Author: 350NH

Categories
Action

Comment before Dec. 1st on EPA’s Clean Power Plan!

Carbon has been in the news a lot lately, as climate change becomes more prevalent in policy discussion and news outlets. Carbon dioxide produced by humans is the primary driver of climate change. Scientists have determined that 350 parts per million is the maximum safe level of carbon in the atmosphere, if we wish to avoid a run-away climate catastrophe. Today that ratio stands at over 400 parts per million. The importance of regulating carbon emissions cannot be stressed enough.

coal-fired-power-plant-499908_1280

The EPA’s Clean Power Plan is a major move toward regulating carbon emissions from power plants. This is a vital step as other attempts to regulate carbon from stationary sources through litigation have ended with the Supreme Court affirming the responsibility of the EPA to regulate carbon under the Clean Air Act. The rule-making in progress is critical for the EPA to begin to address carbon emissions from power plants in the near term, and any future regulation of other permanent sources.

This process has been working for some time and the new rules are moving toward the end of their extended public comment period December 1. There is still time to make your voice heard! The more the EPA hears from the public in support of carbon regulations the better. The plan can be found here.

Instructions for posting comments and the necessary links are here.

For general, if not expert, questions about this, feel free to contact Chris Whiteman at chris.a.whiteman@gmail.com.

Categories
Action

The Glorious People’s Climate March!

PCM devil

What a glorious day it was! Blocks and blocks of passionate climate activists, social justice activists, seasoned marchers, first-time marchers – all lining up together to demonstrate our demand that world leaders address climate change with forceful, immediate actions.(Thanks to Megan Seidell for these photos of some of the great art in the March!)Folks boarded charter buses in Concord, Nashua, and Portsmouth, NH, at about 5:30 a.m., ready for the 5-hour trip to New York City. As we arrived in the city, the 30 or more blocks designated for people to line up for the March were already filled with a lively and diverse mass of people from all over the country and beyond. Canada was well-represented. The March started at 11:30, but the farthest from the starting point didn’t start moving for more than 2 hours after that – all due to the incredible size of the group!

At 12:58, we all watched for a signal to indicate the start of a 2-minute period of silence, in memory of those who have suffered from the ravages of climate change and the fossil fuel industries. As those in front of us raised their hands, we raised ours and fell silent. Then, at 1:00 p.m. a tremendous wave of sound – yells, horns, bells, whistles, claps – swept from the beginning of the march to the end. We were sounding the alarm about Climate Change!

PCM fish

This gigantic action took months of planning by many people in many organizations.

heck out the videos of the People’s Climate March, and look at the list of groups that were involved, at Peoplesclimate.org. 350 New Hampshire is very grateful to 350.org for the substantial financial assistance that allowed us to lower the cost of bus tickets for the riders. We are also thankful to

Sierra Club Maine, for generously subsidizing buses and agreeing to pick up riders in Portsmouth.

Categories
Action

“Stop the Pipeline” Rally draws hundreds!

stop the pipeline MA photo

Galvanized by the possibility that a new fracked natural gas pipeline will traverse Southern New Hampshire as well as Massachusetts, 350NH participated in the Stop the Pipeline rally held at the Massachusetts State House on July 30.

RallyCollage by Aaron and Marcia Arsenault here

350NH believes that there are better alternatives to meeting New England’s and our State’s energy needs than adding additional pipelines carrying natural gas. Conservation in energy use, more efficiency in existing natural gas operations, and the development of renewable energy resources are all better alternatives.

Further, while natural gas releases fewer greenhouse gases than does coal when it is burned, natural gas is at least as damaging to the environment when the methane released in its production and through undetected leaks is taken into account. (Methane is the main component of natural gas. A recently released report by the International Panel on Climate Change shows that methane is a far more potent greenhouse gas than previously thought, with 34 times the heat-trapping intensity of CO2.)

Quoting the Conservation Law Foundation, “there is a role for gas, but it must be limited…We cannot simply replace every retiring coal and oil plant with natural gas and expect to leave our children with a livable climate… the increased use of existing natural gas electric generation capacity has helped to pave the way for the retirement of dirtier coal plants, but building new, long-lived natural gas infrastructure without any constraints isn’t compatible with meeting our climate goals”. (4 Things You Should Know About CLF’s work on Natural Gas, Jul 29, 2014, by Shanna Cleveland)

Many pipeline opponents believe the planned pipeline is designed less to meet New England’s energy needs than to export gas to Canada, where it can be sold on world markets at a greater profit than that commanded in this country.

The immediate concern for NH is that the pipeline connection proposed by Kinder-Morgan’s Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co. would, after traversing Massachusetts, run from Pepperell, Massachusetts through Hollis or its vicinity to a location in Merrimack or Amherst, from which Liberty Utilities hopes to serve new customers.

New England Governors have been proposing to finance the building of the pipeline (as well as hydropower transmission projects) by a tariff imposed on consumers of electricity. This kind of financing, forcing consumers to bear infrastructure costs, would be a first. On August 1, however, the Governors’ representatives voted to delay votes on the gas and hydropower transmission proposals, including the tariff; their vote suggests that at least the financing plan is being reconsidered.

The Stop the Pipeline rally engaged more than 400 people, individuals whose property would be destroyed or depreciated by the pipeline, members of environmental advocacy groups and legislators, all protesting the proposed tariff in addition to construction of the pipeline. Protesters delivered petitions to Governor Patrick, the speaker of the Massachusetts House and the President of the Massachusetts Senate. They lobbied their legislators and, through a delegation, met for almost an hour with Governor Patrick and his Secretary of Energy & Environmental Affairs.

Categories
Pipeline

“Natural” Gas Pipeline Controversy Comes to NH

Driving through the towns just below the Massachusetts/New Hampshire border, one sees a lot of signs these days.

stop the pipeline photo 1

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, a subsidiary of Texas-based Kinder Morgan, wants to build a pipeline to carry fracked natural gas (NG) across the northern edge of Massachusetts from Richmond, on the New York border, to an existing NG hub in Dracut, MA, roughly 13 miles southeast of Nashua, NH. There it would join an existing network of pipelines taking much of that gas northward to Canada. The capacity of this pipeline would be nearly four

times that required to overcome any shortages experienced during winter periods of peak demand.

Residents of towns along the Massachusetts-New Hampshire border were first alerted that something was up when representatives of Kinder Morgan came knocking on their doors, asking whether KM could survey their properties by drilling to find what is under the topsoil.

Why Canada?

NG can be sold in Europe for two to three times the U.S. market price and in Asia for three to four times the U.S. price. Under North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), exporting to Canada does not carry the restrictions that apply to export to non-free-trade countries. The reason for the rush to build pipelines to Canada is to get the gas where it can more easily be sold abroad for more money.

The New Hampshire Connection

Liberty Utilities, a subsidiary of Canadian energy giant Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp., would like to see a spur line from Massachusetts to a yet-to-be-constructed hub in Merrimack, NH. The route originally proposed would pass directly through conservation land of Hollis’ Beaver Brook Association, a popular land trust.

In an effort to preserve land which had been donated or purchased with monetary gifts, Beaver Brook Association hired an engineer to come up with alternative routes for the pipeline. One of those alternatives would still pass through the town of Hollis, but would avoids the conservation land; two would pass through adjacent Brookline, NH. Both towns are now joining their Massachusetts neighbors in a fight to stop these pipelines altogether.townsent march

Land owner concerns and options

Residents along the proposed routes question if there’s any real need for the added capacity the pipeline would provide. They resent the intrusion into their towns. They question the ethics of having to pay for pipelines through a surcharge on their electric bill. They are concerned about Kinder Morgan’s safety record. The gas passing through the pipeline would not have been purified, and would contain residues of chemicals used in the fracking process. It would not have had an odorant added to aid in leak detection.

Some residents have found that allowing an energy pipeline to pass through their property would violate the terms of their mortgage. Some have been told that, if the pipeline goes through their property, or even if their land abuts property traversed by a pipeline, their homeowner’s insurance would be canceled.

Landowners are faced with a limited number of choices. The final pipeline siting decision will be made by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Once a FERC permit has been granted, their land can be taken through eminent domain.

Nearly 30 towns have united to oppose the construction of these lines. That’s the reason for the signs, and for a rolling protest moving from west to east in Massachusetts, ending with the presentation of a petition to Massachusetts’ Governor Patrick on July 30.

Deeper Environmental Concerns

The proposed pipelines ignore our need to get away from producing and burning fossil fuels. Natural gas is primarily methane, a greenhouse gas over 80 times more powerful than CO2 in the short term, over 20 times more in the long term. Studies show that, when a full accounting of methane’s impact on the environment is taken into account, fracked natural gas has no benefit over coal or oil in reducing greenhouse gas effects. Building the proposed pipelines would involve an enormous investment, only to postpone the inevitable need to transition to sustainable energy sources.

To support your neighbors and our environment, contact your Governor and your state representatives, and join the upcoming rallies.

For info:

In Brookline, NH, contact: kthomp0909@aol.com

In Hollis, NH, contact: hollispipeline@gmail.com

Websites:

NH Pipeline Awareness here

No Fracked Gas in Massachusetts here

Nashoba Trust here

Follow the rolling protest here

Categories
Action

“No Tar Sands” People’s Conference Inspirational!


July 13 photo 1 More than 80 dedicated climate activists met for the “No Tar Sands!” People’s Conference and Rally on Sunday, July 13, 2014. The event, sponsored by the Tar Sands Free Northeast coalition, drew folks from New Hampshire, Maine, Massachusetts, and Vermont. The demonstrators met to voice their demands that the governors of New England states draw the line against fossil fuels and lead the way to sustainable energy sources that do not create greenhouse gases that increase climate change.(photo:Gwen Whitbeck)

The protesters assembled in a parking area directly across from the Mt. Washington Hotel, where governors from New England states and Premiers from eastern Canadian provinces were about to meet to discuss energy and trade issues. The Canadian government is eager to transport increasing amounts of bitumen (“tar sands oil”) through New England states by rail and by pipeline. Canada would also like to send hydro-electric power from Quebec to the USA, which would require the construction of gigantic high-tension wires that would cross NH from North to South, a project called “Northern Pass.” A large group protesting the Northern Pass project held a protest rally on the same date learn more here .

Tar sands free NE at Bretton Woods, July 13, 2014 081-1

Speakers from Maine’s Sierra Club, 350 Maine, National Wildlife Federation (NWF), 350 New Hampshire, and others spoke about the environmental devastation caused to Alberta, Canada, where the tar sands are being extracted. The destruction of the health and livelihood of the First Nations peoples who live in the extraction area, and the total disregard for their historic and human rights, was emphasized by speaker Sara Lachance. Jim Murphy (NWF) pointed out that fuel derived from tar sands contains much more carbon than most forms of fossil fuel, and should be banned from inclusion in our states’ heating and transportation fuels. (Photo:Read Brugger)

There was a somber moment of silence to honor the memories of the 48 residents of Lac Megantic who died as a result of the oil train explosion on July 6, 2013. The harm and death caused by the exploitation of the earth for fossil fuels occurs on global, local, and personal levels – and so we resist and act!

For more about the rally, visit 350 New Hampshire’s Facebook page and check out press coverage by NHPR here .

Categories
Action

“Oil Train Hazards” rally held in Dover, NH

Canada-Oil-Train-Dera_sham-3-725x465

350 NH members and friends recognized the anniversary of the oil train explosion in Lac Megantic, Canada on July 6, 2014, by holding an “Oil Train Hazards!” Protest Rally in downtown Dover, NH. On July 6, 2013, an oil train that was parked near the town of Lac Megantic rolled into town, derailed, and exploded. The explosion and fire killed 47 people and destroyed some 30 homes, a library and a busy bar. The train had been carrying volatile Bakken crude oil from North Dakota, which is also the kind of crude being shipped through Dover.

102_0432

As we gathered in Dover, at a site just blocks away from the tracks where oil trains regularly travel, our goals were to raise awareness of the hazards of transporting oil by rail, and to keep the memory of the Lac Megantic disaster alive.

Several of us wore hazmat suits and wielded mops and buckets to clean up a simulated oil spill, while others displayed posters to the constant stream of traffic. Two local news sources covered the event: Foster’s Daily Democrat here and Seacoast Herald here.

The rally concluded with a solemn remembrance of those who died in Lac Megantic a year ago. As we stood circled in a nearby park, each name and age was read aloud and a gong sounded. We left feeling renewed determination and dedication to work toward shifting our nation from fossil fuel dependence to sustainable sources of energy that do not cause climate change.

Categories
Legislative

House Science, Technology and Energy Committee Heard HB 1376

The House Science, Technology and Energy Committee heard HB 1376 on February 18.

The bill, as introduced, would require the the Department of Environmental Services to examine the potential harm to the public and the environment resulting from the transportation of tar sand oil through the Portland-Montreal Pipeline.

Representative Marcia Hammon introduced the bill on behalf of herself and its other sponsors, outlining the plan for such transportation and some of the anticipated risks. Testimony intended to allay fear of these anticipated risks was given by the Canadian consul.

A DES representative explained that the Department has limited expertise and no regulatory authority with respect to pipelines; if the bill were passed, it would have to sacrifice staff time and budget intended for other responsibilities.

Others testifying in favor of the bill were Cathy Corkery for the Sierra Club; Katie Thomson, a UNH student just completing a research study of the potential impact of the transmission of tar sands oil across northern New Hampshire on local culture, business and tourism; Carol Foss, Audubon Society of New Hampshire; Trudy Mott-Smith and Doug Whitbeck of 350NH.In consideration of further written testimony and an amendment by Rep Marjorie Shepardson spelling out in more detail what would constitute the examination of potential harm to the public and the environment, the Committee appointed a subcommittee to revise the bill.

The revised bill will replace DES with a special legislative committee to carry out the examination, and will possibly expand the charge to include transportation of tar sands oil by truck and rail.

Categories
Legislative

Testimony on HB 1376


The Connecticut River near its headwaters in Pittsburg, New Hampshire.Today HB 1376, bill in the New Hampshire House heard testimony. If passed, House Bill 1376 would require the Department of Environmental Services to examine the potential harm to the public and the environment resulting from such pipeline transportation of tar sands bitumen.

The following testimony was submitted by one of 350NH’s members.

February 17, 2014

Rep. David Borden

Chairman, Science, Technology, and Energy Committee

NH House of Representatives, Concord, NH

Dear Chairman Borden

My name is Corry Hughes, I live in Jefferson NH. My husband and I stand in support of HB 1376 which would require the examination of the potential harm to the public and the environment of New Hampshire from the transportation of bituminous tar sands through Coos County by the Portland-Montreal pipeline.

Our town of Jefferson is one of five communities in southern Coos County that lies directly in the path of the Portland- Montreal Pipeline. Reversing the flow of this aging pipeline to carry toxic tar sands bitumen would put these communities at grave risk in the event of a leak or spill. The pipeline transverses forests and farmlands, parks and yards, and 80 bodies of water, from small brooks to major rivers like the Connecticut and the Androscoggin as it goes through northern NH.

Pipelines transporting tar sands diluted bitumen are statistically more than 3 times more likely to spill than those carrying typical crude; this would certainly be likely in the case of the Portland-Montreal Pipeline, an old pipeline that was not designed to carry this heavier, denser substance under high pressure in a reverse direction than intended. A spill in a stream or river would be almost impossible to clean up, and would pollute the water for miles downstream. A broken pipe on farmland or in a neighborhood would displace families and render that land unusable indefinitely. Diluted bitumen and its additives such as benzene (a carcinogenic neurotoxin) put the health of our wildlife, livestock, and above all, our families at risk.

In my town of Jefferson, the pipeline goes within feet of our elementary school, creating a nightmare scenario should a leak occur in that area which could make dozens of young children very sick. And think of the economically disastrous consequences if the leak occurs in rivers or near businesses, especially those that depend on tourism, such as Santa’s Village in Jefferson, a well-known family attraction that has delighted generations (and which is Jefferson’s biggest employer). The pipeline passes very near Santa’s Village; a spill there could shut it down, probably permanently.

We simply cannot afford the risk of dirty tar sands oil passing through New Hampshire, to be carried to overseas markets. All the risks (and no reward) would fall on us and put in peril our precious families, our homes, our landscape, and our economic future. We strongly urge passage of HB 1376 as a first step in protecting us and our environment.

Image Credit

Categories
Legislative

Warrant Articles and Resolutions


Corry Hughes April 2013

350NH is leading the campaign to register NH citizens’ opposition to the transportation of tar sands oil through the State by sponsoring resolutions to be voted on at town meetings.

The first step in this campaign is educating voters about the proposed use of the Portland – Montreal pipeline from Canada to Casco Bay in Maine. Presently the pipeline carries conventional oil from Casco Bay to Canada. There is a proposal to reverse the flow through

the pipeline to carry oil extracted from tars sands in Canada to Casco Bay for export. The pipeline is about the same age as the one which leaked last year in Mayflower, Arkansas.

Given all the publicity about the Keystone XL pipeline in the Midwest, many NH residents are surprised to learn about the possibility of the same toxic, corrosive tar sands proposed for Keystone being piped through Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine. 350NH members are highlighting a substantial difference between Keystone XL and the existing Montreal-Portland pipeline: the age of the pipeline. Keystone XL would be newly built, whereas the Montreal-Portland is 50 years old and not designed to carry tar sands oil.

Citizens petitions are being circulated in, Loudon, Jefferson, Gorham, Bath, Lancaster, Whitefield and Randolph, the second step needed to put a resolution against piping tar sands oil on town meeting warrants. A citizen’s petition has been completed in Exeter and the article made it through the deliberative session without amendment. It will be voted on by paper ballot on March 11. 350NH will be sponsoring educational opportunities, including slide shows, flyers, letters to the editor, and public demonstrations from now through the town meetings in March.

The results of town meeting votes affirming resolutions against the piping of tar sands oil across the State will be sent to relevant political, regulatory and corporate players.

If you live in any of the towns where this resolution will be brought to the voters, you can help! Email us at 350newhampshire@gmail.com. Non-residents of those towns can help by being present at public demonstrations and donating to 350NH to help us with printing and other costs.

Below is the text of the Jefferson Town Resolution

Petition to Keep New Hampshire Tar Sands Free

We, the undersigned voters of the Town of Jefferson, New Hampshire, request that you insert in the warrant for the 2014 Town Meeting, the following article:

To see if the Town will vote to instruct the Selectboard to enact the following resolution to protect citizen health, safety, and quality of life; water resources and environmental quality; and local, regional, and state economies with respect to the transport of crude oil through New Hampshire.

WHEREAS, 18” and 24” pipelines were constructed across northern New Hampshire in 1950 and 1985, respectively, to transport imported light crude oil from Portland, Maine, to Montreal, Quebec; and

WHEREAS, present market conditions have substantially reduced demand for transporting imported light crude oil inland from the Atlantic coast; and

WHEREAS, abundant production of heavy crude and tar sands oil in western North America has created a market for transportation of these oils to Atlantic ports; and

WHEREAS, these market conditions suggest that reversing the direction of flow on the above-mentioned pipelines could become economically profitable for corporations in the foreseeable future; and

WHEREAS, spills of diluted tar sands oil create more costly and difficult clean-up challenges than conventional oil spills, including public health risks from toxic fumes and long-term water and riverbed contamination from sunken oil; and

WHEREAS, a significant spill of any petroleum product along the pipeline Right-of-Way in New Hampshire would have a devastating effect on the economy and environment of Jefferson, including property values, business, tourism, recreation, hunting and fishing; and

WHEREAS, pipeline age and the hydraulic stresses resulting from reversal of flow can contribute to the likelihood of a spill; and

WHEREAS, existing technologies and practices for inspecting pipeline integrity have failed to prevent catastrophic pipeline failures;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:

1. That the Town expresses its opposition to the transport of tar sands oil through New Hampshire and the Town of Jefferson and its deep concern about the economic, environmental, and public health risks of such transport; and

2. That the Town strongly encourages the New Hampshire General Court and the U.S. Congress to take all reasonable steps to ensure that any proposed flow reversal of the Portland-Montreal pipeline receives thorough review at both state and federal levels of economic, environmental, and public health and safety impacts, including the impact of spills; and

3. That the Town transmit a copy of this resolution to all relevant state, federal, and other pertinent entities.

Categories
Uncategorized

Site Evaluation Committee Realizes the Public Wants More than the Status Quo on New Hampshire Energy

On the evening of December 5th, 2013 at the Keene Recreation Center, over 30 southern New Hampshire residents ranging from Keene to New Ipswich met to share their collective voices on the future of the state of New Hampshire’s Site Evaluation Committee (SEC). Two compelling themes came out of the Keene SEC public comment session. They included concern over the SEC’s role in alleviating greenhouse gas emissions from energy generation and transmission in the state, as well as public opinion wanting the SEC to consider more robust studies into future energy development plans.

As part of an early December spree of public comment sessions across the state, SEC representatives and staff from consulting firm Raab Associates facilitated Thursday’s session. Their facilitation entailed breaking up the +30 attendees across several tables with 4-6 people each. At each table, people discussed their concerns on present SEC approaches to engagement with the public, noise and visual standards, generation and transmission standards relative to state energy policies, and redefining SEC membership. Then, on a computer-projected screen, everyone voted simultaneously about their preference for SEC status quo positions compared to alternative future positions the SEC could pursue.

According to anyone’s observations from Thursday evening, there could be no doubt about public frustration and uncertainty at current SEC policies and practices. Over 50 percent of the attendees viewed as “very ineffective” current SEC practices that left too much ambiguity in how SEC disclosed energy facility development decisions. Furthermore, well over 50 percent viewed “greenhouse gas and climate change” emissions as a leading future concern for SEC policies and practices to tackle. Thus, the inroads for climate movement groups and stakeholders such as 350 New Hampshire among others could prove more receptive than previously anticipated.

Matthew Young, a member of the 350 New Hampshire Leadership Committee, even found opportunities to hand out 350NH background information and inform attendees about what is being done to alleviate climate change and its effects in the Granite State.

“We need to account for an energy future in New Hampshire which doesn’t fight against, but rather works within our carrying capacity and available, renewable resources,” Young said. “We won’t be able to lead a sustainable future if we can’t put a moratorium on tar sands development and make an active legislative push for strengthening the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS).” The RPS currently mandates the state of New Hampshire to generate 25 percent of its energy from renewable resources (e.g. biofuels, solar, wind sources) by 2025.

For more information on future 350-New Hampshire events surrounding direct actions to promote climate change awareness, legislative actions to push for renewable state energy policies, feel free to e-mail us at 350NewHampshire at gmail.com. We look forward to hearing from you!