delivered EPC services for the project
offsites and interconnecting units.
**Permian oil-field growth continues**
In its earnings presentation for fourth-quarter 2022 and preliminary results
for yearend 2022, ExxonMobil said it increased year-over-year net production
from the Permian by about 90,000 boe/d to about 550,000-560,000 boe/d, with
overall production from its regional operations anticipated to reach more than
600,000 boe/d during 2023.
By 2027, the operator said it plans to grow Permian output to about 1 million
boe/d amid ongoing improvements in capital efficiency, lower costs, higher
resource recovery, and better environmental performance.
**ExxonMobil confirmed that by the end of fourth-quarter 2022 it had
eliminated routine flaring from its Permian operations by 100% as part of the
company’s efforts to achieve net-zero Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions from the region by 2030.**
#######+++++++#######+++++++#######
**SEE ALSO:** [Willow Oil Project in Alaska Faces Legal Challenges, Economic
Doubts,](https://www.theenergymix.com/2023/03/19/willow-oil-project-in-alas…
faces-legal-challenges-economic-doubts/) Gaye Taylor, The Energy Mix, March
19, 2023
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/22/exxonmobil-completes-major-
refinery-expansion-in-east-texas/>
# [‘SYNTHESIS REPORT’ on Climate Crisis Coming Today from UNITED
NATIONS](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/20/%e2%80%98synthesis-
report%e2%80%99-on-climate-crisis-coming-today-from-united-nations/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/4A10F360-84B6-437E-8718-5357178C8005.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/4A10F360-84B6-437E-8718-5357178C8005.jpeg)
The all-important ‘synthesis report’ will be the primary working document for
the next 10 years
**Nations approve key UN science report on climate change**
News from Article by [Frank Jordans, ABC
News](https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/fight-science-holds-key-
climate-report-97971652), March 19, 2023
**ASSOCIATED PRESS -- Governments gave their blessing on Sunday to a major new
U.N. report on climate change, after approval was held up by a battle between
rich and developing countries over emissions targets and financial aid to
vulnerable nations.**
**The report by hundreds of the world’s top scientists was supposed to be
approved by government delegations on Friday at the end of a weeklong meeting
in the Swiss town of Interlaken.**
The closing gavel was repeatedly pushed back as officials from big nations
such as China, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, the United States and the European Union
haggled through the weekend over the wording of key phrases in the text.
The report by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change caps a series
that digests vast amounts of research on global warming compiled since the
Paris climate accord was agreed in 2015.
**A summary of the report was approved early Sunday but agreement on the main
text dragged on for several more hours** , with some observers fearing it
might need to be postponed. The unusual process of having countries sign off
on a scientific report is intended to ensure that governments accept its
findings as authoritative advice on which to base their actions.
At the start of the meeting, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres called on
delegates to provide “ cold, hard facts ” to drive home the message that
there's little time left for the world to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees
Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) compared with preindustrial times.
While average global temperatures have already increased by 1.1 Celsius since
the 19th century, Guterrres insisted that the 1.5-degree target limit remains
possible "with rapid and deep emissions reductions across all sectors of the
global economy.”
Observers said the IPCC meetings have increasingly become politicized as the
stakes for curbing global warming increase, mirroring the annual U.N. climate
talks that usually take place at the end of the year.
Among the thorniest issues at the current meeting were how to define which
nations count as vulnerable developing countries, making them eligible for
cash from a “loss and damage” fund agreed on at the last U.N. climate talks in
Egypt. Delegates have also battled over figures stating how much greenhouse
gas emissions need to be cut by over the coming years, and how to include
artificial or natural carbon removal efforts in the equations.
As the country that has released the biggest amount of carbon dioxide into the
atmosphere since industrialization, the United States has pushed back strongly
against the notion of historic responsibility for climate change.
**The U.N. plans to publish the report at a news conference early Monday
afternoon, March 20th.**
___
**SEE ALSO:** [What is the IPCC AR6 synthesis report and why does it
matter?](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/19/what-is-the-ip…
ar6-synthesis-report-and-why-does-it-matter) ~ Fiona Harvey, The Guardian UK,
March 19, 2023
**Summary report by world’s leading climate scientists sets out actions to
stave off climate breakdown**
The fourth and final installment of the sixth assessment report (AR6) by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the body of the world’s leading
climate scientists, is the synthesis report, so called because it draws
together the key findings of the preceding three main sections. Together, they
make a comprehensive review of global knowledge of the climate.
The first three sections covered the physical science of the climate crisis,
including observations and projections of global heating, the impacts of the
climate crisis and how to adapt to them, and ways of reducing greenhouse gas
emissions. They were published in August 2021, February and April 2022
respectively.
The synthesis report also includes three other shorter IPCC reports published
since 2018, on the impacts of global heating of more than 1.5C above pre-
industrial levels, climate change and land, and climate change and the oceans
and cryosphere (the ice caps and glaciers).
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/20/%e2%80%98synthesis-
report%e2%80%99-on-climate-crisis-coming-today-from-united-nations/>
# [Chevron Seeks to Produce Safe Fuels from Plastics, But … (not so
fast)](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/19/chevron-seeks-to-produce-saf…
fuels-from-plastics-but-%e2%80%a6-not-so-fast/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/867C24F8-D8E2-4432-AC7B-CD81E061271B.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/867C24F8-D8E2-4432-AC7B-CD81E061271B.jpeg)
Fuels derived from plastics are generally toxic or worse!
**This “Climate-Friendly” Fuel Comes With an Astronomical Cancer Risk**
From an [Article by Sharon Lerner,
ProPublica](https://www.propublica.org/article/chevron-pascagoula-pollution-
future-cancer-risk), February 23, 2023
**The Environmental Protection Agency recently gave a Chevron refinery the
green light to create fuel from discarded plastics as part of a “climate-
friendly” initiative to boost alternatives to petroleum. But, according to
agency records, the production of one of the fuels could emit air pollution
that is so toxic, 1 out of 4 people exposed to it over a lifetime could get
cancer.**
**“That kind of risk is obscene,”** said Linda Birnbaum, former head of the
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. “You can’t let that get
out.”
That risk is 250,000 times greater than the level usually considered
acceptable by the EPA division that approves new chemicals. Chevron hasn’t
started making this jet fuel yet, the EPA said. When the company does, the
cancer burden will disproportionately fall on people who have low incomes and
are Black because of the population that lives within 3 miles of the refinery
in Pascagoula, Mississippi.
ProPublica asked Maria Doa, a scientist who worked at the EPA for 30 years, to
review the document laying out the risk. Doa, who once ran the division that
managed the risks posed by chemicals, was so alarmed by the cancer threat that
she initially assumed it was a typographical error. **“EPA should not allow
these risks in Pascagoula or anywhere,” said Doa, who now is the senior
director of chemical policy at Environmental Defense Fund.**
In response to questions, an EPA spokesperson wrote that the agency’s lifetime
cancer risk calculation is “a very conservative estimate with ‘high
uncertainty,’” meaning the government erred on the side of caution in
calculating such a high risk.
Under federal law, the EPA can’t approve new chemicals with serious health or
environmental risks unless it comes up with ways to minimize the dangers. And
if the EPA is unsure, the law allows the agency to order lab testing that
would clarify the potential health and environmental harms. In the case of
these new plastic-based fuels, the agency didn’t do either of those things. In
approving the jet fuel, the EPA didn’t require any lab tests, air monitoring
or controls that would reduce the release of the cancer-causing pollutants or
people’s exposure to them.
**In January 2022, the EPA announced the initiative to streamline the approval
of petroleum alternatives in what a press release called “part of the Biden-
Harris Administration’s actions to confront the climate crisis.” While the
program cleared new fuels made from plants, it also signed off on fuels made
from plastics even though they themselves are petroleum-based and contribute
to the release of planet-warming greenhouse gases.
**
Although there’s no mention of discarded plastics in the press release or on
the EPA website’s description of the program, an agency spokesperson said that
it allows them because the initiative also covers fuels made from waste. The
spokesperson said that 16 of the 34 fuels the program approved so far are made
from waste. She would not say how many of those are made from plastic and
stated that such information was confidential.
All of the waste-based fuels are the subject of consent orders, documents the
EPA issues when it finds that new chemicals or mixtures may pose an
“unreasonable risk” to human health or the environment. The documents specify
those risks and the agency’s instructions for mitigating them.
But the agency won’t turn over these records or reveal information about the
waste-based fuels, even their names and chemical structures. Without those
basic details, it’s nearly impossible to determine which of the thousands of
consent orders on the EPA website apply to this program. In keeping this
information secret, the EPA cited a legal provision that allows companies to
claim as confidential any information that would give their competitors an
advantage in the marketplace.
Nevertheless, one consent order covers a dozen Chevron fuels made from
plastics that were reviewed under the program. Although the EPA had blacked
out sections, including the chemicals’ names, that document showed that the
fuels that Chevron plans to make at its Pascagoula refinery present serious
health risks, including developmental problems in children and cancer and harm
to the nervous system, reproductive system, liver, kidney, blood and spleen.
**Aside from the chemical that carries a 25% lifetime risk of cancer from
smokestack emissions, another of the Chevron fuels ushered in through the
program is expected to cause 1.2 cancers in 10,000 people — also far higher
than the agency allows for the general population. The EPA division that
screens new chemicals typically limits cancer risk from a single air pollutant
to 1 case of cancer in a million people. The agency also calculated that air
pollution from one of the fuels is expected to cause 7.1 cancers in every
1,000 workers — more than 70 times the level EPA’s new chemicals division
usually considers acceptable for workers.**
In addition to the chemicals released through the creation of fuels from
plastics, the people living near the Chevron refinery are exposed to an array
of other cancer-causing pollutants, as reported in 2021. In that series, which
mapped excess cancer risk from lifetime exposure to air pollution across the
U.S., the highest chance was 1 cancer in 53 people, in Port Arthur, Texas.
**The 1-in-4 lifetime cancer risk from breathing the emissions from the
Chevron jet fuel is higher even than the lifetime risk of lung cancer for
current smokers.**
In an email, Chevron spokesperson Ross Allen wrote: “It is incorrect to say
there is a 1-in-4 cancer risk from smokestack emissions. I urge you avoid
suggesting otherwise.” Asked to clarify what exactly was wrong, Allen wrote
that Chevron disagrees with the “characterization of language in the EPA
Consent Order.” That document, signed by a Chevron manager at its refinery in
Pascagoula, quantified the lifetime cancer risk from the inhalation of
smokestack air as 2.5 cancers in 10 people, which can also be stated as 1 in
4.
In a subsequent phone call, Allen said: “We do take care of our communities,
our workers and the environment generally. This is job one for Chevron.”
In a separate written statement, Chevron said it followed the EPA’s process
under the Toxic Substances Control Act: “The TSCA process is an important
first step to identify risks and if EPA identifies unreasonable risk, it can
limit or prohibit manufacture, processing or distribution in commerce during
applicable review period.”
The Chevron statement also said: “Other environmental regulations and
permitting processes govern air, water and handling hazardous materials.
Regulations under the Clean Water, Clean Air and Resource Conservation and
Recovery Acts also apply and protect the environment and the health and safety
of our communities and workers.”
Similarly, the EPA said that other federal laws and requirements might reduce
the risk posed by the pollution, including Occupational Safety and Health
Administration’s regulations for worker protection, the Clean Water Act, the
Clean Air Act and rules that apply to refineries.
But OSHA has warned the public not to rely on its outdated chemical standards.
The refinery rule calls for air monitoring only for one pollutant: benzene.
The Clean Water Act does not address air pollution. And the new fuels are not
regulated under the Clean Air Act, which applies to a specific list of
pollutants. Nor can states monitor for the carcinogenic new fuels without
knowing their names and chemical structures.
We asked Scott Throwe, an air pollution specialist who worked at the EPA for
30 years, how existing regulations could protect people in this instance. Now
an independent environmental consultant, Throwe said the existing testing and
monitoring requirements for refineries couldn’t capture the pollution from
these new plastic-based fuels because the rules were written before these
chemicals existed. There is a chance that equipment designed to limit the
release of other pollutants may incidentally capture some of the emissions
from the new fuels, he said. But there’s no way to know whether that is
happening.
Under federal law, companies have to apply to the EPA for permission to
introduce new chemicals or mixtures. But manufacturers don’t have to supply
any data showing their products are safe. So the EPA usually relies on studies
of similar chemicals to anticipate health effects. In this case, the EPA used
a mixture of chemicals made from crude oil to gauge the risks posed by the new
plastic-based fuels. Chevron told the EPA the chemical components of its new
fuel but didn’t give the precise proportions. So the EPA had to make some
assumptions, for instance that people absorb 100% of the pollution emitted.
Asked why it didn’t require tests to clarify the risks, a spokesperson wrote
that the “EPA does not believe these additional test results would change the
risks identified nor the unreasonable risks finding.”
In her three decades at the EPA, Doa had never seen a chemical with that high
a cancer risk that the agency allowed to be released into a community without
restrictions. “The only requirement seems to be just to use the chemicals as
fuel and have the workers wear gloves,” she said.
While companies have made fuels from discarded plastics before, this EPA
program gives them the same administrative break that renewable fuels receive:
a dedicated EPA team that combines the usual six regulatory assessments into a
single report.
The irony is that Congress created the Renewable Fuel Standard Program, which
this initiative was meant to support, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
boost the production of renewable fuels. Truly renewable energy sources can be
regenerated in a short period of time, such as plants or algae. While there is
significant debate about whether ethanol, which is made from corn, and other
plant-based renewable fuels are really better for the environment than fossil
fuels, there is no question that plastics are not renewable and that their
production and conversion into fuel releases climate-harming pollution.
Under the EPA’s Renewable Fuel Standard, biobased fuels must meet specific
criteria related to their biological origin as well as the amount they reduce
greenhouse gas emissions compared with petroleum-based fuels. But under this
new approach, fuels made from waste don’t have to meet those targets, the
agency said.
In its written statement, Chevron said that “plastics are an essential part of
modern life and plastic waste should not end up in unintended places in the
environment. We are taking steps to address plastic waste and support a
circular economy in which post-use plastic is recycled, reused or repurposed.”
**But environmentalists say such claims are just greenwashing.** Whatever you
call it, the creation of fuel from plastic is in some ways worse for the
climate than simply making it directly from fossil fuels. Over 99% of all
plastic is derived from fossil fuels, including coal, oil and gas. To produce
fuel from plastics, additional fossil fuels are used to generate the heat that
converts them into petrochemicals that can be used as fuel.
“It adds an extra step,” said Veena Singla, a senior scientist at NRDC. “They
have to burn a lot of stuff to power the process that transforms the plastic.”
Less than 6% of plastic waste is recycled in the U.S. Scientists estimate that
more than a million tons of that unrecycled plastic ends up in the environment
each year, killing marine mammals and polluting the world. Plastic does not
fully decompose; instead it eventually breaks down into tiny bits, some of
which wind up inside our bodies. As the public’s awareness of the health and
environmental harm grows, the plastics industry has found itself under
increasing pressure to find a use for the waste.
The idea of creating fuel from plastic offers the comforting sense that
plastics are sustainable. But the release of cancer-causing pollution is just
one of several significant problems that have plagued attempts to convert
discarded plastic into new things. One recent study by scientists from the
Department of Energy found that the economic and environmental costs of
turning old plastic into new using a process called pyrolysis were 10 to 100
times higher than those of making new plastics from fossil fuels. The lead
author said similar issues plague the use of this process to create fuels from
plastics.
**Chevron buys oil that another company extracts from discarded plastics
through pyrolysis. Though the parts of the consent order that aren’t blacked
out don’t mention that this oil came from waste plastics, a related EPA record
makes this clear. The cancer risks come from the pollution emitted from
Chevron’s smokestacks when the company turns that oil into fuel.**
The EPA attributed its decision to embark on the streamlined program in part
to its budget, which it says has been “essentially flat for the last six
years.” The EPA spokesperson said that the agency “has been working to
streamline its new chemicals work wherever possible.”
**The New Chemicals Division, which houses the program, has been under
particular pressure because updates to the chemicals law gave it additional
responsibilities and faster timetables. That division of the agency is also
the subject of an ongoing EPA Inspector General investigation into
whistleblowers’ allegations of corruption and industry influence over the
chemical approval process.**
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/19/chevron-seeks-to-produce-safe-
fuels-from-plastics-but-%e2%80%a6-not-so-fast/>
# [West Virginia Interfaith Power & Light is worthy of
support!](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/18/west-virginia-interfaith-
power-light-is-worthy-of-support/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/C847BBB3-F755-46BA-
BA88-F3FDCAF79F3B-300x169.png)](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/C847BBB3-F755-46BA-BA88-F3FDCAF79F3B.png)
WVIPL has performed important work here in WV over the past 20 years
**[Dear Friends and Supporters](https://wvipl.org/),**
**We are writing to you today with important information from the[West
Virginia Interfaith Power and Light](https://wvipl.org/) (WVIPL).**
**Faith Climate Action Week is coming up and Interfaith Power and Light has
released some great planning materials. You can find them here:**
<https://www.faithclimateactionweek.org/>
The theme for this year is **" Living the Golden Rule: Just Transition to a
Clean Energy Economy."** We hope you will check these resources out and
utilize them in your faith community.
The **WVIPL is on the verge of gaining independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit
status**. We will be developing a Board of Directors with officers. If you
have the time and interest in helping out, please contact Robin Blakeman at
_rbrobinjh(a)gmail.com_ , and include “ **WVIPL leadership** ” in the subject
line of your email.
With spring just around the corner, a time of rebirth and rejuvenation, we
thank you for your support and extend an ongoing invitation to be involved in
the important work of caring for our common home.
**Sincerely** , _[[WVIPL Steering Committee and
Staff](https://wvipl.org/)](https://wvipl.org/)_
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/18/west-virginia-interfaith-power-
light-is-worthy-of-support/>
# [American Conservation Film Festival was March 10 – 12 in Shepherdstown &
Elsewhere](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/17/american-conservation-fi…
festival-was-march-10-12-in-shepherdstown-elsewhere/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/564B615D-9705-415D-9E03-616827D10C3E-205x300.jpg)](…
content/uploads/2023/03/564B615D-9705-415D-9E03-616827D10C3E.jpeg)
Mary Anne Hitt was the Main Speaker on March 12th ……. (Click this image to
read it)
**@[American Conservation Film Festival
2023](https://conservationfilmfest.org/) @**
**Evolve Shepherdstown** (106 W. German Street) is the festival’s pop-up
headquarters, a place for guests to pop in and meet representatives from
conservation groups like **Solar Holler, Sky Truth, Trout Unlimited, WV
Rivers, Garden Stewards, and Oak Springs Garden Foundation.** Film stars and
filmmakers were popping in throughout the weekend, including the on-screen
personalities from Hellbent and Little Stream, Big Magic, and filmmaker Neil
Losin of sym•bee•o•sis.
At 1pm on Sunday afternoon, Shepherdstown resident **Mary Anne Hitt** ,
international climate advocate and activist, read an excerpt from her essay
included in **”All We Can Save: Truth, Courage and Solutions for the Climate
Crisis”**.
At 2pm, we learned more about West Virginia’s native brook trout and star of
the film, “ **Little Stream, Big Magic** ” from **Than Hitt** , research
biologist. Did you miss the art installation “ **School of Trout** ” created
by fourth grade students at Shepherdstown Elementary School. Over 50
beautifully collaged trout greeted visitors to Evolve all weekend.
Admission was free. Evolve was open Sat & Sun 11AM to 5PM.
#######+++++++#######+++++++########
**The[American Conservation Film
Festival](https://conservationfilmfest.org/action-opportunities/) 2023**
If you value exceptional filmmaking on stories that literally change lives and
an organization devoted to the curation and presentation of those stories,
please consider a donation to ACFF. We so appreciate your support and look
forward to fulfilling our mission for years to come. And we send each of you
our wishes for your well-being and continued engagement with the things that
bring you joy and solace.
**ACFF Environmental Efforts Throughout the Year**
Whenever possible, our staff works from home offices in order to reduce fuel
demand and pollution. To reduce environmental impacts, staff has reduced their
intake of meat and dairy and some are vegetarian. Some of our staff has
invested in zero emission, hybrid vehicles and walk to the office, weather
permitting. For long distance business trips, carpooling or public
transportation is utilized as much as possible. Meetings are often conducted
using video conferencing with Zoom or via conference call to cut down on
driving. There is more ….
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/17/american-conservation-film-
festival-was-march-10-12-in-shepherdstown-elsewhere/>
# [Activities Underway in West Virginia to Address the PFAS Issues ~ Traces
are Toxic](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/16/activities-underway-in-
west-virginia-to-address-the-pfas-issues-traces-are-toxic/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/8371E544-6E6F-47DA-A0CD-A616331F0876.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/8371E544-6E6F-47DA-A0CD-A616331F0876.jpeg)
Delegate Evan Hansen provides leadership on this PFAS legislation
**State will get $18 million in federal funds to deal with PFAS chemicals in
drinking water**
From the [Article by David Beard, Morgantown Dominion Post (Yahoo!
News)](https://news.yahoo.com/state-18-million-federal-funds-023100710.html),
March 15, 2023
**MORGANTOWN — West Virginia will receive more than $18 million in federal
funds to address the presence of potentially toxic PFAS chemicals in drinking
water.**
State Health Officer Matthew Christiansen shared that news during Gov. Jim
Justice's Wednesday administration update press briefing. Justice was
reviewing legislation completed during the recent session, and HB 3189 — the
PFAS bill — is awaiting his signature.
**Christiansen reminded listeners that the U.S. EPA recently set maximum
contaminant levels for two members of the PFAS family — PFOA and PFOS — at 4
parts per trillion. EPA also recommended calculations for four other PFAS
compounds.**
Expecting that to happen, the Department of Health and Human Resources and the
Department of Environmental Protection formed a working group to help local
water systems develop plans to treat drinking water for PFAS. Christiansen's
bureau is part of DHHR and he said, "The Bureau for Public Health is committed
to ensuring safe water for the citizens of West Virginia."
**The EPA announced that the $18 million will come to the state, Christiansen
said. The money can be used for a wide variety of actions, including research,
testing treatment, source water control, restructuring, consolidation and
technical assistance.**
The working group will offer support and avenues for communication, and help
local systems with best practices and mitigation, he said.
**HB 3189 is the PFAS Protection Act, targeting PFAS in drinking water. It
follows on the heels of a Department of Environmental Protection Study ordered
in 2020, performed by the U.S. Geological Survey.
Under prior EPA drinking water advisory numbers, 37 of the state's 279 raw
water intakes had PFAS levels above those set by EPA. Under the new
thresholds, 100 more sites exceeded the level, for a total of 137.**
**Now, DEP will go back, resample the finished (treated) water from those
sites and try to determine the sources. Industries that use PFAS chemicals
must report their usage to the DEP. And DEP will, to the extent data is
available, consider ways to address the sources and mitigate the impacts on
public water systems.**
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/16/activities-underway-in-west-
virginia-to-address-the-pfas-issues-traces-are-toxic/>
# [BLOOMBERG LAW: Limiting P.P.T. PFAS Quite Challenging But
Necessary](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/15/bloomberg-law-limiting-p…
t-pfas-quite-challenging-but-necessary/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/94B7B706-9D41-4187-A635-186781E2C8A0.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/94B7B706-9D41-4187-A635-186781E2C8A0.jpeg)
PFAS are very stable organic chemicals, lasting “forever” …
**US Plan to Limit PFAS in Water Draws Concern Over Cost, Science**
From a [Review by Pat Rizzuto, Bloomberg
Law](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/us-plan-to-limit-
pfas-in-water-draws-concern-over-cost-science), March 15, 2023
The first-ever national drinking water limits for PFAS the EPA proposed
Tuesday are raising concerns about the costs to utilities and ratepayers,
questions from industry about the science the agency used, and predictions of
more litigation over the health effects of the chemicals.
The proposal also should spur controls on upstream sources of the chemicals,
according to both a key lawmaker and the Southern Environmental Law Center, a
nonprofit environmental legal advocacy organization.
The Environmental Protection Agency proposed a 4 parts per trillion (ppt)
enforceable limit on the amount of either perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) or
perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) that could be in drinking water. It also
proposed a strategy to limit four additional per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS) in drinking water.
VIDEO: PFAS: The ‘Forever Chemicals’
Water utilities would be required to monitor the PFAS, reduce levels exceeding
the proposed limits, and notify their customers if the PFAS levels were above
the EPA’s limits. The proposed limits, the lowest level many laboratories can
reliably detect, are tighter than any states have proposed.
Also known as forever chemicals, some PFAS persist in the environment for
years and have been linked to an increase in the risk of various diseases
including cancer.
The plans “signal a more aggressive stance on the EPA on regulating these
chemicals,” said Stephanie Feingold, a partner at law firm Morgan Lewis
specializing in environmental regulations and litigation.
Additional PFAS rules the agency is pursuing include designating two or more
PFAS as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act, or Superfund law; limiting industrial
effluents of the chemicals; and collecting extensive information on PFAS that
have been in commerce for more than a decade.
The Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA) has serious concerns
about the cost of this rulemaking, particularly as those costs will
potentially fall to ratepayers, said association spokesman Brian Redder.
**Cost Concerns** ~ The EPA offered treatment options to address the presence
of PFAS in drinking water. Granular activated carbon (GAC), anion exchange,
high-pressure membrane technologies, reverse osmosis (RO), and nanofiltration
can remove the PFAS, the agency’s proposed rule said.
The EPA’s estimated costs for water utilities to comply with its proposal
range from $772 million to $1.2 billion, while its estimated benefits range
from $908 million to $1.2 billion. Yet treatment expenditures utilities
already have incurred suggest the costs could exceed the agency’s estimate,
AMWA CEO Tom Dobbins said in a statement.
“For comparison, AMWA member Cape Fear Public Utility Authority’s estimated
capital cost for its treatment was $43 million, and its annual operating cost
was $3-5 million,” Dobbins said. “If about 16 utilities of similar size to
Cape Fear nationwide had to implement comparable treatment techniques, the
total cost would exceed EPA’s estimate,” of $772 million, he said.
The 2021 infrastructure law provided $10 billion to address emerging
contaminants including PFAS in drinking water. “But the costs of meeting the
proposed standards will far exceed the additional funding, said the American
Water Works Association (AWWA).
More than an estimated 5,000 water systems will have to develop new water
sources or install and operate advanced treatment; another 2,500 water systems
in states with existing standards will need to adjust existing PFAS treatment
systems, it said.
A recent study requested by AWWA estimated the national cost for water systems
to install treatment to remove PFOA and PFOS to levels required by the EPA’s
proposal exceeds $3.8 billion annually, that association said.
“The vast majority of these treatment costs will be borne by communities and
ratepayers, who are also facing increased costs to address other needs, such
as replacing lead service lines, upgrading cybersecurity, replacing aging
infrastructure and assuring sustainable water supplies,” AWWA said.
Both water associations stressed the need to make sure the EPA used sound
science to underpin its proposed limits. “I think there will be litigation,”
even before a final rule would be finalized, on both the science underpinning
the EPA’s proposal and its strategy to limit the four PFAS, said Jessie
Rosell, an environmental attorney with Lathrop GPM’s PFAS practice.
**Litigation Outlook** ~ Rosell and Feingold described the “hazard index”
strategy the agency proposed to use to regulate four PFAS as an unusual
approach to limiting drinking water contaminants. The index, a mathematical
calculation of whether people’s exposure to contaminants is close to levels
that might cause health problems, is more often used as a tool for deciding
whether some kind of cleanup or other regulatory action is needed, Feingold
said.
Rosell predicted there will be legal challenges to the EPA’s proposal similar
to those chemical manufacturers mounted after the agency last June set interim
and final health advisories for PFOA, PFOS, and hexafluoropropylene oxide
(HFPO) dimer acid and its ammonium salt, referred to as the “GenX chemicals”
due to the technology that produces them.
The US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit dismissed for lack of standing
the challenge the American Chemistry Council brought against the agency’s
interim health advisories for PFOA and PFOS. But the Chemours Co.'s challenge
to the agency’s final GenX health advisory is proceeding in the US Circuit
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Issues raised in those lawsuits are likely to be raised again, Rosell said.
“We have serious concerns with the underlying science” that the EPA used to
develop its proposals, ACC said in a statement. It pointed to draft guidance
the World Health Organization issued that proposed much higher limits than did
the EPA—100 ppt on PFOA and PFOS .
The agency also has not completed its health assessment of two of the six
PFAS, the chemistry council said. Those two are perfluorohexane sulfonate
(PFHxS) and perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA). The agency’s research office
expects it will take until next year for the agency to complete its analysis
and then have independent scientists critique it.
“The maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) the EPA sets will become target cleanup
levels at Superfund sites and de facto cleanup levels at other sites, which is
another reason it’s so important to get the science right,” said Tom Flanagin,
an ACC spokesman.
Meanwhile, both Rosell and Feingold said attorneys representing individuals in
toxic tort cases could use the science and standards in the EPA’s proposal to
bolster their cases, as they’ve already been using the interim and final
health advisories the agency set last June.
Plaintiffs in a multidistrict case relating to PFAS in firefighting foam and
the Department of Justice on Tuesday alerted the U.S. District Court for the
District of South Carolina about the EPA’s proposal.
“EPA determined PFOA and PFOS are likely carcinogens (i.e., cancer causing)
and that there is no level of these contaminants that is without a risk of
adverse health effects,” according to the filing. “Given that there is no
higher regulatory authority than EPA, no prudent water provider can ignore
this important safety information even prior to it becoming legally
enforceable.”
**Disposal, Upstream Releases** ~ The EPA’s proposal raises many questions
including how drinking water utilities will dispose of spent filters and other
equipment they use to remove the PFAS, Feingold said. The technologies the EPA
named concentrate the PFAS they remove from drinking water, but then move them
into other media, she said.
Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.) said he plans to reintroduce his Clean Water
Standards for PFAS Act this year to limit industrial discharges of PFAS into
rivers, groundwater and other drinking water supplies.
“States must act now using existing law to protect people and their drinking
water,” said Geoff Gisler, a senior attorney with the Southern Environmental
Law Center. Michigan has required pretreatment for 59 industrial and other
facilities that release PFAS into sewers, according to information the
Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy previously
provided Bloomberg Law. Colorado, Michigan, and North Carolina have taken some
actions to reduce industrial sources of PFOS and some other PFAS, but not
nearly as much as they should, Gisler said.
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/15/bloomberg-law-limiting-p-p-t-
pfas-quite-challenging-but-necessary/>
# [The Hydrogen Boondoggle is an Enormous Slush
Fund](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/14/the-hydrogen-boondoggle-is-an-
enormous-slush-fund/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/A2E68673-9F5E-4C1F-9959-B25E3C12F627.png)](https://…
content/uploads/2023/03/A2E68673-9F5E-4C1F-9959-B25E3C12F627.png)
The Ohio River Valley Institute has studied these half-baked ideas!
**Hydrogen Slush Fund Means More Dollars Wasted On The Green Energy
Boondoggle**
From a [Letter to Editor by Frank Lasee, Former Wisconsin State
Senator](http://www.truthinenergyandclimate.com), February 25, 2023
Nearly 50 years ago in 1976, the US Congress authorized the Hydrogen Program
managed by the National Science Foundation. Then in 1983, Bush and Congress
threw more money at hydrogen as an alternative energy source.
Last year Congress and Biden, in their infrastructure bill, created a $9.5
billion dollar hydrogen slush fund. The Europeans have also authorized $5.2
billion euros for their hydrogen slush fund.
Since 1839, scientists have been working on hydrogen for energy and storage
with little to show for it. The future of green hydrogen is just as dull.
Brown and grey hydrogen, made from coal or natural gas (CH4), makes more
reasonably priced hydrogen now.
Hydrogen is not a fuel. It must be created and is only a way of storing and
transporting energy. All of which are difficult, expensive and there is no
infrastructure to support it.
This $9.5 billion slush fund is a breeding ground for multiple Solyndras.
(Solyndra was 1/3 of the 1.5 billion-dollar taxpayer loss on Obama’s solar
revolution.)
The Biden administration has authorized a half billion loan guarantee for a
green hydrogen hub in Delta, Utah. Never mind that green hydrogen requires
huge volumes of water and Delta is on the edge of the desert, and the entire
southwest is chronically short of water. Or that Utah today only gets 4% of
its electricity from wind and solar. There is no “excess” wind and solar to
create green hydrogen in Utah.
Building a green hydrogen hub in a very dry place with very little “renewable”
energy is not wise; some would even call it stupid. The Biden administration
needs a talking point to fix the recently admitted unreliability problem of
wind and solar. So common sense and fiscal responsibility are unnecessary.
Our electric grids need full-time demand matching electricity, or we have
blackouts. There is a dawning realization by the climate religion, there isn’t
enough lithium in the world, over the next few decades, to build tens of
millions of electric vehicles and industrial scale grid batteries too.
In addition, lithium batteries cannot store the abundant solar power
California has in the sunny mild winter for use in hot July. The energy will
have left those batteries long before July rolls around. Hence, the expensive
talking point of green hydrogen was born.
Making green hydrogen takes a lot of energy. About 35% more energy than the
created hydrogen stores. Then you lose another 30% when you transport and use
it. Hydrogen yields only 35% of the energy input. It is a real energy loser.
Making green hydrogen requires 13 times more water, sea water has to be
desalinated first, and additional water for cooling. Then heat the water to
2,000 degrees and electrocute it, freeing oxygen into the air and hydrogen
into the factory. Then super chill to near-absolute zero. Then compress it to
10,000 psi, which is three times the psi of an average scuba tank. Super cold
liquid hydrogen is born.
It can be used for fuel cells and burned in electric producing power plants
instead of natural gas. We get far more bang for our buck with natural gas
rather than create electricity to make green hydrogen, only to burn it again,
to make electricity using a process that costs 65% of the energy.
The whole concept of using wind and solar to produce green hydrogen has an
elephant-in-the-room type problem. The Industrial Four Step process of making
hydrogen isn’t something that can be started on sunny mornings and stopped in
the late afternoon. Or fired up when the wind starts blowing and then shut
down when the wind stops. What will keep the hydrogen process flowing on dark
windless nights?
Does a green dreamer care to answer that? Do the facts matter? Heck, it is
only federal borrowed money anyway. Hydrogen is just another form of political
greenwashing at the American people’s expense.
We need to stop the wasteful spending of taxpayer money — money we don’t have
— on green boondoggles before it is too late.
Before the communist Chinese, who use more than half of the 8 billion tons of
coal as their primary fuel source (60% of total energy), eat our lunch and
rule the world, Americans need to wake up to the dangerous threats of the
green energy nightmare and the rising threat of the Red Chinese Dragon before
it is too late!
>>> Frank Lasee is a former Wisconsin state senator. The district he
represented had two nuclear power plants, a biomass plant and numerous wind
towers. He has experience with energy, the environment, and the climate. You
can read more energy and climate information at
www.truthinenergyandclimate.com which Frank leads.
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/14/the-hydrogen-boondoggle-is-an-
enormous-slush-fund/>
# [German Natural Gas Grid Adding 30% Hydrogen For Regional Gas
Network](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/13/german-natural-gas-grid-
adding-30-hydrogen-for-regional-gas-network/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/0536C1E3-93ED-44C8-B755-84E1BD51938C.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/0536C1E3-93ED-44C8-B755-84E1BD51938C.jpeg)
Research and planning bringing modern innovations
**The Hydrogen Stream: German grid operator increases hydrogen blend in
regional gas network**
From the [Articles of Sergio Matalucci, PV Magazine](https://www.pv-
magazine.com/2023/03/10/the-hydrogen-stream-german-grid-operator-increases-
hydrogen-blending-in-regional-gas-network/), March 10, 2023
**German grid operator Netze BW, a unit of energy company EnBW Group, said it
will increase the amount of hydrogen in its regional gas network in Oehringen,
in the southwest of Germany, from 20% to 25%.**
“In three weeks, we will reach 30% of hydrogen in the local gas grid,” Heike
Grüner, project leader, told pv magazine. Netze BW will keep a 30% hydrogen
blend for some months to generate better data on home heating in detached
family homes.
“In the following phase of the project, we will introduce oscillations from 0
to 30% hydrogen. Volatile mixtures will simulate real-life volatility typical
of energy systems with an increase in renewable energies.”
Netze BW, which operates the distribution grid in large parts of Baden-
Württemberg region, said that 100% hydrogen in the grid in the future would be
possible. The company will share the data coming from the Oehringen “hydrogen
island” with all the European grid operators to show that gas grids can be
used in the clean energy transition.
Netze BW started to use a hydrogen blend for the company's appliances in
November 2021, introducing a hydrogen-gas blend for customers in 2022. Last
year, the company also tested all the appliances in the Oehringen network with
a blend of up to 35% hydrogen.
#######+++++++#######+++++++########
**Toyota‘s new electrolysis equipment using the fuel cell stack and other
technology from the Mirai vehicle will be put into operation this March at a
Denso Fukushima Corporation plant.** “It will serve as a technology
implementation venue to promote its widespread use going forward,” said the
Japanese car manufacturer. Toyota added it would accelerate its efforts to
build a model for the local consumption of locally produced hydrogen, using
electrolysis equipment to produce clean hydrogen and combust it in one of the
plant's gas furnaces.
The **Climate Change Committee said that hydrogen is related to three of the
ten priorities** to deliver a reliable decarbonized power system in the UK.
The UK's independent adviser on tackling climate change underlined that the
government should identify priority hydrogen investments by 2024, finalize by
the end of the year ad-hoc funding mechanisms to support the development of 10
GW of low-carbon hydrogen production, and fast-track the development of new
business models for hydrogen transportation. The report sees a limited role of
hydrogen in heating.
Researchers at **Australia 's Monash University have isolated an enzyme** that
can convert minute concentrations of hydrogen in the atmosphere to produce a
sustained electrical current, paving the way toward a future where devices are
literally powered out of thin air. The research team, led by Rhys Grinter,
Ashleigh Kropp, and Chris Greening from the Monash University Biomedicine
Discovery Institute in Melbourne, isolated and analyzed the genetic code of an
enzyme that enables a common soil bacteria to consume hydrogen and extract
energy from it.
The **Atlantic Council said that green hydrogen could spur development in Sub-
Saharan Africa** , especially in South Africa, Namibia, and Kenya. “Following
the hydrogen valley model, the Southern Corridor Development Initiative is a
partnership between the Namibian Green Hydrogen Council and the German firm
Hyphen Hydrogen Energy. The project is expected to produce 300,000 tons of
green hydrogen by 2030 from 5 GW to 6 GW of installed renewable energy
capacity,” said the Atlantic Council. According to the report, the export
potential depends on finding a solution to local energy poverty, inequities
between nations, and energy networks within the region.
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/13/german-natural-gas-grid-
adding-30-hydrogen-for-regional-gas-network/>
# [‘Farmers for Climate Action’ Program Searches for
Solutions](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/12/%e2%80%98farmers-for-
climate-action%e2%80%99-program-searches-for-solutions/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/95195216-0C9C-4064-A7FF-026D2AD5F42A.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/95195216-0C9C-4064-A7FF-026D2AD5F42A.jpeg)
Climate activists march to the U.S. Capitol after the ‘Farmers for Climate
Action’: “Rally for Resilience” in Freedom Plaza on March 7, 2023 in
Washington, DC.
**Farmer Activists ‘Keep Slugging’ at ‘Farmers for Climate Action’ Rally in
D.C.**
From an [Article by Thom Duffy, Billboard
Magazine](https://www.billboard.com/music/music-news/john-mellencamp-perfor…
farmers-climate-change-rally-washington-dc-1235281452/), March 7, 2023
America’s farmers came to Washington, D.C., more than 40 years ago to save
their farms. On Tuesday (March 7), a new generation of farmers, ranchers,
farmworkers and activists came to the nation’s capital to save the planet.
John Mellencamp, co-founder of Farm Aid, sang Tuesday for those gathered
before they marched up Pennsylvania Avenue to the U.S. Capitol building,
calling for Congress to take action on climate change in the forthcoming Farm
Bill.
“Here’s all I can say – keep slugging,” said Mellencamp, recalling how he and
Willie Nelson and Neil Young formed Farm Aid in 1985 to support family farmers
— a commitment they have sustained for four decades, joined by Farm Aid board
members Dave Matthews and Margo Price. “We’ve been slugging since 1985 and
let’s keep slugging,” said Mellencamp. “Let’s try to improve the quality of
the food that we eat, the air that we breathe and the people that we are.”
Taking the stage midday at Freedom Park, Mellencamp looked at the crowd before
him and remarked: “The faces are much younger than they used to be. And I
think that’s great that there are younger people trying to improve the planet
and the food that we eat. So it’s up to you guys to lead the way.”
**With that, Mellencamp played a spare, acoustic rendition of “Rain on the
Scarecrow,” his harrowing 1985 song about the farm foreclosure crisis that led
to the creation of Farm Aid.**
**_Rain on the scarecrow / blood on the plow
This land fed a nation / this land made me proud
And son, I’m just sorry there’s no legacy for you now_**
Farm Aid’s own legacy is the rising awareness, since the mid-1980s, of the
importance of a national system of agriculture that values family farmers,
good food, soil and water, and strong communities.
**In recent years, there also has been an increasing awareness that industrial
agriculture practiced on large corporate farms is contributing to the climate
crisis. In a report in August 2021, the National Resources Defense Council
stated that industrial agriculture is a “significant source” of carbon in the
atmosphere.**
The farmers and activists in D.C. championed what is known as regenerative
farming, agriculture methods that can hold carbon in the soil, enhance
biodiversity and help mitigate climate change.
Farm Aid, with its annual concerts each September, may be the highest-profile
organization drawing attention to the state of American agriculture — and
Willie Nelson is certainly the nation’s best-known champion of family farmers.
But this week’s gathering dramatically demonstrated that the breadth and scope
of the nation’s farm movement transcends Farm Aid.
The “Rally for Resistance: Farmers for Climate Action” was organized under the
umbrella of the **National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition** and involved
some two dozen activist organizations and more than 30 delegations of farmers
from across the country who converged on Washington to make their voices
heard.
Plans for this rally were revealed at the Farm Aid festival in Raleigh, N.C.,
in September and exclusively reported by Billboard. The spark for the
gathering is the current debate over the contents of the Farm Bill, the multi-
part, multibillion-dollar legislation that is passed by Congress about every
five years and has a massive influence on how the nation’s food is grown.
**The most recent Farm Bill was passed in 2018 and expires this year.**
**In September, Farm Aid joined more than 150 organizations in co-signing a
letter asking President Biden “to weigh in on the next Farm Bill and demand
that Congress build even further on the administration’s actions to date to
reduce economic inequality; bridge the nation’s racial divides; end hunger;
confront the climate crisis; improve nutrition and food safety; and protect
and support farmers, workers, and communities,” wrote Farm Aid communications
director Jennifer Fahy.**
The evening before Mellencamp’s performance, supporters gathered at Luther
Place Memorial Church on Logan Circle, a site of social activism since it was
built in 1873. Philip Barker, a Black farmer and longtime activist from North
Carolina, summed up the focus of the days of action: farmer-led climate
solutions, racial justice in the Farm Bill, and “communities over
corporations.”
Sessions during the rally began with land acknowledgements, statements
recognizing that the land upon which the nation’s capital was built was taken
from indigenous people. Other speakers addressed the particular hardships that
BIPOC farmers have experienced through decades of U.S. farm policy. And still
others called for immigration reform as a way to address the chronic shortage
of labor on America’s farms. Throughout, the voices and crowd chants in
Spanish testified to the changing demographics of the nation’s farms.
This gathering in Washington had particular resonance for David Senter,
founder of the American Agriculture Movement. In 1979, Senter was one of the
organizers of the Tractorcade protest that drew thousands of farmers to the
capital. They traveled by tractor, traveling across the U.S. at 15 miles an
hour — ”we came in on every East/West interstate, 100 miles a day,” recalls
Senter — to lobby Congress for a new Farm Bill to increase crop prices and to
have greater influence in agriculture policy. (One farmer at Tuesday’s rally
returned with the tractor he’d driven to D.C. in 1979).
Senter then returned to Washington in 1987 to accompany Willie Nelson and John
Mellencamp when the two artists testified before the Senate Agriculture
Committee about the family farm foreclosure crisis.
**Senter was one of the featured speakers Tuesday at the rally in Freedom
Park.** Since his earlier trips, have the stakes become higher? “We continue
to lose family farmers and the farms become larger and larger,” replied
Senter. “But we have to figure out how to make place for the next generation
of farmers, the young farmers that want to grow food for this country and the
world, so that they can survive.”
That “absolutely does” include addressing the climate issue, said Senter.
“Because we live in an extreme climate situation. I mean, you have floods,
tornadoes, wildfires, droughts. It’s just unbelievable the climate extremes
we’re experiencing and, of course, farmers, they deal with that every day,
trying to produce food. So it’s very important that we get involved with
that.”
When Willie Nelson and his fellow artists formed Farm Aid in 1985, he
recruited Carolyn Mugar to run the organization. “The earliest Farm Aid files
are all stained with spaghetti sauce since I did that work at my kitchen
table,” she recalled Tuesday. Then she set off across the country, speaking to
farmers at their kitchen tables. (Mugar was recognized for her work on
Billboard’s Women in Music list in 2020, the 35th anniversary of Farm Aid).
“What in the Farm Bill can people get behind? Really, the very bottom line of
everything is farm viability,” said Mugar. “A farmer cannot really even start
getting into regenerative agriculture [to address climate change] if that farm
is not financially viable.
“And that means that we’ve really got to look at how farming should be taking
place in this country. And do we really want to continue corporate
concentrated farming, where the land is toxic and ruined, into the future? Or
do we want to support farmers who are trying to keep, maintain and build the
soil?”
In dealing with the nation’s lawmakers, said Mugar, “we’ve got to get smarter
about what we demand.”
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/12/%e2%80%98farmers-for-climate-
action%e2%80%99-program-searches-for-solutions/>
# [Chemical Leaks, PFAS & Local Train Derailments
Recently](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/11/chemical-leaks-pfas-local-
train-derailments-recently/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/226C87B9-E5EB-4F5A-A4D4-6E6D58327CF7-300x173.jpg)](…
content/uploads/2023/03/226C87B9-E5EB-4F5A-A4D4-6E6D58327CF7.jpeg)
Empty coal train derailment in the New River Canyon of West Virginia
**CSX Train Derails In New River Gorge, Injuring 3 Railroad Workers**
From an [Article by Curtis Tate, WV public
Broadcasting](https://wvpublic.org/2-csx-workers-injured-in-new-river-gorge-
derailment-released-from-hospital/), March 10, 2023
In a statement, CSX said an empty coal train struck a rock slide before 5 a.m.
near Sandstone.
[Sandstone is on the New River and WV Route 20 in Summers County, just South
of the local interchange of I-64.]
The train’s four locomotives derailed and one caught fire. Two of the three
CSX workers injured in a Wednesday derailment in the New River Gorge have been
released from the hospital, the railroad said Friday. Another injured worker
continues to receive treatment.
An engineer, conductor and engineer trainee were operating the westbound
109-car empty coal train early Wednesday when it struck large pieces of rock
on the track near Sandstone.
**All four locomotives and 22 cars derailed.** One locomotive came to rest in
the river, and leaking diesel fuel caught fire. By Friday, CSX said the
derailed locomotives and cars had been removed from the site. The railroad
said it expected to resume rail service on Saturday.
Amtrak’s Cardinal, which shares the affected track with CSX, was canceled in
both directions for the remainder of the week.
As part of its restoration effort, CSX said it would excavate any soil or rock
that came in contact with diesel fuel and replace it with clean material.
#######+++++++#######+++++++
**SEE ALSO:** [Confusion Reigned After Ohio Derailment, Hazmat Chief
Testifies,](https://wvpublic.org/confusion-reigned-after-ohio-derailment-
hazmat-chief-testifies/) Energy & Environment WVPB Staff, March 9, 2023
Eric Brewer, director of emergency services for Beaver County, Pennsylvania,
said the decision to detonate five tank cars full of flammable vinyl chloride
was poorly communicated.
[~~ Continue Reading](https://wvpublic.org/confusion-reigned-after-ohio-
derailment-hazmat-chief-testifies/)
#######+++++++#######+++++++#######
**SEE ALSO:** [A Look At Chemical Leaks, Train Derailments And PFAS On This
West Virginia Morning](https://wvpublic.org/a-look-at-chemical-leaks-train-
derailments-and-pfas-on-this-west-virginia-morning/), Energy & Environment
WVPB Staff, Feb. 27, 2023
A serious train derailment and chemical release in Ohio has dominated the
headlines for the past few weeks. West Virginia has seen its own share of
disasters with hazardous materials, including an oil train derailment and fire
in 2015. Energy & Environment Reporter Curtis Tate spoke with Jesse Richardson
of the West Virginia University Land Use and Sustainable Development Law
Clinic about those events.
~ ~ [Continue Reading](https://wvpublic.org/a-look-at-chemical-leaks-train-
derailments-and-pfas-on-this-west-virginia-morning/)
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/11/chemical-leaks-pfas-local-train-
derailments-recently/>
# [PETITION ALERT ~ L.N.G. by Rail is Way Too Dangerous, Tell President Biden
and the PHMSA](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/10/petition-alert-l-n-g-
by-rail-is-way-too-dangerous-tell-president-biden-and-the-phmsa/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/C1A9F04E-010D-4D21-A33C-57B655679B9A.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/C1A9F04E-010D-4D21-A33C-57B655679B9A.jpeg)
You can help to prevent LNG accidents, fires and injuries …
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/D14A8541-7B32-4A38-ADC1-52D18D8BB68E-300x24.png)](h…
content/uploads/2023/03/D14A8541-7B32-4A38-ADC1-52D18D8BB68E.png)
**Stop Liquified Natural Gas by Rail in Your Community!**
**MEMO** :[ To Regional Residents & Concerned Citizens, Mid-Atlantic
States](https://cleanaircouncil.salsalabs.org/bombtrains_copy1?wvpId=3ba821…,
March 9, 2023
**We are asking for your support to[sign a petition asking President Biden and
the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) to take
action to protect communities from the transport of dangerous liquified
natural gas (LNG) by rail. LNG is natural gas that is chilled to
-260°F.](https://cleanaircouncil.salsalabs.org/lngrailpetition/index.html?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=4760a265-1fd8-4eeb-8434-8d4fd0a8f4ce)
It is highly flammable and explosive when exposed to air and can burn the skin
if it makes contact.**
PHMSA is a federal agency under the Department of Transportation that is
responsible for regulating the nation’s pipeline infrastructure. In July 2020,
PHMSA issued a rule that lifted a long-standing ban on transporting liquified
natural gas (LNG) by rail. PHMSA also issued a special permit to specifically
allow the transport of LNG by rail from a liquefaction plant in Wyalusing, PA
to an export terminal in Gibbstown, NJ by a company called New Energy
Solutions. This LNG would then be shipped overseas.
**The proposed rail route for this project would expose almost 2 million
people to the risks of LNG, many of whom are low-income and already
overburdened by environmental injustice. The special permit allows the
transport of LNG using rail cars that were not designed for LNG transport,
adding to the potential for a catastrophic incident. And as LNG is made from
methane gas, it’s a highly potent greenhouse gas, further exacerbating the
climate crisis.**
**[Urge PHMSA to suspend the rule that authorizes LNG to be transported by
rail, to deny the renewal of the special permit for Energy Transport
Solutions, and to permanently ban the transport of LNG by
rail.](https://cleanaircouncil.salsalabs.org/lngrailpetition/index.html?eTy…
Thank you for taking this important action.
>>> _Sincerely, Joseph Otis Minott, Esq., Executive Director and Chief
Counsel_
CLEAN AIR COUNCIL, 200 FIRST AVE, SUITE 200, PITTSBURGH, PA 15222
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/10/petition-alert-l-n-g-by-rail-is-
way-too-dangerous-tell-president-biden-and-the-phmsa/>
# [Traditional Values Under Threat in U.S. Congress: E.S.G. Plans Under
Attack!](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/09/traditional-values-under-
threat-in-u-s-congress-e-s-g-plans-under-attack/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/9E048C83-2E2F-4BD9-9264-6C42462F244D.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/9E048C83-2E2F-4BD9-9264-6C42462F244D.jpeg)
Many investors say “ESG Is Here To Stay”
**Conservative values cast aside, Congress wages war on ‘woke’**
[Opinion Editorial of the Morgantown Dominion
Post](https://www.dominionpost.com/2023/03/08/conservative-values-cast-asid…
congress-wages-war-on-woke/), March 9, 2023
While we’ve been largely focused on what’s been happening in Charleston
lately, we’ve also had our eye on Washington, D.C., and the culture war
backlash happening there. **Last week, Congress passed a joint resolution
“disapproving” a Department of Labor rule that allows investment firms to take
into consideration environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors. The
resolution, if signed into law, would reverse the rule and forbid investment
firms from using non-monetary factors when crafting portfolios for investors —
even if it’s what investors want.**
**The House of Representatives passed the resolution on a party-line vote. In
the Senate, Sens. Joe Manchin and John Tester (D-Mont.) joined with
Republicans to approve the disapproval.** (In an interview with Fox News about
his support of the resolution, Manchin said, “E.S.G.s by itself could just
kill our economy.” We assume he means the fossil fuel industry, from which he
personally benefits.)
**The resolution will go to President Joe Biden, who will have to decide
whether or not to veto the bill. We hope he does. Because when it comes to ESG
investing, also called sustainable investing, Congress has crossed the line
with its resolution.**
There are certainly cases where government interference in the market is
warranted — like when monopolies kill competition and drive up prices, or when
companies shirk their responsibilities to protect consumers.
**The Department of Labor rule does not mandate that investment firms offer
ESG, nor does it give any government-funded incentive for doing so — it merely
gives financial institutions the ability to offer something that consumers
increasingly want.**
**Even within investment firms, not every client has to participate.** The
vast majority — including big-name firms like Charles Schwab and Fisher
Investments — offer optional ESG portfolios, traditional portfolios that give
zero consideration to ESG or the ability to select a combination of ESG and
regular investments.
**In other words, Congress’ resolution is actually limiting the free market.**
Individual investors increasingly want to know that their money is doing
“good” and supporting companies that reflect their own personal values.
Congress is essentially taking away investors’ say in what’s being done with
their dollars, because conservatives view ESG as a form of “woke-ism” forcing
progressive values onto Wall Street, rather than the market responding to
consumer demand. **It boggles the mind how quickly conservatives abandon their
small-government, free-market values in their endless pursuit of culture
wars.**
**If the government were to step in, it should only be to standardize the
definition of ESG. What factors and benchmarks are considered ESG vary widely.
In general, though, ESG considers things like companies’ environmental impact
or green initiatives; diversity policies or human rights records; and
political contributions or history of lawsuits. Some critics have raised the
issue of “greenwashing” — companies claiming to be environmentally friendly or
socially responsible — that make companies look more attractive for ESG
investing than they actually are.**
_[Sometimes government regulation of the financial industry is necessary — but
this is not one of those
times.](https://www.dominionpost.com/2023/03/08/conservative-values-cast-
aside-congress-wages-war-on-woke/)_
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/09/traditional-values-under-threat-
in-u-s-congress-e-s-g-plans-under-attack/>
# [Absolutely No Real Necessity to Build & Operate Nuclear
Reactors](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/08/absolutely-no-real-
necessity-to-build-operate-nuclear-reactors/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/EBFB9A52-9CE8-4B27-9DC6-A269711BB14A.jpeg)](https:/…
content/uploads/2023/03/EBFB9A52-9CE8-4B27-9DC6-A269711BB14A.jpeg)
Modular nuclear reactors will be incredibly expensive, quite dangerous when
operating and generate high level radioactive waste
**[Action Alert from the WV Environmental Council](https://wvecouncil.org/),
March 8, 2023**
At any time, **the Senate Finance Committee is set to consider HB 2896, which
aims to** **designate West Virginia as an agreement state with the US Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (US NRC). However, this move could result in a financial
burden of at least 9 million dollars for our State over the next 4-8 years.
(As per the US NRC 's estimation, becoming an agreement state takes around 4-8
years.)**
**The financial impact of HB 2896 cannot be ignored. This amount of money is
substantial, especially considering the current funding shortages faced by the
WV Department of Environmental Protection (WV DEP), which is already
struggling to fulfill its regulatory obligations towards existing
industries.**
**Please contact Senate Finance Committee members and tell them you do not
want West Virginia to take on the financial burden of HB 2896! Calls are most
effective:**
Senator Eric Tarr (Chair): (304) 357-7901
Senator Rupie Phillips (Vice Chair): (304) 357-7857
Senator Jason Barrett: (304) 357-7933
Senator Donna J. Boley: (304) 357-7905
Senator Charles H. Clements: (304) 357-7827
Senator Glenn Jeffries: (304) 357-7866
Senator Mike Maroney: (304) 357-7902
Senator Eric Nelson: (304) 357-7854
Senator Mike Oliverio: (304) 357-7919
Senator Robert H. Plymale: (304) 357-7937
Senator Ben Queen: (304) 357-7904
Senator Rollan A. Roberts: (304) 357-7831
Senator Randy Smith: (304) 357-7995
Senator Chandler Swope: (304) 357-7843
Senator Jack Woodrum: (304) 357-7849
>>> _[West Virginia Environmental Council](https://wvecouncil.org/), P.O. Box
1007, Charleston, WV 25324_
info(a)wvecouncil.org (304) 414-0143
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/08/absolutely-no-real-necessity-to-
build-operate-nuclear-reactors/>
# [TRAIN DISASTER in East Palestine Pollutes Eastern Ohio & Ohio
River](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/05/train-disaster-in-east-
palestine-pollutes-eastern-ohio-ohio-river/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/FEDCD3F5-C5F1-4158-ABFA-B46AD3EBF48C-300x168.jpg)](…
content/uploads/2023/03/FEDCD3F5-C5F1-4158-ABFA-B46AD3EBF48C.jpeg)
Chemical pollution toxic to land, to fish, to animals and people. (Click image
to enlarge it)
**Environmental Disaster from East Palestine, OH Train Derailment**
From the [Article by Leigh Martinez, PennFuture
Blog](https://www.pennfuture.org/Blog-Item-2023-East-Palestine-Ohio-Train-
Disaster), February 23, 2023
The East Palestine, Ohio train derailment disaster is shocking in its scale
and potential effects. Unfortunately, we may not know this disaster's long-
term health and environmental impacts for months or even years.
The gradual release and burn of these chemicals increased the risk that they
spread beyond the crash site. With butyl acrylate found in local surface
water, testing the groundwater supply and subsoil is crucial. We encourage
anyone concerned about pollution and the safety of their community to document
their observations and request soil and well water testing from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The residents of East Palestine and neighboring communities deserve
transparency around the EPA's plan for continued air quality monitoring and
the data of air tests.
Regardless of location and as a regular practice, residents should report any
unusual odor or changes in environmental conditions to the appropriate state
environmental agency. We encourage residents to do their best to document the
changes they've observed so environmental threats can be tracked and
mitigated.
PennFuture continues to closely track developments and information coming from
both locals and government agencies.
**What We Know of the Accident** ~ On Friday, February 3, at 8:54 p.m. ET, a
Norfolk Southern freight train heading to Conway, Pennsylvania, derailed in
East Palestine, Ohio, approximately 1.2 miles from the Pennsylvania state
line. Thirty-eight rail cars went off the tracks and caught fire.
According to the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB), the
investigating agency, a resident's home surveillance video showed what appears
to be a wheel bearing in the final stage of overheating failure moments before
the derailment. The fear of a possible explosion forced the evacuation of
1,500 to 2,000 residents in a town of only 4,900.
**An Explanation of the Environmental Disaster ~** The train towed 20 cars
with hazardous material—11 of which derailed. Five overturned cars contained
vinyl chloride, a chemical used to make PVC plastic and vinyl products.
According to the National Cancer Institute, it is a flammable gas and cancer-
causing.
Norfolk Southern said some cars carrying vinyl chloride were at risk of
exploding. Ohio Governor Mike DeWine authorized a controlled burn of the
chemicals on Monday, February 6. This burn resulted in a massive smoke plume.
**Vinyl Chloride ~** When burned, vinyl chloride breaks down into two
chemicals: hydrogen chloride and phosgene. Phosgene is highly poisonous—used
in chemical warfare during World War I and responsible for many deaths,
according to the CDC. While long-term exposure to higher concentrations of the
gas can be deadly, the gas released by Norfolk did not result in reports of
injuries or fatalities.
**Hydrogen Chloride ~** This strong acid gas can cause eye, skin, and
respiratory irritation and pain.
**Other Chemicals Onboard ~** In addition to vinyl chloride, the EPA listed
the following chemicals as also on the train: 3. Butyl acrylate — a liquid
used for making paint, adhesives, and sealants, 4. Ethylhexyl acrylate — a
liquid used for making paint, printing inks, and plastics, is toxic to the
lungs and nervous system, 5. Ethylene glycol monobutyl ether — an industrial
solvent that can be absorbed through the skin and is toxic to the liver and
kidneys, 6. Isobutylene — a gas used in antioxidants, packaging, plastics,
and high-octane plane fuel.
**It 's currently known that the derailment caused the release of butyl
acrylate and ethylhexyl acrylate, which leaked into the ground, nearby
streams, and storm drains.**
Another major cause for alarm is the areas of contaminated soil and free
liquids that, according to the EPA, "were observed and potentially covered
and/or filled during reconstruction of the rail line including portions of the
trench /burn pit that was used for the open burn off of vinyl chloride."
Having multiple chemicals released adds to the complexity of the situation.
On Tuesday, February 21, EPA Administrator Michael Regan ordered Norfolk
Southern Railway to pay for the contaminated soil and water cleanup and
reimburse the EPA for the private cleanup of residential homes and businesses.
This order enables the EPA to force Norfolk Southern to adhere to a plan set
and managed by the EPA.
**Health Impacts ~** The EPA monitored the air quality and tested East
Palestine's municipal drinking water well. Private well water testing is
ongoing and residents with wells are told to still use bottled water. The EPA
did not yet release the data from air monitor testing.
**Drinking Water ~** Ohio Gov. DeWine said on Wednesday, February 16, that the
water in East Palestine's municipal system is safe to drink based on the Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency's results, however: 1. The Ohio EPA recommends
people using private wells for drinking water schedule an appointment for well
water testing. 2. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP) will conduct independent water sampling to monitor water contamination
risks related to the train derailment closely.
**Air Monitoring ~** Air quality monitors are a tool to measure exposure to
air contaminants, but the technology has limitations. While the EPA has come
out to say the air quality in and around East Palestine is safe for residents
to return home, officials have not provided any data from the air tests.
Depending on which types of air monitors the EPA is utilizing, they may not be
providing the exact chemical breakdown and measurements in the air. How a
healthy first responder reacts to a particular air quality measurement differs
from an older adult or a child.
The EPA needs to be transparent with community members on the technology used
to test air quality, the limitations of the equipment, the chemical
specificity found, and the measurements.
**Environmental Impacts ~** The Norfolk Southern train carried 20 cars with
hazardous materials. After the spill, chemicals—including an entire load of
butyl acrylates—were seen running into storm drains and water sources.
As of Tuesday, February 21—two weeks after the train derailment—Norfolk
Southern reported the chemical spill contaminated at least 15,000 pounds of
soil and 1.1 million gallons of water.
Locals documented images of dead fish and an oily sheen along Ohio River
tributaries days after the spill. Those streams are reintroduction sites for
the hellbender salamander.
Water pollution puts endangered amphibian species at risk. An official with
the Ohio Department of Natural Resources told WKBN that it would take time to
know the effects on the hellbender. The federal government's Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry opened an investigation tracking the chemical
exposure.
**Water Contamination ~** According to the Ohio EPA, the Sulphur Run stream
was the body of water most impacted by the derailment because of an
"impoundment" on February 8 when officials rerouted the water with the damming
and pumps.
Environmental teams dammed a portion of Sulphur Run and rerouted it to protect
water downstream. Teams will treat contaminated water with booms, aeration,
and carbon filtration units.
**What Are Dioxins?** Dioxins are highly toxic, persistent organic pollutants
that take a long time to break down once in the environment. They are a
contaminant formed during the production of some chlorinated organic
compounds, released through waste incineration or burning fuels. Dioxins can
travel long distances in the air or water; when they settle into the soil, it
will take several years to break down.
Once in the environment, they can accumulate in the food chain—primarily in
animal fat, fish, and shellfish. Dioxins can cause cancer, disrupt hormones,
lead to reproductive and developmental problems, and damage the immune system.
In July 1976, a chemical plant explosion near Seveso, Italy exposed locals to
the highest known levels of dioxin.
Ohio's senators Sherrod Brown (D) and J.D. Vance (R) sent a joint letter
requesting the state and federal EPAs to test the air for dioxins.
[Follow EPA updates on the environmental impact of the Norfolk Southern train
derailment
disaster.](https://response.epa.gov/site/site_profile.aspx?site_id=15933)
**What Pennsylvania Leaders Say About Railroad Safety ~**
**On Tuesday, February 21, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro said his office
made a criminal referral against Norfolk Southern to the acting Pennsylvania
attorney general for review. At a press conference with Ohio Governor Mike
DeWine, Shapiro said: "The combination of Norfolk Southern's corporate greed,
incompetence, and lack of care for our residents is absolutely
unacceptable."**
Shapiro previously said publicly and in a letter to Norfolk Southern's CEO:
"You can be assured that Pennsylvania will hold Norfolk Southern accountable
for any and all impacts to our Commonwealth."
**Gov. Shapiro listed three critical things Norfolk Southern did wrong after
the derailment:**
1\. Norfolk Southern made its own plan and did not implement a unified command
which confused first responders and emergency management. As a result, state
and local agencies had to react versus work in tandem.
2\. Norfolk Southern gave inaccurate information and conflicting modeling
about the impact of the controlled release of chemicals.
3\. Norfolk Southern was unwilling to explore an alternative to burning
chemicals and released and burned the chemicals without warning government
agencies.
**Pennsylvania 's senators Bob Casey (D) and John Fetterman (D) sent a joint
letter with the Ohio senators requesting the EPA continue its monitoring of
the land, air, and water in East Palestine, Darlington Township in Beaver
County, and other impacted communities "until the long-term effects of the
exposure are fully understood."**
**Questions and Actions Post-Emergency Operations**
[PennFuture believes environmental disasters are long-term public health
disasters.](https://www.pennfuture.org/Blog-Item-2023-East-Palestine-Ohio-
Train-Disaster) We should ask the following questions of Norfolk Southern
Railway Company and Pennsylvania and Ohio leaders:
1\. What is the current plan for continued community engagement? How
frequently will residents in East Palestine and the surrounding areas receive
updates? Are there opportunities to comment on cleanup plans? 2. How is
ambient air being monitored? What are those measurements? 3. Where are air
samples being collected? 4. How frequently is the air quality being tested? 5.
Do experts know how far the toxic plume traveled? 6. Which bodies of water are
scientists sampling, and for which chemical constituents? 7. Are officials
advising children and dogs not to play in streams? 8. Were surface wipes used
on residents' homes and vehicles? If so, what were the results? 9. Where are
soil samples being collected, and how deep are those samples? 10. What is the
plan for dioxin testing? 11. What is the plan to notify the community of
dioxin contamination? 12. Was the controlled release and burn the best way to
control the chemicals? 13. What are the reasoning and safety around
transporting various chemicals near one another? 14. Was the train adequately
inspected? Are there plans to improve the inspections in the future? 15. How
can the community engage with testing and ongoing monitoring? 16. Are we
investing enough in environmental agencies' personnel and equipment to ensure
the fastest and best response to the next disaster?
**Notable Environmental Organizations to Follow ~ Ohio Environmental Council &
Clean Air Council**
The longer people go without answers and action, anxiety and fear grow in the
community. We need to limit pollution's impact on the ecosystem and mental
health. East Palestine and Beaver County residents deserve transparency in
testing and cleanup and a clear plan for long-term environmental monitoring.
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/05/train-disaster-in-east-
palestine-pollutes-eastern-ohio-ohio-river/>
# [Community Solar Petition Available Now ~ You Can Sign & Be
Helpful!](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/04/community-solar-petition-
available-now-you-can-sign-be-helpful/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/08167427-555A-43ED-893C-7CD8F306D0F2-300x46.jpg)](h…
content/uploads/2023/03/08167427-555A-43ED-893C-7CD8F306D0F2.jpeg)
Strength & progress result when our various groups work together
**Sign the petition: Show your support for community solar ASAP**
From the [Coalition Named “West Virginians for Energy
Freedom”](https://www.energyfreedomwv.org/community-solar)
You can join with fellow West Virginians in support of allowing community
solar in our State of West Virginia. Community solar will rein in energy
costs, create jobs, and promote energy freedom.
[Community solar projects](https://www.energyfreedomwv.org/community-solar)
enable individuals, businesses, or organizations to purchase or subscribe to a
“share” in a community solar project. Community solar participants receive a
credit on their electric bill each month for the energy produced by their
share.
And, community solar ensures we have the right to choose where our electricity
comes from.
Also, **community solar** has the power to save West Virginia families
millions of dollars per year through lower electric bills.
It does so while encouraging local economic development throughout the State.
This creates good jobs and attracts more employers to invest in West Virginia.
**Let’s face it, community solar is a free-market way to generate electricity.
Let’s secure energy freedom for West Virginia families now, i. e., as soon as
possible.**
#######+++++++#######+++++++########
**SEE ALSO:** “[Advocates Pitch Community Solar To State Lawmakers. Some Say
No](https://wvpublic.org/advocates-pitch-community-solar-to-state-lawmakers-
some-say-no/),” Curtis Tate, WV Public Broadcasting, January 10, 2023
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/04/community-solar-petition-
available-now-you-can-sign-be-helpful/>
# [Small Modular Nuclear Reactors ~ Bad Deal or Terrible
Deal](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/02/small-modular-nuclear-reactor…
bad-deal-or-terrible-deal/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/57B4AAB5-38E6-43BF-
BA8A-5652F07CDB8F-232x300.jpg)](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/57B4AAB5-38E6-43BF-BA8A-5652F07CDB8F.jpeg)
Small Modular Nuclear Reactors studied by Union of Concerned Scientists
**Small modular nuclear reactors: A bad deal for Southwest Virginia! And all
of us!**
From the [Letter by Rees Shearer, Virginia
Mercury,](https://www.virginiamercury.com/2023/02/16/small-modular-nuclear-
reactors-a-good-deal-for-southwest-virginia/) February 16, 2023
**In announcing his 2022 Virginia Energy Plan, Gov. Youngkin said, “A growing
Virginia must have reliable, affordable and clean energy for Virginia’s
families and businesses.” The Governor’s plan to promote and subsidize Small
Modular nuclear Reactors (SMnRs) in Southwest Virginia fails all three of the
Governor’s own criteria:**
>>> SMnRs can’t be reliable when they cannot reliably be built and brought on
line in a predictable and timely fashion.
>>> SMnRs can’t be affordable because nuclear power is close to the costliest
of all forms of electric power generation.
>>> SMnRs can’t be clean since they produce extremely toxic high and low-level
nuclear waste, which has no safe storage or disposal solution.
**Appalachia has long served as a sacrifice zone for rapacious energy
ambitions of other regions.** Southwest Virginians have had reason to hope
that would change as opportunities for low-cost solar development emerged in
recent years. Instead, politicians like Youngkin are making too-good-to-be-
true promises about SMnRs, sidelining opportunities to promote solar, which
can produce power in a matter of weeks, not decades.
Imposing SMnRs on Southwest Virginia is disturbing. My father worked for the
Atomic Energy Commission in the 1950s. The promise the nuclear industry and
the government touted then – “electricity, too cheap to meter” – never has
been realized. TVA and other utilities abandoned nuclear plants under
construction, leaving costly monuments to that folly and sticking electricity
customers with the bill.
**COSTS** : It’s not at all clear that SMnR technology will succeed, or when.
Levelized cost charts of electric power generation rate nuclear as among the
very most expensive means to generate electric power at utility scale. If
nuclear waste management, insurance, and decommissioning costs are counted,
actual costs are far higher. (Some of these costs are already socialized for
nuclear power – e.g. insurance in the Price-Anderson Act.)
The first commercial SMnR is not expected to be completed until 2029, but
already its developers have raised the target price of its power by 53%. This
is not a surprise; nuclear power construction history documents an extremely
strong correlation between new designs and cost increases and project delays.
Indeed, the Lazard research shows that nuclear is the ONLY grid-wide
generation source to increase in price, 2009-2021. The increase was 36%!
**NUCLEAR WASTE, TRANSPORT, AND REPROCESSING** : Nuclear waste and
reprocessing are also serious concerns. Make no mistake, unreprocessed nuclear
waste, for all practicable purposes, is FOREVER. The fact that we have become
accustomed to risk does not, by any means, reduce risk. Nor will SMnRs
generate less waste than their larger forebears. Indeed, a recent Stanford
University study concluded that “small modular reactors may produce a
disproportionately larger amount of nuclear waste than bigger nuclear plants.”
Safeguarding this waste is already costing taxpayers and utility customers
tens of billions of dollars. With the failure of the U.S. to designate a
central storage facility, nuclear power plants are forced to continue to store
the waste in pools on site.
Yet nuclear waste recycling, known as reprocessing, is no panacea. In
November, the Governor spoke in Bristol in support of recycling nuclear waste
from SMnRs: “I think the big steps out of the box are the technical capability
to deploy in the next 10 years and on top of that to press forward to
recycling opportunities for fuel.” He may have had in mind BWX Technologies of
Lynchburg, which is beginning reprocessing of uranium at its Nuclear Fuel
Services (NFS) plant just south of the Virginia border in Erwin, Tennessee,
for nuclear weapons.
It took over a decade, but in 1984, Congress finally killed the last proposal
to reprocess nuclear waste into nuclear fuel. The reprocessing would have
taken place at the Clinch River Breeder Reactor, also south of the Virginia
border, near Oak Ridge, TN. The concern then was the potential for accidental
highly toxic “spills” of nuclear wastes or purposeful diversion of plutonium
into the international weapons market. I recall this clearly because I spoke
at a public hearing in Abingdon about the transportation of nuclear waste that
would be bound for the Clinch River plant.
Transportation of SMnR nuclear wastes along Virginia mountain roads or
railroads across the border to Erwin presents further risk of accident and
contamination. Longstanding concerns about transportation and security of
nuclear wastes have never been adequately addressed.
In addition, Princeton University physicist, Frank N. von Hippel reported in
the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
charged with protecting U.S. citizens from reactor disasters such as Three
Mile Island, Chernobyl, or Fukushima, has moved toward offering greater
flexibility for a nuclear industry plagued by cost overruns and calls for
safety improvements, rather than hewing to its primary responsibility for
maintaining safety of nuclear generating facilities and the American people.
The Bulletin also reports that, because of longstanding financial troubles
experienced by the commercial nuclear power industry, state legislatures are
increasingly being asked and are feeling compelled to subsidize nuclear power.
Gov. Youngkin’s state energy plan would take Virginia down that road, a road
that could be very long.
**URANIUM MINING in VIRGINIA?** Because of toxic pollution risks, mining
uranium in Virginia is currently prohibited under a moratorium enacted by the
General Assembly. Coles Hill in Pittsylvania County contains the largest
deposit of uranium in the U.S. Just a month ago, Consolidated Uranium, a
Canadian company, announced its purchase of Virginia Energy Resources, which
owns Coles Hill. It sounds like those executives think that another run at
overturning the mining moratorium might be successful. That this purchase
announcement comes so shortly after Youngkin’s announcement of SMnRs in his
Virginia Energy Plan feels like more than coincidence.
Uranium mining in a wet, eastern location would present a far higher
opportunity for contamination than mining that has for years had problems
affecting water and public health in the West. We Appalachians know the social
and environmental costs of an extractive economy. We should not support any
enterprise that forces that kind of exploitation upon our neighbors,
especially mining with known, pervasive health, safety and environmental
risks.
**CORPORATE CRONYISM and POLITICAL BOONDOGGERY** : BWX Technologies of
Lynchburg (formerly Babcock and Wilcox) is the nuclear contractor we can
anticipate would be charged with Gov. Youngkin’s wish to reprocess nuclear
waste into fuel. BWX has been on the ropes for years, since nuclear became so
unpopular with utilities in the wake of the Three Mile Island accident. It has
managed to stay afloat with military contracts and wants to develop the
reactors it builds for subs and aircraft carriers for commercial power
production. The SMnRs are its ticket, and Gov. Youngkin is playing both their
salesman and the state’s purchasing agent. Some General Assembly members are
angling to help their localities and favored industries cash in.
#######+++++++#######+++++++#########
**SEE ALSO ~** [INFOGRAPHIC: Small Modular Reactors | Department of Energy,
2018](https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/infographic-small-modular-reactors)
#######+++++++#######+++++++#########
**" Advanced" Isn't Always Better ~ Assessing the Safety, Security, and
Environmental Impacts of Non-Light-Water Nuclear Reactors**, Edwin Lyman,
March 18, 2021
If nuclear power is to play an expanded role in helping address climate
change, newly built reactors must be demonstrably safer and more secure than
current generation reactors. Unfortunately, most "advanced" nuclear reactors
are anything but.
The [Union of Concerned Scientists undertook a comprehensive
analysis](https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/advanced-isnt-always-better) of the
most prominent and well-funded non-light-water reactor (NLWR) designs. We
asked:
§- What are the benefits and risks of NLWRs and their fuel cycles ?
§- Do the likely overall benefits of NLWRs outweigh the risks and justify the
substantial public and private investments needed to commercialize them?
§- Can NLWRs be safely and securely commercialized in time to contribute
significantly to averting the climate crisis?
Based on the available evidence, we found that the NLWR designs we analyzed
are not likely to be significantly safer than today’s nuclear plants. In fact,
certain alternative reactor designs pose even more safety, proliferation, and
environmental risks than the current fleet.
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/02/small-modular-nuclear-reactors-
bad-deal-or-terrible-deal/>
# [EYES ON THE SHELL ETHANE CRACKER FACILITY IN S.W. PA ~ Zoom
3/1/23](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/01/eyes-on-the-shell-ethane-
cracker-facility-in-s-w-pa-zoom-3123/)
[![](https://www.frackcheckwv.net/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/DCA61B84-F5D4-4F35-B3AD-A12BBD9DA24E-300x206.jpg)](…
content/uploads/2023/03/DCA61B84-F5D4-4F35-B3AD-A12BBD9DA24E.jpeg)
The Shell Ethane Cracker Facility appears to have challenging performance due
to complex startup activities
**Eyes on Shell Monthly Meeting, Beaver County, Pennsylvania. March 1, 2023**
From the [Beaver County Marcellus Awareness Community, Ambridge,
PA](https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZ0pdeGprj8qH9b1ZZrasEDVuwnYVxWpGtX8),
3/1/23
**All of us, no matter where we come from or what we look like, want to live
in a safe, healthy environment where our families can thrive. But fossil fuel
lobbyists and the politicians they pay for are once again sacrificing our
health for their profits. We are coming together as a community to protect our
families and hold Shell accountable for the damage they will do to our
environment.**
Connect with **Eyes On Shell** , and learn more about: -monitoring processes,
-expected air contaminants, -water pollution, -health impacts ….
Join us to learn about steps you can take to protect yourself, and your loved
ones from harm. You can be part of the Eyes on Shell watchdog team. If you
see, smell, or hear something that doesn’t seem right, let us know.
eyesonshell(a)gmail.com ……. (724) 923-3244
Note: By registering for this event you give permission for the organizers to
send related emails to you.
**Time** ~ [You can choose to attend the following
session](https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZ0pdeGprj8qH9b1ZZrasEDVuwnYVxWpGtX8).
~ Mar 1, 2023 07:30 PM
<https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZ0pdeGprj8qH9b1ZZrasEDVuwnYVxWpGt…>
**Our mailing address is:**
Beaver County Marcellus Awareness Community
P.O. Box 31, Ambridge, PA 15003
URL: <https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2023/03/01/eyes-on-the-shell-ethane-
cracker-facility-in-s-w-pa-zoom-3123/>