Our path is therefore dictated by our willingness to put our foot forward, join a movement, and create new roads to move on together.
Continue readingClimate Movement: Where We Go From Here
Survivors of Climate Disasters Share Stories and Call for Fossil-Fuel Polluters to be Held Accountable
Survivors of numerous disasters driven by climate change yesterday called for fossil fuel companies to be held legally accountable for their crimes, inflicting massive damage on public health and the climate as well as lying to the public for decades about their culpability.
Continue readingClean Water Advocates Challenge Army Corps of Engineers on Fracked Gas Pipeline Water Quality Review
Coalition’s Suit Says Corps Violated Clean Water Act
RICHMOND, VA — Today, a coalition of clean water advocates filed a suit contending the United States Army Corps of Engineers improperly issued a crucial permit for the fracked gas Mountain Valley Pipeline. Under section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the Army Corps is charged with issuing a permit for the pipelines’ stream crossings that allows the project’s builders to trench through the bottom of those streams, including the Greenbrier, Elk, and Gauley Rivers, and fill the crossings with dirt during construction of the pipeline. Before the Army Corps can issue this permit, the state in which construction will occur must certify the pipeline’s construction will not degrade the state’s water quality.
The permit issued to the Mountain Valley Pipeline by the Army Corps is commonly known as a “nationwide” permit, which takes a one-size-fits-all approach that can only be used when a state has done the necessary water quality analysis. Since West Virginia waived its right to do that analysis, the Army Corps can not legally issue the section 404 permit for construction of the pipeline in West Virginia.
If successful, this suit will require the Army Corps or the state of West Virginia to do another water quality impact review before the pipeline can be built through that state.
The suit was filed by Appalachian Mountain Advocates on behalf of a coalition made up of the Sierra Club, Appalachian Voices, Indian Creek Watershed Association, West Virginia Rivers Coalition and Chesapeake Climate Action Network.
In response, Sierra Club Organizing Manager Bill Price released the following statement:
“The Army Corps of Engineers has a responsibility to protect the people and places we love and their one-size-fits-all approach to this project falls far short of fulfilling that responsibility. The fracked gas Mountain Valley Pipeline is a dirty, dangerous project that threatens our water, climate and communities and it shouldn’t be built until the Army Corps has done a serious analysis of how badly it would affect the water of Virginia and West Virginia at all river and stream crossings.”
Angie Rosser, Executive Director for the West Virginia Rivers Coalition, said:
“The combination of WVDEP’s waived water quality analysis and the Army Corps’ cookie-cutter approach just doesn’t cut it for a project of this scale. This illegal move greatens the risk to West Virginia’s rivers and streams and must be addressed before any construction begins.”
Anne Havemann, General Counsel for the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said:
“The federal and state governments have fallen short when it comes to the Mountain Valley Pipeline. The Army Corps’ blanket permit does not come close to covering the scale and scope of this massive pipeline project. We are asking the court to make the Army Corps take seriously its responsibility to protect our waters.”
CONTACT:
Doug Jackson, Sierra Club, 202.495.3045, doug.jackson@sierraclub.org
Derek Teaney, Appalachian Mountain Advocates, 304.793.9007, dteaney@appalmad.org
A Game Changer from Hillary Clinton: FERC Needs to be Focused on Combating Climate Change
On October 16th, in Keene, New Hampshire, at a public town hall meeting attended by hundreds, Hillary Clinton had this to say about the notorious Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC:
“If we’re going to have a national commitment to do something about climate change, FERC needs to be part of that commitment. And that’s my view on how we have to alter a lot of parts of the Federal Government. Ya know, it’s not just the EPA that needs to be focused on combating climate change, every part of the Federal Government needs to be focused. I want to have, by the end of my first term, a half a billion more solar panels installed and by the end of my second term enough clean, renewable energy to power every home in America. And if those are our goals, then it’s important that we don’t have the right hand doing something different than the left hand.”
Whoa, what’s going on here?!? I could see Bernie Sanders, or maybe Martin O’Malley, saying this, but Clinton?
It’s not that I have great faith that Clinton, if elected, would follow through on this in the ways and with the urgency needed. I don’t. But her saying this now, over a year before the election, can be of great value. It can lead to other candidates also addressing the issue of FERC, including at upcoming debates. It can lead to growing press coverage about the wide, deep and determined grassroots movement fighting FERC as it continues to rubber stamp every proposal for the expansion of fracked gas infrastructure that comes before it.
When FERC holds public meetings in localities which are facing new pipelines, compressors, storage and export terminals, Clinton’s words should be printed up and distributed to everyone there and written in large, bold letters on signs and banners.
When Beyond Extreme Energy takes action at FERC Commissioners’ monthly public meetings in DC, something it has been doing for a year, the same thing should happen, as much as possible.
When Clinton or other Presidential, Senate or House candidates, and not just Democrats–hey Republicans, do you support the federal government taking people’s land to benefit private corporations?–are answering questions at town hall meetings in Iowa, other New Hampshire towns, Nevada, South Carolina or other states, we must make sure questions about FERC and fracking are brought forward.
Seemingly from out of nowhere, thanks to the courage and persistence of local New Hampshire activists, a light can be seen at the end of the long tunnel that so many of us fighting FERC have been in for years. When Hillary Clinton is publicly saying what so many of us have been saying, when FERC is going to be even more on the defensive than they already are, when our up-from-below pressures just keep building, there is reason to believe that, yes, we can win in our battle against FERC and its fossil fuel industry partners.
A Twofer for the Climate on February 24
If you’re concerned about the climate emergency and were plugged in to news sources yesterday, you probably know that the climate movement won a big victory: President Obama vetoed the legislation passed by Congress to approve the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline.
But there was another, less publicized, important development yesterday: the introduction by Maryland Congressman Chris Van Hollen, with 16 co-sponsors, of the Healthy Climate and Family Security Act (H.R. 1027) in the House of Representatives.
The Healthy Climate bill uses a “cap and dividend” framework. It would legislate a steadily declining cap on carbon emissions, about 2% a year starting the year that it is passed, leading to an 80% reduction compared to 2005 levels by 2050. Coal, oil and gas companies that bring fossil fuels out of the ground or into the country would be required to buy permits at auction. The overall number of those permits would decrease as the cap declines, leading to rising permit prices. All of the money raised by this process, many hundreds of billions over the first decade, would be returned in equal amounts as “dividends” to every US resident with a social security number.
Given the absolute need for the federal government to enact a price on carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions, this less publicized development is, arguably, as important as President Obama’s veto.
The fact is that there are several things which the climate movement must be doing:
1) Stopping the expansion of extreme energy extraction: tar sands oil, fracking, Arctic oil and gas drilling, mountaintop coal removal, and deep ocean oil and gas drilling in particular.
2) Accelerating the rapidly growing shift from fossil fuels to wind and solar as energy sources for electrical power.
3) Advancing local, state and federal legislation that incentivizes energy efficiency and renewables.
4) Supporting strong federal regulation of greenhouse gases.
5) Working to enact federal legislation that puts a price on carbon and other planet-heating greenhouse gases.
Given the power, wealth and greed of the fossil fuel industry and its ability, so far, to control almost all Republican congresspeople and a significant percentage of Democrats, it is not surprising that number five is the least developed of all of these.
That has to — absolutely has to — change.
As 350.org co-founder Bill McKibben emphasized on yesterday’s tele-press conference on the bill’s reintroduction, it makes “no sense to allow one industry to throw its pollution into the atmosphere for free. If anyone owns the sky, it’s not Exxon. It’s all of us.”
The Healthy Climate and Family Security Act would “accelerate very quickly the biggest job on the planet: getting rid of carbon,” added McKibben. “There would be no plan for Keystone XL if there was anything like a rational price on carbon.”
With Congressman Chris Van Hollen leading the way and the support of groups like 350.org, CCAN, Center for Popular Democracy, Center for Biological Diversity, National People’s Action, Public Citizen and the Sierra Club, a strong, fair and commonsense federal solution to price carbon is finally moving forward. More information on this legislation can be found at http://climateandprosperity.org.
For more information on this new legislation:
Van Hollen moving climate change with 2016 leverage. CNN News. 2/23/15.
Focus legislative energy on a national carbon policy, not Keystone XL. Washington Post. 2/24/15.
Pricing Carbon, Paying Dividends Policy Update: August 2014
The Chesapeake Climate Action Network supports efforts to advance legislation to put a price on carbon and return all or most of the proceeds to American families. We are pleased to support HR 5271, the Healthy Climate and Family Security Act, “cap and dividend” legislation introduced by Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) in the House of Representatives on July 30, 2014.
We will be producing and distributing this occasional newsletter to keep others informed about developments with this bill and with other efforts to put a price on carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions.
More information on the Van Hollen bill can be found at http://climateandprosperity.org.
In This Issue:
1. A Video Message from Rep. Chris Van Hollen
2. New York Times, July 30, 2014: The Carbon Dividend, by James K. Boyce
3. The Baltimore Sun, August 4, 2014: Cap and Dividend
4. The Washington Post, August 28, 2014: A climate for change: a solution conservatives could accept
5. The Santa Fe New Mexican: A smart strategy for fighting carbon pollution
6. Bloomberg Businessweek: Is This How to Sell Americans on Fighting Global Warming?
7. CCL Legislative Update: Rep. Van Hollen introduces cap-and-dividend bill
8. With Liberty and Dividends For All book review: Use Common Wealth to Reduce Inequality
#1: A Video Message from Rep. Chris Van Hollen (2 ½ minutes)
#2: New York Times, July 30, 2014: The Carbon Dividend, by James K. Boyce
“From the scorched earth of climate debates a bold idea is rising — one that just might succeed in breaking the nation’s current political impasse on reducing carbon emissions. That’s because it would bring tangible gains for American families here and now.”
Read the New York Times op-ed.
#3: The Baltimore Sun, August 4, 2014: Cap and Dividend
“In short, the concept makes a lot of sense — in terms of promoting conservation, reducing pollution and greenhouse gases and supporting renewable energy — with the added benefit of making such a transition a bit easier for anyone with a valid Social Security number. It is the ultimate consumer-friendly approach to a rational U.S. energy policy with the chief shortcoming being that it doesn’t serve the agenda of any deep-pocketed special interest group and so may have trouble finding broad support in Congress.”
Read the Baltimore Sun editorial.
#4: The Washington Post, August 28, 2014: A climate for change: a solution conservatives could accept
“This is not the first time that Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), a House Democratic leader, has made the point that the best climate-change policy is not complicated. He introduced a similar plan in 2009. The underlying logic is older still: Since the beginning of the climate debate, mainstream economists, left and right, have argued that the best way to cut greenhouse gases is to use simple market economics, putting a price on emissions that reflects the environmental damage they cause.”
Read the Washington Post editorial.
#5: The Santa Fe New Mexican: A smart strategy for fighting carbon pollution
“I’m a University of New Mexico student who works full time to make ends meet. I support this bill because I think we need to make the price of carbon-polluting energy sources reflect their true costs — in terms of the environment and our children’s futures, so we shift away from these sources to cleaner energy supplies. Secondly, I think regular people like me and my working-class family need to have help making the transition.”
Read the op-ed.
#6: Bloomberg Businessweek: Is This How to Sell Americans on Fighting Global Warming?
“The bill would require companies to have permits to produce or import carbon-containing fuels such as oil, coal, and natural gas. The permits, instead of being allocated politically, would be auctioned off by the government, so they would get into the hands of the emitters who need them the most. A similar auction system drastically reduced emissions of sulfur dioxide—which causes acid rain—quicker and cheaper than experts expected.”
Read the full Bloomberg story.
#7: CCL Legislative Update: Rep. Van Hollen introduces cap-and-dividend bill
“The introduction of this legislation shows that we have moved legislators — especially Democrats — a long way toward revenue-neutrality in carbon pricing, as well the concept of returning revenue to households as dividends. This is an important step forward as we seek bi-partisan legislation, and we’re thrilled with Van Hollen’s bill from that standpoint.”
Read the CCL update.
#8: With Liberty and Dividends For All book review: Use Common Wealth to Reduce Inequality
“One beauty of his proposal is that the income everyone receives would come without political or psychological stigma. The dividends couldn’t be criticized as reckless government spending or money taken through taxation. Nor could they be called a handout to the ‘undeserving poor.’ Dividends from common wealth would be a universal birthright, and that is a big part of their appeal. Chase down a copy of With Liberty and Dividends for All. It will challenge many of your assumptions about what we can accomplish within a market economy and within the framework of the commons. The reverberations from this short, readable and profoundly original book will be heard for years to come.”
Read the full review.
CCAN encourages readers of Pricing Carbon, Paying Dividends to distribute it to others who might be interested. We welcome input on the contents of this publication and ideas for what could be included.
Send to Ted Glick at ted@chesapeakeclimate.org.
Ernest Moniz and the Growing No-Fracking Movement
It is very unfortunate that Ernest Moniz, the new Energy Secretary, is, like Barack Obama, an “all of the above” energy guy.
In his first week in office last week, he said some good things publicly about energy efficiency and solar, wind and geothermal energy.
The problem, however, is that Moniz is a big supporter of fracking. In the same interview linked above, he describes shale gas as a “bridge fuel,” giving us time, he says, to “develop the technology and lower the costs” of clean, renewable energy.
400 is here: God help us
We now live in a world of veritable science fiction. Last week, scientists reported that our delicate, life-giving global atmosphere has reached a new level of danger: 400 parts per million of carbon dioxide concentration. There hasn’t been this much heat-trapping CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere in at least 3 million years, long before human beings evolved. If there was ever a wake-up-call moment on global warming, a time to become really alarmed, it’s now!
Appalachia Rising Delivers Dirty Water to EPA
Over 100 people, primarily Appalachia residents, took action today at the headquarters of the Environmental Protection Agency in Washington, D.C., calling for the EPA to use its powers to end mountaintop removal.
15 people, including a couple of youth no older than 10, risked arrest by sitting in front of a main entrance to EPA. They sat next to about 75 one-gallon containers of dirty and toxic water brought to DC by Appalachian residents, the kind of water produced by mountaintop removal operations.
Do the math: The movie
Millions of Americans have recognized the need to take action now to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, and the latest movie from 350.org highlights the movement’s growing strength. Watch the movie, and then join us in action!