Author: chejadmin

As we anxiously await President Obama’s decision on TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline, new concerns have emerged regarding detection of leaks and other potential hazards the pipeline could pose to public health. Last year alone roughly 364 pipelines had spills in the U.S., leaving a total of 54,000 barrels of oil to clean up, according to PBS, quoting the Department of Transportation.

An increasing number of Texas and Oklahoma residents worry about pipeline spills. One, of the more recent ones occurred in March, when ExxonMobil’s Pegasus Pipeline near Mayflower, Ark., ruptured and flooded streets and yards in nearby neighborhoods.

Although ExxonMobil said nearby lakes and air quality weren’t affected, local scientists remain skeptical. A 2010 spill in Michigan’s Kalamazoo River left residual amounts of tar sands in the river bed.

As in the 2010 spill in Michigan, residents of Mayflower immediately began reporting health complications–including headaches and coughing fits—and worry about lingering effects from benzene, linked to respiratory illness and cancer. A month after the Arkansas spill, the Pegasus Pipeline again ruptured in the neighboring state of Missouri, adding to the count of incidents this year. Some justice may be served on behalf of Mayflower residents, as last week Arkansas’s attorney general filed suit against ExxonMobil for improper waste storage and water contamination.

These disasters serve as a chain of omens as Keystone XL’s approval looms near. Despite the spills, TransCanada refuses to adopt additional safety measures such as infrared leak detection equipment for helicopters performing fly-overs, according to Bloomberg, even after TransCanada found a series of “anomalies” and dents in the pipeline, requiring workers to dig up segments near Douglass, Texas, part of the final stretch of the project.

Now, on the edge of a landmark decision, President Obama has, as New York Times reporter John Broder put it, “a rare opportunity to set the parameters of the energy debate for the rest of his term.” Many, including former Obama aides, former Vice President Al Gore, and even Nobel Prize winner the Dalai Lama have all called for the president to veto the project. Any appeasement of environmental groups with a smaller, side deal by the administration cannot offset the damage the pipeline will reap on communities and ecosystems.

The relatively untapped Chattanooga shale field—which runs from southern Kentucky through central Tennessee—will soon see a long awaited incursion of major gas and oil companies such as CONSOL Energy, CNX Gas and GeoMet and Atlas Energy. Tennessee’s General Assembly’s Joint Committee on Government Operations passed a series of rules on hydraulic fracking on May 22st, set to go into effect June 18^th.

CONSOL Energy—which has gas leases in on rough 240,000 acres in the state–already is preparing to begin horizontal drilling in Anderson County which borders Kentucky. Soon workers will shoot gallons of water and nitrogen into the shale rock in order to release and collect the natural gas within. Some of the most glaring issues regard the notably high bar on when the rules actually apply—of which most operations will not meet due to low demand and the state’s geography.

Unlike the Marcellus shale field in Pennsylvania, Tennessee’s’ Chattanooga field is significantly shallower, which warrants less water to be used. Part of the controversy with the new rules is that public notice only applies when operations exceed 200,000 gallons of water, which is unlikely in the case of Chattanooga as significantly less water is necessary. In addition general notice of the operations themselves only is required for those living half of a mile from the site, which would excludes many.

In September local environmental groups pushed for a ban on fracking operations that would use water exceeding 200,000, the board dismissed the ban but kept 200,000 gallons as a marker for public notification. The board, at that time called the Oil and Gas Board—now merged with the Water Quality Control Board making the Board of Water Quality, Oil and Gas—ignored the cries of the groups for tighter regulations.

Serious questions have arisen about the effectiveness of the new set of rules, in assuring proper safety of local population and environment. Groups such as the Tennessee Clean Water Network and the Sierra Club’s Tennessee Chapter were less enthused. Concerns were raised by the safety of local ground water, as fracking produces significant quantities of waste water—also known as “flowback”—which contains salt, oil, grease and occasionally radioactive material depending on the location and method of fracking.

Meg Lockhart of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation contends, “Wastewater disposal is a significant issue in the Northeast where fracking occurs.  The amounts of liquid we’re dealing with in Tennessee are much, much smaller, if liquid is used at all.  But, if water in any significant quantity is used, some of it would come back up the well”. Renee Hoyos, Excecutive Director of the Tennessee Clean Water Network

It is a bit hyperbolic at this stage to assume that fracking operations in Tennessee will reach the level that of Ohio or Pennsylvania, but if gas prices resume to increase in the near future we can expect to see more and more companies expanding into previously ignored areas of the country.

A wave of anxiety and outrage grips Newton County, Kentucky, as a proposed natural gas pipeline would rend a path through Ohio and Kentucky. The Bluegrass Pipeline—put forward as a joint venture by Williams Companies Inc. and Boardwalk Pipeline Partners, LP—would carry an estimated 200,000 to 400,000 barrels a day of shale gas from western Pennsylvania to Texas, where it will likely be shipped to overseas markets; construction is expected to be completed by late 2015.

“Bluegrass would include building a new NGL pipeline to a Hardinsburg, Ky., interconnect with Boardwalk’s Texas Gas Transmission LLC system and converting a portion of Texas Gas from Hardinsburg to Eunice, La. (the TGT Loop Line) to NGL service,” Christopher Smith of the Oil and Gas Journal noted.

In addition to new pipeline infrastructure, the project would necessitate construction of additional facilities throughout the South—including a facility in Louisiana. The project would also upgrade older infrastructure incapable of handling the potential influx of Marcellus Shale gas from Pennsylvania.

“As development in the region’s Marcellus and Utica shales has ramped up, producers have found themselves stuck with an underdeveloped infrastructure that can’t yet handle processing or transporting all the oil and gas extracted here,” Erich HYPERLINK “http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/business/news/venture-proposes-bluegrass-pipeline-to-the-gulf-coast-678443/”Schwartzel of Pittsburgh’s Post-Gazette wrote.

Much like Kentucky, Ohio has been swept up in the massive oil and gas boom. In addition to the Bluegrass Pipeline, Ohio will see the construction of the Hickory Bend cryogenic processing plant, a $150 million project developed by Pennant Midstream LLC–a joint venture of NiSource Midstream Services LLC and HilcorpHYPERLINK “http://www.hilcorp.com/” Energy.

An additional $150 million will go toward building a pipeline for Utica shale gas from western Pennsylvania to Mahoning County in eastern Ohio. The project could exceed $1 billion in the future, according to the BusinessHYPERLINK “http://businessjournaldaily.com/drilling-down/nisource-exec-300m-gas-project-could-grow-1b-2013-5-1” Journal Daily.

The feverish rush by oil and gas companies to exploit the apparently lacking infrastructure that begs for new pipelines offers an easy opportunity for companies to get in the game. Despite efforts by the aforementioned ventures to address concerns of environmental damage—Pennant Midstream LLC paved two roads in Mahoning County and claims it will use electric rather than diesel fuel– many questions remain as to what long-term effects, including leakage and explosions, both pipelines could have in Ohio and Kentucky.

A new bill circulating in New Jersey’s General Assembly is drawing controversy for it‘s tough stance against industrial pollution in low-income neighborhoods.

Assemblywoman L. Grace Spencer (D) introduced  Assembly Bill 3836 in February. The bill would bar industrial plants from being built in any neighborhood deemed to be a “burdened community.”  If passed, it could offer a much-needed reprieve for low-income residents of neighborhoods such as Ironbound in Newark. Ironbound has long struggled with pollution from local chemical plants, incinerators and Newark Liberty International Airport.  In this year’s State of the Air report card by the American Lung Association gave Essex County – where Newark is located — an “F” for poor air quality.

Ironbound is under constant siege of industrial expansion. This year its residents face a proposal calling for the construction of the Bayonne Bridge, which would carry legions of commercial trucks that pass through Newark’s East Ward. “Parents, community leaders and medical researchers say asthma is a particularly serious problem in the Ironbound, a hot spot for the chronic respiratory disease within a city whose asthma-related hospitalization rate is already more than double Essex County’s,” wrote reporter Steve Strunsky in the Star-Ledger.

In addition, construction has begun on a 655-megawatt natural gas plant, operated by Hess Corp, approved last year by the Newark Planning Board. Despite claims by Hess engineers of the plant’s low impact, many community activists remain outraged over the plant’s use of natural gas derived from hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. The use of such gas warrants concern for Ironbound residents, as it contains considerable amounts of methane (CH₄), found in a study by the Air and Waste Management Association to “include organic compounds that contribute to the formation of ground-level ozone (smog), as well as hazardous air pollutants like benzene.”

Long-stressed Ironbound is just one of the many communities in New Jersey locked in a perpetual battle with industrial polluters. If passed, Assembly Bill 3836 would mark a major turning point in the struggle against industrial polluters and hopefully serve as a model for other similar struggles being waged across the nation.

A black plume of noxious gas enveloped adjacent neighborhoods after a fire broke out at the Marathon Detroit Refinery on April 27^th. Residents of nearby Melvindale were evacuated by town officials after the fire was designated a Level 3 Hazard. However, residents of Detroit received no immediate warning nor a call for evacuation by the city of Detroit, sparking outrage by the affected, predominantly African American community.  Residents complained of a lingering “foul egg smell” as well as general irritation in breathing, a local Fox station reported.

“The Marathon oil refinery fire was ultimately not a Level 3 Hazardous Materials incident, although that was the initial declaration based on preliminary information,” Detroit Fire Commissioner Donald Austin told the Detroit News. Officials are still testing air quality post-explosion. An environmental justice organizer at the Michigan Sierra Club Chapter, Rhonda Anderson, worries about a potential misreading of the samples taken by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). “The EPA did not arrive until after the fires had already been contained.” Anderson said by telephone, “This is the data the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality chose to go on”.

Since 2001, Marathon has racked up 13 air pollution violations by the MDEQ, including a nuisance violation for a continuing overpowering odor reported by community leaders. “We found terrible things. Carcinogens, carbon monoxide, benzene and toluene, which harm the nervous system, methyl ethyl ketone, which can cause blindness. A lot of really bad stuff,” local activist and cancer survivor Theresa Landrum reported.

In a 2011 study, Professor Paul Mohai from the University of Michigan School of Natural Resources and Environment investigated air pollution around Michigan schools and its potential impact on academic performance in children. The study concluded that schools located near areas of heavy industry faced an increased chance of children developing neurological damage — in turn affecting academic performance– after exposure to high levels of air pollutants common to the burning of fossil fuels.

Marathon specializes in processing a type of heavy crude from Canada known as tar sands, which a study by Forest Ethics found releases heavy quantities of sulfur dioxide, a chemical associated with respiratory illness. The study referenced a 2010 EPA investigation of the local sewer system adjacent to the refinery, “finding cancer-causing chemicals benzene, toluene, and hydrogen sulfide,” known byproducts of tar sands refining and the  source of complaints of respiratory problems by nearby residents.

In 2012, Marathon completed its Detroit Heavy Oil Upgrade Project, a $2.2 billion expansion of its refining capacity; raising its input of Canadian heavy crude to an additional four hundred barrels a day. Marathon has also taken it upon itself to buy out local homeowners to build “green spaces,” an effort some suspect was designed to placate locals furious over the expansion. The Detroit Free Press noted many residents have sharply criticized the program, claiming the “purchasing agreement would bar them from suing Marathon for any future health problems.”

Marathon’s torment of the community is not an issue unique to Detroit. Rather, it is part of a larger problem of poor regulation of refineries that continues to make the lives of low-income families a low priority. The looming decision on whether the Keystone XL pipeline will win approval by the President will decide the fate of many communities near refineries, because the pipeline would bring heavy crude from Canada through the Midwest to Texas.

Residents of Port Arthur, Texas, have long battled the Valero Refinery, which like Marathon processes heavy crude. Hilton Kelley, head of Community In-power and Development Association (CIDA) and a life-long resident, said more tar sands crude would lead to “a serious increase of sulfur dioxide in our community.”

“This is what happens when you roll back regulations on safety,” Kelley said by phone. “These people don’t really care about the welfare of our communities”.

By Andrew Morris

The Sierra Club, Rainforest Action Network and BankTrack last month released a list of the 10 worst offenders in coal financing.  It is no surprise that banks such as J.P. Morgan, Citigroup and Bank of America are on the list, given their copious lending to companies that operate coal-fired power plants and practice mountaintop-removal mining.

The 10 banks highlighted in the report loaned a combined $20 billion to coal companies. While this is a daunting figure, overall usage of coal-fired power has declined by 11 percent since 2011, potentially signaling a slow demise of the practice. Until then, coal-fired power plants continue to be among the more environmentally devastating forms of energy production, with proven links to groundwater and surface water contamination; climate change; and human health problems triggered by toxic levels of mercury and coal dust.

Coal production generates a half trillion dollars in externalized environmental and health costs each year, as noted in a 2011 Harvard School of Public Health study. The costs range from hospitalization for residents of coal communities – who have higher-than-average mortality rates and suffer disproportionately from cancer and other illnesses– to water pollution and toxic waste spills.

The “report card” released by the three groups this week gave the lowest grades to BNY Mellon for its financing of both mountaintop removal and coal-burning power plants; the bank was given “F’s” in both categories. Close behind was Goldman Sachs, which got two “D’s.”

“As the costs of climate disruption for our communities and future generations mount, U.S. banks continue to finance tens of billion dollars for companies that are mining and burning coal we can no longer afford to burn,” Ben Collins, research and policy campaigner for Rainforest Action Network’s Energy and Finance Program, said in a press release.