CHARLESTON, W.Va. - Huge gas pipelines now seeking approval aren't needed but will make utility rates spike, according to their critics.
Federal regulators have issued a preliminary Environmental Impact Statement for the Mountain Valley Pipeline, a $3.2 billion project that would run 300 miles across West Virginia and Virginia. Joe Lovett, executive director of Appalachian Mountain Advocates, said it's one of six similar lines proposed to carry Marcellus and Utica gas to eastern markets. Even though they're not needed, he said, the pipeline builders and utilities are allowed to pass along their costs plus a hefty guaranteed profit.
"So, it's a double hit to ratepayers," Lovett said. "It's a total scam, and those rates will be passed along to ratepayers. So, both of these pipelines are going to raise your utility bills."
A spokeswoman for the pipeline said two years already have been spent planning and developing the pipeline, and hundreds of adjustments have been made to protect the public interest. The companies have argued that the projects are being built to meet expected demand in eastern Virginia and the Carolinas.
Lovett said regulators allow pipeline developers to claim costs plus a guaranteed 14 percent profit - and that's separate from the 10 percent or 11 percent assured profit for the utility that buys the gas. He said costs and profit for the MVP, the Atlantic Coast Pipeline and others would be shifted to consumers, who have little choice but to pay it. He added that a study by Synapse Energy Economics found enough existing pipeline capacity to supply Virginia and the Carolinas through 2030.
"Synapse determined that neither the Mountain Valley nor the Atlantic Coast Pipeline are necessary to meet the needs of getting gas produced in West Virginia or Pennsylvania to market," Lovett said.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has said it found "limited adverse environmental impacts, with the exceptions of impacts on forest," from the MVP. Lovett disputed this, and said it's a mistake for FERC to consider each pipeline project separately. He's convinced it's likely to cause overbuilding - at the expense of consumers, landowners and the environment.
"So, as long as FERC continues to analyze pipelines in isolation," he said, "it can't make a fair determination about whether they're necessary and what the alternatives are to those."
The preliminary EIS for the Mountain Valley Pipeline is online at ferc.gov. The Synapse study is at abralliance.org.
get more stories like this via email
Clean-energy advocates in Texas are closely monitoring a bill before the Legislature that, if passed, could stop the development and operation of additional projects.
The state has experienced a huge increase in wind and solar energy use.
A recent study shows that Texas ranks first in the nation for wind power generation, second for solar power generation, and is second in the nation for battery storage.
Luke Metzger, executive director of Environment Texas, said they're hosting a meeting tonight to better explain Senate Bill 819 - which could hinder further expansion.
"Our webinar seeks to educate the public about some of these attacks on clean energy," said Metzger, "reminding people how critical they are for our environment, for public health, as well as working to bust some of the myths out there about renewables."
A similar bill passed in the Texas Senate during the last legislative session but didn't make it through the House of Representatives.
The webinar starts at 6 o'clock. Viewers can register on the Environment Texas website.
The demand for electricity in the State is projected to double over the next five years.
Problems with the Texas grid have more people turning to clean energy to cool and heat their homes and businesses.
Metzger said it's estimated that Texans save $1 billion each month because of wind and solar.
"As renewables have grown - as of just last year producing almost one third of the electricity in the state of Texas," said Metzger, "we're starting to see some pushback from fossil-fuel companies and others that are threatened by the growth in clean energy."
He said Senate Bill 819 includes discriminatory permitting requirements, setbacks for wind and solar facilities, and new taxes and fees targeting renewable energy.
get more stories like this via email
In Wyoming, electric utility PacifiCorp's draft 2025 plans show a shift away from renewable energy additions compared with last year, according to a new report.
Final plans are expected later this month, following industry wins during the state's legislative session. One new law passed by the Wyoming Legislature decreased the severance tax rate for surface coal from 6.5% to 6%, saving the industry about $10 million annually. A second creates a new fund, also $10 million, to support companies pumping carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas, into the ground in order to increase oil production.
Emma Jones, climate and energy organizer for the Wyoming chapter of the Sierra Club, said the moves are pushing the state in the wrong direction.
"What it's doing is providing an incentive for fossil fuel industries to continue to produce carbon dioxide," Jones pointed out. "What we've seen is that it's not increasing the number of jobs available for people and it's not making energy cheaper."
Jones added in Wyoming, tax breaks and extra funding to fossil fuel companies come at a cost to state beneficiaries, such as education and public services. According to the report, in 2023, the state's electricity generation profile consisted of about 71% coal-fired power plants, 21% wind and the rest was a mix.
Jones noted state officials fret Wyoming is becoming a "retirement community." She emphasized over roughly the past decade, the state ranked second lowest in the U.S. for job growth, at just 1% compared with the national average of nearly 14%.
"Our most important export today is not coal or natural gas, but jobs," Jones contended. "Skilled laborers, educated young people who are leaving the state for better opportunities elsewhere."
In its 2023 plan, PacifiCorp calculated two outlooks, one with high renewables and one with low. It projected higher renewables would mean about 10,000 more jobs than the alternative.
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
The Sierra Club's Utah chapter said electric utility PacifiCorp's long-term plan to embrace renewable energy has changed and is now placing more reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, which they argued poses a threat to the state's resiliency.
A new report commissioned by the Sierra Club aims to highlight the economic impacts of renewable energy in Utah. Put simply, the study found the deployment of renewable energy projects, such as wind, solar and storage facilities, would generate significant economic benefits for the Beehive State.
Luis Miranda, senior campaign organizer for the Sierra Club, acknowledged families in coal country are facing economic uncertainty.
"I can't help but feel so proud for the legacy of generations of Utahns and coal miners and coal plant workers who have sacrificed so much to ensure the lights stay on in this country," Miranda noted. "And yet the question I hear again and again isn't just about jobs, it's about long-term stability."
Miranda explained people want to know if there will be careers allowing them to stay in their communities and plan for the future. He emphasized the answer lies within "greener" forms of energy. But conservatives disagree and argued energy must remain cheap, reliable and dispatchable. Advocates countered they realize the grid cannot solely run on renewables but want to see utilities like PacifiCorp make more of an effort and not stall on progress.
Utah's electricity-generation profile is currently made up of about 47% coal, 36% natural gas and 17% renewables.
Rosa Monahan, staff attorney for the Sierra Club, said PacifiCorp's latest integrated resource plan extends rather than shortens the life of coal operations in Utah and Wyoming. She called it a mistake.
"That is the wrong direction to go," Monahan contended. "To make no progress until after 2030 is really just going to continue to put us behind the 8-ball, and so we want to see progress continuing to move forward as more resources are developed like the long-duration storage, more geothermal, particularly in Utah."
The report authors said the data used in the analysis was developed and came directly from PacifiCorp, when company published a report in 2023 with a "high renewable outlook" portfolio and believed it would be able to meet demand as well as utilize renewable energy in a cost-effective and reliable manner.
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