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

Indiana now classifies natural gas and propane as clean energy under a new state law.

Gov. Mike Braun signed Senate Bill 178, granting the fuels eligibility for tax credits and other incentives.

Sam Carpenter, executive director of the nonprofit Hoosier Environmental Council, opposed the measure, arguing the fuels significantly contribute to climate pollution.

"Methane is around 38 times more potent as a greenhouse gas," Carpenter pointed out. "What happens is there's a lot of leakage that happens in the drilling, in the extraction, the storage, the transportation, even the burning of methane."

Proponents of the bill argued it supports an "all of the above" approach to reduce energy costs for Hoosiers.

Carpenter cautioned investing in natural gas infrastructure could backfire. He noted the high costs and slow pace of building pipelines and transmission systems. He also emphasized Indiana's energy landscape is already shifting.

"Ninety percent of new generation coming online is renewable," Carpenter stressed. "It's wind, and it's solar, and it's battery storage, and that's really based on price, and it's based on the competitive factor, and it's based on timeliness."

Carpenter suggested the measure will likely have minimal immediate impact unless federal policies change. The bill passed with bipartisan support in the General Assembly.


get more stories like this via email

Lawmakers in the U.S. House will vote on a bill this week affecting Virginia's ability to create stronger emissions standards for vehicles and trucks.

The bill targets "California emissions standards," policies which call for 100% of cars sold to be electric or emissions-free by 2035. That policy has been partially or fully adopted by Virginia and 16 other states.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on his first day in office to repeal the standards, leading to the legislative effort.

Rob Sargent, program director of Coltura, an energy transition nonprofit, said the federal government should be increasing access to electric vehicles instead of going against policies that promote them.

"EV tax credits and any programs designed to make EVs available to the American people are key," he said, "and can unlock decades of savings for people for what has been a strain on their household finances."

A report by the independent Government Accountability Office stated that Congress does not have the authority to repeal the emissions standards. Supporters of the bill have said banning gas cars is an affront to consumer freedom.

More than a half million Virginians are considered "gas super users," meaning they use significantly more gasoline than the average driver.

Sargent said repealing strong emissions standards would make it harder for states to reduce their carbon footprint.

"If Congress acts to pull the rug out from under those states' ability to take action to make cars cleaner in their state," he said, "then it also will undercut the availability of electric vehicles for consumers that would save them money."

The Senate is considering a similar bill despite opposition from within the Legislature.


get more stories like this via email

This week, the Trump administration announced what it terms "emergency permitting" for energy projects, streamlining a sometimes yearslong process down to 28 days. Opponents said it will mean time in court.

The U.S. Interior Department plans to alter the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act and National Historic Preservation Act so projects around oil, gas, coal, minerals and more can proceed without the agency approvals the laws require. The department said it's part of President Donald Trump's January "National Energy Emergency" declaration.

Erik Molvar, executive director of the Western Watersheds Project, said there is no such emergency.

"The idea that there's some kind of 'national energy emergency' is a lie that the Trump administration is making up to justify an extralegal approach to approving energy projects and skipping past the environmental safeguards that Congress put in place," Molvar contended.

He argued the move risks historic sites, wildlife habitat and recreation opportunities on Montana's 30 million acres of public land. Molvar added he expects energy projects brought under the new, streamlined permitting will be overturned in court.

The announcement comes just one day after the Interior Department's draft strategic plan for the next four years was leaked. A "big idea" cited in the draft is to, quote, "release federal holdings to allow state and local communities to reduce costs," and in parentheses, "housing." Molvar stressed it would essentially put federal responsibilities in the hands of smaller entities.

"These state and local governments have a distinct tendency -- particularly in conservative parts of the rural West -- to want to maximize industrial development, maximize local communities' abilities to line their own pockets, with really little consideration to the long-term health of the land," Molvar emphasized.

Strategic goals listed in the plan include to "restore American prosperity" and "ensure national security through infrastructure and innovation."


get more stories like this via email