PFAS in La Crosse

March 11th, 2021

There’s been a lot of talk landing in my inbox these days about the PFAS mess in the surface and ground water around the La Crosse Regional Airport, affecting private and public wells.

The City of La Crosse has sued:

PFAS? Welcome to our world in Minnesota:

MPCA PFAS 3M Settlement

That settlement was for $850 million, “settled” in 2018, but I think it was too little and too soon.

Meanwhile, La Crosse, WI is taking this seriously, and the City of La Crosse has sued the handful of those making and marketing and selling PFAS:

City Of La Crosse Files Lawsuit Calling Out 23 Companies For PFAS Contamination

And the City of La Crosse’s page:

Well Water Testing Around the La Crosse Regional Airport

More articles:

La Crosse files lawsuit against ‘forever chemical’ companies after contamination spread to over 100 homes

La Crosse files lawsuit against 23 chemical manufacturers over PFAS contamination

Coal ash? Comment now!

September 22nd, 2019

Remember the huge coal ash impoundment ruptures/breeches dumping coal ash all over? THIS is why treatment and use of coal ash matters:

TVA coal ash slide – UPDATES

And even in Minnesota: TVA coal ash — we had our own ash slide here in MN

There was a rule update and comments in 2018, and it was remanded, and so here we go around again…

FEDERAL REGISTER ANNOUNCEMENT: Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities

Comments must be received on or before October 15, 2019!

From the EPA’s announcement (CLICK HERE):

Public Hearing on the Proposed Changes to the Regulations for Coal Combustion Residuals: Enhancing Public Access to Information and Reconsideration of Beneficial Use Criteria and Piles

Wed, October 2, 2019

9:00 AM – 8:00 PM EDT

DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel

300 Army Navy Drive

Arlington, VA 22202

The public hearing will consist of three sessions:

  • A morning session starting at 9:00 am and ending at noon.
  • An early afternoon session starting at 1:00 pm and ending at 4:00 pm.
  • An evening session beginning at 5:00 pm and ending at 8:00 pm.

CLICK HERE FOR THE PROPOSED RULE!

Just do it, comment away!!! Comments must be received on or before October 15, 2019.

? Affordable Clean Energy Rule?

September 1st, 2018

tRump’s “Affordable Clean Energy Rule” would be quite the legacy (though he leaves so many, how to choose).

EPA’s Affordable Clean Energy Rule page

Here are the fact sheets from that page:

Fact Sheets (these are links below!):

And the proposed rule as published in the Federal Register yesterday:

Affordable Clean Energy Rule-Federal Register-8-31-2018-18755

It’s 68 pages long, and intense.

Comments due October 30 — how to comment?  From their site:

Online: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for submitting comments to EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0355.

Email: Comments may be sent to a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov. Include Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0355 in the subject line of the message.

Mail: Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Mail Code 28221T, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0355, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460.

Fax: Fax your comments to: (202) 566-9744. Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0355.

Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket Center, Room 3334, EPA WJC West Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0355. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

An America First Energy Plan?

January 23rd, 2017

Contact Page for Trump’s White House

Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414

The Trump regime has published this “Energy Plan.”  WHAT?  Mitt Romney’s “Energy Plan” wasn’t much, and was grossly misguided, but it at least had SOME substance:

Romney’s Energy Plan – much ado about nothing

This is something a 5th grader could put together, nothing but blathering and slapped together code words.  It shows no thought or understanding of energy in the U.S. today.  I mean really, “clean coal” is so dead. During the Bush administration, they put billions in, between tax credits, grants, subsidies at state and federal levels — here’s a DOE announcement from 2006:

Energy Secretary and Secretary of the Treasury Announce the Award of $1 Billion in Tax Credits to Promote Clean Coal Power Generation and Gasification Technologies

The Bush Administration made coal gasification (IGCC) a priority, and even all that lobbying, subsidization, and wishful thinking couldn’t make it happen.  Minnesota’s Excelsior Energy’s Mesaba Project is one example of that abject failure (see also www.camp-site.info).  Delaware’s NRG coal gasification plant is another (note another NRG coal gasification plant proposed for NY went south too).

Meanwhile, existing coal is not economical, that’s why the older plants are being shut down, not anything to do with “Clean Power Plan,” and instead, that there’s a surplus of electricity and coal plants’ production costs a lot more than other available electric generation.  The market says no!  How does Trump think he can trump the market?  And even if he could, how is that in our interest?

Here’s a map of MISO market — note all the blue on these maps — I love using these as wallpaper, a constant reminder:

MISO LMP map

Here’s the PJM market map:

PJM LMP map

And the joint MISO/PJM market map:

Joint MISO/PJM LMP map

Coal cannot compete in the market, even with its outright and embedded regulatory subsidies, even the existing plants.  There’s a glut of electricity, has been for a decade now.  As Xcel’s Ben Fowkes says, recorded in the Seeking Alpha transcript of the XEL Earnings Call, January 31, 2013. 

So I think the economies are in decent shape across all our jurisdictions. Doesn’t necessarily mean it translates to high sales growth. And that’s consistent with our forecast. I mean, we’re not anticipating that we’re going to see a tremendous rebound in sales, even as the economies start to improve. I mean, I think, that’s our new normal, frankly.

So…. drumroll….  Here it is, cut and pasted from the White House site in its entirety (emphasis added in red)(and parenthetical comments):

Energy is an essential part of American life and a staple of the world economy. The Trump Administration is committed to energy policies that lower costs for hardworking Americans and maximize the use of American resources, freeing us from dependence on foreign oil.

For too long, we’ve been held back by burdensome regulations on our energy industry. President Trump is committed to eliminating harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the U.S. rule. Lifting these restrictions will greatly help American workers, increasing wages by more than $30 billion over the next 7 years.

Sound energy policy begins with the recognition that we have vast untapped domestic energy reserves right here in America. The Trump Administration will embrace the shale oil and gas revolution to bring jobs and prosperity to millions of Americans. (does he have no understanding of energy market?) We must take advantage of the estimated $50 trillion in untapped shale, oil, and natural gas reserves, especially those on federal lands that the American people own. (does he not know the havoc in ND during Bakken BOOM!, the many Bakken BOOM! train explosions, pollution, and deaths?  And he’d allow corporations to take OUR land?) We will use the revenues from energy production (a production tax increase?) to rebuild our roads, schools, bridges and public infrastructure. Less expensive energy will be a big boost to American agriculture, as well.

The Trump Administration is also committed to clean coal technology, and to reviving America’s coal industry, which has been hurting for too long.  (again market forces, coal is not least cost, and new coal is way beyond anything market would support.  “Clean” coal?  Don’t even think about it, it doesn’t exist!)

In addition to being good for our economy, boosting domestic energy production is in America’s national security interest. President Trump is committed to achieving energy independence from the OPEC cartel and any nations hostile to our interests. At the same time, we will work with our Gulf allies to develop a positive energy relationship as part of our anti-terrorism strategy.

Lastly, our need for energy must go hand-in-hand with responsible stewardship of the environment. Protecting clean air and clean water, conserving our natural habitats, and preserving our natural reserves and resources will remain a high priority. President Trump will refocus the EPA on its essential mission of protecting our air and water. (everything I’ve seen and heard from Trump and EPA pick points towards dismantling and defunding EPA.  What does this mean?)

A brighter future depends on energy policies that stimulate our economy, ensure our security, and protect our health. Under the Trump Administration’s energy policies, that future can become a reality.

How clueless can Trump be?  Well, we’re seeing… and it’s unbelievable… UNBELIEVABLE!

JasonLewis_STrib AngieCraig

The Terrible Mini-Trump of Minnesota — and the Progressive Who’s Running Against Him

This is an odd article.  Lewis is indeed terrible, and doesn’t even live in the district (not a requirement for Congress — that needs to be changed), and Angie Craig is a “progressive” NOT!  They’re both wealthy corporate toadies, with Craig’s flavor distinctly DFL and edging a bit left, but more in the middle, and not nearly far enough to be labeled “progressive” nor to offset the extreme reactionary Republican politics of Lewis.

But what’s most odd about this is the articles’ digging into the politics of oil in Minnesota, of pipelines, and of environmental groups doing the deals that benefit the Koch Bros.  It’s good to see this receive some scrutiny.  From the article:

Environmental issues are big in Minnesota, and one of the biggest polluters in the state is located in the district: the Pine Bend refinery, south of St. Paul, owned by the Koch brothers.

NOTE: PINE BEND/KOCH REFINERY IS LOCATED IN THE 2nd CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT.

The article then starts in on the EPA and the Clean Water Rule, contested by Republicans, and we know well of Republican efforts to eliminate the EPA.  But it also correctly reports that “our” Sen. Amy Klobuchar vote with Republicans against the Clean Water Rule, and only after pressure changed her vote the next time it came up.  There’s nothing green about Sen. Amy Klobuchar!

As for the refinery, here’s how they work, buying out local governments and “environmental” groups — from the article:

The refinery became notorious in the 1990s for toxic pollution, especially of the water. Flint Hills Resources, the Koch brothers’ company that runs the refinery, paid millions of dollars in environmental fines in the 1990s and 2000s. At the same time it launched a major greenwashing effort, which continues today: help for Minnesota ducks, support for Minnesota Public Radio, funding a children’s theater festival in St. Paul. An example of the Koch spin: As part of a 2013 plan to expand the refinery, the company announced that it had signed an agreement with two environmental groups to “cut greenhouse gas emissions at the refinery by about 52,000 metric tons per year.” Cutting emissions—what could be better? Except that the “cut” is “about a fifth of the total expected increase from the project.” That means the net increase in greenhouse-gas emissions will be 260,000 metric tons—into the air south of the Twin Cities—every year.

“… pollution… especially of the water.”  ???  Here’s the deal referenced above, one that anyone challenging pipelines, refineries, water pollution, and air emissions, should be aware of, a deal between “Flint Hills Refinery,” Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA) and the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) (can you believe that name?!?!) where the “environmental” orgs backed off on their air emissions permit challenge:

FHR Pine Bend Settlement Agreement- FINAL SIGNED

This deal was found online, on the EIP website, and then was removed from the page but the link remains (Here’s the link to EIP posting — download HERE NOW before it disappears).  I’d posted this back in 2013:

MCEA deal with the Koch Bros?

A cool $1 million went into a fund to “reduce PM 2.5” through a diesel program, that’s the part that was made public.  Is there other money passed out for this agreement?  And there’s this:

FHR_MCEA_EIP1And this:

FHR_MCEA_EIP2And this:

FHR_MCEA_EIP3aFHR_MCEA_EIP3bAnd most importantly, the Confidentiality clause!

FHR_MCEA_EIP_ConfidentialityClauseWere there other deals?  This one was to be kept “confidential.”  (Again, the link to EIP posting — download HERE NOW before it disappears)  From my years of work and association with United Citizens Action Network (U-CAN) against the CapX 2020 transmission project, and knowledge of their isolation in fighting the MinnCan pipeline, which went from the Bakken oil fields to the Pine Bend/Koch refinery, that NO “environmental” groups intervened against that pipeline, and that only MPIRG tried to help U-CAN, it’s hard to believe that there was not a deal of some sort.  The silence was deafening.

To look up the MinnCan pipeline docket, go HERE and search for dockets 05-2003 for the Route Permit and 06-02 for the Certificate of Need (Note the pipeline company is sometimes “Minnesota Pipeline Company” and “Koch Pipeline Company.”).  Note the lack of an Environmental Impact Statement, the due process issues, and NO intervenors in the Certificate of Need, and none of the “environmental” orgs in Minnesota intervened in routing either… what a mess that was.

Do tell — what are the positions of Jason Lewis and Angie Craig on the air and water pollution from the refinery in CD2?  Where are the Minnesota “environmental” organizations on the air and water pollution from the refinery and the Bakken BOOM! oil trains in CD2?

ows_136616444072418Photo fair use from the Star Tribune