CHARLESTON, W. Va. – A spate of proposed gas pipeline projects has drawn sharp criticism from environmental advocates, who say the federal permitting agency has a built-in bias toward the industry.

Last week, nearly 70 people from almost a dozen states testified at what organizers called a People's Hearing, aimed at documenting bias and problems at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Delaware Riverkeeper Maya van Rossum said FERC almost always sides with the industry over citizens and the environment - in part, she argued, because more and larger pipelines add to the fees that fund the agency's budget.

"[Fees] increased the more pipeline projects that are approved and the greater the volume of gas that's approved to pass through them,” van Rossum said. "Throughout the 30 years that FERC has been funded in this way, it only rejected one pipeline project."

The industry and agency claim many of the proposed pipelines are being driven by pressure to get the large volume of new Marcellus and Utica gas to market. But Van Rossum said Congress should investigate.

By law, FERC permits pipelines that can demonstrate a public need. And it allows those companies to make a 14 percent guaranteed profit.

Like other agencies of its kind, FERC often relies on the specialized expertise of individuals from the industry. Van Rossum said over time, staff, consultants and even FERC commissioners move back and forth though what she called "a revolving door" between the regulators and the regulated. In her view, the situation results in a clear conflict of interest.

"In the case of one commissioner, he was reviewing and approving a pipeline project for the company where his wife worked,” van Rossum said.

Half a dozen separate pipeline projects are currently seeking approval to carry Marcellus and Utica gas to Virginia and the Carolinas, even despite one study that found gas supplies are adequate through 2030.

One problem, Van Rossum said, is that companies will sometimes justify the need for the pipeline by showing contracts to sell gas from one branch of the corporation to another.

"The customer for the pipeline company delivering the gas is actually - in total or in part - the pipeline company itself,” she said.

Van Rossum argued that FERC has become a "rogue agency" that has been "captured" by industry - an especially problematic relationship in light of the agency’s power to grant eminent domain. She believes Congress should rein it in.



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