Invenergy – Page 5

April 18, 2016May 3, 2016

Banners dropped at RI Office of Energy Resources opposing power plant

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

Two large banners were dropped from the fourth floor of the Rhode Island Department of Administration Building outside the offices of the Rhode Island Office of Energy Resources (OER), to protest Commissioner Marion Gold’s support of the fracked-gas and diesel fuel power plant planned for Burrillville by Invenergy.

One banner read, “All That Glitters is Not Gold” and another “No New Power Plant”. The group began a sit-in at OER office, demanding that Dr. Gold revoke her support of the power plant project and pledge to meet with Burrillville residents.

“For five months we have been trying to schedule a meeting with Dr. Gold to no avail. Enough is enough.“ said Kathy Martley a Burrillville resident who participated in the sit-in and one of the founders of BASE (Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion). “We need our State’s energy leaders to stop supporting fossil fuel projects”.

After being ordered by the Capitol Police to roll up and remove the banners, Dr. Gold emerged from her offices, initially saying that she did not have time to meet with the small group because the Federal Energy Secretary Moniz, in town to deliver a lecture at Brown University.

Gold then reconsidered and offered the group ten minutes, which turned into 15. Kathy Martley and others explained their objections to the plant. Nick Katkevich, of FANG, (Fighting Against Natural Gas) asked Gold to reconsider her support for the plant. Gold indicated that she is waiting “for the process to play out” before making a decision about the plant, but Katkevich countered that in the past she has supported the plant.

Gold also wouldn’t say she supported the plant, adopting a curiously neutral position, given her past support.

“The power plant is bad for Burrillville, bad for Rhode Island and will impact the most vulnerable communities around the world by contributing to global climate change. We are asking Dr. Gold to do the right thing and revoke her support of this project,” said Sally Mendzela of North Providence in a statement.

In a statement the group added, “According to the region’s utility regulators, this power plant is not necessary to meet demand. Rhode Islanders should be weary of Invenergy’s false claims. They are not concerned about what’s best for Rhode Island, only what’s best for their own profits.”

You can watch the meeting with Marion Gold in the video below.

April 17, 2016April 29, 2016

Burrillville Town Council knew about power plant plans in February 2015

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

At the most recent Burrillville Town Council meeting, Council President John Pacheco said that “As a town council, we did not know this plant was actually going to happen until the Governor announced it.”

Pacheco was not quite telling the truth.

Videos from February and March 2015 town council meetings show that local elected officials – both the council and legislators – have been paving the way for the controversial Invenergy power plant for months before Governor Gina Raimondo officially announced the project, contrary to recent statements by the Council President.

Governor Gina Raimondo announced Invenergy’s plans to build another power plant in Burrillville on August 4, 2015. The town council met with local legislators Paul Fogarty, Cale Keable and Brian Newberry to discuss the idea seven months earlier.

On February 23, 2015 Burrillville Town Manager Michael C Wood, at a “special meeting” of the town council, said, “We’ve had some conversation. There’s the potential for a new power plant to come to Burrillville.” Present at this meeting was the entire Town Council except for Stephen Rawson and Donald Fox.

This special meeting was between the town council and state Senator Paul Fogarty, Representative Cale Keable, and Representative Brian Newberry. The meeting was held to discuss state level legislation of interest to the town council with their state representatives.

Wood told the council and legislators he wanted to “make sure that the existing [state level] legislation we have will allow for the siting and construction of the new power plant in the town.” The legislation concerns Burrillville’s ability to enter into tax agreements with power companies and can be seen here.

“It would be appreciated, Cale,” said Wood, talking to Rep Keable directly, “making sure that that legislation, as written, will allow the town to potentially entertain the possibility of a new power plant.”

“Okay,” said Keable, “We’ll look at that.”

As can be seen from this screen shot from earlier in the video, this meeting was poorly attended.

At another “special meeting” on March 18, 2015, Town Councilor Stephen Rawson talked about Burrillville water contaminated with MTBE. Several years ago some of the well water in Burrillville was contaminated with MTBE, a virulent carcinogen that some residents say sparked a cancer cluster in the town. The water that Invenergy wants to use for its cooling system will come from this MTBE contaminated well water.

Though Invenergy claims the water will be filtered and the water will be pure enough to dump in the Clear River when they are done, no one seems quite sure if the science adds up. Note also that as far as I have been able to tell, no one has attempted to use MTBE contaminated water to cool a power plant before.

In the clip below, Rawson says that, “Years ago Mike [Town Manager Michael Wood] had tried to make a proposal, and it was a good one, to run that water up to the [Ocean State] power plant as cooling water so the wells would be flushed and probably get rid of the MTBE that’s in the ground water.”

Rawson notes that Harrisville, which has authority over this situation, blocked this proposal.

Town Councillor David Place then says to Wood, “you and I had that discussion with that new power plant going in, of bringing back that idea of running a line to the new power plant and doing the exact same thing when that new power plant comes in. I think you said that that discussion had come up.”

“They have already reached out to Mike Kirkwood [General Manager of the Pascoag Utility District],” said Wood, “I don’t know about Harrisville…”

“They shouldn’t be involved at all,” said Place, because the wells and siting of the power plant will be entirely inside Burrillville, and Harrisville will have no control over the decision.

“To get to your point, Steve,” continued Wood, addressing Rawson, “that probably will happen, and that will help the well situation…”

Later in the same meeting Town Manager Wood says, “We need to set up something, maybe not right now, to deal with the new power plant… some professional help… to negotiate a deal with them.”

“How soon is that going to be done?” asks Council President John Pacheco.

“Not right away,” answers Wood, “But it should be on our radar screen. Probably within a year.”

“I’m sorry,” says a female town councilor (either Kimberly Brissette Brown or Michelle Bouchard), “What power plant are you talking about?”

“Invenergy,” answers Wood, spelling it out for clarification. “I-N-V-E-N-E-R-G-Y.”

The discussion then turns to the protesters who walked 28 miles, from Burrillville to Providence, in protest of the expansion of the compressor station in Burrillville. Wood laughs when he is asked, “Did those protesters ever make it to Providence?”

Contrary to Council President John Pacheco’s statement last week, the videos make clear that not only was the town council, as a whole, aware that Invenergy was planning to build a power plant in Burrillville, they have been actively involved with the project for months prior to its public announcement.

It also appears that Town Manager Michael Wood suggested the idea of using the MTBE contaminated water to cool the plant, one of the most controversial and potentially dangerous aspects of the plan. If the water isn’t filtered properly or cannot be filtered, dangerous levels of MTBE water will be dumped into the Clear River or released as airborne steam, potentially threatening the health and safety of thousands of Rhode Islanders.

At no time is the idea of not bringing the new power plant to Burrillville discussed by the Town Council. The idea of opposing the plant never seems to have occurred to them.

Many voters in Burrillville are aware of these videos and their faith in their Town Council and state representatives has been severely challenged or even shattered.

April 14, 2016May 3, 2016

Burrillville Town Council secretly negotiating tax deals with Invenergy

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

In a stunning revelation, Burrillville Town Council legal counsel Oleg Nikolyszyn confirmed under questioning from Burrillville resident Jeremy Bailey that the council has been secretly negotiating a tax agreement with Invenergy for the proposed gas and oil burning power plant. Before this revelation, the existence of such negotiations may have been suspected, but were not confirmed. Shortly after Nikolyszyn’s revelation, Councillor Kimberly Brissette Brown questioned whether the item was properly before the Council. Council President John Pacheco III said that the item was not properly before the council, and said that if Bailey wanted to discuss the issue of the Council’s tax agreement deliberations with Invenergy, he would have to put that item on the agenda.

How Bailey would know to put previously unknown secret meetings with Invenergy on the agenda was not discussed.

Nikolyszyn’s admission capped a stressful and difficult Burrillville Town Council meeting, in which council members, aided by legal counsel Nikolyszyn, once again said that they have no power to stand against Invenergy. President Pacheco said that if the Town Council doesn’t remain absolutely neutral about the plant, it may seem that they are unfairly influencing various boards, the members of which the Town Council has nominated. Why this level of neutrality is necessary from the Burrillville Town Council in relation to boards they nominate but such neutrality is not necessary for Governor Gina Raimondo, who nominates the members of the Energy Facilities Siting Board and has taken a position in strong support of the power plant, is unknown.

Burrillville resident Jonathan Dyson later followed up with the Town Council about the tax negotiations with Invenergy, asking if there was any board, regulation or law that forced the tax agreement meetings. Despite saying earlier that the item wasn’t properly before the board, Pacheco answered Dyson and maintained that entering into such discussions was a fiduciary duty of the Town Council. Then Pachco added that these negotiations also include the “potential abutters to the power plant,” that is, people who own property next to Invenergy’s land.

Pacheco didn’t explain exactly what this means, but it seems to indicate that Invenergy is actively negotiating what payments, if any, abutters to the project might receive in the event that the power plant is built.

When Dyson then asked the Town Council “under what conditions would the Town Council say no to Invenergy,” Town manager Michael Wood angrily said, “That is not an agenda item.” But in fact, it was an agenda item 16-106 (b). Wood then said that the item was too vague and would not be discussed, never mind that earlier, Council President Pacheco had complimented Gary Patterson, who requested that item be placed on the the agenda, saying, “Your item on the agenda was properly phrased. I appreciate that.”

Throughout the meeting the Town Council took great pains to tell the people attending that the fix wasn’t in and this wasn’t a done deal. However, to the consternation of most of those present, the Town Council has admitted to secretly negotiating tax agreements and issues of abutment with Invenergy. Worse, theses discussion have been going on for some time, as the earliest discussions seem to precede Oleg Nikolyszyn becoming town solicitor.

By the end of the meeting the public was more angry and distrustful of the Town Council than when the meeting began.

I’ll be writing much more about this meeting in a future piece, but right now, questions remain: How long has the Town Council been in negotiation with Invenergy? Who has been party to these negotiations? The Town Council says that this isn’t a done deal, that the “fix isn’t in” but what other unknown meetings and negotiations are happening without the public’s knowledge?

April 13, 2016May 3, 2016

Sheldon Whitehouse won’t take a position on Burrillville power plant proposal

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

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse is one of Congress’ sharpest critics of the fossil fuel industry when he’s in Washington D.C. When the fossil fuel industry comes to Rhode Island, on the other hand, Rhode Island’s junior senator is less sanctimonious on the subject. He’s not taking a position on a methane power plant proposal for Burrillville currently being considered by the state Energy Facility Siting Board.

“The Senator believes this is an issue that should be left for the state siting board and DEM to decide,” said Whitehouse spokesman Richard Davidson in an email to RI Future on Tuesday. “He feels his time is best spent fighting for national efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions.”

Davidson was reiterating remarks the senator said during a recent appearance on NBC10 News Conference that seemed to contradict an earlier WPRI report that Whitehouse “supports” the project. “I did not take a position, and I do not intend to take a position,” Whitehouse told NBC10’s Bill Rappleye.

“As a general proposition I’m opposed to fossil fuels,” Whitehouse said. “Nobody fights harder than I do in the Senate to try to knock down the fossil fuel industry, break it’s grip on the Senate and let us solve the problem of climate change.”

But he clearly doesn’t oppose the methane-fueled power plant proposal in his home state.

“To the extent all we are doing is taking out choke points that create artificially high prices for Rhode Islanders or creating potential spikes in electricity when there is very high demand that goes beyond way above regular prices, I’m not going to object to those things,” he told Rappleye. “I object more generally and categorically to having our dependence on fossil fuels.”

The proposal for a new fossil fuel power plant in Burrillville has pitted environmental activists, Burrillville residents and, more recently, local legislators against Governor Gina Raimondo and Invenergy, the company that wants to build and manage the facility. Raimondo and Invenergy promise lower energy prices while activists and locals say the project guarantees fossil fuel production for another three decades while diminishing the quality of life in bucolic Burrillville, a small rural town in northwestern Rhode Island.

Whitehouse was seen as an important bellwether on the proposal because of his ongoing efforts in Congress to call attention to the physical and economic dangers of climate change and continued reliance on fossil fuels. For more than two years, Whitehouse has delivered “Time To Wake Up” speeches on the senate floor that detail the dangers of climate change and dishonesty of the fossil fuel industry.

Local environmentalists were disappointed Whitehouse didn’t oppose the project. They were more disappointed that he told WPRI there was no push back from environmentalists. “From the larger environmental movement – the Save the Bays and the League of Conservation Voters and the Nature Conservancies and all that – there’s no blowback whatsoever. They understand the difference between the national and the local concern,” Whitehouse said, according to the WPRI report.

But a subsequent RI Future report showed Save The Bay and the League of Conservation have not taken positions on the proposed power plant. And the Environment Council of RI, of which the Nature Conservancy is a member, took issue with Whitehouse’s characterization of the political ramifications. “To be clear,” said the group in a news release. “ECRI strongly opposes the proposal to build a new, long-lived fossil-fuel plant in Rhode Island, because building this plant would make it impossible for the state to meet its short-, medium-, and long-term goals for carbon-emission reductions.”

Below is a transcript of Whitehouse’s remarks to Bill Rappleye and the full episode of NBC10 News Conference:

As a general proposition I’m opposed to fossil fuels. Nobody fights harder than I do in the Senate to try to knock down the fossil fuel industry, break it’s grip on the Senate and let us solve the problem of climate change.

What happened in this case is that there are two, I think, facilities and one of them bid into the auction and was selected so that’s going to be part of the process going forward. there’s another one that did not bid into the auction but may bid into later auctions or they may try to sell power somehow on the side and that goes into our grid and is part of the process…

I did not take a position, and i do not intend to take a position, in the siting decision that is made or in the auction. there really isn’t a role for a member of congress either in a siting decision which is a contested administrative matter where we really aren’t supposed to try to interfere or in the capacity auction. so I’ve stayed out of that. I understand the point that we have these terrific spikes in energy prices and we have variances in energy prices particularly natural gas prices in the northeast versus other places where they pay way lower prices because of choke points in the system.

And to the extent all we are doing is taking out choke points that create artificially high prices for Rhode Islanders or creating potential spikes in electricity when there is very high demand that goes beyond way above regular prices I’m not going to object to those things. I object more generally and categorically to having our dependence on fossil fuel and the way I’m best positioned to fight that is to fight every week every day in the senate to getting something done and I would say we are actually closer than we have ever been to making sure president’s clean power plant stays or getting a carbon fee that adjusts the whole market so the subsidies for fossil fuels are levelized and are no longer given that advantage.

You have to allow administrative procedures to take their course everybody has a chance to say their peace but for a senator or a congressman to try to but into a ongoing administrative proceeding is something that can create an ethics problem and is usually seen as an improper interference. people in that process are entitled to have that be a fair process that comes to its own decision without a senator leaning on it.”

April 7, 2016May 3, 2016

Is Raimondo’s power plant support softening?

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

In light of the letter to the Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) from Representative Cale Keable and State Senator Paul Fogarty expressing “unequivocal opposition” to the new “1000-megawatt, fracked gas power plant in the heart of Burrillville’s idyllic village of Pascoag” I reached out to the Invenergy‘s earliest booster, Governor Gina Raimondo for comment. Raimondo spokesperson Marie Aberger responded (italics mine):

The Governor and her team are closely monitoring the plans and listening to community feedback and concerns. We will be learning more about the health and environmental impacts of the plans as the Energy Facility Siting Board continues its review of the proposal, and reviewing those impacts carefully.

“At the same time, the Governor believes we need to take action to address our energy costs in the present for all Rhode Island families and businesses. A large part of the Governor’s strategy is to adopt new solutions that will lead us to a cleaner, more reliable energy system in the future, including offshore wind and solar power.”

It’s difficult to tell if this statement shows a softening of the Governor’s position on the plant, which she called, “something that’s good for Rhode Island” when she announced the project in July of last year. Since she announced the plant Raimondo has been petitioned by environmental activists to change her position and has been confronted by sign carrying protesters at many public events.

But recently opposition to the plant has been building Burrillville, where residents are facing potential economic and environmental disaster due to the plant. Hundreds showed up at a community meeting with Keable and Fogarty at the Jesse Smith Memorial Library in Burrillville and hundreds more came out to the EFSB public hearing at the Burrillville High School. The political pressure is intensifying and many residents feel that Raimondo talk about being an environmental champion rings hollow given her support.

It was perhaps because he wanted to protect his status as an environmental champion that Senator Sheldon Whitehouse went from supporting the plant in an interview with Channel 12’s Ted Nesi to claiming that he can’t oppose or support the plant for political reasons in an interview with Bill Rappleye of Channel 10.

It turns out you can’t support the environment and fracked methane.

Still, Raimondo’s statement said that she’s “listening to community feedback and concerns” so that seems to mean that she needs to hear from people opposed to this plant and who want to see Rhode Island embrace a clean energy future. Given that, here’s the governor’s address, phone number and a link to the Governor’s contact page:

Office of the Governor
82 Smith Street
Providence, RI 02903

Phone: (401) 222-2080

http://www.governor.ri.gov/contact/

April 7, 2016May 3, 2016

Burrillville legislators oppose Invenergy’s fracked gas power plant

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

Sen. Paul Fogarty (D-Dist. 23, Glocester, Burrillville, North Smithfield) and Rep. Cale Keable (D-Dist. 47, Burrillville, Glocester) announced today their unequivocal opposition to Invenergy’s application to construct a 1,000-megawatt, fracked gas power plant in the heart of Burrillville’s idyllic village of Pascoag.

In a letter to the state’s Energy Facilities Siting Board, the Burrillville legislators stated that their opposition was the result of lengthy discussions with their constituents.

“As an initial matter, it must be stated that Burrillville has already done more than its fair share for the cause of the region’s energy needs,” Senator Fogarty and Representative Keable wrote in their letter.

“As you know, Burrillville already hosts a fossil fuel burning power plant and has done so for over two decades. Siting a second power plant in the same town does not comport with any rational notion of fairness. More importantly, having two power plants within five miles of one another raises serious concerns regarding cumulative negative health effects,” the letter continued.

“Additionally, the very residents who would be impacted most adversely by the proposed power plant have already endured – and continue to endure – the extreme inconvenience of a gas pipeline compression station located directly adjacent to the proposed site of this power plant. These residents have sacrificed enough of the quiet enjoyment of their homes. No more should be asked of them. We certainly should not ask them to suffer the loss in market value to their homes that the siting of this power plant would entail,” stated the letter.

In their letter, Senator Fogarty and Representative Keable noted that Burrillville and neighboring Glocester contain many of Rhode Island’s natural resources – a significant reason that so many people have chosen to live in those rural towns. The George Washington Management Area, Casimir Pulaski Memorial State Park, the Buck Hill Management Area, and the Black Hut Management Area are all in the immediate vicinity. There are also in the immediate vicinity numerous pristine bodies of water including Wilson’s Reservoir, Wakefield Pond, Round Lake, Wallum Lake, Pascoag Reservoir/Echo Lake, Pulaski Pond, Bowdish Reservoir and Lake Washington.

In regard to these natural resources, Representative Keable and Senator Fogarty stated that, “[t]o put these natural resources at risk by siting a colossal power plant in the middle of them would be unconscionable.”

Senator Fogarty and Representative Keable made a strong case in their letter that the proximity of Zambarano Hospital to the proposed power plant makes the location an especially bad idea.

The letter states, “[W]e view as sacrosanct our obligation to speak on behalf of the patients at Zambarano Hospital, many of whom lack the capacity to speak on their own behalf. Our friends at Zambarano Hospital are the very people that government exists to protect – government should not now put them in harm’s way.”

“Our concerns with regard to Zambarano are twofold. First, the hospital’s water supply is drawn directly from Wallum Lake. That water supply must be protected. Second, in the event that there were a catastrophe at the proposed power plant, it seems highly unlikely that the nearly 120 patients at Zambarano could possibly be evacuated in a safe manner. We understand that he likelihood of this contingency is low. Should it come to pass, however, the humanitarian crises it would create would be unfathomable.”

The letter also focused on the negative impact to the nearby town of Glocester and village of Chepachet.

“For our Glocester constituents, this proposed power plant promises only burden, without any corresponding benefit. For example, we have serious concerns that during the proposed construction of this power plant traffic flow through the historic village of Chepachet would be unworkable. The village of Chepachet is already burdened with heavy traffic during peak times.”

The letter noted that the traffic and congestion concerns will also be a problem for Burrillville residents.

“Our concerns regarding traffic extend not only to Glocester, but also to Burrillville and in particular to those living on Route 100. Obviously, the sheer amount of heavy traffic that would be involved in building the proposed power plant would be incredibly burdensome for anyone living on Wallum Lake Road. Our peaceful town would be subjected to nuisance activity of all kinds: congestion, noise, light, and, in all likelihood, dropping property values.”

Representative Keable and Senator Fogarty also took note that they both voted to support the Resilient Rhode Island Act of 2014 which calls for reductions of greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2025, 50 percent below 1990 levels by 2035, and 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. They noted that the proposed power plant is in likely violation of the Act by furthering the state’s reliance on fossil fuels.

[from a press release]

April 1, 2016May 3, 2016

Power and justice

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

I went to the hearing in front of the Rhode island Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) in Burrillville on March 31 about the proposed Clear River gas fired power plant. Hundreds of people turned out. When we arrived at 5:45 we had to go beyond the High School parking lot into the neighborhood to park. Upon walking up to the school what you saw were about 100 guys in union t-shirts. Inside, the room got very full and I heard that 100 more people stayed outside. There were at least four police officers at the event to help keep the peace.

Invenergy provided the usual dog and pony show. Too many slides full of words. The guy needed an energy boost and a much better power point. He pretended to address the issues, but did not. You could tell he really did not want to be there. He was introduced by the company’s local RI lawyer one of the usual faces I see at the State House. I do not think the lawyer was very happy to see the sea of humanity opposing the project either.

Testimony from the public was OVERWHELMINGLY against the plant. The two towns folk who spoke in favor had nothing to say and were roundly booed. The rank and file union guys were a mixed bag. Some spoke for jobs and some where incoherent. The union leaders were more articulate, but still stuck in the old paradigm. The opposition to the plant was lead by folks who live right in the neighborhood of the proposed plant. Noise, light pollution, toxics, odors, water and the destruction of their dreams and relatively pristine community were cited repeatedly. Many of the local residents also spoke passionately about climate, and the larger context, as did a few of us outsiders.

If public opinion matters, then the EFSB has an easy decision. NO. if the political fix is in and the powers demand that it get built, the EFSB will be shut down as useless. If they can not determine that the plant will prevent us from ever meeting our greenhouse gas emissions goals, pollute the local environment, and create all sorts of hazards and burdens for the community, the EFSB is hiding. If they want to drown Providence they are fools.

I think what I took away from the hearings the most is how out of touch the union leaders are with where the economy is going and where their future jobs are going to be. I worked in construction for many years. It is an honorable way to make a living. But the unions need to learn to stop building things that are bad for communities because that eventually undercuts prosperity and their support in the community. They need to say no to the corporate criminals and stand with communities against destruction. They need to stop being dependent upon corporate criminals for their work and start developing their own projects. They should act more like a cooperative rather than pick up the dregs from the rich and tell communities that this is the way to create jobs. It harms their workers to be seen as harming communities. And in a low growth environment, they need to be even more careful.

There is a lot that needs to be built right now. We need housing that people can actually afford to live in. We need non polluting energy sources, new storm water management systems, better roads, bike paths and rail corridors. But all the union executives seem to do (and maybe this is because the most visible private sector unions are in construction, and the only projects big enough are those that are based on the public’s money) is shill for the worst corporate criminals: in this case an industry that has lied about the harm it does for the last 50 years, that knew greenhouse gases were going to cause big problems, and hid the information.

You have to ask why the pipe-fitters and the steel workers, with their pension funds, do not invest directly in their own workers. Why are they not building their own wind farms or their own solar arrays? Have they bought into the ‘subservient to capital model’ that tells them to be shills for every stupid project that comes down the road so their members can get jobs?

Of course the politicians are also to blame. They refuse to understand the political and economic climate. They think they can muscle communities for corporations and base their careers on looting communities to benefit the rich. When will they get that taking care of communities, ecological healing and economic justice are the road to prosperity, not burning dinosaurs to make the climate as hot as when the dinosaurs lived? And how can anyone who lives in Rhode Island not realize that pretending real estate development is economic development is a scam. Even the World Bank, IMF and OECD tell us that subsidizing the rich works AGAINST community prosperity. But then again, an analysis I read of the World Economic Forum in Davos pointed out that the politicians and the corporate criminals they consort with are the only ones in the whole world who are not ready for a new economy based on justice and healing ecosystems.

I said one thing at the end of my three minutes that I think I will repeat here. If we stop this power plant, it will be a shot heard round the world. The fossil fuel industry must be stopped. Stop the coal mining, stop the pipelines, stop the fracking, stop the building of new infrastructure that ties us into the old system for the next 40 years. If we stop this plant it will be a beacon for people around the world that the empire can be stopped. That we can have a green future.

Little Rhody has a future as a leader, but the economy that gets us there is not the one that Governor Wall St is leading us towards. We have reminded her of this before, and I hope she gets a clue soon.

April 1, 2016May 3, 2016

Public comment on Burrillville power plant: Video

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

Here’s the full video from the Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) public comment hearing held in the Burrillville High School auditorium last night. You can read the report and see pictures from the hearing here:

Labor, citizens clash over power plant in Burrillville

Labor, citizens clash over power plant 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

For full video of all public commentary, see here.

It has been a long wait, but the people of Burrillville finally got their chance to speak out on the Clear River Energy Center (CREC), Invenergy’s proposed $700 million gas and oil burning electrical plant last night. The Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) held the first public comment hearing in the Burrillville High School auditorium, which holds 600 people. More than 100 people were outside, unable to get in. Hundreds of people signed up to speak, only 48 people got to do so.

The EFSB board is made up of Margaret Curran, chair of the RI Public Utilities Commission and Janet Coit, director of the Department of Environmental Management. The third seat on the board has recently been filled, since Parag Agrawal has been hired as the associate director of the Rhode Island Division of Planning. He begins his new job on April 18, so should be at the next EFSB hearing.

Tensions were high in the auditorium. Michael Sabitoni, president of the Rhode Island Building and Construction Trades Council and over a hundred union members arrived early, and many Burrillville natives resented their presence. One speaker from Burrillville claimed that the union members were “intimidating.” A union speaker objected to this, calling the accusation of intimidation, “B.S.”

As near as I can tell, the eight speakers in favor of the power plant were all union members. They made their case based on the 300 construction and 24 permanent jobs that would be created. Sabitoni said that he’s run into meetings like this before, where a community shows up to complain about a large project to be built in their town. He dismissed the concerns of Burrillville citizens as NIMBYism.

Donna Woods was the first speaker, and she was set the tone for the evening. She said that there is a fear that the decision to approve the power plant has already been made, despite Curran and Coit’s insistence to the contrary. During Wood’s testimony, Curran broke protocol and addressed Wood directly, insisting that no decision has been made.

“Many of us feel that we’ve been screaming underwater,” said Woods, “This is real life stuff and we’re really afraid.”

2016-03-31 Burrillville EFSB 021 — Janet Coit and Margaret Curran

Residents of Burrillville and the surrounding communities are worried about the noise, air pollution, water pollution, the destruction of a pristine environment to make room for the power plant and their property values, which are already dropping. But many speakers spoke of the environmental dangers of fracking, about helping to prevent global warming and sea level rise, and about our greater duty to future generations.

Burrillville has experienced environmental disaster first hand. Well water was contaminated years ago with MBTE from a leaking gas station gas tank. MBTE causes cancer, and many in the auditorium last night have friends and relatives who suffered and died. Between the gas pipeline compressor stations, the Ocean State Power Plant and the MBTE disaster, many residents feel, in the words of one speaker, that, “Burrillville has given enough.”

Invenergy began the public comment hearing with a presentation. I wrote about this 30-60 minute long presentation and questioned the need for it here. Curran introduced the presentation saying it would last 20 minutes, but in fact it lasted longer, much closer to the originally estimated 30 minutes. After cutting the presentation short for time, Curran said that the full report was on the EFSB website, which is a point I made in my piece. An additional six members of the public could have spoken had Invenergy not been needlessly granted that time.

The frustration that the citizens of Burrillville feel about the proposed Invenergy power plant and the EFSB process is only expected to magnify over the next weeks and months. Frustration with their elected leaders in the Town Council, General Assembly and state wide offices is widespread and no one should be surprised if Burrillville seeks change in the upcoming elections.

The next public comment meeting is scheduled for 6pm, Monday, May 23.

March 28, 2016

FANG to offer nonviolent direct action training in Providence

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

FANG (Fighting Against Natural Gas) will be holding Nonviolent Direct Action Trainings in Providence next week at the First Unitarian Church of Providence. The organizers write:

This Spring, FANG will continue to nonviolently escalate our efforts to stop Invenergy‘s fracked-gas power plant that’s proposed for Burrillville, stop Spectra‘s continued pipeline expansion schemes and confront other forms of injustice.

“In December 100 people marched in Burrillville and eight people were arrested as part of a nonviolent direct action. Now it’s time to go bigger and stop these fracked-gas projects once and for all. Plug into the resistance and into future actions by attending one this nonviolent direct action workshop!

“We’ll cover the history of nonviolent direct action, different types of action tactics, how to carry out an action and much more. These trainings are meant to immediately help people plug into actions that will happen this Spring.”

Four trainings are planned in all, two in Providence and two in Worcester:

Tuesday, April 5th from 6-9pm at the First Unitarian Church of Providence (1 Benevolent St)
Thursday, April 7th from 6-9pm at the First Unitarian Church of Providence (1 Benevolent St)
Monday, April 11th from 6-9pm at Stone Soup in Worcester (4 King Street)
Thursday, April 14th from 6-9pm at Stone Soup in Worcester (4 King Street)

You can register for the trainings here.

March 15, 2016March 15, 2016

Pattern of protester suppression at Raimondo events emerging

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

Activists protesting the Clear River Energy Center in Burrillville, Invenergy’s proposed $700 million gas and oil burning energy plant, have been showing up at many of the public speaking events attended by Governor Gina Raimondo and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse over the last few months. Raimondo is on record as fully supporting the power plant, Whitehouse has recently shifted from being for the plant to saying that he has to be neutral.

The protesters have been peaceful and respectful. There have been no efforts towards disrupting events. For the most part protesters silently hold signs declaring their views, only speaking up at the end of the event.

Recently, however, protesters have been excluded from attending these public events and come under increased scrutiny from various law enforcement agencies.

On March 4, Lorraine Savard, a retired public school teacher, went to the Rhode Island State House with her anti-power plant sign, where she expected to be able to hold her sign at the back of the room during the Cherry Blossom Festival, held in the State Room.

“I was allowed into the State Room on the condition that I not wave the sign,” Savard wrote of the incident, “I sat with my sign on the floor next to me. Overstuffed red couch toward the back is where I sat. Sign facing out. It did not take long for the girl to come take my sign and hide it out of sight. I left with my sign.”

Savard told me that “the girl” is the member of the governor’s staff who maintains an office in the State Room at the State House.

In response to an inquiry, Marie Aberger, press secretary for Governor Raimondo, said, “The Governor’s staff did not take a sign away from anyone in the State Room. We are fully supportive of the public’s right to free speech.”

Three days later URI Professor of Physics and occasional RI Future contributor Peter Nightingale attended a NORAD press conference in Quonsett, RI. He stood outside the event with his sign, discussing the proposed power plant with Congresspersons David Cicilline and James Langevin.

Nightingale reports, “Mike Miranda, private owner of NORAD, did get tired with me and my off-topic message. He asked me to leave the event, which he referred to as private. The press was there and my impression was that the public was invited, but I left.”

Nightingale wonders, “how much state and federal money is spent on shuttling our leadership to and from these ‘private’ events.”

The next day, at the Pawtucket Visitor’s Center in downtown Pawtucket, Lorraine Savard found herself unable to enter the building with her sign. “I was not allowed into the press conference this morning. I stood outside with my sign. The Visitors Center is a public place, paid for with federal funds. I’m incensed. I am a pacifist at heart and not assertive enough to have demanded entry. The police came out and asked if it was a peaceful demonstration. I alone was there. How peaceful can it get?”

In this case it was federal law enforcement officers asked Savard to leave the property.

Intrigued by these reports, I accompanied Savard to the State House State Room for the International [Working] Women’s Day Event where Governor Raimondo was going to speak. The woman who uses the State Room as her office did not take Savard’s sign, but did wag a finger and caution her against displaying it. A Capitol Police officer was stationed directly next to Lorraine for the entirety of the event as she stood at the very back of the room.

When the Governor spoke at East Providence High School on March 10, Savard was not allowed on school property. Further, even when she stood off school property, she found herself under scrutiny from two East Providence police officers.

“[I w]as not allowed on the school property,” writes Savard, “The Principal came out to tell me I would be escorted off school grounds if I did not comply. I stood at the end of the drive and was then approached by 2 EP police officers and told not to block the drive. Madam Gov waved at me when her car drove in. There was press there, I took advantage of her interview and the camera when I went back to my car. I lined up the sign to be in line with the camera. As I returned to my car with sign one of the EP police approached. I called to him and said I was leaving.”

Preventing protesters from attending and holding signs at public events is obviously a serious First Amendment issue, but in the cases above, it’s unclear that these events that were open to all or designed to be open to every member of the public. Determining whether a violation of the First Amendment has taken place depends on the facts of each particular incident and on the nature of the forum.

That said, you would hope that in an open and democratic society our leaders would be particularly sensitive to free speech issues and err on the side of allowing non-disruptive, peaceful expressions of critical views and opinions. When the public is disallowed from attending events we become victims of political theater and propaganda. Without true engagement the public will not be in possession of information that an engaged electorate needs.

Governor Raimondo and others, please take note: An informed, engaged electorate is only dangerous to a politician who is more interested in maintaining power than serving the public interest.

March 7, 2016March 8, 2016

NORAD celebration private—for pooh-bahs only

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The NORAD celebration made twitter buzz; @QuonsetRI:

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

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

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

One final tweet from @QuonsetRI:

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

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

March 2, 2016May 3, 2016

Supporting Burrillville gas plant becoming politically untenable

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

Politicians like Governor Gina Raimondo and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, who want to position themselves as environmentalist elected officials, are finding that supporting plans to expand fossil fuel infrastructure is a losing proposition.

Raimondo, who came out early and strong for Invenergy’s Clear River Energy Complex, a $700 million dollar gas and oil burning plant in Burrillville, has been under continued pressure from environmentalists to end her support. When the Governor attends a public event, there’s about even odds that at least one protester will be there holding a sign asking her to change her position.

Yesterday Raimondo was greeted by three power plant protesters at the Hope Artiste Village in Pawtucket while on her way to a press conference. In the video, the Governor invites Nick Katkevich of FANG (Fighting Against Natural Gas) to walk with her as he asks her if her position on the plant is changing. (It isn’t.)

Even when Governor Raimondo goes out of state, she is confronted by environmental activists fighting against fracked gas. During her recent trip to Washington DC Raimondo engaged in a public discussion on climate change with Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf. Pennsylvania is a state heavily invested in fracking. According to Nicholas Ballasy of PJ Media, “The moderator of the discussion… took just two questions from the audience before abruptly ending the event after the protesters interrupted. The protesters held up signs that said ‘Gov. Tom Wolf: Ban Fracking Now’ with the Food and Water Watch Fund’s logo on them.”

Though Raimondo was not the target of this protest, she must know that the plant in Burrillville will depend on the fracked gas coming out of places like Pennsylvania, and that the environmental devastation fracking wreaks there will be partly her fault if she continues to support Clear River.

In the video of the interruption below, you can see Raimondo seated behind a sign that says, “Climate and Clean Energy.”

When Invenergy proposed the new power plant, Raimondo must have seen it as a good idea. Energy prices in Rhode Island were high, construction jobs scarce, and the verdict on gas was still somewhat up in the air. All that has changed recently.

The power plant is not needed, as shown by the recent ISO New England Forward Capacity Auction. As the Conservation Law Foundation demonstrated electrical rates in Rhode Island are dropping, and the proposed plant has nothing to do with this drop.

The construction jobs on offer in Burrillville, which were not that many or for that long, are not as needed since Raimondo signed the Rhode Works legislation to rebuild our bridges and roads. Many of these jobs would go to out of state contractors if the power plant is built, and would not have benefited Rhode Islanders any way.

The evidence against fracked gas as a “clean energy source” and a “bridge fuel” is amassing. Countless studies are now showing that methane gas leaks erase the benefits of fracked gas. Worse, “natural gas plants don’t replace only high-carbon coal plants. They often replace very low carbon power sources like solar, wind, nuclear, and even energy efficiency. That means even a very low [methane] leakage rate wipes out the climate benefit of fracking.”

Finally, the fracked gas bubble is beginning to burst. As I pointed out in a previous piece, there isn’t as much frackable gas as was first assumed, and the price of gas will soon rise even as oil prices drop. With the proposed Burrillville plant designed to burn gas or oil, whichever is cheaper and more available, we may find ourselves with a brand new state of the art oil burning plant.

Raimondo wants to be seen as a leader on the climate. She serves as as vice chair of the on the Governors’ Wind and Solar Energy Coalition (GWSC). She’s one of 17 governors to sign the Governors Accord for New Energy and she was at the conference in DC, mentioned above. But it’s not enough to divest financially from fossil fuels: she has to divest herself politically as well.

Political support for fracked gas is eroding fast. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, who came out in support of the plant in an interview with Ted Nesi, walked back his support Friday morning in an interview with Bill Rappleye, saying it would be unethical for him to take a position.

That the Environment Council of Rhode Island, a coalition of 62 different groups that protect the environment in the Ocean State “strongly opposes the proposal” may have had something to do with Whitehouse’s shifting position, but why this message hasn’t penetrated the Governor’s office is a mystery.

Asked yesterday about her position on the proposed plant, Senate President Teresa M Paiva-Weed said that she hasn’t formulated an opinion because there’s no legislation on it before the General Assembly. Sure, that’s a political dodge, but Paiva-Weed’s not backing the plant either. Her Green Jobs RI report says nothing about expanding fossil fuel infrastructure.

There is a chance that our political leaders will succumb to the will of the fossil fuel companies and force this plant down our throats, like they did with 38 Studios or tried to do with the PawSox stadium. They will pretend to believe the lies of the fossil fuel industry and stick us with a power plant that we don’t need, that is ruinous to the local environment and will destroy the climate of the planet. If so, their legacy will be that of destroyers, not environmentalists.

February 16, 2016May 3, 2016

Recent power auction proves Burrillville power plant unneeded

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

The Clear River Energy Center, a gas and oil fired energy plant proposed by Invenergy for Burrillville, Rhode Island is not needed, according to the results of ISO New England Forward Capacity Auction, the results of which were released last Monday. The results of the auction means that cost of energy in Rhode Island in 2019-2020 will be reduced and these lower costs have nothing to do with the energy offered by Invenergy.

[Note: Jerry Elmer had this to say in an email received after the story ran: “Energy and capacity are two different commodities. (The third component of electricity price is ‘ancillary services.’) The price of both energy and capacity are elements of the ultimate price of electricity that is paid by ratepayers (electricity customers) but energy and capacity are not the same thing. (That is, energy and capacity are not the same thing as each other; and energy and capacity prices are not the same thing as the price of electricity.) As components of the overall electricity market in New England, energy represents about 80% of the value (price) of electricity and capacity represents about 20%. (Ancillary services are a very, very small part of the price.)]

Forward Capacity Auctions (FCA) are somewhat complicated, and making sense of the ISO NE press release was a big lift, so I talked to Jerry Elmer, senior staff attorney at the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF), to get my head around it.

“Invenergy is planning to build a 900 – 1000 MegaWatt (MW) plant,” said Elmer, “Only 485 MWs cleared in that auction and got a capacity supply obligation (CSO). So what that tells you immediately is that the plant is not needed in RI. If the plant were needed it would have gotten a CSO of 900 MW.”

Hold up. Let’s take this a little slower.

The way electrical prices are determined in Rhode Island is through a series of annual auctions. Most recently we completed FCA 10 (Forward Capacity Auction 10). Power companies bid to supply energy and ISO NE takes the best offers at the lowest price. The companies in the bidding are then obligated to supply that power during the time period specified and at the determined price. This is the capacity supply obligation (CSO).

In the most recent auction, FCA 10, Invenergy cleared only 485 MWs, about half of what their proposed 900-1000 MW plant could produce.

Under the rules of ISO NE, a certain amount of energy must be locally sourced in each zone. Here in Rhode Island, we are in the South Eastern New England (SENE) zone and the amount of locally sourced power required is 10,028 MW.

As Elmer explained the math, “The zone cleared the auction at 11,348 MW. So do a thought experiment: Invenergy got a CSO for 485 MW. Take 485 MW out of 11,348 MW and you’ve got 10,843 MW in the zone without Invenergy. You’ve got a surplus. You’ve 500 MW more than you need, without Invenergy.”

This is not what Invenergy expected when they presented their plans for the new plant. “If you look at Invenergy’s filing with the Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB),” says Elmer, “they were talking about how desperately the plant is needed, it’s needed in RI to keep the lights on, and that the clearing price of capacity is going to be much higher in RI than in the rest of the ISO NE pool, what they call ‘rest of pool.’”

In the previous auction, Rhode Island did not fare so well. The reason for this is that between FCA 9 and FCA 10 the zones were restructured. “It used to be, up until this auction, there were two separate zones,” said Elmer, “There was SEMA RI (SouthEast Massachusetts and RI), NEMA Boston (SouthEast Massachusetts and Boston), and ‘Rest of Pool,’ but for FCA 10, the ISO collapsed what used to be the NEMA Boston zone with the SEMA RI zone and made one SouthEast New England (SENE) zone.

“The interesting thing here is that Invenergy has been planning this plant for a couple of years and it is true that in the two previous actions, FCA 8 and FCA 9 one year ago, the SEMA RI zone cleared much higher than rest of pool. Invenergy was right about that. So they start this plan for this plant, and they figure that they are going to absolutely clean up financially.

“This is an import constrained zone, clearing price is double what the rest of the pool is, we’re going to put 900 or 1000 MW into this very high priced zone, we are going to make a fortune. This was their thinking.

“Between FCA 9 and FCA 10, ISO NE collapsed the NEMA Boston and SEMA RI zone into a big zone, and now, instead of the zone that includes RI being very constrained with a shortage of power, we now have an excess of power in the zone.”

Drawing the lines of the various zones has nothing to do with politics, said Elmer, “It’s nothing you can vote on or put political pressure on. It’s physics! It’s where the transmission does or does not exist.”

Let’s look at this from Invenergy’s point of view for a minute: Invenergy “thought they were supposed to have 900 or 1000 MW cleared, at a very high price,” said Elmer, “instead only half the plant cleared, 485 MW. What cleared went at exactly the same price as rest of pool, no premium, zero. The rest of pool came out 25 percent lower than last year’s clearing price, and the zone here [in Rhode Island] cleared at about half the price of last years price for this zone.”

This is great news for Rhode Island, but for Invenergy, not so much. “Here’s the kicker,” said Elmer, “Invenergy got a CSO for 485 MW. That means they have got to build the plant. They are on the hook. They posted a huge bond with the ISO called Financial Assurance (FA) just to be allowed to play in the auction. So now Invenergy has the worst of all worlds.

“It only sold half its capacity to the ISO and at a much lower price than anticipated, but they still have to build the plant, or as an alternative, they could sell their CSO between now and June 1, 2019 in one of the annual or monthly reconfiguration auctions that the ISO runs, and get out of the business altogether and not even build the plant.

“They are now forced to build the plant that will be much less profitable and lucrative than they thought, or get out of it.”

Currently, the EFSB is holding hearings to determine whether or not the plant will be built. In their filing with the EFSB, Invenergy’s two major arguments in favor of the plant were, “The plant is needed for system reliability, to prevent blackouts, to keep the lights on” and “The plant will end up lowering the bill for ratepayers,” said Elmer.

“What the results of the auction shows is that both of Invenergy’s main arguments are just wrong. They are false,” said Elmer, “The plant is not needed for system reliability, it is not needed to keep the lights on and the net effect on the clearing price is either zero or very close to zero because the plant wasn’t needed.”

“CLF is presenting three witnesses to the EFSB,” said Elmer, “one witness for each of the three arguments that Invenergy is making in favor of the plant. We’ve got one witness on the system reliability issue: Is the plant needed to keep the lights on? The answer is no and this auction proves it.

“We have a separate witness on the money issue. Will building the plant save money for rate payers? This auction result says no, the answer is no.

“And then we’ve got another witness on the climate change/carbon emission issues whose testimony is going to be that if the plant is built, it will be impossible for the state to meet its carbon emission reduction goals.”

This information is “absolutely all relevant to the EFSB. In fact, Invenergy is the party before the EFSB that raised these issues! CLF is not raising these issues. We’re addressing these issues because Invenergy raised them. In legal terms, Invenergy opened the door on each of these issues, we’re just walking through it. We’re not raising these issues, Invenergy’s raising these issues. The reason we’ve got witnesses addressing these issues is because Invenergy raised them!”

The arguments in favor of the plant that we are hearing from our elected leaders, such as Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, that Rhode Island suffers from an energy “choke point” and needs this plant for grid reliability, is simply not true any more, if it ever was. Given this new information, Senator Whitehouse should now feel very free to change his position on the proposed plant.

The low energy prices available now allows Rhode Island the luxury of planning a just transition to renewable energy sources and the time we need to concentrate on efforts to lower the amount of energy we need. Political leadership is needed to take advantage of this opportunity, and should not be squandered on an unnecessary fossil fuel plant that will harm Rhode Island’s environment and keep us addicted to fossil fuels for at least another half century.

February 3, 2016

Two protests rock State House during Governor’s budget address

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

As Governor Gina Raimondo presented her budget to the General Assembly and the television viewers at home, she was being simultaneously protested by two groups. The first was a coalition of environmental groups opposed to her support for the expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure in Rhode Island, and the second was made up of undocumented workers and their allies, there to hold the Governor to her promise to make driver’s licenses available to all.

The evening started with members of FANG (Fighting Against Natural Gas), BASE (Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion), Fossil Free Rhode Island and the Environmental Justice League of RI (EJLRI) coming together to protest the Governor’s support for three fracked gas projects in Rhode Island: Invenergy‘s planned fracked gas power plant, the Clear River Energy Center, to be built in Burillville; Spectra Energy‘s planned expansion of pipelines and a compressor station in Burrillville; and National Grid’s planned liquefaction plant at Field’s Point in South Providence.

About five minutes before Senate President Teresa Paiva-Weed, as per tradition, lead Governor Raimondo to the House Chambers, English for Action, a group dedicated to improving the lives of immigrants and undocumented workers, entered the State House to stage their own protest. Candidate Raimondo had promised this group that she would issue an executive order, within her first year in office, allowing undocumented workers to get driver’s licenses.

The Governor has broken this campaign promise.

The two groups lost no time in joining forces and ascended the stairs to the second floor chanting and marching. They were kept from approaching the entrance to the House Chambers by Capitol and State Police who formed a line in front of them. The protests were loud, but completely peaceful.

2016-02-02 State House 021 — Governor Raimondo

After the Governor entered the House Chambers to deliver her State of the State address, (successfully avoiding any contact with protesters) the two groups briefly separated before joining forces on opposite stairways in the main rotunda. Here they gave a series of short speeches explaining their positions and pledging to support each other’s efforts.

As EJLRI’s Jesus Holguin said to me afterwards, the two issues are actually more related than they might appear. The same forces that drive people from their home countries to seek work in the United States are working to keep the United States addicted to fossil fuels. During his address to the crowd, Nick Katkevich of FANG pointed out that English for Action is one of many groups that has signed onto FANG’s letter opposing the power plant.

The two groups pledged to support each other’s issues and future actions.

One thing that became abundantly clear is that the number of people who are willing to protest the Governor (and, as we saw yesterday, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse) is growing. Katkevich asked those present to join with FANG “everywhere the Governor goes” to call Raimondo out on her support for the power plant.

February 1, 2016May 3, 2016

FANG confronts Whitehouse over his Invenergy support

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

As Senator Sheldon Whitehouse stood up to speak to a room packed with concerned environmentalists and sustainability stakeholders at the #ResilientPVD Sustainability Workshops, held in the Providence City Hall Monday afternoon, climate activists representing FANG (Fighting Against Natural Gas) and BASE (Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion) stood up and silently held aloft signs challenging the Senator on his stated support for Invenergy‘s Clear River Energy Center (CREC) in Burrillville.

The event was not interrupted and proceeded as planned. At one point Leah Bamberger, Providence’s Director of Sustainability, confronted Nick Katkevich of FANG, who was handing out flyers to people in the room. The flyers ask “Did you know?” and answered, “Sheldon Whitehouse supports the massive fossil fuel power plant proposed for Burrillville.” After their brief interaction Bamberger returned to her seat and Katkevich resumed handing out flyers.

Among those standing with signs I recognized Sister Mary Pendergast of the Sisters of Mercy and Burrillville resident Kathy Martley.

Senator Whitehouse came out in support of the CREC power plant in an interview with Ted Nesi. In the interview Whitehouse cited support from environmental groups for his stance, support that subsequent investigation has revealed does not exist.

The #ResilentPVD event today is part of a three day series of “charrettes, workshops, and community meetings to explore how Providence’s infrastructure, buildings, and neighborhoods can prepare for the impacts climate change.” An impressive array of sustainability experts from across the country are in attendance. There is a report expected on Wednesday.

Mayor Jorge Elorza introduced Senator Whitehouse as the state’s foremost climate champion though some in the audience were audibly agitated by that designation, with someone commenting that “He supports the fossil fuel plant in Burrillville!” Whitehouse was not visibly disturbed by the protesters, though he seldom looked their way as he spoke.

FANG and BASE are planning to protest at the RI State House Tuesday evening during Governor Gina Raimondo‘s State of the State address Tuesday evening. Governor Raimondo has also been a vocal champion of the CREC plant, as has Speaker of the House Nicholas Mattiello.

2016-02-01 FANG Whitehouse PVD City Hall 06 — Whitehouse and Elorza

2016-02-01 FANG Whitehouse PVD City Hall 13 — Bamberger and Katkevich

January 25, 2016May 3, 2016

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

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

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse at Forward on Climate rally

Senator Whitehouse supports the new gas powered energy plant in Burrillville, but the support he cites for his position from environmental groups doesn’t exist.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Not quite.

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

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

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

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

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

Burrillville is not positioned near the Bay.

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

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

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

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

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

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

January 25, 2016May 1, 2016

Invenergy’s proposed power plant will burn oil

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

The Clear River Energy Center, a power plant that Invenergy wants to build in Burrillville, has been advertised as a “natural” gas powered facility that will cut climate change causing emissions, but Invenergy’s plans call for “two one million gallon fuel oil storage tanks on site.” The power plant planned for Burrillville is to be equipped with “new combustion turbines” that will be “dual fuel,” meaning they will be able to burn gas or oil.

“In order to comply with the Pay-for-Performance initiative, many natural gas generators are installing dual fuel capability,” said Invenergy, during their presentation to the Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB). “Duel fuel facilities typically burn fuel oil during periods of natural gas scarcity, leading to overall more emissions intensive footprints than facilities that have secured firm natural gas as a cleaner solution, such as Clear River.” (emphasis mine)

It should be noted that Invenergy is planning to buy “firm gas.” They are building their plant on land adjacent to the Spectra gas pipeline, and they are actually going to enter into a contract guaranteeing them gas. Invenergy may be the first electricity power plant in the entire ISO-NE footprint to contract for firm gas. Invenergy hopes that this will ensure that their plant needs to burn oil very seldom. There is a plus and a minus to contracting for firm gas. The minus is that you pay a premium for the guarantee of firm delivery. The plus is that you are guaranteed delivery of much cheaper gas.

However, the term “natural gas scarcity” could refer to any time that natural gas has become more expensive than oil. Every economic textbook begins by explaining the scarcity/price relationship. So it follows that Invenergy intends the Clear River Energy Center to generate its power with oil in the event that gas prices become prohibitive. (As of publication Invenergy has not responded to questions about this.)

Fortunately, shale gas production and fracking will provide cheap, clean natural gas for the next hundred years right? (Putting aside, for the moment, the fact that methane is 80x more potent as a GHG than C02, so the methane emissions are a huge concern.)

Not quite, say an ever increasing number of experts.

As Bill Powers wrote on Forbes, “While many grandiose claims about the potential supply of shale gas, such as ‘the US has a 100-year supply’, have been made in recent years; almost none have ever been supported by any empirical evidence.”

Powers, who does not consider himself an environmentalist, goes on to explain that his analysis of the gas industry does not support the “wildly optimistic” the US Energy Information Administration (EIA)’s enthusiasm about gas production.

John Manning, at the International Banker, agrees. After presenting a short history followed by a look at the economic impacts of the expensive technology and costly environmental effects of fracking, Manning notes the trend of “a downward revision of the estimated shale oil and gas reserves in the country.”

Manning goes on to say, “A new report from the EIA has revealed that the Monterey shale basin in California, which was previously thought to hold 15.4 billion recoverable barrels of crude, making it the most promising untapped deposit, actually holds just 4% of this amount, or 600 million barrels. Exploitation of the Monterey shale was to create 2.6 million new jobs and add $24.6 billion in tax revenues by 2020. This is a heavy blow, and when it is added to the other pressures on the industry, it resonates all the more deeply as it raises questions about the deposits that have already been exploited, the reserves of which are being reported by the oil industry itself. The future of energy will be all about sustainability and within the fracking industry sustainability is in rather short supply.” (emphasis mine)

Then there’s this graph, courtesy of the Post Carbon Institute, which says that the EIA has been seriously exaggerating gas production.

Finally, take a look at ShaleBubble.org which makes the progressive, environmentalist argument for the gas bubble. The idea that our coming reliance on natural gas is little more than an industry ruse to keep us all hooked on fossil fuels suddenly starts to seem like a very real possibility.

So let’s go back to Invenergy’s plans for Burrillville, which include “dual fuel” combustion turbines. All of Invenergy’s pollution reduction promises are based on the burning of fracked methane (natural gas) which means (again, putting aside the fact that methane is 80x more potent as a GHG than C02, so the methane emissions are a huge concern) that when the plant burns oil, it will generate the very kind of climate changing pollution it has ostensibly been built to prevent.

And Invenergy is fast tracking their application with the EFSB. They want all project permits to be granted this year so they can begin construction by early 2017 and start producing energy by June 2019.

Why the rush?

The Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) quotes Invenergy as saying it wants to “bid into the ISO-NE’s Forward Capacity Auction number 10 (“FCA 10”) in February 2016, and if selected, commercial operation of the Facility will be required by June 1, 2019, with significant penalties due if this capacity obligation is not met.”

“Invenergy,” says the CLF, “for reasons that seemed appropriate to Invenergy” has put itself in the position of losing a lot of money if their new plant is not producing electricity by 2019. Later in their brief the CLF says, “Invenergy chose to participate in the upcoming auction before it had any of the permits required for its proposed plant, and, as a result, Invenergy is now trying to stampede the EFSB into processing its (Invenergy’s) application prematurely, even while that application is facially incomplete in multiple respects.”

Instead of producing a complete proposal, as required by law, the CLF contends that Invenergy submitted an incomplete application. The CLF does not speculate as to why Invenergy has put itself in such an unfavorable position.

But a clue might be found on the ShaleBubble.org website:

“An exhaustive, county-by-county analysis of the 12 major shale plays in the U.S. (accounting for 89% of current tight oil and 88% of current shale gas production) concludes that both oil and natural gas production will peak this decade and decline to a small fraction of current production by 2040.”

In other words, by 2019, when the plant is operational, there’s a good chance that the gas bubble will have burst or will be about to. Domestic oil and gas prices will soar, leaving only imported oil as an economically viable fuel source. And guess what?

The Burrillville power plant is ready to burn oil.

Now, because oil prices are certain to rise and because power plants burning oil are more heavily regulated and therefore more costly and limited in their operation, the business case for the Invenergy plant running as an oil plant is very different and much less plausible than running on gas. That said, the most compelling case for the new plant is based on cost savings and meeting energy needs. If gas skyrockets in price, so will the cost of energy. Since gas is a limited commodity whether their is a bubble or not, the price is sure to rise. The price trends on renewables, however, is downward.

January 22, 2016January 23, 2016

“Zero-emission” cars running on fracked gas

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

In an editorial this week in the ProJo, Janet Coit and Marion Gold come to the rescue of embattled Governor Gina Raimondo. Janet Coit is Director of Rhode Island’s Department of Environmental Management and Marion Gold is Commissioner of the Rhode Island Office of Energy Resources. Both serve at the pleasure of the governor and whatever strengths, independence is not one of them.

Governor Raimondo has troubling connections to Wall Street going back to her days as Rhode Island treasurer. Here are just two of a recent flurry of publications questioning the pension fund reforms that she pushed through in those days:

One of Governor Raimondo’s key supporters is John Arnold, a former Enron trader who went on to found a profitable hedge fund.

The irony of the Coit-Gold ProJo editorial is that it’s based on Enron-style accounting, used in this case to hyper-inflate Governor Raimondo’s “visionary” contributions to the climate change battle.

In their editorial Coit and Gold mention that RI ranks number four on the State Energy Efficiency Scorecard put out by ACEEE. You do not have to know how this ranking is produced to understand that it is pure bunk. Just look at what the Energy Information Adminstration web site has to say about Rhode Island:

Natural gas fueled 95% of Rhode Island’s net electricity generation in 2014.
Rhode Island is the second-lowest emitter of carbon dioxide among all states. Like the lowest emitter, Vermont, Rhode Island does not have any coal-fired electricity generation.

Natural gas is mostly methane. It is a greenhouse gas that is about 100 times as potent as CO₂. Methane is burned and escapes unburnt to generate Rhode Island electricity, but we put all of those climate threatening emissions on our neighbors’ tabs.

There is more about the ACEEE rating of Rhode Island as fourth in the nation that is disconcerting. Scan the ACEEE web site and you quickly discover that they mention EPA’s Clean Power Plan again and again. There are some minor problems with this plan:

Obama’s “Clean Power Plan” is a huge gift to the methane (“Clean Energy”) industry — we’ll show you how in a minute. And guess who’s big in methane? Big oil, of course […]

The plan fits perfectly with Obama’s general practice of saying one thing and doing the opposite.

Director Coit is one of the members of the Energy Facility Siting Board that is currently deliberating the fate of the new fracked-gas power plant with the Orwellian name Clear River Energy Center, Invenergy’s plan to sacrifice Burrillville to unfettered greed.

Coit is publicly on record with her support of methane:

With her so-called pragmatism, doesn’t Director Coit not sound remarkably like House Speaker Mattiello?

In the Coit-Gold editorial there is not a word about Clear River, nor about the natural gas that already produces 95% of RI’s electrical power. There is no mention that Governor Gina Ms Wall Street Raimondo is on record supporting fracked gas. That silence must be “because there is a fire wall,” as Director Coit said in the preliminary hearing of the siting board last week. How convenient!

As the Clear River theater of the siting board progresses, we might hear about the CO₂ emissions the power plant will produce in Rhode Island. What we will not hear from the Governor and her allies on the board is to whom we will charge the fugitive methane. Most of that escapes at the wellheads in Pennsylvania and along the pipelines and from the compressor stations. Nor will we hear about the suffering it causes to the people on the frontlines in Burrillville and across the globe. None of that, but we’ll follow the statutes, because we are a nation of laws.

Indeed, all of the Enron-style accounting is perfectly legal, but, dear reader, you surely do not believe any more than I do, that Mother Nature is impressed.

There is yet another accounting trick buried in the Coit-Gold editorial: the Zero-Emission Vehicle Action Plan. True, we need electric cars and they have no tail pipes that emits CO₂. Still, the electric energy such cars use has to be generated somewhere. If it comes from renewables we win; if we generate it with fracked gas, we loose. The latter is of course exactly what will happen if we let Invenergy build the Clear River Energy Center.

We are constructing a 30 megawatt wind farm off Block Island and are talking about a frack-gas facility with 30 times that capacity in Burrillville. Accounting gimmicks devoid of physics may fool the people, the editor of the the ProJo and our hapless leaders, but none of that will change the laws of nature.

Update after the original post: Senator Sheldon Whitehouse from National Grid has finally made up his mind and now supports the Clear River Energy Center. He uses his same old arguments about choke points and price spikes. That was none of that last winter is but an irrelevant detail: As New England freezes, natural gas stays cheap.

January 21, 2016October 6, 2016

Raimondo: States need ‘broader view’ of renewable power

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

The Governors’ Wind Energy Coalition announced that it “will pair its advocacy work for wind with work for solar energy as well” and has changed its name to the Governors’ Wind and Solar Energy Coalition (GWSC).

Rhode Island Governor Gina Raimondo, who serves as Vice Chair of the Coalition, said, “I support the foresight of my colleagues to broaden the Coalition’s focus and include solar energy development as a policy priority. Wind and solar provide complementary benefits to the U.S. electric grid and will help diversify the country’s energy mix. The need for states to take a broader view of renewable power is clear.”

Raimondo’s support of wind and solar seems at odds with her support for Invenergy‘s proposed Clear River Energy Center, a fossil fuel power plant slated to be built in Burrillville. John Niland, vice president of business development at Invenergy said in an interview with Ted Nesi that his company is “very keen on renewable energy” but not, apparently for Rhode Island. Is this new embrace of solar and wind power a sign that Raimondo is shifting her position on methane gas?

According to an American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) press release:

“This bipartisan governors’ coalition has been highly effective at getting policy results and have helped grow wind energy for nearly a decade,” said Tom Kiernan, CEO of the AWEA. “The governors’ decision to combine forces with solar energy reflects the economic and environmental value of diversifying our nation’s grid with clean, reliable renewable energy.”

Technological innovations and performance-based policy continue to help lower wind and solar energy’s costs, making both homegrown technologies more affordable than ever. Wind and solar power are important job creators, putting Americans to work in all 50 states.

Wind and solar energy added 61 percent of all new generation capacity in 2015 through November according to SNL Energy. As states make plans to comply with the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan, the nation’s first-ever rule to reduce carbon emissions from existing power plants, zero-emission wind and solar power are expected to continue supplying large amounts new electricity in the years ahead, resulting in numerous consumer and environmental benefits.

American wind power now supplies enough electricity for 19 million American homes after surpassing the 70 gigawatt (GW) mark of installed wind capacity late last year. Wind energy could double to supply 10 percent of the U.S. electricity mix by 2020, and double again to supply 20 percent of U.S. electricity by 2030. It can become one of the largest sources of electricity in the U.S. by supplying 35 percent by 2050. According to the Department of Energy’s Wind Vision report, by meeting the 2030 scenario American wind power could support 380,000 well-paying jobs, a number that could grow to 600,000 by 2050.

Emerging opportunities to invest in the rapid growth of the U.S. wind energy industry will be on full display at this year’s WINDPOWER 2016 in New Orleans from May 23 – May 26. The event is the Western Hemisphere’s largest annual wind power trade show.

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