Offshore wind farm near Block Island, R.I.

Essay by Christine Todd Whitman and Leon Panetta, POLITICO, January 28, 2022

When world leaders gathered last fall at COP26, it was billed as the “world’s last best chance” to save the planet from the climate crisis. The conference ended with real uncertainty as to whether comprehensive action will be taken, here and abroad, to avoid catastrophe. Fortunately, one of the best opportunities for progress is all around us: the waves, wind and water along the U.S.’s nearly 100,000 miles of coastline.

As the engine of our planet’s weather and climate systems, the ocean’s potential as a climate solution is as vast as the ocean itself. In fact, ocean-based climate action can provide 20 percent of the emissions reductions needed to achieve global targets to limit climate change and its effects. According to the High Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy, “reductions of this magnitude are equivalent to the annual emissions from all coal-fired power plants worldwide or taking 2.5 billion cars off the road.”

Here are some key opportunities:

>>> Boost Offshore Renewables: Offshore renewables, like wind and wave energy, can help power the nation while cutting emissions. These sources of clean energy can serve as part of a just and equitable transition by providing economic benefits and abundant electricity to the communities that have suffered the most under climate change.

>>> Reduce Emissions from Shipping: We also need to look to the ocean to significantly reduce contributors of greenhouse gas emissions, such as maritime shipping, which generates more emissions than airlines. The administration, working with ports and the shipping industry, can implement strategies that will move us to zero-carbon shipping by 2050 to drastically reduce the climate contributions of cargo ships and freighters at sea. Infrastructure improvements at ports, fleet upgrades and alternative fuels can all be part of the effort.

>>> Rebuild Coastal Ecosystems: By protecting the ocean, we also enable the ocean to protect us through natural climate mitigation. Carbon-rich coastal environments like salt marshes, seagrass meadows and mangrove forests all naturally absorb carbon up to four times more effectively than trees on land. And when we conserve these habitats for their climate benefits, we are also protecting natural coastal infrastructure that will safeguard communities against storms and rising sea levels. This is particularly crucial for supporting marginalized communities, including low-income neighborhoods that were built in flood zones and are on the front lines of the climate crisis.

Washington has never before had a comprehensive ocean climate plan that weaves these efforts together. In order to realize the ocean’s potential to curb the climate crisis, the White House must marshal agencies across the government, so they are working in concert toward the same goals. President Joe Biden has taken a series of promising steps throughout his first year in office, but the U.S. still needs a coordinated federal strategy to turn this momentum into lasting results. The White House, to its credit, recently held itsfirst meeting of the congressionally authorized Ocean Policy Committee and made a commitment to develop a new cross-cutting strategy.

As the committee puts pen to paper, it should not waste the opportunity to map out the best strategies that embrace the ocean as a climate solution. From our time as Cabinet officials in previous administrations, we’ve been in the trenches on policymaking and know it is critical to have an overarching strategy rather than letting each agency chart its own path. A coordinated policy approach is more effective because it allows the administration to identify big picture goals and eliminate duplicative efforts.

Today, we work with a bipartisan effort to catalyze action toward meaningful ocean policy reform called the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative. Alongside over 100 ocean policy leaders — ranging from outdoor recreation brands to professional surfing organizations — we stand ready to join with the administration to advance a comprehensive ocean climate action plan.

It’s true that political disagreement has delayed climate action for far too long. While we come from different parties, we’ve found common cause on ocean policy and see it as a particularly fruitful area of bipartisan cooperation.

After all, our ocean and coastlines are vital to our economic and national security. They are also the foundation for what we call the “Blue Economy,” which acknowledges the wealth of marine resources — from sustainable fishing to aquaculture to shipping to tourism — that must be balanced sustainably to support jobs and economic growth. With the Blue Economy expected to grow at twice the rate of the overall economy, it is hard to imagine a better return on investment than securing the health and future of our ocean.

Now more than ever, we need to be taking every opportunity to avoid climate catastrophe — and the clock is ticking. From Category 5 hurricanes on the East Coast, to wildfires out West, to devastating tornadoes in the Midwest, we’re seeing the effects of climate change every day. Our country is poised like never before to advance bold climate action, and a coordinated ocean climate action plan can help turn that tide.

The ocean makes up over 70 percent of our planet. We believe it can help save the planet itself.

NOTE ~ Christine Todd Whitman is the former governor of New Jersey, former EPA administrator under President George W. Bush, and serves as co-chair of the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative Leadership Council. ALSO, Leon Panetta served as the CIA director and defense secretary under President Barack Obama, as White House chief of staff under President Bill Clinton, and was a former co-chair of the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative Leadership Council.

Eastern shore, the Delmarva Peninsula, east of Chesapeake Bay, is 180 miles of flat farmland

From an Article by Diane Bernard, Maryland Public News Service, July 10, 2020

ANNAPOLIS, Md. – Environmental groups and local residents are speaking out against a proposed fracked-gas pipeline to run through rivers, farms and forests from Delaware to Maryland’s Eastern Shore.

The Hogan administration held a public hearing about Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company’s plan to build more than 20 miles of pipeline to bring fracked gas to the historically black University of Maryland Eastern Shore campus and the rest of Somerset County.

Anthony Field, Maryland campaign coordinator for the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, says with the recent setbacks for both the Atlantic Coast Pipeline and Dakota Access pipeline, the project is out of step with the public’s desire to move away from fossil fuels.

“The era of fossil fuels is over,” says Field. “We simply cannot be building new infrastructure for toxic methane gas. Eastern Shore officials should promote the speedy development of clean energy sources like offshore wind instead.”

Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company officials say the pipeline is needed in the area to meet growing market demand. They point out it also would bring gas service to Somerset County, one of only three counties in Maryland without access to natural gas.

But Field says the public must weigh any support for a fossil-fuel energy source with the pipeline’s potential threat to the area’s ecosystems, particularly water supplies. And he notes that once the pipeline is up and running, its emissions would boost greenhouse gases – ultimately affecting air quality in a low-income area already challenged by climate change.

“This is extremely concerning,” says Field. “Especially UMES, for example, is an HBCU, and largely disenfranchised folks – people of color, lower-income individuals – are mostly the ones affected by the changing climate, and the issues that these kind of infrastructure bring to the state and the country.”

Field says his group and others will continue protesting the pipeline. In the meantime, Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan plans to spend more than $100 million to increase fracked-gas pipelines and infrastructure in the state.

Fifty years ago, the American Petroleum Institute had conclusive evidence

From an Article by David Hasemyer, Inside Climate News, March 6, 2020

A lawsuit for damages related to climate change brought by the city of Baltimore can be heard in Maryland state courts, a federal appeals court ruled on Friday. The decision is a setback for the fossil fuel industry, which had argued that the case should be heard in federal court, where rulings in previous climate cases have favored the industry.

In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel of the Fourth U.S. Circuit of Appeals dismissed the industry’s argument that the lawsuit was more appropriate for federal court because the damage claims should be weighed against federal laws and regulations that permitted the industry to extract oil and gas, the primary cause of the greenhouse gas emissions that drive global warming.

Pending any further appeals, the ruling leaves the door open for the case to proceed in a Maryland court, where the city is relying on state laws covering a number of violations, including public nuisance, product liability and consumer protection.

The court’s decision Friday is the first federal appeals court to rule in a string of climate cases under appeal across the country over the question of federal or state jurisdiction. It affirmed an earlier ruling by a lower federal court that the case was best heard in state court.

The ruling is not binding on other pending appeals, but legal scholars say that other federal appeals courts will take notice of the findings.

Although the ruling blocks one avenue of defense for the industry, the judges did not foreclose other possible challenges related to the question of jurisdiction. There was no immediate indication from the industry of whether further legal options might be considered or what those might be.

Baltimore’s top legal officer, acting City Solicitor Dana Moore, hailed the ruling as a rebuke to the industry.

“We were confident in our case and are grateful that the Court of Appeals agreed,” Moore said in a prepared statement. “We look forward to having a jury hear the facts about the fossil fuel companies’ decades-long campaign of deception and their attempt to make Baltimore’s residents, workers, and businesses pay for all the climate damage they’ve knowingly caused.”

The foundation for the appeals court ruling was laid last year when lawyers representing the city argued before the appeals court that the foundation of the case rested on the promotion of a harmful product by the fossil fuel industry. That equated to violations of state product liability laws best decided by state courts, the city’s lawyers argued.

The essence of the fossil fuel companies’ argument was that much of the oil and gas was extracted from federal land under permits issued by the federal government so the allegations must be resolved under federal law.

Ann Carlson, an environmental law professor at the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, part of the University of California, Los Angeles’ School of Law, said the ruling is significant because it steamrolls one of the primary roadblocks used by the industry in an attempt to block the city’s day in court.

“This ruling removes an obstacle to the plaintiffs moving forward in state courts and puts these cases much, much closer to a trial where the facts and the truth will emerge,” said Carlson, who has done limited pro bono work on the Baltimore case.

Carlson called the ruling “well-reasoned” and “solid,” so that other appellate courts considering similar climate cases could take notice. “There could be some influence,” she said. “The issues are much the same and this ruling could provide some guidance to the other courts.”

The Baltimore case, filed two years ago, seeks to hold 26 fossil fuel companies financially accountable for the threats posed by climate change. The lawsuit alleges that fossil fuel companies, including Exxon, Chevron and Phillips 66, knowingly sold dangerous products for decades and failed to take steps to reduce that harm.

Baltimore’s lawsuit claims that the 26 companies are responsible for approximately 15 percent of the carbon dioxide emissions in the five decades from 1965 to 2015. Among the consequences of that increase in atmospheric carbon have been extreme weather events and sea level rise, both particular threats to Baltimore.

“As a direct and proximate consequence of defendants’ wrongful conduct … flooding and storms will become more frequent and more severe, and average sea level will rise substantially along Maryland’s coast, including in Baltimore,” the city argued in its suit.

The Baltimore case joins more than a dozen lawsuits—including claims filed by the state of Rhode Island and cities and counties in California, Colorado, New York and Washington State—that are currently pending to hold fossil fuel companies financially accountable for their role in creating climate change and for deceiving the public about the impact of their business practices.

The industry is trying to steer the climate cases into the federal courts, where the U.S. Supreme Court could ultimately end up ruling on the issue.

###########################

See also: Former Exxon Scientists Tell Congress of Oil Giant’s Climate Research Before Exxon Turned to Denial | InsideClimate News, October 24, 2019

Exxon’s research warned of the risks of climate change from human-cause greenhouse gas emissions 40 years ago. Then came the ‘sea change’ at the energy company.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

See also: Shell and Exxon’s secret 1980s climate change warnings | The Guardian, September 18, 2018

In the 1980s, oil companies like Exxon and Shell carried out internal assessments of the carbon dioxide released by fossil fuels, and forecast the planetary consequences of these emissions. In 1982, for example, Exxon predicted that by about 2060, CO2 levels would reach around 560 parts per million – double the preindustrial level – and that this would push the planet’s average temperatures up by about 2°C over then-current levels (and even more compared to pre-industrial levels).

Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) Terminal at Cove Point on Chesapeake Bay

Extracted from an Extensive Article by Kevin Rector, Baltimore Sun, March 20, 2019

In a quiet pocket of Southern Maryland where beach bungalows line dirt roads to the Chesapeake Bay, the nation’s booming natural gas industry has established an unlikely multibillion-dollar foothold.

For a year now, natural gas pulled from ancient shale formations deep below the surface of Pennsylvania and other states has been piped across Maryland to a new $4.4 billion gas export terminal in the woods beyond Cove Point Beach in Calvert County.

From there, the gas is cooled through a complex industrial process to minus 260 degrees Fahrenheit, which liquefies it and makes it easier to transport. It is then piped through a tunnel to a platform a mile offshore and loaded onto massive tankers for shipment overseas — to Japan and India, the Middle East and Europe, and countries across Central and South America.

Lea Callahan says the increase in tanker ships in the waters beyond her beachfront home, about 65 miles south of Baltimore, has been shocking. “All of a sudden, it was like boom,” she said. “They come in at all hours, so you wake up in the morning and you see another ship.”

The new activity makes Maryland a global gateway for natural gas extracted from the ground through hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, even though the state has banned the controversial process within its own borders. It also puts Maryland at the vanguard of a growing global trade in liquefied natural gas, or LNG, that U.S. government leaders and energy executives are feverishly working to support by building similar facilities across the country.

Global demand for natural gas is on the rise, particularly in China and other growing Asian markets. The United States is expected to account for 40 percent of the new production needed to meet that demand through 2025, according to the International Energy Agency.

The Cove Point terminal began operations in early 2018 as just the second large LNG export facility in the continental U.S.; Cheniere Energy’s Sabine Pass terminal in Louisiana began exporting in 2016. But more than a dozen others are in the works — each of them eager to replicate Cove Point’s success.

“This is the golden age of gas,” said Nobuo Tanaka, former executive director of the International Energy Agency. He lives and works in Tokyo, where much of the Cove Point gas is heading.

The Maryland terminal, owned by the Virginia-based utility Dominion Energy, used to import gas — from countries like Norway and Trinidad and Tobago. But that business largely dried up with the rise of fracking and other drilling techniques in the United States, and the resulting surge in domestic shale gas production.

In response, Dominion decided to convert the Cove Point facility to exports, initiating what officials called the most expensive private sector project in state history. Construction to convert the terminal, completed last year, employed 4,500 people at its peak and used 800 miles of wire and fiber, 80 miles of piping and 20,000 tons of steel.

The result has been a boon to business and to county coffers. The revamped facility now handles about 770 million cubic feet of natural gas per day, enough to power millions of overseas homes. That business generated more than $500 million in export revenue for Dominion last year. And Calvert County will get more than $50 million in taxes and other payments from the company this year — a massive influx for a jurisdiction with a general fund of less than $300 million.

“Frankly, I think we are the envy of many counties who would like to have such an economic driver,” said Evan Slaughenhoupt Jr., former president of the Calvert County Board of Commissioners.

But environmental activists and some local residents say the terminal is a giant, glaring contradiction — making Maryland the only state in the country that has both a ban on fracking and an export terminal for sending fracked gas to international markets.

Natural gas is used in cooking, heating and electricity production. It also is used in industrial production of plastics and other chemical products. It generally burns cleaner than coal and other fossil fuels, but critics say the industry that produces it is far from environmentally friendly.

Kim Grosso displays a jar of water from her farm’s well in Dimock, Pa. Grosso says the well was contaminated by Cabot Oil and Gas, which was fracking for natural gas beneath her property.

In particular, environmental advocates say fracking — which blasts water, sand and chemicals into rock formations to release trapped gas — is associated with groundwater contamination, increased risk of earthquakes and emissions of potent greenhouse gases.

And they say the Cove Point terminal provides incentive for fracking in states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia, undermining and reducing the impact of the Maryland ban that Gov. Larry Hogan signed into law in 2017.

They and some local residents also believe the facility represents a more immediate threat to the communities around it, though Dominion and federal regulators say it is safe.

Callahan, 62, who inherited her Cove Point home from her mother, said she fears an industrial accident could spew out fire, chemicals or toxic pollutants. And she complains the changeover of the terminal to exports has turned her quiet waterfront enclave into a heavily patrolled security zone, where sheriff’s deputies paid by Dominion harass residents as they go about their daily lives.

“It used to be so nice. All of us used to walk over there with our dogs. … I’d bring the kayak right up, look at the marsh, look for blue herons and all that stuff,” Callahan said.

“I wanted to retire down here. And now I’m not doing it. I refuse to live near a potential bomb.”

She and other homeowners have joined environmentalists to protest the facility, both in Cove Point and in Annapolis, accusing state and federal regulators of conducting inadequate threat assessments. But they say their efforts have been ignored by both sides of the political aisle.

The new export terminal was pushed through regulatory and permitting processes during the administrations of President Barack Obama and Gov. Martin O’Malley, both Democrats, and has continued to enjoy support under their Republican successors.

Hogan said it “is delivering economic benefits to Maryland and the nation, and creating jobs right here in our state.” U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry, appointed by President Donald Trump, called Cove Point’s expansion into exporting “an exciting and remarkable new chapter in America’s history.”

Maryland officials agree with federal regulators that the facility is safe, and say it is in line with both the Trump administration’s goal of reducing trade deficits and the state’s goal of improving the environment. They contend natural gas is an important bridge fuel between dirtier coal and cleaner renewable energy sources like wind and solar.

“One of the few things that President Obama and President Trump have agreed on is the benefit to the country of exporting clean energy — natural gas — to other parts of the world,” said Benjamin Wu, Hogan’s deputy commerce secretary. “It’s a trade priority for us.”

Others argue the economic benefits to the state and county, dwarfed by Dominion’s own windfall, do not justify the threats the project poses to the public and the environment. In Pennsylvania and elsewhere, they say, other small towns are being overrun by the industry as it churns out gas for distant mega-cities like Tokyo.

These critics see only downsides — and danger.

‘It has a lovely marsh’!!! At least since the 1930s, Cove Point Beach had been an escape.

Far from the bustle of Baltimore and Washington but near enough for weekend getaways, the spit of beach drew residents from both cities. They built bungalows as vacation homes through the 1960s, and many eventually moved in for good, creating a community mixed with year-round and seasonal residents.

By the early 1970s, Cove Point was prized as one of the Chesapeake Bay’s few beaches. So when the park plans were scrapped in favor of building the import terminal, the decision caused a dust up echoed today. Many residents and environmental groups were furious.

“The bay at that point [is] relatively pristine. It is a beautiful site. It has one of the last remaining beaches on the bay. It has a lovely marsh,” said Ronald J. Wilson, then an attorney for the environmental groups.

But faced with a lengthy and unpredictable legal battle, opponents in 1972 agreed to a deal that allowed Columbia to build the terminal. The company made concessions.

It agreed to build a tunnel out to its loading platform rather than a pier. It put a majority of the 1,100-acre property not used for the termina.

Josh Tulkin, Maryland director for the Sierra Club, said the group was concerned that construction of the export terminal would be harmful to the surrounding environment. But it also argued the operations would contribute to global warming by supporting the fracking industry.

“There is no climate model that suggests we can be burning gas, to the extent that this facility requires, 30 years from now — or this planet is baked,” Tulkin said.

The Sierra Club made similar arguments in an unsuccessful legal effort to block the Cheniere facility in Louisiana. In Maryland, the Sierra Club took Dominion to court, and again lost. But about 800 acres of the property still had to remain wooded under the original easement.

The trees are part of why the nearby town of Lusby retains a rural feel, and why Cove Point Beach remains quaint. They also help to obscure 130 acres of dense industrial activity — activity some residents say has led to disturbing changes in their community, and to the bay it sits on.

Living with a refinery!!! What’s behind the trees and a 60-foot sound wall is a high-tech refinery — a maze of piping and metal and massive white storage tanks, where raw gas is purified and cooled into a liquid. That is critical, because the liquid occupies just 1/600th of the space raw gas would take up, making LNG much easier to transport.

There are combustion turbines and gas compressors. The cooling and refrigeration process relies on something called a cryogenic heat exchanger, and on a mixture of chemicals that are stored on site. The process is not easy, and not exactly clean. But the facility is designed to capture as much emissions as possible.

All told, the operation was responsible for more than 1 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions in 2018 — three times more than before exports began, according to Maryland Department of the Environment preliminary data.

That makes the facility one of the largest stationary sources of such emissions in the state. But the output fell well within the 2 million metric tons it is permitted to release into the atmosphere each year, state officials say.

Mike Frederick, Dominion’s vice president of LNG operations during the project’s construction, said the company regularly monitors some 270,000 different valves, pipes and other industrial components at any given time, especially for any leaks of greenhouse gases like methane.

For all that, some residents say they pay little mind to the facility. The construction that converted it for exports was annoying, and caused traffic, but that’s over now. It also provided some 10,000 people with temporary work, about 30 percent of whom were from Calvert and nearby Charles and St. Mary’s counties.

And it doubled the permanent jobs on site to nearly 200. Besides jobs, the company provides funding for a local park and local charities. Plenty of people see Dominion as a good neighbor — something Frederick says the company works hard at and prides itself on.

Others, however, believe Dominion’s good deeds are simply its way of buying goodwill not otherwise earned. Rather than being a good neighbor, they say Dominion looms over the community like an illegitimate landlord.

Linda Morin lived about a mile from the terminal for nearly 30 years, but moved 20 minutes north to Prince Frederick last year because of the shift to exports. Morin said she fears the terminal’s expansion made it more dangerous. She and others worry that its densely spaced chemical and gas storage tanks might explode in a chain reaction.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which gave its approval to the project in 2014, says the plant is safe and the residents’ concerns are unfounded.

Residents have other concerns, too — from the tides of the bay to the men who patrol its shore. Some complain about an arrangement through which the Calvert County sheriff’s office patrols the area on behalf of Dominion — which pays the salaries, benefits, pension contributions and other costs for nearly a dozen deputies. It also buys equipment, including boats, for their use.

Some residents say they have been harassed by the officers, who carry Dominion identification along with their deputy badges. They flash whichever one suits their need as they confront people strolling on the beach and walking their dogs, critics say.

“It just feels really ugly and creepy,” said Leslie Garcia, who has been part of the Cove Point Beach community for four decades. “This is all collusion. Government and corporate collusion.”

Calvert County Sheriff Mike Evans dismissed that notion. He said the county has had agreements with Dominion and the U.S. Coast Guard to provide security around the terminal for more than a decade, with the goal of serving and protecting the citizens, not Dominion. “There is no collusion,” Evans said. “We are good partners in this agreement.”

“Our daily orders come from the sheriff,” said Capt. Steve Jones, who leads the team of deputies detailed to the terminal. “Dominion does not give us marching orders.”

Some residents also believe Dominion caused the tides to change around Cove Point beach — resulting in a deadly undertow — by dredging out the shipping channel to its offshore platform in 2010.

Dominion referred questions about such claims to the government. State and federal agencies told The Sun they do not have the data to confirm or deny a change in the tides or the creation of a heavier undertow.

Garcia and others said they are convinced, citing the drowning deaths of three men in two separate incidents in 2015, in the same waters where they taught their kids to swim. “I’ve kayaked for years out there. …My son and his friends would go to the point and body surf. …You could step way out there and collect sharks’ teeth and do whatever, and you just can’t do that now,” Garcia said.

Tulkin contends that no one knows the full environmental impact of the Cove Point operation because federal regulators didn’t consider the ill effects of the fracking that harvested the gas nor of the greenhouse gases emitted when it is liquified, transported and burned throughout the world.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which approved the project after studying the issue for two years, determined it was “in the public interest” and would not significantly affect the “quality of the human environment.”

The regulators required Dominion to take various steps to mitigate local environmental concerns. But they also held — and state officials and a federal appeals court affirmed — that they were not required to consider concerns associated with the fracking industry at large.

Critics argue that in supporting the facility, state and federal regulators abdicated their responsibility to people and the environment not just in Maryland, but communities hundreds of miles away. See the Comment(s) to this Article below.

David Goldwyn, the U.S. special envoy for international energy affairs from 2009 to 2011, worked to pitch U.S. shale gas to foreign investors alongside then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Now an international energy consultant, Goldwyn says Cove Point is “very well-positioned” to maintain its place in the market for many years to come given its proximity to the near-boundless Marcellus Shale.

Environmentalists should welcome that, he said, particularly given that coal-dependent developing countries are among Dominion’s customers.

Goldwyn argues the world should be moving from coal and diesel to natural gas as fast as it can — even if that means one day abandoning LNG plants like Cove Point once technological innovations make wind and solar a truly viable alternative.

“In the meantime, I will take every short-term [greenhouse gas] reduction I can get,” Goldwyn said.

Cove Point critics vehemently disagree, arguing the government should be trying to shutter the plant as a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and move immediately toward renewable energy.

“I’m very, very concerned about our future, and not just here in Cove Point,” Garcia said. “I mean, we will be extinguished before everybody else, but we are a canary in a coal mine. …

“This is not the future. This is not the way to go. Period.”

Kayak protest against new fracked gas pipeline under Potomac River

From an Article by Luke Broadwater, Baltimore Sun, January 2, 2018

The Maryland Board of Public Works unanimously rejected Wednesday plans for a pipeline that would carry fracked natural gas through three miles of Western Maryland, after years of environmentalists and neighbors fighting the project.

Republican Gov. Larry Hogan and Comptroller Peter Franchot and Treasurer Nancy Kopp, both Democrats, voted against a needed easement for the pipeline, citing concern for the environment. “We were going to subject our state to all the environmental problems of this pipeline and get none of the economic benefits,” Franchot said. “This became a fairly big issue.”

Despite a state agency’s recommendation that Columbia Gas Transmission, which is owned by energy company TransCanada Corp., receive permission to build the pipeline through Washington County, board members were inundated with testimony against the project, including a letter from 62 state lawmakers.

Document: Letter from 65 Maryland lawmakers urging rejection of fracked-gas pipeline Franchot called the testimony “compelling.”

“We urge you to deny TransCanada’s proposal to build a gas pipeline through Maryland,” the lawmakers wrote. “We believe this project would reverse course on our state’s efforts to protect the health of our residents and combat climate change. … Given that Maryland has banned fracking, it defies our state’s existing energy policy to bring the same public health risks to our residents by way of a pipeline.”

The letter, organized by Montgomery County Del. David Moon, a Democrat, was signed by Democrats from around the state, including seven from Baltimore.

Hogan signed Maryland’s ban of fracking, a natural gas harvesting technique that involves injecting liquids at high pressure underground to force out the gas, in 2017.

“The construction and operation of the Potomac Pipeline would impact at least 10 wetlands and 19 streams, in addition to the Potomac River,” the letter stated. “The pipeline right-of-way includes a Potomac River crossing through the C&O Canal and the Western Maryland Rail/Trail. In addition to violating the spirit of our renewable energy portfolio and fracking ban, the TransCanada pipeline also directly endangers public health.”

A TransCanada official said the company would explore its options in light of the board’s decision. “Today’s vote denying our easement request is unfortunate,” said Scott Castleman, a company spokesman. “That being said, it does not change the need for, or the company’s commitment to, our Eastern Panhandle Expansion Project. It remains critical for West Virginia’s Eastern Panhandle and the surrounding region, and will provide much-needed additional natural gas supplies for continued business and economic development.”

While Franchot cited the lawmakers’ letter in discussing his vote, Hogan did not explain his vote except to say the legislators had nothing to do with his decision. “We were always going to have a 3-0 vote,” the governor said. “It had nothing to do with any letter from the legislature, I can assure you.”

Maryland’s Department of Natural Resources had urged approval of the easement for the pipeline through a small portion of Washington County owned by state government.

The pipeline would transport fracked gas from Pennsylvania to a new plant in West Virginia. More than 13,000 people have signed a petition opposing the proposed plant in Jefferson County, West Virginia. About 35 people, including some from Western Maryland and West Virginia, attended the Maryland Board of Public Works meeting in Annapolis to oppose the deal.

Brent Walls, the Upper Potomac Riverkeeper, said he was shocked by the board’s unanimous vote. “We had no idea it would be a 3-0 vote. We’ve been fighting this pipeline for two years,” Walls said. “If the pipeline leaks, which they do leak, it’ll get into people’s well water. I’m ecstatic.”

In a statement, the Chesapeake Climate Action Network called Hogan’s vote “dramatic and surprising.” Last year, the Hogan administration pushed a plan to increase use of natural gas in the state.

“Today, he took a step in the right direction by rejecting a permit for a dangerous fracked-gas pipeline proposed by TransCanada,” said Brooke Harper, Maryland director for the climate network. “Hopefully, this signals a reversal of the governor’s prior policy of promoting fracked gas consumption and pipelines in Maryland.”

Castleman, of TransCanada, said the pipeline project has been “studied and scrutinized” for two years by groups including the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Maryland Department of the Environment and the Maryland Department of Natural Resources.

“This extensive process has confirmed that through proper design and construction our project can be completed in an environmentally responsible and safe manner,” he said. “We will consider our options over the coming days to keep this project on track.”

>>>>>>>>>> See the video here.

Natural Gas Compressor Station, Accident, MD

Accident Compressor Station Title V permit hearing set for April 26, 2017 at 6 PM

From an Announcement by Engage Mountain Maryland, The Garrett County Republican, April 19, 2017

The air quality permit to operate the Texas Eastern Transmission facilities at Accident will be the subject of a public hearing on Wednesday, April 26, 6:00 PM at the Garrett College Career Technology Training Center, 116 Industrial Park Drive in Accident.

Every five years the facility’s air quality permit goes through the renewal process, and the public may make comments related to air quality concerns. The Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) will accept oral or written comments at the hearing, or within five days after the hearing, until May 1, 2017.

The Accident facilities were the focus of two community meetings held in Fall 2015, sponsored by Engage Mountain Maryland. At the first meeting, citizens were given the opportunity to ask questions about operations at the facility, including air quality monitoring, and to hear about MDE and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regulations pertaining to the “Accident Dome.” The next meeting featured public health presentations about compressor stations, air emissions and noise.

Based on uncertainty about the duration and extent of emissions at the facility, Citizen Shale submitted an application to the national non-profit organization, Earthworks, for GasFinder FLIR (Forward Looking InfraRed) imagery of gas emissions from the Texas Eastern Transmission facilities at Accident.

FLIR images documented that air emissions of concern were observed when the compressors were operating.  These results were shared with the Garrett County Commissioners, acting in their capacity as the Board of Health, October 2016.

Additionally, the Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration will provide an overview of federal safety regulations of transmission pipelines as well as an update of investigations of the Aliso Canyon, California underground gas storage facility leak and the Delmont, PA pipeline explosion.  The Delmont pipeline has the same operator as the Texas Eastern transmission pipeline at Accident — formerly, Spectra Energy. In February of this year, Canada’s Enbridge purchased Houston-based Spectra Energy.

MDE’s public hearing is not an informational meeting. Questions raised as part of formal testimony will be addressed in a written Response to Comments document after the close of the comment period, according to MDE’s notice.

See also:  Health Risks from Compressor Stations

Oakland (Maryland), March 5th @ 9:30 AM

“Fracking Western Maryland” — Premiering at: Garrett 8 Cinemas, Saturday, March 5th at 9:30 AM

A film by Mike Wicklein you won’t want to miss!

FRACKING WESTERN MARYLAND? is a documentary film by Mike Wicklein who has captured the contentious issues surrounding the fracking moratorium bill that was passed in the 2015 legislative session. The film features many familiar faces of Garrett County and legislators in Annapolis who advocated for and fought against the bill. You will learn how Engage Mountain Maryland helped to rally support to change the trajectory of this very important decision to hit the pause button on fracking Western Maryland.

If you’re on Facebook, you can join the event page to see who else is going and get last minute updates. Admission is free to the public. Seats will be on a first come first basis.

FREE ADMISSION — Saturday, March 5 at 9:30AM
Garrett 8 Cinemas, 19741 Garrett Highway, Oakland, MD

>>>>>>>>>>>

Lunch With The Producer — Chat & Chew!

Mike Wicklein will be present for this unprecedented premiere at Garrett 8 Cinemas to share his unique perspective on how the film developed from a 10 minute short to a 70 minute feature documentary. Engage Mountain Maryland is pleased to be presenting this important piece of work that so artfully weaves a story of a community bound by it’s love of the place they call home. You can personally meet the producer, director, and editor following the premiere at a special fund raising lunch. Join others in conversation and speak with individuals that are featured in the film.

>>>>>>>>>>>

A Stylish Premiere — Get your own commemorative T-Shirt!

You can remember this special event with the Premiere T-Shirt that sports the stunning poster image from the documentary, Fracking Western Maryland? They can be ordered in advance at our Engage Mountain Maryland shop or purchased at the event for $20. They are made of sturdy 100% preshrunk cotton and printed in full color. Sizes from small to 2XL are available while supplies last.

Rally on July 13^th at National Mall to Protest Cove Point LNG Export Terminal

RE: July 13th Cove Point Rally in Washington, DC

In just 10 days, people from across the Mid-Atlantic will be marching through the streets of Washington, DC to stop fracked gas exports at Cove Point. As my friend Bill McKibben said by video invitation,“It’s a doable, winnable fight – if we show up.”¹

With a Cove Point decision pending from President Obama’s Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as early as this August, we need to show up — in our biggest numbers yet.

Will you be there on July 13th? Stand with us in Washington to say NO to gas exports at Cove Point, NO to more fracking and pipelines — and a loud and proud YES to the wind and solar power that won’t leak, explode or flood our communities.

What: Rally to Stop Fracked Gas Exports at Cove Point and Beyond!

When: July 13th 12:30-3:30PM

Where: Rally begins west of the U.S. Capitol on the National Mall. Meet at the intersection of 3rd St NW and Madison Drive NW, Washington, DC 20216. March to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Transportation: Bus seats are available from Calvert County, MD, Charlottesville, VA, Richmond, VA, the Philadelphia area, and New York City. Click here for bus info and the rally ride board.

Sign up here to march with us July 13th in DC, and ensure you get updates on all the final logistics.

We’re all connected in this anti-fracking movement — upstream, downstream, and everywhere in between. Just look at who’s coming to DC:

Karen Feridun is coming from Pennsylvania because gas exports at Cove Point will mean more fracking by companies like Cabot Oil & Gas — and more communities facing spills, illnesses, and undrinkable water.

People are busing in from across Virginia, where neighbors are rising up to fight three new gas pipeline proposals that could cut across farms, parks, and even the George Washington National Forest.

Scientist Sandra Steingraber is coming from New York, where a recent court victory affirmed the rights of towns to ban fracking, because, “The only things Americans get from LNG exports are terrifying new health and safety threats, worsening climate instability, and higher heating bills — all so that the gas industry can make bigger profits from fracking us.”

Will you be there to stand with us? Sign up here to march against fracked gas exports July 13th in DC.

Forward, Mike Tidwell, Director, Chesapeake Climate Action Network

PS: Need a ride? Click here to join a bus or carpool — folks are coming from across the Mid-Atlantic.

PPS: Learn more about why we’re standing against fracked gas exports at Cove Point by clicking here.

1. Click here to watch Bill’s video invitation.