Disruption and evolution at energy meeting


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

2016-09-15 ISON-NE PVD 003The Consumer Liaison Group (CLG) Meeting happens four times a year and its a chance for ISO-NE to exchange information with electricity consumers in New England. ISO-NE is the group that regulates our electricity markets and keeps the lights on by coordinating electricity generation and transmission. They run billion dollar markets and interact with companies like Spectra Energy, Invenergy, National Grid and Deepwater Wind. Pretty much every aspect of the process of getting electricity to your television is touched upon by ISO-NE in some way.

2016-09-15 ISON-NE PVD 002The latest meeting of the CLG, in Providence on Thursday, featured a panel discussion with representatives from the four companies mentioned above. The panel was pulled together with the help of Douglas Gablinske, executive director of The Energy Council of Rhode Island (TEC-RI) an advocacy group for energy company concerns. Readers of RI Future may remember that Gablinske was a vocal opponent of Cale Keable’s bill to reform the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB).  He was also the only speaker at the RI Public Utilities Commission (RIPUC) to speak in favor of the pipeline tariff.

Gablinske surprised me by asking if I knew about any planned protests or disruptions. I said I didn’t. He asked me specifically about the FANG Collective. I had no idea of what plans they have, if any, I said. Then Gablinske said that he noticed Mary Pendergast on the list of people who had signed up to attend. Pendergast was sitting in the room, and he soon went over to introduce himself to her.

2016-09-15 ISON-NE PVD 001
As the meeting ended, protesters unfurled a banner

During the course of the presentation there was a disruption. As Invenergy’s John Niland gave his presentation to the room, Mary Pendergast stood and display a small sign that said, “No fracked gas Power plant.” Her protest was silent but it did seem to throw Niland off a bit, as his delivery seemed somewhat distracted.

It was during the third presentation that the disruptions became more pronounced. As Richard Kruse, vice president at Spectra Energy spoke glowingly about the need for bigger and better pipelines in our fracked gas infrastructure future, Kathy Martley of BASE (Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion), Keith Clougherty of the FANG Collective and Sally Mendzela stood up.

“Spectra Energy, Energy for Death,” said Martley as I headed for my camera. “Say no to Invenergy and tell Invenergy to go home,” Martley continued.

As the protest continued, Gablinske took the podium and said, “You have a right to be here but not be disruptive” as Clougherty continued to speak.

Lennette Boiselle, an ally of Geblinske and a lobbyist for the Northern Rhode Island Chamber of Commerce got up and left the room, presumably in search of security. Readers might remember Boiselle as the person arguing against democracy at the public comment hearing concerning Cale Keable’s EFSB bill.

“The political correctness, of not allowing other people to talk is sweeping through this country,” said Geblinske, “It’s an incorrect assumption, this gentlemen has the right to speak…”

“We’ve been listening to you our whole lives, Pal,” interrupted Sally Mendzela.

Gablinske ultimately offered to set up a forum where “both sides” could be heard but it is unknown if this will actually happen. The protesters took their seats, no one was ejected from the forum, and Kruse finished his talk.

Amazingly, though, that wasn’t the end. During a brief question and answer period at the end of the presentations, Gablinske called on Clougherty to ask a question!

“I would ask for a question, not a speech or a statement,” said Gablinske, when he realized who he had called upon.

Clougherty then asked Niland, Kruse and Bill Malee, a National Grid VP, “Do your companies have any money set aside for restitution for the millions of people who are going to be displaced and killed by the infrastructure projects you all are proposing?”

There is no good answer representatives from these companies can give, yet Niland attempted one. As expected, it was not good.

I found the most interesting talk of the day came from Mary LouiseWeezieNuara, External Affairs Representative for ISO-NE.

“The region’s competitive wholesale electricity markets are really designed to maintain reliability through the selection of the most economically efficient set of resources,” said Nuara, but the states “have environmental and renewable energy goals that are beyond the objectives of the wholesale electricity markets.”

What’s happening is that states are setting goals to increase renewables and reduce greenhouse gas emissions (like the goals set out in ResilientRI, but all the New England states have some version of this idea.) ISO-NE is designed to deliver energy as reliably and cheaply as possible. As a market, it cannot deliver renewables or reduce emissions unless those options are cheaper and cleaner. In August, NEPOOL (which represents the interest of the New England states when dealing with ISO-NE)  began looking into how to adjust wholesale electricity markets to accommodate the goals of the states. It is NEPOOL’s goal to develop a “framework document” by December 2 to provide guidance to ISO-NE regarding potential changes. (A kind of advisory opinion, if you will.)

What makes this interesting, to my mind, is that if ISO-NE starts taking the climate change concerns of the states into account, plants like the one Invenergy is planning for Burrillville will have a harder time selling their energy into the markets.

ISO-NE is a little over a decade old, but already it’s finding that its systems are in need of being updated over concerns of climate change. By contrast, the EFSB here in Rhode Island was established thirty years ago, in 1986. The RI General Assembly has shown little inclination towards revising the EFSB’s mandate in lieu of climate change.

Below please find all the video from the CLg meeting except for the closing comments.

Rebecca Tepper, chair of the CLG Coordinating Committee and chief of the Energy & Telecommunications Division of the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office introduced keynote speaker Rhode Island General Treasurer Seth Magaziner.

Douglas Gablinske, executive director, The Energy Council of Rhode Island

Jeffrey Grybowski, chief executive officer, Deepwater Wind

John Niland, director of business development, Invenergy

Richard Kruse, vice president and regulatory & FERC compliance officer for Spectra Energy

Bill Malee, vice president of regulatory affairs, for National Grid

ISO-NE Q&A

Patreon

Senator Whitehouse is fighting ‘dark money’ in Washington


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

2016-09-06 Dark Money 006Saying that fighting dark money in politics is his “patriotic duty,” Senator Sheldon Whitehouse sat next to Congressmembers David Cicilline and James Langevin in a “roundtable discussion” to highlight his work on the DISCLOSE Act, introduced by the Senator in June, which would “require disclosure of donations greater than $10,000 to organizations spending at least $10,000 in an election.”

“The American people want and deserve accountability in their elections,” said Whitehouse, “Unchecked secret corporate spending has tipped the scales of power away from ordinary Americans and in favor of big special interests. If Congress is going to make meaningful progress in the months and years ahead on important issues that matter to Rhode Islanders like addressing climate change, reforming our broken campaign finance system is the first step.”

Whitehouse’s DISCLOSE Act, which has been supported by Langevin and Cicilline in the U.S. House of Representatives, is part of the “We the People” legislative package to deal with secret corporate political spending, lobbyist influence, the revolving door, and other facets of the campaign finance system. Whitehouse touted the suite of legislation as a solution to the corporate spending blocking meaningful legislative action on issues like ensuring economic security for the middle class and addressing climate change.

It seems that Whitehouse mentioned climate change and chose Save the Bay’s headquarters in Providence as the location of his round table discussion because, as the Senator said in response to Meghan Kallman, chair of the RI Sierra Club, “I think it’s pretty safe to say, that at a national level, the climate battle is the campaign finance battle. They’re totally married together into one thing.”

2016-09-06 Dark Money 003Notably, there were protesters outside Save the Bay holding signs reminding their elected representatives about both Invenergy’s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant and National Grid’s proposed LNG liquefaction facility for Fields Point in the Port of Providence, a stone’s throw away. They were there to remind elected officials that their jobs in Washington do not absolve them from taking positions on local issues. None of the elected leaders in the room, aside from State Senator Juan Pichardo, who has publicly taken a stand against the LNG plant in Providence, have thrown their considerable political weight behind the opposition to these projects.

“This is a national package, [but] many many many issues are local,” said Kallman, “We’re watching Dakota. We’re watching Burrillville. We’re watching Fields Point… We have something of a disconnect between what’s happening on the national level and where the front line battles are being fought.”

2016-09-06 Dark Money 004The influence of corporate spending on elections since the 2010 Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court is a major concern to all who attended the event. Citizens United unleashed a previously restricted torrent of special interest money into the political system.  More than $1.5 billion in unlimited contributions, including more than $500 million in secret contributions, have been poured into federal elections since the decision was issued.

“It didn’t take long after Citizens United for secret money has find its way to the shores of Rhode Island,” said John Marion, Executive Director of Common Cause Rhode Island. “We know that Rhode Islanders don’t want unlimited undisclosed money in our elections. We are fortunate to have a congressional delegation that has taken this issue seriously and has offered real solutions for the problems posed by big money in our politics.”

“Senator Whitehouse is a national leader fighting to make our elections and government work for everyday people again through the We the People Act,” said Aquene Freechild, campaign co-director of Public Citizen‘s Democracy Is For People Campaign. “He’s pushing the current congressional majority to snap out of their campaign cash-induced paralysis and stand up to the tiny but influential donor class: by overturning Citizens United, disclosing all spending in elections, and slamming shut the revolving door that transforms public servants into corporate shills.”

Also in attendance at the roundtable discussion were RI Secretary of State Nellie Gorbea, RI State Representative Art Handy, state director of Clean Water Action Jonathan Berard, Save the Bay’s Topher Hamblett and Dean Michael J. Yelnosky of the Roger Williams University School of Law. You can watch the rest of the video from the event below.

2016-09-06 Dark Money 0052016-09-06 Dark Money 001

Patreon

Environmentalists hail Elorza’s stance on LNG


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

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 013The Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) “is thrilled that Mayor Jorge Elorza listened to the community and is taking a strong stand against fracking, climate change, and LNG production in Providence.”

The EJLRI statement comes in response to Elorza’s announcement that he opposes National Grid‘s proposed LNG liquefaction facility to be located at Fields Point in the Port of Providence.

State Representative Aaron Regunberg, who represents the 4th district in Providence, also hailed the mayor’s announcement. “I am so glad the mayor has joined our opposition to this terrible proposal. It shows the LNG facility is not a done deal. This is a fight we can win, and so it is a fight we must win. Now it’s time for our federal delegation, who I know are all committed to fighting climate change, to put that commitment into practice here in Providence and join our push for #NoLNGinPVD!”

EJLRI echoed Regunberg’s call for more state elected officials to join them in the fight against expanding LNG infrastructure in Rhode Island. “We are very thankful for the support and climate leadership from our mayor and state legislators, and we now call on our federal congressional delegation and Governor Gina Raimondo to join us and stop National Grid’s plans to liquefy and export fracked gas from Providence.”

Monica Huertas, a leader in the #NoLNGinPVD campaign, responded to the news from the mayor’s office by saying “As a resident of the Washington Park neighborhood, I am so thankful for Mayor Elorza to have so willingly come out against ‘LNG.’ We can make a difference in the smallest state and as residents of the capital city we can take the lead on dismantling the old ways of doing things.  This shows that he is on the right side of history. After we have won the battle for clean energy, we can look back at this key moment in Providence and be proud that we fought together.”

Meghan Kallman, Chair of the RI Sierra Club said, “The Sierra Club is pleased with Mayor Elorza’s statement of opposition to the proposed LNG facility in Providence. Climate change is one of the gravest threats that our community faces. Infrastructure such as this liquefaction plant, that locks us into further consumption of fossil fuels, is a bad choice for our future. Further, its proposed location would imperil some of the most vulnerable residents of Providence. We are pleased that Mayor Elorza has listened to the concerns of the community and is opposing this wrongheaded proposal.”

“We have to move to renewable energy,” said Sam Bell, executive director of the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats (RIPDA). “Certain machine politicians may not believe we need to act to stop climate change, but our state cannot afford not to act. Elorza giving in to the people of Providence and supporting the NO LNG in PVD movement is a big win.”

The EJLRI statement concludes, “The decision to approve or reject National Grid’s proposal is still under fast-track review and likely approval in the Washington DC offices of FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  Governor Raimondo, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Congressman David Cicilline, and other elected officials need to join their colleagues in Providence and make it clear that there can be no more dangerous fracked gas expansion projects in Providence, or anywhere in the state.  We stand by no fracked gas LNG in Providence, no fracked gas power plant in Burrillville, and no fracked gas Access Northeast expansion of the pipeline, compressor station, and additional LNG production.

“Rhode Island is making international news as a climate change leader, and we need to be clear that real climate leaders reject fracking and support a rapid and Just Transition to a sustainable future that centers the needs of workers and frontline communities.”

Patreon

Sierra Club seeks clarification from Elorza on LNG statement


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

2016-06-08 NO LNG 003The Rhode Island Sierra Club has responded to Mayor Jorge Elorza‘s statement on National Grid‘s proposed liquefaction project for Field’s Point in the Port of Providence.

“The Rhode Island Sierra Club is glad the Mayor has publicly agreed to not offer any subsidies to National Grid related to the LNG liquefaction project in Fields Point. We would however urge him to clarify whether his definition of subsidy also includes Tax Stabilization Agreements and if it doesn’t, we would would ask him to take the same strong stance against those type of subsidies and end TSA negotiations immediately.

“While Elorza is correct in saying the decision will ultimately be made by FERC, we would argue his assertion, ‘the city will have little input into that decision’ is false. The mayor can’t abdicate his responsibility on this. Local officials can be hugely influential on Federal decisions. An outcry from public officials immensely helped in 2005 when a similar project was ultimately denied.  Not sending in a letter, like the one nine Providence legislators sent to FERC last week, is a statement and a betrayal of his rhetoric on climate change.

“At the absolute minimum, we would ask the mayor to join the thousands of residents, and many businesses, environmental, community and religious organizations in signing the NoLNGinPVD campaign’s petition letter to FERC.

“The mayor also needs to hold the City Council accountable and ask them to follow through on their resolution to provide wide-scale public involvement, on which no action has been taken.   They resolved to host meetings between National Grid, Dept. of Health, DEM, Coastal Resource Management Corporation and city residents, and city residents deserve nothing less.”

Patreon

Elorza: No city support for Grid’s LNG project


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
2015-11-30-World-AIDS-Day-006-Jorge-Elorza-600x507 (1)
Jorge Elorza

Providence Mayor Jorge Elorza issued a statement affirming his opposition to public subsidies for National Grid‘s proposed liquefaction facility at Field’s Point in the Port of Providence.

“The City of Providence has a long standing commitment to sustainability that rivals top cities nationally,” said Emily Crowell, press secretary for Mayor Elorza, “With a goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2050, we are committed to moving away from fossil fuels and helping combat the global climate crisis. Ultimately, the decision on the LNG plant will be up to the federal government, however the City will provide no subsidies if the project moves forward.” [Emphasis added]

Elorza was strongly encouraged by the Rhode Island Sierra Club to come out against National Grid’s project. Their statement notes that the final decision will be made by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and that the city will have little input into that decision.

2016-06-08 NO LNG 009

Patreon

Sierra Club statement on National Grid LNG proposal


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

RI Sierra Club Logo QuahogThe Rhode Island Sierra Club strongly praises the bold climate leadership of the nine Providence legislators who publicly expressed their opposition to National Grid’s proposal for a $180 million fracked gas liquefaction facility at Fields Point in the Port of Providence.

Last week, Providence State Representatives Aaron Regunberg, Joe Almeida, Grace Diaz, John Lombardi, Chris Blazejewski and Edie Ajello, along with Providence State Senators Juan Pichardo, Gayle Goldin and Harold Metts submitted a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) describing their deep concerns with National Grid’s proposal. We wholeheartedly agree with their statement that this project represents a boondoggle for ratepayers, an unjustifiable safety risk for the local community, and the kind of unacceptable doubling down on fossil fuel infrastructure that will guarantee we blow past our legally mandated emission reduction goals. And we are proud to see so many legislative leaders refusing to condemn our beautiful state to a future of climate catastrophe.

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 013Unfortunately, the same can not be said of Providence Mayor Jorge Elorza. Rather than making any effort to live up to his rhetoric on climate change, Mayor Elorza has chosen to partner with National Grid and help them advance their proposal with tacit support and active negotiations for a Tax Stabilization Agreement to smooth out the utility’s tax payments over time.

Stopping climate change is the moral crisis of our time – and it will only be possible if we end these vast investments in new fossil fuel infrastructure that guarantee our addiction to fossil fuels continues past our planet’s point of no return. We all need to join in this fight. Rhode Island Sierra Club pledges our support for elected officials who take this moral imperative seriously, like the nine Providence legislators who came out in opposition to the LNG proposal last week. And we condemn in the strongest possible terms the cowardice of self-proclaimed climate leaders who choose to give in to the fossil fuel industry. Mayor Elorza, your actions speak much louder than your words – please, do the right thing and join your legislative delegation in standing up for Providence’s current and future citizens.

It takes a village to clean Woonasquatucket River

WoonasquatucketWhen the Providence Police Department, the Woonasquatucket River Greenway Project, the Olneyville Housing Corporation, and the community joined forces, it was all for the love of a river. The banks of the Woonasquatucket were strewn with trash, the soil was toxic from the mill industry of a bygone era, the underused and overgrown area was a perfect invitation for drug deals and other nefarious activity.

And the children of this community, which is rich with diversity and hardworking folks trying to provide safe recreational opportunities for youth, were getting the short end of the environmental stick. It isn’t an unusual situation. But truth be told, kids and adults everywhere love nature whether in cities, suburbs or the country, whether poor or well-to-do if given an opportunity to revel in its beauty.

When the Woonasquatucket restoration began, everyone knew it was not going to be an easy job. But the benefits of the eventual payoff provided a strong incentive.

The scene then wasn’t pretty, and the work ahead was hard. The area needed to be rid of highly contaminated soil, a toxic legacy of the industrial past, new soil put in, and old soil capped to prevent exposure to lingering pollutants. The area was strewn with trash and debris that required removal by heavy manual labor.

Plantings of trees, shrubs and gardens went on unnoticed at first, until a local community group took root and started a bike shop next to a blooming community garden. All of these were small but critical steps to returning health to the river and the surrounding community.

These actions were informed by the broken window theory, which proposes that lower levels of disorder in a community lead to higher and higher levels of disorder.

Trash signals a lack of concern for residents and leads to degraded care for property, which leads to greater levels of devaluing the community and higher-level crimes. Olneyville was an example of this theory in action. Through it all ran the Woonasquatucket River, a forgotten treasure that once attracted the Huck Finn in all of us.

Once community-minded partners got together and restored the riverbanks as a haven for recreation, there arrived a burgeoning volunteer force ready to maintain it. Over 1,300 volunteers many of them local residents lent a helping hand last year alone. Today, there are bike programs, educational activities, art competitions, and Riverside Park. The area once buried beneath pollution and crime is an intergenerational gathering point for healthy play, conversation and relaxation. Criminal activity has dropped sharply and the community, its housing and environmental agencies, and the police are partners in an urban success story where a winding river now flows past peaceful banks on its way to Narragansett Bay.

The success of the Woonasquatucket River and neighborhood restoration project was featured in the recently released 2016 Watershed Counts Report, an annual update on the health of the bi-state Narragansett Bay Watershed that guides future actions. This case study focused on how the collaborative work of individuals, communities, private organizations, and state and federal authorities is critical to the protection of Narragansett Bay, one of New England’s greatest natural and economic resources.

Clean environments that support the love of nature are ubiquitous among people of every background, and should be central to uplifting efforts as dedicated citizens, advocacy groups and local governments work with communities seeking to calm troubled waters throughout the nation.

The Toxic Tour of South Providence


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
Sherrie Anne Andre, with National Grid behind her.
Sherrie Anne Andre, with National Grid behind her.

South Providence, at the port, is one of the heaviest concentrations of toxic chemical storage in New England, and not coincidentally, those who live in the area suffer the highest rates of asthma. Sherrie Anne Andre of the FANG Collective and Julian Rodríguez-Drix of the Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island lead a tour of over 60 people, including Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein, along Allens Avenue, pointing out some of the worst polluters in our state.

The Rhode Island Recycled Metals facility was the first stop. In 2015 the US Coast Guard revealed that the site was operating without proper permits. As a result the facility was not in compliance with laws regarding oil spillage and storm water run-off. In general, recycling is a good and positive thing. But when done without concern for the health and safety of residents and the environment, the losses can outweigh the gains.

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 015
The tour passes through Motiva

Motiva Enterprises LLC occupies both sides of Allens Avenue. Chemical piping actually runs underneath the road. Motiva is a joint venture between Saudi Aramco and Shell Oil. Here in Providence the facility is the largest of many fuel terminals in the port and a major importer of petroleum products. It receives regular shipments via tanker ship and exports via truck. The Port of Providence is the entry point for the majority of fuels that power southern New England. In 2014 Motiva managed 34,425 pounds of toxic waste products. Over 1000 pounds of toxic waste was emitted into the air, making Motiva the largest air emitter in the City of Providence.

Ethanol trains come through the port every week. Known as “bomb trains” elsewhere in the United States, similar trains were banned in Boston because of safety and toxic concerns. The ethanol is mixed at the Motiva facility and transported out.

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 008
Rhode Island Recycled Metals

Univar is the largest facility in the area. It is a wholesale chemical distributor and chlorine manufacturer. As far as is known, though Univar produces chemicals used in fracking, they are not manufactured or stored in Rhode Island. There are 3.3 million pounds of toxic chemicals stored at the Univar facility. It is the most dangerous facility in all of Rhode Island, with a 14 mile hazard radius. Stored here are 1.4 million pounds of chlorine gas, 1.2 million pounds of anhydrous ammonia, 626,400 pounds of ammonium and 35,000 pounds of formaldehyde. each one requires a chemical risk assessment plan from the Environmental Protection Agency.

National Grid wants to upgrade its facilities at the Port of Providence by installing a liquefaction plant on the premises. This would allow the company to supercool LNG so that it becomes more compact, allowing the company to store much more LNG on the premises. Note that LNG is fracked methane, imported through pipelines to the facility. These pipelines, owned by Spectra Energy, run through Burrillville, through Cumberland, and across the bay from East Providence.

Jill Stein
Jill Stein

The existing storage tank is filled by truck. It takes about 2600 trucks to fill the 24.2 million gallon tank, said Andre.

The proposed LNG liquefaction facility will cost $180 million. These costs will most likely be passed on to consumers. The facility will be located between National Grid’s existing storage tank and the Univar facility. The energy required to power the liquefaction is equivalent to half of the energy generated by Deepwater Wind, the first offshore wind farm in the United States, presently under construction off the coast of Rhode Island.

One more concern: National Grid is located on the former site of a manufactured gas plant. The soil in the area is soaked with chemicals from when a company squeezed gas from coal, a toxic process that permanently contaminated the land. The RI Department of Environmental Management has records of dozens of other leaking, underground tanks in this area. “The soil we are walking on is known to be toxic,” said Rodríguez-Drix.

On the National Grid site, some of the chemical contaminants have been capped with the intention of keeping the contamination from further spreading, but this capping will be disturbed when construction begins, allowing the wind to carry the toxins into the air and into the bay for the two years of construction.

Below is video of the tour:

Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein attended the Toxic Tour, and talked about the Green New Deal.

Raymond Two-Hawks spoke about the aboriginal response to the continued denigration of his ancestral lands.

Laura Perez is running for House District 11 against incumbent state Representative Grace Diaz.

Sheila Calderone is a resident of South providence and a member of the Environmental Justice League who suspects that illnesses she has suffered are a result of the pollutants she has been exposed to while growing up in the area.

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 001

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 002

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 003

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 004
Laura Perez

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 005

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 006

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 007

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 008

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 010

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 011

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 012

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 013

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 014

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 016

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 017

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 018
Julian Rodríguez-Drix

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 020

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 021
Raymond Two-Hawks
2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 022
Sheila Calderone

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 023

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 025
Jill Stein

Patreon

PVD City Council passes Yurdin’s Fields Point expansion review resolution unanimously


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
Seth Yurdin
Seth Yurdin

The Providence City Council voted unanimously to approve Councillor Seth Yurdin’s resolution to “require a thorough review of” the “proposed Fields Point Liquefaction Facility… and a Comprehensive Public Participation Plan.”

“This is a very important neighborhood issue,” said Yurdin to the City Council ahead of the resolution’s passage, “it’s a social justice issue, its about treating all our residents fairly. There are significant health issues that have been raised [and] safety concerns, related to locating this facility in proximity to a residential neighborhood.”

The process of approving National Grid’s proposed liquefaction facility at Fields Point is in the hands of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), but as Yurdin noted in his comments before the City Council last night, there has not been much room made for public input into the plan. Part of Yurdin’s resolution calls for “public forums in multiple neighborhood locations” and “shall require representatives of the project site owner [National Grid, presumably] to attend to answer questions and address concerns, as well as require that representatives from Rhode Island Department of Health, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, and the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Corporation participate in the public forums.”

The resolution also calls for:

  • An “environmental impact analysis include potential disaster scenarios, evacuation plans, and casualties within a two-mile radius of the project site, as well as evaluates the concentration of other facilities in the area that may impact public health and safety in the case of a disaster.”
  • That the review “include studies of diesel truck traffic between I-95 and the port area on a daily, monthly, and annual basis, and the estimated particulate matter released into the air as a result of such traffic.”
  • That the “City Council support the Rhode Island Department of Health request that a Risk Management Plan be required.”
  • That the “City of Providence will ensure compliance with the highest standards of environmental and health protocols, and will address, to the extent allowed by law, environmental, safety, and health concerns associated with this project.”

Watching the resolution pass were several members of the Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island, who were quite pleased with the City Council’s resolution.

EJLeague

Though this resolution by itself will not resolve the issues surrounding the LNG expansion at Fields Point, it will bring much needed attention and public input to the project, allowing a robust discussion of the future of fossil fuels in Rhode Island at a time when the fate of our species is being decided by what we do next.

Read the Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island white paper on National Grid’s plan here:

●  Flawed Proposal: Background info on National Grid’s unnecessary project

●  Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

●  Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues

●  Climate Change: it causes climate change and is at risk from climate impacts

●  Public Health: health disparities and impacts on health care institutions

●  Economic Inequality: high cost project that will cause economic damage

●  Alternatives and Solutions: Strategies for Climate Justice & a Just Transition

Patreon

NORAD celebration private—for pooh-bahs only


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

Governor Gina Raimondo’s office issued a press release with this title: “State, Congressional Leaders Hail 6th Consecutive Record Breaking Year for Auto Imports at Quonset’s Port of Davisville.” This was the reason for today’s celebration at North Atlantic Distribution, Inc. (NORAD) attended at Quonset by the governor and our congressional delegation.

CcuynzSW4AMu7pw

As part of the “FANG needs YOU: To protest Governor Raimondo to confront Governor Raimondo” campaign, I went to the NORAD event to confront our governor about her support for fossil fuels.

IMG_2886

When the governor passed, I asked her about the cost of the proposed gigawatt, fossil-fuel fired plant in Burrillville, aka the Clear River en Energy Center.  Holding up my sign, I said: “Nice jobs program, Governor, $2.3 million per job.  How do you justify that?”  Even from within six feet, she did nor see nor hear a thing!

We seem to have a trend here, as observed by Lorraine Savard, who staged a respectful bird-dogging presence at the Cherry Blossom event at the State House earlier the same day. Referring to Governor Raimondo, Lorraine observed: “She is either ignoring me or she is afraid to look me in the eye.”

You’d expect that Governor Raimondo has friends who would be quite able to invest the $2.3 million for a comfortable early retirement of  the 300 workers who might benefit from the construction without creating a sacrifice zone.  But I’m loosing my thread.

I had the pleasure to exchange a couple of words with our senators and representatives. When I asked Congressman Cicilline if he was planning to join us in opposing the power plant, he replied that Burrillville was not his district. True enough, but not all that gutsy.  Fortunately, he agreed with me when I replied that it was not my district either, but my world.

The NORAD celebration made twitter buzz; @QuonsetRI:

@jimlangevin: I never get tired of coming down to @QuonsetRI for these great announcements

One of Representative Langevin’s staff told me, when I asked his boss about Burrillville: “This is a different event, Peter.”  I have to sleep on that one.

Unfortunately, Mike Miranda, private owner of NORAD, did get tired with me and my off-topic message.  He asked me to leave the event, which he referred to as private.  The press was there and my impression was that the public was invited, but I left.  Do you blame me when I wonder how much state and federal money is spent on shuttling our leadership to and from these “private” events?

Mike Miranda of NORAD
Mike Miranda of NORAD

One final tweet from @QuonsetRI:

Mike Miranda, CEO & Pres. of NORAD: We’re likely only port in country w/ 7 diffrnt manufacturers snding cars here

Undoubtedly, what you see in the picture are all electric cars that soon will run on electric power generated by Invenergy’s fracked-gas power plant in Burrillville.   We call those “zero-emission” emission vehicles  and that’s how we implement the Paris Accord and the #CleanPowerPlan.  Unfortunately, not only here in Rhode Island.
Screen Shot 2016-03-04 at 2.44.41 PM

Enviro group support for Burrillville power plant cited by Whitehouse does not exist


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
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse at Forward on Climate rally

2015-12-07 FANG BASE Raimondo Whitehouse 008Senator Whitehouse supports the new gas powered energy plant in Burrillville, but the support he cites for his position from environmental groups doesn’t exist.

In a short interview with Ted Nesi, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, widely considered to be the most environmentally conscious member of the US Senate, threw his support behind Invenergy’s Clear River Energy Center in Burrillville, a power plant to be run on fracked methane.

Whitehouse said, “Rhode Island and a large part of Southern New England are on the wrong side of a couple of gas pipeline choke points, with the result that at certain times costs soar in Rhode Island because the choke point creates a supply-demand imbalance which causes prices to soar, and in other states that’s not happening.

2015-12-07 FANG BASE Raimondo Whitehouse 015“I don’t think it’s valuable from Rhode Island’s perspective to make Rhode Islanders pay high winter gas prices when it doesn’t change the overall complexion of the gas market. So I am not objecting to that particular plant, because it’s a choke point issue.”

When Nesi asked Whitehouse if he’s received any blowback  for his refusal to oppose the plant, Whitehouse said,  “Some. There’s a small group of people who would like to have me change my position.

“From the larger environmental movement – the Save the Bays and the League of Conservation Voters and the Nature Conservancies and all that – there’s no blowback whatsoever. They understand the difference between the national and the local concern.”

Peter Nightingale, second from left, was arrested at Sheldon Whitehouse's office.
Peter Nightingale, second from left, was arrested at Sheldon Whitehouse’s office.

So do Save the Bay and the League of Conservation Voters (LCV) really support Whitehouse’s position on the new Burrillville power plant as the Senator implies?

Not quite.

I asked both Save the Bay and the League of Conservation Voters for comments on what Whitehouse said. Neither group came close to backing the Senator up.

Seth Stein, National Press Secretary for the League of Conservation Voters, said, “LCV does not have an RI state league partner. We focus on Federal policy, and do not generally weigh in on local politics in states where we do not have a state league.”

Students from Brown and URI with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse at the People's Climate March
Students from Brown and URI with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse at the People’s Climate March

Topher Hamblett, director of policy at Save the Bay, said, “Save The Bay has not taken a position on the project (we’re focused on a host of Bay issues). On development projects like this we usually evaluate potential impacts to water resources, wetland systems and Bay/coastal eco-sytsems.”

Save the Bay’s executive director Jonathan Stone wrote, “Save the Bay has not taken a position on the plant. On energy development proposals like this we always evaluate impacts on water quality, wetlands habitat, public access, and other impacts on the health of the Bay and coastal Rhode Island.”

Burrillville is not positioned near the Bay.

sheldonwhitehouseGiven that two of the three groups that Whitehouse named have no position on the project, and the third group, “the Nature Conservancies and all that” doesn’t specify any particular agency, it appears that Whitehouse’s answer was intended to minimize the importance of local opposition to the power plant, not honestly appraise the support for natural gas infrastructure expansion that exists in the wider environmental community.

One nature conservancy that does have a strong position on Invenergy’s plans is one that will be directly impacted by the plant. The Burrillville Land Trust, has been granted intervenor status in the process to determine the power plant’s fate and has filed a motion to shut the application process down.

So none of the environmental groups that Whitehouse implied would support him, do. Instead, we have wide ranging opposition to the plant from a host of groups that understand what is at stake in allowing Rhode Island to continue to depend on fossil fuels for its energy.

The Conservation Law Foundation, the Burrillville Land Trust, Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion  (BASE), Fighting Against Natural Gas (FANG), Fossil Free RI, Rhode Island Chapter of the Sierra Club, the Green Party of RI, Occupy Providence and the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats have all come out against the plant.

In his interview with Nesi, Whitehouse cavalierly dismissed the concerns of local environmental groups, and could name no environmental groups that support his position.

If Whitehouse is truly the Senate’s climate champion, we are all in serious trouble.

Patreon

Alternatives and Solutions: Strategies for Climate Justice and a Just Transition


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

The Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) has created a brilliant position paper, “National Grid’s Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Liquefaction Facility: Toxic Hazards in the Port Providence: Proposals for a Just Transition” that eviscerates National Grid‘s plans to build a new liquefaction facility for fracked LNG at Fields Point in South Providence. Over the next few days RI Future will be presenting the EJLRI’s position paper in its entirety.

Solutions and Alternatives

The information presented in the previous posts show that in addition to not being necessary, National Grid’s proposed LNG Liquefaction Facility would be dangerous and would contribute to existing environmental racism. LNG Liquefaction is not needed in Rhode Island in general, and it certainly should not be placed in the most toxic and most impoverished part of the state.

The immediate solution is to stop this facility from being built. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) needs to deny National Grid LNG LLC’s application, and the RI Department of Environmental Management (RI DEM) and RI Coastal Resources Management Council (RI CRMC) need to deny the state level permits.

That being said, ­ the proposed liquefaction facility is not the only problem outlined in this position paper. Even without the added significant risks of the liquefaction facility, the existing LNG storage tank, the Motiva oil terminal, the Univar chemical plant, the Enterprise LPG terminal, and other facilities in the area all pose significant environmental health hazards, and create the overall context of environmental racism. Toxic and hazardous facilities are dangerous for communities and dangerous for workers. Yet families are dependent on them for jobs, municipalities are dependent on them for tax income, and the way our socio­economic system is set up we are all collectively dependent on the products they produce. Regardless of our dependency, the reality of climate science is that the fossil fuel / petrochemical industry is rapidly pushing our planet past its limits, producing present and future catastrophic impacts, and making people sick, ­especially front-line communities of color and indigenous communities. Our dependency on these industries is literally killing us.

As an organization, the EJ League is interested in big­ picture, long­ term, real solutions to interlocking crises that impact communities of color, marginalized communities, and planetary ecosystems. We are members of three national coalitions of grassroots, membership ­based organizations: Right to the City, Grassroots Global Justice, and Climate Justice Alliance. Together, and lead by our members and our communities, we are developing and sharing solutions that address these intersecting crises from the grassroots. These community­ based solutions are in opposition to the corporate top­ down false solutions that pretend to address a single symptom while reinforcing the underlying root causes of the problems.

True solutions are rooted in the work of grassroots internationalism, and using the framework of a “Just Transition”. We are collectively building a different context and a different system, an economy for people and the planet. The Just Transition framework emerged from partnerships between environmental justice and labor organizations. In the words of the Just Transition Alliance, “together with front-line workers, and community members who live along the fence ­line of polluting industries, we create healthy workplaces and communities. We focus on contaminated sites that should be cleaned up, and on the transition to clean production and sustainable economies.”

As part of the Climate Justice Alliance (CJA) Our Power Campaign, we are part of a collaborative that is:

uniting front-line communities to forge a scalable, and socio­economically just transition away from unsustainable energy towards local living economies to address the root causes of climate change.

“We are rooted in rooted in Indigenous, African American, Latino, Asian Pacific Islander, and working ­class white communities throughout the U.S. We are applying the power of deep grassroots organizing to win local, regional, statewide, and national shifts. These communities comprise more than 100 million people, often living near toxic, climate polluting energy infrastructure or other facilities. As racially oppressed and/or economically marginalized groups, these communities have suffered disproportionately from the impacts of pollution and the ecological crisis, and share deep histories of struggle in every arena, including organizing, mass direct action, electoral work, cultural revival, and policy advocacy.

“Together we are strengthening relationships between community­ based organizations, environmentalists, labor unions, food sovereignty/sustainable agriculture groups and other sectors of society.

“As CJA we are coalescing our power to reshape the economy and governance in the coming decades ­ we are communities united for a just transition.”

CJA’s Our Power Campaign has the long term goals to: 1) End the Era of Extreme Energy, and 2) Implement a Just Transition to Local Living Economies. This will be achieved by:

  • Building Local Living Economies​ with a model that that centers on: Zero Waste, Regional Food Systems, Public Transportation, Clean Community Energy, Efficient Affordable and Durable Housing, and Ecosystem Restoration and Stewardship
  • Building Community Resilience: ​Creating climate jobs that will build stronger, resilient, and more equitable communities through Grassroots Economies (ex. worker owned cooperatives) and Rights to Land, Water, and Food Sovereignty.

Economic strategies around Just Transition require strong partnerships between environmental justice community advocates and the labor movement. Too often the corporate 1 percent strategy of divide and conquer is successful, but Just Transition pushes us to build powerful working class alliances to overturn the economic and political power structures that simultaneously harm workers, create widespread economic inequality and poverty, and destroy the planet’s ability to sustain life. There is a growing international movement to change this, and the following reports outline some of the strategies to build strong labor/environmental alliances around energy systems and a Just Transition:

Just Transition in Port of Providence

Working with our national alliances and using these strategic frameworks, EJ League will continue to convene local and regional coalitions to develop and implement Just Transition strategies in Rhode Island, focusing on the Port of Providence as an urgent need. Our goal is to develop concrete strategies and tactics to leverage a rapid transition away from natural gas and all fossil fuels, with democratic front-line community ownership over the development of the sectors for truly renewable energy and energy efficiency work. Through workshops, teach-­ins, and hosting a Just Transition Assembly with Grassroots Global Justice in late summer / early fall, we will be doing the collective work of developing local solutions to massive social and planetary problems. We will share our joint understandings and perspectives on the problems, learn about the frameworks and strategies that are effective elsewhere, and will forge pathways to transform our oppressive realities.

There are too many solutions and alternatives to list, and most solutions will be built collectively through praxis and not through theory. As a starting point, one could easily envision how the $100 million price tag for the proposed liquefaction facility could be better spent in ways that would address energy needs, create jobs in the economically marginalized and oppressed front-line communities next to the Port, support renewable energy and energy efficiency, and build greater community health instead of increased toxic risk. With the high percentage of old housing stock and rental units in low­ income communities, there is a large need to improve housing quality with weatherization, energy efficiency, and improvements in indoor air quality, lead abatement, and other healthy housing requirements. This investment would reduce the need for heating fuels, improve health outcomes, and would be able to employ many people from the community.

Job training programs around weatherization and housing work are already in place, and are focused on people of color, youth, and people with records who are excluded from many other sectors of the dominant economy. EJ League has a Board Member who is a weatherization job training specialist, energy auditor, and is working on seeking investors to build a production facility for cellulose to be used in blown-­in insulations and home weatherizations. Worker­ owned cooperative enterprises in the industries of energy efficiency would transform economic power dynamics, bring democratic control into the workplace, and build wealth at the local level. These types of economic developments would be community ­owned, community­ led, would employ community members, and would support true community wealth development in stark contrast with the corporate fossil fuel and petrochemical model developments that poison, displace, and extract wealth at the expense of community well­being.

In addition to worker owned businesses for energy efficiency, we need community­ owned renewable energy development. National Grid is required to make a bare minimum level of investment into renewables, and is allowed to add a surcharge to all consumer bills to cover this. Despite the fact that everyone is paying for this, National Grid’s limited investments into renewables have been in affluent white suburban communities. Front-line communities, which have been sacrifice zones for hazardous energy developments for generations, need massive investments in renewable energy. But these investments cannot operate like most investments in the dominant capitalist economy, which come in from outside with disregard for residents, take advantage of poverty conditions, lead to gentrification and displacement, and extract wealth for the investor’s return on investment. We are also not asking for charity or handouts that would support public relations campaigns for polluting industries. We are demanding reparations.

We are exploring mechanisms to make it possible for renewable energy to benefit our communities, given that current capitalist market mechanisms favor larger corporations, municipalities with surplus budgets and strong tax bases, and families that are homeowners who can afford up­front costs in order to get the return on their solar/renewable energy investments. We are determined to make renewable energy a working reality that benefits low ­income communities of color in multiple ways, from reduced toxic hazards, lowered bills, better jobs, and shifting away from energy sources that are literally killing us. We know this will not happen overnight, and it will be a massive cross­ sector effort to manifest this vision. But we also know that we cannot afford to wait, and nothing is more urgent. We invite you to join us.

See also:

●  Flawed Proposal: Background info on National Grid’s unnecessary project

●  Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

●  Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues

●  Climate Change: it causes climate change and is at risk from climate impacts

●  Public Health: health disparities and impacts on health care institutions

●  Economic Inequality: high cost project that will cause economic damage

●  Alternatives and Solutions: Strategies for Climate Justice & a Just Transition

Economic Inequality: high cost project that will cause economic damage


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
The Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) has created a brilliant position paper, “National Grid’s Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Liquefaction Facility: Toxic Hazards in the Port Providence: Proposals for a Just Transition” that eviscerates National Grid‘s plans to build a new liquefaction facility for fracked LNG at Fields Point in South Providence. Over the next few days RI Future will be presenting the EJLRI’s position paper in its entirety.

Economic Inequality

The Fields Point Liquefaction Facility project takes advantage of, and will increase problems with economic inequality and economic injustice related to energy. First and foremost, the massive $100 million price tag for construction will be passed onto consumers as an added charge. National Grid tries to hide this fact by saying “the cost of the natural gas commodity on a customer’s bill is a pass through cost. This project will allow National Grid and other companies who use the Fields Point facility to supply domestic LNG at a more stable cost.” But “pass through cost” means they pass that cost through to us, and there is no guarantee that prices of domestic fracked gas will be any more stable than prices of internationally ­sourced LNG. If anything, the international prices of LNG have been steadily declining while domestic fracked gas prices are at historic lows and likely to increase as the industry builds LNG export terminals and fracked gas power plants that increase demand and lead to rising prices. There are existing plans and proposals to connect the Spectra Pipeline (the source of the fracked gas for this facility) (See: here and here) to an LNG export facility in Canada ​and to build a massive 900 MW power plant in Burrillville, RI that would be powered by gas from Spectra’s “Algonquin” pipeline.

Despite the industry’s claims of needing to build these projects to lower prices, with power plants and other major purchasers getting preferential treatment with locked in prices in long term contracts, individual consumers in Rhode Island will see rising gas prices for home heating and cooking. The $100 million construction costs for the liquefaction facility will be added on top of the price of gas, and collectively we are the ones who will end up paying the bill. On a purely economic level, the proposed facility does not make sense and will be locking us into further dependency on fracked gas.

Income and wealth inequality in Rhode Island means increasing gas prices won’t impact everyone equally. There are only four municipalities in RI that qualify as high poverty “core cities”, with childhood poverty rates over 25 percent – ­ Providence, Pawtucket, Central Falls, and Woonsocket. Providence as a whole has a 27.7 percent poverty rate, almost twice the national average of 12.8 percent, and the front-line communities close to the Port includes the census tracts with the greatest concentrations of poverty in the state, specifically census tracts 5, 7, and 12. Five of the twelve census tracts in the adjacent neighborhoods are within the top 10 poorest tracts in Rhode Island, ranking 1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th and 10th. The median family income is $31,800 with the poorest tracts having median family income as low as $14,067. On average, 35 percent of people in the community live below the poverty line and 63 percent are below the 200 percent poverty line. In the poorest census tracts, 64 percent live below the poverty line and 83 percent are below the 200 percent poverty line.EJLRI Position Paper_Page_27

The Providence unemployment rate of 12.4 percent is much higher than the statewide average of 7.7 percent , while the highest unemployment levels were found in Wards 8, 9, 10, and 11 (South Providence and Washington Park), where unemployment rates range from 15.3 percent to 40.5 percent . Ward 10, directly adjacent to the Port, has the highest unemployment levels including Census Tract 5 which is the highest at 40.5 percent.

Given this data, it is clearly a myth that expanding operations at the Port will create jobs to solve economic issues such as unemployment. There is no public data available on the workforce in the Port, but based on personal accounts and parallels with other comparable sectors, the jobs for work in Providence are not given to residents of Providence, let alone residents of the neighborhoods that are directly impacted. With the limited number of temporary jobs promised with the proposed LNG Liquefaction facility, the high­ paying jobs requiring specialized skills will be going to Kiewit, a multinational corporation that has also worked on the Keystone XL pipeline.

The increased costs of home gas prices will have a devastating impact in Washington Park and South Providence, where families living in poverty are already dealing with the frequent impacts of National Grid terminating utility service. This is especially true in rental units which are often less energy efficient: because tenants pay utility costs, landlords have no incentive to invest in weatherization or energy efficiency, making heating costs higher. In violation of state and federal law, National Grid routinely shuts off utilities for low­ income medically vulnerable people who are dependent on heat and/or electricity for medical needs. The RI Center for Justice filed a class action lawsuit against National Grid and the RI Division of Public Utilities and Carriers to stop these utility terminations.​

The press release for the suit included the following:

“In my work on behalf of medically vulnerable children and families, I have witnessed National Grid’s routine disregard for health and safety considerations,” says attorney Jeannine Casselman, legal program director of the RI Medical Legal Partnership at Hasbro Children’s Hospital. “Even in cases involving children with severe illnesses and disabilities, we see utility shut offs happening on a regular basis. In some instances, this can lead to loss of housing altogether. Rather than provide a reasonable repayment plan for struggling families, National Grid too often shuts off services, causing further disarray and trauma to low­ income households.”

In collaboration with the George Wiley Center’s Lifeline Project, this effort is working to protect the health and welfare of families that are put in danger by National Grid’s reckless and greedy energy policies. The EJ League endorses the George Wiley Center’s campaign and the full demands described in the letter from health care professionals and delivered to the RI PUC:

1. A one-year moratorium on termination for all accounts that are coded as ‘medical’.

2. The engagement of an independent third party monitor to review the Division of Public Utility’s approval of petitions for permission to terminate for all accounts coded as medical. The monitor will be selected by a joint committee composed of members of the George Wiley Center, the medical community, the Department of Health and the Public Utilities Commission.

3. The Public Utilities Commission immediately begin requiring data submissions from National Grid that are consistent with those requirements placed on the company in Massachusetts, as per the George Wiley Center’s formal request from March of 2015.

4. The Public Utilities Commission immediately begin accepting and thoroughly reviewing petitions for emergency restoration and providing timely responses to each request.

There is no publicly available address ­specific data that shows geographic distribution of utility shut offs. Regardless, the concentration of extreme poverty and high levels of chronic disease and health problems in the front line communities next to the Port make it highly likely that these neighborhoods are disproportionately impacted by utility terminations. Testimonials for grassroots membership­ based organizations in the community confirms that utility termination is a major problem for many families living in front-line communities next to the fossil fuel energy complexes in Port of Providence which provide energy for the entire region. This is yet another sign of environmental injustice and systemic injustice that is built into the normal business operations of the fossil fuel industry.

See also:

●  Flawed Proposal: Background info on National Grid’s unnecessary project

●  Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

●  Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues

●  Climate Change: it causes climate change and is at risk from climate impacts

●  Public Health: health disparities and impacts on health care institutions

●  Economic Inequality: high cost project that will cause economic damage

●  Alternatives and Solutions: Strategies for Climate Justice & a Just Transition

Climate Change: LNG plant causes climate change and is at risk from climate impacts


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

The Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) has created a brilliant position paper, “National Grid’s Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Liquefaction Facility: Toxic Hazards in the Port Providence: Proposals for a Just Transition” that eviscerates National Grid‘s plans to build a new liquefaction facility for fracked LNG at Fields Point in South Providence. Over the next few days RI Future will be presenting the EJLRI’s position paper in its entirety.

Climate Change

As a new fossil fuel facility involving methane, a potent greenhouse gas, the Fields Point Liquefaction Facility will create emissions that contribute to climate change. The source of the methane that would be liquefied is the Spectra Energy pipeline, which carries gas produced by hydraulic fracturing (fracking) from the Marcellus Shale into New England. As a result, the emissions and climate change impacts of the fracked gas life cycle must be taken into account, from drilling to consumption. While the oil and gas industry and their supporters like to present “natural” gas as a “cleaner” alternative or a “bridge fuel” towards a renewable future, in reality gas produced by fracking is worse for the climate than coal.

The proposed liquefaction facility is part of a much larger regional strategy to massively expand fracked gas infrastructure across the region, coordinated by the “Access Northeast” project linking Spectra Energy, National Grid, and Eversource Energy. In order to take climate science seriously and hopefully avert devastating runaway climate change, fossil fuel use must be rapidly scaled back not expanded. This is especially true for natural gas, given the much higher potency of methane as a greenhouse gas. Instead of investing in the build out of new fracked gas infrastructure, massive investments need to be made in energy efficiency and truly renewable energy.

National Grid’s proposed facility would contribute to climate change emissions

National Grid will need a compressor station to take the incoming gas from the pipeline and bring it up to the needed pressure for liquefaction. This compressor would be powered by gas from the pipeline, contributing in addition to methane leaks throughout the natural gas pipeline, storage, and delivery system.

Running the liquefaction facility requires a large amount of energy a​nd will use 15 Megawatts of electricity to liquefy the gas. For comparison sake, the Deepwater Wind offshore wind farm project will be generating 30 Megawatts of electricity, which means National Grid’s proposal would essentially cut the benefits of this groundbreaking renewable energy development in half. In general, 98 percent of Rhode Island’s electricity is generated from natural gas.

Climate Adaptation?

In addition to contributing to climate change, the proposed facility and the Port of Providence in general is at high risk from climate ­related impacts and severe weather events. It, along with the rest of the Port, is at sea level and is at risk from climate change amplified hurricanes as well as from future sea level rise. In both projected scenarios, as well as in other major flood events, the proposed liquefaction facility would be underwater, along with the adjacent facilities storing hazardous, flammable and/or explosive substances. National Grid claims the facility will be built to withstand a 500 year flood ­ yet it also claims to have done outreach with community organizations that have never existed, which brings their trustworthiness into doubt. In recent years, multiple 1000 year floods have occurred, supercharged by the overheated climate. While it may be poetic justice or karmic effect to have the major producers of climate change emissions be impacted by the effects of climate change, once again it would be the neighboring front-line communities that would be hurt most by any climate­ related disaster.

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_22
Image source: slide from presentation by Austin Becker titled “Hurricane Consequences in the face of climate change: Case studies of two seaport clusters, Gulfport (MS) and Providence (RI). In the report, both ports are referred to as “highly vulnerable.” Note: overlaid words show organizations involved, do not correlate with locations on map

See also:

●  Flawed Proposal: Background info on National Grid’s unnecessary project

●  Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

●  Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues

●  Climate Change: it causes climate change and is at risk from climate impacts

●  Public Health: health disparities and impacts on health care institutions

●  Economic Inequality: high cost project that will cause economic damage

●  Alternatives and Solutions: Strategies for Climate Justice & a Just Transition

Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues


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

The Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) has created a brilliant position paper, “National Grid’s Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Liquefaction Facility: Toxic Hazards in the Port Providence: Proposals for a Just Transition” that eviscerates National Grid‘s plans to build a new liquefaction facility for fracked LNG at Fields Point in South Providence. Over the next few days RI Future will be presenting the EJLRI’s position paper in its entirety.

Environmental Racism

Beyond the potential disaster scenarios described in the previous section, there are many ongoing disasters that daily impact the front-line communities living next to Port of Providence. Business as usual under the current economic system is a state of disaster for marginalized communities, with concentrated poverty, mass incarceration, substandard housing conditions, and health disparities.

Environmental racism t?akes many forms, but is simply defined as the concentration of environmentally hazardous conditions in communities of color. A legal definition states:

“Environmental racism refers to intentional or unintentional targeting of minority communities or the exclusion of minority groups from public and private boards, commissions, and regulatory bodies. It is the racial discrimination in the enactment or enforcement of any policy, practice, or regulation that negatively affects the environment of low income and/or racially homogeneous communities at a disparate rate than affluent communities.”

The Supreme Court’s recent decision upheld the Federal Housing Act’s assertion that racism in housing policy does not need to be individually intentional if it can be shown as a systemic outcome of racial disparities.

Similarly, environmental racism is evidence as the result of sets of institutional policies and practices, regardless of whether the intent to discriminate is apparent. As described by Charles Ellison in an article titled Racism in the Air You Breathe, “?w?here you live—down to your exact zip code—can determine how fast you get sick and how soon you die.”? The following section will take a detailed look at the front-line communities of Southside (upper and lower South Providence) and Washington Park, which are right next to the Port of Providence.

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_13

Demographics and the Waterfront?

This map shows the “percentage non­white” (based on 2010 census data) in a block by block geography. The approximate area of the industrial Port of Providence is highlighted in red. The line between Providence and Cranston (south of Fields Point and Roger Williams Park) shows a dramatic shift in demographics from people of color to predominately white.

The front-line communities adjacent to the Port of Providence are a corporate sacrifice zone; areas of concentrated poverty and marginalization where polluting industries are allowed to be sited and conduct hazardous operations with little regard for health or environmental impacts on the neighborhoods. This comparison of waterfront areas paints a clear picture of apartheid and de facto environmental racism. Downtown, Fox Point, and East Side / Blackstone neighborhoods in Providence, as well as Pawtuxet Village in Cranston and along the East Bay Bike Path in East Providence all have beautiful waterfront access with parks, biking, yachts, boating, sport fields, and festivals in relatively affluent and predominately white neighborhoods. Meanwhile South Providence, with concentrated poverty and communities of color, has little to no waterfront access in an area zoned for heavy industrial use with multiple polluting and hazardous facilities.

Environmental Justice Analysis?­
Environmental Justice involves looking at the intersection of environmental hazards and their health impacts, demographics, and social inequalities, and forges strategies to erase inequities and ensure that everyone has a healthy environment to live, work, pray and play. Due to deeply entrenched institutional racism and societal inequalities areas of concentrated and racialized poverty are often also pollution hot spots filled with refineries, landfills, lead paint, highways, etc and lacking in benefits such as green space, waterfront access, healthy food, and clean air. Public transportation travels more frequently through poorer communities.­ Rhode Island Public Transportation Authority (RIPTA) terminal is also located in this community. In fact, South Providence is one of the largest “environmental justice” communities where all of these factors are concentrated statewide. Several tools from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) make it possible to use hard data to tell the story of Environmental Justice concerns in the areas around the Port of Providence. The tools used to generate the following analyses include the EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) and the EJSCREEN tools, the open source data mapping project JusticeMap.org and the Center for Effective Government’s national mapping tool for schools and high risk chemical facilities. The area of analysis is primarily local, at the neighborhood level (Upper and Lower South Providence, Washington Park), zip code level (02905, 02907), and facility­ specific (one mile radius from proposed facility). It should be noted that while the one mile radius is used for the initial Environmental Justice impact analysis, a greater radius of two miles or more should be used to analyze cumulative and secondary impacts of the proposal.
The one mile radius around the proposed Liquefaction Facility, including a section of East Providence across the Bay which is more affluent and more white, has a combined demographic risk score calculated by EPA that is in the 90th percentile for Rhode Island, and 94th percentile for EPA Region 1 (New England). In other words, there are more at ­risk demographics in this radius than in 90 percent of the rest of RI, and more than 94 percent of the rest of New England. That combined profile consists of the following: 75 percent “minority population” (in 91st percentile for RI; 93rd percentile for EPA region 1) 56 percent low­ income (in 85th percentile for RI; 91st percentile for Region)17 percent linguistically isolated (in 88th percentile for RI; 92nd percentile for Region)31 percent with less than high school education (86th percentile for RI; 93rd percentile region)EJLRI Position Paper_Page_15a

EPA Toxic Release Inventory?­

This EPA database catalogues releases of toxic chemicals. All 11 polluters listed for City of Providence are included in zip code 02905, which contains a greater number of polluting facilities than any other city or town in Providence County. All 11 of the polluters listed are within the one mile radius of the proposed Liquefaction Facility, both within the industrial area in the Port of Providence and but also in the neighborhood area between Eddy St. and Allens Ave in Washington Park.

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_15b

According to EPA the industry that contributes most to on­site toxic releases in the 02905 zip code are Petroleum Bulk Terminals. The TRI facilities listed include many of the risks described in the previous section, such the Motiva fuel terminal (Petroleum Bulk Terminals) and Univar USA Inc (Chemical Wholesalers), as well as facilities located even closer within residential communities: Monarch Metal Finishing Co (Fabricated Metals), Safety­Kleen Systems, Inc (Hazardous Waste/Solvent Recovery) and Mahr Federal, Inc. (Computers/Electronics Products).

Schools at Risk

A?s described earlier, the Univar chemical facility has a 14 mile hazard radius, pictured below as the large red circle. There are 311 schools within this zone, which are attended by approximately 110,000 children. The table below shows the national rankings of the percent of children within vulnerability zones. RI’s high ranking is due almost entirely to the Univar facility in Port of Providence, adjacent to the proposed Liquefaction Facility.

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_16

EPA’s EJ SCREEN Tool

This new interactive mapping tool is a way to analyze the intersection of demographic risk profiles alongside environmental indicators such as air quality (particulate matter and ozone levels), lead paint, and proximity to traffic or facilities that require a chemical risk management plan, that store and process toxic materials, or that are water discharge polluters. The results can be mapped out and compared to the rest of the state, the rest of the EPA region, or nationally. In all of the following maps, the national percentile is displayed with the 95th­100th percentile in red and 90th­95th percentile in orange.

Proximity to Facilities Requiring a Chemical Risk Management Plan

The following map shows the Greater Providence area and highlights the areas that have close proximity to a large chemical facilities that require having a chemical Risk Management Plan (RMP). The area adjacent to the port is highlighted in red, meaning that it is in the 95th – ­99th percentile nationwide in a combined measure of chemical risk proximity and demographic risk.

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_17

The one mile radius around the proposed Liquefaction Facility ranks in the 97th percentile for the state, the 98th percentile for EPA Region 1 (New England), and 95th percentile nationally. This is an Environmental Justice community that is at high risk for exposure in a chemical incident.

Proximity to Water Discharger Facility

The following map for the combined EJ indicator for proximity to Major Direct Water Discharger Facilities and demographic risk. Again, the areas in Providence closest to the port are in the highest percentiles nationwide. In state, regional, and national comparisons, the one mile radius from the proposed facility is in the 97th percentile for this risk factor.

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_18a

Traffic Proximity

The following map shows the EJ SCREEN risk status for Traffic Proximity and Volume. The one mile buffer from the site is in the 96th percentile for both state and national comparisons, and in the 98th percentile compared to the rest of EPA Region 1.

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_18b

Traffic proximity and volume is an issue that requires careful attention for the proposed liquefaction facility. The I­95 corridor is a major interstate roadway with heavy vehicle traffic. The Thurbers Ave exit, Eddy St. exit, and residential streets along Eddy St. and Allens Ave. carry most traffic in and out of the Port of Providence, and are located in some of the largest asthma hot spots in the state. This asthma hot spot has a high concentration of people with asthma (impacting Black and Latino families most) and some of the highest rates of emergency room visits and hospitalizations due to asthma. Air pollution in the form of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), particulate matter (PM), ultra-fine particles, and black carbon are connected with heavy vehicle traffic and especially truck traffic. These air pollutants are known asthma triggers and are also linked to other respiratory health issues, certain cancers, and developmental disabilities. This is an existing burden that severely impacts Southside and Washington Park neighborhoods. The construction and operation of the liquefaction facility will be additional cumulative impacts in an area that is already overburdened. The proposed export of LNG via tanker trucks is a large concern: why should these communities now bear the burden of supplying the rest of RI and MA with LNG? National Grid says that there won’t be a net change in truck traffic, with 16 tankers per day currently delivering LNG and an estimated 16 tankers per day exporting LNG once the facility is built. However, there are no binding guarantees this wouldn’t increase later. National Grid’s partners in Access Northeast are proposing major new LNG storage tanks near New Bedford, if these tanks are built would they be supplied with LNG from Fields Point? FERC should analyze the production capacity of this facility and determine if the supply produced would require additional tanker traffic to distribute. In either case, the two years of construction will have a significant impact on additional traffic in the community.

Toxic Storage and Discharge Facilities

Toxic materials are a major issue in these neighborhoods, and are some of the highest ranking EJ Indexes placing all of South Providence and West End above the 95th percentile.

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_19

For proximity to Toxic Storage and Disposal Facilities, communities in the one mile radius surrounding the proposed facility are in the 98th percentile for the state and the 99th percentile for EPA Region 1 and National comparisons.

Environmental Justice: working towards equitable healthy environments

In simplistic terms, environmental justice means guaranteeing equitable access for all people to have healthy environments where they live, work, play and pray. For a more detailed description of environmental justice, please read the EJ Principles. The environmental justice movement has exposed the reality of the extent to which this equitable world does not exist. Because of ongoing legacies of racism, economic inequality, segregation, redlining, and other systemic injustices, someone’s zip code is the greatest factor in their health and life expectancy. Unfortunately, the front-line communities next to the Port of Providence, which are densely populated and filled with schools, day cares, home, and healthcare facilities, are a prime example of an area suffering from a concentration of pollution and a lack of environmental benefits such as parks, healthy food, and safe recreational areas. Many of the numerous schools in the community are crumbling and don’t have funding to deal with issues such asbestos, lead paint, mold, and poor indoor air quality. At home, many residents are faced with substandard housing quality. The high percentage of older homes means that many are energy inefficient, have lead paint, and are likely to have mold, mildew, and other air quality issues. Homeowners in the community were and continue to be hard hit by the foreclosure crisis, and the high percentage of rental apartments means that many residents are dependent on landlords to improve housing quality and make home more energy efficient. For homes that aren’t owner occupied, there is no financial incentive for the owner to make these upgrades, and the tenants are the ones who suffer from high energy costs and negative health impacts.

Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area


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
The Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) has created a brilliant position paper, “National Grid’s Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Liquefaction Facility: Toxic Hazards in the Port Providence: Proposals for a Just Transition” that eviscerates National Grid‘s plans to build a new liquefaction facility for fracked LNG at Fields Point in South Providence. Over the next few days RI Future will be presenting the EJLRI’s position paper in its entirety.

Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

EJLRI02
Despite what the gas industry says, LNG is a dangerous substance. Developing additional large scale LNG infrastructure in densely populated urban areas, and particularly at Fields Point in the Port of Providence, poses a number of risks for potential disasters. This following section is an abbreviated summary of some of the risks and potentially dangerous scenarios. The gas industry is quick to state that LNG isn’t flammable or explosive, and that it isn’t stored under pressure. This is somewhat t​rue, but it’s a dangerous half ­ truth. LNG is stored at very cold temperatures (under ­260°F), in double shelled containers without any air present. In these conditions, LNG is in stable liquid form and without air it is not flammable.

The potential dangers with LNG occur if something goes wrong and it leaves these conditions. At any temperature over ­260°F it begins to boil and convert to methane gas, which causes it to expand by 600 times. At these temperatures, any sealed container would become rapidly pressurized. If LNG spills and begins mixing with air, it does become flammable between concentrations of 5 – ­15 percent gas to air. For comparison, propane is flammable at concentrations of 2.1 – ­9.5 percent, gasoline is flammable at 1.3­ – 7.1 percent. As leaking or spilled LNG boils and expands, at first it presents ​hazards of cryogenic freezing (​due it’s very cold temperature) and asphyxiation ​(due to it being heavier than air, displacing oxygen). If the expanding LNG cloud comes across an ignition source with enough air mixed in, it would become a​ pool of fire that can ignite back to the source of the spill.​ If the spilled LNG is pressurized (for example during the re-­vaporization process, when LNG is converted back to gas to re-inject in to the grid), it can cause a jet fire. If a vapor cloud of boiling and expanding LNG occurs within a confined structure, and catches fire, it can become over pressured and potentially explosive. Ignition of pressurized liquids can cause a BLEVE: Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion.​​ (See here and here)

Relevant Past LNG Disasters

Washington State: March 31st, 2014

​A rupture in one of the “pressure vessels” next to an LNG storage tank was cited as the cause of an explosion that injured 5 workers, sent 250 pound fragments of steel shrapnel flying over 300 yards, punctured a double shell LNG storage tank, and caused an evacuation of people within two miles from the LNG storage facility. “B​enton County sheriff’s Deputy Joe Lusignan said Wednesday that it was ‘a little bit of a miracle’ that no one was killed. ‘It was an extremely powerful explosion, the initial explosion,’ he said. ‘Fortunately, we didn’t have any subsequent ones after that.’” The blast caused an evacuation within a 2 mile radius, far larger than the half­ mile area that National Grid is considering for impacts in Providence. Luckily, the area in Washington was sparsely populated, with only 1000 residents and agricultural workers evacuated, whereas a 2 mile radius from the LNG tank in Providence has a population of close to 80,000 people, which doesn’t include additional people at work, school, or in RI Hospital and trauma center. According the Reuters, the LNG blast in Washington “could focus attention on the risk of storing massive gas supplies near population centers.”​

Skikda Algeria, January 2004

The port city of Skikda, Algeria suffered an explosion and deadly incident at an LNG Liquefaction Facility. A steam boiler exploded “after it probably drew flammable vapors from a hydrocarbon refrigerant leak into its air intake. This triggered a secondary, more massive vapor cloud explosion destroying a large portion of the plant. The incident killed 27 people, injured 74, and created an $800 million loss.” In the U.S, the 2004 incident spurred increasing opposition to LNG import facilities being proposed at the time. In response, “energy industry executives and regulatory officials have pointed out that the explosion in Skikda [was] attributed to a boiler that is not expected to be part of LNG terminals in the United States, which are to be used for warming liquefied gas back into a vapor, then storing it. The Skikda plant did the opposite, chilling natural gas until it condensed into a liquid.” National Grid’s proposed Liquefaction Facility in Providence would perform the same function as the Skikda plant in Algeria.

LNG Facility in Providence Denied in 2005 due to safety risks ­

I​n 2005, FERC denied an application from Keyspan (now National Grid) to expand the existing Fields Point LNG storage tank into an LNG import facility. FERC Commissioner Nora Brownell stated that the proposal was turned down because of safety risks and the “very real concerns made by the residents in communities and all of the towns nearby.” The “Commission staff concluded that the KeySpan LNG conversion project would not meet current federal safety standards… [and] identified 75 specific environmental mitigation measures that must be met by KeySpan LNG and its accompanying pipeline project [CP04­223, CP04­193].

A report by former White House anti­-terrorism adviser Richard Clarke concluded that “urban import terminals, such as Fields Point LNG, would be vulnerable to “catastrophic” terrorist attacks, and also make “extremely attractive” terrorist targets.”  In the detailed 159­ page report, Clarke details multiple scenarios in which an attack on the LNG facility in Fields Point Providence results in an LNG pool fire and catastrophic mass casualties. The comprehensive report detailed neighboring industrial and chemical facilities that would be impacted by a LNG fire, but said that further study would be needed to assess the additional risks posed.

High Risk Neighbor: Univar Chemical Facility ­

The proposed LNG Liquefaction facility neighbors a chemical facility owned by Univar, a multinational chemical corporation that also happens to manufacture chemicals for hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”). Fracking is a controversial process used in extracting natural gas from shale and other unconventional formations; the process has been banned in New York State due to public health concerns raised by the NY Department of Health. While it is unknown whether Univar’s facility in Providence has a direct link with fracking, the facility is listed on EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory due to onsite release 1,275 pounds of toxic chemicals in 2013. Chemicals listed on the EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory database for the Univar site in Fields Point include but are not limited to:

1,1,1­TRICHLOROETHANE, ACETONE, AMMONIA, CHLORINE, CHLOROBENZENE, DI(2­ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE, DIBUTYL PHTHALATE, ETHYLENE GLYCOL, FORMALDEHYDE, FREON 113, METHANOL, N,N­DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE, PHOSPHORIC ACID, SODIUM HYDROXIDE, STYRENE, TETRACHLOROETHYLENE, TOLUENE, TRICHLOROETHYLENE and TRIETHYLAMINE.

Former White House Anti­-Terrorism official Richard Clarke wrote in his 2005 report on LNG in Fields Point that,

In the event of a [LNG] pool fire, temperatures would be high enough to compromise chemical storage tanks. Univar workers handle such chemicals as chlorine, sodium hydroxide, hydrogen peroxide, and potassium hydroxide at the site. Chlorine leaks can be lethal. For example, a recent chlorine gas leak in South Carolina killed nine people and required evacuations for up to one mile from the site. We do not know all the effects of gas leaks on all these chemicals, or the potential consequences of explosion of these chemicals caused by high heat from an LNG pool ­fire. Additional research into the safety of this chemical facility is needed in assessing the risks posed.”

14 mile hazard radius: 110,000 schoolchildren at risk ­

I​n 2014, the Center for Effective Government released a report titled “Kids in Danger Zones: One in Three U.S. Schoolchildren at Risk from Chemical Catastrophes” which investigated schools being located within the hazard radius of chemical facilities. Appendix III of the report shows the percentage of students in vulnerability zones, by state. ​With 67 percent of students at risk from a chemical incident, Rhode Island is ranked 2nd highest nationwide, ​ranking above both Texas and Louisiana which are both known for welcoming petrochemical facilities in busy Gulf of Mexico ports. RI’s high chemical risk ranking is due almost entirely to the Univar chemical facility in Providence, adjacent to the proposed LNG Liquefaction Facility. Within the 14 mile hazard radius of the facility there are 311 schools with approximately 110,000 children.

Major Fuel Terminals and Fuel Transportation ­

T​he Port of Providence is the largest fuel port in Southern New England, and supplies oil products (gasoline, diesel, ethanol, jet fuel, etc) to all of Rhode Island, Eastern Connecticut, and Worcester County and South Coast Massachusetts. The fuels are transported in and out of South Providence by international tanker ships, heavy truck traffic, and and a railway line that travels between I­95 and Roger Williams Park and Zoo before connecting with the Amtrak and MBTA Commuter Train tracks in South Elmwood. Port of Providence has terminals operated by Sprague Energy, Global Partners LP, Enterprise Products (subsidiary of Duke Energy), New England Petroleum, and Motiva (a joint venture between Shell Oil and Saudi Arabia’s Aramco). National Grid’s LNG storage tank and proposed liquefaction facility is bordered by the Motiva terminal to the West and Northwest, and next to Global’s terminal to the South and Southeast.

Given the close proximity of highly flammable and potentially explosive substances, an incident at one facility could trigger a secondary incident at a neighboring facility. An incident, whether caused by natural disaster, human error, equipment malfunction, or terrorism, could quickly spread and cause much larger incidents. The presence of pipelines, tanker ships, fuel trucks, storage tanks, and ethanol trains each pose individual risks, their concentration in close proximity multiplies the potential scenarios in which an incident could occur. The Thurbers Ave exit is one of the busiest set of highway ramps in Rhode Island, with sharp turns and confusing cross traffic patterns. This is the exit that the majority of truck traffic into and out of the port uses, including the LNG tanker trucks carrying “methane refrigerated liquid.” A​ny potential accident, and the resulting disaster scenario, must be taken into consideration with National Grid’s proposed Liquefaction Facility.

Ethanol “bomb” trains ­

E​thanol trains docking at the Motiva terminal are within the half mile hazard radius of the proposed Liquefaction Facility, and are directly adjacent to the sharp turn on I­95 by the Thurbers Ave exit. It is not unfathomable to conceive of a potential disaster involving a traffic accident with a fuel tanker or train car containing explosive ethanol or toxic chemicals traveling into or out of the port. In preparation for a potential incident, RI Department of Environmental Management and the City of Providence hosted a Tri­State HAZMAT Full­Scale Response Exercise on September 10th, 2011 focusing on a scenario of an ethanol train derailment at the Motiva terminal in Port of Providence, requiring both land­based and marine response teams.

According to the joint press release,“E​thanol is a highly volatile, flammable, colorless clear liquid and unlike gasoline, is completely soluble in water rendering containment boom and absorbent boom virtually useless during a release. More than two million gallons of denatured ethanol move through the Port of Providence area by rail, barge, and tractor ­trailer every week.” In 2014, community groups in Boston organized against ethanol trains coming through densely populated neighborhoods and sharing tracks with MBTA and commuter rail trains. A​lternatives for Communities & Environment​(ACE), Chelsea Collaborative, and Chelsea Creek Action Collaborative successfully won a statewide legislative moratorium against the dangerous ethanol “bomb”trains. ​(See here and here)

Dangerous incidents occurring in the Port of Providence

The following are not just hypothetical scenarios to study, they have occurred in the past. Luckily, previous incidents have been contained and have not escalated to worst case scenarios, but that potential exists.

Lightning Strike​­

On July 19, 2006 lightning struck an oil tanker that was about to dock at the Motiva facility adjacent to National Grid’s LNG tank. Associated Press reported that it resulted in a four alarm fire and that “every firefighter in Providence was on the scene.” A truck driver parked nearby said he​“saw a bolt of lightning, followed by an explosion and a large fireball. [He] said he could feel the heat from the initial explosion several hundred feet away in a nearby parking lot. ”I’ve never seen anything in the world like this,” he said.” EPA responded by setting up air quality monitors nearby to check for toxic releases of airborne pollutants.

Earthquake​ ​

On July 22, 2015 there was a 2.3 magnitude earthquake in Rhode Island which was felt in Johnston RI, and Bristol RI, and Fall River, MA. The epicenter was determined to be in the Port of Providence at Fields Point, the exact location of the existing LNG storage tank and proposed Liquefaction Facility. According to R.J. Heim, reporting for WJAR/NBC10, “t​he earthquake leaves many people wondering if it compromised infrastructure at the busy port or shake a cluster of fuel tanks located nearby.” National Grid reported that their facility was not compromised, but questions remain as to whether the outcome would have been different if the Liquefaction Facility were in operation at the time, or if a stronger earthquake were to hit along the same fault line.

Hurricane ­

H​urricane Sandy was devastating for New York City and parts of the southern coast of Rhode Island, but luckily was not a direct hit on Providence. The Port of Providence is at sea level, and is on the wrong side of the Hurricane Barrier. A significant storm surge coming up Narragansett Bay would be blocked at the Hurricane Barrier, protecting downtown Providence that would cause additional surge and impacting the port. Of three major tidally influenced rivers that flow into Narragansett Bay in Providence, the Hurricane Barrier would block a storm surge from entering the Woonasquatucket or Moshassuck Rivers, displacing that excess water into the Blackstone River and the narrow top of the bay, where this heavy industrial port is located. A joint research project by University of Rhode Island, the RI Department of Transportation, and the Federal Highway Administration recognizes that “hurricanes pose a significant threat” and is undertaking a vulnerability assessment of infrastructure at the Port of Providence. However, most studies of storm impacts on the Port of Providence only consider the economic impact and how to make infrastructure more resilient; the impact on the communities of South Providence and Washington Park is often ignored.

Emergency Preparedness and Response

There are many potential disasters waiting to happen with the existing industries in Port of Providence, let alone with the proposed $100 million liquefaction facility. While there has been at least one disaster response exercise focused on the port, and a large quantity of specialized foam was purchased following the lightning ­induced fire at the Motiva terminal, neither of these initiatives relate to the specialized disaster response scenarios required in the event of an LNG or a secondary Univar chemical facility incident. Given the high concentration of facilities in the Port that store toxic materials, discharge pollutants, and/or require a chemical risk management plan, there are major questions remaining about what the overall disaster response plan is, who would be able to respond, and whether those  responders would have the proper training and equipment required.

Richard Clarke’s 2005 report L​NG Facilities in Urban Areas details many possible disaster scenarios that the state is ill equipped the handle. While scenarios involving LNG import tankers no longer apply due to FERC’s rejection of the previous 2005 proposal, the existing LNG incidents around the world have all been with Liquefaction Facilities, Peak Shaving storage tanks, or tanker trucks ­ all of which are or will be present in Port of Providence.

What would happen if an incident compromised the I­95 corridor near Thurbers Ave, or if an event impacted the state’s only trauma center? How would a two mile radius evacuation of a densely populated area occur, with RI Hospital, Hasbro Children’s Hospital, and Women and Infants all being within the two miles? What plans are in place to protect the children who attend schools within the hazard radius? Do any existing plans for disaster preparation and response take into account the high level of linguistic diversity within the community?

See also:

●  Flawed Proposal: Background info on National Grid’s unnecessary project

●  Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

●  Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues

●  Climate Change: it causes climate change and is at risk from climate impacts

●  Public Health: health disparities and impacts on health care institutions

●  Economic Inequality: high cost project that will cause economic damage

●  Alternatives and Solutions: Strategies for Climate Justice & a Just Transition

Flawed Proposal: Background info on National Grid’s liquefaction proposal


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

The Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) has created a position paper, “National Grid’s Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Liquefaction Facility: Toxic Hazards in the Port Providence: Proposals for a Just Transition” that eviscerates National Grid‘s plans to build a new liquefaction facility for fracked LNG at Field’s Point in South Providence. Over the next few days RI Future will be presenting EJLRI’s paper in its entirety.

Introduction

EJLRI01

This document is a detailed response to the many reasons to oppose National Grid’s proposal to build a $100 million Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) production plant in the Port of Providence. This project (also known as the “Fields Point Liquefaction Facility”) is costly and dangerous, and it is being planned for an area with many existing environmental justice concerns.

Beyond the obvious problem of having ratepayers (all of us) pay the bill for National Grid to benefit their own bottom line, there many specific concerns about the project. This report groups these concerns into the following major categories:

●  Flawed Proposal: Background info on National Grid’s unnecessary project

●  Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

●  Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues

●  Climate Change: it causes climate change and is at risk from climate impacts

●  Public Health: health disparities and impacts on health care institutions

●  Economic Inequality: high cost project that will cause economic damage

●  Alternatives and Solutions: Strategies for Climate Justice & a Just Transition

The goal of this report is to make the case for organizations, businesses, residents, agencies, and public officials to join us in rejecting National Grid’s proposal, and supporting the alternatives and solutions highlighted at the end of the report.

Background on National Grid’s proposal

According to National Grid, their proposal to build a Liquefied Natural Gas production facility in South Providence in necessary, safe, clean, and will have no major negative impact. We disagree on all these counts, and explain why throughout the remainder of this report.

National Grid’s case for the project is available on their website. National Grid needs to get approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), and all of the documents submitted by National Grid and comments from any other stakeholder are available on FERC’s website under Docket # PF15­28 (Search at https://elibrary.ferc.gov/) . Since National Grid’s perspective is detailed on websites, media stories taken directly from company press releases, and in hundreds of pages sent to FERC, we won’t use much space here describing their project proposal.

The main points are:

●  Instead of delivering LNG to the storage facility in Providence via truck, National Grid wants to build a $100 million facility to produce LNG directly from a Spectra Energy pipeline that delivers gas from Marcellus Shale (Pennsylvania) to Providence.

●  LNG is produced by cooling natural gas (methane) to ­260 degrees, which reduces its volume by 600 times and puts it into liquid form

●  LNG is currently only needed in RI for up to 9 days each year

●  National Grid would then use LNG tanker trucks to export the LNG produced in 
Providence to other locations in Rhode Island and Massachusetts

●  The production facility would require a gas compressor station and an electrical cooling 
system that would use 15 Megawatts. (for reference, this is half of the 30 megawatts that Deepwater Wind will generate off the coast of Block Island)

There is no justified need for the project.

According to National Grid’s own information, the existing LNG storage is only used up to 9 days each year, and is less than half of the gas used even on the coldest days with the highest demand. National Grid says the requests to increase the supply of LNG come from two storage customers: Narragansett Electric Company and Boston Gas Company. Both of these companies are subsidiaries of National Grid.

National Grid’s “Public Participation Plan” is incredibly flawed.

In the document submitted to FERC, there are no actual community groups on their listing of Environmental, Community, and Neighborhood Stakeholders. The only two groups included, the South Providence Neighborhood Association and the Washington Park Neighborhood Association, don’t actually exist. When questioned about this, National Grid’s spokesperson David Graves responded that “The stakeholder list was first developed when both of these groups were active in the 
neighborhood” which is also false, since neither group has ever existed. David Graves also stated that National Grid “[has] not been successful in locating any other neighborhood groups in the area that have an organized board of directors or a published list of officers and, to my knowledge, we have not been contacted by any neighborhood groups asking to be included in the list of stakeholders.” This is despite the fact that there are many thriving organizations in Providence, including three local groups that came to National Grid’s Open House on August 13, 2015 to speak out against the project (PrYSM: Providence Student Youth Movement, PSU: Providence Student Union, and EJLRI: Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island).

There were numerous articles written about the protest at the open house. (See: here, here and here.)

National Grid’s internal review and list of impacted stakeholders is flawed and limited in multiple ways. Most of their documents only refer to a 1⁄2 mile radius from the project, at some points only a 1⁄4 mile. Within this range are mostly other industrial projects and businesses, with only a few residential buildings considered. National Grid suppressed the addresses of who they have contacted, but stated they sent letters to affected landowners within 1⁄2 mile, which would only include industrial businesses and some landlords (not rental tenants). The required public Open House, held on August 13th 2015, was not well advertised. The time and date were printed once in the Providence Journal in July as part of the initial press release, but the time and date were not listed on National Grid’s project website, which just listed the Open House as being “in August” and required emailing National Grid to ask for time and date.

At the time of the Open House, the website and all materials were only in English, despite the fact that Spanish is a predominant language in the community where the facility is being proposed. It appears that National Grid has not made any effort to actually engage the community. Those community members who did participate in the poorly promoted Open House were racially profiled and threatened by an excessive police presence and were ignored by National Grid in later correspondences with FERC and media inquiry.

In order to understand the impact of the project on the neighboring community, the analysis must use a radius of at least 1 mile from the proposed site. Cumulative impacts and evacuation plans for potential disasters must consider at least a 2 mile radius. Given the demographics of the community and the concentration of other industrial activity at the location, a full analysis of the cumulative impacts must be included, and issues such as public health, climate change, and environmental justice concerns need to be analyzed in depth.

Next: Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

Inaugural Ocean State Oyster Festival a success


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
Oysters from Salt Water Farms,  ready to be eaten.
Oysters from Salt Water Farms, ready to be eaten.

Saturday marked the first ever Ocean State Oyster Festival, celebrating the resurgent and exploding oyster industry in Rhode Island, held at the Riverwalk in Providence.

Attendees were both curious and hungry. Smiles and a light-hearted attitude infected all those wandering around the festival looking for the next shellfish to slurp.

“For me it’s the history, the direct heritage of it all,” said Steven Thompson, a Warren Town Council member who spoke at length the “rebuilding” of the oyster industry in his town, which he said was “decimated”and is now growing again.

Farms from across the Ocean State came to display and provide the all-important oysters while music played and smiles were brought to nearly every face.

Oysters on ice from Salt Pond Oysters, shucked and ready for slurping.
Oysters on ice from Salt Pond Oysters, shucked and ready for slurping.

Oysters are a cornerstone of Rhode Island heritage. According to the Ocean State Oyster Festival oyster farming as far back as 1900 was a thriving industry in RI, Point Judith Pond provided an unmatched bounty of oysters. The industry grew fast with the exponential boom putting immense pressure on local oyster populations. Over fishing decimated the shellfish nearly driving them into extinction. The growth of industry drove itself into near collapse.

About 20 years ago Rhode Island sustainable aquaculture movement began and sparked the current oyster farming climate.

“It’s blowin’ up. From a few farms 15 years ago to now almost 50,” said Travis Lundgre, an employee of Salt Pond Oysters.

When asked why he loves it Lundgre said, “The calm of it all. Oyster farming is just different, different from every other kind of farming.”

Jesse Kwan, of the Oyster Country Club, called them “the foundation of the oceans.”

Smiles at the festIn Rhode Island, oysters are the quintessential local food, with nearly every farm supplying restaurants around the state almost exclusively. Some of the larger farms, including Salt Pond Oysters, Walrus & Carpenter Oysters, and Salt Water Farms, do export their stock to other states and around the country as well.

“You could eat one and I could eat one and we’d taste two different things,” said Lauren Nutini of Salt Water Farms, the largest oyster farm in Rhode Island.

With programs like the Blount Shellfish Hatchery at Roger Williams University, Blount Fine Foods, based in Warren, provided the endowment to create the only shellfish hatchery in Rhode Island. Warren was historically an oyster farming community and now that same community is pulling together in efforts to restore the oyster farms.

Tents and PeopleThe farms themselves use sustainable farming techniques to ensure the oysters not only thrive but provide a healthy ecosystem around them.  One such practice is “reseeding” or pouring the old shells back into the farms allowing the baby shellfish something to latch onto and grow before popping off and being harvested.

Oysters filter nearly 50 gallons of water a day, with some farms having 6 million animals, that’s over 300 million gallons of water being cleaned cumulatively a day for years as they mature and grow.

“There’s nothing better after a day at the beach,” said attendee Fred Jodry, “It’s a mouthful of the ocean.” Jodry explained his intrigue with the resurgence of oyster farming in Rhode Island. “Industry took it out, and it’s nice to see this coming back.”

People enjoying the sun and seafood.
People enjoying the sun and seafood.

Another $815 million for the Narragansett Bay Commission?


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

NBCmapBesides the $120 million taxpayer ballpark subsidy and the $100 million streetcar to hardly anywhere, another elephant in the room is the Narragansett Bay Commission’s (NBC) $815 million Phase 3 stormwater project.

This is not paid for by the entire state, but largely by the 118,000 households in the NBC district – Providence, Pawtucket, Central Falls, North Providence, Johnston, Cumberland, Lincoln and the northern part of East Providence – almost $7,000 per household.

The NBC wants to proceed with this despite concerns about “affordability” – recognized by the EPA as legitimate, despite the potential of alternative “green infrastructure,” despite concerns about the fairness of who pays, and despite not having the time to assess the results of phase 2, just recently completed. Also, though there is some flexibility in meeting federal clean water standards, it seems the NBC goal is to go beyond the minimum, even as Phase 1 and 2 has already cost about $547 million and has approximately quadrupled sewer bills for residents, whether they rent or own.

The problem the NBC is addressing is the combination of our sewage with stormwater runoff overwhelms the treatment plant after a storm and untreated sewage get into Narragansett Bay. Phase 1 constructed the tunnels, pipes and pump stations to temporarily store the stormwater, phase 2 involved interceptors, drains and catch basin improvements. Phase 3 is apparently more tunnels.

Roughly 80 percent of the flow after storms is due to runoff from roads, parking lots and other impervious surfaces, but the cost is almost all born by those contributing the 20 percent of sewage. This is another subsidy to drivers from all over who use the roads and parking lots at stores, offices, state government, hospitals, colleges etc. A big beneficiary of the spending are shoreline property owners who pay nothing, shellfishermen and other Bay users. There is a possible social justice issue here.

There are few checks and balances. There was a “stakeholder” review process that few know about. The PUC rubber stamps what the NBC wants, even allowing monthly billing which tripled postage and processing costs compared to the previous quarterly billing, perhaps hiding the scope of the increases. Local politicians don’t much care, they are not blamed as the sewer bills are not collected through their tax system. The state’s environmental community understandably just wants the Bay cleaned up and is little concerned with who pays, even if the metro area becomes increasingly unaffordable. And though Transport Providence and others have tried to call attention to the role of parking lots and the auto culture that underlies a lot of this problem, and others on the problem of runoff from fertilized lawns, the issue, unlike the ballpark or trolley, is too complex to get easy attention.

While no expert on this, I do recommend attention to this issue and I wonder what the progressive community thinks about this project. Visit www.narrabay.com for the NBC viewpoint and plenty of information.

Why Team SCA is the progressive favorite in the Volvo Ocean Race


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
DSCF4836
Team SCA sailing past Castle Hill, nearing the finish of Leg Six of the 2014/15 Volvo Ocean Race

All the teams in the Volvo Ocean Race use identical boats, they sail over the same waters, and they bounce over the same waves.

However, there is something very different with one team in this year’s 38,739 nautical mile race. Team SCA is the only all-women team in the otherwise male-dominated around-the-world sailboat race currently stopped over in Newport.

If there is a team for progressives to root for, it has to be SCA.

They aren’t the first all-female team in ocean racing: Maiden (89-90) in the Whitbread Round the World Race, Heineken (93-94), E F Education (97-98), and American Sports Too (01-02). But women remain under represented in the sport.

Many of the SCA crew started ocean racing solo for lack of opportunity in the primarily male sport. “There’s no way they would take a female on the boats,” said Sophie Ciszek, one of the crew for Team SCA.

So, often women took to solo racing, many in the Mini Transatlantic, sailing alone 4000 miles in 21 ft. long boats to break into the ranks of professional sailing. Team SCA finished the 5,000 mile sixth leg of the Volvo Ocean Race in Newport this last week along with five competitors. Thousands of fans were at Ft. Adams in Newport to welcome Team SCA. The six Volvo boats are on display this week at Ft. Adams, and start the next leg (to Lisbon, Portugal) Sunday, May 17th, at 2:00 PM.

The Volvo Ocean Race boats berthed at Ft. Adams in Newport
The Volvo Ocean Race boats berthed at Ft. Adams in Newport

SCA Corporation, an international paper products and forestry company based in Sweden, sponsored the female team. Its intent was to create a fully supported team, on the same level as the men’s teams. Team SCA began in 2012, when 250 women from all over the world applied for 11 positions. One by one they were eliminated and the chosen few went into training.

Approaching the Volvo finish in Newport, Team SCA squeezes everything oout of light winds
Approaching the Volvo finish in Newport, Team SCA squeezes everything out of light winds

Last year, they sailed into Newport as part of their offshore training. Skipper Samantha Davies and her crew-mates are soaked in extensive solo offshore racing experience and have the skills to sail alongside the boys. They proved that in the first week of Leg 6, sailing right up in the front pack, exchanging for the lead. That was sailing at its highest competitive level. Days before arrival in Newport, an unfortunate high pressure system cut them off from the leaders and set them back 100 miles.

Team SCA, sailing through the East Passage
Team SCA, sailing through the East Passage

On the positive side, they finished in daylight, and were treated to the beauty of Brenton Point, Castle Hill, Hammersmith Farm, and the Volvo Race Village at Ft. Adams.  Twelve hours earlier, Dongfeng, the winner, battled Abu Dhabi to finish in the dark. In a tense close fight, they finished three and a half minutes apart after seventeen days. That is nothing short of amazing and one-design sailboat racing at its finest! 7,000 plus fans on land and an estimated 200 boats cheered in the night time winners.

Team SCA, less than a mile from the finish
Team SCA, less than a mile from the finish

As the father of a daughter who sailed competitively in high school, I have witnessed women competing in sailing on an even footing. Both my children, sailing for Newport’s Rogers High School Sailing Team in the 1990s, competed on a coed basis. And the fastest Rogers High School Sailing Team skipper was a woman for several years. For sure, the Farr Ocean 65 racing sailboat is a handful, twelve-and-a-half metric tons (27,000 lbs.) of throbbing carbon fiber race horse. Lugging the sails below and dragging them up on deck, and constantly trimming and changing sails is no easy chore. Flying along at 20 knots, the 65 ft. hull must bang on the waves like a surfboard.

Okay, men are stronger on the whole. But with teamwork and pacing – critical for ocean racing – skilled and properly trained women are up to the job, as are some men. Furling the asymmetrical spinnaker when gybing into the East Passage off Jamestown, Team SCA executed the maneuver flawlessly in front of my eyes, with the rhythm of a Swiss watch- a fine finish to 5,000 miles of sailing under challenging conditions.

DSCF4830
Team SCA gybing to enter the East Passage, Block Island in the background

This Saturday, May 17th, at 2PM, the Volvo boats will race over a short course at the mouth of Narragansett  Bay. The fleet will start near the Ft. Adams shoreline and sail to a buoy off Castle Hill Lighthouse and back. The race will consist of two laps over this short course. Ft. Wetherill in Jamestown and Ft. Adams in Newport will be the prime viewing areas for those watching from land.

Team SCA has won two of the five in port races in the 2014/15 Volvo Ocean Race so far, third place overall for the in port races to date. Team Alvimedica, skippered by Rhode Islander, Charlie Enright, has also won one of the in port races so far, so the racing should be keen. The layout of the course will make for a lot of maneuvering at close quarters, something fun to watch.

DSCF4889
Team SCA at Ft. Adams, getting the boat ready for Saturday’s in port race and the Sunday start of Leg Seven, Newport to Lisbon, Portugal

Photos and story by Roberto Bessin 2015


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