SEATTLE - Port of Seattle commissioners will appeal a Seattle Department of Planning and Development finding against a Shell Oil contractor leasing Terminal 5 as its homeport for repairing oil rigs on their way to Alaska. But late Tuesday, port commissioners also voted to warn the contractor that it can't move forward without a definitive ruling.
A separate lawsuit was filed in March to prevent the oil homeport for environmental reasons. In that case, plaintiffs' attorney Patti Goldman of Earthjustice said allowing oil rigs at the port doesn't fit the future of Seattle.
"The port wants to be a green and sustainable port, and it wants to have a thriving container business," she said. "This homeport use is very different, and if we went that route, that would collide with the plans that the city has for green tourism and green business, and put everything on a different direction."
The technical issue is whether the port's current city permit for a cargo terminal can stretch the definition of "cargo" to include parts and repairs for oil rigs, or if the port should be required to get a new permit. After hours of public testimony, the commissioners seemed most concerned about the decision setting a precedent for the port's other operations.
In the meantime, rigs already are lined up to arrive in Puget Sound, and Goldman said that's a problem. She cited one, known as the Noble Discoverer, which had oil leaks in 2012 that cost its owner $12 million in fines.
"That's what we're bringing here, is a ship with a very bad track record that has still been cutting corners on safety. That really matters from a local level," she said. "And then, you put on top of it what are we enabling here, what are we facilitating - and that's Arctic drilling and exploitation of fossil fuels."
Goldman said Puget Soundkeeper and other groups believe bringing oil vessels into the sound would have negative consequences for water quality and fish, and they think the Port of Seattle should have had an environmental review before leasing space to Foss Maritime, a Royal Dutch Shell contractor. That lawsuit won't be heard until the end of July.
get more stories like this via email
A new report found four dams in the Columbia River Basin are big emitters of methane.
Research from the organization Tell The Dam Truth showed the four lower Snake River dams in eastern Washington emit the equivalent of 1.8 million metric tons of carbon dioxide each year.
Robin Everett, deputy western region field director for the Sierra Club, said it undercuts some of the claims the dams are helping provide the region with clean energy.
"It's really clear from this report that we have to take this a lot more seriously that there are some real impacts as far as emissions go from these dams," Everett asserted.
The reports showed the dams produce the equivalent emissions of burning 2 billion pounds of coal annually. Defenders of the dams counted they are important for barging and irrigation for the area's agricultural lands.
But Everett pointed out the dams have another effect on the region: they block the dwindling population of salmon and steelhead from traveling upstream on the Snake River. She noted it not only hurts fish populations but the tribes relying on them.
"We have an obligation for them to be able to fish and if there are no fish to fish, we have broken the treaties," Everett contended
Chinook salmon are also an important source of food for orca on the West Coast. Everett added protecting salmon is important for tribes and the region as a whole.
"Our moral obligation to the salmon and the orca that depend on them are met as well," Everett concluded.
Disclosure: The Sierra Club contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, Environment, and Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
A proposed pumped-storage hydroelectric facility for Cuffs Run near the Susquehanna River in York County has been challenged by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.
The foundation filed a motion to intervene in the proceedings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is considering granting a preliminary permit to build a 1.8-mile-long dam for the project.
Harry Campbell, science policy and advocacy director for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, said they are working to stop the project in order to protect the unique Cuffs Run area and its ecological benefits for future generations.
"If approved, this project would destroy it about 580 acres of prime farmland, fields and forests, some of which have not been disturbed in about 100 years," Campbell pointed out. "Those farms, fields and forests exist harmoniously with and in support of a plethora of plant and animal life."
The foundation is circulating an online petition and encouraged Pennsylvanians to provide comments before Sunday.
The stream is home to naturally reproducing brook trout. Advocates worry the $2.5 billion project would also be harmful to the Susquehanna River. Campbell noted about 40 families would be displaced.
"For those who call Cuffs Run home, it's more than just a place to live. It's their heritage and they want it to be part of their legacy," Campbell asserted. "This project just simply is the wrong idea in the wrong place. In order to honor that heritage and that legacy, we need to preserve this area."
Campbell emphasized the Cuffs Run project is about 993 acres of land draining into a 2.5-mile unnamed tributary. He added in terms of stream habitat, the rocks, pebbles and woody material have been identified as among the best in the region for supporting critters living in the water.
Disclosure: The Chesapeake Bay Foundation contributes to our fund for reporting on Energy Policy, Rural/Farming, Sustainable Agriculture, and Water. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Tennesseans want more say in how the Tennessee Valley Authority plans for their future electricity needs and a bill now in Congress could give the public more influence.
The "TVA Increase Rate of Participation Act," would require a more open decision-making process for the utility.
Brianna Knisley, director of public power campaigns for Appalachian Voices, said the TVA is currently developing its new Integrated Resource Plan to meet future energy demands. The bill would require more public participation in the plan's proceedings.
"Right now the stakeholders who get to provide input early on in the IRP process are all hand-selected by TVA," Knisley pointed out. "You can't choose to be in that IRP working group. And those are the only folks who get substantial input in the architecture of the IRP, as it's being designed."
The utility serves more than 10 million people across six states. The TVA said it is reviewing the legislation. A draft of the plan will be published at a later date. The TVA said it already has a "robust stakeholder engagement plan."
After the plan is released, Knisley noted public input happens during what's known as the scoping phase of the National Environmental Policy Act. Open houses are set up, where the TVA answers questions from the public. Knisley encouraged Tennesseans to raise any of their concerns during the public and virtual hearings.
"I think additional public input into our region's long-term energy plan is only going to strengthen outcomes," Knisley contended. "And make that long-term energy plan better meet the needs of the Tennessee Valley, as a whole."
She added it is important for Tennesseans to work with Congress on the best way to improve public input in the TVA decision-making process.
Disclosure: Appalachian Voices contributes to our fund for reporting on Energy Policy, Environment, Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email