Toxics Action Center

September 29, 2016September 29, 2016

PUC declines to kill pipeline tariff, but it’s dying any way

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

The Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission (RIPUC) today ruled against Conservation Law Foundation (CLF)’s motion to dismiss National Grid‘s proposed pipeline tariff and instead issued an indefinite stay. CLF argued that National Grid’s plan to charge electrical consumers to underwrite and guarantee profits for its proposed ANE pipeline is no longer viable given a recent Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling that declared such pipeline tariffs unconstitutional under state law.

Since National Grid’s plan required the consent of all New England states, CLF moved to dismiss the docket here in Rhode Island, yet Meg Curran, chair of the RIPUC, didn’t agree that the project was necessarily dead, saying she still had questions about the project. Curran felt that National Grid’s offer to withdraw their application and refile at a later date or accept a ruling that the docket be put on hold were better options.

RIPUC board member Herbert DeSimone Jr agreed. He said that dismissal would not be appropriate, and withdrawing the application would create “unnecessary redundancies” upon refiling, as all the evidence heard to date would have to be heard again and all motions re-decided. DeSimone suggested that the RIPUC issue an indefinite stay in the proceedings, with the caveat that National Grid file a progress report on January 13, 2017.

Curran and DeSimone then unanimously voted in favor of the plan. Marion Gold, the third member of the RIPUC, had recused herself.

The meeting was attended by representatives from and members of People’s Power and Light, the FANG Collective, Food and Water Watch, Toxics Action Center, Fossil Free RI, NoLNGinPVD and the RI Sierra Club.

“The Commission’s decision to delay this proceeding is a step toward the inevitable death of the pipeline tax. Forcing Rhode Island electric customers to foot the bill for a gas pipeline we don’t need defies our best interest and our laws,” Megan Herzog with the Conservation Law Foundation said. “Both Massachusetts and the federal government have rejected the project, and we will keep fighting until Rhode Island follows suit.”

“Rhode Island consumers should not have to take on the long-term risk of a new, unnecessary natural gas pipeline. We must protect electric customers from being charged for a natural gas pipeline, and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has already done this by deciding that the unprecedented cost-recovery scheme proposed by utilities is illegal, according to Mass. law,” said Priscilla De La Cruz of People’s Power and Light, also in attendance.

August 17, 2016August 26, 2016

Court kills pipeline tariff in Mass, RI still considering

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

As the Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission considers a request from National Grid to have ratepayers help subsidize a controversial pipeline project, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled against such pipeline tariffs in a decision released Wednesday.

“This is an incredibly important and timely decision,’ said David Ismay, the Conservation Law Foundation’s lead attorney on the case. ‘Today our highest court affirmed Massachusetts’ commitment to an open energy future by rejecting the Baker Administration’s attempt to subsidize to the dying fossil fuel industry. The course of our economy and our energy markets runs counter to the will of multi-billion dollar pipeline companies, and thanks to today’s decision, the government will no longer be able to unfairly and unlawfully tip the scales in their favor.”

The ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court may have an impact on National Grid‘s proposed “pipeline tariff” here in Rhode Island. The Massachusetts court deemed “it unlawful for Massachusetts to force residential electricity customers to subsidize the construction of private gas pipelines, requiring the companies themselves to shoulder the substantial risks of such projects rather than allowing that risk to be placed on hardworking families across the Commonwealth,” according the the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) who brought the case.

The CLF was the plaintiff in the Massachusetts case. The CLF maintained in their motion to intervene in the Rhode Island case that “an electricity distribution company” entering “into a contract for natural gas transportation capacity and storage services” and receiving “cost recovery for its gas contract from electricity ratepayers” is “something that has never occurred in the United States since the Federal Power Act was enacted in 1935, during President Roosevelt’s first term in office.”

Megan Herzog, one of the two lawyers representing the CLF before the RIPUC said in a phone call that the “pipeline is a bad deal for the whole region and that the Massachusetts court affirmed that.” Though the judge ruled on the case using Massachusetts law, there are statutes in Rhode Island that reflect similar principles.

According to Craig S. Altemose, a senior advisor forthe anti-LNG advocacy group 350 Mass for a Better Future, “It is unclear how much this will be a fatal blow to any of Spectra’s proposed projects, but we have absolutely undercut their financing (to the tune of $3 billion), called into question similar pipeline tax proposals in other states, [italics added] and have given Spectra’s investors greater reason for pause. Either way, we have unambiguously won a victory that the people’s money should be not used for private projects that further commit us to climate catastrophe.”

“Today’s decision reinforces what we already know: it’s not in the public interest to subsidize new fossil fuel infrastructure. It deals a serious blow to companies like Spectra who wanted to subsidize their risky projects with handouts from ratepayers. Communities facing an onslaught of fracked gas projects in their backyards like those in Burrillville have good reason to feel hopeful right now. We urge Governor [Gina] Raimondo and the Rhode Island PUC to follow the lead of Massachusetts and reject the pipeline tax,” Ben Weilerstein, Rhode Island community organizer with Toxics Action Center said.

Though the ruling in Massachusetts has no statutory value in Rhode Island, it may establish some lines of legal reasoning that will be helpful as the Rhode Island Public Utilities (RIPUC) Commission decides on Docket 4267, the Rhode Island part of National Grid’s ambitious plan to charge electrical ratepayers not only for pipeline infrastructure investments, but also to guarantee the company’s profits as they do so.

National Grid responded with the following statement: “This is a disappointing setback for the project, which is designed to help secure New England’s clean energy future, ensure the reliability of the electricity system, and most importantly, save customers more than $1 billion annually on their electricity bills. We will explore our options for a potential path forward with Access Northeast and pursue a balanced portfolio of solutions to provide the clean, reliable, and secure energy our customers deserve. While natural gas remains a key component in helping to secure New England’s long-term energy future, the recently passed clean energy bill also presents a welcomed opportunity to support the development of large-scale clean energy, such as hydro and wind.”

Yesterday The RIPUC held a hearing on Docket 4627, asking National Grid to explain why it used such a “broad brush” in redacting information in its application. In the meeting announcement it was said that RIPUC Chair Margaret Curran thought “it is not intuitively clear how the information redacted falls within the exception to the Access to Public Records Act.” Much of what National Grid argues that much of what it wants to keep secret falls into the category of trade secrets, and releasing the information would put it at an unfair disadvantage with competitors, such as NextEra Energy Resources, LLC (NextEra).

As pointed out previously, National Grid will not release how much money ratepayers will be on the hook for if this idea is approved by the RIPUC.

Here’s full video of the hearing:

NextEra brought a separate motion to allow its lawyers access to highly confidential parts of National Grid’s application.

Here’s the full video of that hearing:

The Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) released the following statement today in response to the favorable decision from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Conservation Law Foundation v. Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU):

‘This is an incredibly important and timely decision,’ said David Ismay, CLF’s lead attorney on the case. ‘Today our highest court affirmed Massachusetts’ commitment to an open energy future by rejecting the Baker Administration’s attempt to subsidize to the dying fossil fuel industry. The course of our economy and our energy markets runs counter to the will of multi-billion dollar pipeline companies, and thanks to today’s decision, the government will no longer be able to unfairly and unlawfully tip the scales in their favor.’

According to the opinion by Justice Cordy, DPU’s 2015 rule (“Order 15-37”) allowing Massachusetts electric customers to be charged for the construction of interstate gas pipelines is prohibited by the plain languages of statutes that have been the law of the land in Massachusetts for almost two decades.

In his opinion, Justice Cordy wrote, Order 15-37 is ‘invalid in light of the statutory language and purpose of G. L. c. 164, § 94A, as amended by the restructuring act, because, among other things, it would undermine the main objectives of the act and reexpose ratepayers to the types of financial risks from which the Legislature sought to protect them.’

August 3, 2016August 3, 2016

National Grid wants RI ratepayers to guarantee its profits

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

National Grid is requesting that the Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission (RIPUC) approve a 20-year gas capacity contract” with Algonquin Gas Transmission Company LLC (Algonquin) for natural gas transportation capacity and storage services on Algonquin’s Access Northeast Project (ANE Project).”

The multinational energy conglomerate not only wants Rhode Island ratepayers to subsidize the construction of fracked gas infrastructure, they want consumers to ensure that the project is profitable for the company.

Part of National Grid’s 572 page application includes “a Capacity Cost Recovery Provision tariff, which allows the Company to recover all incremental costs associated with the ANE Agreement, as well as the Company’s proposed financial incentive.” Understand that when National Grid says “financial incentives” they are talking about company profits.

The logic that National Grid is using to claim the right to tariffs is that the RIPUC has allowed such charges when it comes to “long-term renewable electricity for retail customers from wholesale power providers.” [emphasis added] In other words, because the government has taken an interest in expanding renewable energy sources like wind and solar, and allowed tariffs to support these efforts, National Grid argues that it should be allowed similar considerations for fossil fuels such as fracked gas.

2016-08-02 RIPUC 006 Pricilla De la Cruz — Pricilla De la Cruz

National Grid owns a 20 percent stake in the ANE Project, so Rhode Islanders will be ensuring that the company generates a profit as they buy fracked gas from themselves if the RIPUC approves this request.

A similar tariff stalled in the Massachusetts legislature, where the state Senate unanimously rejected the idea but the session ended before a House vote. The Massachusetts Supreme Court is deciding on the validity of the tariff, since the Massachusetts PUC approved the idea.

National Grid also asked that their request be approved “as expeditiously as possible,” meaning that they want the decision fast tracked. As a result, the public comment meeting held last night at the RIPUC offices in Warwick was the first and last opportunity for public comment, unless RIPUC commissioners Margaret Curran and Herbert DeSimone III decide to hold another public comment meeting. (The third member of the RIPUC board, Marion Gold, has recused herself.) Written comment can be sent to thomas.kogut@dpuc.ri.gov. Mention that you are commenting on Docket No. 4627.

The first speaker of the night, Doug Gablinske of The Energy Council of New England (TEC-RI), was also the only speaker in favor of the idea. Gablinske called the project “a novel approach” and said that “it’s good for ratepayers, for employees, for employers and for business.”

From there, things went downhill pretty quickly.

Calling the tariff an “unprecedented charge” Priscilla De La Cruz of the People’s Power and Light called on the RIPUC to reject National Grid’s request. “Why should consumers take on the risk of a new, unnecessary gas pipeline?” De La Cruz maintained that the entire idea conflicts with the goals of the 2014 Resilient Rhode Island Act. (You can read De La Cruz’s full testimony here.)

Lynn Clark came down from Burrillville, wearing her “No New Power Plant” tee shirt to argue against the proposal. She said that allowing National Grid to pass the costs of their LNG project onto consumers adds “insult to injury” to everyone living in her part of the state.

Other states did comprehensive studies before considering pipeline tariffs, said Nick Katkevich of the FANG Collective, who has been fighting pipeline projects in and around Rhode Island for three years. Massachusetts and Maine have both produced studies that concluded that pipeline tariffs are a bad idea, said Katkevich. “It’s shameful that National Grid wants to have guaranteed profits as part of this,” said Katkevich. “They don’t care about people. They don’t care about people’s utility rates… if they did they wouldn’t put guaranteed profits in there.”

“No one wants these pipelines,” said Katkevich, “across the region people are resisting the first of the three Spectra expansions… There have been 240 people arrested as part of direct action in New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts.”

If you have an opinion on this project, you can send it to Luly.massaro@puc.ri.gov. Mention that you are commenting on Docket No. 4627.

Below find all the testimony from the hearing.

July 27, 2016

LNG as bad as coal, or worse says new report

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

A new report released by Toxics Action Center, Frontier Group, Environment America and more than a dozen community groups across New England finds that burning gas for electricity is as bad for the climate as coal, or worse.

The report, titled “Natural Gas and Global Warming: A Review of Evidence Finds that Methane Leaks Undercut the Climate Benefits of Gas,” shows that older claims that gas has a modest impact on the climate are wrong, as they fail to account for the greenhouse gas effect of methane and high rates of methane leaks from gas infrastructure.

Ben Weilerstein, eastern Massachusetts and Rhode Island organizer with the Toxics Action Center, held a press conference outside the RI State House with Kathy Martley of BASE (Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion). Martley has been fighting the expansion of fracked gas infrastructure in Burrillville for years, and was the woman responsible for getting Governor Gina Raimondo to visit the town to discuss Invenergy‘s planned $700 million fracked gas and diesel oil burning power plant.

“For years, communities on the frontlines of proposed pipelines, power plants, compressor stations, and LNG terminals have been told by the fossil fuel lobby and politicians that gas is a low-carbon bridge to a clean energy future,” said Weilerstein. “Today, it’s clearer than ever that this is not the case. New fracked gas infrastructure proposed across the region threatens our climate future, our health, and our neighborhoods. It’s time to double down on clean local renewable energy sources right here in New England.

“Methane can leak during every stage of natural gas production – during drilling, processing, and even from the pipeline,” said Elizabeth Ridlington of Frontier Group in a statement. Ridlington wrote the report, saying, “Our review of the evidence suggests that these leaks may have an annual global warming impact equivalent of up to 250 coal-fired power plants, enough to nearly or completely offset any other climate benefits of natural gas.”

Released simultaneously in seven New England cities and towns today, the report emphasizes that methane is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, trapping 86 to 105 times as much heat as CO2 over a 20-year period. Making these findings even more concerning, the report authors found flaws in studies that reported very low rates of methane leakage, finding evidence instead of high rates of methane leaks from gas infrastructure.

Kathy Martley noted that reports like this have been coming out for years, and that it’s time for the Governor Gina Raimondo and Rhode Island Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Jack Reed to read these reports and act. “For health and environmental reasons we need to stop LNG now,” said Martley.

May 26, 2016May 27, 2016

National advocacy groups call on Raimondo to drop power plant support

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

Today, over a dozen national advocacy groups joined local community groups in delivering a letter to Rhode Island Governor Gina Raimondo asking her to show climate leadership and revoke her support for the proposed Invenergy Clean River Energy Center in Burrillville, RI. The groups noted there are serious concerns about local air and water pollution, and also that methane released from fracked gas is a potent greenhouse gas contributing to the climate crisis. Methane leaks from every stage of the natural gas system, from well sites to processing plants and compressor stations to beneath city streets.

“Support for this project is inconsistent with climate leadership and will move us away, rather than towards, the quick and just transition to 100 percent renewable energy that we desperately need…Promoting natural gas not only will lock in decades more of fracking and contribute to the climate crisis, but it will result in billions of dollars being spent on the infrastructure to support burning gas, preventing us from moving into a sustainable energy future,” said the letter.

Governor Raimondo has spoken out about the need to address climate change, and her desire for the state to become a green energy leader. Regarding Rhode Island’s participation in the Governors’ Accord for a New Energy Future, Raimondo said, “Already, we’ve taken valuable steps forward to reduce our environmental impact and grow green jobs by supporting the construction of the nation’s first offshore wind facility, investing in renewables, and encouraging clean modes of transportation. More work remains, and this accord acknowledges the challenges we face and our commitment to addressing them.”

“Governor Raimondo can’t have it both ways,” said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, which organized the letter. “Fracked gas is as dirty as it gets. Burrillville residents deserve better than the Invenergy plant. The climate deserves better, too.”

“There are 300 gas plants proposed across the country,” said Nick Katkevich of The FANG Collective. “Building these plants will lock us in to climate catastrophe and hurt communities facing the onslaught of fracked-gas infrastructure. We need Governor Raimondo to listen to her constituents and drop her support of Invenergy’s proposed power plant.”

“Fracked-gas is not a bridge fuel to a clean energy future – it’s a road block. We need a just transition to 100 percent community owned renewable energy. For this to happen in Rhode Island, Invenergy’s proposed power plant must be cancelled,” said Kathy Martley of Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion, who lives a quarter mile from the proposed power plant site and the existing Spectra Energy compressor station in Burrillville, RI.

Many of these organizations will be converging on Philadelphia on July 24, on the eve of the Democratic National Convention to demand that elected leaders including Governor Raimondo take swift action to keep the vast majority of fossil fuels in the ground and commit to transitioning swiftly to renewable energy.

“Governor Raimondo’s decision will not only determine the fate of the project,” said Hauter. “It will also determine whether she is a leader in this revolution, or a follower on the same old dirty path.”

Organizations signing the letter include: 350 CT; 350.org; AnastasiaThinks INC; Breast Cancer Action; Burrillville Against Spectra Expansion; Center for Biological Diversity; Climate Disobedience Center; Elders Climate Action; Environmental Action; The FANG Collective; Food & Water Watch; Franciscan Response to Fracking; Friends of the Earth; Grassroots Environmental Education; Immanuel Congregational Church UCC Environmental Ministry Team; Jewish Climate Action Network; Justice Action Mobilization Network; Justice and Peace Office of the Congregation of Notre Dame USA; National Nurses United; People Demanding Action; Popular Resistance; Progressive Democrats of America; South Coast Neighbors United, Inc.; Stand; Stop the Algonquin Pipeline Expansion; Toxics Action Center; U.S. Climate Plan; and We Are Seneca Lake.

The letter can be found online at: http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/sites/default/files/rhode_island_powerplant_sign_on_letter_final_5_23_16.pdf

[From a press release]