Northeast Gas Association: NGA ISSUE BRIEF: Pipeline Expansion Projects
July 21, 2013
Northeast Gas Association: NGA ISSUE BRIEF: Pipeline Expansion Projects.
|
FossilFuelSubsidy_201112.pdf
July 18, 2013
Report_FossilFuelSubsidy_201112.pdf.
Pennsylvania Fossil Fuel Subsidies:
An Overview
by
Christina Simeone, Director, PennFuture Energy Center
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Pennsylvania taxpayers may not know they are subsidizing the production and use of fossil fuels. In fact,
Pennsylvania is subsidizing fossil fuels at a cost of almost $2.9 billion per year.1,2 Use of these fuels burdens
taxpayers with additional non-monetized externalities such as air, land and water pollution and the associated
negative human health and property impacts. Since many of these subsidies were passed years or decades ago,
Pennsylvania’s current policymakers may not all be aware that these subsidies exist or understand their cumulative
impacts.
The federal government has long subsidized the production and use of fossil fuels to the tune of billions of
dollars per year, and to the considerable benefit of these extremely profitable and mature industries. Federal level
subsidies reduce the amount of taxable income that fossil fuel companies are required to report to Pennsylvania for
state taxes. Further, Pennsylvania tacks on additional subsidies such as tax breaks and grant programs that benefit
the use or production of fossil fuels. With respect to energy, there is no free and competitive market, least of all in
Pennsylvania.
The state’s fossil fuel subsidies come primarily in the form of tax exemptions, with only a handful of applicable tax
credits and grant programs. There are exemptions for the use of fossil fuels, such as exempting gasoline purchase
from Sales and Use Tax, which make these fuels more attractive by lowering their costs to the consumer. There are
also exemptions that benefit distributors of fossil fuels, such as exempting natural gas sales from the Gross Receipts
Tax, thereby reducing the tax burden on distribution companies, and increasing their profitability. Producers of
fossil fuels also enjoy subsidies, like the Sales and Use Tax exemption for the purchase of mining equipment,
which reduces costs to coal mining companies and increasing profitability. Ironically, Pennsylvania subsidizes the
purchase of pollution control equipment to help users of fossil fuels pay for the cost of cleaning the air and water
fouled by these very fossil fuels.
This preliminary overview of Pennsylvania’s fossil fuel subsidies is intended to promote discussion and perhaps
even a reexamination of Pennsylvania’s overall incentive strategy with respect to energy. This report should be
read as an introduction to the issue of Pennsylvania’s fossil fuel subsidies; additional research and analysis is
required.
PEER – NO SURPRISE FEDERAL PIPELINE SAFETY EXERCISES SINCE 2005
July 18, 2013
PEER – NO SURPRISE FEDERAL PIPELINE SAFETY EXERCISES SINCE 2005.
For Immediate Release: Jul 17, 2013
Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337
NO SURPRISE FEDERAL PIPELINE SAFETY EXERCISES SINCE 2005
Scant Oversight or Local Coordination on Pipeline Emergency Response Plans
Posted on Jul 17, 2013
Washington, DC — The federal pipeline safety agency has not conducted a single surprise exercise for more than eight years to determine whether an operator can execute emergency response plans, according to documents released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). Nor does the agency have a ready account of which emergency response plans it has approved, rejected or changed.
More than 2.5 million miles of pipelines carrying oil, natural gas and high-hazard liquids, honeycomb the U.S. Each year, there are more than 100 “significant” pipeline accidents involving loss of life, injuries, fire and/or major spillage. Recent pipeline spills and explosions have had catastrophic results.
Federal guidelines call for up to 20 unannounced exercises annually to demonstrate an operator’s “ability to respond to a worst case discharge spill event.” Yet in documents obtained in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) concedes that –
- It has not conducted any unannounced safety exercise since 2005, when it only conducted one. In the preceding 10 year period, the agency conducted 36 surprise exercises, peaking with 14 in 1997;
- In the last five years, PHMSA has completed only 26 announced safety reviews, with only one initiated in 2012. More than half of all these reviews (15) occurred in 2011; and
- The agency cited two exercises in 2004 which were labeled “unknown” because PHMSA had no record on whether they were surprise or scheduled.
“Since there are no surprise safety drills, it should be no surprise when the on-scene response to actual emergencies is lacking,” stated PEER Counsel Kathryn Douglass, who brought the suit that pried the documents loose. “Given PHMSA’s supine posture, pipelines in America are essentially self-regulated.”
Beyond whether operators can carry out their emergency response plans, the adequacy of those plans also remains in question. Months after PEER asked and ultimately sued PHMSA to produce response plans submitted by pipeline operators, the agency still has only been able to provide a handful of the 314 current plans. Moreover, PHMSA cannot identify a single one of the more than 1,000 pipeline response plans it has reviewed during the past five years that it has rejected or amended.
“If it takes PHMSA months to produce copies of emergency response plans, that means communities on the front line have no access to the safety playbook in case of an accident,” Douglass added, noting that in recent major pipeline spills, local emergency response agencies were in the dark both about what was occurring and what the planned response was supposed to include. “We should not have to sue in federal court to obtain pipeline emergency response plans – they should be posted routinely on the web.”
###
See PMSA list of pipeline safety exercises – unannounced, announced and unknown
Look at federal guidance on unannounced pipeline exercises
Scan the list of all current and archived facility response plans
View PHMSA failure to implement NTSB recommendations following recent disasters
Constitution Pipeline Interventions by legal non-profits 7-17-13
July 17, 2013
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 17, 2013
CONTACT
Stop the Pipeline, Anne Marie Garti, 718-316-0322
Earthjustice, Bridget Lee, 212-845-7379
Riverkeeper, Tina Posterli, 516-526-9371
Catskill Mountainkeeper, Wes Gillingham, 845-901-1029
Clean Air Council, Matt Walker, 215-567-4004 ext. 121
Delaware-Otsego Audubon Society, Andrew Mason, 607-652-2162
Delaware Riverkeeper Network, Maya van Rossum, 215-369-1188 ext. 102
Sierra Club, Atlantic Chapter, Roger Downs, 518-426-9144
Sierra Club, Pennsylvania Chapter, Thomas Au, 717-234-7445
Hundreds Intervene in Proceedings over Federal Review of Constitution Pipeline Project
120-mile natural gas pipeline through NY and PA attracts scrutiny and controversy
WASHINGTON, DC – A coalition of environmental groups, along with more than 300 residents are intervening in proceedings over a 122-mile natural gas pipeline proposed to run through portions of New York and Pennsylvania, subjecting the already unpopular project to an added layer of controversy.
The flurry of intervention filings is the latest sign that residents and advocates are prepared to fiercely challenge infrastructure projects that will allow more fracking-enabled gas development in the region.
“The people who live here do so by choice — for the rural lifestyle, clean air, pure water, and abundant wildlife. They understand this pipeline will lead to an industrialization of the area, and they are not going to give up their land — and everything else they love about country living — without a fight,” said Anne Marie Garti, a founder of Stop the Pipeline, a grassroots organization formed by landowners and citizens who oppose the pipeline.
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, which has raised concerns over the environmental impacts of the project, has also intervened in the federal proceedings, indicating that the state agency intends to scrutinize the federal approval process.
The Constitution Pipeline Project — a joint venture between oil and gas company subsidiaries Williams Partners Operating, Cabot Pipeline Holdings, Piedmont Constitution Pipeline Company, and Capitol Energy Ventures — is proposed to transport natural gas from Susquehanna County in Pennsylvania through Broome, Chenango, Delaware, and Schoharie Counties in New York to two existing interstate pipelines. Concerned about their property rights, as well as environmental and public health impacts of the project, approximately 1000 people submitted comments to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) last year opposing the proposed project, and 35 percent of the property owners along the pipeline route have refused to allow project personnel onto their land.
“My wife and I bought land, and built our house by hand, in order to enjoy the tranquility of the countryside,” said Dan Brignoli, a lifelong resident of Delaware County. “Last year they wanted to put the pipeline 200-feet from our home, but we wouldn’t let them on our land. Now they’ve moved it up the hill a hundred feet, just over the property line, but it could still pollute our water, or kill us if there were to be an explosion. The government shouldn’t let them take our land when there isn’t a real need for this pipeline. They just want to make more money — and lay down the infrastructure for fracking in New York State.”
But in spite of local objection, the companies proposing the project are pushing forward with plans, and filed an application with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in June. Today is the deadline to intervene in the FERC proceedings, resulting in filings by more than 300 residents; Stop the Pipeline, represented by the Pace Environmental Litigation Clinic; Riverkeeper; and a coalition of environmental groups — Catskill Mountainkeeper, Clean Air Council, Delaware-Otsego Audubon Society, Delaware Riverkeeper Network, and the Pennsylvania and Atlantic Chapters of Sierra Club — represented by the nonprofit environmental law organization Earthjustice.
“This 122-mile Constitution pipeline, planned to run through five counties and two states, is the sort of massive infrastructure project that will lock the region into continued extraction and burning of fossil fuels at a time when we need instead to be speeding the transition to clean renewable energy,” said Earthjustice attorney Bridget Lee. “The law requires the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to give careful consideration to the pipeline’s impacts on people, communities, and the environment. Foresight and common sense dictate that FERC officials consider foregoing the project altogether.”
“Pipelines that have cut through our region have inflicted incredible damage — destroying forests, cutting through creeks, irreparably transforming wetlands, causing more polluted runoff, and decimating habitat critical to creatures in our region, said Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper. “The harms to the ecology of the region are devastating, but so are the harms to the people — damaging ecotourism, harming recreation such as hunting and boating, destroying the peace and beauty of communities during and after construction, forever changing what it means to live in these communities, and increasing the drilling and fracking that are destroying communities elsewhere and making this country even more dependent on dirty fossil fuels.”
The 122 miles of pipeline and additional miles of access roads will cut across forests and watersheds.
“The proposed project poses a substantial threat to ground and surface water resources in both New York and Pennsylvania. The 122 mile pipeline has the potential to impact and potentially contaminate multiple public drinking water sources and an untold number of private drinking water wells that lie within the Project area. The pipeline itself proposes to cross hundreds of streams and wetlands by literally digging a hole through them,” said Kate Hudson, Watershed Program Director at Riverkeeper. “These impacts alone demand that FERC take a hard look at the project’s environmental effects. Any project that jeopardizes multiple water resources in two states is clearly against the public’s interest.”
The project also includes two compressor stations, posing a threat to air quality and public health.
“The so-called Constitution Pipeline could emit hundreds of tons of harmful and climate-disrupting air pollution in Pennsylvania and New York each year, yet the Application ignores these real threats to public health,” said Matt Walker of the Clean Air Council. “The Project also is likely to create more demand for increased fracking and transmission infrastructure, all of which will cause even more air pollution and more health impacts for the people who call the surrounding communities home. Given the potentially serious risks to public health and air quality, the Council urges FERC to deny the Application for this ill-advised project.”
The project will disturb hundreds of acres of land — with access roads and industrial equipment cutting across forests and watersheds. The project potentially will affect both threatened and endangered species, including the Indiana Bat, migratory birds, and special protection waters.
“The pipeline as planned will fragment some of the best remaining bird habitat in the region,” said Delaware-Otsego Audubon Society Co-President Andrew Mason. “Many species already in decline will suffer further losses from this corridor that will break up their breeding territories and allow predators and nest parasites into the forests.”
Aided by the controversial high volume hydraulic fracking process and state and federal deregulation, gas drilling in Pennsylvania has increased exponentially in recent years and New York residents are fighting to protect their state from an impending gas drilling rush.
“If this project goes forward, the big winners will be the stockholders of the natural gas companies and the big losers will be the rest of us, said Wes Gillingham, Program Director of Catskill Mountainkeeper. “There is no public necessity for this project. This is clearly a case of the gas industry trying to push through a project to increase their profit margin at the expense of the people along the route. This is the start of a massive web of gas infrastructure — the beginning of the industrialization of New York we have all been warned about.”
The pipeline will spur the already frantic pace of gas drilling and fracking in Pennsylvania — along with the air, water, and climate pollution that accompanies such development — and would lay the groundwork for industry to operate in New York. The impacts associated with this industrial activity include: spills of diesel fuel and fracking chemicals, methane migration into groundwater; contamination of major rivers with fracking wastewater, forested landscape pockmarked with well pads and access roads and pipelines cutting through forests and fields.
“FERC must acknowledge that the proposed Constitution Pipeline is not primarily a natural gas conveyance from point A to point B but a facilitator of fracking along the way,” said Roger Downs, Conservation Director for the Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter. “The Western Slope of the Catskills and the Upper Susquehanna River Basin are protected from fracking simply because there is no infrastructure to transport the gas to market. The Constitution Pipeline will be just that inducement — transforming this storied landscape into an industrial grid work of well pads and gathering lines.”
Attached is a press release announcing the entrance of the legal nonprofits into this battlefield.
Below a list of some of the public interest, nonprofit interventions and comments filed as of 4 pm. The positions of the NYS DEC, US Army Corp of Engineers, and Department of the Interior (US Fish and Wildlife) are currently aligned with the public interest law firms, and nonprofits.
Anne Marie
Motion to Intervene by Stop the Pipeline. Submitted by the PACE ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION CLINIC under CP13-499.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130717-5045
Motion to Intervene of Earthjustice on Behalf of Catskill Mountainkeeper, Clean Air Council, Delaware-Otsego Audubon Society, Delaware Riverkeeper Network, and Sierra Club in CP13-499.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130717-5273
Comments of Catskill Mountainkeeper, Clean Air Council, Delaware-Otsego Audubon Society, Delaware Riverkeeper Network, Sierra Club, and Riverkeeper, Inc. under CP13-499-000.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130717-5249
Motion to Intervene of Riverkeeper, Inc. under CP13-499.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130717-5205
New York State Council of Trout Unlimited submits Petition to Intervene re the Constitution Pipeline Company, LLC under CP13-499.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130715-0019
Motion to Intervene of Center for Sustainable Rural Communities under CP13-499.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130710-5164
Motion to Intervene of Otsego 2000, Inc. under CP13-499.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130717-5244
Motion to Intervene of Town of Davenport, New York under CP13-499.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130717-5133
Motion to Intervene by the Town of Meredith under CP13-499.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130717-5217
Motion to Intervene of Town of Franklin, New York under CP13-499.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130716-5118
Motion to Intervene of New York Public Service Commission under CP13-499.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130701-5138
Motion to Intervene of New York State Department of Environmental Conservation under CP13-499.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130710-5194
Motion to Intervene of U.S. Department of the Interior under CP13-499, et. al..
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130717-5222
Comments of the US Army Corps of Engineers regarding preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Constitution Pipeline Project under PF12-9.
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130716-0001
http://elibrary.FERC.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20130716-0002
###
Quebec’s Lac-Mégantic oil train disaster not just tragedy, but corporate crime | Environment | guardian.co.uk
July 17, 2013
GDACC 
