Disruption and evolution at energy meeting


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jeffrey Grybowski, chief executive officer, Deepwater Wind

John Niland, director of business development, Invenergy

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

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

ISO-NE Q&A

Patreon

Providence legislators oppose ‘dangerous’ new LNG development


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

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

2016-07-13 NoLNGinPVD 003A group of Providence elected officials announced their strong opposition to a proposal by National Grid to develop a new fracked gas liquefaction facility at Fields Point in South Providence. Citing concerns ranging from costs to ratepayers, safety risks and climate impact, the legislators — including Representatives Joseph S. Almeida (D-Dist. 12, Providence), Grace Diaz (D-Dist. 11, Providence), Aaron Regunberg (D-Dist. 4, Providence), Chris Blazejewski (D-Dist. 2, Providence), Edith H. Ajello (D-Dist. 1, Providence) and John J. Lombardi (D-Dist. 8, Providence) and Senators Juan Pichardo (D-Dist. 2, Providence), Gayle Goldin (D-Dist. 3, Providence) and Sen. Harold M. Metts (D-Dist. 6, Providence) — called on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to reject National Grid’s application, and warned the City of Providence against signing a tax stabilization agreement with the utility to facilitate the project.

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

State House 001“No matter how you look at it, this project is a money-maker for the utility at the expense of our community and our state,” said Representative Almeida. “National Grid is asking us, the ratepayers, to foot the $180 million bill for this project, for what? So they can increase their own profits by exporting LNG out of the state! This does nothing to benefit our constituents, and it does nothing to benefit my neighbors on the South Side. All this proposal will do is transfer money from ratepayers’ pockets to National Grid’s coffers, and we’re not going to accept it.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[From a press release]

Patreon

The Toxic Tour of South Providence


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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Sherrie Anne Andre, with National Grid behind her.
Sherrie Anne Andre, with National Grid behind her.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Jill Stein
Jill Stein

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

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

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

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

Below is video of the tour:

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

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

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

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

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 001

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 002

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 003

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 004
Laura Perez

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 005

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 006

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 007

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 008

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 010

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 011

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 012

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 013

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 014

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 016

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 017

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

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 020

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

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 023

2016-07-21 Toxic Tour 025
Jill Stein

Patreon

RIDEM issues blistering critique of Invenergy’s power plant application


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

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

2016-03-31 Burrillville EFSB 002RIDEM’s third data request to Invenergy, released yesterday, reads as a devastating critique of the proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant. If Governor Gina Raimondo was serious when she recently told ecoRI News that, “…if there are issues then the plant won’t go forward,” then the project is dead on arrival.

In addition to “missing info” that renders the application incomplete, on page 3 the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management notes that impact of the the various projects in Burrillville has been fragmented, making the cumulative impact of Invenergy’s proposed power plant; Spectra Energy’s Aim Project; Eversource Energy, National Grid and Spectra Energy’s Access Northeast project and TransCanada’s Ocean State Power difficult to determine.

“For the purposes of comparing costs and benefits to wildlife, all of the existing and proposed work related to increased natural gas operations (processing and transport) in Burrillville should be reviewed as a single and complete project,” says RIDEM, “Piecemeal review of related projects in different stages by different applicants undercounts their cumulative impacts from loss of forests and fragmentation, air, noise and light pollution etc. in an area of the state that has been a longstanding conservation priority.”

On page 7, RIDEM alleges that the “applicant makes several confusing and conflicting assertions about the purpose and need for the project…

“The emissions and cost-benefit analyses both primarily only list benefits. A proper analysis should include costs, yet there is no mention of loss of forests, biodiversity, ecosystem services etc… This seems particularly important since the application notes that the majority of the benefits outlined (e.g. construction jobs and energy costs savings) would be rather short-lived and the majority of the foreseeable costs would be long term or permanent.”

When it comes to selling the idea of a fracked gas power plant, the RIDEM data request accuses Invenergy of circular logic. “A pointed example includes dismissing hydropower in the Power Generation Alternatives section (and omitting it from all other sections) solely because it would not be appropriate on the proposed [power plant] site, which was selected for proximity to the gas line, and then dismissing alternative project locations because they do not have the desired natural gas infrastructure.”

Further, the “premise that natural gas is the only way to meet [New England’s energy] demand is not borne out by the information provided,” says RIDEM.

RIDEM’s report to the Energy Facility Siting Board (EFSB) will be shaped by Invenergy’s answers to these and other questions. Though these questions raise serious doubts about the need for the new plant and Invenergy’s integrity in preparing its application, ultimately the EFSB takes RIDEM’s report as advisory only, meaning the board could choose to approve the project despite these issues.

Yet Governor Gina Raimondo’s words, that “if there are issues then the plant won’t go forward,” ring loudly here. The issues raised in this set of data requests are serious, and the questions raised must be addressed honestly.

Raimondo

Patreon

Acushnet, not Burrillville, targeted for Spectra LNG storage facility says town council


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

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

2015-10-08 LNG 009Spectra Energy is not planning to build a liquified natural gas (LNG) storage facility in Burrillville alongside the controversial compressor station and near the site of Invenergy‘s planned $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant. The Burrillville Town Council evealed at their Wednesday night meeting that when Spectra submits their official FERC pre-application for the project on July 22, it will be Acushnet, MA, not Burrillville, that will be forced to fight against yet another fracked gas infrastructure nightmare in New England.

The existence of Spectra’s plan came to light when the Burrillville Town Council released the agenda for the July 13 meeting, which included item 16-200 “Correspondence from Spectra Energy regarding Algonquin Gas Transmission LLC – Access Northeast Project (Pre-filing Docket No. PF16-1-000) relative to potential construction of a liquefied natural gas (“LNG”) storage facility in New England.”

This project is yet another addition to the expansion of fracked gas infrastructure in New England. Page 4 of the Supplemental Project Information Filing for Spectra’s Access Northeast Project (FERC Docket No. PF16-1-000) released in April 2016, reads “As part of this Project, Algonquin will upgrade and expand the existing Algonquin pipeline system and construct a liquefied natural gas storage facility in New England to deliver, on peak days, up to an additional 925,000 dekatherms per day (“Dth/d”) of natural gas.”

This same document, on page 11, lists Burrillville as an alternative site for the facility, noting that further expansion of pipeline capacity might be needed due to its location.

4.2.2.1 Burrillville Site Area

Algonquin began evaluating alternative sites as far west as its Burrillville Compressor Station, which offers a large site already owned in fee by Algonquin. The Burrillville, Rhode Island alternative site is located adjacent to Algonquin’s existing Burrillville Compressor Station. Due to its location, any LNG service that would be pulled into on the G-System and Algonquin’s mainline pipelines from the proposed LNG facility site would have to be pushed from the alternative site at Burrillville using Algonquin’s mainline pipelines that, to this point in the Project development, have been designed to carry 195,000 Dth/d. The location of the LNG site at Burrillville would require that Algonquin’s mainline pipelines carry an additional 225,000 Dth/d for a total of 420,000 Dth/d. To render the same service as that provided by the proposed Access Northeast LNG Facility site (Acushnet, Massachusetts), additional upgrades would be required including: the installation of a total of approximately 17.7 miles of new pipeline (8.1 miles of additional 36-inch diameter pipeline at the Burrillville Compressor Station Discharged 9.6 miles of 30-inch loop on the G-1 System); plus additional horsepower at the proposed Rehoboth Compressor Station.

At Wednesday’s Burrillville Town Council meeting, Town Manager Michael Wood said that there were two locations being considered in Burrillville, the one adjacent to the compressor station mentioned above and another location “off Barnes Rd.” Council president John Pacheco III cautioned those in attendance that the information looks good for Burrillville, but that no one will definitively know Spectra’s plans until July 22.

Repeated calls to Spectra’s media hotline on Tuesday and Wednesday went unanswered, save for an email that Thanked me for my interest, answered none of my questions and referred me to Spectra’s Algonquin Northeast Project website.

Of course, just because the project isn’t being built in Burrillville doesn’t make this a win. Acushnet already has an LNG storage facility, and this will be a second one, or possibly an upgrade.

“This project shouldn’t be built anywhere,” said a Burrillville resident to me after the meeting.

Patreon

Police remove Burrillville residents from zoning board meeting


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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
john scott burrillville 02
John Scott

The Burrillville Zoning Board meeting on Tuesday night became tense when Burrillville resident John Anthony Scott, an outspoken opponent of Invenergy’s proposed $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant, attempted to play some video of the noise made by the Spectra Energy compressor station.

One of the many issues regarding the proposed power plant is the noise generated by the build up of fracked gas infrastructure in the area.

“Can we have the security stop this?” asked zoning board chair Raymond Cloutier, at which point four or five police officers descended and peacefully removed Scott from the podium, before escorting him out of the auditorium.

“So you’re surpresssing our first amendment rights,” said Scott, “I’m going to make sure I tell the news channels that. I’ll post it all over social media.”

According to Sally Mendzela, who attended the meeting,

John Scott
John Scott

“John Anthony Scott and Nicholas Cook set up huge speakers on the stage. The meeting started with regular business and then went on to public comment. Every speaker had to be sworn in. At some point, Burrillville Town Council attorney Oleg Nikolyszyn or Ray Cloutier, the zoning board chair, asked who had put the speakers up there. Nicholas and John were fetched and then all hell broke loose. They wanted to play a video John’s wife had of the pressure release from the compressor station.

“Oleg got all fired up about the difference between decibels and megahertz and said he would not allow Cook and Scott to play the video or audio recording.

“Cloutier had the five cops present come down front, all with the audience screaming and whatnot. John and Nicholas picked up the speakers and headed out with the cops.”

Edit: John Scott issued a statement in which he points out that “I have & always had a great relationship with the Burrillville Police… After the video… Nick & I left freely to go put equipment away in his car then returned to watch the rest of the meeting listening & supporting our family & friends residents & community!”

Some time after Scott and Cook were escorted out, Burrillville resident and power plant opponent Jeremy Bailey spoke to the board. He took the opportunity to hum to the board, to approximate the sound they might have heard if they had listened to the video and audio.

Both Bailey and John Scott have announced that they are running for positions on the Burrillville Town Council.

During a blow off, which happens several times a year, large quantities of methane and other chemicals are released directly into the atmosphere. The sound approximates a commercial jet airliner taking off.

Patreon

Hearing tomorrow for Spectra Pipeline protesters arrested in Burrillville


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

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

fang1Three protesters who locked themselves to construction equipment at the site of a controversial pipeline project in Burrillville, RI are scheduled for disposition/Frye hearing on June 2, 2016 at the Rhode Island Superior Court in Providence.

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

fang2“Spectra is spewing toxic chemicals from their compressor stations, damaging communities with their pipelines, all to expand the fracking industry’s profits at the expense of public health, safety and the environment.  Spectra should be the ones paying restitution for the real harm that they are causing” said Matt Smith, an organizer with Food & Water Watch and one of three defendants in the case.

fang3Spectra’s “AIM” expansion has come under fire recently from New York Governor Andrew Cuomo as well as US Senators Schumer and Gillibrand, who have asked the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to halt construction on the pipeline’s New York segment over safety concerns. Of particular concern is a 2 mile stretch of pipeline that would push volatile compressed gas within feet of the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant. Located just 30 miles north of Manhattan, Spectra’s pipeline expansion near the aging plant creates a situation that puts 20 million residents and the entire economics of the United States at risk. A Spectra pipeline which connects to Spectra’s “AIM” expansion exploded in Salem Township, Pennsylvania last month, creating a massive fireball that left a local resident with third degree burns over 75% of his body.

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

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

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

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

PA gas pipeline explosion predicted by whistleblowers


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

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

Devastation similar to that wrought by a gas pipeline explosion Friday in Salem Township, Pennsylvania is a real possibility in Burrillville, Rhode Island, and discounting this danger would be irresponsible. For a view of the damage done, in which one person was “badly burned,” see this footage from Pittsburgh Action News 4. The photos here are taken from this video.

Ashlee Hardway at Action News 4, wrote, “The explosion happened around 8:30 a.m. and involved a 30-inch pipeline owned by Texas Eastern, a unit of Spectra Energy, according to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.”

The explosion means that Spectra Energy will not be able to deliver the gas it has been contracted for, and the company has declared force majeure, which temporarily voids a contract for reasons outside a company’s control. This might mean that a dual fuel power plant, like the one planned by Invenergy for Burrillville, will have to start burning diesel oil until the gas pipeline is repaired.

The cause of the explosion has not yet been determined, but it’s hard not to think about a conversation I had with two Spectra Energy inspectors in November who claimed that the company cut corners in building their pipelines.

The safety inspectors essentially predicted this disaster.

“Right now, what they’re hoping to do, is they’re hoping to slam all this through, and then at the end ask for forgiveness,” said one of the former inspectors. “Oops, sorry about that, I didn’t know, let me write you a check. Because once this thing’s turning meter, they’re going to be making millions of dollars a day. It doesn’t matter what your problems are…”

Perhaps suspecting their days are numbered, fossil fuel companies are rushing to build the infrastructure required to keep us dependent on methane or “natural” gas for the next 50 years or more, even as evidence mounts that methane is a major contributor to climate change. This gives lie to the claim that methane will serve as a bridge fuel, something to ease the transition from fossil fuels to green energy sources, as the infrastructure investments being made are long term and permanent. Companies are investing billions laying pipelines, building compressor stations, and constructing energy plants and other infrastructure ahead of industry-wide extinction.

In their rush to build, safety and environmental concerns are being brushed aside, suspect many experts. A recent “Pipeline Safety Trust analysis of federal data,” shows that, “new pipelines are failing at a rate on par with gas transmission lines installed before the 1940s.”  Sarah Smith writes that Carl Weimer, director of the Pipeline Safety Trust, told attendees at a National Association of Pipeline Safety Representatives annual meeting in Tempe, AZ that, “The new pipelines are failing even worse than the oldest pipelines.”

Though some of the problems may be related to workers learning how to implement the latest technologies, Weimar says, “there’s also some suggestions that we’re trying to put so many new miles of pipeline in the ground so fast that people aren’t doing construction … the way they ought to.”

In the same piece Smith quotes Robert Hall, of the National Transportation Safety Board Office of Railroad, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Investigations, who agreed that, “the rapid construction of pipelines in the U.S. is likely a contributing factor to ‘people … out there possibly taking shortcuts or not being as diligent’ as they would be if the pace of construction were less fervent.”

According to the whistleblowers I talked to:

These pipes have to last underground for at least 50 years. If there’s the smallest mistake in their cathodic protection, that’s what’s going to corrode. All of a sudden you’ve got, even at 800-900 pounds of pressure, doesn’t sound like much, but when you’ve got a 42 inch pipe, traveling that distance and it goes ka-bang, you’re not talking about taking out a block, you’re talking about taking out a large area. You’re talking about a humongous ecological impact, you’re talking about displacing hundreds of families, you’re talking about leveling homes, killing people instantly, I mean, if one of those places were to go up, it’s going to be a bad day.”

In 2011 a cast-iron gas pipe cracked, causing an explosion that killed five people in Allentown, PA. Pipes like those are no longer used. But when work is rushed, construction is sloppy and disaster is possible.

“There’s a reason we do what we do,” said Inspector One, “Every bolt is torqued. I know when you torqued it, I know what torque wrench you used, what model number, when it was calibrated. That’s how serious every flange has to be. Because if one of these points blow up you’re talking about a humongous issue. These guys are making those kind of mistakes. They’re short-cutting things, they’re not inspecting things properly, they’re covering stuff up before an inspector’s had a chance to look at it.

“I have had inspectors that have come up to me in the field and have said to me that there is a pipe buried under ground that was not inspected appropriately. And the reason that it was not excavated and inspected is that it cost too much money.”

All pipeline welds are examined with x-rays to make sure they are up to code. After the weld is x-rayed the inspector waits for the film to come back from the lab. “How is it that you have a pipe already buried before you receive the film?” Inspector One asks, noting that he had a tech “receiving the film (on Tuesday) for a pipe buried last Wednesday.”

Spectra “has a checkered history of accidents and violations of federal safety rules in the U.S. and Canada dating back decades,” says Dan Christensen writing in the Miami Herald.  “Since 2006, the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration recorded 25 incidents that caused more than $12 million in property damage along Spectra’s main line — the 9,000-mile Texas Eastern Transmission that connects Texas and the Gulf Coast with big urban markets in the Northeast. The causes ranged from equipment failure and incorrect operations to pipe corrosion.”

SpectraBusters has a long list of links to stories about Spectra’s poor performance record.

Spectra, a multibillion dollar company, will likely cut a check to cover the damage in Pennsylvania. That check might amount to a day’s earnings for the company, maybe less. Meanwhile, what is the cost in human terms?

devastation 2The victim “told us that he heard a loud noise and compared it to a tornado. All he saw was fire and started running up the roadway and a passerby picked him up,” [Forbes Road Fire Chief Bob] Rosatti said.

“The heat was so intense that it was burning him as he was running,” he said.

A quarter-mile evacuation zone was established. Rosatti said the explosion and fire “damaged all the trees, all the utilities going down the roadway — the phone, cable, electric. Burned all the telephone poles off. It kind of looks like a bomb went off.”

Patreon

FANG targets State Street Corp. in Boston over fossil fuel support


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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
FANG State St Corp
(from FANG’s Facebook)

A group of people associated with The FANG Collective carried out an action at the international headquarters of State Street Corporation in downtown Boston on Friday. Two members of the group locked-down to two doors at the main entrance of the building using bicycle locks while others swarmed inside urging the companies to end its investments in the fracked-gas industry.

Galen Shireman-Grabowski and Jay Gustaferro of Gloucester, MA were extracted from their lock down by security and police and placed under arrest.

State Street Corporation is Boston’s oldest financial institution and has $28 trillion in assets.  State Street is one of the largest institutional shareholders of a multitude of companies involved in fracking, fracked-gas pipelines and liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. Among their top holdings is Spectra Energy, whose pipeline expansions projects have come under intense scrutiny across the Northeast.

“State Street Corporation with it’s holding in companies like Spectra Energy, Anadarko and Dominion, is fueling the climate crisis and impacting communities that are being inundated with fracked-gas infrastructure across the country,” Said Shireman-Grabowski who traveled from Vermont for the action.

Cgqon-HW0AE0EHT

State Street Corporation has faced protests over the past year from activists resisting Spectra’s “AIM” pipeline expansions project, Dominion’s Cove LNG facility in Maryland and Kinder Morgan’s “NED” project. On Wednesday Kinder Morgan declared that they were indefinitely delaying the NED pipeline project that would have cut across Massachusetts.

Activists held signs that listed a number of the fracked-gas companies that State Street has holdings in that read “State Street We See You.” Another banner deployed on the site read “State Street Divest: No More Pipelines.”

“State Street Corporation is locking our world into a climate crisis and they can no longer hide from public scrutiny. We are watching them, and we will hold them accountable,” said Gustaferro.

[from a press release]

Protesters target National Grid in Massachusetts, 4 arrested


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

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

IMG_0310Four people have been arrested at National Grid‘s North American headquarter building in Waltham, MA. National Grid, one of the Northeast’s largest utility companies, has a track record of injustice.

[Update: All 4 activists were booked at the Waltham, MA Police Station and are being transferred to the Waltham District Court at 38 Linden St. All have been released.]

FB_IMG_1461187112557

On Wednesday a group of residents from the Boston area launched a sit-in at National Grid’s North American Headquarters. Activists cited concerns about National Grid’s practice of utility shut-offs, past and proposed rate hikes, and the company’s support of Spectra Energy and Kinder Morgan’s proposed fracked-gas pipeline projects.

The activists deployed a report card-style banner in National Grid’s lobby with “subjects” and bright red Fs indicating failing grades. Alongside these grades were required action the activists would like to see the company take. Highest on the list banner was National Grid’s practice of utility-shut offs.

IMG_0291“Utility shut-offs disproportionately impact the most vulnerable members of society; elders and those with disabilities, low-income communities, and people of color,” said protester Carly Toomey. “Rate hikes and shut-offs fuel displacement in areas already reeling from gentrification.”

The FANG Collective, who supported the action, has been fighting Spectra Energy’s fracked gas pipelines in the region for two years. National Grid is a 20 percent stakeholder in Spectra’s proposed Access Northeast pipeline, a $5 billion project that would be paid for by a ratepayer tariff on National Grid consumers.

The activists pointed to the fact that the shift to fracked-gas as an energy source requires the construction of  infrastructure like power plants and liquefaction facilities in low-income communities and communities of color. Proposed facilities are planned for Salem and Brockton, MA, Providence and Burrillville, RI, and Bridgeport, CT, among others.

“We demand National Grid drop their support for fracked-gas infrastructure and instead fund local green jobs, especially for women and people of color,” said Jonathan Barry who participated in the sit-in. “These investments would contribute to healthy communities as opposed to displacement and climate change.”

[From a press release]

Patreon

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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
2016-02-02 State House 018
Jesus Holguin, EJLRI

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.

2016-02-02 State House 024About 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.

2016-02-02 State House 001

2016-02-02 State House 002

2016-02-02 State House 003

2016-02-02 State House 004

2016-02-02 State House 005

2016-02-02 State House 006

2016-02-02 State House 007

2016-02-02 State House 008

2016-02-02 State House 009

2016-02-02 State House 010

2016-02-02 State House 011

2016-02-02 State House 012

2016-02-02 State House 013

2016-02-02 State House 014

2016-02-02 State House 015

2016-02-02 State House 016

2016-02-02 State House 017

2016-02-02 State House 019

2016-02-02 State House 020

2016-02-02 State House 022

2016-02-02 State House 023

2016-02-02 State House 025

2016-02-02 State House 026

2016-02-02 State House 027

2016-02-02 State House 028

2016-02-02 State House 029

2016-02-02 State House 030

2016-02-02 State House 031

2016-02-02 State House 032

2016-02-02 State House 033

Patreon

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


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

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

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

Solutions and Alternatives

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Just Transition in Port of Providence

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

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

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

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

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

See also:

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

●  Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

●  Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues

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

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

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

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

Economic Inequality: high cost project that will cause economic damage


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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
The Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) has created a brilliant position paper, “National Grid’s Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Liquefaction Facility: Toxic Hazards in the Port Providence: Proposals for a Just Transition” that eviscerates National Grid‘s plans to build a new liquefaction facility for fracked LNG at Fields Point in South Providence. Over the next few days RI Future will be presenting the EJLRI’s position paper in its entirety.

Economic Inequality

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

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

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

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

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

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

The press release for the suit included the following:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

See also:

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

●  Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

●  Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues

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

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

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

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

Public Health: health disparities and impacts on health care institutions


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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
The Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) has created a brilliant position paper, “National Grid’s Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Liquefaction Facility: Toxic Hazards in the Port Providence: Proposals for a Just Transition” that eviscerates National Grid‘s plans to build a new liquefaction facility for fracked LNG at Fields Point in South Providence. Over the next few days RI Future will be presenting the EJLRI’s position paper in its entirety.

Public Health

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

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_23

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_24At hearings and public events about the proposed liquefaction facility, multiple community members have spoken out about issues of high asthma rates in the community being a major concern. Public health data backs up this concern, and shows that the area is one of the state’s largest asthma hot spots. While most of the state has asthma rates of 0­4.4 percent or 4.5­6.2 percent, most of Providence has asthma rates of 8 – ­10.3 percent and the neighborhood next to I­95 and the Port has the highest levels in the state at 10.4 – ­15.4 percent. (link)

On top of the high level of children with asthma, the front-line community and asthma hot spot next to the port also has some of the highest levels in the state for Emergency Department visits or Hospitalizations due to asthma. Among children with asthma living next to the Port of Providence, 15.5 –  ­ 24.1 percent have had an Emergency Department visit, compared to rates of 0­3.3 percent for more affluent neighborhoods in Providence. Similarly with asthma ­related hospitalizations, for front-line neighborhoods adjacent to the Port or Providence, children with asthma had inpatient hospitalizations at a rate of 5.1 – ­8.3 percent compared to the rate of 0­0.7 percent in the more affluent neighborhoods in Providence.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

See also:

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

●  Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

●  Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

Climate Change

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

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

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

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

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

Climate Adaptation?

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

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

See also:

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

●  Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

●  Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues

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

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

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

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

Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues


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

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

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

Environmental Racism

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

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

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

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

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

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_13

Demographics and the Waterfront?

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

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

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

EPA Toxic Release Inventory?­

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

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_15b

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

Schools at Risk

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

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_16

EPA’s EJ SCREEN Tool

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

Proximity to Facilities Requiring a Chemical Risk Management Plan

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

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_17

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

Proximity to Water Discharger Facility

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

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_18a

Traffic Proximity

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

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_18b

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

Toxic Storage and Discharge Facilities

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

EJLRI Position Paper_Page_19

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

Environmental Justice: working towards equitable healthy environments

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

Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area


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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
The Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island (EJLRI) has created a brilliant position paper, “National Grid’s Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Liquefaction Facility: Toxic Hazards in the Port Providence: Proposals for a Just Transition” that eviscerates National Grid‘s plans to build a new liquefaction facility for fracked LNG at Fields Point in South Providence. Over the next few days RI Future will be presenting the EJLRI’s position paper in its entirety.

Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

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

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

Relevant Past LNG Disasters

Washington State: March 31st, 2014

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

Skikda Algeria, January 2004

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

LNG Facility in Providence Denied in 2005 due to safety risks ­

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

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

High Risk Neighbor: Univar Chemical Facility ­

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

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

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

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

14 mile hazard radius: 110,000 schoolchildren at risk ­

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

Major Fuel Terminals and Fuel Transportation ­

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

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

Ethanol “bomb” trains ­

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

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

Dangerous incidents occurring in the Port of Providence

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

Lightning Strike​­

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

Earthquake​ ​

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

Hurricane ­

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

Emergency Preparedness and Response

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

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

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

See also:

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

●  Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

●  Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

Introduction

EJLRI01

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

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

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

●  Potential Disasters: dangerous facility in a high risk area

●  Environmental Racism: ongoing and underlying environmental justice issues

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

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

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

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

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

Background on National Grid’s proposal

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

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

The main points are:

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

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

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

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

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

There is no justified need for the project.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Spectra Energy protesters who planted tulips are sentenced in court


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

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

Those arrested in Burrillville earlier this month for trespassing onto land owned by Spectra Energy and planting tulips were processed in court today. They were given a filing in court which will not be put on their permanent record if there are no further arrests this year, and told to not trespass onto Spectra Energy property again. Spectra is currently working to upgrade pipelines and compressor stations in Burrillville as part of a massive methane gas expansion project. Protesters are hoping to stop the project and save the planet.

2015-12-15 Burrillville Eight
Kyle Schulz, Andrea Doremus, Mary Pendergast, Lauren Niedel and Sally Mendzela

In a statement, Sister Mary Pendergast wrote, “A culture of care is part of my spirituality: care of Earth, and care of people who are poor. Pope Francis has called us all to an ecological conversion and he said it is essential and not an option. He asks for a revolution of Mercy as well as a bold, cultural revolution. The Paris agreement is calling for an end to the fossil fuel era NOW! Yet the Burrillville plant will lock RI into fracked gas for the next 30 years. It is beyond time for the people to rise up, sure as the tulips we planted on Spectra.”

Andrea Doremus, also arrested and processed through court today, wrote, “I got arrested because I’m a high school U.S. history and Civics teacher, and I feel it is my educational and moral responsibility to model for my students what it means to stand up for what you believe in, and to use the tools of civil society to challenge that which is wrong and out of balance. Democracy is earned, not given – the forces of greed make sure that is true. And every generation needs to learn and earn it again.

“As Naomi Klein says, we are at a historical juncture. I believe it is our democratic responsibility to act.”

Patreon

Burrillville Town Council argues with, disappoints residents on gas expansion project


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

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Martley
Kathy Martley (right) addresses the Burrillville Town Council

Burrillville Town Councilor Stephen Rawson became combative with some of those who spoke against the Spectra pipeline expansion and Invenergy’s new fracked methane power plant at this week’s council meeting.

Rawson was quiet early on as Kathy Martley, who leads BASE (Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion), read her statement about the health and environmental dangers of a methane gas energy plant. She ended her talk by urging the town council to pass a resolution opposing the buildup of fracked gas infrastructure in Burrillville.

Rawson was even quiet when Nick Katkevich of FANG (Fighting Against Natural Gas) handed out copies of a recent story in RI Future in which two former Spectra safety inspectors alleged dangerous working conditions on Spectra’s build sites and a disregard for environmental and safety regulations.

But Rawson’s ability to restrain himself reached its limit with the third speaker, Lauren Niedel, who spoke of why she opposes the buildup of fracked methane infrastructure in northern Rhode Island and why she decided to be arrested for trespass, along with seven others, as a protest against Spectra over the weekend.

In the course of her testimony Niedel said that, “Governor Raimondo just came out saying she wants us to be using 100 percent renewable energy by 2025,” a reference to Raimondo’s executive order, signed in a State House ceremony the day before. Niedel misspoke, she meant to say that the order was for all state buildings to be using 100 percent renewables by 2025.

Rawson
Stephen Rawson

Rawson jumped on Niedel for this. “Can you give the date and time that Governor Raimondo said these things?” he asked.

“Yesterday,” said Niedel, along with several other people crowded in to the town council chambers. “It was for government buildings.”

“I believe it would be hypocritical of [Raimondo] to have a press conference to welcome the power plant, then come out with that statement,” said Rawson, “But for state buildings, that’s different.”

Rawson then looked at Niedel and admonished her, saying, “That was an exaggeration.”

“I’m sorry I misspoke,” said Niedel.

Of course, this wasn’t the point Niedel was trying to make. Governor Raimondo supports the proposed Invenergy Clear River power plant. The plant will have “a 30 year life span,” said Niedel, “We will be indebted with a fossil fuel infrastructure until 2050, making us beholden to Invenergy until then.”

Niedel’s point appears to be that for the Governor to have one standard for state buildings and another for the the rest of Rhode Island is hypocritical, or at least inconsistent. But that point was lost on Rawson, who went in for a cheap rhetorical hit instead of grappling with Niedel’s larger point.

Later that same evening Rawson got into what seemed to be a full on argument with Kathy Sherman, a Burrillville resident seeking clarification on just what the Town Council would be doing when negotiating with Invenergy about the proposed power plant. Sherman’s home is within a half mile of the plant’s location, and she is afraid that her property values are going to plummet due to the noise and air pollution a large power plant will bring. Will the town council be representing her needs, she wondered, or should she and her neighbors retain their own lawyers?

It was a complex question, and Town Manager Michael Wood didn’t have a lot of information or satisfactory answers. Much of what Invenergy is proposing hasn’t been fully revealed yet. There are hundreds of details to nail down. The town council’s job is to represent Burrillville, said Wood, but that doesn’t mean that the town council will be representing every concern of every resident.

Rawson then jumped in to explain that 25 years ago, the town went through the exact same process with the Ocean State energy plant. There was noise, there was construction, there was the “occasional blow off” but the plant ultimately had no effect on property values, said Rawson.

“That was 30 years ago,” replied Sherman, “things are different now.”

“Not 30 years,” said Rawson.

“1987, 2015. That’s thirty years, minus two,” she countered.

Now Rawson was exasperated. “Can I speak now?” he asked, eager to finish what he called his “history lesson.”

“Maybe you should listen instead of talking,” said Sherman. She didn’t have time for history lessons. She needed to understand the town council’s intentions, and was realizing that the town council had little idea of what it’s intentions were going to be.

“Please be patient,” commanded Rawson, “We’re going to do what’s necessary to mitigate the negative impacts.”

“You sound like Algonquin,” said Sherman, to a smattering of applause. She was referring to Spectra’s Algonquin pipeline expansion.

“Algonquin’s not the issue here,” countered Rawson, employing one of the town council’s favorite tactics, “We’re talking about the power plant.”

Whenever a speaker brings up an aspect of the power plant in reference to the pipeline or mentions the pipeline in relation to the power plant, town councilors pounce on the chance to explain that these are two different projects from two different companies. Of course most of those speaking to the town council know this. The projects, though different, are related: by proximity, because both projects are in Burrillville; by nature, as they are both methane infrastructure projects; and by business, since the pipeline will be supplying the methane that powers the energy plant.

Rawson and some other town councillors sometimes smugly correct speakers in this way to score easy, rhetorical points and shut down the conversation. Maybe it’s easier than addressing the concerns of the public in an honest, open way.

“We are in the process of developing an idea of what we want to do,” said Wood, the town manager. “You have to take a leap of faith and trust that the town council will do what’s best.”

This inspired pained groans from the audience.

Outside, after the meeting, residents clustered in small groups, talking about what had just transpired inside. They were not very happy. A consensus quickly formed that Rawson and Councillor Donald Fox, who had interrupted and admonished a woman in an argument about water filters, never treated male speakers with the kind of disrespect and argumentative tone they used when addressing women.

One resident, who hadn’t spoken during the meeting, asked if it was possible to recall the council members and force a new election. Another pointed out that they were in an election year, and that change was in the offing if the town council doesn’t begin to better represent the concerns of the residents.

There were three categories of speakers at the town council meeting. Those for the methane infrastructure build up, those against it, and those neutral on the subject but who are afraid that having such facilities so close to their homes will ruin their property values. Kathy Sherman falls into the last category.

Only two people spoke in favor of the new power plant. Chris Votta is a union iron worker, interested in the construction jobs the project will create. David Eston is a power plant worker who believes that methane will be a necessary bridge fuel as we make the conversion to renewables.

But every other speaker, and a large number of those crowded into the council chambers, opposed the project.

In their flyer “Invenergy talks about clean energy, then proposes gas, not a clean energy,” said one resident, “natural gas and fracking is exactly the opposite of” clean energy.

“Having a second power plant in this small town is complete insanity,” said another.

Lorraine Broussard, a self-described “ardent environmentalist” was one of the last to speak against the projects, saying, “Fossil fuel is a dinosaur on the eve of extinction… Natural Gas is a fracking lie.”

Patreon


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