Monday 23 October 2017

Pipelines & Compressor Stations (13)

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Rubberstamps Pipelines, Ignoring Strong Evidence of Significant Harm & Lack of Need Waterkeepers Chesapeake, a coalition of nineteen independent Waterkeeper and Riverkeeper programs, condemns the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s decision to approve the Atlantic Coast (ACP) and Mountain Valley Pipelines (MVP), despite strong evidence of significant harm. The potential water quality impacts from these natural gas pipelines in the Chesapeake Bay watershed is alarming, specifically for the headwaters of the Shenandoah and James rivers. Waterkeepers Chesapeake applauds Commissioner LaFleur dissenting view that questions the need for the ACP and MVP, and recognizes the dire environmental, ecological, and public health impacts that will result from these needless projects. The Commission’s approval seriously undermines FERC’s credibility as a supposedly objective permitting agency, given the fact that its decision was made in advance of necessary and required decisions by the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and the state environmental authorities in the affected states of Virginia, West Virginia and North Carolina on critical environmental issues.  Over the coming weeks and months, Waterkeepers Chesapeake will join the Shenandoah Riverkeeper, Upper James Riverkeeper, hundreds of landowners, scientists, faith leaders, businesses, public health organizations, non-profits, and other community organizations and thousands of Virginians to stop these pipelines at the federal, state, and local levels. [The Virginia State Water Control Board will hold town meetings in December to consider the application for water quality certification for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. The consideration is part of the process required under Section…
In late August, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) approval of a Southeastern natural gas pipeline under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Court found that FERC failed to quantify the climate impacts that would result from burning the natural gas that the Sabal Trail pipeline would deliver to power plants in Alabama, Georgia, and Florida. According to the Court, FERC’s environmental impact statement (required under NEPA) for the project “should have either given a quantitative estimate of the downstream greenhouse emissions that will result from burning the natural gas that the pipelines will transport or explained more specifically why it could not have done so… As we have noted, greenhouse-gas emissions are an indirect effect of authorizing this project, which FERC could reasonably foresee, and which the agency has legal authority to mitigate.” The Court reasoned that quantifying greenhouse gas pollution from pipeline projects would enable FERC to compare potential emissions to other projects and to the total emissions from the state, region, and nation for emissions-control goals. This information is essential for ‘informed decision making’ and ‘informed public comment,’ according to the Court. “The D.C. Circuit’s decision is long overdue – for too long FERC has rubberstamped project after project from the natural gas industry without fully considering the significant climate change impacts that these projects will cause. This is the first case in a line of cases to successfully challenge FERC’s lack of consideration for…
Alarmed with the Potential Detriment to the Environment, Coalition Calls for Assessment, Rejection of TransCanada’s Eastern Panhandle Expansion Project Baltimore, MD — On Tuesday August 8, a letter signed by 18 state and local environmental organizations was delivered to Secretary Ben Grumbles of the Maryland Department of the Environment. The signatories demand that MDE use its authority to conduct a thorough evaluation of the potential environmental impacts of TransCanada’s proposed Eastern Panhandle Expansion Project pipeline. The letter suggests that once MDE diligently carries out its obligation to Marylanders to examine the full impacts, the agency will see no other option than to reject the proposed pipeline project. The letter asserts that MDE will find rejecting the project will be the only way to protect the health of Maryland’s waterways and communities. This four-mile pipeline would bring fracked gas from Pennsylvania to West Virginia, and would travel through Maryland, just west of Hancock. The proposed path of the pipeline crosses directly under the C&O Canal and the Potomac River, the primary drinking water source for more than 6 million people. The letter asks: We urge MDE not to rush through its review of this Project. Protection of Maryland’s streams, rivers, and wetlands is too important to place at risk. MDE must take the time needed to ensure it has all necessary information, review that information, give the public an opportunity to thoroughly review and comment on the information at a public hearing, and then conduct a thorough and transparent analysis of…