Governor Gina Raimondo was the introductory speaker Tuesday morning at the AWEA Offshore WindPower 2016 conference in Warwick. Raimondo spoke to the conference attendees, mostly representatives of various wind power companies and allied industries, with some federal and state government employees on hand as well. Raimondo was keen on selling Rhode Island as a place for the growth and development of renewable energy such as solar and wind.”
“I am an advocate for the environment,” said Raimondo, “and I usually begin my comments in audiences such as these talking about the reality of climate change… Climate change is real, caused by human activity and not going to go away on it’s own. It’s up to us, policy makers, business leaders, entrepreneurs to meet the challenge of climate change.”
Comparing the problem of climate change to her work on pension reform, Raimondo said, “Climate change isn’t that different from big, thorny fiscal issues, which is to say it’s not going to go away unless we take action and it’s only going to get harder the longer we wait. So we have to meet the challenges of climate change with urgency and a seriousness of purpose, in the same way we would with other fiscal challenges.”
The governor then made her pitch for creating jobs in the state. “As Governor of Rhode Island I want my state to be a leader. Number one, it’s the right thing to do, number two, I want our state to be known as the state that solves problems and meets challenges. But number three, the silver lining in meeting the challenge of climate change is that we can create jobs.
“The good news here is that we can create jobs in solar, in wind, in energy efficiency, and those are the kind of jobs that I want to have here in Rhode Island.
“My message is that all the things about Rhode Island that enabled us to be first, with Deepwater Wind, are the reason you ought to think about doing business in Rhode Island,” said Raimondo, before making a very questionable claim that, “we have no fossil fuel industry here in Rhode Island. We’re not ‘as attached’ to [the] ‘good old’ fossil fuel industry. That’s a big deal. That means we have a culture embracing of this industry [wind energy].”
The governor’s press secretary, David Ortiz, later clarified what Governor Raimondo meant by this statement, saying that, “her point was that the state has no fossil fuel deposits and does not extract natural gas, crude oil or coal.”
Though this is true, it does not follow that Rhode Island has a “culture” embracing alternative energy. The fossil fuel industry has a giant economic, political and environmental presence in the state.
Putting aside the proposed Burrillville power plant, or any other of the proposed LNG infrastructure expansions in various stages of being approved, “Rhode Island’s Port of Providence,” according to the US Energy Information Administration (USEIA), “is a key regional transportation and heating fuel products hub” and “natural gas fueled 95 percent of Rhode Island’s net electricity generation in 2015.”
The USEIA goes on to say that Rhode Island “does not produce or refine petroleum,” as Raimondo’s office clarified, but, “Almost all of the transportation and heating fuel products consumed in Rhode Island, eastern Connecticut, and parts of Massachusetts are supplied via marine shipments through the Port of Providence. The port area has petroleum storage tanks, and a small-capacity petroleum product pipeline runs from the port to central Massachusetts.”
Rhode Island is heavily dependent on LNG imports. “Electric power generators and the residential sector are Rhode Island’s largest natural gas consumers. More than half of the natural gas consumed in the state goes to the electric power sector and almost all in-state electricity generation is fueled with natural gas,” says the USEIA, “Historically, natural gas has arrived in Rhode Island from producing areas in Canada and from the U.S. Gulf Coast and Mid-Continent regions, but increasing amounts of natural gas are coming from Appalachian Shales, particularly the Marcellus Shale of Pennsylvania.” This makes Rhode Island heavily dependent on fracked gas for its power generation.
And finally, as far as the dirtiest fossil fuel, coal, goes, “Providence is one of the leading coal import centers in the northeast, receiving one-tenth of the imported coal delivered to eastern customs districts in 2015. The state is part of the six-state Independent System Operator-New England (ISO-NE) regional grid. And, although Rhode Island and Vermont are the only two states in the nation with no coal-fired electricity generation, the ISO-NE grid remains dependent on coal-fired facilities during periods of peak electricity demand.”
So, although Rhode Island has no industry producing or refining fossil fuels, Rhode Island is heavily burdened and intertwined with the fossil fuel industry. We are soaking in fossil fuels as an importer and exporter. We fund the fracking of America with our energy choices, and even as we are economically and politically dictated to by companies like National Grid, Spectra, Invenergy and Motiva (a subsidiary of Saudi Aramco and Shell Oil Company, we bear the environmental scars of their abuse of our habitats and our health.
This is the fossil fuel industry in Rhode Island.
It is massive and it is killing us.
Also speaking at the AWEA Offshore WindPower 2016 conference was Deepwater Wind’s Jeff Grybowski, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and Representative David Cicilline.
]]>
Then this picture was taken yesterday:
When asked for an explanation, Graves today said, “Kiewit put this sign up without our knowledge. They are the contractor building the access road for equipment and personnel working on the LNG tank embankment improvement. They are also the contractor designated to oversee installation of the liquefaction equipment when we have the OK to proceed with that project. It appears that in their minds the projects are one and the same, which is not the case. There is no work going on associated with the liquefaction project. Kiewit has been told to take down the sign and replace it with one that clearly identifies what work is underway.”
It seems that the projects under way at Fields Point are so confusing and interconnected that even National Grid’s contractors are having trouble telling them apart.
NoLNGinPVD, an environmental group opposed to the liquefacton facility, issued the following statement: “This is another glaring example of why we cannot trust the process at National Grid’s word and why it is an embarrassment to our state that the “public” utility is pulling the strings of our public officials. DEM refuses to hold National Grid accountable and enforce the legally petitioned for Public Involvement Plan. The city council ordinance committee has shelved a resolution calling for public oversight. The federal delegation that spoke out when a similar project would have affected recreational usage of the bay by wealthy suburbanites is deafeningly silent when the burden of danger is and pollution is absorbed by working class people of color on the south side of Providence. National Grid and their contractor Kiewit do know what they are doing, they are forcing unneeded and dangerous fossil fuel infrastructure on a community of color that has raised many environmental justice concerns. They know this, and they think they can get away with it. We’re going to make sure they don’t.”
]]>
National Grid’s proposed pipeline tariff, now under an indefinite stay per the Public Utilities Commission here in Rhode Island, was rejected in New Hampshire last week. The controversial and complicated plan, which would make electricity ratepayers in New England financially responsible for the creation and profitability of a new fracked gas pipeline, involves multiple companies working together across multiple states. Here’s a description from the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission:
“Eversource is a public utility headquartered in Manchester, operating under the laws of the State of New Hampshire as an electric distribution company (EDC). Algonquin is an owner-operator of an interstate gas pipeline located in New England. Algonquin is owned by a parent company, Spectra Energy Corp (Spectra), a publicly-traded corporation headquartered in Houston, Texas. Algonquin has partnered with Eversource’s corporate parent, Eversource Energy, headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts, and Hartford, Connecticut, and with National Grid, the parent company of EDC subsidiaries in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, to develop the Access Northeast pipeline. In general terms, Eversource Energy’s EDC subsidiaries in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire and National Grid’s EDC subsidiaries in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, are each individually seeking regulatory approval of gas capacity on the Access Northeast pipeline.”
When the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled against National Grid’s pipeline tariff in Massachusetts, the Conservation Law Foundation brought a motion to dismiss the proposal here in Rhode Island. Instead, the PUC issued an indefinite stay in the proceedings, with the caveat that National Grid file a progress report on January 13, 2017.
Last week the New Hampshire PUC ruled against their state’s involvement in the plan, writing,
“The proposal before us would have Eversource purchase long-term gas pipeline capacity to be used by gas-fired electric generators, and include the net costs of its purchases and sales in its electric distribution rates. That proposal, however, goes against the overriding principle of restructuring, which is to harness the power of competitive markets to reduce costs to consumers by separating unregulated generation from fully regulated distribution. It would allow Eversource to reenter the generation market for an extended period, placing the risk of that decision on its customers. We cannot approve such an arrangement under existing laws. Accordingly, we dismiss Eversource’s petition.
“We acknowledge that the increased dependence on natural gas-fueled generation plants within the region and the constraints on gas capacity during peak periods of demand have resulted in electric price volatility. Eversource’s proposal is an interesting one, with the potential to reduce that volatility; but it is an approach that, in practice, would violate New Hampshire law following the restructuring of the electric industry. If the General Court believes EDCs should be allowed to make long-term commitments to purchase gas capacity and include the costs in distribution rates, the statutes can be amended to permit such activities.”
The Maine Public Utilities commission has voted in favor of the pipeline tariff.
]]>
“At breakfast this morning my nine year old, out of the blue, said, ‘Mom, what are you doing about climate change?’” said Governor Gina Raimondo at a press event in the offices of Newport Solar on Monday, “What a perfect day to ask the question! So I told him all about this and he was proud of me that we were on that.”
Newport Solar in North Kingstown is where Raimondo chose to kick off National Energy Awareness Month with her new Office of Energy Resources (OER) commissioner Carol Grant. Newport Solar is a Rhode Island leader in solar installation, and its successful efforts should be lauded.
“Our clean energy sector in Rhode Island has created a slew of new opportunities for education and jobs, and that will continue as we move forward in building the clean energy industry,” said Raimondo at the event.
Commissioner Grant spoke about Rhode Island’s high ranking in the State Energy Efficiency Scorecard. The American Council on Energy‐Efficient Economy (ACEEE) recently ranked Rhode Island fourth in the country for best energy efficiency programs and policies. “We want to educate Rhode Islanders on the many benefits of the state’s energy efficiency and renewable energy programs,” said Grant, “and we look forward to further developing a future of clean, affordable, reliable and diversified energy.” [italics mine]
Also at the event was Michael Ryan, Vice President of Government Affairs at National Grid, encouraging Rhode Islanders to save energy.
Energy in Rhode Island needs to be “affordable, reliable, and clean” said Raimondo, “It’s got to be all three, and it can be all three.”
Later, Raimondo’s three criteria had mysteriously become four, or more. “So I’m going to continue to lead and push, as your governor, towards more clean, affordable, and reliable and diversified energy sources… to lead the nation in more and more sources of clean, renewable, affordable, sustainable energy.”
Towards the end of the presser, National Grid’s Michael Ryan, ironically standing in front of a large Newport Solar banner emblazoned with the tagline, “Think outside the grid,” mis-repeated Raimondo, saying that the energy must be “efficient, affordable and reliable.
“Those are key with National Grid.”
In the video below you can watch the complete press event. Solar, wind and efficiency were lauded but fracked gas, the third leg of Raimondo’s energy policy, and a key driver of National Grid’s business, was never mentioned except via subtle dog whistles.
These dog whistles are words like reliable, diversified and efficient. These are the words anti-environmentalists use when they want to scare us into accepting fracked gas as a bridge fuel, like when Rush Limbaugh said, “Solar panels are not sustainable, Millennials. May sound good, yes. ‘Clean, renewable energy.’ But what do you do when the sun’s down at night? What do you do when the clouds obscure the sun? We’re not there yet.”
Limbaugh admits that solar panels are clean and renewable. But he’s doubting their reliability and sustainability.
This is how a politician like Raimondo can appease companies like National Grid, which are actively working to expand Rhode Island’s dependence on fossil fuels, while publicly talking only about the work she’s doing on energy that’s actually clean and renewable.
On April 13 Raimondo appeared at a solar farm in East Providence to announce the results of the 2016 Rhode Island Clean Energy Jobs Report released by the Rhode Island OER and the Executive Office of Commerce. At this event Marion Gold, who publicly supported the power plant planned for Burrillville, was still the OER commissioner.
“The clean energy economy is supporting nearly 14,000 jobs,” said Raimondo, “a forty percent increase from last year. That is amazing.”
The press release for this event noted that this job growth was likely the result of the “maturation of the solar industry, start up activity in smart grid technologies, and the progress made on the construction of the Block Island Wind Farm.”
There was no mention at this event of fracked gas, Burrillville, Invenergy, Spectra pipelines, or National Grid’s expansion of LNG at Fields Point, until reporters asked the governor about it directly, at which point Raimondo somewhat reluctantly admitted that she does in fact support Invenergy’s $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant planned for Burrillville.
In Raimondo’s capacity as vice chair of the Governors’ Wind Energy Coalition she was proud to “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.”
Again, no mention of her support for fracked gas.
Raimondo has consistently touted her support for renewables like wind and solar, only occasionally voicing her support for fracking. Raimondo never holds a press release in front of a fracked gas pipeline or compressor station. She holds them at wind turbines and solar farms, giving the appearance of a strong leader on the environment.
But National Grid and Invenergy need to know she’s on board with their plans, so she signals her support during the press conference with careful phrasing.
And if the governor’s phrasing is off message, National Grid’s Michael Ryan will misquote her. “Clean” energy is out, “reliable” energy is in. In other words, “Let them eat fracked gas.”
Raimondo’s choice of location for her press conferences demonstrates that if she is not embarrassed by her support of fracked gas, she at least is beginning to recognize how history will ultimately judge her support.
As Bill McKibben said in a recent message to Rhode Island, “Five to ten years ago we thought the transition was going to be from coal, to natural gas as some sort of bridge fuel, onto renewables and now, sadly, we realize we can’t do that in good faith, because natural gas… turns out to be a dead end, not a bridge to the future but a kind of rickety pier built out into the lake of hydrocarbons.”
Fracked gas was well known to be a bad idea when Raimondo stood with Invenergy’s CEO Michael Polsky and tried to sell the idea to Rhode Island. Raimondo’s support for Invenergy’s power plant was a massive political blunder with consequences not only for her political career, but for the future of Rhode Island and the world.
A future, and a world, her children will be living in.
]]>
The Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission (RIPUC) today ruled against Conservation Law Foundation (CLF)’s motion to dismiss National Grid‘s proposed pipeline tariff and instead issued an indefinite stay. CLF argued that National Grid’s plan to charge electrical consumers to underwrite and guarantee profits for its proposed ANE pipeline is no longer viable given a recent Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling that declared such pipeline tariffs unconstitutional under state law.
Since National Grid’s plan required the consent of all New England states, CLF moved to dismiss the docket here in Rhode Island, yet Meg Curran, chair of the RIPUC, didn’t agree that the project was necessarily dead, saying she still had questions about the project. Curran felt that National Grid’s offer to withdraw their application and refile at a later date or accept a ruling that the docket be put on hold were better options.
RIPUC board member Herbert DeSimone Jr agreed. He said that dismissal would not be appropriate, and withdrawing the application would create “unnecessary redundancies” upon refiling, as all the evidence heard to date would have to be heard again and all motions re-decided. DeSimone suggested that the RIPUC issue an indefinite stay in the proceedings, with the caveat that National Grid file a progress report on January 13, 2017.
Curran and DeSimone then unanimously voted in favor of the plan. Marion Gold, the third member of the RIPUC, had recused herself.
The meeting was attended by representatives from and members of People’s Power and Light, the FANG Collective, Food and Water Watch, Toxics Action Center, Fossil Free RI, NoLNGinPVD and the RI Sierra Club.
“The Commission’s decision to delay this proceeding is a step toward the inevitable death of the pipeline tax. Forcing Rhode Island electric customers to foot the bill for a gas pipeline we don’t need defies our best interest and our laws,” Megan Herzog with the Conservation Law Foundation said. “Both Massachusetts and the federal government have rejected the project, and we will keep fighting until Rhode Island follows suit.”
“Rhode Island consumers should not have to take on the long-term risk of a new, unnecessary natural gas pipeline. We must protect electric customers from being charged for a natural gas pipeline, and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has already done this by deciding that the unprecedented cost-recovery scheme proposed by utilities is illegal, according to Mass. law,” said Priscilla De La Cruz of People’s Power and Light, also in attendance.
The No LNG in PVD coalition is demanding that National Grid immediately halt construction and excavation work at 642 Allens Ave, the site of the proposed liquefaction facility in Fields Point. The proposed facility, which is opposed by Mayor Jorge Elorza and nine state legislators, is currently being reviewed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). National Grid has requested that FERC not hold any public hearings or grant fast tracked approval for the project. No LNG in PVD, a coalition of residents, organizations, and elected officials opposed to National Grid’s LNG facility, calls on the RI Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) to revoke a recently granted permit which authorized soil excavation at the site, which is contaminated with numerous toxins hazardous to human health.
A group of concerned Providence community members submitted a petition to RIDEM on August 31st which requested that RIDEM revoke the soil management permit until concerns are addressed and a Public Involvement Plan (PIP) is put in place. RIDEM site remediation regulations, amended in 2011, require a PIP – a formal process for public participation and community oversight of the cleanup plan for activities that occur on contaminated sites. RIDEM formally initiated the PIP on September 6th, notifying National Grid “to initiate the process of developing an approvable PIP associated with the planned environmental cleanup of the Providence Gas Company site, and any other site redevelopment activities requiring remedial actions that fall under the jurisdiction of the Remediation Regulations.”
National Grid was required to respond to RIDEM within seven days with proposed plans and a schedule for developing a PIP with the community, writes No LNG in PVD, but says National Grid has ignored this requirement. In addition to violating this regulatory request, says No LNG in PVD, National Grid has begun excavating soil in a large portion of the site along Allens Ave and Terminal Road. Community members have observed uncovered piles of dirt with visible airborne dust.
The project’s location, 642 Allens Ave, has a long history of industrial contamination dating back to the earliest days of the gas industry. Providence Gas Company operated a “manufactured gas plant” from 1910 to 1954 which resulted in the release of many toxic substances which polluted the soil and groundwater. The site has also been host to an ammonia plant, a toluene facility, a propane works, and most recently an LNG storage facility. Numerous substances which pose a risk to public health, safety, and the environment have been recorded at the site, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), phenolic compounds, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including benzene and naphthalene, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), ferri and ferro cyanide compounds, asbestos, and metals including lead and arsenic. Many locations in the site contain multiple hazardous substances at levels that far exceed allowed standards, and while some specific areas have been remediated since 1994, the majority of the land has not been remediated.
The petition submitted to to RIDEM articulated a number of community concerns about construction at the LNG site exposing workers or community members to toxins.
“This is our community, people live here and kids go to school here, why does National Grid think it’s okay to put our lives and our health at risk? It’s our legal right to be involved in these decisions,” said Gina Rodríguez, a community resident and leader in the No LNG in PVD coalition. Monica Huertas, another coalition leader said, “It’s outrageous that there’s a known toxic site this close to my house, and we can go down Allens Ave and see clouds of dust blowing off from the piles that National Grid is digging up. The whole point of this Public Involvement Plan law is to address things like that, but National Grid is just ignoring our concerns and DEM isn’t doing anything to stop them.”
A growing number of elected officials are working with the No LNG in PVD coalition and have declared opposition to National Grid’s unnecessary, expensive, and dangerous LNG proposal. The coalition denounces National Grid’s rush to begin work at the site before any public oversight is put in place. “This is exactly what RIDEM’s site remediation regulations are for,” said Representative Joseph Almeida. “In cases like this, where a project could release extremely dangerous contaminants, it is vital that the affected community have a role in overseeing remediation activities. Members of my district are already overburdened by environmental and health hazards. It is vital that DEM stop National Grid from kicking up a new load of previously buried poisons and toxics without giving this community any say.”
David Graves, spokesperson for National Grid, responded. “Construction work now underway on the property is not related to the liquefaction project. All of the work has been properly permitted. As part of our normal procedures, the earth excavated from the site is being covered.
“There are or will soon be two projects underway in the immediate area. One is construction of an access road to accommodate equipment that will come on site to make improvements to containment dyke wall that surrounds the LNG tank. The other is to cap approximately five acres of land at 642 Allens Ave that is part of a remediation project that was started several years ago. Both have been approved by DEM.”
No LNG in PVD coalition member Aaron Jaehnig responded to Graves’ statement. “The petition to DEM for a Public Involvement Plan related to that property clearly requested a halt to any construction or remediation projects until a Plan was in place. DEM’s request to National Grid, for that plan did not alter our request or sepcify that prior permits were exempt. The PIP process exists so the concerned residents, potentially effected by the disruption of toxic materials, are legally granted oversight to such projects. Its great that that National Grid believes they are above participation in this process, it just confirms our suspicions that their actions do not take the public’s well being into consideration. They have already shown a blatant disregard for the community by ignoring DEM’s request for response to the PIP order within seven days. All construction and remediation activity should be halted immediately until that process is completed.”
National Grid has responded a second time, denying some of the allegations made by the N o LNG in PVD coalition: “The work underway at our property at 642 Allens Ave. property, which has been properly permitted, is unrelated to the liquefaction project. One element of the work is environmental remediation. It is enhancing public safety not endangering it as claimed by one group. Also, at no time have we requested to FERC that they not hold public hearings and we responded to DEM on the matter of the Public Involvement Plan (which is unrelated to the current work on the property) within the required time. Every project we undertake is planned and executed under rigid safety and environmental standards and the work currently underway is no exception.”
]]>
The Consumer Liaison Group (CLG) Meeting happens four times a year and its a chance for ISO-NE to exchange information with electricity consumers in New England. ISO-NE is the group that regulates our electricity markets and keeps the lights on by coordinating electricity generation and transmission. They run billion dollar markets and interact with companies like Spectra Energy, Invenergy, National Grid and Deepwater Wind. Pretty much every aspect of the process of getting electricity to your television is touched upon by ISO-NE in some way.
The latest meeting of the CLG, in Providence on Thursday, featured a panel discussion with representatives from the four companies mentioned above. The panel was pulled together with the help of Douglas Gablinske, executive director of The Energy Council of Rhode Island (TEC-RI) an advocacy group for energy company concerns. Readers of RI Future may remember that Gablinske was a vocal opponent of Cale Keable’s bill to reform the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB). He was also the only speaker at the RI Public Utilities Commission (RIPUC) to speak in favor of the pipeline tariff.
Gablinske surprised me by asking if I knew about any planned protests or disruptions. I said I didn’t. He asked me specifically about the FANG Collective. I had no idea of what plans they have, if any, I said. Then Gablinske said that he noticed Mary Pendergast on the list of people who had signed up to attend. Pendergast was sitting in the room, and he soon went over to introduce himself to her.
During the course of the presentation there was a disruption. As Invenergy’s John Niland gave his presentation to the room, Mary Pendergast stood and display a small sign that said, “No fracked gas Power plant.” Her protest was silent but it did seem to throw Niland off a bit, as his delivery seemed somewhat distracted.
It was during the third presentation that the disruptions became more pronounced. As Richard Kruse, vice president at Spectra Energy spoke glowingly about the need for bigger and better pipelines in our fracked gas infrastructure future, Kathy Martley of BASE (Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion), Keith Clougherty of the FANG Collective and Sally Mendzela stood up.
“Spectra Energy, Energy for Death,” said Martley as I headed for my camera. “Say no to Invenergy and tell Invenergy to go home,” Martley continued.
As the protest continued, Gablinske took the podium and said, “You have a right to be here but not be disruptive” as Clougherty continued to speak.
Lennette Boiselle, an ally of Geblinske and a lobbyist for the Northern Rhode Island Chamber of Commerce got up and left the room, presumably in search of security. Readers might remember Boiselle as the person arguing against democracy at the public comment hearing concerning Cale Keable’s EFSB bill.
“The political correctness, of not allowing other people to talk is sweeping through this country,” said Geblinske, “It’s an incorrect assumption, this gentlemen has the right to speak…”
“We’ve been listening to you our whole lives, Pal,” interrupted Sally Mendzela.
Gablinske ultimately offered to set up a forum where “both sides” could be heard but it is unknown if this will actually happen. The protesters took their seats, no one was ejected from the forum, and Kruse finished his talk.
Amazingly, though, that wasn’t the end. During a brief question and answer period at the end of the presentations, Gablinske called on Clougherty to ask a question!
“I would ask for a question, not a speech or a statement,” said Gablinske, when he realized who he had called upon.
Clougherty then asked Niland, Kruse and Bill Malee, a National Grid VP, “Do your companies have any money set aside for restitution for the millions of people who are going to be displaced and killed by the infrastructure projects you all are proposing?”
There is no good answer representatives from these companies can give, yet Niland attempted one. As expected, it was not good.
I found the most interesting talk of the day came from Mary Louise “Weezie” Nuara, External Affairs Representative for ISO-NE.
“The region’s competitive wholesale electricity markets are really designed to maintain reliability through the selection of the most economically efficient set of resources,” said Nuara, but the states “have environmental and renewable energy goals that are beyond the objectives of the wholesale electricity markets.”
What’s happening is that states are setting goals to increase renewables and reduce greenhouse gas emissions (like the goals set out in ResilientRI, but all the New England states have some version of this idea.) ISO-NE is designed to deliver energy as reliably and cheaply as possible. As a market, it cannot deliver renewables or reduce emissions unless those options are cheaper and cleaner. In August, NEPOOL (which represents the interest of the New England states when dealing with ISO-NE) began looking into how to adjust wholesale electricity markets to accommodate the goals of the states. It is NEPOOL’s goal to develop a “framework document” by December 2 to provide guidance to ISO-NE regarding potential changes. (A kind of advisory opinion, if you will.)
What makes this interesting, to my mind, is that if ISO-NE starts taking the climate change concerns of the states into account, plants like the one Invenergy is planning for Burrillville will have a harder time selling their energy into the markets.
ISO-NE is a little over a decade old, but already it’s finding that its systems are in need of being updated over concerns of climate change. By contrast, the EFSB here in Rhode Island was established thirty years ago, in 1986. The RI General Assembly has shown little inclination towards revising the EFSB’s mandate in lieu of climate change.
Below please find all the video from the CLg meeting except for the closing comments.
Rebecca Tepper, chair of the CLG Coordinating Committee and chief of the Energy & Telecommunications Division of the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office introduced keynote speaker Rhode Island General Treasurer Seth Magaziner.
Douglas Gablinske, executive director, The Energy Council of Rhode Island
Jeffrey Grybowski, chief executive officer, Deepwater Wind
John Niland, director of business development, Invenergy
Richard Kruse, vice president and regulatory & FERC compliance officer for Spectra Energy
Bill Malee, vice president of regulatory affairs, for National Grid
ISO-NE Q&A
Providence Mayor Jorge Elorza sent a strongly worded letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) last week, expressing his opposition to National Grid’s proposed Fields Point Liquefaction Project.
Saying that approval of the project “would have a detrimental impact to the City of Providence and its residents,” Elorza went on to frame the issue in global terms.
“The entire world is threatened due to climate change and we must move away from fossil fuels,” wrote Elorza, “The City of Providence has continually expressed a commitment to reducing its carbon footprint, promoting an equitable environment, and creating a more sustainable future for our City’s posterity. Providence does not want to perpetuate the global climate crisis, nor do we want to be burdened by the risks associated with a liquefaction plant in Providence.”
Elorza also touched on the issues of air quality in the area of Fields Point.
“The proposed facility would generate harmful pollutants that impact the surrounding community’s air quality and ecosystem. The proposed location for this project is surrounded by dense, lower-income neighborhoods and should not be subjected to the environmental and health burdens associated with the proposed facility.”
Elorza also says that “The proposed plant would also increase greenhouse gas emissions, particularly indirect emissions due to the hydraulic fracking process by which the natural gas is extracted from the ground, as well as the facility’s high electrical consumption (13 megawatts) for the liquefaction process.”
Elorza urged FERC to conduct a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement, rather than an Environmental Assessment and to heed the final guidelines presented by the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), which instructed Federal agencies to include “direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions and the effect of climate change in National Environmental Policy Act Reviews.
Elorza ends his letter asking for and “unequivocal denial” of the project.
]]>
The Providence City Council Ordinance Committee meeting scheduled for 5pm on Monday was cancelled at 4:30pm, what one City Hall worker called, “at the last minute,” by Committee Chair Terrence Hassett. The cancellation effectively stalls the discussion of Councillor Seth Yurdin’s resolution opposing the construction of National Grid’s proposed liquefaction facility for Fields Point in the Port of Providence.
More than a dozen people showed up for the event, only to learn from the hastily printed signs that the meeting was cancelled. People told me that they had made great efforts to be at this meeting. One man brought his six year old daughter with him, others arranged to leave work early. A nurse handed off a patient to her co-worker, and lost out a couple of hours of pay.
Several people, expecting a long meeting, paid for two hours of parking, as the on street parking, which used to be free at 6pm, is now free after 9pm. In all I talked to six people who paid for parking, including Sister Mary Pendergast, who said she’s “on a very limited budget.”
Representative Aaron Regunberg showed up. But even he, when asking various City Hall workers, including the Council President Chief of Staff Cyd McKenna, couldn’t get an adequate answer as to why the meeting suffered a last minute cancellation.
Councillor Seth Yurdin arrived ten minutes before the meeting was due to start. He had received a text ten minutes before arriving telling him the meeting was cancelled. He said he didn’t know why the meeting was cancelled. He had no more insight, it seems, than anyone else.
The people who arrived for the meeting were all prepared to give testimony on the resolution concerning the project at Fields Point, a center of toxic industry located in one of the poorest neighborhoods of color in New England. This was Councillor Seth Yurdin’s second resolution in opposition to the facility, and it was a much stronger statement.
Though Yurdin’s resolution was co-sponsored by half the City Council, passage of the resolution was prevented when Councilors Jo-Ann Ryan and Terrence Hassett flipped their votes.
The resolution was sent to the Ordinance Committee which Hassett chairs. Hassett said at the time that, “I co-sponsored it but a committee review is necessary for a proper vetting and discussion before it is transmitted to the full Council.”
When I asked about why he cancelled the Monday evening meeting that would have allowed for “proper vetting and discussion,” Hassett said, in a written statement:
“The LNG ban, as proposed by Councilman Yurdin, has merit. I co-sponsored it on the floor of the City Council Session.
“However, we have not heard sufficient testimony from the energy developers on the plan itself – the productive results, the environmental impact – what is good versus bad. I’m an environmentally sensitive citizen and public servant, as most of us are. A new and productive proposal, as promised, is certainly worthy of discussion.”
Note that the “energy developers” Hassett is referring to is National Grid, a company that had just as much time and notice to make it to this meeting as the environmental advocates who made the effort to show up for the meeting did. In fact, National Grid has more time, if you take into account the fact that the company employs a full time legal staff.
“My difficulty,” continued Hassett, “is simply approving a resolution banning it until proper testimony is presented. Its akin to a court case. We cannot indict until and unless proper and verified evidence is presented and the jury agrees. Legislative language presents an argument.
“In this case I co-sponsored it on the floor of the City Council. My concern or our general concern is this….we need discussions in an open forum from those proposing the LNG and receive any counter testimony on the plan or proposal.
“Many have advocated transparency in government. I believe in it. It’s how the best decisions are made. So we will carefully review this proposal, a $40 million effort should it meet our needs, our environmental protections and city economy.
“That’s my assessment based on your inquiry. It will be heard. Just better prepared for our decision makers and the public.”
Many who arrived at the City Hall to find the meeting cancelled are convinced that there were some backroom shenanigans involved. But no proof of these speculations will ever materialize. Instead, the blame for cancelling this meeting rests solely on Hassett and his decision, as he explains above.
I asked Hassett a follow up.
“The meeting was cancelled at 4:30. When meetings are scheduled on Friday afternoon and cancelled moments before they are to start on Monday, many people feel that there are shenanigans going on behind the scenes. At the very least, it shows a lack of concern for those who make the effort to attend. Do you have a comment on this?”
I received no answer.
I’ve experienced something like this before. Back in May 2014 a Providence City Council Ordinance Committee meeting that was to discuss the proposed $15 minimum wage for hotel workers was cancelled at the last minute, leaving dozens of working women in the lurch. At the time I wrote, “Working women secured childcare or brought their kids with them. They skipped meals, skipped overtime and traveled to the City Hall on foot, on buses or in carpools, only to find out that the Ordinance Committee meeting had been abruptly cancelled.”
The cancellation of this meeting allowed the General Assembly the time it needed to include an amendment in the State Budget to prevent municipalities like Providence from setting their own minimum wages, frustrating months of activism on the part of the hotel workers. The chair of the Ordinance Committee then was Seth Yurdin.
]]>
Tonight at 5pm the Providence City Council Ordinance Committee will be considering Councilor Seth Yurdin‘s second, stronger resolution opposing National Grid‘s fracked gas LNG liquefaction facility for Fields Point in the Port of Providence.
The resolution was referred to the Ordinance Committee last week, despite a near majority of City Councilors signing on as co-sponsors. At the time Councilor Jo-Ann Ryan said “I voted to send it to committee to provide an opportunity for community input at an open public meeting of the council. You can and should attend and voice your concerns. And encourage others to attend and participate in the process.”
Unfortunately, the meeting was filed on Friday, at 2:48pm, so it did not come to the attention of activists until Sunday afternoon. The timing might dampen “community input” especially given the last minute scrambling ahead of Tuesday’s primary elections.
There will be an opportunity for public comment at this meeting, so feel free to come out and speak your mind about fossil fuels and the future of the world.
Here’s the info:
Providence City Council: Ordinance Committee Hearing
Monday September 12th at 5pm
3rd floor, Providence City Hall (25 Dorrance St.)
And here’s the Facebook event page from NoLNGinPVD
]]>