Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

October 14, 2016October 14, 2016

Even National Grid’s contractor doesn’t seem to know what’s going on in Fields Point

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

When allegations surfaced last month that National Grid was pushing ahead with their Fields Point liquefaction project despite lack of approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and no proper permits from city and state agencies, Grid spokesperson David Graves was quick to deny it, saying, “The work underway at our property at 642 Allens Ave. property, which has been properly permitted, is unrelated to the liquefaction project.”

Then this picture was taken yesterday:

When asked for an explanation, Graves today said, “Kiewit put this sign up without our knowledge. They are the contractor building the access road for equipment and personnel working on the LNG tank embankment improvement. They are also the contractor designated to oversee installation of the liquefaction equipment when we have the OK to proceed with that project. It appears that in their minds the projects are one and the same, which is not the case. There is no work going on associated with the liquefaction project. Kiewit has been told to take down the sign and replace it with one that clearly identifies what work is underway.”

It seems that the projects under way at Fields Point are so confusing and interconnected that even National Grid’s contractors are having trouble telling them apart.

NoLNGinPVD, an environmental group opposed to the liquefacton facility, issued the following statement: “This is another glaring example of why we cannot trust the process at National Grid’s word and why it is an embarrassment to our state that the “public” utility is pulling the strings of our public officials. DEM refuses to hold National Grid accountable and enforce the legally petitioned for Public Involvement Plan. The city council ordinance committee has shelved a resolution calling for public oversight. The federal delegation that spoke out when a similar project would have affected recreational usage of the bay by wealthy suburbanites is deafeningly silent when the burden of danger is and pollution is absorbed by working class people of color on the south side of Providence. National Grid and their contractor Kiewit do know what they are doing, they are forcing unneeded and dangerous fossil fuel infrastructure on a community of color that has raised many environmental justice concerns. They know this, and they think they can get away with it. We’re going to make sure they don’t.”

October 5, 2016

In message to Rhode Island, Bill McKibben praises and undercuts Sheldon Whitehouse on climate change

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

“Five to ten years ago we thought the transition was going to be from coal, to natural gas as some sort of bridge fuel, onto renewables,” said 350.org’s Bill McKibben in a message to Rhode Island, “and now, sadly, we realize we can’t do that in good faith, because natural gas turns out not to work that way, as a bridge fuel.”

McKibben, a leading voice on the dangers of climate change, was speaking in a video message to Senator Sheldon Whitehouse’s annual Rhode Island Energy & Environmental Leaders Day” conference at the Rhode Island Convention Center last Friday.

McKibben started his eight minute message with praise for Whitehouse, calling him an “indefatigable leader,” along with Senator Bernie Sanders, around climate change issues. McKibben called Whitehouse’s Friday dialogues on the Senate floor against climate change and ExxonMobile “relentless” and “remarkable.”

“There are moments when I hope that his last name turns out to be a key to his and our future, but that’s for another day,” said McKibben.

But McKibben was also relentless in his condemnation of natural gas.

Natural gas, said McKibben, “turns out to be a dead end, not a bridge to the future but a kind of rickety pier built out into the lake of hydrocarbons. So we’ve got to make the transition to renewables now, and fast.

“We have to forget about bridges and make that leap.”

Earlier that day, during a question and answer session, Senator Whitehouse once again declined to speak out against the natural gas infrastructure projects currently threatening Rhode Island’s ability to meet carbon and greenhouse gas reduction goals. Greg Gerritt, of ProsperityforRI.com, confronted Whitehouse, saying that the “resistance,” those engaged in front line battles against fossil fuel infrastructure, was ultimately going to have a greater effect than the carbon tax that Whitehouse champions.

“People are saying no more fossil fuel pipelines, no more power plants, no more compressor stations, and they’re putting their bodies out there,” said Gerritt, “I want us to think about how the dark money plays out in a place like Rhode Island where you can talk about climate change, but you can’t actually stop anything.

“The politicians are all saying, ‘even though we know that if we build this we can’t ever meet our carbon goal, we still want to build a power plant.’ And I want to know what are we going to do so that on the ground, here in our own communities, that this power of the fossil fuel industry gets stopped.”

Whitehouse countered that his job in the Senate “is to try to solve this in a place where it will have the most powerful effect that it can, across the board. I will never win this fight, from where I sit, plant by plant. I just won’t, can’t. Too many of them, too much going on, and frankly there are hundreds of others that are being built while some are being protested, there are hundreds of other pipelines being used while one is being protested.

“It’s not effective, to, in my view, uh, it makes a difference, it sends a message, I don’t undercut what people are doing. I think what we did with Keystone helped send a big message, but my job, I think, is two things:

“One, fix that problem of the huge subsidy [for fossil fuel companies] because $700 billion a year or $200 billion a year sends such a powerful message through the entire economy,

“The second is, I see Meg Curran here, the chairman (sic) of the Public Utilities Commission, and we’re working with them, we’re working with FERC, we’re working with the ISO, we’re working with NEPOOL group, to try to make sure that the rules for these siting things, get adjusted. because the rules for these siting plans leave out the enormous cost of carbon.

“So for me, it’s these federal ground rules, to make them responsive to clean energy, to get them to reward the cleanness of clean energy, and to make fossil fuel pay its cost… that’s where I’m focused.”

However, if we are to heed McKibben’s video message, then Whitehouse’s focus seems like a small step, not the leap that McKibben says we need.

“The good news,” said McKibben, “is the distance we have to leap is shorter than we thought because the engineers have done such a good job with renewable technology. During the last ten years the price of solar panels dropped eighty percent. There’s not an economic statistic on our planet more important than that.

“What it means is that we now have a chance, an outside chance, of getting ahead of the physics of climate change. It would require a serious mobilization and a huge effort.”

McKibben has written about what such a mobilization would look like in the New Republic that is worth a read.

“I think we’re going to need real, powerful leadership in order to help us, as FDR helped us once upon a time to take those steps in the right direction.

“The question is not, ‘Are we going to do this?’ Everyone knows that 75 years from now we’ll power our planet with sun and wind,” said McKibben, “The question is ‘Are we going to do it in time to be able to slow down climate change?’ … It may be the most important question that humans have ever faced.

“I wrote the first book about it all back in 1989. The cheerful title of that book was The End of Nature. I fear that not much has happened since to make me want to change the title.

“We’re in a very deep hole,” said McKibben, “and the first rule of holes is to stop digging for coal, for oil or gas and start instead to take advantage of all that green power coming from above from the sun and the wind that we’ve been wasting for so long.”

September 27, 2016September 28, 2016

Updated: No LNG in PVD demands National Grid halt construction at Fields Point

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

The No LNG in PVD coalition is demanding that National Grid immediately halt construction and excavation work at 642 Allens Ave, the site of the proposed liquefaction facility in Fields Point. The proposed facility, which is opposed by Mayor Jorge Elorza and nine state legislators, is currently being reviewed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). National Grid has requested that FERC not hold any public hearings or grant fast tracked approval for the project. No LNG in PVD, a coalition of residents, organizations, and elected officials opposed to National Grid’s LNG facility, calls on the RI Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) to revoke a recently granted permit which authorized soil excavation at the site, which is contaminated with numerous toxins hazardous to human health.

A group of concerned Providence community members submitted a petition to RIDEM on August 31st which requested that RIDEM revoke the soil management permit until concerns are addressed and a Public Involvement Plan (PIP) is put in place. RIDEM site remediation regulations, amended in 2011, require a PIP – a formal process for public participation and community oversight of the cleanup plan for activities that occur on contaminated sites. RIDEM formally initiated the PIP on September 6th, notifying National Grid “to initiate the process of developing an approvable PIP associated with the planned environmental cleanup of the Providence Gas Company site, and any other site redevelopment activities requiring remedial actions that fall under the jurisdiction of the Remediation Regulations.”

National Grid was required to respond to RIDEM within seven days with proposed plans and a schedule for developing a PIP with the community, writes No LNG in PVD, but says National Grid has ignored this requirement. In addition to violating this regulatory request, says No LNG in PVD, National Grid has begun excavating soil in a large portion of the site along Allens Ave and Terminal Road. Community members have observed uncovered piles of dirt with visible airborne dust.

The project’s location, 642 Allens Ave, has a long history of industrial contamination dating back to the earliest days of the gas industry. Providence Gas Company operated a “manufactured gas plant” from 1910 to 1954 which resulted in the release of many toxic substances which polluted the soil and groundwater. The site has also been host to an ammonia plant, a toluene facility, a propane works, and most recently an LNG storage facility. Numerous substances which pose a risk to public health, safety, and the environment have been recorded at the site, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), phenolic compounds, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including benzene and naphthalene, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), ferri and ferro cyanide compounds, asbestos, and metals including lead and arsenic. Many locations in the site contain multiple hazardous substances at levels that far exceed allowed standards, and while some specific areas have been remediated since 1994, the majority of the land has not been remediated.

The petition submitted to to RIDEM articulated a number of community concerns about construction at the LNG site exposing workers or community members to toxins.

“This is our community, people live here and kids go to school here, why does National Grid think it’s okay to put our lives and our health at risk? It’s our legal right to be involved in these decisions,” said Gina Rodríguez, a community resident and leader in the No LNG in PVD coalition. Monica Huertas, another coalition leader said, “It’s outrageous that there’s a known toxic site this close to my house, and we can go down Allens Ave and see clouds of dust blowing off from the piles that National Grid is digging up. The whole point of this Public Involvement Plan law is to address things like that, but National Grid is just ignoring our concerns and DEM isn’t doing anything to stop them.”

A growing number of elected officials are working with the No LNG in PVD coalition and have declared opposition to National Grid’s unnecessary, expensive, and dangerous LNG proposal. The coalition denounces National Grid’s rush to begin work at the site before any public oversight is put in place. “This is exactly what RIDEM’s site remediation regulations are for,” said Representative Joseph Almeida. “In cases like this, where a project could release extremely dangerous contaminants, it is vital that the affected community have a role in overseeing remediation activities. Members of my district are already overburdened by environmental and health hazards. It is vital that DEM stop National Grid from kicking up a new load of previously buried poisons and toxics without giving this community any say.”

David Graves, spokesperson for National Grid, responded. “Construction work now underway on the property is not related to the liquefaction project. All of the work has been properly permitted. As part of our normal procedures, the earth excavated from the site is being covered.

“There are or will soon be two projects underway in the immediate area. One is construction of an access road to accommodate equipment that will come on site to make improvements to containment dyke wall that surrounds the LNG tank. The other is to cap approximately five acres of land at 642 Allens Ave that is part of a remediation project that was started several years ago. Both have been approved by DEM.”

No LNG in PVD coalition member Aaron Jaehnig responded to Graves’ statement. “The petition to DEM for a Public Involvement Plan related to that property clearly requested a halt to any construction or remediation projects until a Plan was in place. DEM’s request to National Grid, for that plan did not alter our request or sepcify that prior permits were exempt. The PIP process exists so the concerned residents, potentially effected by the disruption of toxic materials, are legally granted oversight to such projects. Its great that that National Grid believes they are above participation in this process, it just confirms our suspicions that their actions do not take the public’s well being into consideration. They have already shown a blatant disregard for the community by ignoring DEM’s request for response to the PIP order within seven days. All construction and remediation activity should be halted immediately until that process is completed.”

National Grid has responded a second time, denying some of the allegations made by the N o LNG in PVD coalition: “The work underway at our property at 642 Allens Ave. property, which has been properly permitted, is unrelated to the liquefaction project. One element of the work is environmental remediation. It is enhancing public safety not endangering it as claimed by one group. Also, at no time have we requested to FERC that they not hold public hearings and we responded to DEM on the matter of the Public Involvement Plan (which is unrelated to the current work on the property) within the required time. Every project we undertake is planned and executed under rigid safety and environmental standards and the work currently underway is no exception.”

September 15, 2016

Elorza calls for ‘unequivocal denial’ from FERC on Fields Point 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

Providence Mayor Jorge Elorza sent a strongly worded letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) last week, expressing his opposition to National Grid’s proposed Fields Point Liquefaction Project.

Saying that approval of the project “would have a detrimental impact to the City of Providence and its residents,” Elorza went on to frame the issue in global terms.

“The entire world is threatened due to climate change and we must move away from fossil fuels,” wrote Elorza, “The City of Providence has continually expressed a commitment to reducing its carbon footprint, promoting an equitable environment, and creating a more sustainable future for our City’s posterity. Providence does not want to perpetuate the global climate crisis, nor do we want to be burdened by the risks associated with a liquefaction plant in Providence.”

Elorza also touched on the issues of air quality in the area of Fields Point.

“The proposed facility would generate harmful pollutants that impact the surrounding community’s air quality and ecosystem. The proposed location for this project is surrounded by dense, lower-income neighborhoods and should not be subjected to the environmental and health burdens associated with the proposed facility.”

Elorza also says that “The proposed plant would also increase greenhouse gas emissions, particularly indirect emissions due to the hydraulic fracking process by which the natural gas is extracted from the ground, as well as the facility’s high electrical consumption (13 megawatts) for the liquefaction process.”

Elorza urged FERC to conduct a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement, rather than an Environmental Assessment and to heed the final guidelines presented by the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), which instructed Federal agencies to include “direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions and the effect of climate change in National Environmental Policy Act Reviews.

Elorza ends his letter asking for and “unequivocal denial” of the project.

September 2, 2016September 2, 2016

PVD City Council fails to pass 2nd resolution opposing LNG

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

Providence City Councillor Seth Yurdin introduced a resolution Thursday evening that would strengthen the City Council’s opposition to National Grid’s proposed Fields Point liquefaction facility. Immediately after introducing his resolution Councillor Sam Zurier rose to co-sponsor, as did councilors David Salvatore, Carmen Castillo, Wilbur Jennings, Jo-Ann Ryan and Terrence Hassett.

Noting that it seemed as if a majority of the council was co-sponsoring the resolution, Yurdin moved that the resolution be voted on immediately. This caused councilors Jo-Ann Ryan and Terrence Hassett to suddenly flip their support. Yurdin’s move for passage failed, and the resolution was passed onto the Ordinances committee.

Reached for comment, Hassett wrote, “I voted no to have an immediate passage on the floor without a Council committee review. I co-sponsored it but a committee review is necessary for a proper vetting and discussion before it is transmitted to the full Council.”

Ryan wrote, “I requested to be a sponsor of the resolution last night. It was sent to ordinance committee by a majority vote. I voted to send it to committee to provide an opportunity for community input at an open public meeting of the council. You can and should attend and voice your concerns. And encourage others to attend and participate in the process.”

There are no ordinance committee hearings on the current schedule. Hassett is the chair of ordinance and Ryan is a member of the committee.

National Grid wants to expand its LNG footprint in the Port of Providence with the new liquefaction plant. Environmental groups such as the RI Sierra Club and the Environmental Justice League of RI oppose the plan. Curiously, Save the Bay, whose offices are not too far from the proposed site, have not come out against it.

Mayor Jorge Elorza and a large group of state level Providence legislators have recently publicly come out in opposition to the project.

The City Council unanimously approved Yurdin’s previous resolution opposing the site in March. That resolution called for public meetings to be scheduled to address environmental and health concerns of the project. “Unfortunately,” said Yurdin, here we are in the Summer and no such meetings have been held… This resolution is stronger than the previous resolution.”

The previous resolution called for studies and review. The new resolution is a call to strong action.

The new resolution says, in part, “That the City shall take all necessary actions to oppose the proposed Fields Point liquefaction facility, including ceasing to act as a cooperating agency with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and shall not grant any tax stabilizations, subsidies, or any other forms of support to the project.”

September 1, 2016September 1, 2016

Whitehouse not the climate champion Burrillville needs

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

United States Senator Sheldon Whitehouse has a national, and even international, reputation as a climate champion, noted Rhode Island Senate President M Teresa Paiva-Weed as she introduced him to to the nearly 150 people gathered in Newport for a community dinner and Q&A. Paiva-Weed talked up Whitehouse’s concern for his constituents, saying, “Someone like Sheldon makes it a point to be home and to have a focus on the issues at home.”

But to the residents of Burrillville who drove for over an hour through rush hour traffic to attend the dinner, Whitehouse hardly seems focused on “the issues at home” and in fact, his own words belie that. His international reputation as an environmental champion is of small comfort to the townspeople fighting Invenergy’s $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant.

Whitehouse touted his environmental concerns in his opening remarks, saying, “The good news is that… the [climate] denial operation really is collapsing. You can feel it visibly. We’re at the stage where the CEO of Exxon has had to admit, ‘Okay, climate change is real, and we’re doing it and we want to get something done.’”

Climate change, says Whitehouse, “is going to hit home for Rhode Island in a really big way and I want to make sure that I’ve done everything that I possibly can to make sure that we are as prepared for it as we can be in the Ocean State.”

Richard Dionne, vice president of the Burrillville Conservation Commission was called on by Whitehouse to ask the first question.

“When discussing the most influential senators from Rhode Island on environmental quality issues, your name is often brought up in the same sentence as our former Senator John H Chafee,” said Dione, “Not bad company to be in if I do say so myself.”

“Really good company,” agreed Whitehouse.

Dione continued, “However, our Senator Chafee would be rolling over in his grave if he knew that a 900 megawatt fracked gas power plant being proposed by Governor Raimondo was to be sited smack dab in the middle of the John H Chafee Heritage Corridor in the northwest corner of Rhode Island, on the shared border with neighboring states Connecticut and Massachusetts.

“This area has been recently designated as part of the National Park Service. The approximately 13,000 acres of protected forests, recreational areas, wetlands and conservation areas is absolutely the most inappropriate area for this type of project.

“Every environmental organization in the state of Rhode Island has come out against the project,” continued Dione, “including the Environmental Council of Rhode Island, the Audubon Society, the Nature Conservancy, Blackstone Heritage Corridor, the list goes on and on, I have a list right here…”

“I know the list,” said Whitehouse.

“At many of the public hearings I attend, invariably the question gets posed to me, ‘Where is our environmental Senator on this issue and what is he doing for his constituents in Burrillville?’ A town which, by the way, has supported your election in 2006 and 2012.

“So my question is Senator Whitehouse,” said Dione, winding up, “What answer can I bring back to the people of Burrillville, and can you commit this evening to opposing this power plant?”

“The short answer is,” said Whitehouse after a short pause, “There is a process…”

“Here we go,” said a woman at my table with open disdain.

If there was a wrong answer to give, this was it. Everyone who attended Governor Gina Raimondo’s appearance at the Burrillville High School has heard this answer before. No one takes “trust the process” seriously. It’s political dodge ball.

Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) attorney Jerry Elmer has spoken eloquently about the process. “Remember that the reason – the raison d’etre – that the General Assembly created the EFSB (Energy Facility Siting Board) was precisely to take these energy siting decisions away from the Town Councils and town planning boards,” wrote Elmer.

RI Senator Victoria Lederberg, who got the EFSB legislation through the General Assembly 30 years ago, called the siting board concept “one-stop shopping” for power plant developers. Climate change, environmental concerns and the health and safety of residents didn’t seem to be high on the General Assembly’s priorities when the EFSB was formed.

The process renders the opinion of ordinary townsfolk essentially meaningless, said Burrillville Planning Board attorney Michael McElroy. “The EFSB can take [our opinion], they can take it in part, or they can reject it.”

“There is a process,” said Whitehouse, “taking place for [the power plant] through the state Energy Facility Siting Board. They take sworn testimony, as I think you know. There are a whole bunch of local environmental groups that are intervened into that proceeding. The Conservation Law Foundation has come down from Boston to intervene in that proceeding. They have witnesses.”

Senator Whitehouse is incorrect here. The only environmental group certified as an intervenor in the EFSB proceedings is the CLF. The Burrillville Land Trust, Fighting Against Natural Gas (FANG), Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion (BASE) and Fossil Free Rhode Island were denied intervenor status, as it was felt that their interests would be seen to by the CLF.

“It’s essentially an administrative trial that is taking place,” continued Whitehouse, “I have confidence in that process. I have confidence in Janet Coit at DEM (Department of Environmental Management) who by virtue of being the DEM director is on the Energy Facility Siting Board. I have confidence in Meg Curran, chairman of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) who by virtue of being chairman chairs that Siting Board, and there’s going to be somebody from the Department of Administration…”

Associate Director of the Division of Planning, Parag Agrawal, is the third member of the EFSB.

“It’s a process I’ve worked with from my earliest days,” said Whitehouse, “when I first came as a young lawyer to Rhode Island I worked in the Attorney General’s office and I practiced representing the people before the Public Utilities Commission.

“So I have confidence in the process.

“Congratulations,” added Whithouse, “The opposition to Invenergy, I think, has won every round. Burrillville said ’No’ on planning, Burrillville said ‘No’ on zoning, the water board said ‘No’ on water, so I think you’re, yeah, it’s a process and I know it would be easier to just yell about it but it’s a process that I think is honorable and will come to the right result.

“So I want to focus my efforts on where it will make the biggest difference. I know we’ve had some conversation, repeatedly, but I still am of the view that, with the force and strength that I have available to me, I want to apply every bit of that force and strength to the battle in Washington, which if we win it, will be immensely significant, not just to Burrillville but to all of Rhode Island and to the country and the world.

“So, sorry that I don’t have more to give than that, but I do think that I give pretty well at the office with what I do on this issue. Thank you for bringing it up though, I appreciate it.”

Burrillville resident Lynn Clark was called on to ask the next question. This seemed like a coincidence, but in fact, half the questions asked concerned the power plant in Burrillville, in one way or another.

Clark rose and with only the slightest hint of nervousness in her voice, said, “My name is Lynn and I come from the northwest corner of the state of Rhode Island. It has been my home all my life. I applaud you and I love the work you’re doing on the environmental front.

“In Burrillville, our little town has come together and we have come out strong against this giant plan. We have a lot of environmental groups [on our side], 23 currently, and we are working hard.

“I wish I could say that I am as confident in this process as you are, sir. It has been a scary process. We have been consumed by this process. I have been at every meeting, for hours, two or three meetings per week. Sir, this is a scary, scary process.

“We need a champion in Burrillville and we are asking you to please come see us. Please, come talk to us. If this Invenergy [power plant] gets built, the detriments to our little state will be just horrifying.”

Clark’s appeal to Whitehouse was raw and emotional. It’s the kind of speech people give in movies to roust tired champions into battle one final time.

But this wasn’t a movie and Whitehouse wasn’t willing to be the hero.

“I hear you,” said Whitehouse, once again echoing words Governor Raimondo used in Burrillville when she visited, “I can’t add much to what I’ve said to Richard. Thank you for taking the trouble to come down and share your passion.

Eagle Scout James Lawless with Whitehouse

“It is the National Heritage Corridor,” said Clark, not giving up, “We also have a boy scout camp up there, camp grounds… Have you been up to Burrillville?”

“Oh yeah,” said Whitehouse.

“Okay,” said Clark, “I hope you come visit us soon, sir. Thank you.”

Other questions came and went. Whitehouse was asked about the Supreme Court vacancy, grid security and the opioid epidemic. When Newport resident Claudia Gorman asked Whitehouse about the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), he admitted that on the federal level, at least, he isn’t as certain about the integrity of the process.

“There have been several problems, at the federal level, with the approvals,” said Whitehouse, “They haven’t baked into their decision making what is called the social cost of carbon.” Whitehouse added that we don’t take seriously the problem of methane gas leaks, and that he held the first hearings on the issue of gas leaks and that we still don’t know the full extent of that particular problem…

The last question of the evening came from Cranston resident Rhoda Northrup. She rose as Whitehouse tried to bring the discussion to an end, and would not allow the dinner to end without asking her question.

“I do not live in Burrillville I live in Cranston,” said Northrup, “and what’s going on in Burrillville should not be completely on their backs. This is a global issue for all of us and if that power plant comes to our state of Rhode Island, it will set us back forty years. We will be committed for another forty years to a fossil fuel.

“That’s wrong.

“We need to move forward with wind and solar. And with all of that said, I would like to ask the senator if he has an opinion. With everything that’s been said tonight, ‘Do you have an opinion?’

“I know it’s a process,” said Northrup, “but that’s not an answer. Everybody’s telling us it’s a process. We know that. We’re walking the process. But we’re asking our leaders if they have an opinion. You must have an opinion.”

There was a short pause before Whitehouse answered.

“My opinion is that we must get off fossil fuels,” said Whitehouse.

“Thank you for that,” said Northrup.

But Whitehouse was’t finished. Lest anyone believe that by that statement Whitehouse was taking a stance against the power plant in Burrillville and matching action to his words, Whitehouse switched to his familiar political talking points.

“My opinion is that the best way to do that,” continued Whitehouse, “is to balance the pricing of fossil fuels, so that they are treated fairly in the marketplace. Right now they have a huge, unfair advantage because they don’t have to pay for the cost of the harm that they cause…”

August 26, 2016August 26, 2016

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

The 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.”

August 10, 2016August 26, 2016

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

The 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.”

August 9, 2016August 26, 2016

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

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.

August 8, 2016

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

The 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.

Unfortunately, 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.

August 3, 2016August 26, 2016

Providence legislators oppose ‘dangerous’ new LNG development

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

A group of Providence elected officials announced their strong opposition to a proposal by National Grid to develop a new fracked gas liquefaction facility at Fields Point in South Providence. Citing concerns ranging from costs to ratepayers, safety risks and climate impact, the legislators — including Representatives Joseph S. Almeida (D-Dist. 12, Providence), Grace Diaz (D-Dist. 11, Providence), Aaron Regunberg (D-Dist. 4, Providence), Chris Blazejewski (D-Dist. 2, Providence), Edith H. Ajello (D-Dist. 1, Providence) and John J. Lombardi (D-Dist. 8, Providence) and Senators Juan Pichardo (D-Dist. 2, Providence), Gayle Goldin (D-Dist. 3, Providence) and Sen. Harold M. Metts (D-Dist. 6, Providence) — called on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to reject National Grid’s application, and warned the City of Providence against signing a tax stabilization agreement with the utility to facilitate the project.

Last summer, National Grid submitted a proposal to FERC to develop a $180 million facility to produce Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) directly from a Spectra Energy pipeline that delivers fracked gas from Marcellus Shale to Providence. LNG is produced by cooling natural gas to -260°F, which reduces its volume by 600 times and puts it into liquid form. As described in its application, National Grid would then utilize tanker trucks to export the LNG produced in Providence, primarily to locations in Massachusetts.

“No matter how you look at it, this project is a money-maker for the utility at the expense of our community and our state,” said Representative Almeida. “National Grid is asking us, the ratepayers, to foot the $180 million bill for this project, for what? So they can increase their own profits by exporting LNG out of the state! This does nothing to benefit our constituents, and it does nothing to benefit my neighbors on the South Side. All this proposal will do is transfer money from ratepayers’ pockets to National Grid’s coffers, and we’re not going to accept it.”

Legislators also expressed concerns about the safety risks of the proposed project.

“LNG is a dangerous substance,” said Representative Diaz. “Just two years ago, an LNG facility in Washington state exploded, causing an evacuation of everyone within a two-mile area. If that were to happen at this site, all of my constituents would be in danger. Why is it always our community that must shoulder the collateral damage and safety risks from these toxic projects?”

LNG is stable in liquid form, and without air it is not flammable. However, at any temperature over -260°F it converts to methane gas and expands by 600 times, rapidly pressurizing any sealed container. If LNG spills and mixes with airs, it becomes highly flammable and potentially explosive.

“I remember when Keyspan, which has since been bought by National Grid, applied to FERC with a similar proposal to build an LNG import facility at Fields Point in 2005,” said Senator Pichardo. “That application was denied due to the very real safety concerns of this kind of development. In fact, FERC Commissioner Nora Brownell cited the risks of accidents and explosions when turning down the proposal, stating that the project would not meet current federal safety standards. If doubling down on this dangerous fuel was unsafe ten years ago, it is unsafe for our neighborhood today, and I urge FERC to once again listen to the community’s opposition to this harmful development.”

Finally, the elected officials demanded that the climate consequences of the expanded fossil fuel infrastructure be taken into account.

“The science on climate change is clear. If my generation is to have any chance of inheriting an Ocean State with any state left in it, we need to transition to a clean energy economy as quickly as possible. This proposal would sink millions of ratepayer dollars into unnecessary new fossil fuel infrastructure that would be used for decades past our climate’s point of no return, and that is a betrayal of our children,” said Representative Regunberg. “Mayor Jorge Elorza and the Providence City Council have taken credit for being leaders on climate and environmental issues. But if the city awards a tax stabilization agreement to National Grid to support this project, then it is our belief that the mayor and council can no longer claim this kind of climate leadership. We hope they will do the right thing and tell National Grid that Providence will not facilitate this wasteful, ratepayer-funded, environmentally catastrophic scheme.”

The Providence legislators reported that they are submitting letters detailing their concerns to FERC, joining a growing list of community members and neighborhood organizations opposing National Grid’s application.

[From a press release]

June 1, 2016June 1, 2016

Hearing tomorrow for Spectra Pipeline protesters arrested in Burrillville

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

Three protesters who locked themselves to construction equipment at the site of a controversial pipeline project in Burrillville, RI are scheduled for disposition/Frye hearing on June 2, 2016 at the Rhode Island Superior Court in Providence.

In September, the trio used reinforced pvc pipe to attach themselves to construction equipment at Spectra’s fracked-gas compressor site as part of a growing resistance to the oil and gas corporations “AIM” expansion project. The expansion of the Burrillville compressor station is a key part of Spectra’s plans to transport gas extracted via fracking in Pennsylvania to natural gas export terminals in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, Canada. The protesters were charged with misdemeanor trespass and disorderly conduct, the maximum penalty being 1 year in prison and $1000 fine. Spectra Energy is demanding $30,000 of restitution be awarded as part of the criminal case.

“Spectra is spewing toxic chemicals from their compressor stations, damaging communities with their pipelines, all to expand the fracking industry’s profits at the expense of public health, safety and the environment. Spectra should be the ones paying restitution for the real harm that they are causing” said Matt Smith, an organizer with Food & Water Watch and one of three defendants in the case.

Spectra’s “AIM” expansion has come under fire recently from New York Governor Andrew Cuomo as well as US Senators Schumer and Gillibrand, who have asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to halt construction on the pipeline’s New York segment over safety concerns. Of particular concern is a 2 mile stretch of pipeline that would push volatile compressed gas within feet of the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant. Located just 30 miles north of Manhattan, Spectra’s pipeline expansion near the aging plant creates a situation that puts 20 million residents and the entire economics of the United States at risk. A Spectra pipeline which connects to Spectra’s “AIM” expansion exploded in Salem Township, Pennsylvania last month, creating a massive fireball that left a local resident with third degree burns over 75% of his body.

“These fracked-gas facilities are dangerous on many levels: they are accelerating climate change, constantly off-gas poisonous chemicals, destroying communities where the fracking occurs, and are one shoddy weld away from exploding,” says Keith Clougherty, a defendant in the case.

The Rhode Island portion of the “AIM” pipeline expansion involved doubling the size of an existing compressor facility in Burrillville. The project faced sustained resistance from state wide activists and local community members. In August Invenergy announced plans to build a 1000 megawatt power plant immediately adjacent to Spectra’s compressor station. The fracked-gas used at the plant would be delivered through Spectra’s pipeline system.

Opposition to the power plant has steadily grown in intensity since the project was first proposed. Last week hundreds of people rallied at the Statehouse in support of a bill that would give Burrillville residents the power to vote on any tax agreement negotiated between the town and Invenergy. That same week nearly two dozen national environmental and public health organizations sent a letter to RI Governor Gina Raimondo urging her to demonstrate real climate leadership by rejecting the fracked gas power plant proposal.

Recently Spectra announced plans to expand their Burrillville compressor station a second time as part of the “Access Northeast” project.

May 25, 2016May 25, 2016

Activists block pipeline with live-in, solar powered shipping container

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

Peekskill, NY – Just four days after 21 people were arrested for peacefully blockading the entrance to a Spectra Algonquin Incremental Market (AIM) Pipeline work site, two people courageously locked themselves into a renewable-energy powered, 20-ft recycled shipping-container home at the work site, directly on the pipeline route. They plan to stay inside the container blockade for as long as possible.

The AIM Pipeline is a 42-inch, high pressure, fracked gas pipeline, which if completed will run through residential communities and within 105 feet of critical Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant safety facilities. The fully self-contained home is a strong symbol of both resilience and resistance: It is intended to halt construction of the dangerous AIM Pipeline and to represent the safe alternative living situation we need to move towards to fight climate change and to halt our dependence on fossil fuel, which drives the buildout of dangerous infrastructure like the AIM Pipeline. The container home was built using reclaimed and recycled materials, is powered by both photovoltaic solar panels and a bicycle generator, has a green roof growing succulents and herbs, has a solar-heated shower and a compost toilet, and comfortable living space and beds for two occupants. All of these measures are important, but without stopping fossil fuel infrastructure, we are still on a path to disaster – which is why this project is also designed to physically stop construction on the AIM Pipeline.

The sustainable home has two occupants, both of whom walked across the entire country to raise awareness about climate change as part of the Great March for Climate: Jane Kendall is a 65-year-old retired New York mother of two who would like to be spending more time with her family, but feels morally obligated as an elder to do her small part to stop Spectra and to fight for a renewable energy future; and Lee Stewart, a 29-year-old organizer with Beyond Extreme Energy, who has been working to stop FERC since they approved a fracked gas compressor station near his home as part of project that would feed Dominion’s Cove Point LNG export facility.

“I was inspired by the fierce, loving determination in the voices of 13 Resist AIM members who disrupted a FERC public meeting to call out the commissioners for their complicity in the destruction Spectra represents,” said Lee Stewart. “It is an honor to take up temporary residence in New York on the route of the AIM Pipeline.”

“Spectra has placed all of us on a destructive path and in harm’s way. Today this simple small house, built from reused and repurposed materials and powered by renewable energy, stands on the AIM Pipeline path to halt construction,” said Jane Kendall.

This action comes after years of residents and grassroots groups actively engaging in the regulatory process, only to be ignored by FERC. The City of Boston and several grassroots groups have filed a lawsuit in Federal Court challenging FERC approval of the project. In February, Governor Andrew Cuomo wrote to FERC asking for an immediate halt to construction while New York State conducts an independent risk assessment of siting the massive, high-pressure pipeline next to Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant. FERC denied the Governor’s request, and claimed that a risk assessment by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) showed that the plant was safe. Just five days ago, on May 20th, Senators Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand called for an immediate halt to construction. Spectra’s Director of Stakeholder Outreach, Marylee Hanley, responded that “Algonquin Gas Transmission resumed construction on the Algonquin Incremental Market (AIM) project in April and will continue with its construction.”

“Now Spectra is rapidly proceeding with construction in our area despite opposition from thousands of New Yorkers and elected representatives,” said Kendall, “We are at a critical stage in this struggle, with project completion scheduled for November. Each day more trees are cut, more blasting takes place, and more pipeline is laid. It is necessary for us to stop this project now.”

There is no more time to wait. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has shown that it will not protect us from the fossil fuel industry that is destroying our climate. Instead, everyday people are stepping up and modeling the future we want to see while taking a stand against the dangerous pipeline that threatens us and our friends and neighbors.

“I am also taking this step because of the amazing connection I feel to the amazing people all over the state who are not only standing up to AIM, Spectra, and FERC, but who are also finding ways to build community during a time when the power that be are bent on keeping us isolated and narrowly focused,” said Stewart.

Online: www.resistaim.com

On Facebook: www.facebook.com/resistaim

On Twitter: https://twitter.com/ResistAIM

#StopSpectra #ResistAIM #Blockadia

[From a press release]

Democracy Now! covered this story here.

Lee Stewart protested Textron in RI, as seen in this piece on RI Future.

March 17, 2016March 17, 2016

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

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.

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

March 17, 2016March 17, 2016

Yurdin calls for review of National Grid’s proposed Fields Point expansion

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

City Councilman Seth Yurdin (Ward One) is sponsoring a resolution that calls for a comprehensive analysis of National Grid’s plans to construct a natural gas liquefaction facility in Providence. Currently, National Grid has a liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage tank at Fields Point; the new plant would process natural gas and convert it to liquid form on site. The resolution will be considered by the full City Council on Thursday, March 17th.

Yurdin, who has led multiple legislative initiatives addressing climate change and sustainability, said, “The proposal is a significant intensification of the current activity at National Grid’s Fields Point site—producing LNG is very different than storing it—and the impacts of that intensified activity need to be carefully and thoroughly studied, and communicated to the public.”

The LNG proposal is currently under consideration by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Yurdin’s resolution notes that public health and safety, climate change, and environmental justice concerns must be evaluated closely as part of FERC’s review. The resolution states that, “Rhode Island is positioned to become a leader in renewable energy. . . supporting the proposed Fields Point liquefaction facility could undermine efforts to reduce Rhode Island’s reliance on natural gas and other fossil fuels.” Yurdin cited the Block Island wind farm, renewable energy incentives through Rhode Island’s Office of Energy Resources, and Providence’s ongoing initiative to divest from fossil fuels to exemplify the state’s leadership on addressing climate change.

“The development of the Fields Point liquefaction facility will continue to deepen our reliance on fossil fuels, when, in fact, we should be investing much more into clean, renewable energy sources,” Yurdin said. “The long-term cumulative impact of projects like the National Grid LNG will be devastating to our environment.”

Yurdin also noted environmental justice concerns regarding the facility’s proximity to South Providence and Washington Park—communities largely impacted by socioeconomic and health risks, including high rates of poverty, unemployment and asthma: “We cannot ignore that this project may increase health, safety, and environmental risks for already vulnerable populations living in close proximity to the site. We must address these concerns openly and fairly,” said Yurdin.

The resolution calls for a comprehensive environmental impact statement, which would include air quality and truck traffic studies; a risk management plan; and an inclusive public participation process. The City of Providence would hold public forums in multiple neighborhood locations and engage stakeholders to address concerns.

The resolution will be introduced at the City Council meeting on March 17, 2016 at 7 p.m., at City Hall, Council Chambers, Third Floor.

[From a press release]

January 15, 2016January 23, 2016

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

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.

● 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

January 14, 2016January 23, 2016

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

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.

● 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

January 13, 2016January 23, 2016

Public Health: health disparities and impacts on health care institutions

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

Public Health

All of the above issues discussed in this position paper are also public health issues. In looking at the social and environmental determinants of health, public health paints a picture that helps explain why particular populations are more likely to be sick. Issues of potential disasters, environmental racism, climate change impacts, and economic inequality are all public health issues. The EJ League is the backbone organization for COHEP (Community Organizing for Health Equity in Providence), a collaborative effort with DARE (Direct Action for Rights and Equity), PrYSM (Providence Youth Student Movement), and the RI Doula Collective. COHEP is funded through the RI Department of Health’s “Health Equity Zones” (HEZ). As a place based initiative that works to develop collective impact strategies to address health problems and health disparities, COHEP’s HEZ work focuses on a few neighborhoods in South Providence including Washington Park, a front-line community to Port of Providence. Research and GIS mapping conducted as part of the HEZ community assessment show that Washington Park has largest concentration by far of chemical exposures in Providence, and also has the highest concentration of leaking underground storage tanks:

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_24 At hearings and public events about the proposed liquefaction facility, multiple community members have spoken out about issues of high asthma rates in the community being a major concern. Public health data backs up this concern, and shows that the area is one of the state’s largest asthma hot spots. While most of the state has asthma rates of 04.4 percent or 4.56.2 percent, most of Providence has asthma rates of 8 – 10.3 percent and the neighborhood next to I95 and the Port has the highest levels in the state at 10.4 – 15.4 percent. (link)

On top of the high level of children with asthma, the front-line community and asthma hot spot next to the port also has some of the highest levels in the state for Emergency Department visits or Hospitalizations due to asthma. Among children with asthma living next to the Port of Providence, 15.5 – 24.1 percent have had an Emergency Department visit, compared to rates of 03.3 percent for more affluent neighborhoods in Providence. Similarly with asthma related hospitalizations, for front-line neighborhoods adjacent to the Port or Providence, children with asthma had inpatient hospitalizations at a rate of 5.1 – 8.3 percent compared to the rate of 00.7 percent in the more affluent neighborhoods in Providence.

In addition to the many health problems and health disparities impacting the neighborhoods of South Providence and Washington Park, there are also public health impacts relating to healthcare facilities in these communities. The Lifespan and RI Hospital complex is the largest and most visible concern, containing the state’s only level 1 trauma center, Rhode Island Hospital, Women and Infants Hospital, and Hasbro Children’s Hospital.

In addition to this major hospital complex, there are many other healthcare facilities within a close radius (1 to 2 miles) from the proposed liquefaction facility and close to the other hazardous facilities in Port of Providence. These include but are not limited to:

Hasbro’s Medicine Pediatrics Primary Care (245 Chapman St) this facility offers primary care for children, and also offers specialty services for chronic conditions including asthma, diabetes, and hypertension, which exist at very elevated levels in this neighborhood. The facility also offers gender and sexual health services. It falls within the one mile radius of the proposed liquefaction facility.

Providence Community Health Centers (375 Allens Ave) PCHC serves approximately 50,000 patients in Providence, many of whom are low income, uninsured or under insured, and suffering from health problems impacted by social determinants of health. This location has their administrative building for all 9 health centers in Providence, as well as the Chaffee Health Center which serves patients. It is located within the half mile radius of the proposed liquefaction facility.

Providence Community Health Centers Prairie Avenue complex (369 Prairie Ave) this health center location also includes the asthma and allergy specialty clinic for the entire PCHC health center system across Providence.

Fertility Solutions (758 Eddy St) specializes in fertility treatments and in vitro fertilization and other related services

New Beginnings (717 Allens Ave) offers perinatal and ultrasound care

It is clear from this limited list, that any cumulative or emergency related impacts from the proposed liquefaction facility would not only impact the whole state’s health care system, but would particularly impact health care services related to maternal and child care, reproductive care, chronic disease care, and emergency response services. Ongoing background pollution and risks in this area should be seen as a public health crisis. Any potential future disaster impacting the port could cause a public health emergency of unimaginable proportions.

● 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

January 12, 2016January 23, 2016

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

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 and 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.

● 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

January 12, 2016January 23, 2016

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

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

? 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

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

Solutions and Alternatives

Economic Inequality

Public Health

Climate Change

Environmental Racism

EPA Toxic Release Inventory?­

Schools at Risk

EPA’s EJ SCREEN Tool

Proximity to Facilities Requiring a Chemical Risk Management Plan

Proximity to Water Discharger Facility

Traffic Proximity

Toxic Storage and Discharge Facilities

Environmental Justice: working towards equitable healthy environments

EPA Toxic Release Inventory?