Fields Point LNG Plant

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

November 10, 2015

National Grid responds to liquefaction opposition

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

National Grid has proposed a liquefaction plant as an addition to the Field’s Point gas storage facility, to be located in South Providence, and every single comment the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) received on the proposed facility from the public was negative and against the facility’s construction. No one from the public, it seems, is in favor of the project.

Of course this will not deter National Grid.

In a 39 page letter, National Grid’s legal counsel responded to every commenter. Of course, some of the comments were dismissed as irrelevant with the phrase, “Expression of commenter’s view.” This phrase was repeated 27 times, in response, for instance, to Greg Gerritt saying, “Climate change is the crisis of our times” or Jesus Holguin saying, “This facility is not going to benefit us in any way. Something that would benefit us is [a] just transition away from fossil fuels.”

National Grid’s legal team sorted through the testimony of the various commenters and pulled out all the statements that “identify potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts.” Expressed concerns that were not environmental in nature will be addressed at a later time, says National Grid.

The sloppiness of the response’s composition is evident in some of the misspellings of various names. Monay McNeil is misspelled Money McNeil and state Representative Aaron Regunberg is misidentified as Erin Regunberg for instance.

Further, the response to each comment, if the comment was deemed worthy of response, is footnoted in some 13 documents called “draft resource reports” and filed with FERC on November 2 and 4. This means that finding the reason for National Grid’s objection to a particular comment requires cross referencing footnotes with the draft resource reports.

For instance, when Rhode Island state Senator Juan Pichardo was paraphrased as saying he was, “Opposed to this LNG or this facility being built and the waterfront is so close to hospitals and so close to the neighborhood,” National Grid responded with:

Refer to Resource Report 1, Section 1.4 (page 1-14) (Operation and Maintenance).

Refer to Resource Report 5, Section 5.3.2 (pages 5-8 through 9) (Fire Protection), Section 5.7 (pages 5-13 through 5-22) (Environmental Justice) and Section 5.9.2.6 (page 5-28) (Environmental Justice Socioeconomics).

Refer to Resource Report 8, Section 8.2.2 (Existing Residences and Buildings).

Refer to Resource Report 11, Section 11.1 (pages 11-2 through 11-8) (Safety Issues), Section 11.2.3.2 (pages 11-10 and 11-11) (Thermal Radiation and Flammable Exclusion Zones) and Section 11.3.1 (page 11-11) (Facility Response Plan).

Refer to Resource Report 13, Section 13.14 ((pages 13-102 through 104) Hazard Detection System), Section 13.15 (pages 13-105 through 109) (Fire Suppression and Response Plan) and Section 13.16 (pages 13-110 through 111) (Hazard Control Systems).

Senator Pichardo could spend quite a bit of time wading through page after page of reports to find out exactly why National Grid believes his concerns are without merit, if he were so inclined.

To be fair, pages 2-9 of National Grid’s legal response attempt to distill the information from the draft resource reports into a few paragraphs organized by subject, such as “Traffic Impacts” or “Comments on Rate and Cost Impacts on Retail Gas Customers.” In these sections, the concerns and opinions expressed by the public are legally elided by claiming that the law is on the side of National Grid, a legal position that National Grid maintains, but does not prove. Remember that all the documentation National Grid is submitting to FERC are essentially sales documents, created to convince FERC to approve the project over the objections of the public.

For instance, in response to a complaint made that the public meetings were not adequately advertised within the affected community, National Grid’s legal team writes, “Some stakeholders commented on the quality of the public notification that has been provided to local residents for the proposed Project. Resource Report 5, section 5.7.2 discusses the public outreach undertaken by NGLNG to communicate with the environmental justice populations near the proposed Project…”

In other words, despite the experience of the community, National Grid maintains that they satisfied the letter of the law.

There’s a lot in the legal team’s response worthy of comment, and I hope others will chime in with comments on this, but one more point is worth consideration. National Grid is a huge company, with many subsidiaries and ventures. So when National Grid says that there is a customer need for the new liquefaction facility, it should be noted that the customer mentioned is The Narragansett Electric Company, which is owned by National Grid.

At another point, when discussing rate impacts, National Grid disingenuously claims that, “State public utility commissions regulate retail rates.” This is true as far as it goes, until one realizes that the Rhode Island Public Utility Commission serves as a virtual rubber stamping agency for any rate increase proposed by utility companies such as National Grid or its subsidiary, Narragansett Electric.

Like an evil octopus, National Grid wants us to believe that it’s various tentacles aren’t actually all parts of some enormous beast, but independent snakes acting alone.

This is why it is difficult to take seriously National Grid’s answer to the comments of Nick Katkevich, who “urged that the environmental effects of the proposed Project be considered in the same environmental document as pipeline projects sponsored by subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Partners, LP in New England, specifically the AIM, Atlantic Bridge, and Access Northeast projects.”

National Grid claims that these are all separate projects that must each be judged independently, and that there will be no cumulative environmental effects, at least as can be judged under present law. National Grid claims that the liquefaction facility “would be undertaken even if those pipeline projects did not or do not proceed” and “is an unconnected single action that has independent utility so it would not be appropriate to consider it in the same environmental analysis with any of the pipeline expansion projects.”

Despite the contentions of National Grid’s legal team, the planned expansion of fracked and unfracked methane gas infrastructure in Rhode Island seems part of a grand plan to keep our state addicted to fossil fuels that are destroying the environment. These proposed projects have lifespans of 50 years or more, yet optimistically we have much less than 35 years to kick the fossil fuel habit.

No amount of corporate legalese can change that math.

October 9, 2015October 29, 2015

FERC listens as no one speaks in favor of National Grids’ LNG facility

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

No one spoke in favor of the project, but more than 100 people packed the room and 33 people spoke against National Grid‘s plan to build a $100 million methane gas liquefaction facility in Fields Point in South Providence before representatives of FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission), the agency tasked with the job of approving or disapproving the project.

One after another speakers from the affected community, environmental activists, concerned Rhode Islanders and elected members of the General Assembly spoke passionately about negative environmental impacts and the explicit environmental racism implicit of National Grid’s plan.

The liquefaction facility is to be located adjacent to one of Rhode Island’s poorest communities, which already suffers from higher rates of asthma and other respiratory ailments. This community has become a sacrifice zone, a place where dangerous chemicals are stored. A representative from FERC admitted that some additional methane leaks are to be expected as a result of this plan, and methane is one of the most dangerous gases contributing to global warming and global catastrophe.

Peter Nightingale, a member of Fossil Free Rhode Island, has been involved in several FANG (Fighting Against Natural Gas) actions and who was arrested for his peaceful protest at Senator Sheldon Whitehouse‘s Providence office, pulled no punches when he told FERC, “To you who are here silently doing your jobs for this project I have but one thing to say: You are complicit in crimes against humanity and against Mother Earth.”

Monae McNeil, from the Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI), a group central to the community’s resistance to this project, said, that this project “puts low-income communities at risk, if something were to happen.” The site of the project is not protected by the hurricane barrier. There was an earthquake near this location in August. A disaster at this facility would affect as many as 140 thousand Rhode Islanders.

Jan Luby pointed out that no storage facilities like this are being proposed for Barrington, Lincoln or East Greenwich. Instead, these projects are proposed for low-income communities where resistance is expected to be minimal.

Greg Gerritt spoke on behalf of the Green Party of RI and Prosperity For RI. FERC, he said, “has never turned down one of these projects” demonstrating that the agency is not serious about climate change.

Kate Schati doesn’t live on the South Side, but she cares what happens there, because “it affects the people who live in Providence with me… I don’t want them to be at risk of a breach or a leak or an explosion or even the normal operation of a plant…”

Ben Boyd: “…we need to be investing in clean, renewable, sustainable energy sources…”

One of the most impassioned testimonies of the evenings came from Stephen Dahl, of Kingston, RI. “Weep, weep, weep, weep,” he began, quoting William Blake on the Industrial Revolution. This was more performance piece as testimony, and was powerful.

Marti Rosenberg lives within the affected community. “This project shows us that the impact of fracking is much closer than we think.” Methane is used by communities near the South Side, but the South Side itself not so much. Instead, this community bears the brunt of the negative impacts of methane gas, and none of the benefits.

Peter Sugrue questioned National Grid’s motives for project. “We will clearly see a rate increase for this $100 million project,” yet all National Grid is promising is a smoothing of price volatility. How does this benefit Rhode Islanders, is that even to be honestly expected and is it worth the cost?

Paul Klinkman

Liberty Goodwin

Karen Palmer

Nick Katkevich of FANG, which has lead several actions against fracked gas infrastructure in Burrillville and Providence, promised resistance to this project in the event that FERC approves it.

Gina Rodriguez-Drix is a resident of Washington Park, a mother of two and a birth worker, is “deeply concerned about the disproportionate effects” this project will have on women and children of color in her neighborhood and other affected communities.

Julian Rodriguez-Drix is tired. “I’ve got a family with two kids, a full time job, and now it’s up to us to us, spending our free time poring through pages and pages of bureaucratic nonsense that is trying to find ways to justify a facility that you’ve heard everyone here speak out against.”

Representative Aaron Regunberg

Claudia Gorman

Servio

Lisa Petrie

Yudiglen Sena-Abrau

Jesus Holguin

Ana Quezada

Dania Flores is a board member of EJLRI. She spoke to the community (not to FERC) about how National Grid’s plan impacts the Latino community, about how we have our own solutions, and how we need to deport National Grid.

Paul

Beth Milham

Senator Josh Miller

Senator Juan Pichardo

August Juang

Vanessa Flores-Maldonado

Helen MacDonald

Steve Roberts

Susan Walker

Michelle Lacey

Will Lambek

October 1, 2015October 5, 2015

Public hearing on National Grid’s LNG production facility needs you

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

Rhode Islanders will get their only chance to directly address their concerns regarding a proposed methane liquefaction facility in South Providence next Thursday night. The proposal needs approval by FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission), an agency that has almost never turned down such an application in the past. (Though in 2005 FERC did reject an application for LNG infrastructure at Fields Point. It was from Keyspan Energy, a company later acquired by National Grid and it was a very different proposal.) So opponents need to turn out in force if the plan is to be defeated.

The liquefaction plant would be an expansion of an existing methane storage facility at Fields Point, near Thurbers Avenue. The expansion would allow National Grid to convert methane imported through the lng import facility in Everett MA and delivered by tanker truck into liquid form, allowing a greater amount of methane to be stored on site.

The Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) says that the location of the site, near one of the poorest communities in Providence, and mostly populated by people of color, is environmental racism. Further, questions have been raised about the safety to the community due to unavoidable leaks of methane, benzene and the chemicals harmful to human health.

There are wider environmental concerns over the logic of expanding Rhode Island’s reliance on fossil fuels at a time when we should be seeking alternative forms of energy that do not contribute to global warming. Rhode Island has several infrastructure projects in the works to expand our dependence on fracked methane, infrastructure planned to last over fifty years, yet our best case estimates on fossil fuels gives us maybe a fifteen year window to leave them behind before passing the no return point in saving the planet from the worst effects of global warming.

And all this says nothing about the environmental devastation being wrought in those communities where methane is extracted.

Rhode Island should also carefully consider its relationship with National Grid, a company that each year seems to request (and is granted) obscene rate increases for energy, is being sued for violating the law by shutting off the power of the elderly and disabled, and included false information in the application for the liquefaction facility submitted to FERC.

How long are our political leaders, including Gina Raimondo, who wants to be seen as an environmental governor, going to support a lying, price gouging, environment destroying foreign multinational corporation over the health, wellbeing and future of the citizens of Rhode Island? There is a rising chorus of voices demanding substantive change in Rhode Island’s energy and environmental policy, and National Grid is not part of that change.

The EJLRI hopes to “pack the house” at the public hearing, saying that “otherwise, issues like environmental racism, health effects, economic inequality impacts, etc., won’t even be part of the debate.” They provided logistics and organizing info:

Logistics for FERC’s public hearing:

– each person will have a max of 3 minutes to speak
– starting at 6pm people can sign up to speak
– at 6:30, FERC will do a short presentation about the proposed project and their process for reviewing it, and will then call for speakers
– the hearing will go until everyone who signed up as spoken, or until 10:30, whichever comes first

Organizing info:

– whether or not you want to speak, COME SUPPORT! And bring signs or banners if you can
– If you know you’ll be wanting to speak, email info@ejlri.org with the topic you’ll want to speak out. Since everyone only has 3 minutes, we’ll work to make sure all the important topics get covered
– If you don’t know what to say, contact us (info@ejlri.org) and we can give you suggestions. We will also be passing out info sheets and brochures at the event with more info

Background on the issues – here are some articles that talk about reasons why this is a terrible idea and needs to be stopped.

Eco RI: National Grid Wants to Bring New LNG Project to Providence Waterfront

RI Future: Environmental Racism and the Fields Point LNG Plant

Eco RI: Activists Rally Against Providnece LNG Project

RI Future: Southside PVD Activists Speak Out Against Fields Point LNG Plant

August 15, 2015August 18, 2015

Environmental racism and the Fields Point LNG Plant

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

National Grid‘s plan to build a LNG liquefaction system at the Fields Point LNG Plant on Providence’s South Side met with vocal opposition from several environmental, social and economic justice groups and highlighted the issue of racial injustice in environmental politics. Representatives from the Providence Youth Student Movement (PrYSM), the Providence Student Union (PSU) and the Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) took control of the room at one point to conduct a peaceful speak out for the benefit of representatives from both National Grid and FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.)

The event, as planned by National Grid, was unusual. Instead of a series of presentations delivered from a stage, the presentations were arranged around the room in the cafeteria of the Juanita Sanchez Educational Complex. At each stop you could learn more about National Grid’s plans for installing a new plant for liquefying natural gas for storage in an existing tank. This had the effect of making each stop along the way a little more personal, as aspects of the project were explained in a one on one manner by National Grid reps.

When I arrived, about an hour before the event started, I noticed the presence of five Providence police officers outside. Inside, the event was being watched over by two additional officers, one a lieutenant. There were some members of the community present, but most of those who attended seemed to be with the RI Sierra Club or Fossil Free Rhode Island and opposed to National Grid’s plan. Members of these groups were content to engage the various National Grid and FERC reps in conversation.

When the young people representing PrYSM, PSU and EJLRI entered the room, they were followed in by the police officers from outside, three of whom were wearing their motorcycle helmets.

“They’re motorcycle officers,” said the Lieutenant when I asked why seven police officers were needed, “That’s not riot gear. I just called them in.”

“So they were outside, directing traffic?” I asked.

“Yes,” he replied, “Once we clear here, they’ll go back to traffic duty.”

“I know from other actions I’ve covered that these are all decent kids,” I said.

“We don’t know that,” said another officer, “We didn’t know who was coming, or how many. We saw a bus pull up and then we saw all the bullhorns and the lieutenant asked, ‘All right, who’s in charge?’ We just wanted to lay down some ground rules, some normal, by the law ground rules, and they just completely ignored us.”

When I asked David Graves, media relations representative for National Grid about the number of police officers present, he said that initially, National Grid had asked for a two officer detail, but, “when those protesters were arrested this morning in Burrillville, the police department called us and we said that they should do what they feel is the right thing to do and assign a larger detail.”

Graves was talking about activists from FANG (Fighting Against Natural Gas) chaining themselves to the gate at the Spectra Energy Compressor Station. “I don’t think these people are associated with that group,” added Graves.

Still, it was hard not to see the sudden explosion of police on the scene occurring precisely when people of color arrived as anything other than an expression of the kind of institutionalized environmental and economic racism that the groups were protesting. For a primer on environmental racism, you could a lot worse than watching Jesus Holguin below.

The appearance of racialized policing was heightened when the activists from PrYSM, PSU and EJLRI left the room and all seven police officers followed them outside, leaving no police officers in the room. I note here that the two men arrested in Burrilville were white and middle-aged, like the people left in the room without police officers, not young people of color, who conducted themselves fully within the law and left the room in peace. One of the two men arrested in Burrillville, Dr. Curtis Nordgaard, commented on the treatment he experienced as he made his first foray through the criminal justice system, after being released from District Court on personal recognizance earlier the same day. “Part of why we can do this,” said Nordgaard, “is because of our privileged status.”

National Grid’s rep David Graves disagreed with much of what the various protesters said during their speak-out, but he knew the protesters weren’t trouble. “These kids are wonderful,” he said.

As the fight against environmental racism and for a clean energy future intensifies in the years to come, we should expect large corporations such as National Grid to increasingly rely on the government to use the power of the police to intimidate opposition. Billions of dollars are ready to be spent to prevent the transition to a clean energy future, and the billionaires in control of that money will not let go without a fight. As Dr. Noel Healy said, “There is no fixable flaw in fossil fuel industry business plan. We are asking a company to go out of business.”

August 15, 2015

Southside PVD activists speak out against Fields Point LNG Plant

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

National Grid asked for public comment on their plan to build a LNG liquefaction system at the Fields Point LNG Plant on Providence’s South Side, and boy, did they get it. Representatives from the Providence Youth Student Movement (PrYSM), the Providence Student Union (PSU) and the Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) took control of the room to conduct a peaceful speak out for the benefit of representatives from both National Grid and FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.)

Despite the presence of an intimidating police presence, these activists and protesters fearlessly and passionately presented their case.

Julian Rodríguez-Drix of the EJLRI, did a great job outlining the dangers, from asthma to earthquakes. In under seven minutes Rodríguez-Drix basically presented every objection to the liquefaction expansion. He also told a chilling story of taking pictures of the LNG tank after the recent earthquake to see if it had suffered an damage, and his friend’s interrogation by the FBI as a result.

“This whole area is on the wrong side of the hurricane barrier. So a storm surge is just going to double back, protecting downtown, but hitting South Side doubly hard.”

Jesus Holguin of the EJLRI said, “All that pollution rains in our community, giving our community high rates of asthma.”

“So my mom just had a baby three weeks ago,” said Daniel, speaking on behalf of PrYSM. Daniel lives practically across the street from the proposed site. “You should already know that living there is not a safe place to raise a baby.”

Steven Roberts, of the EJLRI, openly doubted that the temporary construction jobs this project would create would impact his community at all. “We don’t know how many jobs have been set aside for folks in this disadvantaged community.”

“Slave ships create jobs, asbestos creates jobs, fracking creates jobs,” said Roberts, “we want people to have jobs and economic stability, but not on the backs of people who look like me…”