D.C. Councilmembers Announce Support for Proposed Carbon Fee-and-Rebate Bill

After the Hurricanes, D.C. Councilmembers Announce Support for Proposed Carbon Fee-and-Rebate Bill

Advocates expect “Climate & Community Reinvestment Act of D.C.” to be introduced in D.C. Council this year

In the face of recent megastorms and other extreme climate events, an historic effort to address carbon pollution in DC gained new momentum on Wednesday, October 25 as three Councilmembers spoke in favor of the bill before a cheering crowd at the Wilson Building. Advocates for the proposed “Climate & Community Reinvestment Act of D.C.” say the campaign has new momentum heading into the fall and expect a bill to be introduced no later than December with the majority support of the Council.
Councilmember Robert White (At-Large) stated: “I’m glad to support a policy that will address climate change while maintaining robust economic growth in the District. Increasingly extreme climate events harm our businesses and threaten the health of our community. The proposal for a carbon rebate is a common-sense solution that would benefit everyone.”
The proposed “Climate and Community Reinvestment Act” would place a fee on carbon pollution in the District and rebate the large majority of revenue raised back to D.C. residents. According to an economic study by the Center for Climate Strategies, this policy would raise incomes for the majority of D.C. residents and result in stable economic growth with a steady boost in jobs. It would also reduce planet-warming carbon emissions 23 percent by 2032 for electricity, natural gas, and home-heating oil consumed in the District.
Councilmember David Grosso (At-Large) stated: “We are currently at a time when our federal government refuses to do anything to address or acknowledge the real threat that climate change poses. In their absence, D.C. must continue to lead and ensure a bright future for ourselves. Though we’ve made significant progress, there is still more work to be done. That is why the carbon fee proposal is so attractive—it provides another avenue through which we can further reduce our carbon footprint.”
Advocates for the proposed policy say the campaign has new momentum heading into the fall Earlier this month, Mary Cheh, head of the Committee on Transportation & the Environment, told a crowd of Ward 3 Democrats that the proposed carbon fee-and-rebate policy is a “fabulous concept” that will “have to have Council support and the mayor’s support – and [it] will.” The coalition expects a bill to be introduced no later than December with the majority support of the Council.
Reverend Kip Banks, Senior Pastor at East Washington Heights Baptist Church, stated: “For too long, climate polluters have not paid for the damage they’re doing to our communities and to our climate. I’m calling as a faith leader for polluters to take responsibility for the harm that their pollution is causing for ‘the least of these.’ This effort in DC can be a beacon to the rest of our country and a source of hope in our warming world.”
Mike Tidwell, Executive Director at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, stated: “The urgent nature of our climate crisis requires a significant, immediate response.  The movement for strong climate action in D.C. has never been more powerful, and now, with the support of several Councilmembers, we are ready to win. There’s no more time to wait. The time for a progressive and equitable carbon fee-and-rebate policy in D.C. is now.”
Judith Howell, SEIU 32BJ member and security officer in D.C., stated: “Fossil fuel pollution and haphazard development affects the citizens in each and every ward of our city. It is time for those who profit from fossil fuels to pay for the damage to our environment. But we must also ensure the policy would not put the burden on working families. We urge the Council and the Mayor to pass a strong climate rebate bill quickly, for the health and prosperity of our working-class families.”
The “Put A Price On It, D.C.” coalition is comprised of more than 40 climate and justice advocacy organizations, including more than a dozen local businesses.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 25, 2017
CONTACT: 
Denise Robbins, Communications Director, Chesapeake Climate Action Network; denise@chesapeakeclimate.org, 608-620-8819
Camila Thorndike, Carbon Pricing Coordinator, Chesapeake Climate Action Network; camila@chesapeakeclimate.org, 541-951-2619.

###

 

Time to Resist the Potomac Pipeline

Two weeks ago, more than 300 hundred activists joined hand-in-hand on a bridge spanning the Potomac River, uniting West Virginia and Maryland in solidarity against TransCanada’s proposed fracked-gas pipeline under the Potomac.
The power and beauty of this moment brought me to tears and filled me with hope. When we are united, we can fight Big Oil and Gas and truly WIN!
Now that we’ve joined hands, it’s time to roll up our sleeves and stop this pipeline once and for all!
Chesapeake Climate Action Network, alongside other members of the “No Potomac Pipeline” coalition, will be holding community meetings throughout Western Maryland and West Virginia over the next couple weeks. Join us to learn the next steps in stopping the Potomac Pipeline! (Keep reading for meeting location/date details.)
After our historic fracking ban victory, Maryland is once again being threatened by fracked gas. TransCanada — the same company behind the Keystone XL pipeline, and who spilled over 16 thousand gallons of crude oil on South Dakota farmland — is trying to build a pipeline that would transport fracked gas between Pennsylvania and West Virginia. They want to do this with the shortest, cheapest, and most dangerous route possible. The “Eastern Panhandle Expansion” project would cut underneath the Potomac River that serves as the source of drinking water for millions of residents in our state and beyond.
Already, the oil companies are suing landowners to force the pipeline through their farmland. This pipeline would threaten the health of our drinking water and well-being of our communities. It would also deepen our dependence on dirty fossil fuels and fracking for years to come. By trying to force a pipeline through Sleepy Creek, Back Creek, and underneath the Potomac, we know that they are putting our families, our water, and our climate at risk.
We’re not going to let this happen.
Join us at a community meeting to learn how to stop this pipeline. During the meetings, we will talk about ways that we can raise our voices in our local communities, reach out to our neighbors, and make sure that our local elected leaders hear loud and clear that Marylanders say NO to the Potomac Pipeline.
Join us to learn how you can become part of a pipeline-free future for West Virginia and Maryland! Follow the links below to RSVP.
 
Eastern Panhandle: Wednesday, November 1, 6:30 pm in Martinsburg WV
Frederick County: Monday, November 6, 6:30 pm in Frederick MD
Washington County: Wednesday, November 8, 6:30 pm in Hagerstown MD
Western Maryland: Sunday, November 12, 4:00 pm in Frostburg MD

This FERC commissioner rejected the agency's approval for the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley Pipelines

Late last Friday night, FERC issued certificates of approval for both the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley Pipelines. It was a cowardly, horrific move for the agency to dump this news on a Friday night — but we didn’t expect much better from an agency now run by Trump’s fossil-fueled appointees.
However, there is an interesting side to this story. One FERC commissioner, Cheryl LaFleur, dissented with the others on their decision. This is the first time she has dissented on a pipeline application in her many years of service — ever. By contrast, the two commissioners who voted in favor of the pipelines were appointed barely a couple months ago.
Read her dissent below, or download a PDF here, and share widely. Stay tuned — big actions to come.

Statement of Commissioner Cheryl A. Lafleur on Order Issuing Certificates and Granting Abandoment Authority under CP15-554 et al.

“With the increasing abundance of domestic natural gas, the Commission plays a key role in considering applications for the construction of natural gas infrastructure to support the delivery of this important fuel source. Under the Certificate Policy Statement, which sets forth the Commission’s approach to evaluating proposed projects under Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act,the Commission evaluates in each case whether the benefits of the project as proposed by the applicant outweigh adverse effects on existing shippers, other pipelines and their captive customers, landowners, and surrounding communities.1 For each pipeline I have considered during my time at the Commission, I have tried to carefully apply this standard, evaluating the facts in the record to determine whether, on balance, each individual project is in the public interest.2 Today, the Commission is issuing orders that authorize the development of the Mountain Valley Pipeline Project/Equitrans Expansion Project (MVP) and the Atlantic Coast Pipeline Project (ACP). For the reasons set forth herein, I cannot conclude that either of these projects as proposed is in the public interest, and thus, I respectfully dissent.
“Deciding whether a project is in the public interest requires a careful balancing of the need for the project and its environmental impacts. In the case of the ACP and MVP projects, my balancing determination was heavily influenced by similarities in their respective routes, impact, and timing. ACP and MVP are proposed to be built in the same region with certain segments located in close geographic proximity. Collectively, they represent approximately 900 miles of new gas pipeline infrastructure through West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina, and will deliver 3.44 Bcf/d of natural gas to the Southeast. The record demonstrates that these two large projects will have similar, and significant, environmental impacts on the region. Both the ACP and MVP cross hundreds of miles of karst terrain, thousands of waterbodies, and many agricultural, residential, and commercial areas. Furthermore, the projects traverse many important cultural, historic, and natural resources, including the Appalachian National Scenic Trail and the Blue Ridge Parkway. Both projects appear to be receiving gas from the same location, and both deliver gas that can reach some common destination markets. Moreover, these projects are being developed under similar development schedules, as further evidenced by the Commission acting on them concurrently today.3 Given these similarities and overlapping issues, I believe it is appropriate to balance the collective environmental impacts of these projects on the Appalachian region against the economic need for the projects. In so doing, I am not persuaded that both of these projects as proposed are in the public interest.
“I am particularly troubled by the approval of these projects because I believe that the records demonstrate that there may be alternative approaches that could provide significant environmental advantages over their construction as proposed. As part of its alternatives analysis, Commission staff requested that ACP evaluate an MVP Merged Systems Alternative that would serve the capacity of both projects.4 This alternative would largely follow the MVP route to deliver the capacity of both ACP and MVP in a single large diameter pipeline. Commission staff identifies significant environmental advantages of utilizing this alternative. For example, the MVP Merged Systems Alternative would be 173 miles shorter than the cumulative mileage of both projects individually. This alternative would also increase collocation with existing utility rights-of-way, avoid the Monongahela National Forest and the George Washington National Forest, reduce the number of crossings of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail and Blue Ridge Parkway, and reduce the amount of construction in karst topography. Commission staff eliminated this alternative from further consideration because it failed to meet the project’s objectives, in particular that it would “result in a significant delay to the delivery of the 3.44 Bcf/d of natural gas to the proposed customers of both ACP and MVP”5 due to the significant time for the planning and design that would be necessary to develop a revised project proposal.6
“Similarly, in the MVP FEIS, Commission staff evaluated a single pipeline alternative to the MVP project that would utilize the proposed ACP to serve MVP’s capacity needs.7 While this alternative was found to have certain environmental disadvantages, such as the need for additional compression to deliver the additional gas, the EIS acknowledges that this alternative would “essentially eliminate all environmental impacts on resources along the currently proposed MVP route.”8
“I recognize that the two alternatives described above were eliminated from further consideration because they were deemed not to meet each project’s specific stated goals. However, I believe that these alternatives demonstrate that the regional needs that these pipelines address may be met through alternative approaches that have significantly fewer environmental impacts.
 
1. Certification of New Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline Facilities, 88 FERC ¶ 61,227 (1999) (Certificate Policy Statement), order on clarification, 90 FERC ¶ 61,128, order on clarification, 92 FERC ¶ 61,094 (2000); 15 U.S.C. 717h (Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act
provides that no natural gas company shall transport natural gas or construct any facilities for such transportation without a certificate of public convenience and necessity.).
2. See Millenium Pipeline Company, L.L.C., 140 FERC ¶ 61,045 (2012) (LaFleur, Comm’r, dissenting)
3. ACP and MVP filed their applications for approval pursuant to section7(c) of the Natural Gas Act on September 18, 2015 and
October 23, 2015, respectively.
4. ACP Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) at 3-6 – 3-9.
5. Id. at 3-9.
6. Staff also found that this alternative would likely limit the ability to provide additional gas to the projects’ customers, another of the stated goals for the original proposal. Id.
7 MVP FEIS at 3-14.
8 Id

Citizens and community groups reject federal commission rubber-stamp on Mountain Valley Pipeline

Hundreds of landowners, businesses, faith leaders and community organizations who have spent three years fighting the proposed fracked-gas Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) are vowing to continue pressing federal, state, and local officials to reject the project, notwithstanding a certificate issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission late Friday.
The agency has utterly failed to account for the harmful impacts to water resources, private property, local economies and the climate from the proposed pipeline, the groups say. In fact, FERC has yet to competently assess whether the pipeline is even needed.
“This project is far from a done deal. With the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and other agency permitting still necessary, we’ve now begun a new phase of our challenge in protecting our waters, farms and businesses, and our future,” said Roanoke County resident Roberta Bondurant of POWHR, a bi-state coalition of community groups along the path of the proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline.
The pipeline, proposed by a consortium of natural gas companies led by Equitrans, would run 300 miles from Wetzel County, West Virginia, through Southwest Virginia and connect with the existing Transco line in Pittsylvania County. It would cross streams, wetlands and other water bodies more than 1,000 times in the two states, many of those in extremely  steep mountain terrain susceptible to earthquakes and landslides.
The project still requires numerous local, state and federal sign-offs. Importantly, both Virginia DEQ and West Virginia DEP must still certify that the project would not harm or degrade water resources. West Virginia issued its certification earlier this year, but recently asked the court to remand the permit back to the state for further consideration after a challenge brought by Appalachian Mountain Advocates on behalf of several community groups. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality is now reviewing tens of thousands of public comments on its draft water quality certificate.  
The U.S. Forest Service, the Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Virginia Marine Resources Commission, and state and local health and zoning departments are among the other government entities that still must also weigh in.
In addition, landowners along the proposed pipeline route have filed two lawsuits against FERC challenging the constitutionality of the use of eminent domain — the taking of private land — by a private company for private gain. (See more background in this fact sheet.)  Attorneys have requested that all activity on the project be suspended until those pivotal questions are resolved.
“We cannot trust FERC to act in our best interests, so we continue to urge state leaders to exercise their right to thoroughly scrutinize this project,” said Lara Mack, Virginia field organizer with Appalachian Voices.  “Scientists have repeatedly warned that impacts to our waters and other natural resources will be permanent. If the MVP is built, communities in its path will suffer the consequences for generations,” said Mack.
“We are living in a climate emergency. In just the past several weeks we’ve seen the tragic consequences of a warmer world, from devastating hurricanes to raging wildfires. Now is the time to move to renewable energy, not build new pipelines that would lock us into climate-warming infrastructure for generations to come,” said Anne Havemann, General Counsel at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network.
“Here along the proposed path of Mountain Valley Pipeline in Giles County, we’ve had yet another earthquake,” said Russell Chisholm, an Army veteran of Desert Storm. “Mountain Valley Pipeline, a newly formed LLC with no experience building a line this massive, expects us to believe they can safely blast, trench and build though an active seismic zone in Giles. Communities are right to be angry that FERC will allow them to do it on the backs of law abiding, tax-paying residents, many of whom are elderly, served in our armed forces, or worked as public servants in our schools, police and fire departments. It would be a bitter injustice to have these citizens displaced–either literally or effectively– by eminent domain for private gain.”
“Localities face the prospect of whole communities in water crises, disasters that no amount of bonding could compensate,” said Bondurant. “Permitting MVP would be antithetical to our region that boasts clean air, pristine waters, outdoor adventure, scenic byways, fertile farming, and economies of health care, education and burgeoning breweries and distilleries dependent on clean water. That would be a shameful legacy for Governor McAuliffe.”    
“This project poses unprecedented economic and environmental threats,” Chisholm said. “We encourage all Virginians to stand with us and call on Governor McAuliffe and his Department of Environmental Quality to reject this ill-conceived and unneeded project.”

###

 
Protect Our Water, Heritage, Rights (POWHR) is a member of Virginia Organizing, a 501(c)3, with member nonprofit and citizen groups spanning from Franklin County, Virginia through Greenbrier and Lewis Counties, West Virginia. For more information on our programs and initiatives, or on how to donate please go to www.powhr.org.
 

WV & MD Unite to Oppose Potomac Pipeline in Historic “Hands Across The Potomac” Event

Largest Action To-Date Against Eastern Panhandle Expansion Included Songs, Flower Drop  

SHARPSBURG, MD- On Saturday, October 14, more than 300 concerned West Virginia and Maryland residents joined hands over a key Potomac River bridge to send a powerful message urging Governor Hogan stop TransCanada from building a fracked-gas pipeline underneath the treasured river. Click here for a photo album on Flickr and here for videos on Twitter.
The group of elected leaders, environmental and social justice advocates, landowners and concerned citizens stood hand-in hand to span the James Rumsey Bridge over the Potomac River in Western Maryland. By connecting the Maryland side of the river to West Virginia, the group showed that they stand as a united front in protesting this pipeline.
Patricia Kesecker, West Virginia landowner who is currently being sued by Mountaineer Gas, said: “when you have put your blood, sweat and tears into the land for almost 50 years and someone can come and take it against your wishes, that is heartbreaking.  When the judge granted Mountaineer Gas the right to our property, she not only robbed us, but she also robbed our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of their heritage.”
The pipeline is being proposed by TransCanada, the company infamous for pushing the Keystone XL Pipeline, and Mountaineer Gas. It would ship fracked gas from Pennsylvania to West Virginia, passing through the town of Hancock, Maryland and underneath the Potomac River. This pipeline would not benefit Marylanders in any way, yet it would pose a grave threat to their drinking water and deepen dependence on dirty fossil fuels for years to come.
Brooke Harper, Maryland & DC Policy Director at the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said: “This is my home. I’ve worked relentlessly for years to protect my community from the dangers of fracking. Now, TransCanada wants to threaten us yet again with this fracked-gas pipeline, which would increase our dependence on fossil fuels and endanger our water. Governor Hogan needs to say no.”
Over the past few months, a growing coalition of legislators, environmental activists. and concerned landowners has been speaking out against the pipeline. From paddling against the pipeline, to a months-long encampment in the spirit of Standing Rock, the coalition has built a massive movement and drawn national attention to the harms that this project could cause.
Mary Mattlage, spokesperson for Eastern Panhandle Protectors, said: “In the light of the recent and unprecedented storms, wildfires, and other natural disasters affecting our planet, we should not be supporting projects such as the Eastern Panhandle Expansion and Potomac pipeline which we know will contribute to greenhouse gas emissions and threaten the water supply for millions of people.”
Josh Tulkin, Director of the Sierra Club Maryland Chapter, said: “Maryland understood that fracking posed a threat to our air, water, and the natural spaces that we hold dear. This proposed pipeline poses the same threat.” said Josh Tulkin, Director of the Maryland Sierra Club. If Governor Hogan is serious about protecting environmental and human health from the dangers of fracking, he will complete the fracking ban by rejecting this pipeline.”
Brent Walls, Upper Potomac Riverkeeper, said: “All pipeline projects have an inherent risk to water quality, but the Potomac Pipeline will cross streams and go through several miles of sensitive karst geology; which magnifies the risks of contaminating the Potomac River and the source of drinking water for millions of people.”
Organizations participating in the action included the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Eastern Panhandle Protectors, Potomac Riverkeepers, Waterkeepers Chesapeake, and the Sierra Club MD Chapter.

CONTACT:
Denise Robbins; Chesapeake Climate Action Network; denise@chesapeakeclimate.org; 608-620-8819
Brooke Harper; Chesapeake Climate Action Network; brooke@chesapeakeclimate.org; 301-992-6875;
Brent Walls; Upper Potomac Riverkeeper; Brent@upperpotomacriverkeeper.org; 443-480-8970

###

Trump's Clean Power Plan Repeal is Shameful. But it Won't Stop Renewable Energy or Local Climate Action.

Statement by Mike Tidwell, Executive Director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, in response to the Trump Administration’s repeal of the Clean Power Plan:

The decision of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to repeal the Clean Power Plan is another shocking move by the Trump Administration to deny climate change at the expense of residents across the Maryland, Virginia and DC region. Just after our country’s most devastating hurricane season tore through national shores, the last thing we need is to incentivize dirty climate-warming coal. Today’s decision further highlights the need of states like Maryland, Virginia and DC to push harder for clean energy while moving away from dirty fossil fuels. Pruitt’s EPA can’t stop the incredible growth of renewable energy or the rising grassroots resistance to Trump’s dirty energy agenda. Local- and state-based action has never been more important.

 
CONTACT:
Denise Robbins, Communications Director, 608-620-8819, denise@chesapeakeclimate.org
Mike Tidwell, Executive Director, 240-460-5838, mtidwell@chesapeakeclimate.org

###

Photo at the top from Flickr user Becker1999

Nineteen Virginians Arrested In Richmond to Protest Gov. McAuliffe’s Fracked-Gas Pipelines during Final Day of “People’s Pipeline Protest” Statewide

After devastating hurricanes, two days of prayer vigils and protests in Richmond, Roanoke, Harrisonburg, Woodbridge, Virginia Beach, Glen Allen and Abingdon culminated on Thursday September 14 with a peaceful sit-in in Richmond. The first-of-its-kind statewide protest connected extreme weather with fossil fuel policies. Protesters showed compassion for storm victims and growing opposition to the Atlantic Coast Pipeline and Mountain Valley Pipeline in call for Virginia Governor to reject the pipelines.

RICHMOND, Virginia– On September 14, hundreds of citizens across Virginia gathered for the final day of the “People’s Pipeline Protest,” two days of action at all seven of Governor Terry McAuliffe’s controversial Department of Environmental Quality offices. During the protest in Richmond, activists engaged in a peaceful sit-in at the Richmond DEQ office, effectively blocking the office entrance for over an hour, and resulting in 19 arrests.

Those arrested today included landowners, physicians and faith leaders opposed to the pipeline. Governor McAuliffe plans to make a final decision on water permits for the controversial pipelines this autumn. He has the full legal authority, under the Clean Water Act, to stop them based on the massive impact the pipelines would likely have on drinking water and rivers and wetlands across 1000 miles of their proposed pathways. Protesters today asked the Governor to deny the water permits sought by Dominion Energy and other energy companies. The sit-in arrestees were released by Richmond city police after receiving misdemeanor tresspassing charges.

The protests and vigils this week aimed to honor the victims of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma while protesting the pro-fracking and pro-pipelines policies of Governor Terry McAuliffe that make climate change worse. Opponents of two controversial gas pipelines called the events the most ambitious and creative environmental protests ever organized in Virginia’s history.

Harrison Wallace, Virginia Policy Coordinator for CCAN Action Fund, said, “​Our human rights to clean air, clean water, and a livable climate are threatened by the dangerous Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley pipelines for fracked gas. Today, sat on the frontlines of the Richmond DEQ offer to amplify the pleas of frontline Virginians who are urging Governor McAuliffe to do the right thing.”

Russell Chisholm, Vice-Coordinator of Preserve Giles County along the path of the Mountain Valley Pipeline, and US Army Veteran of Desert Storm, said: “Let DEQ Director David Paylor’s legacy be one of protecting Virginia’s water for generations, especially in vulnerable rural areas like Giles County where we rely on springs and wells. The thousands of people served by the Roanoke river depend on McAuliffe and the DEQ to protect their drinking water. It’s time to reject these pipelines once and for all.”

The seven DEQ offices run from NoVA to Virginia Beach and from the Tennessee border to Harrisonburg. Focused on stopping the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley Pipelines, these historic protests took place simultaneously on September 13 and 14 as the nation recovers from massive hurricanes and while McAuliffe contemplates a final decision on whether to approve the destructive fossil fuel pipelines.

Faith leaders, students, and others are asking the Governor to consider the growing harm of hurricanes and accelerating  climate change — and to reject the specific water permits needed by pipeline companies, including Dominion Energy. These harmful pipelines for fracked gas would cause the destruction of entire mountain ridgetops, threaten citizens’ property rights, and harm valuable drinking water resources — in addition to exacerbating climate change. The pipelines would trigger new greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to building 46 new coal-fired power plants in Virginia.

April Moore, member of Climate Action Alliance of the Valley, said: “It is moving to me to see many people of different faith traditions demonstrating that the stewardship of our water—on which all life depends—is a sacred duty. We cannot let Dominion Power and other purveyors of dirty fossil fuels rob us of our birthright: clean water for all. Especially when renewable energy sources can provide us with the energy we need now, while also providing an abundance of good jobs.”

Amanda Tandy of 350 Loudoun, said, “These pipelines would harm us all. In addition to the global climate change the pipelines would accelerate, Northern Virginians would be impacted by loss of recreation areas, impacts to the Appalachian Trail, a reduction in water and air quality and our tax dollars going towards any disasters, such as blowouts or leaks, that may occur over the hundreds of miles of these pipelines. Virginians deserve better governance than their executive and his agencies putting the interests of corporate polluters over the interests of the living, taxpaying, voting citizens. New York, West Virginia and Minnesota have pushed back against pipeline construction through their states. Virginia, through its DEQ, needs to do the same.”

Kim Williams, operator of the Norfolk Catholic Worker House, said: “The devastating storms of the past two weeks in Houston and in Florida are a painful reality check. Climate change is now and climate change is here. We need to do everything we can to move immediately off of fossil fuels and to move our energy source to renewables. The climate has changed. Now, the thinking of our Governor and the officials at the DEQ needs to change as well. They need to think beyond the next election cycle. They need to think long-term about what these pipelines would do to cause irrevocable harm to our planet.”

Jason Von Kundra, local Washington County farmer and Virginia Organizing member, said: “These pipelines threaten our our natural resources and health. As farmers, we understand the importance of using the land responsibly. For the sake our next generations, we call on Governor McAuliffe to do the right thing.”

Twenty-five groups endorsed the “People’s Pipeline Protest,” including the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, 350 Loudon, Divest RVA, RVA Interfaith Climate Justice League, Preserve Franklin, Norfolk Catholic Workers, Beyond Extreme Energy, Fort Valley Voices for Action, 350 Central Virginia, Indivisible Midlothian, Friends of Buckingham, Yogaville Environmental Solutions, Interfaith Power & Light, Virginia River Healers , 350 Fairfax, Friends of Augusta, Tidewater Pax Christi Community, C-Ville Rising, Preserve Giles County, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, Oil Change International, Wild Virginia, Virginia Organizing, Friends of Nelson, and the Interspiritual Empowerment Project.

###

CONTACTS:
Denise Robbins, CCAN Action Fund, denise@chesapeakeclimate.org, 608-620-8819;
April Moore, Climate Action Alliance of the Valley, april@shentel.net, 540-333-5497;
Brian Johns, Virginia Organizing, bjohns@virginia-organizing.org, 276-619-1920;

Climate & Faith Groups Announce Bold New Clean Energy Jobs Campaign in MD

Faith, Community and Climate Leaders Announce Campaign To Double Wind and Solar Energy in Maryland

Baltimore, MD –On Wednesday, September 13, at 10:00 a.m. at the Episcopal Diocesan Center, 4 East University Parkway in Baltimore City, Maryland faith, community and climate leaders will announce a new campaign to require that 50 percent of Maryland’s electricity come from renewable sources by 2030. The campaign will unveil a legislative proposal that calls for expanding and strengthening Maryland’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), which requires utilities to buy a certain percentage of renewable energy each year, from the current target of 25% by 2020. The campaign will also call for a substantial investment in training for good clean energy jobs with a livable wage and assistance for minority and women owned businesses working in this field.

Campaign leaders will lift up the more than 300 faith, community, labor, business, climate and environmental groups from across Maryland that have already endorsed this proposal. The Campaign also plans to have hundreds of additional groups endorse in the next few months and will call on Maryland groups to join by going to www.cleanenergyjobs.org/sign.

In addition to being endorsed by the Ecumenical Leaders Group of Maryland and many Maryland faith groups, the Campaign is endorsed by the Maryland State Conference of NAACP Branches and is a priority campaign for the Maryland Climate Coalition, whose groups include the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, the Maryland League of Conservation Voters, Interfaith Power and Light (DC, MD, NoVA), SEIU 1199, and the Maryland Environmental Health Network.

Quotes from Maryland Leaders:

“We call on the Maryland General Assembly to double our goals for renewable energy during the 2018 Session so we can save lives and transition our energy sector away from harmful fossil fuels and toward a clean energy economy,” said Public Health Advocate Vincent DeMarco, who recently formed a new nonprofit, the Maryland Clean Energy Jobs Initiative, Inc., whose goal is to elevate climate issues in the electoral process. “There is no time to waste, so our organization will put all we have into making renewable energy and clean energy jobs one of the top issues in the 2018 state elections.”

“As the federal government moves backwards on climate, Maryland is moving forward,” said Karla Raettig, Executive Director of Maryland League of Conservation Voters. “We believe that committing to a 50% RPS is a reachable and meaningful stepping stone to eventually achieving 100% clean energy in Maryland.”

“The Maryland faith community strongly supports the goal of making sure that by 2030, 50 percent of Maryland’s electrical energy is renewable,” said Rev. Mary Gaut, Chair of the Maryland Ecumenical Leaders Group. “We have a moral imperative to enact this social justice proposal that will help save us from the ravages of climate change and ensure clean energy jobs for our people.”

“The NAACP is committed to making the Maryland Clean Energy Jobs Campaign one of their top priorities,” said Gerald Stansbury, President of the Maryland State Conference of the NAACP “We know that all Marylanders, particularly disadvantaged communities, will benefit from from protecting our climate and ensuring good quality jobs.”

Contact: Vinny DeMarco, Founder, MD Clean Energy Jobs Initiative, demarco@mdinitiative.org, (410) 591-9162
Brooke Harper, MD & DC Policy Director, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, brooke@chesapeakeclimate.org, (301) 992-6875

Groups Deliver over 10,000 Public Comments to DEQ on Fracked Gas Pipelines

RICHMOND, Virginia – Experts, landowners, and environmental groups from across the Commonwealth gathered Tuesday at Virginia’s Department of Environmental Quality headquarters in Richmond to deliver thousands of public comments related to DEQ’s 401 water certification process.
The comments, collected by the Sierra Club, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Appalachian Voices, Bold Alliance, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, and Oil Change International urged the DEQ to do more in order to meet the agency’s obligations to protect Virginia’s water sources from these pipelines.
“DEQ’s draft Certification is legally and scientifically indefensible,” David Sligh, former Senior Engineer at Virginia’s DEQ, said. “The processes DEQ has conducted have been unfair and inadequate to satisfy the Governor’s promises of thorough and transparent regulatory reviews. The State Water Control Board cannot certify these projects unless it can assure that all state water quality standards will be met. A rigorous scientific analysis would prove such a conclusion is impossible.”
The public comments urge Governor McAuliffe and DEQ Director David Paylor to direct the DEQ to extend the public comment period for these projects and to conduct site-specific reviews and permits for each waterway crossed by both of these pipelines. The DEQ has originally announced to the public that it would undergo site-specific reviews for these pipelines in April, but announced in June that they that the agency would instead opt to rely on the Army Corps of Engineers’ blanket permitting process.
“The Corps’ process is woefully inadequate to protect our water,” Bill Limpert, a property owner in Bath County whose property would be traversed by the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, said. “We looked at the Corps’ map of our property and we have two streams that are not even present on that map. How are they supposed to protect our waterways if they don’t even know where they are?”

###

CONTACTS
Jamshid Bakhtiari, Chesapeake Climate Action Network
jamshid@chesapeakeclimate.org, (757) 386-8107
Kirk Bowers, Sierra Club Virginia Chapter
kirk.bowers@sierraclub.org, (434) 296-8673
 

McAuliffe’s Opposition to Offshore Drilling Should Lead to Him Rejecting Fracked-gas Pipelines

After years of staunch support for offshore oil drilling off the coast of Virginia, Governor Terry McAuliffe today for the first time declared his opposition to this dangerous practice. The Governor suggested that weak environmental regulation and enforcement under Donald Trump’s federal agencies drove his decision to finally oppose the practice.

Statement from CCAN’s Virginia Policy Coordinator Harrison Wallace:

Citizens across Virginia were relieved today to hear Governor McAuliffe finally opposes the dangerous practice of offshore drilling off the coast of Virginia. While this decision was long overdue, it is nonetheless the responsible course to protect Virginia’s environment and coastal economy. We applaud the governor on this change of policy.

However, Governor McAuliffe still staunchly supports two proposed massive pipelines for fracked gas across Virginia: the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley pipelines. If the governor applied the same concerns over weak Trump administration enforcement to these pipelines, he would also declare his opposition. The fact is these controversial pipelines will be built and regulated with oversight from Trump’s Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency, Trump’s Department of Energy, and Trump’s U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

If federal agencies under Trump can’t be trusted to keep Virginians safe from offshore drilling, they certainly can’t be trusted to keep Virginia’s water, environment, farmland, and economy safe from fracked-gas pipelines. Governor McAuliffe should reject these pipelines today.

###

CONTACT: Denise Robbins, Communications Director, denise@chesapeakeclimate.org, 608-620-8819;
Harrison Wallace, Virginia Policy Coordinator, harrison@chesapeakeclimate.org, 804-305-1472