West Virginia Wind Farm Study Released

Coal River Mountain Watch recently published a study purporting to show that a wind project on Coal River Mountain in Raleigh County would produce far more in taxes and benefits for the citizens of Raleigh County than would be produced by mining coal by the mountaintop removal process. The study relies heavily on the "externalities" associated with coal - excess deaths and illnesses, and environmental damage - to buttress the conclusion that coal mining is not economically reasonable. More specifically, the Executive Summary states that "[e]ven without comparing it with the wind scenarios, the mountaintop removal scenario is not defensible from the perspective of Raleigh County citizens when considering just two externalities: excess deaths and illnesses, and environmental damage." Of course, weighing the benefits of coal mining against its detriments (and there are several) requires coming up with some metric for accurately comparing costs and benefits of dissimilar things, such as taxes paid, and natural resources damaged. Having been involved in similar economic calculations justifying proposed development projects, I believe it is fair to say that the valuations used by opposing parties often involve wild flights of fancy. That is true whether parties are valuing natural resources to defeat a project, or calculating the economic benefits of projects to support them.

It is interesting to note that even the authors of the study acknowledge that land owners have concluded that "[w]ind farm revenues were found to be much lower than those realized through mountaintop removal." Since severance taxes and other benefits flow from mining revenues, the study authors must have weighted the "externalities" of coal pretty heavily to offset the financial benefits.

Wind farms present problems of their own. For an explanation of some of their demerits, and concerns about their efficacy, see A Problem With Wind Power.

Not everyone in West Virginia supports wind farms. Here is a site for a group in Pendleton County. I have to admit, I've seen these windmills and don't think they look so ugly, but I don't live around them.

Utility Places Large Batteries in Milton

Effective batteries are the crucial "missing link" for all types of alternative grid-based energy. There must be some way to store power when the wind is blowing or the sun is shining, and provide power when there is calm, or at night. There has been a lot of interest in load leveling recently, as can be seen in this article. Some of the changes referred to in this article from MIT, from 2003, are just now coming to pass. And as the Wall Street Journal recently reported, the US is behind the Asian countries in developing battery technology, especially for cars. Note that the AEP batteries are from NGK, a Japanese company, that has a spark plug factory in West Virginia.

This article from the December 18 2008 Charleston Daily Mail explains AEP's practice of putting large batteries in certain locations to level loads. The batteries can be recharged at night, when there is excess capacity, and used when there is excess demand. They can also provide local sources of power when transmission lines are out.

New Valley Fill Disposal Rule Issued

New rules have been issued governing the disposal of overburden at mining sites, but despite the hue and cry heard somepaces, the rules are not significantly different from those that were previously in effect. The State Journal does a good job of laying out the facts involved. The change is opposed by groups such as the Coal River Mountain Watch and the Highlands Conservancy.

The rule is actually EPA approval of a Departmentof Interior Office of Surface Mining rule.

Key New Source Review Air Rule Proposal Dropped

EPA has announced that it will drop its new source review (NSR) rule initiative for power plants, freeing the Obama administration to require upgrades to pollution control measures at the nation's power plants. NSR is intended to require consideration of air pollution control devices when there are changes made at power plants, but not when routine repairs or maintenance is being conducted. Deciding whether to characterize a change as a routine repair, rather than a modification to the power plant, has long been a contentious issue, with power plant operators arguing for the former and states and environmentalists arguing for the latter. At stake are potential upgrades that run in the hundreds of millions of dollars. To learn more about NSR, visit the EPA website.

West Virginia's NSR program is found in its State Implementation Plan, or SIP. The NSR regulations are found at 45 CSR 14 and 45 CSR 16

Lisa Jackson Reported as Likely EPA Administrator, Chu May Head Energy Department

Lisa Jackson, presently head of the New Jersey DEP, is the selection of president-elect Obama to run the US Environmental Protection Agency, according to a story from AP. She's a chemical engineer from Princeton who has the kind of attitude toward regulating greenhouse gases that Mr. Obama likes. It could mean problems for coal during his administration.

An even greater surprise, although consistent with PE Obama's promise of change, is word of the possible choice of a Nobel Prize winner as Energy Secretary. It will be interesting to see whether a brilliant scientist such as Steven Chu can manage the bureaucracy of a large federal agency.

Engage With Grace

I'm happy to pass along a link to the Engage With Grace website, which is trying to get families to talk about end-of-life decisions when they gather during the Thanksgiving holiday. An article in the Boston Globe gives more information about the project. I can tell you from personal experience that these types of conversations don't have to be depressing affairs - they can generate a lot of lively discussion that, at least with my boys, was pretty entertaining. I suppose it's a lot easier to talk about these matters before they become pressing.



I learned about this from my own blawg mentor, Bob Coffield, who operates the best health care blog in the state, and one of the most informative in the country. Check out the hyperlink, he's worth visiting. Here's what he wrote:

Last month I had the opportunity at the Health 2.0 Conference in San Francisco to watch Alexandra Drane announce the Engage With Grace: The One Slide Project. The idea behind the project is to get people to share just ONE slide that helps them and their loved ones talk about having a purposeful end-of-life experience. Alexandra's talk personally touched me because my family went through a similar experience 30 years ago when I was 12 and my mother died at home with cancer in 1978. She had the opportunity to die at home surrounded by her 5 children because both my dad and uncle were her doctors. In the past and today, not all families are given this important choice. The memories I have of my mother's final days 30 years ago are still important to me today. As a health care lawyer who has been involved in the legal aspects of end of life decisions expressing your wishes, knowing the wishes of those who you love and legally documenting them are important.

The Big Turkey Comeback

Here's an interesting take on the recovery of the wild turkey population in America. They recovered from just 30,000 birds to the millions that inhabit forests today, and much of the credit, according to this article, goes to effective game and property management by the federal government, long before the Wild Turkey Federation existed. I can't vouch for the article's accuracy, as the West Virginia DNR gives credit to sportsmen's groups for funding the restocking in West Virginia, but it's a good reminder that it takes coordination by private individuals, interest groups, and state and local governments to manage wildlife successfully.

West Virginia now has over 140,000 wild turkeys. Click here to learn more about the reintroduction of wild turkeys into the Mountain State.

New Storm Water Discharge Guidelines Proposed

One of the largest contributors to stream sedimentation is runoff from construction activities.EPA is seeking comments on its proposed guidelines to control the discharge of pollutants from construction sites. The proposal would require all construction sites to implement erosion and sediment control best management practices to reduce pollutants in stormwater discharges. This proposed rule is projected to reduce the amount of sediment discharged from construction sites by up 27 billion pounds each year.

Controlling water pollution through the NPDES system requires application of 2 types of controls. Dischargers have to meet water quality standards, which are the "safe" levels of pollutants allowed in state waters. The other is technological controls - treatment of the wastewater or runoff in order to reduce pollutants. All industries are expected to meet these technology controls, generally specified in the form of Effluent Limitation Guidelines (ELGs). EPA evaluates industry segments (e.g., steel manufacturing, chemical production, etc.) to determine what types of technological controls are available and appropriate for treating wastewater produced by that segment. As EPA explains it, "[e]ffluent limitations guidelines and performance standards are established by EPA for different industrial categories since the best control technology for one industry is not necessarily the best for another. These guidelines are developed based on the degree of pollutant reduction attainable by an industrial category through the application of control technologies, irrespective of the facility location. Using these factors, similar facilities are regulated in the same manner." U.S. EPA NPDES Permit Writer’s Manual, EPA-833-B-96-003 (December 1996), §5.1.2. Where EPA has not set national ELGs for an industry category or subcategory, technology-based limits are determined on a case-by-case basis by state permit writers and imposed in permits. The proposal by EPA is to develop ELGs for stormwater runoff from construction activities.

Stormwater is more diffuse and harder to capture than wastewater from industrial processes, and EPA generally relies upon best management practices, or BMPs, to control sediment runoff. If the BMPs are in place, the site is deemed to be using the appropriate technology. In this most recent proposal, EPA will require more than the BMPs in certain situations. For certain large sites located in areas of the country with high rainfall intensity and soils with high clay content, stormwater discharges from the construction site would be required to meet a numeric limit on the allowable level of turbidity, which is a measure of sediment in the water. In order to meet the proposed numeric turbidity limit, many sites would need to treat and filter their stormwater discharges.

The current WV construction stormwater permit does not expire until December 4, 2012, at which time the new ELGs will be added to the state permit, in whatever form they are adopted by EPA.

CAFOs of the Sea

Last week EPA finalized its NPDES effluent limitations guidelines and standards rule governing wastewater discharges from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). The rule was originally finalized in 2003, was challenged by environmentalists, and portions of it were set aside by the Second Circuit in Waterkeeper Alliance et al. v. EPA, 399 F.3d 486 in 2005. EPA made changes to address the issues that were vacated or remanded by the Court, and last week's final rule is the result.

This article on salmon farming brought to mind that rule. Although salmon farms are not CAFOs, they are attempts to produce healthy protein in a cost-efficient manner, like terrestrial CAFOs. The article, and some of the commenters, point out some of the problems that are posed by large-scale farming operations - the concentration of pollution, the use of antibiotics, and the possibility of disease spreading to wild stocks. There is a place for the government to step in and regulate these concerns. But these problems should be weighed against the growing demand for fish protein, and the likelihood that commercial fishing has almost depleted tuna and other high-end fish stocks. Large scale farming, properly regulated, is a middle course that can relieve some pressure on wild stocks until they can rebound.

Mine and Industrial Asccident Rapid Response System Update

For those of you who are following the Governor's decision to expand the immediate reporting of accidents (presently required of mining facilities) to industrial plants in West Virginia, Anne Blankenship, one of my colleagues at Robinson & McElwee, put together the following update. If you would like to know more, particularly the types of facilities likely to be reporting, give her a call at 304 347-8344 or contact her at acb@ramlaw.com if you have any questions.

During the 2006 West Virginia Legislative Session, Senate Bill No. 247 was introduced by the Governor and successfully passed, creating the Mine and Industrial Accident Rapid Response System, W.Va. Code §15-5B-1 et seq. (“MIARRS”). Among other requirements, the new legislation set forth notification requirements in the event of an accident in or about any mine. Although the express language of the legislation included the industrial sector, it only included specific performance requirements for the mining sector and required that the state Division of Homeland Security conduct a study to determine the feasibility of providing emergency coverage to “other industrial, manufacturing, chemical or other emergencies” through MIARRS. The results of that study, issued on November 1, 2006, found that these types of emergencies are “best left in the current system of local emergency call systems.” Regulations to implement MIARRS were promulgated shortly thereafter and, after considering the comments of the West Virginia Manufacturers Association, the West Virginia Oil and Natural Gas Association and other industry trade associations, the Division of Homeland Security opted to exclude non-mining industries from the MIARRS regulation (170 CSR 1). Recently, the notion of including non-mining industries in MIARRS has resurfaced and it is anticipated that the Governor will propose legislation in the upcoming 2009 West Virginia Legislative Session that will require other industry sectors to report accidents. The stated objectives of such reporting would be to provide the prompt and accurate reporting of an incident that may require response resources beyond the capability of the facility; to ensure that the appropriate mitigation resources respond to the event; and to ensure that adequate and accurate information is available to the responders and to the public. The details of any such legislation are still being worked on at this time. However, it is anticipated that the industrial community, including manufacturers in the chemical industry, would be expected to report.

Making Biodiesel in West Virginia

An article in the Sunday Gazette -Mail from Nov. 16 reports on 2 different - very different - organizations making biodiesel in West Virginia. AC&S is a corporation making biodiesel as a sideline to its other industrial activities, like cleaning railcars. It is supplying several school districts with biodiesel in the area. They have a reported capacity of 5 million gallons per year. This is the very sort of home-grown industry that the state should be doing everything it can to promote. It's great to see entrepreneurs doing well in the Kanawha Valley.

For his part, Zoe of the Zendiks (a local branch of a national art commune I knew nothing of until I read this article) has done the same sort of biodiesel manufacturing on a smaller scale. He learned everything the hard way, like thousands of basement tinkerers before him. He's evidently offering to share his knowledge with others, and will be offering classes. I went online to try to find out when the classes might be offered, and because I was curious about the organization, but I was blocked by the firm's computer security/porn blocking system. I don't know why, unless the art they produce registers as something too salacious for attorneys' eyes.

The Mid Atlantic Technology, Research and Innovation Center (MATRIC), a local think tank that is quietly doing tremendous things with less financial support than the coffee and doughnut budgets for Research Triangle organizations, is also working on a biofuel project, among many others. Check them out.

New Concentrated Animal Feedlot Operation Rule Announced

There aren't many, if any, concentrated animal feedlot operations (CAFO) in West Virginia, but those that are produce large quantities of manure that can result in pollution if not properly managed. The animals at a CAFO (poultry houses, large hog operations, cattle feedlots) often produce waste that is the equivalent of a small city. Getting rid of it all is often difficult because, although it is useful as a fertilizer, it can quickly overload the area where it can be economically hauled. It then tends to pile up, and leach or run off into nearby streams, causing nutrient pollution that is blamed for a host of troubles, primarily the Chesapeake Bay decline and Gulf of Mexico hypoxic area (along with agricultural and domestic lawn fertilizers). To address the problem, EPA has adopted new regulations for CAFOs. I'm reprinting their summary of the rule below; a link at the end will provide even more information.


) New Requirements for Controlling Manure, Wastewater from Large Animal Feeding Operations EPA has finalized a rule helping to protect the nation's water quality by requiring concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) to safely manage manure. EPA estimates CAFO regulations will prevent 56 million pounds of phosphorus, 110 million pounds of nitrogen, and 2 billion pounds of sediment from entering streams, lakes, and other waters annually.

"EPA's new regulation of animal feedlots sets a strong national standard for pollution prevention and environmental protection, while maintaining our country's economic and agricultural competitiveness," said Assistant Administrator for Water Benjamin H. Grumbles. "This clean water rule strengthens environmental safeguards by embracing a zero discharge standard and requiring site-specific management plans to prevent runoff of excess nutrients into our nation?s waters."

This is the first time EPA has required a nutrient management plan (NMP) for manure to be submitted as part of a CAFO's Clean Water Act permit application. Manure contains the nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus, which, when not managed properly on agricultural land, can pollute nearby streams, lakes, and other waters.

Previous rules required a CAFO operator to use an NMP for controlling manure, but the regulation builds on that by requiring the NMP to be submitted with the permit application. The plan will be reviewed by the permitting authority and conditions based on it will be incorporated as enforceable terms of the permit. The proposed NMP and permit will be available for public review and comment before going final.

The regulation also requires that an owner or operator of a CAFO that actually discharges to streams, lakes, and other waters must apply for a permit under the Clean Water Act. If a farmer designs, constructs, operates and maintains their facility such that a discharge will occur, a permit is needed. EPA is also providing an opportunity for CAFO operators who do not discharge or propose to discharge to show their commitment to pollution prevention by obtaining certification as zero dischargers.

In addition, the final rule includes technical clarifications regarding water quality-based effluent limitations and use of best management practices to meet zero discharge requirements, as well as affirming the 2003 rule requirement for reducing fecal coliform through the use of best conventional technology.

EPA worked closely with the U.S. Department of Agriculture during the development of the rule and will work closely with states during implementation. The rule deadline for newly defined facilities to apply for permits is February 27, 2009.

EPA has been regulating CAFOs for more than 30 years. The final rule responds to a February 2005 federal court decision that upheld most of the agency's 2003 rule, but directed further action or clarification on some portions.

Information on the concentrated animal feeding operation rule: http://www.epa.gov/npdes/caforule

Water Quality Standards Protected in West Virginia

Opponents of development, and of mountaintop mining, often decry West Virginia's alleged failure to comply with federal water quality standards. But take a look at this article from the Columbia Tribune, which highlights a crucial difference between some states and West Virginia. In Missouri, evidently, not all streams are protected by all criteria necessary to protect beneficial uses. They are only protected by narrative criteria, or "free-froms", that require streams to be free from floating scum, odors, deposits or sludge banks, visible color, toxic concentrations of chemicals, and other qualitative and aesthetic concerns. While those limitations also apply in West Virginia, they are not the only water quality protections that are in place.

For those new to water quality standards, numeric criteria can be thought of as the "safe levels" that protect the uses that are assigned to the stream. The "uses" are just what they sound like - the use of a stream for recreation (e.g. wading or boating), or by aquatic life (e.g. fish or invertebrates). If a stream is assigned an aquatic life use, numeric criteria are to be set at levels that, if they are not exceeded, will not kill aquatic life or interfere with reproduction. For example, in West Virginia total mercury levels cannot exceed 2.4 micrograms per liter (ug/l) to protect aquatic life, but the limit for protection of human health is .14 ug/l if the stream is a public water supply. EPA has some good background information on water quality standards that explains this.

In West Virginia, every stream is assigned at least 2 uses - protection of aquatic life and water contact recreation, as required by Section 101 of the Clean Water Act. See section 6.1 of West Virginia's water quality standards. Unlike Missouri, you never have a situation where a stream is without numeric criteria assigned to it.

Norm Steenstra Improving Kanawha County Recycling

Norm Steenstra has made some great changes at the Kanawha County Solid Waste Authority over the past year. I put out some plastic, metal cans and newspapers to be picked up and recycled, but wasn't aware until I saw the Daily Mail article that they can take glass at the main plant, or that such a wide variety of plastic can now be recycled. I don't know if they make much money from some of the recycling (the ground up glass is evidently given away), but it keeps the material out of the landfill and reduces the County's tipping fee. Any environmentally safe reuse is welcome.

Some of us came up against Norm in his former life as a lobbyist for West Virginia Citizen's Action Group, where he advocated on a variety of environmental topics. It is good to see his talents being employed to find an effective reuse of some of the County's solid waste.

Office of Surface Mining Completes Final Environmental Impact Statement on Stream Buffer Rule

Much of the coal mined in West Virginia can only be economically accessed by way of mountaintop mining, which involves removing significant amounts of overburden to reach layers of coal in a mountain. In the mountainous terrain of this state, the overburden has to be placed somewhere, and it will necessarily fill certain small headwater streams. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement rules prohibit placement of overburden closer than 100 feet from a stream, a standard which is almost impossible for miners in Appalachia to comply with.

OSM has just finished a final environmental impact statement, or FEIS, describing what impacts can be expected from the proposed buffer zone rule, which was published in August 2007. The FEIS is intended to address 2 requirements of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA) - preventing additional sediment loading to streams outside the permit area, and minimizing adverse effects on fish and wildlife. The FEIS considers multiple alternative rule scenarios, and then picks a preferred alternative.

OSM is providing a 30 day public comment period on the FEIS. Here are some FAQs about the proposed rule.

The rule has generated a lot of comment, particularly among those opposed to mountaintop mining. An example of some of the comment is found at http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/16985, while strong opposition is registered at http://schreinervideo.com/wordpress/?p=1283

Industries of the Future to Hold Energy Efficiency Symposium in November

Industries of the Future -West Virginia (iof-WV) is offering a symposium on November 19, 2008 on the subject of Energy Efficiency for WV Companies, and the agenda looks interesting. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 challenges U.S. companies to reduce their energy intensity (amount of energy used per unit of product produced) by at least 2.5% per year during the 10-year period from 2007 through 2016 - a 25% reduction over the next decade. The U.S. DOE’s Industrial Technologies Program (ITP) is leading the charge by sponsoring industrial assessments, co-funding R&D projects, providing technical and financial assistance to companies, offering workshops and training on Best Practices software tools, and supporting implementation of advanced industrial technologies. These opportunities and programs will be discussed at the November 19 Symposium in Charleston and could provide some valuable insights into:

How energy-intensive companies are coping and surviving
Innovations in industrial energy efficiency – from the experts
First hand examples of how companies are saving energy and money with free energy assessments
Views from the WV Legislature on smart and efficient use of energy
How companies participate in large multi-year R&D projects
Climate change legislation being discussed in the U.S. Congress - and how it could impact WV industry

give Kathleen Cullen a call if you're interested 304 293-2867 x 5426 or email her at kathleen.cullen@mail.wvu.edu

Check Your BEACH

OK, West Virginia doesn't have any beaches to speak of (although Myrtle Beach has been referred to as the state's 56th county), but you may be planning a trip to the beach this fall or next year. If so, check out the report of beach conditions that is required under the Beach Assessment and Coastal Health Act (BEACH, get it?) which is found at Section 406(g) of the Clean Water Act. As EPA explains it,

Section 406(g) requires EPA to publish a list of discrete coastal recreation waters adjacent to beaches or similar points of access that are used by the public and to update the list periodically as new information becomes available. The list specifies whether the waters are subject to a monitoring and notification program consistent with the performance criteria (National Beach Guidance and Required Performance Criteria for Grants June 2002) EPA published under CWA section 406(a). The list contains information that coastal and Great Lakes States made available to EPA as of January 31, 2008, and it replaces the previous list that EPA published on May 4, 2004. The National List of Beaches provides a national baseline of the extent of monitoring of waters adjacent to beaches or similar points of access, which will allow EPA to measure State program performance in implementing the monitoring and notification provisions of the BEACH Act.

Go here to find a hyperlink to the list of beaches. And really, all you West Virginians out there, and you know who you are, there are lots of good beaches other than Myrtle. Give them a shot!

DC Appeals Court Strikes Down EPA Air Monitoring Rule

One of the ongoing debates in the area of air permitting is whether state and local air quality control officials could impose monitoring conditions in Title V permits in addition to those that are required by EPA. Title V permits are the permits for major air pollution sources, and information about the permits, and a list of those permits issued in West Virginia, can be found here. The Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, which hears many administrative law cases, has ruled that states like West Virginia can impose monitoring requirements in addition to those required by federal regulations.

An excellent article by Dustin Till of the Marten Law Group explains in greater detail the import of the court's decision.

US EPA Adopts General Storm Water NPDES Permit

US EPA has adopted a final storm water general NPDES permit for industrial facilities. This is a permit for industrial facilities like chemical or manufacturing plants that are not issued individual NPDES permits. This is not a permit for the discharge of process water that is generated during a plants' operations; this permit only addresses discharges of storm water (precipitation run off) from the parts of the plant property where the storm water could become polluted by chemicals, wastes, raw materials or other substances that are found at the plant.

The permit action was summarized by EPA as follows:

EPA Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, and 10 today are finalizing EPA's NPDES general permit for stormwater discharges from industrial activity, also referred to as the Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP).The MSGP consists of thirty four (34) separate Regional EPA permits that may vary from each other based on State or Tribal water quality- based requirements. This permit replaces the existing permits that expired on October 30, 2005. As with the earlier permits, this permit authorizes the discharge of stormwater associated with industrial activities in accordance with the terms and conditions described therein. Industrial dischargers have the choice to seek coverage under an individual permit. An individual permit may be necessary if the discharger cannot meet the terms and conditions or eligibility requirements in the permit.

West Virginia is not covered by this permit. It has been delegated the authority from EPA to issue its own permits, including storm water permits for industrial facilities and construction run off. The industrial storm water permit, referred to as the multi-sector permit because it applies to multiple industrial activities, is current until March 31, 2009. At that time it is likely to be reissued and will probably contain permit terms similar to those in the new federal permit that is being approved today.

Nordhaus and Shellenberger Garner Environmental Honors From Time Magazine

Mike Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus have been selected as heroes of the environment by Time for their essay "The Death of Environmentalism" published last year and profiled in this blog earlier this year. Mike and Ted have put forward a convincing case for the proposition that focusing on the limitations imposed by environmentalism is a dead end, and that the movement must emphasize responsible ways (i.e., renewable resources) to generate the power that society needs to function at its current level and provide for future growth.

See the article in Time magazine.

Disclaimer - Mike is my cousin. He's the guy in the black shirt.

Is Butanol the Fuel of the Future?

I was interviewing a DEP inspector about underground storage tanks the other day and he got up on what must be his favorite soapbox - butanol as a substitute for gasoline and a replacement for ethanol. He said butanol is more energy dense than ethanol, isn't as corrosive to pipelines and certain plastics, and does everything except drive the car for you. I was a little skeptical, not having heard of the stuff before, and wondered if it wasn't one of those chimeras, like the cars that run on water. (You know, the ones the car companies are holding all the patents for.) But when I looked on the web, it appears that such mainstays of industry as BP and Du Pont are working with it. Take a look at the fact sheet they've put out, and butanol.com and an interview with Phillip New, president of BP Biofuels. Follow the string of comments following the interview, and you'll see that it can be made from coal at competitive prices, which warms the heart cockles of this Mountain Stater.

WV Nature Conservancy Hosts Corporate Council Dinner

The Nature Conservancy is an environmental organization that everyone can support. Instead of asking government to use its coercive powers to acquire and set aside land for public use, it solicits contributions in order to pay fair market value for property, and then manages it, or gives or sells the land to public institutions for the benefit of all. It also is involved in innovative programs to purchase conservation easements on property, which allows the land to be constructively used as a ranch, farm or timberland, but in a way that protects the natural ecosystem.

The WV chapter of the Nature Conservancy had its annual Corporate Council diner on September 18, and it was a very nice affair. Read about it in this Gazette article.

Consider contributing.

Former Charleston Resident Becomes National Environmental Law Expert

In the "local boy makes good" we see that Michael Gerrard has become a nationally known environmental lawyer.

DEP Drops Water Quality Standard Changes

Officials at the WV DEP have confirmed that they have withdrawn changes to the water quality standards, 47 CSR 2, that were proposed in June. Those changes would have clarified that all water bodies in the state are to be treated as public water supplies, and then would have set up a system for removing that use on very small streams during the permit issuance process. Industry groups had welcomed the DEP's proposal to address use designations through the permitting process, but were opposed to designating all streams as public water supplies. Such a designation greatly increases the permitting burden on state industries, and calls into question the ability of the state to remove the uses during the permit issuance process. Industry groups had proposed that the DEP not designate all streams as public water supplies, and instead require all permit applicants to prove that there was no public water supply that would be affected by the permitted discharge. That would provide protection to public water supplies, and at the same time relieve permittees of having to remove the public water supply use, which is a long and involved process.

The DEP decided to withdraw the rule changes on the grounds that industry was so opposed to the amendments. Presumably the DEP will continue to impose Category A (public water supply) criteria in all permits, even though the water quality standards rule does not provide a basis for doing so. This sets up another battle over Category A use application in a permit appeal, where apparently the DEP believes it will have a greater chance of success.

Coal Bed Methane Industry to See Effluent Limitations Guidelines Development

Coal bed methane (CBM) development is a large - and growing - growing segment of natural gas operations in West Virginia. It captures methane that can be used as natural gas, while providing a protection for underground coal miners. Methane presents the risk of explosion underground, and removing the gas in advance of mining is a safety benefit. However, the production of CBM produces large quantities of water, which has to be discharged somewhere. One option is to truck the water to an underground injection control (UIC) well, but that can be expensive. The preferred route is to discharge it to the nearest stream, but that requires a permit, and water treatment can be costly.

For certain industries, EPA investigates wastewater treatment options and develops effluent limitations guidelines or ELGs that detail how much pollution that industry can be expected to remove from the wastewater. All dischargers are then expected to treat their wastewater to those levels, or even lower if necessary to meet water quality standards. EPA has recently announced that it will be calculating ELGs for the coal bed methane industry during the coming year, as described below. Once developed, the ELGs will be used to write permits for CBM well discharges.


3) EPA Publishes its 2008 Effluent Guidelines Program Plan EPA published its final 2008 Effluent Guidelines Program Plan in the Federal Register today. Effluent guidelines are industry specific national regulations that control the discharge of pollutants to surface waters and to publicly owned treatment works. The Plan announces that EPA will conduct focused detailed reviews in 2009 and 2010 for the steam electric power generating industry; the coalbed methane extraction portion of the oil and gas extraction industry; and unused pharmaceutical disposal in the health services industry. EPA has already initiated a study on pharmaceutical disposal practices at health care facilities, such as hospitals, hospices, long-term care facilities, and veterinary hospitals. A draft information collection request on unused pharmaceuticals management in the health service industry was published in the Federal Register in August for comment. The preliminary effluent guideline plan was published for public comment in October 2007.

To see a copy of the Federal Register notice and other related documents, visit EPA's web site at http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/guide/304m/ . Contact Carey Johnston at 202-566-1014 or email him at johnston.carey@epa.gov for more information about the 2008 Plan.

New Uses for Abandoned Mine Lands May Not be Better Uses

The Charleston Daily Mail reports that EPA has awarded the state money to study whether abandoned mine lands can be used to grow switchgrass and other substances that can be refined as biofuels. The article is set out below. One wonders whether this is the best use of abandoned mine land. West Virginia grows some of the best hardwoods in the world, and the relatively flat sites that are left after mining would be an excellent place to start stands of hardwood timber. For more in that regard, take a look at a publication from Virginia Tech, Commercial Forestry as a Post-Mining Land Use


CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- A team of West Virginia University researchers was expected to announce today that they've received a $550,000 award from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for a project aimed at turning abandoned mine land into fields that produce switchgrass and other biofuels.
The announcement was expected during the 2008 West Virginia Brownfields Conference in Huntington.
Previously mined land qualifies as brownfields - properties that were previously used for industrial or commercial activity - under the Environmental Protection Agency's brownfields program.
A team from WVU's West Virginia Water Research Institute will produce an inventory of abandoned mine sites in the state that are suitable for redevelopment into biofuel and other alternative energy production sites. One community will be selected for the development of a comprehensive pilot program to showcase a so-called "sustainable energy park."
Curt Peterson, WVU's vice president for research and economic development, said in a prepared statement, "Creation of sustainable energy parks on mine-scarred lands is the kind of strategy that this nation and its best thinkers and leaders must pursue in the drive toward energy independence. We are excited about the EPA announcement and proud of the WVU team that captured this competitive award."
Gov. Joe Manchin said in a prepared statement, "Brownfields reclamation work has resulted in successful reuse of commercial property in our state that has benefited West Virginians. The EPA award will help WVU's researchers identify brownfields sites for growing switchgrass and other renewable biofuels that can help meet our energy needs while making good use of reclaimed mine lands."

Manchin asks for faster reporting

Ken Ward of the Charleston Gazette reported on Thursday that Gov. Manchin is asking for changes to state law to require chemical companies to report serious incidents within 15 minutes. This would fall into the hands of the
West Virginia Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management and a trip to their website is a good idea for those interested in emergency response preparation. The statute and regulations that would have to be changed by Gov. Manchin are at W Va Code 15-5B-4 and 170 CSR Series 1.

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Gov. Joe Manchin plans to seek legislation to require chemical companies to report explosions, leaks and other serious accidents within 15 minutes.
Manchin wants to apply a 15-minute reporting requirement for coal mining accidents to other industries.
The governor will within the next few days ask companies to voluntarily go along with the reporting requirement, and then seek legislation next year to write the reporting into state law.
Jimmy Gianato, Manchin's homeland security secretary, announced the plan this morning during a public debriefing on the emergency response to the Aug. 28 explosion at the Bayer CropScience plant in Institute.
Local citizens and emergency responders have complained that Bayer gave them little information on the incident until nearly two hours after the explosion. And Bayer waited more than two hours to formally report the incident to the federal government's National Response Center.
"We want to make sure that information comes in and gets out to the responders and the public," Gianato said.
Manchin pushed through landmark legislation requiring coal companies report major accidents within 15 minutes after delays in the reporting of the Sago Mine disaster and the Aracoma Mine fire in January 2006.
Also during Thursday's meeting, Kanawha County officials said that they would begin issuing shelter-in-place advisories to residents if chemical companies don't provide details within 10 minutes of any future in-plant incidents.
Dale Petry, the county's emergency services director, said he does not want to take chances on waiting until it's too late to issue such an advisory.

How Much Is Your Life Worth?

The following article is taken from a Science And Environment Online publication, Down To Earth. It explains how EPA has changed the hypothetical value of an American life, as used to calculate the economic cost of environmental regulations. To oversimplify, if the cost of implementing the regulation exceeds the value of the humans that will be killed without the regulation, the regulation is not cost-effective.

This leads to a couple of interesting points that many people don't think about. One is that environmental regulations generally involve some analysis of risk assessment and economic cost. A great place to learn about that is Harvard's Center for Risk Analysis. There are no risk free activities, and the risk of any activity must be weighed against the cost of not engaging in that activity. For example, the presence of chlorine in drinking water may cause injury or death to a small number of susceptible persons, but to fail to decontaminate the water supply would kill hundreds of thousands from water-borne diseases, and chlorine is one of the most cost effective ways of purifying water. Or an acceptable level of a certain carcinogen (cancer-causing substance) such as benzene may be set at a level that will, in theory, kill one in a million people who ingest that chemical over a 70 year period. That level is chosen instead of, say, a one in a 100,000 death rate, or a 1 in ten million rate.

The other point is this - while the numbers are best efforts to determine cost and risk, they are often SWAG (Scientific Wild Ass Guesses). In the example below, how would one really calculate that the cost of the regulation is 8 billion dollars? How do you know how many persons will be killed if it isn't put into place? What is the value of a person's life?

US devalues life by $1 million
The decision will lead to less life protecting regulations and more pollution the us Environmental Protection Agency (epa) has lowered the value of a statistical life from us $7.8 million five years ago to us $ 6.9 million today. The alarming drop was a chance discovery by an Associated Press reporter after scavenging through a series of epa documents filed over the last 12 years.Experts are worried since the depreciation has far reaching consequences on pollution related regulations. Unlike the factors commonly used in insurance claims and lawsuits, to figure out the ‘value of a statistical life’, epa economists use payroll figures—how much employers pay their workers to take on additional risks at work, and how much people are willing to pay to avoid certain risks at work. The value is used while drawing up environmental regulations in the country.A government policy is considered cost effective only if the cost incurred for its implementation is either less than or equal to the total statistical value of the lives that it will possibly save. For instance, a certain regulation costs about us $18 billion and is expected to save 2,500-odd lives.Five years ago when the statistical value of life was still us $7.8 million, the life-saving benefits of this regulation would have outweighed its cost of implementation. The policy would therefore be proven acceptable and possibly be adopted. Today, when the value has plunged down to us $6.9 million, the implementation cost of the project will turn out to be far greater than the total value of the lives it will manage to secure. This anomaly will keep the otherwise sound policy, which would have undoubtedly been employed five years ago, from being implemented today.According to Dan Esty, former epa official who at present is the director of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy: “It’s hard to imagine that it (the reduction) has anything other than a political motivation.”Activists allege that the Bush government has purposefully cut down the value to relax federal pollution regulations imposed on large corporations. epa authorities say the change in value was brought about by ‘better’ economic studies.Kip Viscusi, an economist at the Vanderbilt University, Tennessee, says that no study he knew of has shown that Americans are in anyway eager to cut down their costs by spending less on risk prevention. “As people become more affluent, the value of statistical lives goes up,” he says.Meanwhile, the devaluation has alarmed Congress. The Senate environment committee in a statement has said that it would introduce legislation designed to reverse the epa move.

EPA Vetoes Yazoo Project

For those convinced that EPA is the lapdog of industrial and agricultural interests, please note that it killed the Yazoo project, which would have significantly degraded wetland habitat by pumping floodwaters out of the Yazoo/Mississippi River delta area. But don't be surprised if there is a move in Congress to override the EPA action and require construction of the pump project. Although recent hurricanes have shown that the delta area has been mismanaged, and this project would only have made the situation worse, there are strong constituencies for more river control.

More on the Mountaintop

It is nice to think that those outside Appalachia care about its citizens enough to blog on the problems associated with mountaintop mining. One thing we don't need, though, is to further the stereotype of helpless mountaineers who are being taken advantage of by the coal companies, and need to be rescued by someone, preferably the government. There is enough of a culture of government dependence in West Virginia without encouraging more of such thinking. The people of Sylvester were certainly not helpless when they took Massey to court, and obtained a favorable jury verdict. See the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition report on the decision to punish Elk Run Coal for allowing dust to escape its prep plant.

Mining and burning coal require trade offs. People can disagree on how or even whether coal should be produced at all, but the worst thing is to suggest that the people of Southern West Virginia are hostages to fortune. There are environmental effects (not as dire as the first article suggests) but there are also substantial benefits. Coal brings in tremendous amounts of money to the state and to the counties where it is mined. In many of those counties, there is precious little else generating income other than energy production of one type or another, or timbering. Mountaintop mining is one way to produce energy or the nation, and those who talk with approval of underground mining forget or ignore the many complaints of lost well water sources, subsidence, and other problems that can arise from that type of mining.

Rather than painting coal as an evil or blessing, why not simply argue the issues on their merits? Do away with mining, but do it with a full knowledge of the effect it will have, and the reductions in state and local resources that will result.

Hazardous Waste Disposal is More Than Old Paint

As the story from the Albany Times Union shows, household hazardous waste can be found in places you don't expect. While industrial facilities are tightly regulated, homeowners can sometimes be careless about the places they dispose of waste. This is a particular problem since compact fluorescent light bulbs have become popular. Fluorescents contain mercury, and should be properly disposed.



The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection does not have much on its website regarding household hazardous waste, and how to go about disposing of it. It instead sends you to the EPA site for household hazardous waste. Occasionally the DEP hold hazardous waste collection days, but I don't see where any are

Requiring Disclosure of Financial Risks of Climate Change Is Ridiculous

It appears that New York AG Andrew Cuomo has strongarmed a utility into calculating the financial risks of climate change and providing that information to its investors. It's hard to know where to start with a concept this foolish. I generally agree that Americans benefit from the host of financial disclosures that are intended to give roughly equal access to information about companies in a way that levels the investing playing field, but this type of "disclosure" is meaningless. The utility is supposed to calculate the impact on its bottom line of regulations that are not only unwritten, but in great dispute? Or how litigation is going to play out? I particularly like the idea of requiring the utility to estimate the physical impacts of climate change, when the best meteorologists can't agree, and the models are garbage in, garbage out. will any consideration be given to the favorable bottom line impacts of climate change, such as a longer cooling season and more power demand for air conditioning?

This is pointless public posturing and does nothing to serve investors or advance the climate change debate



CUOMO REACHES LANDMARK AGREEMENT WITH MAJOR ENERGY COMPANY, XCEL ENERGY, TO REQUIRE DISCLOSURE OF FINANCIAL RISKS OF CLIMATE CHANGE TO INVESTORS
First-Ever Binding and Enforceable Agreement Requiring a Company to Detail Financial Liabilities Related to Climate Change
Xcel Energy is One of Nation’s Largest Utility Emitters of Carbon Dioxide
NEW YORK, NY (August 27, 2008) - Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo today announced the first-ever binding and enforceable agreement requiring a major national energy company to disclose the financial risks that climate change poses to its investors. Cuomo’s agreement with Xcel Energy (NYSE: XEL) (“Xcel”) comes as many power companies, including Xcel, are investing in new coal-burning power generation that will significantly contribute to global warming emissions.
“This landmark agreement sets a new industry-wide precedent that will force companies to disclose the true financial risks that climate change poses to their investors,” said Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. “Coal-fired power plants can significantly contribute to global warming and investors have the right to know all the associated risks. I commend Xcel Energy for working with my office to establish a standard that will improve our environment and our marketplace over the long-term.”
The agreement includes binding and enforceable provisions that require Xcel to provide detailed disclosure of climate change and associated risks in its “Form 10-K” filings, the annual summary report on a company’s performance required by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to inform investors. These required disclosures include an analysis of financial risks from climate change related to:
• present and probable future climate change regulation and legislation;
• climate-change related litigation; and
• physical impacts of climate change.


Additionally, the agreement commits Xcel to a broad array of climate change disclosures, including:
• current carbon emissions; •
• projected increases in carbon emissions from planned coal-fired power plants;
• company strategies for reducing, offsetting, limiting, or otherwise managing its global warming pollution emissions and expected global warming emissions reductions from these actions; and
• corporate governance actions related to climate change, including whether environmental performance is incorporated into officer compensation.


Substantial financial risks for energy companies that emit large quantities of carbon dioxide are being created by a number of new or likely regulatory efforts, such as New York’s newly adopted regional carbon regulations for power plants, and other future regulatory efforts, including federal regulation, Congressional action, and climate-change related litigation. These risks are especially exacerbated for power companies that are building new coal-burning power plants or other large new sources of global warming pollution emissions. Knowledge of these risks is important for investors to make informed financial decisions.
Xcel Energy provides electricity and natural gas to commercial and residential customers in eight Midwestern and Western States. Its annual revenues are more than $9 billion. In 2006, Xcel was among the top ten largest emitters of global warming pollution by utilities in the United States. Xcel is building a new 750 megawatt, coal-fired power plant in Pueblo, Colorado.
In September 2007, Attorney General Cuomo subpoenaed the executives of Xcel and four other major energy companies for information on whether disclosures to investors in filings with the SEC adequately described the companies’ financial risks related to their emissions of global warming pollution. The Attorney General issued subpoenas under New York State’s Martin Act, a 1921 state securities law that grants the Attorney General broad powers to access the financial records of businesses. In addition to Xcel Energy, the companies that received subpoenas were AES Corporation, Dominion Resources, Dynegy, and Peabody Energy. The Attorney General’s investigation of the remaining companies is ongoing.
Cuomo continued, “I will continue to fight for increased transparency and full disclosure of global warming financial risks to investors. Selectively revealing favorable facts or intentionally concealing unfavorable information about climate change is misleading and must be stopped.”
The Attorney General petitioned the SEC last year to require better corporate disclosure of climate-related risks in securities filings. The petition was coordinated by Ceres, a national coalition of investors and environmental groups. It is supported by more than $6 trillion of investors, including the treasurers and comptrollers from New York, California, Florida, Maryland, Rhode Island and five additional states, and the nation’s largest public pension funds, CalPERS and CalSTRS. The petition remains pending with the SEC.
Ceres President Mindy S. Lubber said, “This groundbreaking settlement will send ripples far beyond Xcel Energy. It serves notice that all companies face financial exposure from climate change and will be expected to better inform investors of their strategies for dealing with it.”
Director of the Natural Resources Defense Council’s State Climate Change Program Dale Bryk said, “As New York and other Northeastern states move forward with the nation’s first cap and trade program for global warming, investors need full disclosure of the financial risks faced by power companies and others with large carbon footprints. Attorney General Cuomo’s work to create an enforceable model for climate change disclosure is a game-changer on this important issue.”
Environmental Defense Fund Deputy General Counsel Vickie Patton said, “Investors from Wall Street to Main Street have a right to know whether publicly traded companies are responsibly addressing the financial risks due to global warming. Federal regulators should take a hard look at the Attorney General’s settlement and standardize companies’ disclosure of climate-related financial risks to ensure a fair marketplace for all investors.”
This case is being handled by Assistant Attorneys General Morgan Costello, Michael Myers, and Daniel Sangeap, under the supervision of Special Deputy Attorney General Katherine Kennedy, Executive Deputy Attorney General for Social Justice Mylan Denerstein and Executive Deputy Attorney General for Economic Justice Eric Corngold.

WV DEP Announces Availability of Grants to Improve Stream Health

The West Virginia Stream Partners Program is accepting grant applications from community groups interested in improving local stream health.
More than $130,000 is available this year through West Virginia’s Stream Partners Program. Community-based watershed associations wishing to implement a watershed improvement project may apply for up to $5,000. The deadline to apply for grants is April 16.
According to Stream Partners Program Coordinator Jennifer Pauer, volunteers have used the money in the past for everything from stream monitoring to environmental education.
"Watershed groups can make a big difference in their communities with their Stream Partners funds," said Pauer. "The money and expertise that the program provides helps create awareness for the groups and encourages others to join them to make a difference in the water quality in their communities."
Pauer says that groups in the state are supported by the Department of Environmental Protection and the West Virginia Conservation Agency.
"If a group or citizen would like to get involved in watershed protection, Stream Partners offers assistance through five regional basin coordinators," said Pauer. "Basin coordinators have the expertise to assist citizens with watershed planning, project development, grant writing, partnership building and community education."
The Stream Partners Program, established in 1996 and housed within the DEP, is a cooperative effort among four state agencies – the Division of Forestry, the Division of Natural Resources, the Conservation Agency and the DEP.
These agencies provide support and resources in many areas including project planning and technical advice. Their representatives also serve on the Stream Partners Program Review Team, which determines grant allocations each year.
For more information on the Stream Partners Program, the
2008-2009 grant application process, or the organization of watershed groups, call the Stream Partners hotline at (800)
654-5227 or e-mail Pauer at Jennifer.Pauer@wv.gov.
To apply online visit http://www.wvca.us/stream.cfm.

Settlement in Mountaintop Mining Case

According to a newspaper article in the Huntington Herald Dispatch, it appears that the Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition has settled its lawsuit objecting to the extension of the Hobet 21 mine. It will now seek attorney fees. This permit was the subject of much clamor, both for and against the permit, and mining can now proceed.

EPA Proposes Fine Particle Nonattainment Areas in West Virginia

EPA has published its list of areas that it proposes designating as not attaining compliance with fine particle (PM 2.5) air quality criteria. Once nonattainment designations take effect, the state and local governments will have three years to develop implementation plans outlining how they will attain the standards by reducing fine particle concentrations.

While WV had proposed only the Charleston metro area (Kanawha and Putnam Counties) and Steubenville-Weirton (Brooke and Hancock Counties) for nonattainment, EPA has responded with a proposal to designate several areas for nonattainment. The areas proposed, and the basis for the proposal, can be found in an August 18 letter from Region III Administrator Donald Welsh. They include Charleston, Huntington-Ashland, Morgantown, Parkersburg and Steubenville-Weirton. Information about the PM 2.5 designations in Region III can be found on the EPA website.

The fine particle standard was changed in 2006 from 65 ug/cubic meter to 35 ug/cubic meter, while the annual standard remained the same at 15 ug/cubic meter .

Combined Sewer Overflows Not Unique to Charleston

Charleston residents have recently been hit with a large increase in sewer fees in order to pay for regular maintenance and upkeep of the city's sewer system. It went up by nearly half (42 %) in order to replace old and leaking sewers and fund a capital improvement fund.

The same thing is happening elsewhere. Lexington, KY is also seeing huge increases in sewer fees to pay for changes to its sewer system to avoid combined sewer overflows, or CSOs. CSOs occur when sanitary and storm sewers run together. During a heavy rain, the sewage treatment facilities are unable to handle the total water/sewage surge effluent and the excess is shunted off to the rivers, untreated. Charleston is also on the list of cities that have CSOs that will have to be addressed at great cost.

Industrial facilities have been held to a higher standard for years, and would not have been allowed to discharge untreated waste. Now it is the cities' turn to meet the same standards, and it is going to be expensive. Still worth doing, but it is always easier to tell someone else to clean up, rather than do it yourself.

Mountaintop Removal More Than a West Virginia Issue.

Mountaintop mining is under assault from all sides, not just in West Virginia. Read a news story about mountaintop mining from the Virginia-Kentucky-West Virginia area. Joe Lovett, predicts that with a new administration in 2009, mountaintop mining will be eliminated in about a year or so. I doubt it. Joe is an excellent lawyer, but I suspect he's off by a decade or more. Coal is still needed to produce electricity, and mountaintop mining is one of the most cost effective ways to get it.

To get the other perspective, including some of the favorable aspects of mountaintop mining, try this article from the Beckley Register Herald.

Ethanol Mandate Affirmed by EPA

The Bush administration has affirmed its support for ethanol production in the United States, refusing to reduce the ethanol mandate from its current 9 billion gallons. Not a lot of corn is grown in West Virginia, but we produce lots of chickens in the eastern part of the state, and growers will be hurt by rising grain costs.

My (extended) family farmed in Ohio and Indiana, and this rise in corn prices would have been a double edged sword for them. Those that were feeding hogs or milking cows would have seen higher prices, but they were all raising corn for sale, too. However, fertilizer prices are high as a result of oil selling at record levels, so their profit margin isn't as big as you might think.

Compressed Air Car to Save the World

From New York comes another invention to save the planet, an improved compressed air car. Compressed air is not new as a power source, and some cars have been proposed with regenerative braking systems that compress air during stops and feed the air to cylinders during acceleration, but this car runs completely from compressed air. An onboard electric motor, apparently powered by batteries that can be recharged overnight or in 2 hours, compresses air to 4500 lbs in a tank, and the air drives the car up to 1000 miles at speeds of up to 96 mph.



And therein lies the problem with so much new technology - excessive claims that only lead to disappointment. It is extremely unlikely (and I am being generous here) that any onboard tank of compressed air in a car as small as this (basically a Smart car) could drive the car anywhere near 1000 miles, or that it will hit 96 mph unless it's falling off a cliff. Even with a battery charged compressor on board, that's a long distance to go. Why not bill it as a commuter car that could get up to 100 miles or so a day with nightly recharging? That would still be reasonably useful, and a good deal more believable

New Solar Energy Process - Nirvana or Cold Fusion?

Claiming a breakthrough in renewable energy technology, scientists from MIT have announced a new, more efficient and less polluting way to make solar energy cost-effective. Promising almost unlimited power and the opportunity to disconnect from the electrical grid, the scientists have solved the problem of night time power generation by coming up with an electrolysis process that mimics photosynthesis. Using neutral pH water and commonly available (if platinum can be characterized in that fashion) metals, the new process can split water into its hydrogen and oxygen components more effectively than present electrolytic processes.

I hope it's true, but the hype reminds me of the promise of cold fusion a few years back. One problem that remains is the current inefficiency of solar cells, which still do not convert much of the sun's energy to power. Limited sunshine in places like West Virginia or northern Europe makes it unlikely that individual home solar energy units will be powering homes in the next 10 years, but we can hope. Perhaps Nanosolar's printed solar panels will be the cost-efficient solar collectors we've been hoping for.

West Virginia DEP Environmental Rulemaking Has Begun

In West Virginia, environmental regulations must be promulgated by the DEP, reviewed by the Legislative Rule Making Review Committee, approved by the full West Virginia Legislature and then filed with the Secretary of State. (Some, such as water quality standards, have to be approved by EPA before they become effective.) That process, not counting EPA review, can take about a year from the time the rules are filed, usually in June or July, until the time they are final filed.

The rules that the DEP has proposed for consideration by the West Virginia Legislature in 2009 can be accessed at the DEP website. Go to http://www.wvdep.org/Item.cfm?ssid=24&SS1ID=975 for a list of the rules that are being considered, as well as information about when public hearings will be held.

Charleston Landfill Goes Green

The City of Charleston is talking about private developers putting in a 2 million dollar electricity generation station at its landfill. Who can be opposed to producing electricity from an otherwise waste gas? Well, it will be interesting to see the cost per kilowatt of generating electricity in this fashion. It appears that the University of Charleston may be interested in paying a premium for the electricity. See the article at http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200807250660

DEP Proposes Changes to Water Quality Standards

The WV DEP water quality standards program has proposed changes to water quality standards rule, found at 47 CSR 2, that would dramatically change the rules pertaining to public water supplies. Currently, the rule only states that the Category B and C uses, for protection of aquatic life and water contact recreation, apply on a state-wide basis. However, the DEP has taken the position in the past that it will apply the Category A use, for the protection of public drinking water supplies, on a state-wide basis. The DEP now wants to write that designation into the rule, a move that is likely to be opposed by a coalition of business and municipal groups that could see changes in the way that NPDES permit limits are written.

The DEP has also proposed to simplify the manner in which the Category A use can be determined not to apply to a certain stream segment. The DEP might decide that a stream segment could not be used as a public water supply because it is too small or it has been hydrologically modified in some way. This is a welcome change, as it would make it easier to show that a use does not apply, without going through an amendment to the rule, which must then be approved by the WV Legislature and the US EPA. However, a question exists as to whether the rule as written will allow the DEP to implement its program as proposed.

Comments on the proposed changes are due at or prior to the August 18 public hearing in the Coopers Rock training room at the DEP headquarters.

EPA to Approve Surface Mine Changes

EPA has announced that it has received from West Virginia the proposed revisions to its coal mining program involving the special reclamation tax, payment for sites where bonds have been forfeited, storm water runoff analyses, and other changes. Information about the proposed rule changes follows.

We are announcing receipt of a proposed amendment to the West
Virginia regulatory program (the West Virginia program) under the
Federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA or
the Act). West Virginia is submitting a proposed amendment to revise
its Code of State Regulations (CSR) and the West Virginia Code, as
contained in Committee Substitutes for Senate Bills 373 and 751. The
proposed amendment covers a variety of issues including, but not
limited to, statutory changes involving the special reclamation tax,
the creation of alternative programs for the purpose of paying for the
reclamation of forfeited sites including water treatment where
required, and incremental bonding.
Other provisions include regulatory revisions relating to public
notice of permit applications, incidental boundary revisions, permit
issuance findings, inspection of certain impoundments, reclamation of
natural drainways subsequent to sediment pond removal, storm water
runoff analysis,
[[Page 38942]]
contemporaneous reclamation standards regarding excess spoil fills and
bonding of certain types of excess spoil fills, and effluent limits and
bond releases on remining operations.
In addition, most blasting provisions have been removed from the
State's Surface Mining Reclamation Regulations at Title 38 CSR 2 and
will now only be found in the State's Surface Mining Blasting Rule at
Title 199 CSR 1.
On June 16, 2008, OSM published in a separate Federal Register
notice, an interim approval of the State's alternative bonding
provisions at section 22-3-11 of the West Virginia Surface Coal Mining
and Reclamation Act (WVSCMRA) that specifically relates to the special
reclamation tax and the creation of the Special Reclamation Water Trust
Fund. OSM will accept comments on all other provisions of the program
amendment pursuant to this proposed rule notice.
DATES: We will accept written comments until 4 p.m., EDT August 7,
2008. If requested, we will hold a public hearing on August 4, 2008. We
will accept requests to speak until 4 p.m., EDT on July 23, 2008.

EPA Approves Storm Water Permit

EPA has approved reissuance of its storm water permit for construction activities. It does not apply in West Virginia, but most states follow its form and impose similar requirements in their state storm water construction permits. In that regard, it's a good guide to what the West Virginia DEP will be offering in the future. The following is a press release from EPA


EPA Re-Issues Permit for Construction Site Stormwater The EPA is re-issuing a stormwater Construction General Permit (CGP), which expired July 1, 2008, for a two-year time period. The permit will apply only where EPA is the permitting authority, which is in five states (Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Idaho and Alaska); Washington, D.C.; most territories; and most Indian country lands.
The CGP regulates the discharge of stormwater from construction sites that disturb one acre or more of land, and from smaller sites that are part of a larger, common plan of development. The permit requires operators of the construction sites to use stormwater controls and develop stormwater pollution prevention plans to minimize the discharge of sediment and other pollutants associated with construction sites in stormwater runoff.
Under the re-issued permit, new dischargers include new construction sites that start construction on or after the effective date of this permit and those that have already started construction, but do not have coverage under the 2003 CGP. Sites that have coverage under the 2003 CGP must continue to comply with the provisions of that permit and do not need to apply for coverage under this new permit.
The permit uses most of the same terms and conditions as EPA's 2003 permit. EPA is coordinating the permit with a second effort that is underway to establish national clean water standards, known as an effluent limitation guideline, for the construction and development industry. Upon finalization of the guideline, EPA plans to include its provisions into a new and improved five-year CGP to be reissued no later than July 2010.
For more information on the Construction General Permit: http://www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/cgp
2) Effective Utility Management Primer and Electronic Toolbox Released To assist utility managers in promoting sustainable operations and improving performance, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency helped create the ?Effective Utility Management Primer.? This is a collaborative effort with six national associations: Water Environment Federation, the National Association of Clean Water Agencies, American Water Works Association, Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, American Public Works Association, and National Association of Water Companies.
Based on the ?Ten Attributes of Effectively Managed Water Sector Utilities? and the five ?Keys to Management Success,? the primer provides a framework through a customized, incremental approach to help utility managers identify which of the 10 attributes they should focus on first. It also features a series of suggested utility performance measures. This will allow utilities to establish a performance baseline and begin to measure their progress. The document is available at http://www.epa.gov/waterinfrastructure/pdfs/tools_si_watereum_primerforeffectiveutilities.pdf
There is also an electronic resource toolbox that utilities will be able to access on-line from the collaborating organizations at http://watereum.org/. Water and wastewater utilities across the country are facing many common challenges, including rising costs, aging infrastructure, increasingly stringent regulatory requirements, population changes, and a rapidly changing workforce. Effective utility management is critical to enable utilities to tackle challenges, increase performance and achieve success in the long run

Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Plan Will Affect West Virginia

EPA has announced the availability of a plan for reducing hypoxia, or oxygen depletion, in the Gulf of Mexico. One method of doing that is to reduce nutrient loading from the states that drain to the Mississippi River. The 2008 Action Plan greatly increases accountability and specificity through the inclusion of an Annual Operating Plan and Annual Report to maintain and track progress between reassessments, state-led nutrient reduction strategies, complementary federal strategies, and an outreach plan to engage stakeholders.
Eleven key actions in the 2008 Action Plan outline critical needs to complete and implement nitrogen and phosphorus reduction strategies, promote effective conservation practices and management practices, track progress, reduce existing scientific uncertainties, and promote effective communications to increase awareness of Gulf hypoxia.

Most of West Virginia drains to the Mississippi, and any reductions on nutrient loading will certainly affect West Virginia businesses and municipalities

You can see the plan at http://www.epa.gov/msbasin/taskforce/actionplan08.htm

EPA Approves Changes to West Virginia's Drinking Water Program.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-8580-7]
Notice of Tentative Approval and Solicitation of Request for a Public Hearing for Public Water System Supervision Program Revisions for the State of West Virginia
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of Tentative Approval and Solicitation of Requests for a Public Hearing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the State of West Virginia is revising their Public Water Supply Supervision (PWSS) program to meet the requirements of Section 1413 of the Safe Drinking Water Act. West Virginia has adopted regulations for the Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2) to improve public health protection through the control of microbiological contaminants by targeting additional Cryptosporidium treatment requirements to higher risk systems, and for the Stage 2 Disinfection By-Products Rule (Stage 2) to reduce exposure to Disinfection By-Products (DBP) by requiring systems to meet maximum contaminant levels as an average at each compliance monitoring location, rather than as a system-wide average, for two groups of DBPs, trihalomethanes (TTHM) and five haloacetic acids (HAA5).
EPA has determined that these revisions are no less stringent than the corresponding Federal regulations. Therefore, EPA has decided to tentatively approve these program revisions. All interested parties are invited to submit written comments on this determination and may request a public hearing.
DATES: Comments or a request for a public hearing must be submitted by July 17, 2008. This determination shall become effective on July 17,
2008 if no timely and appropriate request for a hearing is received and the Regional Administrator does not elect to hold a hearing on his own motion, and if no comments are received which cause EPA to modify its tentative approval.
ADDRESSES: Comments or a request for a public hearing must be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029. All documents relating to this determination are available for inspection between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, at the following offices:
? Drinking Water Branch, Water Protection Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029.
? West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources, Environmental Engineering Division, Capitol and Washington Streets, 1 Davis Square, Suite 200, Charleston, WV 25301-1798.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Moustakas, Drinking Water Branch (3WP21) at the Philadelphia address given above; telephone (215)
814-5741 or fax (215) 814-2318.

Huntington Faces Combined Sewer Overflow Problem

Huntington is the latest West Virginia city to consider how it will pay for the federally-mandated requirement to separate its storm water and its sanitary sewer systems. Like most cities, Huntington has one series of interconnected pipes for the two systems, which lead to the waste water treatment plant. This works well when it isn't raining. When it rains heavily, the the plant is overwhelmed, and a mixture of storm water and raw sewage is discharged into the Guyandotte and the Ohio Rivers. This is referred to as a combined sewer overflow, or CSO, and it is common throughout the nation.

It is extremely expensive to separate systems and install sufficient treatment of storm water to meet water quality standards. EPA is starting to crack down on cities that have not taken care of this problem, and cities are being forced to consider where they will get the hundreds of millions of dollars needed to implement the necessary changes. The amount of federal funds available is completely inadequate for all that has to be done. Some cities have bitten the bullet and increased sewer fees, as I believe Charleston has.

Once again, Huntington has proven itself to be the most beautiful city in West Virginia, with the lousiest governance. If you want to see an article on the city's reaction to the CSO problem, see http://www.huntingtonnews.net/local/080607-rutherford-localsewerrateincrease.html

Global Warming Agnosticism

Charles Krauthammer has written an excellent article about global warming that reflects my thoughts on the subject. He starts it with these two paragraphs:



I'm not a global warming believer. I'm not a global warming denier. I'm a global warming agnostic who believes instinctively that it can't be very good to pump lots of CO2into the atmosphere but is equally convinced that those who presume to know exactly where that leads are talking through their hats.



Predictions of catastrophe depend on models. Models depend on assumptions about complex planetary systems -- from ocean currents to cloud formation -- that no one fully understands. Which is why the models are inherently flawed and forever changing. The doomsday scenarios posit a cascade of events, each with a certain probability. The multiple improbability of their simultaneous occurrence renders all such predictions entirely speculative.



Global warming is probably happening in some places to some degree, but whether it is long term or man-made, and what its ultimate effects will be, are impossible to tell. Anybody who has worked with models can tell you that they can be extremely useful, but are incredibly prone to produce results desired by the person running the model.

It is to our advantage to reduce carbon emissions, and every other "unnatural" activity, but in doing so we must weigh the costs and benefits. Those who present dire pictures of what will happen without strict controls on carbon emissions have not come close to making a defensible argument for their position.



Mr. Krauthammer's entire column can be found at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/29/AR2008052903266.html

Interstate Power Line Moves Ahead

Allegheny Power is developing an interstate electric transmission line, the Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line (TrAIL), across northern West Virginia to carry electricity from West Virginia to the east coast. The project will create more infrastructure for transmission of West Virginia-generated power. While there has been some opposition to the power line, as there always is, the forces fighting the agreement that was reached with the West Virginia Public Utilities Staff and the PSC Consumer Advocate are now smaller, and the project appears poised to go through. You can read about the results of the negotiations before the PSC in an article by Ken Ward at http://wvgazette.com/News/Business/200805300580

If we're to centralize power generation at places where environmental controls can be more effectively imposed, such as power plants that centrally produce electricity for plug-in cars, instead of having individual internal combustion engines in each car, then more power lines are going to be necessary.

Storm Water Exemptions for Oil and Gas Operations Rejected

The Ninth Circuit recently rejected an interpretation of the Energy Policy Act that exempted certain oil and gas operations from storm water controls. You can read a blog about the decision at http://eartotheground.typepad.com/weblog/2008/05/exempting-oil-and-gas-operations-from-stormwater-rules-is-overruled.html.

This decision could have significant effect on oil and gas operations in West Virginia, which are subject to best management practices but not storm water permitting.

EPA Proposes New Air Limits for Coal Preparation Plants

EPA has proposed new air emission limits for coal preparation plants, which are the places that raw coal is taken to be made suitable for use and sale. The changes primarily involve limitations on particulate matter (PM). The following provides information about the rule and the contact information for filing comments.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 111(b)(1)(B) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA has reviewed the emissions limits in the standards of performance for coal preparation plants which were promulgated January 15, 1976. This action presents the results of EPA's review and proposes amendments to limits for coal preparation plants consistent with those results. Specifically, we are proposing to tighten and add additional particulate matter (PM) emissions limits for sources constructed after April 28, 2008. In addition, we are proposing to clarify the procedures used to measure emissions from coal preparation plants and add new monitoring requirements for sources constructed after April 28, 2008.DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before June 12, 2008. If anyone contacts EPA by May 8, 2008 requesting to speak at a public hearing, EPA will hold a public hearing on May 13, 2008. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on the information collection provisions must be received by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on or before May 28, 2008.ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0260, by one of the following methods: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.

You can find the full proposal at Federal Register: April 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 82) Page 22901-22913

Free Climate Change Webcasts Being Offered by EPA

For those of you who are concerned about climate change, or want to know what EPA plans to do about its effect on water supplies and wetlands, EPA is offering two free webcasts on May 8 and May 13. See the descriptions below.


Free May 8 Webcast on EPA?s Draft Water Climate Change Strategy On Thursday, May 8, EPA will be hosting a free webcast from 2:30 to 4:30 pm EDT to discuss EPA's Draft National Water Program Strategy: Response to Climate Change. The agency recently distributed this draft strategy and is now seeking comment until May 27, 2008. The draft strategy represents an initial effort by EPA's National Water Program to identify potential impacts of climate change for clean water and drinking water programs, and to define actions both to adapt water programs to these impacts as well as to mitigate the release of greenhouse gases. The free webcast will highlight some of the key impacts on water resources and water programs, and key actions we are proposing. If you are interested in participating in this webcast or want a copy of the draft strategy go to http://www.epa.gov/water/climatechange/ .

Free May 13th Webcast on Wetlands and Climate Change On Tuesday, May 13th, 2008, a free Watershed Academy Webcast, "Wetlands and Climate Change," will highlight the unique challenges that wetland habitats face including rising sea levels and variable temperature and precipitation patterns. Expert instructors will discuss the issue from diverse perspectives reflecting the multifaceted approach needed to address the challenges of climate change. EPA's Watershed Academy sponsors free, monthly Webcasts for watershed practitioners from around the globe.
The Webcast will feature Dr. Virginia Burkett, Chief Scientist, Global Change Research at the U.S. Geological Survey; Peter Slovinsky, Coastal Geologist, Maine Geological Survey; Jim Powell, Water Quality Standards Section Manager, Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation; and David VanLuven, Hudson River Estuary Landscape Director, The Nature Conservancy-Eastern NY Chapter. To register please visit: http://www.epa.gov/watershedwebcasts.

High Gas Prices? Increase Oil Production in the US

Paul Samuelson is one of the brightest minds in economics, and he writes in a coherent, engaging manner. He believes we are deluding ourselves if we complain about high gas prices, which are due to the tight oil market, and yet refuse to allow drilling for oil and gas in significant portions of the United States. See his column from a week ago at http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/other/orl-syn-sam0501,0,6344504.story

DEP Proposes Changes to Water Quality Standards

The DEP Water Quality Standards office unveiled a revised proposal for determining which waters of the state should be preserved as drinking water supplies. It would designate all streams in the state as water supplies (designated as Category A in the standards), and provide a way for NPDES permit writers to determine where that use should not apply. Currently, to show the Category A use should not apply, one must go through a very involved procedure that includes getting approval from the Legislature and from EPA. The new procedure would expedite that process, but only for small streams, or streams with modifications on them, such as culverts. Larger streams would still be assumed to be potable water supplies, even if there is no water supply intake. The result is that dischargers can be stuck with lower permit limits, and higher costs, in order to protect water users that are not even present.

The change proposed by the DEP is positive, at least for dischargers to the smallest streams. However, removing the use will still be cumbersome on larger streams. The DEP would be better served by foregoing the designation of all streams as public water supplies, and protecting those streams that actually serve as water supplies.

An article on the meeting can be found at http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200804300675

Bamboo as Environmentally Sustainable Crop

An article on bamboo cultivation that was reprinted from the Seattle Times presents some interesting information about opportunities for the cultivation of non-running, non-aggressive bamboo. It will never replace hardwoods domination of the Eastern forests, but it may be an interesting plant to throw into the horticultural mix in West Virginia. See the article at http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/pacificnw/2004360712_pacificpbamboo20.html

One mistake the writer made was to assume that hardwoods, once cut, do not regenerate. In fact, clear cut hardwood forests in the East begin to regenerate from shoots and seeds almost immediately.

EIS Available for Western Greenbrier Co-Production Demonstration Project

In order to satisfy the National Environmental Policy Act, certain projects must be the subject of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Department of Energy has recently finished its EIS for the Western Greenbrier Co-Production Demonstration Project, Rainelle, Greenbrier
County, WV, which involves an innovative use of coal refuse and co-generation. For an abbreviated project summary from the Federal Register, and information on where to get the EIS, see below.


SUMMARY: DOE has decided to implement the Proposed Action alternative,
identified as the preferred alternative, in the Western Greenbrier Co-
Production Demonstration Project, Final Environmental Impact Statement
(DOE/EIS-0361; November 2007) (FEIS). That alternative is to provide
approximately $107.5 million (up to 50% of the development costs) to
Western Greenbrier Co-Generation, LLC (WGC) through a cooperative
agreement under the Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI) Program for a
Co-Production Facility to be located at Rainelle in Greenbrier County,
West Virginia. This funding will be used by WGC to design, construct
and demonstrate a 98 megawatt (net) power plant and cement
manufacturing facility based on an innovative atmospheric-pressure
circulating fluidized bed (CFB) boiler with a compact inverted cyclone
to generate electricity and steam by burning approximately 3,000 to
4,000 tons per day of coal refuse from several local sites.
DOE considered two overall alternatives: To provide cost-shared
funding or not to provide cost-shared funding to WGC's proposed
project. In addition, DOE examined a range of implementing options for
the power plant site, fuel supply, water supply, limestone supply,
means of transportation, and transmission corridors. DOE analyzed in
detail the environmental (including socioeconomic) impacts of each of
these different options, as well as the economic and environmental
benefits related to the reclamation and potential reuse of the coal
refuse sites.
This ROD and Floodplain Statement of Findings have been prepared in
accordance with the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] parts 1500-1508) for
implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), DOE's NEPA
Implementing Procedures (10 CFR part 1021), and DOE's Compliance with
Floodplain and Wetland Environmental Review Requirements (10 CFR part 1022).
ADDRESSES: The Final EIS is available on the DOE NEPA Web site at
http://www.blogger.com/www.eh.doe.gov/nepa/documentspub.html