After a federal appeals court this week denied a request from a group of Virginia landowners to stop construction of the Mountain Valley Pipeline on their land under eminent domain, communities near the pipeline say the project's scale raises serious concerns about safety and landslide risk.

The more than 300-mile natural gas pipeline would run through several Virginia and West Virginia counties.

Activist and Roanoke County resident Ben James said he's already witnessed forests destroyed and spoken with residents who say their water has been contaminated.

"It's ruined people's water supplies," said James. "It certainly changes the landscape just by the nature of it being built. It's caused a lot of problems in people's watersheds and from pollution and just disrupting the water systems."

The pipeline is several years behind schedule and massively over budget. In a report, Equitrans Midstream, the company behind the pipeline, said it won't be in operation until next year.

Total project costs are now expected to exceed $7 billion. Supporters of the pipeline argue it will reduce energy costs and increase reliability.

After a slew of permitting challenges and legal hurdles, this year the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the project's construction.

James said residents remain concerned about pipeline explosions, which pose a serious threat.

"No one in politics seems to be doing anything about it at this point," said James. "But there's a lot of people who live here and a lot of people from other areas that care about the environment and care about the damage this is doing to communities."

West Virginia Lawmakers, including U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin - D-WV, and U.S. Sen. Shelley Capito - R-WV, have championed the restart of the pipeline's construction.

In West Virginia, the MVP's route runs through Braxton, Doddridge, Fayette, Greenbrier, Harrison, Lewis, Monroe, Nicholas, Summers, Webster and Wetzel counties.





get more stories like this via email

Coastal tribes in the Northwest are on the front lines of the changing climate but face barriers to responding to its effects.

A new report collected testimony directly from tribal members to hear what their biggest hurdles are. Sea level rise is already pushing some tribes from the coast of Washington.

Meade Krosby, senior scientist in the Climate Impacts Group at the University of Washington, one of the organizations behind the report, said tribes have been at the forefront of adapting to climate change but their biggest barriers stem from accessing funds to address the scale of the issue.

"The tribes are having to navigate really a maze of different pots of money that are spread out across different agencies and departments and units within federal government agencies," Krosby explained. "They're having to chase down these funds."

The report was compiled with input from listening sessions with members from 13 tribal nations on the Washington and Oregon coasts. It identified five key barriers to greater adaptation to climate change, including funding, staffing and technical expertise.

Funds from the Inflation Reduction Act, the 2022 federal climate action law, could help speed up tribes' responses. The Tribal Coastal Resilience program associated with the University of Washington recently received $3.4 million for coastal readiness projects.

Amelia Marchand, senior tribal climate resilience liaison for the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, also worked on the report.

"We're hoping that those funding opportunities will be less of a burden, a little bit more supportive to the flexible and timely needs that tribes have," Marchand noted.

Even with the funding, Marchand stressed climate change is accelerating, worsening the conditions for tribes.

"Swift action is really needed to ramp up the response and to have it occur in a manner that's coordinated and respectful of tribal sovereignty, tribal self-determination and tribal rights," Marchand emphasized.



get more stories like this via email

A rural Mississippi community is fighting to protect the health of some Cherokee residents threatened by industrial pollution.

Barbara Weckesser, treasurer of the group Cherokee Concerned Citizens, and some of her neighbors formed the group in 2013 to address noise, dust and odor stemming from the Bollinger shipyard and Chevron refinery, just a few miles from the Gulf of Mexico community.

Weckesser explained about 120 families there have experienced high pollution levels, which she believes has created health issues, including elevated levels of heavy metals in children.

"We have lost 30 residents in the last six years, none from COVID," Weckesser pointed out. "They've either been heart or lung, or cancer deaths. We currently have about eight to nine active cases, most of them within the 40-60 age range."

Weckesser contended they have not received adequate responses from state agencies to their multiple complaints about the problem but noted some progress has been made. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency installed an air monitoring system and provided grant funding to the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality to follow through with the results.

Jennifer Crosslin, president of the group, said they are advocating for the local government to buy out the Cherokee Forest subdivision. She added the national organization "Buy In" has applied for federal funding on their behalf to implement relocation and restoration plans.

"We would like for anyone in Cherokee Forest Subdivision who wants to be relocated, to be relocated," Crosslin emphasized. "And for their property to be turned into a buffer zone that can protect nearby residents from industrial pollution and flooding, and improve the climate resiliency for the rest of the city."

The National Coastal Resilience Fund provided a $300,000 grant from the Inflation Reduction Act for community-led habitat restoration planning to the "Buy-In" organization for Mississippi. The grant aims to improve wetland habitat in high-risk residential neighborhoods in Pascagoula.

This story is based on original reporting by Lisa Abelar for the Mississippi Free Press.

Washington D.C. residents are pushing back on a plan to build out existing fossil fuel infrastructure.

Washington Gas' $12 billion Project Pipes plan called for upgrading existing infrastructure throughout the nation's capital despite the district's 2045 carbon neutrality goals. Environmentalists worry this will waste ratepayer's money and not address ongoing gas leaks.

Naomi Cohen-Shields, D.C. campaign manager for the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said what Washington Gas is doing follows a wider national trend.

"We are seeing things like accelerated pipe replacement programs, that's what Project Pipes is," Cohen-Shields explained. "There are examples of that popping up across the country. Again, it's part of a playbook. Things like building out new gas plants like Dominion is trying to do or new pipelines, again part of the playbook."

Virginia's Dominion Energy is moving forward with a natural gas plant in Chesterfield despite residents' objections and state climate goals. In a statement, Washington Gas said it supports the District's climate goals and believes residents will be best served by a fuel-neutral approach to decarbonization. The company is pledging to help D.C. policymakers achieve the 2030 climate goals.

Washington Gas' parent company, Alta Gas, faced similar community resistance.

Cheryl Maloney, member of the Mi'kmaq Nation in Nova Scotia and other residents pushed back when the company applied to build up its methane gas infrastructure without much notice. She said Washington Gas' aged company charter should not be considered untouchable.

"They have a 1800-and-something charter that giving them rights to sell oil and gas in perpetuity, so everyone thinks they have this everlasting right," Maloney emphasized. "But it doesn't consider, do the people that hold the money have to spend it on the oil and gas infrastructure?"

The public certainly should not have to, Maloney argued, and she feels ratepayers should have more say in what utility companies invest in. She contended Washington Gas' plan is not a great deal for ratepayers who lose out on alternative clean energy options. New methane gas pipes usually last 40 to 45 years, but she added they will have shortened life spans due to the district's climate goals.