Leaders Unveil “Carbon Fee and Rebate” Plan for the Nation’s Capital

Local Groups Propose Plan to Penalize Carbon Pollution, Rebate Millions of Dollars to City Residents, Invest in the Green Economy, and Create Tax Credits for Businesses

WASHINGTON, DC – Local faith leaders, economic justice advocates, labor organizers, environmentalists, and others gathered on the front steps of D.C.’s city hall on Thursday to unveil a dynamic “carbon fee and rebate” plan to reduce global warming pollution in the city of Washington, D.C. The plan would charge polluters for their carbon emissions and rebate the overwhelming majority of the revenue back to every resident of the District.
The groundbreaking plan, released in the wake of April’s massive Peoples Climate March in D.C., outlines how the District of Columbia can reduce carbon pollution in the city while increasing employment. The plan will also boost incomes in the District through a universal “carbon rebate” paid to every resident on a quarterly basis, including an enhanced rebate to low-income District residents. The plan would also make investments in green infrastructure throughout the city. Finally, the plan proposes using a small share of the carbon revenue to create a tax credit for local businesses.
“After months at the table, community leaders representing the vast majority of D.C. residents have put together a remarkably fair and effective policy to address climate pollution,” said Jeremiah Lowery, a Ward 4 resident and organizer for the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “This policy would significantly reduce carbon pollution in the city, create a badly needed new source of income for residents, and grow the D.C. economy at the same time.”
On the heels of last autumn’s unsuccessful carbon tax initiative in Washington State, the D.C. campaign to put a “price” on carbon is backed by a unified alliance of labor leaders, environmentalists, and economic justice advocates. These include the D.C. Sierra Club, the Service Employees International Union Local 32B (32BJ SEIU), Interfaith Power and Light, the Working Families Party of D.C., Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Black Millennials for Flint, and more. The groups are unified under the “Put a Price On It D.C.” campaign.
The proposed policy would apply to natural gas and oil consumed in the District as well as carbon-intensive electricity and emissions linked to transportation (exempting public transportation). It would rebate 75% of the carbon revenue to all D.C. residents, invest 20% in green energy projects, and use 5% to reduce property taxes for local businesses. Legislation proposed by the group would be called “The Healthy Climate, Healthy Business, and Family Rebate Act of D.C.”
“Carbon pollution and climate disruption threaten the health of our children and the future of our community,” said Mark Kresowik, a Ward 4 homeowner, father, and Deputy Regional Director for the Sierra Club.  “Our diverse coalition has worked together and found common ground to ensure polluters pay for their damage, help those who have been overburdened by pollution and underserved by economic opportunities, and make clean energy and transportation more available to families, workers, and businesses.”
Advocates released economic data showing how a rebate-oriented carbon fee – beginning at $20 per ton of CO2 in 2019 and rising to $150 per ton in 2032 – would benefit local businesses, workers, and household incomes in D.C. Advocates enlisted the services of the well-known D.C.-based think tank called the Center for Climate Strategies (CCS) to run sophisticated computer model runs based on these carbon fees for the District. For this purpose, CCS employed an energy/economic computer model from the highly respected company Regional Economic Models, Inc., and found that the mix of 75% rebate, 20% investments, and a 5% property tax cut for businesses produced maximum benefits while reducing carbon pollution by 23% in the city by 2032.
Said Josephine Chu, co-founder of local D.C. catering company, Zenful Bites: “Zenful Bites is proud to be part of the ‘Put a Price on It D.C.’ coalition. This policy will expand our customer base and make our city a healthier, safer place to live. We’re happy to help move this campaign forward for a more sustainable economy.”
Starting on day one, the money raised through carbon pricing would be returned to every D.C. resident through a quarterly rebate, with extra money earmarked for low-income residents.  In just the first year of this policy, every family would receive over $500/year, and every low-income family would receive nearly $900 per year. This amount would steadily increase over time to more than $1,600 and $2,750 by 2032 for average families and low-income families respectively. Roughly 75% of D.C. residents would see their net incomes increase, with low-income residents seeing a rebate of roughly four dollars for every dollar they pay through the carbon fee. Only the wealthiest D.C. residents, who use substantially more energy than average households, would pay more through the fee than they see in rebate. This progressive rebate structure, combined with green investments and local business tax reductions, will ensure that D.C. reduces carbon while creating net job growth and boosting average incomes. This proposal, for example, would create new jobs in construction, food service, and other high-employment sectors of the economy.
“It is time to put the health and welfare of our communities before polluters’ profits, as communities of color, working families and immigrant communities disproportionately suffer the devastating impacts of toxic pollution and climate change,” said 32BJ SEIU member and private security officer, Judith Howell. “Our communities are targeted and our air and water are poisoned first. But we can work together to overcome and hold polluting corporations and their lobbyists accountable, so we can change the direction of climate change.”
“So many of our D.C. faith communities understand that climate polluters should pay for the damage they’re doing to our common home, and should take responsibility for the harm that their pollution is causing for our most vulnerable neighbors,” said Joelle Novey, Executive Director of Interfaith Power & Light (DC.MD.NoVA). “Looking forward, we anticipate that our country will ultimately put a national price on carbon. We’re getting started today by joining with all people of goodwill in the District to make climate polluters pay.”
See our fact sheet here for more information.


###

Victims Of Mountaintop Removal From Dominion’s Proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline Speak Out In Front of Governor McAuliffe’s Office

Following news that Dominion’s Atlantic Coast Pipeline would obliterate 38 miles of ridgelines in Virginia and West Virginia, several severely impacted residents and business owners spoke at a Richmond press conference detailing their concerns and calling on McAuliffe to reject the pipeline.

RICHMOND, VA — Virginia residents whose lives and property would be destroyed by mountaintop removal — triggered by Dominion Resources’ proposed fracked-gas pipeline — spoke out at a press conference today outside Governor Terry McAuliffe’s office. They demanded the Governor use his full legal authority to stop Dominion’s plan to explode entire ridgetops along 38 miles of mountains to build the controversial Atlantic Coast Pipeline.

According to a new briefing paper, Dominion Resources intends to blast away, excavate, and partially remove entire ridgetops along 38 miles of Appalachian mountains as part of the construction of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. Similar impacts – although not yet fully inventoried – are expected to come from the construction of a second pipeline to the south: the Mountain Valley Pipeline led by the company EQT.

During the press conference, speakers demanded the Governor use his regulatory power to halt both proposed pipelines. They detailed how their communities will be directly impacted by the shattered ridgelines that will come with the construction of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. They explained how the Atlantic Coast Pipeline would force businesses to close, lower property values, and harm the tourism economy. Additionally, they detailed how the pipeline would cause irrevocable harms to the natural environment, and increase the threats of water pollution and landslides.

“The proposed pipeline has been a 24/7 nightmare for my wife and I since we first learned of it,” said Bill Limpert, retired environmental regulator and property owner Little Valley, Bath County. “The Atlantic Coast Pipeline would cut our property in half. Then it would leave an 125-foot-wide scar for 3,000 feet along Miracle Ridge, which is now covered by old growth forest — some of it never cut. It would lower our property value by at least 50 percent, and our property would become a toxic asset. It would also leave us well within the blast zone of the pipeline, and we — and a number of our neighbors — are trapped at the head of Little Valley in the evacuation zone with no chance of escape or rescue in a pipeline accident. We would be forced to abandon our retirement home and property if the pipeline is constructed as proposed. We simply cannot live next to this dangerous pipeline or witness the destruction it would bring upon our property, and we will not relent in fighting it with everything we have.”

Engineering and policy experts have examined documents submitted by Dominion to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and, using GIS mapping software, found that Dominion would require mountaintops to be “reduced” by 10 to 60 feet along the proposed route of the pipeline. For perspective, the height equivalent of a five-story building would be erased in places from fully forested and ancient mountains.

In addition to the expected mountaintop removal, Dominion has yet to reveal how it intends to dispose of at least 247,000 dump-truck-loads of excess rock and soil—known as “overburden”—that would accumulate from the construction along just these 38 miles of ridgetops.

Nancy McMoneagle, President and Executive Director of The Monroe Institute, stated: “The Monroe Institute has done business in Nelson County since 1979, contributing almost $2 million annually to Nelson County’s economy, employing around 50 staff and service contractors. If the Atlantic Coast Pipeline comes through Institute property as is now projected, our operations would be decimated, all these jobs would be lost, and thousands of our customers throughout the world would be left without our services.”

Dominion has submitted a proposal to FERC to build a 42-inch diameter pipeline that would transport natural gas from West Virginia into Virginia and North Carolina. Dominion has attempted to paint the Atlantic Coast Pipeline as an “environmentally-friendly” project. However, its proposed construction method and route selection across and along steep mountains is unprecedented for the region—if not the country—and is viewed as extreme and radical by landowners, conservationists, and engineers. Similar impacts – although not yet fully inventoried – could come from the construction of a second pipeline to the south: the Mountain Valley Pipeline led by the company EQT Midstream Partners, LP.

“Dominion is taking our land in order to destroy the mountain ridge directly over our home,” said Joseph W. McMoneagle, President of the New Land Home Owners Association. “Blasting on Roberts Mountain will destroy this mountain’s stability, and permanently disrupt the delicate underground water supply to more than half a dozen homes in our subdivision. Stripping old growth trees and underbrush will open the mountain ridge to heavy erosion, and future mud and landslides that will overrun our natural mountain springs and streams. Most of our residents are over age sixty, so we have a frequent need for emergency vehicles traveling unhindered in and out of our valley. Because our roads are excessively narrow and steep, it will be impossible to pass Dominion’s pipeline construction trucks during one of those emergencies. Altering our roads will be taking our land without the excuse of a pipeline. I ask the Governor to put an immediate stop to this nonsense before someone is seriously hurt.”

The full briefing paper is available here.

###

Contact:

Denise Robbins, 240-396-2022, denise@chesapeakeclimate.org

Anne Havemann, 240-396-1984, anne@chesapeakeclimate.org

D.C. Residents to Take Action at City Hall During Peoples Climate March to Advance Local Climate Justice Campaigns

Tens of Thousands Will Call on D.C. City Council to Cut Ties with Wells Fargo and Put a  Price on Carbon, as They Pass John A. Wilson Building During March for Climate, Jobs, and Justice

 
WASHINGTON — On April 29 during the Peoples Climate March, two D.C.-based climate justice campaigns will engage tens of thousands marching down Pennsylvania Ave. past the John A. Wilson Building to call on D.C. City Councilmembers to support two related campaigns for climate justice. One campaign, led by 24 local organizations in the “Put A Price On It D.C.” Coalition, aims to place a fee on carbon emissions and equitably rebate the revenue back to D.C. residents. The other, led by the D.C. ReInvest Coalition, is advocating for D.C. to divest city funds from Wells Fargo over its investments in the Dakota Access Pipeline. Volunteers will display banners on the steps of City Hall, lead chants and speeches, and distribute flyers giving marchers instructions to take action.
The action will take place during the highly-anticipated March for Climate, Jobs and Justice, where tens of thousands of climate justice activists will march against Donald Trump and his climate science-denying cabinet. D.C. ReInvest Coalition  and the Put a Price on It D.C. Coalition are joining forces to ensure that this national mobilization remains rooted in local campaigns for climate justice and propels its host city forward.

  • What: Thousands of marchers at Peoples Climate March take action at City Hall demanding D.C. City Council support local carbon rebate and Wells Fargo divestment campaigns
  • When: Saturday, April 29, 2017, 12:30 – 2:30 PM
  • Where: Steps of Penn. Ave. entrance, John A. Wilson Building, 1350 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20004,
  • and Jumbotron in Freedom Plaza at 13th St. and Pennsylvania Ave. NW
  • Who: Put a Price on It D.C. Coalition, D.C. ReInvest Coalition, Peoples Climate Movement, and tens of thousands of marchers for climate justice

 
Background Information:
D.C. has continually surpassed the the federal government—and most states—on climate and clean energy policy. However, existing local legislation is insufficient to meet the City’s goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions 50% below 2006 levels by 2032 and 80% by 2050.  At the same time, D.C. continues to suffer high income inequality, among the nation’s highest rates of homelessness, and lack of access to quality food, among other issues plaguing D.C. residents.
The two campaigns leading direct action at City Hall aim to take D.C. back from the grip of polluters responsible for climate disruption and help empower D.C. communities by returning money back to residents. The D.C. ReInvest campaign seeks to divest City finances from banks that support unjust dirty energy projects such as the Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines, and reinvest in institutions that will revitalize D.C.’s most vulnerable communities. The Put a Price on It D.C. coalition proposes a local Carbon Fee and Rebate policy, which would be the country’s strongest and most progressive mechanism to price carbon pollution, providing deep economic benefits for D.C.’s most vulnerable residents.
The movements to price carbon pollution and divest from fossil fuels are natural allies. Divestment forces institutions to take a stand against dirty energy and their financiers — and for good reason. For example, Wells Fargo — D.C.’s bank of record and a financial supporter of the Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines — is also a major investor in private prison corporations that are in part responsible for mass incarceration of people of color, and has settled with the federal government for racist, predatory lending practices.  Choosing to divest signals readiness for an economy rooted in health and sustainability, not racism, greed, and destruction.
In effect, those who divest are ready for a price on carbon. This indispensable climate policy would hold polluters accountable by making them pay for dumping their waste into our shared atmosphere. Carbon pricing generates revenue that can go back to households, making it a uniquely progressive and politically salient climate solution. 
Divesting from dirty energy projects, pricing carbon, and reinvesting in D.C. communities will provide cross-cutting benefits for local residents in addition to advancing the global effort to fight the climate crisis. Pollution from dirty infrastructure, as well as discriminatory practices by major fossil fuel supporters such as Wells Fargo, disproportionately impacts low-income communities and communities of color that already lack economic and political resources and pathways to resilience and sovereignty. Making polluters pay their fair share and returning capital to disadvantaged communities therefore has cascading benefits for racial justice, economic opportunity, and social equity.
The two coalitions are honored to present a unified front—backed by thousands—for responsibility, transparency, and climate justice in D.C. government.
CONTACT:
Denise Robbins; CCAN; 608-620-8819; denise@chesapeakeclimate.org
Camila Thorndike; CCAN; 541-951-2619; camila@chesapeakeclimate.org
Charlie Jiang; DC ReInvest Coalition & 350 DC; 773-930-6723; charlieyj12@gmail.com
 

Dominion’s Atlantic Coast Pipeline Would Require Extensive Mountaintop Removal

New research exposes how Dominion’s proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline would decapitate 38 miles of ridgelines in Virginia and West Virginia. Evidence will show project is OPPOSITE of “environmentally friendly” and states must reject it

RICHMOND, VA — A briefing paper released today details how Dominion Resources intends to blast away, excavate, and partially remove entire mountaintops along 38 miles of Appalachian ridgelines as part of the construction of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. Engineering and policy experts have examined documents submitted by Dominion to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and, using GIS mapping software, found that Dominion would require mountaintops to be “reduced” by 10 to 60 feet along the proposed route of the pipeline. For perspective, the height equivalent of a five-story building would be erased in places from fully forested and ancient mountains.
Furthermore, Dominion has yet to reveal how it intends to dispose of at least 247,000 dump-truck-loads of excess rock and soil—known as “overburden”—that would accumulate from the construction along just these 38 miles of ridgetops.
“In light of the discovery that the Atlantic Coast Pipeline will cause 10 to 60 feet of mountaintops to be removed from 38 miles of Appalachian ridges, there is nothing left to debate,” said Mike Tidwell, Executive Director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “Dominion’s pipeline will cause irrevocable harm to the region’s environmental resources. With Clean Water Act certifications pending in both Virginia and West Virginia, we call on Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe and West Virginia Governor Jim Justice to reject this destructive pipeline.”
Dominion has submitted a proposal to FERC to build a 42-inch diameter pipeline that would transport natural gas from West Virginia into Virginia and North Carolina. Dominion has attempted to paint the Atlantic Coast Pipeline as an “environmentally-friendly” project. However, its proposed construction method and route selection across and along steep mountains is unprecedented for the region—if not the country—and is viewed as extreme and radical by landowners, conservationists, and engineers. Similar impacts – although not yet fully inventoried – could come from the construction of a second pipeline to the south: the Mountain Valley Pipeline led by the company EQT Midstream Partners, LP.
“The Atlantic Coast Pipeline could easily prove itself deadly,” said Joyce Burton, Board Member of Friends of Nelson. “Many of the slopes along the right of way are significantly steeper than a black diamond ski slope. Both FERC and Dominion concede that constructing pipelines on these steep slopes can increase the potential for landslides, yet they still have not demonstrated how they propose to protect us from this risk. With all of this, it is clear that this pipeline is a recipe for disaster.”
The briefing paper released today was prepared by the Chesapeake Climate Action Network in coordination with the Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance, Friends of Nelson, Appalachian Mountain Advocates, and the Dominion Pipeline Monitoring Coalition. It cites data from the Draft Environmental Impact Statement prepared by the Federal Energy Regulatory Council (FERC) as well as  information supplied to FERC by Dominion. It also compiles information from GIS (Geographic Information System) mapping software and independent reports prepared by engineers and soil scientists.
Key findings include:

  • Approximately 38 miles of mountains in West Virginia and Virginia will see 10 feet or more of their ridgetops removed in order to build the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.
  • This figure includes 19 miles in West Virginia and 19 miles in Virginia.
  • The majority of these mountains would be flattened by 10 to 20 feet, with some places along the route requiring the removal of 60 feet or more of ridgetop.
  • Building the ACP on top of these mountains will result in a tremendous quantity of excess material, known to those familiar with mountaintop removal as “overburden.”
  • Dominion would likely need to dispose of 2.47 million cubic yards of overburden, from just these 38 miles alone.
  • Standard-size, fully loaded dump trucks would need to take at least 247,000 trips to haul this material away from the construction site.

“It is astounding that FERC has not required Dominion to produce a plan for dealing with the millions of cubic yards of excess spoil that will result from cutting down miles of ridgetop for the pipeline,” said Ben Luckett, Staff Attorney at Appalachian Mountain Advocates. “We know from experience with mountaintop removal coal mining that the disposal of this material has devastating impacts on the headwater streams that are the lifeblood our rivers and lakes. FERC and Dominion’s complete failure to address this issue creates a significant risk that the excess material will ultimately end up in our waterways, smothering aquatic life and otherwise degrading water quality. Without an in-depth analysis of exactly how much spoil will be created and how it can be safely disposed of, the states cannot possibly certify that this pipeline project will comply with the Clean Water Act.”
“Even with Dominion’s refusal to provide the public with adequate information, the situation is clear: The proposed construction plan will have massive impacts to scenic vistas, terrestrial and aquatic habitats, and potentially to worker and resident safety,” said Dan Shaffer, Spatial Analyst with the Dominion Pipeline Monitoring Coalition. “There is no way around it. It’s a bad route, a bad plan, and should never have been seriously considered.”
The full briefing paper is available here.
CONTACT:
Denise, 240-396-2022, denise@chesapeakeclimate.org
Anne Havemann, 240-396-1984, anne@chesapeakeclimate.org
Briefing-Paper-Mountaintop-Removal-to-Build-ACP
 

Poll Shows Marylanders Overwhelmingly Support Major Expansion of Renewable Power

Prospect of more clean-energy jobs is seen as moving voters and could impact the 2018 election for Gov. Hogan and Democrats. Seventy-one percent of voters support DOUBLING wind and solar power above current law

Health also seen as a key motivator. And Donald Trump’s fossil fuel agenda seen as pushing many Marylanders toward clean power

ANNAPOLIS, MD – A stunning seventy-one percent of Maryland voters support doubling the state’s commitment to wind and solar power, according to a poll released a week after the close of the 2017 legislative session in Annapolis. The poll suggests clean energy could be a major factor in the 2018 election cycle, with make-or-break consequences for Republican Governor Larry Hogan and other candidates of both parties.

The survey, conducted during the winter General Assembly session by the prominent Maryland polling firm OpinionWorks, highlights a growing trend in the state toward support for clean energy development instead of for fossil fuels. Even before the Maryland House and Senate agreed to ban fracking in March and adopt several bills in support of renewable power during the 2017 session, the poll shows that Marylanders have become increasingly convinced that more jobs result from clean energy with improved health consequences. The survey also suggests that President Trump’s support of fossil fuels actually increases many Marylanders’ support of clean energy.
“This poll identifies a shift in Maryland politics,” said Steve Raabe, president of OpinionWorks, based in Annapolis. “We’ve polled on energy in Maryland for years, and voters have never been this impatient to move the state from fossil fuels to renewable sources of energy. As a test of voter preference for candidates, clean energy now polls very strongly as a wedge issue. Candidates at all levels should take note.”
The Chesapeake Climate Action Network and its sister organization CCAN Action Fund are nonprofit groups dedicated to building support for doubling wind and solar power in the state. Current Maryland law mandates that 25% of the state’s electricity come from renewable power by 2020. But Gov. Hogan vetoed that law and was overridden by the General Assembly earlier this year. Some advocates are now proposing a 50%-clean electricity standard by 2030. The idea would also include using several million dollars in polluter fees (from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative program) to directly invest in training workers and promoting clean energy job development in the economy.
In the OpinionWorks survey, 71% of registered voters supported a 50% clean electricity standard. Respondents were told that electricity prices would rise slightly under such a policy. Respondents were also told new jobs would likely result from the policy. A majority of registered voters supported the policy in both political parties in every region of the state.
The poll documents the potentially powerful political impact that voter sentiments could have on candidates in the 2018 elections based on clean-energy views. This impact is measured in the poll by comparing the so-called “generic ballot” with what happens when a candidate of one party supports the 50% clean electricity proposal while the candidate of the other party opposes it. Based on the poll responses from registered voters, candidates of either party benefit from supporting the proposal.
For example, if Governor Hogan supports the proposal to expand the state’s renewable energy requirement while his Democratic challenger opposes it, the Governor’s support grows to a whopping 62%. But if Hogan opposes a 50% clean energy standard and his Democratic opponent supports it, the Democrat surges to a 59%-22% percent lead among poll respondents.
A significant finding in the poll – related to job creation – seems to explain these dramatic shifts in candidate support. By a robust 4-to-1 margin, voters believe that moving away from fossil fuels and investing in clean energy will create more jobs in Maryland.
“The job market is a top concern here, and clean energy is increasingly seen as an economic boon in the state,” said Mike Tidwell, director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network and the CCAN Action Fund. “More Marylanders now work in the solar industry than in the crab industry. This poll confirms that people want more and more of that economic benefit.”
Interestingly, the poll found that efforts by the Trump Administration to promote the use of fossil fuels may be pushing people in the opposite direction in Maryland. Fifty percent (50%) of voters said they would be MORE likely to want Maryland to expand its own commitment to renewable power if they knew that “federal efforts under the Trump administration were focused on increasing fossil fuel use and reducing support for renewable power at the national level.”
Given falling wind and solar prices, some economic models predict that ramping up clean electricity to 50% in Maryland could actually have zero impact on ratepayers over time. The first question in the OpinionWorks poll did reference a possible price increase and, again, the support was 71%. But later in the poll, when respondents are informed of a possible zero-impact scenario, support soared to 84%.
The OpinionWorks poll was conducted in late January and timed for release at the close of the 2017 legislative session. The poll was commissioned by the Chesapeake Climate Action Network and is being released by the group’s sister organization, CCAN Action Fund.

EmPOWER Maryland energy efficiency bill becomes law

Legislation expected to create nearly 70,000 jobs, grow economy and save businesses billions of dollars.

The EmPOWER Maryland energy efficiency legislation championed by businesses and environmental organizations has officially become law.
EmPOWER Maryland helps homeowners and businesses reduce energy waste by offering them technical assistance and incentives to take steps such as installing new appliances, sealing air leaks, and optimizing manufacturing production lines.
Gov. Hogan declined to sign the bill, but he didn’t veto it either, and it passed by a veto-proof margin. As a result, it officially became law at midnight this morning.
See reactions from other business and environmental organizations below
So far, the energy efficiency program has saved utility customers $1.8 billion on their electric bills. According to recent, independent research by the American Council for an Energy Efficiency Economy, the extension is expected to:

  • Create more than 68,000 over the next decade, with most of the jobs in construction and services.
  • Save ratepayers $11.7 billion because of reduced energy consumption.
  • Add $3.75 billion to Maryland’s gross domestic product.

“The new services EmPOWER Maryland provides will create jobs, save ratepayers money and strengthen our economy,” said Brian Toll, Policy Chair with Efficiency First Maryland. “Everyone who pays an electricity bill will benefit.”
Supporters of the bill include major trade associations, businesses, and environmental groups including Union Hospital, Schneider Electric, MGM Resorts, the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, the Maryland Alliance for Energy Contractors, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Earthjustice, and the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, among others.
Quotes
James McGarry, Maryland & DC Policy Director, Chesapeake Climate Action Network: “The cheapest and cleanest form of energy is the kind that is never used, thanks to energy efficiency and conservation. This bill will create good-paying jobs in energy efficiency, and help us transition to a clean energy future where our environment is protected for future generations.”
Michael Giangrande, Chairman, Maryland Alliance for Energy Contractors: “As someone who works in energy efficiency, I see firsthand how EmPOWER Maryland is creating jobs and improving people’s lives by saving them money, making their homes more comfortable and keeping electricity costs down.”
Deron Lovaas, Senior Policy Advisor, for the Natural Resources Defense Council’s Urban Solutions program: “This is an amazing accomplishment for one of our nation’s most forward-thinking states. EmPOWER Maryland is an example of how common-sense policies like energy efficiency can win support no matter whether you’re a liberal or conservative, Republican or Democrat.”
Jessica Ennis, Senior Legislative Representative, Earthjustice: “Clean energy solutions like EmPOWER Maryland are critical to ensuring that we have clean air to breathe and clean water to drink.”

###

CONTACT: Denise Robbins; denise@chesapeakeclimate.org; 240-396-2022

Federal Review of Atlantic Coast Pipeline Fails People and the Environment

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s flawed analysis of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline fails the public and the environment.
An analysis of environmental impacts for the proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline is completely inadequate and falls far short of legal requirements.  This is the overwhelming consensus of thousands of comments filed this week with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).  The agency had issued on December 30 a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on the proposed 600-mile natural gas pipeline that would go from central West Virginia, through Virginia and terminate in southern North Carolina.  April 6 is the deadline for public comments.
“FERC’s inability to provide a sound analysis of this project is a violation of the National Environmental Policy Act,” said Lewis Freeman, Chair and Executive Director of the Alleghany-Blue Ridge Alliance, a coalition of 51-organizations opposing the project. “What’s more, the Commission is poised to make a decision that will reverberate for decades based on inadequate information.”
The shortcomings of the DEIS are considerable because of its failure to:

  • Assess the true market demand for natural gas in the region of the proposed pipeline;
  • Take a hard look at the effects the proposed route planned through predominantly minority and low-income neighborhoods would have on communities;
  • Consider the devastation to mountaintops construction would have across steep, forested Appalachian ridges;
  • Provide adequate environmental information. The DEIS lacks sufficient information about the ACP and its potential environmental impacts on a wide variety of resources, including water resources, wetlands, cultural resources, threatened and endangered species and climate change implications; and
  • Identify, consider, and analyze all reasonable alternatives.

“The federal government is glossing over the massive impacts this 600-mile pipeline would have on neighboring communities and climate change,” said Alison Kelly, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council. Greenlighting this pipeline without a sufficient review of the damage it would cause is a disservice to the people who life in its path and treasure this part of Appalachia.”
Greg Buppert, a senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center, said: “FERC is only telling one side of the story, and that story fails to answer the critical threshold question – is this project even necessary?”  Buppert points out that recent energy demand forecasts have cast serious doubt on the need for the ACP.  Furthermore, two-thirds of new generating capacity being added in the United States is based on renewable sources, not natural gas. Building the ACP would be contrary to the future growth of the electric utility industry.
“ACP refused to do the necessary impact analysis, so we have had to hire engineers to find out what will actually happen,” said Ben Luckett, a senior attorney with Appalachian Mountain Advocates. “We’ve learned the pipeline would create millions of cubic yards of excess dirt and rock for which ACP has no disposal plan and will level many of our scenic ridgetops, much like a mountaintop removal coal mine. We fear the most likely resting place for all of that construction spoil will be in our rivers, lakes, and streams. It is truly a slap in the face to hear FERC dismiss these impacts as ‘insignificant’ or, worse yet, to see that they have failed to analyze them at all.”
“The Atlantic Coast Pipeline environmental review failed to adequately address the threats it poses to our communities and our environment. This dirty and dangerous pipeline creates concern for significant risks of adverse impacts due to the nature of the terrain that the line would cross. Based on multiple unresolved environmental issues and potential hazards, and the magnitude of this project, FERC must reject the application. The stakes are very high and the risks are far too great,” said Kirk Bowers, Virginia Chapter, Sierra Club.
Anne Havemann, Senior Counsel at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said: “The Atlantic Coast Pipeline would be a disaster for the climate. It will trigger a massive new wave of fracking, bringing climate pollution equivalent to 20 new coal-fired power plants. FERC’s own former chairman Norman Bay said that the agency should reconsider how it analyzes environmental impacts of pipelines like ACP, including analyzing lifecycle climate emissions. FERC should heed his advice and revise its analysis, or reject the pipeline.”
Peter Anderson, Virginia Program Manager for Appalachian Voices, noted: “A couple of months ago, the former Chairman of FERC raised significant doubts that the agency adequately analyzes pipeline need and climate impacts. This draft environmental impact statement is no different. FERC should rescind this DEIS and start over, this time with final route proposals, completed surveys, climate analysis that accounts for the entire life cycle, and a critical analysis of market demand and alternatives.”
“We know that projects like these are invariably placed near communities of low-income, people of color, or the elderly. In usual fashion, the ACP places a heavy burden on the poor and elderly, perhaps by design. These folks may not have the energy, stamina, and resources to fight, and that’s what these companies are banking on. This is an example of outside interests that plan to use our resources and toxify our land for their own benefit. It’s an old story that continues to play out the same way, despite the best efforts of local people to change our energy landscape,” said April Pierson-Keating Mountain Lakes Preservation Alliance, Upshur County, WV.

# # #

Contacts:
Lewis Freeman, Allegheny-Blue Ridge Alliance, 703-298-8107, lewfreeman@gmail.com
Greg Buppert, Southern Environmental Law Center, 434-977-4090, gbuppert@selcva.org
Ben Luckett, Appalachian Mountain Advocates, 404-645-0125, bluckett@appalmad.org

Maryland Fracking Ban To Become Law, With Nationwide Implications

Senate passes bill with GOP governor support, following six years of grassroots resistance across the state of Maryland

ANNAPOLIS – With game-changing support from Republican Governor Larry Hogan, the Maryland state Senate Monday night gave final approval to a bill to forever ban the practice of fracking in Maryland. This move culminates years of protests against fracking for gas from landowners, health leaders, and environmentalists. It also sets a nationally significant precedent as other states grapple with the dangerous drilling method.

Maryland will now become the first state in America with proven gas reserves to ban fracking by legislative action. New York has banned the drilling process via executive order. Vermont has a statutory ban but the state has no frackable gas reserves at present.

The Maryland ban is sending political waves across the East Coast and the nation. From Virginia (where leaders have imposed or proposed local bans at the county and municipal level) to the state of Florida (which is looking to follow Maryland’s statewide ban), the “keep-it-in-the-ground” movement is gaining new bipartisan steam even as President Donald Trump recklessly works to approve disastrous pipelines like Keystone XL.

“Let the news go forth to Congress and the White House: fracking can never be done safely,” said Mike Tidwell, director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network. “The Republican governor closest to DC – Larry Hogan of Maryland – has joined scientists and health leaders in agreeing that fracking must be banned. This is a win for Marylanders and for citizens nationwide as we move away from violent fossil fuels and toward sustainable wind and solar power.”

With Senate passage late Monday night, the Maryland bill will now be sent to Gov. Hogan’s desk in the next few days for signing.

The push to ban fracking in Maryland began six years ago as gas companies swarmed into western Maryland to tap the Marcellus Shale basin. This is the same pool of gas that has been widely fracked in Pennsylvania and West Virginia with negative consequences. But then-Governor Martin O’Malley (D) imposed a temporary moratorium before any drilling occurred. Over the years, the movement for a permanent ban came to include farmers, doctors, students, faith leaders, environmental groups, and others – constituting the largest statewide grassroots movement ever seen in Maryland on an energy issue. Former member of the House of Delegates Heather Mizeur was a leading figure in sparking the statewide ban effort. With time, multiple counties and cities in the state banned fracking locally and public polling consistently showed growing support for a statewide ban. Finally, earlier this month, with overwhelming support among Democratic lawmakers, even the previously pro-fracking Republican governor saw the wisdom of a ban.

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network has been honored to play a leading role in this campaign along with our friends in the Don’t Frack Maryland Coalition, including Food and Water Watch, Citizen Shale, Engage Mountain Maryland, the Sierra Club, the Maryland League of Conservation Voters, Physicians for Social Responsibility and many others.

The Maryland fracking ban bill also could not have succeeded without the extraordinary leadership of Kumar Barve (D-Montgomery County) and David Fraser-Hildago (D-Montgomery County) in the Maryland House of Delegates. The same must be said of Bobby Zirkin (D-Baltimore County) and Paul G. Pinsky (D-Prince George’s County) in the Maryland Senate. But Senator Zirkin, more than any other legislator, fought tirelessly for the fracking ban and refused to compromise on the road to this historic victory.

CONTACT: Denise Robbins; denise@chesapeakeclimate.org; 608-620-8819

GOP Governor Supports Fracking Ban in MD!

ANNAPOLIS, MD — Today, Republican Governor Larry Hogan of Maryland yielded to overwhelming scientific data and voter support by giving his support to a statutory ban on hydraulic fracking for gas in the state. He made the announcement at a press conference joined by Maryland Senator Bobby Zirkin, the lead sponsor of Senate Bill 740. The bill would place a statewide ban on the drilling practice. Hogan’s announcement almost certainly assures that a fracking ban will become law in the state. The House of Delegates passed a fracking ban bill last week with bipartisan support, and the Senate could now do the same next week. Maryland would then become the first state in the country to ban fracking by statute. The ban has been supported by a huge coalition lead by the “Don’t Frack Maryland Coalition” with leadership from Food and Water Watch and the Chesapeake Climate Action Network.

Mike Tidwell, Executive Director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, stated:

“Governor Hogan’s decision to support a permanent fracking ban in Maryland has created a day of historic importance for the entire nation. Hogan has joined a statewide bipartisan effort to prevent this dangerous drilling technology from ever polluting Maryland’s water, air, climate, and childhood health. In short, he has done the right thing. Most importantly, on climate change, Maryland is now poised to keep a dangerous pool of fossil fuels in the ground forever. Scientists say this is what states across America and countries around the world need to do to solve global warming. Instead of fracking, we need more solar energy. Instead of coal, we need wind power. Instead of oil, we need electric cars. Larry Hogan just took a big step for Maryland and the nation in moving us toward that goal.”

Western Maryland Residents, Faith Leaders Arrested In Civil Disobedience Action In Support Of Fracking Ban

Sit-in at State House calls on MD Senate to pass a permanent, statewide ban on fracking

ANNAPOLIS, MD- A group of anti-fracking advocates — including faith leaders and western Maryland residents — barred the entrance to the Maryland State House Thursday morning in a peaceful act of civil disobedience. The protesters demanded that the Maryland Senate pass a permanent ban on the controversial gas drilling technique, and were joined by dozens of faith leaders and supporters at a rally on Lawyer’s Mall.
The activists appealed to Senate leadership, including Senate President Mike Miller, to lead the way in passing a bill for a statewide fracking ban. Last Friday, the House of Delegates passed a ban bill by a bipartisan, veto-proof-majority of 97-40. Maryland voters overwhelmingly oppose fracking according to recent polls from The Washington Post and Opinionworks.
“Last week, the House passed a bill to ban fracking because it has become resoundingly clear that Marylanders oppose the drilling practice,” said Delegate Shane Robinson (D-39). “I am proud to have stood up for my constituents in protecting their water and climate. Now, it is up to the Senate to take us over the finish line for a statewide fracking ban.”
Supporters of a ban say that fracking would threaten the drinking water for all Marylanders and greatly harm public health. Over 80 percent of the peer-reviewed scientific studies that have been published on public health – examining asthma attacks, premature births, high-risk pregnancies, and more – show risks or actual harm to people living near active fracking operations. Chesapeake Physicians for Social Responsibility concluded that no regulations on fracking can “adequately protect public health and the environment over time.”
“As stewards of God’s creation, United Methodists are opposed to hydraulic fracturing because of the serious consequences for the environment, including damage to water and geological stability,” said Reverend Julie Wilson, Chair for the Board of Church and Society for the Baltimore Washington Conference of the United Methodist Church. “We support a ban on fracking.”
“Western Maryland would be targeted first by fracking, and western Marylanders overwhelmingly know that we can never allow it to take place,” said Ann Bristow, Garrett County resident and member of Gov. O’Malley’s Marcellus shale advisory commission. “The more we learn about fracking, the more we know we need a ban. Our water, health and climate are far more important than short term gain for the natural gas industry. Once free of worrying about fracking in Maryland, we can all turn our attention to a renewable and sustainable future.”
Fracking would also threaten the local economy of western Maryland, which relies heavily on tourism and agriculture. In Garrett County, which is likely to be the first area targeted if fracking is allowed, more than half the jobs and two-thirds of the tax base are derived from tourism-related real estate and business activity—all of which could be threatened by industrial fracking operations.
“Our mom-and-pop ecotourism business is run out of our house,” said Carol McMahon Calhoun, owner of All Earth Eco Tours. “Friendsville is a small valley community that would be destroyed by fracking. If fracking is allowed, it would pollute our water, air, and soil, because even though the Town proper has banned fracking, we cannot adequately protect ourselves from upstream pollution.”
“I am willing to be arrested in order to protect clean water, protect air quality, protect the people of Maryland, protect wildlife, and protect farms from the greed of the oil and gas industry, said western Maryland resident Carol Smith. “We must protect the earth since the earth cannot protect itself.”
 
CONTACT:
Denise Robbins; Chesapeake Climate Action Network; denise.sylvie@gmail.com; 608-620-8819
Jackie Filson; Food and Water Watch; 202-683-2538, jfilson@fwwatch.org