SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Wharf Rat who wrote (933198)5/3/2016 9:42:49 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Respond to of 1572637
 
New York State Refuses Permit for Constitution Pipeline in Major Victory for Anti-Fracking Organizers

By Sharon Kelly • Tuesday, May 3, 2016 - 17:50

In a striking victory for grassroots environmental and community groups, New York state's Department of Environmental Conservation announced on April 22 that it had denied a key permit for a pipeline that would have carried fracked gas from Pennsylvania to planned natural gas export facilities in New York state.

The Constitution Pipeline, planned to stretch 125 feet wide and 124 miles long starting near Dimock, PA and crossing over 275 streams and waterways, would have required the cutting of as many as 700,000 trees in Pennsylvania and New York, part of a build-out project estimated to cost investors as much as $1 billion.

But in recent months, the project faced escalating opposition, not only from larger environmental nonprofits, but also from a coalition of local landowners and activists who adopted tactics ranging from collecting over 15,000 public comments for New York state's review of the project to civil disobedience at federal hearings.

In its April 22 letter to the Constitution Pipeline Co., LLC, New York state's Chief Permit Administrator John Ferguson cited not only concerns about tree-felling in watersheds, but also the impacts the pipeline and its construction would have on the New York's streams and wetlands, and even threats to old growth forests — extraordinarily rare in the eastern U.S. — from the proposed construction.

Although New York state had requested detailed information about how the company would handle stream-crossings, the company had failed to explain how it would avoid or mitigate damage to the state's waterways, the administrator said.

“Constitution's failure to adequately address these concerns limited the Department's ability to assess the impacts and conclude that the Project will comply water quality standards,” he wrote. “Accordingly, Constitution's request for a [401 Water Quality Certificate] is denied.”

Williams Co., which had partnered with Cabot Oil & Gas and Piedmont Natural Gas to form the Constitution Pipeline Co., had first broached construction plans with regulators in 2012. In 2014, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved the project – as long as the pipeline company obtained all required state permits.

Environmentalists hailed the decision. “Governor Cuomo's rejection of the Constitution Pipeline represents a turning of the tide, where states across the nation that have been pressured into accepting harmful gas infrastructure projects by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) may now feel emboldened to push back,” said Roger Downs, Conservation Director for the Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter.

“This is also a tremendous victory for the thousands of citizen activists and impacted landowners who through four years of sacrifice and grassroots organizing created the political space for this decision to be made,” he said.

Organizers in the state said they planned to push for a broader shift away from fracked gas and other fossil fuels. “This landmark decision should serve as a precedent,” said Walter Hang, President of Toxics Targeting, Inc., “for denying New York State authorization for all proposed fossil fuel pipelines and infrastructure projects in order to safeguard public health and the environment.”

The pipeline's backers said they were considering an appeal through the courts. “We are very disappointed by today’s decision,” Williams Partners said in a statement. “We remain absolutely committed to building this important energy infrastructure project.”

New York state's decision comes on the heels of a string of cancelled oil and gas infrastructure building plans. Just days earlier, Kinder Morgan announced it was dropping its plans to construct a $3.1 billion pipeline, the Northeast Direct, that would have crossed Pennsylvania and New York state on its route to New England. And plans to build two different Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) plants recently collapsed when a pipeline and export terminal scheme was dropped by Oregon LNG, citing “a funding decision” and the Jordan Cove project, also in Oregon, failed to demonstrate to federal regulators that anyone was willing to buy the LNG they planned to sell.

Oil and gas industry groups reacted by warning that the price of natural gas might rise as a result. “This decision impacts not only the residents of New York, but also the families and businesses in the surrounding states whose consumers currently pay the highest energy costs in the country,” Marty Durbin, executive director for market development at the American Petroleum Institute, said in a statement.

But fossil fuels have historically been subject to sudden price spikes, and environmental groups have argued that a shift to renewable energy can help save consumers money. “The costs of renewable energy technologies have declined steadily, and are projected to drop even more,” the Union of Concerned Scientists notes. “In contrast, fossil fuel prices can vary dramatically and are prone to substantial price swings,” – risks so great that utilities spend millions to hedge against price uncertainties, adding to the costs borne by consumer.

“Clean, renewable energy is the only responsible path forward for New York,” Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Watch, said in a statement responding to New York state's rejection of the pipeline project.

New York state's decision drew the support of anti-fracking celebrities. “This is what real climate leadership looks like,” Mark Ruffalo, a member of New Yorkers Against Fracking, said in a statement. Actor James Cromwell had also been a public opponent of the project.

The permit denial was extraordinarily unusual, observers said, with the state's top environmental official recently telling Politico that “he could not recall another pipeline that had been rejected by the state in recent years.”

Opposition to the Constitution Pipeline had seemed to surge after a Pennsylvania family whose 23-acre maple sugaring operation was condemned under eminent domain allowed grassroots organizers to camp on their property and activists turned back a first wave of tree cutters. As DeSmog reported, dozens of supporters, many from New York state, encamped on the property to try to protect the Holleran maple farm from being clear-cut before New York had granted its water permits.

A federal judge ordered U.S. Marshalls to arrest anyone who tried to prevent the tree cutting on that property – and the Marshalls arrived with assault rifles and flack jackets to enforce that order. Tree felling on the Holleran land began on March 1st.

“We tried to tell Williams and Cabot that this might happen before they cut our trees, and why couldn’t they please wait but they insisted on doing it anyway, ours and many other peoples,” Catherine Holleran, 59, told State Impact after New York's decision was announced. “And now it’s for nothing, it looks like they are not going to get their go-ahead at all.”

As DeSmog previously reported, a January 2016 survey by the Pipeline and Gas Journal reported 34,112 miles of new or planned pipelines across North America, but many of these projects have run into a nearly unprecedented level of public opposition. “I think at FERC we have clearly seen increased opposition to infrastructure,” Federal Energy Regulatory Commission chairman Norman Bey testified before Congress in December. FERC has been labeled a “rubber stamp machine” by activists who say that permits are rarely denied by the agency.

Organizers in other states said that today's decision on the Constitution pipeline could serve as a precedent for their own local battles.

New York “has demonstrated that states are not just at the mercy of FERC when it comes to reviewing interstate gas pipelines,” said Tom Gilbert, campaign director for ReThink Energy NJ and New Jersey Conservation Foundation. “We urge the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection to take a similarly prudent approach when it considers permit applications for the proposed PennEast Pipeline, which would significantly affect preserved open spaces, cross protected C-1 streams 49 times, and threaten the drinking water supply for over 1.5 million New Jerseyans.”

The battle had drawn the attention of Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, who before New York state acted had called for the project to be abandoned.

“The possibility of methane leaks from the proposed Constitution Pipeline would be catastrophic to our air and our climate — and if this pipeline were approved, eminent domain would be used to seize land from farmers and homeowners,” Mr. Sanders said in a statement earlier this week. “We need to move to a 100 percent clean energy economy. Building more risky pipelines that encourage the production of dirty fossil fuels is not the path forward.”

Some of those most directly impacted by the pipeline project welcomed the news but kept their eye on the next battles to come.

“In response to the decision by the DEC, I could not be more thrilled,” Megan Holleran, whose family's Pennsylvania maple sugaring operation was clear-cut to make way for the proposed pipeline, told DeSmog.

“I'm sure that Williams will seek to appeal this decision and I'm interested to see what alternate plans they will consider to recoup the shareholders funds spent on meaningless tree clearing in PA,” she said. “However, I am optimistic that in the future they will find it harder to convince the judges and regulatory agencies in PA that their project is inevitable and urgent. Hopefully this will lead to more careful and reasonable decision making in the future.”

desmogblog.com



To: Wharf Rat who wrote (933198)5/4/2016 10:27:40 AM
From: Brumar892 Recommendations

Recommended By
FJB
TideGlider

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1572637
 
The sky is falling” scare stories have no place in public interest science or policy

John Coleman

Earth Day 2016 brought extensive consternation about how our Earth will soon become uninhabitable, as mankind’s activities of civilization trigger unstoppable global warming and climate change. President Obama used the occasion to sign the Paris climate treaty and further obligate the United States to slash its fossil fuel use, carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth.

I love this little blue planet and do all I can to preserve it for my children and grandchildren.

If I thought for even a second that the civilized activities of mankind are producing a threat to our planet, I would spend the rest of my life correcting the problems. However, after devoting a decade to carefully studying mankind’s impact on our climate, I am firmly convinced that the entire global warming/climate change campaign is based on a failed scientific theory.

In short, there is no dangerous manmade climate change problem.

“Who cares about your scientific study,” many people respond. “This is about loving a native environment. This is about escaping from the horrors of so called civilization.”

That response is understandable because for fifteen years the Greenpeace-Sierra Club crowd has been constantly decrying the “ugliness” of civilization: cars, planes, trains, trucks, factories, power plants and all the rest. It seems they think things were better in pre-industrial times, or perhaps the world of Tarzan or modern-day central Africa.

There certainly has been a steady barrage of “research” that finds everything going drastically wrong with Planet Earth because of our civilized life. The media join in, of course, proclaiming “the sky is falling,” and Al Gore’s book, movie and “climate crisis tipping point” mantra stirred the media into an even bigger tizzy. Now almost the entire Democrat Party has climbed aboard.

As a result, billions of dollars in annual government funding keep the alarmist climate research and environmental campaigns marching on. Tens of billions more subsidize wind, solar and biofuel energy that is supposedly more “sustainable” and “climate friendly.”

Today, a high percentage of Americans accept climate change as a valid problem, even though the vast majority rate it at the bottom of their top ten or twenty concerns. Many accept news reports that tell us the United Nations through the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC) has “settled” the science in the last fifteen years.

In fact, President Obama and others say the matter is so proven that 97% of scientists agree on climate change. But this oft-quoted phrase has been totally debunked as fabricated or bait-and-switch. A group of scientists is asked, “Do you agree that Earth has warmed in recent years and Earth’s climate is changing?”

Probably every honest, competent scientist would answer “Yes.” But then the “survey” team changes the question to have them say, “Yes, humans are causing dangerous climate change.” Since 100% agreement would look suspicious, they back off a little and make it a “97% consensus.”


This leaves a somewhat David and Goliath situation for those of us climate experts who agree that Earth’s climate is changing, has always changed, and humans have some effects today – but do not believe that mankind’s emissions of plant-fertilizing carbon dioxide have replaced the powerful natural forces that have always driven climate change, or that any current or future changes must necessarily be dangerous or cataclysmic. We are frequently insulted and dismissed as Deniers.

Our side is not as small as the media may have you think. Many notable scientists totally reject claims of a manmade climate crisis. Over 31,000 have signed a statement that rejects the manmade global warming scare and says we see “no convincing evidence” that humans are causing dangerous climate change. They and other experts have widely discredited the IPCC and other assertions about the climate.

There is even a Non-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). It has published several impressive 4,000-page books of scientific papers that totally dismantle IPCC claims. The NIPCC’s Climate Change Reconsidered and other books are also published on-line.

Even the late, great author/physician/scientist Michael Crichton (of Jurassic Park fame) debunked global warming and wrote about it in his novel State of Fear.

Our fossil fuel, nuclear and hydroelectric powered civilization has made billions of lives much healthier, longer and more pleasant than in previous times. Heating and air conditioning, power for lights and computers and smart phones, and modern hospitals and schools are just a few of the blessings that bring incalculable value to our lives. What we enjoy today is the result of hundreds of generations of hard working men and women, each one moving us forward by inches or miles.

In my 80s now, I think about the world into which I was born. Radio was just beginning. Phones were few and far between and very primitive, requiring hand cranks and operators. Cars and trucks were slow and produced awful soot, smoke, carbon monoxide and other pollutants. Factories, power plants and home furnaces fueled by dirty unprocessed coal with un-scrubbed smoke billowing from their chimneys, left us all in smoggy, unhealthy air.

Doctors had few medicines to offer, and only primitive x-ray devices to peer inside us. Jet airplanes, computers, televisions, rockets, satellites and so much more had not yet been invented. Most people died in their late 40s or 50s. In this one man’s lifetime, civilization has made amazing progress.

Now think about what life on Earth will be like when you are my age. I predict the fossil fuel-powered society will have been replaced by systems only a few geniuses are even thinking about today. A long list of now fatal diseases will have been conquered, and people will live healthy life into their late nineties.

I predict our cars and planes will not need drivers or pilots, and space flight will become common. Robots will do much of the work, so people can enjoy their lives much, much more.

And I predict that anyone who looks back on the threat of climate change/global warming and all the threats to life on Earth will have a hearty laugh, as mankind will have progressed beyond accepting any such silliness.

Life is good. Enjoy it. And stop worrying about climate hobgoblins.

Via email: Weather Channel founder John Coleman is the original meteorologist on ABC’s Good Morning America. He has been studying weather and climate for over 60 years




To: Wharf Rat who wrote (933198)5/4/2016 10:34:04 AM
From: Brumar891 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1572637
 
1) A five year period is meaningless 2) If ice free means just under a million sq km, then "ice free" is just a Chicken Little scare story 3) it's not even a scary story as who cares if the arctic has a million sq km of ice or not?