Providence’s parkway proposal: the essence of community development


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

elorza raimondoPlease join me in giving a round of applause to Mayor Elorza and the Providence Department of Planning and Development for their hard work and due diligence every step of the way during the 6/10 Connector’s community engagement process.

The city has been extremely transparent and open, taking the public’s input into consideration while drafting their design for the future of the 6/10 Connector. It is reassuring to know that the mayor and the planning department are actively listening to the needs and wants of the community. By taking a bottom-up approach, the City of Providence is conveying that its interests align with that of its communities, and appreciates the ideas and solutions that its residents bring to the table. Who else knows what’s best for the City of Providence other than the residents that live, work, and thrive here.

On Monday, October 3, the City released their draft plans for the future of the 6/10 Corridor at a public forum held at the Doorley Jr. Municipal Building in downtown Providence. While the City’s plans do not call for a surface boulevard that I and other community members would have liked to see presented, I can tolerate the parkway design. The parkway concept addresses the concerns of both sides about the looming question, “What should the future of the 6/10 Connector look like?” The plan addresses the need to fast-track the reconstruction of the structurally deficient Huntington Viaduct, out of concern that the structure might collapse. The plan appeases auto-interests as well as those citizens who want to see a concept that is more pedestrian and bike friendly, although we would much prefer a pure boulevard instead of a parkway.

The proposed parkway plan frees up land for development (approximately 50 acres), expands the footprint of DePasquale Square, adds two new off-street bike paths, creates a new exit to West Exchange Street, adds additional connections to the existing street grid, and reconnects parts of Olneyville to the urban fabric of Providence, among other things as well. The proposed “halo” elevated rotary where Route 6 merges with Route 10 allows for the potential to incorporate boulevard elements into sections of the route further down the line. While the entire length of the 6/10 Connector isn’t the pure boulevard that many of us had envisioned, the two-phased parkway plan allows the City and State to revisit the compelling arguments made in favor of an intermodal boulevard.

The most important aspect of the plan isn’t the plan itself. Rather, it is culmination of everything that has led to the plan being drafted in the first place. It is the countless hours spent by engaged citizens, who took it upon themselves to get involved, speak out, and voice their opinions about the project; citizens who persevered even when things weren’t going their way because they knew that this is a critical, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to turn the 6/10 Connector into something truly special. Without vocal citizens and lots of vigorous discussions, RIDOT would probably have elected to refurbish the highway a long time ago, and that wouldn’t have worked for motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians, and city residents alike.

The future of the 6/10 Connector will single-handedly change the physical, social, and economic makeup of the city for generations to come. It is up to us as citizens to decide whether or not we want to make Providence a more livable community for our children, our children’s children, and ourselves. Or, if we want to sit idle, content with the current economic conditions in our Capital City. The choice is ours. RIDOT has the final say about the project’s design, and I strongly encourage my fellow Rhode Islanders to continue to be actively involved in the process, and vocal about the future we envision for a livable, thriving city for decades to come.

North Smithfield and Lincoln Town Councils come out against Burrillville power plant


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Lorraine Savard

On Tuesday night the North Smithfield Town Council voted unanimously to oppose Invenergy‘s $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant, and on Wednesday evening a second unanimous vote opposing the power plant happened in Lincoln. When Middletown votes to oppose the plant next week, as is expected, that will bring the total number of municipalities passing resolutions in opposition to the power plant to four, since Glocester passed a resolution last week. Many other cities and towns are considering similar resolutions as per the Town of Burrillville‘s request, with Cranston‘s town council discussing it at their next meeting.

Denise Potvin and Suzanne Dumas of Burrillville, Rhoda-Ann Northrup of Cranston and Lorraine Savard of Central Falls all spoke out against the plant in Lincoln. Only Savard spoke out against the plant in North Smithfield.

Over 60 local environmental groups have come out against the power plant, the Burrillville Zoning and Planning Boards have expressed their opposition, and both Pascoag and Harrisville have chosen to not sell Invenergy the water they need to cool their turbines.

Below see video from the Town of Lincoln’s meeting last night and from North Smithfield’s meeting Tuesday night.

 

Glocester Town Council supports Burrillville in opposition to power plant


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Though the Middletown Town Council was the first municipality in Rhode Island to take up the issue of whether or not to support the Burrillville Town Council in opposition to Invenergy‘s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant, on Thursday the Glocester Town Council became the first municipality in the state to pass it. Lead by Council President Walter MO Steere, the resolution was passed unanimously.

20161006_193128Before the resolution could be passed, two town councilors took the opportunity to address some rumors that had been swirling about town. Councilor George Steere said that he was not negotiating to sell water to Invenergy, whose application before the Energy Facilities Siting Board has stalled due o a lack of water to cool its turbines. (Invenergy is currently pursuing a deal with Woonsocket, and perhaps other suppliers.) The rumors, said Steere, originated from an effort begun in 2011 when he was approached to potentially supply water to Pascoag in the aftermath of that town’s water contamination crisis. Crushing the rumor entirely, Steere said, “There will never be one gallon of water from my property [used] to cool a power plant.”

Councilor William Reichart wanted to assure those in attendance that his company, Reichert & Sons Fuel Oil Inc. was in the business of supplying heating oil to homes and small businesses and was in no way able or willing to supply Invenergy with the diesel oil needed to ill its million gallon tanks.

Three residents from Burrillville, Ray Trinque, Paul Roselli and Jeremy Bailey, spoke before the town council, and about a dozen more attended the meeting.

 

Middletown first to consider solidarity with Burrillville against power plant


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
0047_Edit
Middletown Town Council

The Middletown Town Council appears to be the first town or city council in Rhode Island to take up the Burrillville Town Council’s call for solidarity in the face of Invenergy’s planned $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant. As part of the vote to oppose the power plant, the Burrillville Town Council also voted to ask every city and town in Rhode Island to support them in their opposition.

At Monday’s town council meeting Claudia Gorman spoke about the issues surrounding the approval process and the wide ranging opposition to Invenergy’s plans both locally and statewide.

“Advisory opinions submitted during the ongoing permitting process have expressed reservations regarding the vagueness of Invenergy’s application, negative environmental impacts, incomplete or unsatisfactory mitigating practices, and a glaring lack of a source for the thousands and thousands of water needed to cool this operation,” said Gorman, “I hope my town council will support Burrillville, Rhode Island in their opposition to this major, industrial project called the Clear River Energy Center.”

After Gorman finished her statement Councillor Henry Lombardi Jr said that he has been following this because of issues Middletown is facing with “another energy issue.”

“Burrillville already has a power plant in their town, it is going to affect their water supply,” said Lombardi, “I watched some of the public comment and they are just vehemently opposed to this. Enough is enough. I would suggest that we strongly support this resolution.”

“I have already directed the town clerk to draw up the resolution to oppose it,” said Council President Robert Sylvia, “which will be on the next docket.”

March for licenses for undocumented workers covers three cities


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 003A march of over 50 people from Jenks Park in Central Falls to the Gloria Dei Lutheran Church near the Rhode Island Mall was held Sunday to demand driver’s licenses for all, regardless of immigration status. Marchers carried signs, sang and chanted as the wound their way through Central Falls, along East Ave in Pawtucket and Hope St in Providence, pausing briefly near the fountain in Lippitt Park and at the State House.

The march briefly detoured through the East Side, to pass by the home of Governor Gina Raimondo, who broke a campaign promise to grant licenses through executive action. Instead, the governor threw the issue to the General Assembly, where House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello declined to advance the legislation.

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 015The march was organized by the Safer Rhodes Coalition and Comité en Acción. Organizer Claire Pimental, writing for RI Future, said that passing this legislation will improve the quality of life and overall safety of our communities, from higher rates of insured and licensed drivers, to greater cooperation between police and the immigrant communities they serve.

Before the march Mayor James Diossa of Central Falls was joined by state Senators Donna Nesselbush and Frank Ciccone, Senator elect Ana Quezada, and Representatives Aaron Regunberg and Shelby Maldonado.

Below find pictures and video from the event.

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 004

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 025 Yaruska Ordinola
photo (c)2016 Yaruska Ordinola
2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 024 Yaruska Ordinola
photo (c)2016 Yaruska Ordinola

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 023

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 022

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 021

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 020

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 018

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 017

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 016

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 014

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 013

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 012

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 011

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 010

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 009

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 008

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 007

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 006

2016-09-25 Safer Rhodes 005

Pawtucket school lunch workers reach agreement, prevent one day strike


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

FullSizeRender (1)The Pawtucket School Lunch Workers reached an agreement Thursday afternoon in an effort to prevent a one day strike the school lunch workers had planned for Friday. Unite Here Local 26 who represented the lunch workers, called the agreement “a decisive victory for all women who feed the kids and the fight for equal pay.”

Under the agreement the pay gap for Pawtucket School Lunch Workers will dramatically shrink as they receive $1.20 in raises over three years.  Unite Here says that after the lunch workers “courageously called attention to the problem of wage discrimination, Aramark Educational Services, LLC and the City of Pawtucket demonstrated that they wanted to be leaders in solving this problem.”

Melanie Plante, a truck driver based out of Jenks Junior High, described the victory: “We will proudly be serving the kids tomorrow.  This new Agreement will help all of us improve our lives and raise healthy, happy families.”

Carolyn DeOliveira, lead cook at Nathaniel Greene Elementary, “Our members have worked hard to earn more and to maintain their health benefits.  I am really proud to call myself a Pawtucket School Lunch Worker.”

The new three year Agreement covering the 81 school lunch employees will expire in April 2019.

Unite Here Local 26 represents 9,000 hotel, food service, airport, & casino workers across Rhode Island and Massachusetts.

FullSizeRender

 

Cranston City Council candidate Kate Aubin calls on Republican opponents to denounce Trump’s hateful rhetoric


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Aubin“The language Donald Trump has used to describe Hispanic Americans, Muslims, women and others is both hateful and dangerous. It is a lot more than ‘putting his foot in his mouth,’ and it must be condemned,” said Democratic candidate for Cranston City Council Kate Aubin. “Incumbent City Councilor Michael Farina made the decision to switch parties from Democrat to Republican in March, when it was already clear that the national GOP would likely be led by Mr. Trump. His failure to denounce the hate ­filled language and ideology coming from the top of his new party shows a lack of judgment, courage, and leadership.”

Trump for President signs can be found around Cranston, says Aubin, displayed next to signs for the three Republican City Wide City Council candidates. Their names also appear on signs with local GOP standard bearer, Mayor Allan Fung, who told WPRI in August that he supported “the Republican nominee” and said of Trump’s hate speech that the presidential nominee “keeps putting his foot in his mouth.” By aligning themselves with the mayor and not publicly disavowing Trump, Michael Farina, Ken Hopkins, and Louis Petrucci are sending a signal that Trump’s message of racism and division is okay by them.

IMG_20160921_155003Farina, reached by email, did not reply directly to Aubin’s call for him to disavow Trump. “I am running for city council not President,” said Farina, “and this is a lame attempt for her to garner attention in a race against 2 incumbents and other more popular candidates herself. She should run on the issues and how she plans on making Cranston better. I stand by my record of positive improvements in the city of Cranston.”

This isn’t enough for Aubin. “When nomination papers were filed in June, Trump was already the presumptive nominee of the Republican party. No one forced Michael Farina to switch parties and become a Republican, and his continued unwillingness to disavow Trump’s racism and bigotry — even when given a direct opportunity — demonstrates a severe lack of judgment, courage, and leadership.

“So this absolutely matters to Cranston and the people of our city deserve to know where Mr. Farina stands on Donald Trump. I believe that Trump’s near constant hateful and incendiary comments are dangerous for America and for Cranston. I have spoken clearly about the issues I am passionate about for our city — improving our neighborhoods by making them more walkable and affordable, protecting our environment, improving our local economy, reducing wasteful spending, and making sure Cranston has top performing schools.”

At the time Farina switched party affiliation from Democrat to Republican he said he believed there had been “efforts to inhibit or obstruct him from taking positions on certain issue contrary to fellow Democratic leaders.”

“As a Democrat I have felt pressure,” said Farina, “to conform to party positions … more about political maneuvering and personal ego than the constituents.”

Aubin says that as a longtime advocate for social justice, she believes in a Cranston that is strong, diverse, and equitable. The America that Donald Trump is selling, based on xenophobia and intolerance, has no place in Cranston or anywhere in our country.

CLF files motion to dismiss in power plant case


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

2016-07-19 Burrillville MTBE Site Visit 025The Conservation Law Foundation‘s (CLF) senior attorney Jerry Elmer filed a Motion to Dismiss today with the Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) in the case of Invenergy’s $700 fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant planned for Burrillville. CLF’s motion is broader than the one filed by the Town of Burrillville, which concentrated on the fact that Invenergy to date has supplied no information on where the water to cool the power plant will come from, making it impossible to assess the project.

In addition to the water issue, CLF’s motion is based on the lack of advisory opinions from multiple agencies, due to Invenergy’s lack of providing needed information. This is CLF’s second motion to dismiss. As this new Motion to Dismiss says in its conclusion, “Back in January, CLF argued that this docket should be closed due to inadequate information from Invenergy.

“Invenergy’s Application lacked enough details for the parties, including CLF, to assess and respond to its proposal. The EFSB voted to let the process take its course. The Board noted that ‘further information’ might at some point be ‘necessary to conduct a thorough review and make an informed decision…’ It added that discovery would be available as part of the process.

“In the intervening eight months, twelve agencies and subdivisions have attempted to conduct the thorough reviews and make the informed decisions demanded of them by the Energy Facility Siting Act and the Board. Discovery has occurred. And Invenergy has failed to provide enough information for the agencies and subdivisions to issue fully informed advisory opinions. The process has taken its course, statutory deadlines have passed, and there still is not enough information for the Board to do its job. Invenergy’s failure to provide adequate information violated the Energy Facility Siting Act, it precluded the agencies and subdivisions from doing their jobs, and it precludes the EFSB from fulfilling its statutory mandates, Enough is enough: Invenergy’s application must be dismissed.”

UPDATE: See Jerry Elmer’s blog post about the motion here.

Invenergy requests extension on power plant hearings


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
2016-07-26 PUC Burrillville 3033
Alan Shoer, listening

Invenergy‘s attorneys Alan Shoer, Richard Beretta Jr and Nicole Verdi today filed a motion with the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) for a thirty day extension because they need the time to nail down an alternative water source for their proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant.

“The grounds for this request is that Invenergy expects to have an alternative water supply plan for the Project filed with the Board and available for review within the coming weeks,” reads the motion, “Therefore, in order to provide all parties with enough time to review and comment on Invenergy’s alternative water supply plans, Invenergy requests that the EFSB extend the remaining Procedural Schedule deadline thirty (30) days.”

In their original application Invenergy requested “an expedited review of this application and a Final Decision on its approval by no later than September 15, 2016,” adding, “This Facility will be bid into the ISO-NE’s Forward Capacity Auction number 10 (“FCA 10”) in February 2016, and if selected, commercial operation of the Facility will be required by June 1, 2019, with significant financial penalties due if this capacity obligation is not met.”

 

Citizens Bank trashes land, and land use planning


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

citizens johnstonLast week the big shots celebrated the groundbreaking for the new Citizens Bank headquarters on green space just west of I-295 in Johnston. Not me. I think the state is a triple loser, losing open space, tax revenue, and spending tax money. The 3,200 jobs that are supposed to be established there are not new but just a relocation of Citizens employees from built up areas in Providence, East Providence and Cranston.

Taxpayers are out because Johnston gave them a 20 year “tax treaty” (aka subsidy) and we will spend millions for a new interchange on I-295 at Greenville Avenue, and to extend sewer lines there. Providence Gas Company executives started Grow Smart RI because they were concerned with the high costs of providing infrastructure to such developments. Now that company is part of National Grid and they closed their building in downtown Providence, you cannot even pay a utility bill there any more. It seems corporate America is not interested in smart growth. Putting development where we have infrastructure is the core of land use planning, but everyone, including Statewide Planning, the Governor, RIDOT, and our congressional delegation seems ready to ignore this and roll over for Citizens. They don’t even seem to care that I-295 may become more dangerous with more traffic and more exit/entrance merges.

The site being developed, about 123 acres, is mostly forest and brush, and  Greenville Avenue, now a pleasant residential area, will inevitably suffer from traffic and ugly sprawl development from the new interchange. Citizens employees may well live even further out, perhaps within the Scituate watershed,  risking eroding our drinking water quality. Employees will do a lot  of driving, there is no serious chance for transit there. Gasoline consumption in the US just set a record high and Citizens Bank seems determined to make us use even more. Perhaps the “fossil free” folks opposing some specific fossil fuel supply projects, (e.g. the Burrillville power plant, Keystone pipeline) should pay more attention to actually reducing the demand for fossil fuels.

Not everyone in Johnston is so pleased with this. I note the Johnston Sunrise had an “open letter” from the Johnston Homeowners and Neighbors Association decrying what Raimondo and Mayor Joseph Polisena have done to facilitate this project which can turn their neighborhood into another ugly commercial strip choked with traffic and gobbling up more green space. But nobody helped or even paid attention, the town council and the planning and zoning boards did what Citizens Bank wanted, including amending the apparently worthless comprehensive plan.

I note that potential subsidies for reusing downtown Providence’s Superman Building have drawn criticism from both liberal and conservative groups but the Citizens project has not. As a city kid originally from New York, I think this reflects a Rhode Island suburban mind-set, cities are for the poor and minorities, we move out when we can, no reason to put the jobs there. The East Side, anchored by Brown and RISD, is the main exception.  Liberals and conservatives also mostly see the bus system as for the poor and minorities. Liberals are willing to subsidize it to keep it going, but for the most part will not use the buses themselves. Not even if service is pretty good – as it is in many places.

Finally, I’ll contrast this with what I just read about Denver, Colorado which has had unusual success in recovering from the 2008 recession. One key element noted in the article was regional cooperation in which various communities there support each other in generating development and building transit, rather than undermine each other as Johnston has done,  So our cities struggle, maybe face bankruptcy, sprawl spreads further, and our life style keeps us pumping out the greenhouse gases.

Raimondo’s office must take 6/10 position


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

https://twitter.com/TransportPVD/status/770773009380638720?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

The assembled crowd of 200 people at Tuesday night’s 6/10 Connector community meeting were unequivocal: no highway should be rebuilt along the corridor. It found a receptive if demur audience in Providence Planning Department and Mayor Jorge Elorza. RIDOT and Governor Gina Raimondo’s Office appear to be the only agencies backing the highway rebuild after the loss of a federal grant for the billion dollar project.

https://twitter.com/TransportPVD/status/770769768815132672

RI Future has been among several area publications that have called on Mayor Elorza to take a more direct stance on the project. While the mayor’s office has clearly favored a boulevard approach to 6/10, it hasn’t yet sought direct conflict with RIDOT or Governor Raimondo’s office. Following the rejection of a federal grant RIDOT intended to use towards part of the 6/10 corridor, statements from the agency have focused on the dire need to complete the highway rebuild with a minimum of public input. Read past coverage Tear It Down: Pictures of Our Potential 6/10 Future The Drivers’ Argument for the Boulevard On Tuesday night, Mayor Elorza did not seek direct conflict with the agency, but did refer to the 6/10 Connector as “really a Disconnector”, a sign of his preferences. In a Projo report leading up to the Providence meeting, RIDOT spokesperson Charles St. Martin bristled in his emailed response to questions on the project:

As we stated before, we cannot continue to postpone this work,” wrote DOT spokesman Charles St. Martin in an email. “Thanks to the passage of Rhodeworks, Rhode Island has $400 million in committed state and federal funding to draw from to address the Route 6-10 interchange. RIDOT is evaluating its options to tackle this problem and will soon present a recommendation for next steps. No decisions have been made at this time.”

This brings us to an important question: When is Gov. Raimondo’s office going to see the writing on the wall and redirect the agencies under her charge to better priorities? The assembled crowd was almost unanimous in its priorities. The process sat small groups at tables to outline ideas and present them. Each group, to the one, came up with some form or other of the following priorities:

  • New housing
  • Non-displacement of current residents while bringing in new residents
  • Better outreach & a more welcoming process for Latino residents
  • A full and complete bike and pedestrian network
  • More green space
  • Rapid transit to connect Providence within and without its city borders
  • No highway

The groups varied in how they phrased these goals, but each group essentially outlined the same things. Notable about the meeting was the presence of individuals from communities like Cranston, Pawtucket, and Central Falls, whose citizens might have been more inclined to favor a highway than those having one built next to them. But those from outside Providence also favored the boulevard option. Among the attendees was Cranston at-large city council candidate Kate Aubin, who has made removing the 6/10 Connector a central tenet of her candidacy.

https://twitter.com/TransportPVD/status/770764144735838208

While Aubin is running on a progressive ticket, conservative Rhode Islanders also attended, questioning the priority of rebuilding 6/10 as-is. Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity’s Lawrence Gilheeney tweeted:

More pointedly, Brian Bishop, of the taxpayers’ rights group OSTPA spoke to the unnecessary waste of rebuilding the highway, drawing the night’s first laughter and applause:

https://twitter.com/TransportPVD/status/770775028090613760

Bishop, who owns properties on the East Side as well as a farm in Coventry, said that he was a “car person” and that others “can handle the bikes,” a friendly jab at non-OSTPA member Hugo Bruggeman, who held the table’s priority list and spoke to bike infrastructure like his home in the Netherlands. Bishop described the highway “hybrid” that RIDOT has been pushing over the Providence Planning-preferred boulevard as “brought to you by the same people who want to rebuild it again.” The audience roared with laughter at RIDOT’s expense.

With federal grants figured into the mix, RIDOT’s hybrid-highway proposal would have cost upwards of 80% of toll funds. Without that funding, it’s quite possible that rebuilding the highway as-is could put all other state projects on the back burner. Conservatives like Bishop and liberals like Aubin equally question the validity of this priority, despite living outside the city.

Which brings us back to a pointed question: Who exactly does favor the 6/10 Connector as a highway, other than RIDOT and Gov. Raimondo’s office? As a more politically diverse coalition coalesces around opposition to the plan, Gov. Raimondo is going to have to make some decisions soon.

~~~~

Correction: A previous version of this article erroneously named Lawrence Gilheeney’s group the Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Progress. It is the Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity. No doubt a liberal Freudian slip on my part. . . :-) Corrected.

Burrillville Zoning Board votes ‘No’ on Invenergy


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Ray Cloutier
Ray Cloutier

Ray Cloutier, chair of the Burrillville Zoning Board, ripped Invenergy‘s plans for a $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant to shreds Tuesday evening as he lead the board in a unanimous decision to reject the company’s application in their advisory opinion to the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB). Cloutier called Invenergy’s plans to use “up to a million gallons of water” per day “totally irresponsible” saying that future growth and development in the town would be curtailed. “That’s totally irresponsible,” he said.

Elizabeth Noonan
Elizabeth Noonan

The Burrillville Zoning Board has been tasked by the EFSB to deliver an advisory opinion. The Zoning Board based much of their decision on the work done by the Burrillville Planning Board. The EFSB can give the advisory opinion as much or as little weight as they choose. They can adopt the opinion in whole or in part, modify the opinion or simply ignore it.

But the opinion, based on strong research and hours upon hours of expert and community testimony, should not be considered lightly. Cloutier maintained that Invenergy has avoided providing the board with requested answers.

“Due to… a lack of concrete information, we, the board, have asked in several different ways, several different times,  for concrete information from this company, and they’ve either ignored our questions, or evaded them, or answered in a very vague manner,” said Cloutier, “We’ve gotten no definite answers, as far as I can tell, on anything.

“We have no plans. Nothing that we can read.”

One big stumbling block is the water. Cloutier said:

The big question, and we’ve asked this over and over again, available water supply. There is no water supply. As a matter of fact, they’ve been denied any water from anybody in this town. And if they were to attempt to drill a well, and draw from the ground water, it would seriously deplete the aquifer in the whole town.

“It would stop any further development. It would cripple the town from developing anything further after this. There’s no guarantee that there’s enough water for [Invenergy]. I’ve heard that there’s up to a million gallons of water  per day demand at times for this plant. That’s totally irresponsible.

“This town would be facing a public water moratorium on future village growth if this is approved. It’s unbelievable that we’d consider that.”

The meeting started off contentiously. Burrillville residents, worried about the outcome of the opinion, quickly hijacked the meeting, demanding the opportunity to speak publicly. Cloutier appeared frustrated at times and admonished the crowd to be respectful. But in the end Cloutier thanked residents for their patience during the difficult process.

Invenergy’s lawyer Elizabeth Noonan actually lost her cool as members of the audience interrupted her, saying, “People, really, I’m trying to address the board member, could you give me a- little quiet?” One woman in the audience shouted, “No!” Noonan countered, “I don’t speak when you speak.” She then gave up trying to speak and put down her microphone.

With the decision of the Burrillville Zoning Board made, this part of the EFSB process has come to a close. The EFSB is still waiting on final advisory opinions from the Department of Health and the Department of Environmental Management.

Here’s Stephanie Sloman‘s testimony on low octave noise, which Cloutier found very compelling:

Here’s the full meeting:

 

‘Essentially our advisory opinion means nothing’


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

ProcessThe Burrillville Planning Board meeting, held on Monday evening, was a confusing muddle that revealed the structural weaknesses of the “process” that Governor Gina Raimondo implored the people of Burrillville to trust in.

The board was meeting to vote to approve the final version of its required advisory opinion to the EFSB (Energy Facilities Siting Board) concerning Invenergy’s $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant, a scheme that is wildly unpopular with Burrillville residents.

The powerlessness of a small, town appointed board in the face of a multi-billion dollar company with state government support was aptly demonstrated when board chair Jeffrey Partington lamented that “one of the weaknesses of this entire [process] is that we haven’t seen plans” from Invenergy.

The “process” is designed so that a town planning board has to decide to endorse or oppose a plan that will have enormous impact on the town, without seeing the actual plans.

This is by intent.

Conservation Law Foundation attorney Jerry Elmer has pointed out that the process “was designed to take the power to stop a proposal like Invenergy’s out of the hands of the local people… and put it into the hands of the EFSB.”

Hours of meetings and endless discussions have consumed the board’s time and the energy and efforts of local townsfolk.  Yet the board’s own attorney, Michael McElroy, succinctly summed it up when he said, “Essentially our advisory opinion means nothing. It’s simply an advisory opinion. The EFSB can take it, they can take it in part, or they can reject it.”

At this meeting we learned that though Invenergy is confident that they can design the power plant to meet the noise ordinances set by the town, they have no intention of posting a bond to insure that this goal is met. An expert hired by the town has said that though he has never seen a power plant meet noise requirements so low and that such a thing has never been done, he believes it might be possible.

“It may be difficult and it may be expensive,” noise expert David Hessler cautioned, adding, “I think it can be done.”

Later in the same meeting Hessler admitted that he had “never seen a power plant meet the noise levels” but reiterated that he thinks this plant can be designed to do so.

Maybe this is why Invenergy won’t post a bond: What bonding company wants to insure a project that may well prove to be impossible? Not agreeing to post a bond may also be a legal strategy. The EFSB, when they decide on the final terms of the deal, might include a bonding that Invenergy agreed to, but more likely the EFSB will simply give Invenergy a waiver on the noise level, allowing the company to disregard Burrillville’s ordinance, without bringing up the bonding issue at all.

Why post a bond to meet a requirement you intend to have waived?

So all the sturm und drang over low octave vs. decibel limits on noise may well be for naught. “Essentially our advisory opinion means nothing,” said McElroy.

Here in Rhode Island we call that, “the process.”

Here’s the full video of the Burrillville Planning Board meeting.

Patreon

Department of Health hears testimony on Burrillville power plant


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Burrillville 45The Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH) held a public comment hearing in Burrillville Tuesday to solicit opinions on the potential health effects of building Invenergy‘s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant. RIDOH has been tasked by the Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) to create a non-binding advisory opinion on potential public health concerns relating to the project, including but not limited to biological responses to power frequency, electric, and magnetic fields associated with the operation of the power plant, and the potential impacts on the quality of drinking water associated with the construction and operation of the plant. The final report is due in early September.

RIDOH has released a first draft of their report, which was consumed by Burrillville residents opposed to the plant. Much of the public comment centered around the idea that RIDOH wasn’t taking into account the compounded effects of the gas infrastructure in and around Burrillville but was instead concentrating on the proposed power plant by itself.

Perhaps the most dramatic moment of the evening came when Stephanie Sloman rose to give her testimony.

“I had a whole speech prepared,” said Sloman (see video #20 below), “but I noticed that Invenergy’s sitting over there, and I refuse to speak and read my speech in front of these people. I don’t think they should even be here, frankly.”

The evening’s meeting was made harder on residents of the town because at the same time as this meeting there was a meeting of the Harrisville Fire District and Water Board. This meant that some people (including me) had to run out to the other meeting and then return to the RIDOH hearing, still in progress.

Several Burrillville residents noted that Governor Gina Raimondo, during her visit to Burrillville in July, recommended that residents get involved in and trust the process. That seems awfully hard to do when two important meetings are scheduled at the same time .

Below is all the video from the event.

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

Patreon

Attorney Sinapi denies conflict of interest


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Richard Sinapi
Richard Sinapi

About a half hour before Tuesday evening’s Harrisville Fire District and Water Board meeting started, attorney Richard Sinapi was engaged in semi-private conversation with board chair Ronald Slocum and vice chair James Scotland Sr inside the meeting place. Sinapi was apparently selling Invenergy’s idea to open a new well in Harrisville to cool its power plant to the commissioners, essentially telling them that Harrisville would lose out on $10 million if they did not accept the deal.

I arrived at the meeting site about a half hour early. Outside was Burrillville resident Robert Woods. Woods is a recently appointed member of the Burrillville Planning Board. An outspoken critic of Invenergy’s $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant, he recently recused himself from planning board business concerning Invenergy out of “an abundance of caution.”

Woods told me he could see inside the building, where Harrisville attorney Richard Sinapi was talking to the chair and vice chair of the Harrisville Water Board. The door to the offices were locked but after knocking, Woods and I were let in. Attorney Sinapi, as seen in the video, was engaged in conversation with two members of the board.

“I don’t know what plan C is, it’s very secret,” said Sinapi, “All I know is that it’s a lot more expensive than the ten million dollars… So… It’s ten million dollars.”

“Gentlemen,” said Robert Woods, “it seems like this is a little out of order, no? The meeting hasn’t started…”

“I’m the attorney, the meeting hasn’t started,” said Sinapi, “and there’s no quorum.”

“I realize that but you shouldn’t…” began Woods, before Sinapi wheeled around on him.

“There’s no quorum, and the meeting hasn’t started yet,” snapped Sinapi, “and I’m the attorney.”

“I realize you’re the attorney,” said Woods, “you’re talking about that to members of the board, I don’t know, I’m not an attorney but it just seems a little out of order to me, that’s all.”

“You’re entitled to your opinion,” said Sinapi.

“That’s why I’m voicing it,” said Woods.

Fifteen minutes later, and about ten minutes before the start of the meeting, Sinapi took another commissioner into an office, where he could be seen speaking privately. What they were talking about is not known.

2016-08-09 Sinapi
The laws governing open meetings are complex, but on the face of things, Sinapi seems to be correct. His advocacy on behalf of Invenergy’s proposal does not seem to have violated the Open Meetings Act. Certainly there was no quorum, but if Sinapi was having this conversation with multiple commissioners in small groups over time, it might constitute what is called a “rolling quorum.” But of course, I’m no lawyer.

There are, however, other considerations at play. Many Burrillville residents have told me that they feel that Sinapi should have recused himself, since he is not only the lawyer for Harrisville, he is also the lawyer for the New England Mechanical Contractors Association. In that capacity Sinapi has apparently advocated for Invenergy’s power plant at the State House.

In his capacity as Harrisville’s lawyer, should Sinapi have been advocating for Invenergy’s proposal to the water board? Sinapi says that there is no conflict of interest. I spoke to Sinapi by phone. He maintains that in his capacity speaking for the Mechanical Contractors Association at the State House, he was working to “defeat a bad bill that would be bad for business, not to support or oppose the power plant.”

In his capacity as attorney for Harrisville, Sinapi says his job is to protect the Harrisville water supply and the financial integrity of the water board. If “Invenergy brings water into town, through a pipeline,” said Sinapi, “it could render the Harrisville supply redundant. We provide half the water to Pascoag.”

While he had me on the phone, Sinapi wanted to correct me on two points. I listed the Harrisville Water Board vote against Invenergy’s proposal as 5-1 (and the ProJo reported it as 6-1) but Sinapi claims the vote was 5-2 in favor of turning Invenergy’s offer down.

Sinapi’s other objection to my piece was my contention that a lawyer for the Harrisville Water Board “should have known” more about MTBE than his testimony at the State House seemed to indicate. According to Sinapi, water containing up to 40 parts per million MTBE is acceptable for drinking. In Connecticut, up to 70 parts per million is acceptable. Though MTBE is dangerous, said Sinapi, “it’s not like Benzene or something.”

Patreon

Invenergy loses bid for Harrisville’s water


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Harrisville Fire DistrictThe Harrisville Fire District and Water Board voted 5-1 to turn down Invenergy’s offer to purchase water to cool it’s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant in Burrillville. Thunderous applause broke out in the Assembly Theater, where the meeting had to be held to accommodate the nearly 100 people in attendance.

The road to the no vote was Rhode Island political theater at its finest, with the Harrisville District attorney, Richard Sinapi, taking on the role of villain in the piece.

Sinapi is not only the attorney for Harrisville, he’s also a lobbyist who has testified at the State House in favor of the proposed power plant. He represents the New England Mechanical Contractors Association. In this capacity, on May 25 he testified in favor of the power plant and against Rep. Cale Keable’s bill to give the residents of Burrillville a vote on any tax treaties the Burrillville Town Council might negotiate with Invenergy.

At the House Committee on Environment meeting Sinapi suggested that choosing to purchase a home near an existing pipeline means that one should expect a power plant to be built nearby, just as choosing to live near the airport in Warwick means that one should expect runway expansions and jet noise.

Sinapi also suggested that since we live in a republic, people should not expect a democratic vote on things like power plants being located next door to their homes, they need to understand that their representatives will decide for them, and that they do not have a choice in the matter.

It was on the subject of water, however, where Sinapi made his most egregious comments at the House Environmental meeting in May. “Well 3A has in fact been shut down. It was shut down because it was not suitable for potable purposes. You cannot drink that water. It’s contaminated with MTBEs. However, you can wash with it, you can bath with it. You can’t consume it. That water, that contamination, is 16 years old.”

This is of course completely wrong. MTBE contaminated water cannot be used for washing or bathing, by court order. The water will irritate the skin and there is an unpleasant “sweet smell” to the water as well. Sinapi, a legal advisor to the Harrisville Water Board, should have known this.

At the Harrisville Water Board meeting Tuesday evening, Sinapi presented Invenergy’s pitch to the water board. He said that he and Harrisville became “involuntarily” involved in the Invenergy project after the Burrillville Town Council asked Harrisville to explore the possibility that drawing MTBE contaminated water out of well 3A might spread MTBE contamination throughout the aquifers. Sinapi did not mention his previous involvement as a lobbyist for the New England Mechanical Contractors Association at the meeting.

The offer from Invenergy was to build a pipeline from a well site in Harrisville to the Invenergy power plant site, at Invenergy’s cost. Sinapi presented the idea as an economic boon to Harrisville. The water drawn, said Sinapi, was, “not to exceed the capacity of the well.” Harrisville would receive about $10 million dollars in water sales over the life of the power plant.

Additionally, said Sinapi, if Harrisville did not accept the offer, Invenergy would move on to a “third option” which Sinapi described as more expensive for Invenergy. “I would like to emphasize,” said Sinapi, “they have a third option. It’s not just 3A, they have a third option.”

After Sinapi’s presentation, during the public commentary period, residents of both Harrisville and Pascoag asked, “What is the third option?”

“I’ve been told by two sources that they have a third option,” said Sinapi.

“You made it up, that’s fine,” said someone from the audience.

Under further questioning from Burrillville resident Donna Woods, Sinapi admitted that he has “no idea” what the third option might be.

When Burrillville resident (and candidate for Burrillville Town Council) Jeremy Bailey rose to speak, he said, “I have a an issue right now. Mr. Sinapi was paid $15,000 last year to represent the Mechanics Union, who wants the power plant… That’s a conflict of interest, and none of you [the Harriville Water Board commissioners] seem to be concerned with that… We have a state that’s so corrupt with non-transparency and not a single one of you really has a concern with it.”

No one on the board responded to Bailey’s concerns. Instead, they moved to vote.

The vote was taken, and Invenergy’s proposition to open a new well in Harrisville was turned down, 5-1.

Patreon

Noise, air pollution from proposed power plant would ruin Burrillville


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
OER fudges reality and ignores impact of escaping methane—see disclaimer in lower-left corner.

On Tuesday August 9, the Rhode Island Department of health (RIDOH) will hold a hearing on Invenergy’s proposed gigawatt fossil fuel power plant in Burrillville, aka the Clear River Energy Center (CREC). The meeting will start at 5:30 pm at Burrillville HighSchool, 425 East Avenue, Harrisville, Rhode Island 02830.

imagesAs part of the process, RIDOH issued an advisory opinion. Even a cursory reading of the document reveals issues so serious that they should prevent the construction of CREC. Yet another Rhode Island administrative body that lacks enthusiasm for the project!

RIDOH identifies serious negative health impacts of noise:

According to the WHO [World Health Organization], sleep disturbance, one of the most common complaints raised by noise-exposed populations, can have a major impact on health and quality of life. People can recognize and react to sounds, even when asleep. Those reactions, including wakening and changes in sleep stage, are associated with daytime after-effects, such as sleepiness, reduced cognitive and motor performance, and impairment of cardiovascular function.

The RIDOH opinion also quotes written testimony of Julia O’Rourke, who lives on Wallum Lake Road in Burrillville:

Specifically, in the past year, I have experienced excessive noise and vibrations coming from the Algonquin Compressor Station site which this project will be located next to. The noise and vibrations emanating from this site are extremely disruptive and negatively impacting our health and we are unable to sleep or enjoy the peace and quiet of our home. I am concerned that the noise levels and vibration are only going to increase during the construction and operational phase of this project.

Clearly, the neighborhood around the CREC site and Spectra Energy’s compressor station will become unlivable.  RIDOH suggests, if the plant were to be built, that Spectra Energy and Invenergy install sound proofing and buy “properties subject to noise levels that cause serious annoyance and/or sleep disruption.”

RIDOH’s opinion mentions that questions have also been raised as to whether National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) of the Environmental Protection Agency adequately protect public health. We, and probably others, indeed raised those questions—those and quite a few others—in this public comment.  The federal standards fail to account for short-lived pollution spikes which are typical for the operation of compressor stations and power plants. Nitrous oxides are are highly problematic in this respect. In addition, there are lots of other problems with “data” Invenergy’s submitted to the Energy Facility Siting Board.

Sure,  we could go ahead with the construction of the power plant and turn Burrillville into a major air pollution dump. Is that justified simply to create a couple of jobs and export electricity to the Northeast? Can we justify that simply because “no states have promulgated a short-term NO2 standard that is more stringent than the NAAQS and the process for adopting such standards is arduous?”

Interestingly, RIDOH is much more advanced in its understanding of the effect of the proposed power plant than the Rhode Island Office of Energy Resources. RIDOH states:

The burning of fossil fuels and the extraction of fossil fuels by “fracking” both contribute to climate change by emitting various greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, most notably carbon dioxide and methane. Both have the effect of harming the health of Rhode Islanders now and in the future.

Of course, most of the methane problem occurs long before the fracked gas reaches Rhode Island. Information in a recent presentation of Rhode Island’s Office of Energy Resources shows that the office explicitly ignores such effects.

OER fudges reality and ignores impact of escaping methane—see disclaimer in lower-left corner.
OER ignores impact of escaping methane—see disclaimer in lower-left corner

Not only does the office ignore basic science, it is also out of sync with federal guidelines on how the effects of greenhouse gas emissions on climate change should be taken into account.  Those guidelines, issued last week, explicitly call for:

  1. Taking into account reasonably foreseeable direct, indirect, and cumulative GHG emissions and climate effects;
  2. Consideration of reasonable alternatives and the short- and long-term effects and benefits in the analysis of alternatives and mitigation

Unless we change course, Rhode Island will be doing neither.  RIDOH writes:

We cannot measure the direct contribution of the proposed plant, or of any single facility, to public health by means of climate change.

Sure, but if we forge ahead without understanding what we do, we are in violation of the precautionary principle of  the Rio Declaration, an international treaty signed and ratified by the U.S. This is the supreme law of the land:

Principle 15

In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.

How about we cannot “measure the direct contribution” of the plant to global warming?  True enough, but we can easily estimate the impact of the national policy of which construction of the plant is part. Because natural gas is worse for the climate than oil and coal, the conclusion is simple: given the rate at which natural gas escapes unburned, and before the use of methane starts paying off, we’ll be dead, leaving an uninhabitable planet for future generations.

Not enough water for proposed power plant and future growth


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

On August 9, the Harrisville Fire District in its monthly meeting will discuss how to respond to Invenergy’s request for the supply of water for its proposed power plant in Burrillville, the Clear River Energy Center (CREC). For time and place follow this link.

Screen Shot 2016-08-08 at 9.47.53 PMFuture water shortages caused by CREC have been a topic of discussion and speculation for many months.  That indeed there is a serious risk is clear from information contained in documents obtained from several Rhode Island departments in response to Fossil Free RI‘s request made under the Access to Public Records Act.

As a reminder, the following is worth quoting from a previous post based on documents supplied by the RI Department of Health:

According to a presentation at a meeting about CREC attended by several state agencies, 0.18 MGD (million of gallons of water per day) will be left for growth if the power plant is built. June Swallow of the Center for Drinking Water Quality at the Rhode Island Department of Health attended the meeting. Her longhand notes show that Harrisville and Pascoag each are expected to need 0.12 MGD for growth. This suggests a deficit of 0.24 MGD – 0.18 MGD = 0.06 MGD.

Also documents supplied by the RI Department of Environmental Management raise concern. There is, for example, the following email exchange between Alisa Richardson of RIDEM and Ken Burke formerly of the Rhode Island Water Resources Board:

Thanks Alisa,
I think we should talk about having the Town acknowledge that with low flow conditions and high energy demands, that the Town is effectively pledging most (if not all) of its available water to this development. This local decision is theirs to make. Will someone from the Town also be at this meeting?
Thank you,
Kenneth J. Burke, P.E.MBA
General Manager/Treasurer

This email (my emphasis) appears on page 50 of this document.  There is more of interest, but the conclusion is the same; search the document for “Alisa” and “Ken.”

Also Stephanie Sloman, a retired environmental engineer who worked for a large electroplating plant in Massachusetts, weighed in. She submitted a thorough and detailed testimony to the Invenergy docket of the Energy Facility Siting Board.

Her conclusion is that, no matter how you look at it, there is not enough water for future growth in Burrillville and the other towns that draw from the same source.

Clearly, the RI departments of Environmental Management and Health, and the Water Resources Board are aware of the looming water supply problem. As Stephanie Sloman explains, anyone capable of elementary arithmetic can check this. As she points out, Invenergy is apparently is not one of those.

Recently, Gina Raimondo mentioned that she would withdraw her support for the CREC project if there were any issues. Of course, trouble with the water supply is only one of a myriad of issues each single one of which should suffice for her to make good on that promise.

Invenergy power plant facing water problems


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

2016-07-19 Burrillville MTBE Site Visit 009Invenergy’s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant in Burrillville is running into some water problems. The Pascoag Utility District, at a special meeting called by board chair Al Palmisciano for August 19, will decide for or against allowing Invenergy to access well 3A, which is closed by court order due to MTBE contamination.

A decision in Invenergy’s favor is by no means certain. In fact, Invenergy already seems to be searching for other options. On August 9 the Harrisville Fire District is taking up Invenergy’s, “inquiry as to whether and under what conditions Harrisville would be willing to consider developing and constructing a well and distribution means to supply water to the power plant at Invenergy’s expense.” Invenergy is also asking Harrisville to “authorize such additional pump and water testing and legal research as is necessary to determine the yield, viability and estimated cost of developing a well on the Victory Highway site and constructing an appropriate means of distribution at Invenergy’s expense.”

The Harrisville meeting is taking place at a time that overlaps with the RI Department of Health (RIDOH)’s public commentary hearing at the Burrillville High School, part of the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB)’s process of determining the fate of the power plant. This will have the effect of dividing the potential audience, but over the last few weeks water has become a very big issue in northern Rhode Island because the area is experiencing a severe drought, with rainfall five inches below average.

Aquifers and wells are feeling the effect of the lack of rainfall. Invenergy plans to use an average of 100,000 gallons of water a day to cool their plant, and almost a million gallons a day when burning oil. This is in addition to the 4 million gallons of water used to cool Burillville’s existing power plant, Ocean State Power. This strain on the area’s water supply may be lead to even more severe water shortages in the area. At the very least, it will forestall the possibility of future growth in the area.

Even if both Harrisville and Pascoag deny Invenergy their water, it doesn’t necessarily put an end to the company’s plans. Water could be imported from over state lines, and of course there is always the option used by Ocean State Power. According to a video by Paul Roselli of the Burrillville Land Trust and Burrillville resident Norman Derjarlais, the company seems to be trucking in the water from Western Sand & Gravel, a nearby superfund site, in leaking trucks. From 1975-1979 about 12 acres of this area was used for the disposal of liquid waste, including chemicals and septic waste.

You can watch the video below.

Patreon

Audubon Society and Nature Conservancy oppose Burrillville power plant


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Audubon Society of Rhode Island logoThe Audubon Society of Rhode Island and the Nature Conservancy in Rhode Island have released statements in opposition to Invenergy‘s $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant proposed for Burrillville.

Saying that its “mission is to protect birds, other wildlife and their habitat through conservation, education and advocacy for the benefit of people and all living things, the Audubon Society of Rhode Island has come out in opposition to “the proposed 900MW power plant in Burrillville, Rhode Island because it will disturb the integrity of western Rhode Island’s forested habitats and wildlife corridors and because the plant undermines Rhode Island’s ability to achieve greenhouse gas reduction goals set in the 2014 Resilient Rhode Island Act.

“Rhode Island’s Executive Climate Change Coordinating Council (EC4) is charged with developing a plan for achieving the Resilient Rhode Island Act’s greenhouse gas reduction goals,” says the press release, “Audubon requests that the plan examine opportunities for meeting energy demand through efficiency and expanded renewable energy. This analysis should be completed before the state builds the new Invenrgy facility.”

Meanwhile, the Nature Conservancy in Rhode Island has also issued a statement in opposition to the power plant, saying, “Invenergy’s proposed 900MW power plant for Burrillville will make it more difficult for Rhode Island to achieve its newly enacted greenhouse gas reduction targets; it has not been proven necessary to meet energy needs; and it will pose unacceptable environmental risks to habitats and plant and animal species.”

“The Nature Conservancy in Rhode Island supports a comprehensive approach to energy development that considers energy conservation, renewable energy, and other alternatives to fossil fuels,” says their press release, “The Conservancy urges the state to undertake an independent assessment of its projected energy needs, within the context of the larger region’s energy needs, and to develop a strategy to meet those projections before committing to a new large-scale power plant.”

TNC – RI Logo

 


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387