December, 30 2009, 02:04pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Abigail Dillen, Earthjustice, 212-791-1881 x221 office
Glen Besa, Sierra Club VA, 804-387-6001
Coal-Power Transmission Line Off the Table
Corporations forced to admit power not needed
RICHMOND, CA
Two coal-burning
energy companies are withdrawing plans to build a multi-billion dollar
transmission line from Appalachia to East Coast cities - the Potomac
Appalachian Transmission Highline, or PATH line. The announcement came
with a concession
that the new line is not needed to address electricity demand in the
foreseeable future.
energy companies are withdrawing plans to build a multi-billion dollar
transmission line from Appalachia to East Coast cities - the Potomac
Appalachian Transmission Highline, or PATH line. The announcement came
with a concession
that the new line is not needed to address electricity demand in the
foreseeable future.
The proposed PATH line would have flooded Northeast cities with
dirty coal energy and made it harder for renewable clean energy to get
a toehold in eastern power markets. The line also would have saddled
ratepayers with extra costs for years to come. The
companies decided to abandon their pending application for approval of
the PATH project in Virginia after stiff opposition from Earthjustice
and Sierra Club prompted the Virginia State Corporation Commission to
order new analyses to assess the need for the
power line in light of decreased electricity demand, significant
efficiency gains, and a dramatic rise in the availability of demand
side management resources over the past few years.
dirty coal energy and made it harder for renewable clean energy to get
a toehold in eastern power markets. The line also would have saddled
ratepayers with extra costs for years to come. The
companies decided to abandon their pending application for approval of
the PATH project in Virginia after stiff opposition from Earthjustice
and Sierra Club prompted the Virginia State Corporation Commission to
order new analyses to assess the need for the
power line in light of decreased electricity demand, significant
efficiency gains, and a dramatic rise in the availability of demand
side management resources over the past few years.
As predicted by the conservation groups' experts, the new analyses
revealed that the PATH line will not be needed in 2014 as PATH's
proponents had previously claimed. In papers filed with the Virginia
state commission on Tuesday, representatives for the
companies stated: "These developments raise questions about the ability
of PATH-VA to support the Application now on file with the Commission
that is based on the need for the PATH Project in 2014."
revealed that the PATH line will not be needed in 2014 as PATH's
proponents had previously claimed. In papers filed with the Virginia
state commission on Tuesday, representatives for the
companies stated: "These developments raise questions about the ability
of PATH-VA to support the Application now on file with the Commission
that is based on the need for the PATH Project in 2014."
Earthjustice attorney Abigail Dillen said, "AEP and Allegheny
Energy have been crying wolf to boost profits from dirty old coal
plants. It's no longer possible to take these companies seriously when
they say that they need to increase dependence on coal-fired
power to keep the lights on."
Energy have been crying wolf to boost profits from dirty old coal
plants. It's no longer possible to take these companies seriously when
they say that they need to increase dependence on coal-fired
power to keep the lights on."
Proposed by American Electric Power (AEP) and Allegheny Power, the
high-voltage PATH line would have run through West Virginia, Virginia
and Maryland, at a cost of more than $1.8 billion to ratepayers.
high-voltage PATH line would have run through West Virginia, Virginia
and Maryland, at a cost of more than $1.8 billion to ratepayers.
Experts, testifying on behalf of the Sierra Club, found that the
proposed transmission line would have made the eastern grid less
reliable and increased air pollution. This testimony also validated
concerns raised by environmental and community groups
that the project would increase pollution from coal-fired power plants.
proposed transmission line would have made the eastern grid less
reliable and increased air pollution. This testimony also validated
concerns raised by environmental and community groups
that the project would increase pollution from coal-fired power plants.
Read expert testimony against the PATH transmission line here.
https://www.earthjustice.org/news/press/2009/experts-raise-concerns-about-new-transmission-line-from-coal-country-to-eastern-grid.html
"It is critical that these utilities invest in efficiency and
renewable energy and begin to move away from coal," said Glen Besa,
Director of the Sierra Club in Virginia. "Perhaps this delay will
prompt them to reassess not only the PATH power line but
how they meet future electricity needs."
renewable energy and begin to move away from coal," said Glen Besa,
Director of the Sierra Club in Virginia. "Perhaps this delay will
prompt them to reassess not only the PATH power line but
how they meet future electricity needs."
Earthjustice represented the Sierra Club in the Virginia proceedings challenging the permit to build the line in that state.
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460LATEST NEWS
G7 2035 Coal Phaseout Pledge Called 'Too Little, Too Late' to Match Climate Emergency
"If they are serious and aligned with what the science says is needed to keep 1.5°C within reach, G7 countries must ditch this dinosaur, planet-wrecking fuel no later than 2030," one advocate said.
Apr 30, 2024
The Group of Seven Climate, Energy, and Environment Ministerial concluded a meeting in Turin, Italy, on Tuesday with a commitment to phase out "unabated" coal use by 2035.
While the agreement is "unprecedented" for the U.S. and Japan, which had not previously set an expiration date on their burning of the dirtiest fossil fuel, it still does not align with the Paris agreement goal of limiting global heating to 1.5°C.
"The commitment to phase out coal is simply too little, too late. If they are serious and aligned with what the science says is needed to keep 1.5°C within reach, G7 countries must ditch this dinosaur, planet-wrecking fuel no later than 2030," Greenpeace International global climate politics expert Tracy Carty said in a statement. "And the climate emergency demands they just don't stop at coal. Fossil fuels are destroying people and planet and a commitment to rapidly phase out all fossil fuels—coal, oil, and gas—is urgently needed."
"This is not the goal for coal we need, and it will not deliver climate justice."
In their Climate, Energy, and Environment Ministers' Meeting Communiqué, the countries agreed to "phase out existing unabated coal power generation in our energy systems during the first half of 2030s or in a timeline consistent with keeping a limit of 1.5°C temperature rise within reach, in line with countries' net-zero pathways."
The agreement comes days after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized a rule mandating that all coal plants that plan to operate after 2039 must slash their climate-heating emissions by 90% by that date. Like the "unabated" language in the G7 communiqué, the EPA plan leaves open the possibility that coal plants could continue to run if they can effectively eliminate their carbon dioxide pollution with carbon capture and storage. However, this is an unproven technology that has not succeeded at scale; for example, Oil and Gas Watch News reported last Thursday that a taxpayer-funded CCS project at an ethanol plant in Illinois had only captured up to 10-12% of CO2 emissions each year for the past decade.
"It is past time that the U.S. made concrete commitments to phase out coal power," Jeff Ordower, the director of 350.org North America director, said in a statement. He added that while 350.org welcomed "this and all steps toward phasing out fossil fuels, such as the Environmental Protection Agency's recent announcement to further limit coal-fired power plants' CO2 emissions, we must not lose sight of what is really at stake."
Further, Ordower said that the U.S.' plans "must not rely on unproven technologies like carbon capture, or dangerous, expensive, and unequal ones like nuclear just so they can continue business as usual."
Similarly, 350.org Japan campaigner Masayoshi Iyoda said, "Japan agreeing to a specific deadline to phase out domestic coal power generation is momentous and long overdue."
"As an historic outlier among G7 countries on making coal phaseout commitments, and with the highest share of power generated from coal among its G7 peers, this is a step forward. However, 2035 is too late to meet the 1.5°Ctarget set in the Paris agreement," Iyoda continued.
"This was the first opportunity for the G7 to show they were taking the COP28 agreement seriously. They have failed."
Amnesty International also criticized the timeline of the deal.
"This is not the goal for coal we need, and it will not deliver climate justice," Candy Ofime, Amnesty International's climate justice researcher, said in a statement. "Commitments put forward by G7 members—which have burnt coal for power for more than a century—to stop using this pollutant by 2035 are simply too late and weakened by unacceptable caveats."
Ofime pointed out that the deal appeared to make no mention of phasing out coal in steel production, despite the fact that the process burns up around 30% of total coal use. She also argued that the language around "unabated" coal use was "misleading."
"Abatement relies on the use of carbon capture and storage, and other technologies such as ammonia and hydrogen co-firing with coal, which are unproven at scale and can come with other risks," Ofime sad. "Coal pollution cannot be adequately abated, and harms health and the climate whenever it is used."
Campaigners also criticized the G7 countries for focusing their timeline on coal and not oil and gas, especially since all nations agreed to work toward "transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly, and equitable manner" at last year's COP28 United Nations climate talks in Dubai.
"This was the first opportunity for the G7 to show they were taking the COP28 agreement seriously. They have failed," said Romain Ioualalen, Oil Change International's global policy campaign manager.
Oil Change pointed out that G7 countries are responsible for nearly half of all CO2 emissions from new oil and gas production, as well as 27% of production overall. At the same time, they subsidized fossil fuels to the tune of $25.7 billion a year between 2020 and 2022, compared to only $10.3 billion for renewables. While the countries did reaffirm a pledge to end "inefficient" fossil fuel subsidies by 2025 or earlier, they did not offer any more details on the timeline.
"While the G7 focuses on coal, it conveniently omits to stress that limiting warming to 1.5°C means they also need to end fossil fuel expansion at home, going fastest in phasing out existing production," Ioualalen said. "They must end the billions of dollars in taxpayer finance still flowing to fossil fuel projects abroad and fund the buildout of affordable renewable energy on fair terms. If their oil and gas expansion plans are allowed to proceed, it would lock in climate chaos and an unlivable future."
The ministers also reaffirmed the importance of natural gas deliveries to Europe to help it replace Russian gas in the wake of Russia's ongoing war on Ukraine. However, European officials have said that they will have enough gas supplies to last through the next decade despite a Biden administration pause on new liquefied natural gas (LNG) export approvals.
"Faced with climate catastrophe, the G7's persistent endorsement of fossil gas is alarming," Carty of Greenpeace said. "Gas is not needed, not cheap, and is certainly not a 'bridge fuel' to a safe climate. The biggest fossil fuel threat today by wealthy nations is coming from the rapidly expanding LNG industry. An urgent shift is needed towards less, not more, gas—and massively expanded renewables."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ilhan Omar Says GOP Calls to Put Student Protesters on Terror Watch List 'Insanely Dangerous'
Sen. Marsha Blackburn put "a target" on protesters across the country with her latest attack on them, said Omar.
Apr 30, 2024
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar on Tuesday urged her colleagues to condemn the latest Republican threat against the thousands of university students and faculty who have protested U.S. complicity in Israel's assault on Gaza, after Sen. Marsha Blackburn suggested the protesters have "promoted terrorism" and called for them to be surveilled by the federal government.
"Any student who has promoted terrorism or engaged in terrorist acts on behalf of Hamas should be immediately added to the terrorist watch list and placed on the [Transportation Security Administration] No-Fly List," said the Tennessee Republican.
Blackburn's comments came nearly two weeks after a solidarity encampment set up by students at Columbia University—and the suspension and arrests of more than 100 participants—galvanized students at dozens of schools across the United States and around the world to call for their institutions to divest from Israel and for the U.S. to cut off military funding for the Middle Eastern country.
More than 1,000 students, educators, and other supporters have been arrested, with videos of particularly aggressive police responses at schools including Emory University in Atlanta, Washington University in St. Louis, and University of Texas at Austin further sparking anger among opponents of Israel's bombardment.
Omar (D-Minn.) called Blackburn's comments "insanely dangerous."
Blackburn previously denounced the protesters as "unruly" and "terrorist sympathizers."
Numerous reports have described how the anti-war protests have been peaceful until police officers began violently arresting attendees, while opponents have shared "escalating unhinged calls to crack down" on the demonstrations, said Intercept reporter Murtaza Hussain.
Also on Tuesday, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) wrote to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, urging him "investigate and prosecute" organizers of the protests" and accusing them of "conspiring to violate the civil rights of a religious minority," referring to Jewish Americans.
Last week, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) called on President Joe Biden to summon the National Guard to clamp down on the protests.
Johnson's call was echoed by Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.).
"The calls from Cotton and Hawley to deploy the National Guard are not about anyone's safety—many of the pro-Palestinian protesters, against whom the might of the U.S. military would be aimed, are Jewish," wrote Adam Serwer at The Atlantic. He recalled that in 1970, members of the Ohio National Guard fatally shot four young students at Kent State University.
"Sending the National Guard to campuses facing Vietnam War protests led to students being killed, including some who had nothing to do with the protests, rather than to anyone being safer," wrote Serwer. "The most likely outcome based on past precedent would be an escalation to serious violence. Which might be the idea."
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Tax Convention Presents Historic 'Opportunity to Create Well-Being for All'
"At the U.N., low- and middle-income countries are in the majority, and they want a fair system where their voices are heard."
Apr 30, 2024
Tax justice advocates this week are expressing hope that delegates at a United Nations summit aimed at drafting an international tax convention will take the "once-in-a-century opportunity," as one campaigner and researcher said, to place the common good at the center of the global tax system instead of individual and corporate greed.
Representatives of U.N. member states are meeting for the Ad Hoc Committee to Draft Terms of Reference for a United Nations Framework on International Tax Cooperation, following decades of campaigning by countries in the Global South.
"It's happening," said Rebecca Riddell, policy lead for Oxfam America. "The start of historic negotiations for a fairer global tax system. We're here because of the leadership of African countries. Because of the 125 states that voted yes. And because of tireless civil society efforts."
The U.N. General Assembly passed a resolution last November calling for the meeting, with the committee required to submit "terms of reference to the General Assembly by August and a final vote on a tax convention framework expected by the end of 2025.
At the Tax Justice Network (TJN), Sergio Chaparro-Hernandez wrote last week that the negotiations are taking place with an "unprecedented level of transparency," with civil society groups able to account for the positions adopted by each state.
Another "noteworthy development" as the meeting gets underway, said Chaparro-Hernandez, is that "several of the 48 countries that had voted against Resolution 78/230 last year are now actively participating in the process."
"The European Union, for example, which voted as a bloc against the resolution last year, accepted the path set out by the resolution by stating in its initial statement at the organizational session that, 'the UN framework convention on tax cooperation can and should serve to further promote tax transparency and fair taxation,'" he added.
Along with TJN, other civil society groups including the Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR), Eurodad, and Greenpeace are participating in the committee meeting and lobbying for a far-reaching convention framework that will "redefine the pillars of the international tax system and to make it fully inclusive, just, and effective."
"At the U.N., low- and middle-income countries are in the majority, and they want a fair system where their voices are heard," said Maria Ron Balsera, a researcher at CESR.
Under current global tax rules, the wealthiest individuals and corporations pocket $480 billion each year through the use of tax havens and other forms of tax evasion, said Greenpeace on Tuesday, "most countries just can't cover people's basic needs, nor meet their climate and biodiversity targets and commitments."
"The U.N. Tax Convention is a historical opportunity to create well-being for all, by moving decision-making power from a few rich [Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development] countries to the U.N. where every country has a vote," said the group.
Chenai Mukumba, executive director of Tax Justice Network Africa, spoke to attendees of the committee meeting about prioritizing mechanisms to crack down on tax evasion.
"While we flag the importance of this work to developing countries, we cannot overemphasize that inclusive and effective tax cooperation is important that has benefits for our global community," said Mukumba. "The international community as a whole is better off when we have more countries that have resources and capacity to provide their citizens with essential services."
On Monday, Greenpeace Africa's pan-African political strategist Fred Njehu wrote to Ramy Mohamed Youssef, chair of the U.N. Tax Convention Committee, and addressed him not only as an advocate but as "a dad, a concerned citizen, and a taxpayer."
Changing global tax rules and ensuring the wealthy pay their fair share, said Njehu would unlock "the money for everyone’s basic needs and the recovery of climate and nature."
"We both know that this is mostly because multinational corporations have been exploiting the majority of the world for way too long, and governments in some rich countries have facilitated it," said Njehu. "They're making billions on the destruction of the world and our suffering. And then, they hide their profits in tax havens. A downward spiral where wealth and power have become so concentrated as to threaten democracy, civilization, and the living world we're part of."
"Mr. Youssef, you have a big responsibility and a unique opportunity to turn things around this year," he added. "Civil society, academics, and countries that represent 80% of the world’s population are backing you and your colleagues at the U.N. Tax Convention Committee to change the global tax rules, which are critical for how the global economy works... Now we need equality, transparency and accountability. Polluters must pay and the wealthy must be taxed fairly."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular