CHARLESTON, W.Va. – Clean water groups say getting a single, general permit to cover work at hundreds of separate sites by gas pipeline companies is an abuse of the permitting process.

A coalition of six citizen and conservation groups is asking federal courts to stop the Atlantic Coast Pipeline from using one, nationwide permit for its work at all water crossings.

The issue has already stalled some work on the Mountain Valley Pipeline.

Cindy Rank, a longtime advocate with the West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, says this type of general permit is intended for small projects, like building a single road over a single creek.

"However, with the giant pipelines, we're crossing hundreds and hundreds of these small headwater streams with a nationwide permit, without looking at the overall impact on watersheds," she points out.

The pipeline companies argue it would be too much red tape to get separate permits for each water crossing.

Rank says mountaintop removal mines did the same thing until stopped by the courts. She says the mines claimed a single permit allowed for disposal of excess rock in hundreds of valley fills.

Rank says demanding these companies adhere to the process of getting individual permits is vitally important, because it's difficult – maybe even impossible – to build 42-inch natural gas pipelines through the raw Appalachian Mountains without causing massive damage.

"These pipelines are major construction projects that are impacting hundreds of people,” she stresses. “The whole hillside washes down, and across the road and into the streams – some of which are trout streams, which will be permanently impacted."

The Mountain Valley Pipeline had argued that the national permit allowed it to cross under the Greenbrier, Elk and Gauley rivers.

But the state Department of Environmental Protection said to use the permit, the water crossing work had to be finished in 72 hours, which Rank calls a "ludicrous expectation."

Late last month, a federal court decided the general permit does not cover the river crossings.


get more stories like this via email

The Port of New York and New Jersey is receiving funding to cut emissions. It's part of the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Ports Program.

Of the $3 billion national grant, the port will get more than $402 million to monitor emissions and transition equipment to electric power.

Jordan Stutt, CALSTART's northeast region senior director, said zero-emission vehicles can help port operations in many ways.

"So, we're going to see everything from electric forklifts and drayage trucks," said Stutt, "to shore power systems - to help major ships use electricity at ports, instead of burning diesel while they idle there for days."

Particulate emissions have been steadily declining at the port, but carbon emissions are rising.

In 2019, the port of New York and New Jersey was one of the highest emitting ports nationwide, with one million tons of carbon being released from it.

Cutting port emissions will have widespread benefits for nearby communities. Research shows municipalities near ports often face poor air quality and the health impacts of it.

Stutt noted that this $3 billion is going to existing technologies for ports to reduce emissions. He said the money's other uses will help bolster ports' climate-friendly futures.

"Through these investments, we will gather really critical data to help us better understand the benefits of this transition," said Stutt. "It'll help build out the workforce to support deployment and maintenance of all this equipment, and it'll help encourage increased manufacturing of zero-emission equipment."

He added that these will help lower costs for the next generation of zero-emission vehicles.

By already having these vehicles and the equipment, it will ensure lower costs in the future - meaning the government funds won't be as necessary to make up the cost differential.

From cow waste to clean energy, Michigan will soon have a couple of new state-backed digesters to get the job done.

Last Tuesday, the Michigan Strategic Fund approved Freehold Energy RNG to pursue a tax-exempt bond for its project.

The company plans to build facilities in St. Joseph and Muskegon counties to produce renewable natural gas from dairy waste.

The estimated cost for the project is between $75 to $80 million of local investment. Freehold's Principal Project Developer CW Alexander shared the environmental benefits of the initiative.

"It equates to about 4.3 million gallons of gasoline equivalent per year, which equates to about 90,000 metric tons of CO2 reduction," said Alexander, "or about equivalent of 20,000 cars removed off the road."

Construction is expected to begin next year - with the facilities becoming operational in 2026.

Digesters can range from small systems for single farms to large facilities handling waste from thousands of cows - producing biogas and nutrient-rich fertilizers as byproducts.

Alexander highlighted additional benefits, such as odor reduction around farms. He also said his company plans to repurpose excess sand used by farmers for cow bedding.

"With the benefit of that is it improves agricultural land quality, because you're not moving sand onto the fields," said Alexander. "It's now just the manure as fertilizer, once processed, is going onto the fields. So that's a pretty significant benefit to the land quality over the long term."

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's MI Healthy Climate Plan aims for Michigan to achieve 100% clean energy by 2040, and carbon neutrality by 2050.






get more stories like this via email

Nationwide, 76% of Trump voters and 86% of all voters oppose attempts to weaken the Environmental Protection Agency, according to a new poll commissioned by the Environmental Protection Network.

President-elect Donald Trump last month announced former New York Congressman Lee Zeldin as his pick to run the EPA.

Matt George, partner and head of research for the firm Seven Letter, said the data show the vast majority of voters want legislation such as the Clean Air Act to remain in place, and want strengthened regulations to curb pollution.

"The majority of voters really do recognize the value of regulations that keep our air and water clean and keep us healthy," George reported. "They want to maintain those regulations."

The poll also found opposition to weakening the EPA is higher among Latino, suburban and independent voters who shifted Republican in this year's presidential election. Critics of a second Trump administration said the president-elect wants to dismantle the EPA by significantly cutting staff and funding. According to the League of Conservation Voters, during his time in office, Zeldin repeatedly voted against clean-water and clean-air legislation.

A recent Environmental Protection Network report found widespread benefits from agency regulations, showing rules passed during the last four years will save more than 200,000 lives through 2050, prevent more than 100 million asthma attacks, and deliver more than $250 billion in net public health gains each year.

George added support for the EPA has increased since 2017.

"We see that those numbers have only gotten better in 2024, in this year where we have one percentage point gain in 'strengthened' or 'expanded,' but we see that the numbers for 'weakened' or 'eliminated' have been cut effectively in half," George explained.

Without knowing who Trump had named as EPA administrator, almost two-thirds of voters who supported Trump in the election expressed concern his EPA pick would put the interests of corporations ahead of protecting clean water, clean air and public health. Last week the agency announced it will likely allow the state of California permission to ban the sales of new gas-powered cars and trucks by 2035.


get more stories like this via email