Colstrip Power Plant - Montana Environmental Information Center

DowntoEarth
Clean & Healthful.
It’s your right, our mission.
N E W S F R O M T H E M O N T A N A E N V I R O N M E N T A L I N F O R M AT I O N C E N T E R
IN THIS ISSUE
3
Coal Mining Pollution
4 Big Rigs to Move
5
Keystone XL Pipeline
6 Signal Peak Mine
7 Otter Creek Lawsuit
8
Backlash on EPA Rules
10 Fracking Disclosure
Imperfect
Colstrip Power Plant
11 Habitat Conservation
Plan
November 2011 | Vol. 37 • No. 4
A variety of ways you can help MEIC
Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 1184
Helena, MT 59624
Physical Address:
107 W. Lawrence Street, #N-6
Helena, MT 59601
Telephone: (406) 443-2520
Web site: www.meic.org
E-mail: [email protected]
Board of Directors
President: Roger Sullivan,
Kalispell
Vice-President: Zack
Winestine, New York
Secretary: Gary Aitken,
Ovando
Treasurer: Ken Wallace, Helena
Paul Edwards, Helena
Mark Gerlach, Missoula
Steve Gilbert, Helena
Anne Johnson, Bozeman
Myla Kelly, Bozeman
Stephanie Kowals, Seattle
Steve Scarff, Bozeman
Tom Steenberg, Missoula
Michelle Tafoya, Whitefish
Staff
Anne Hedges, Program
Director/Lobbyist,
[email protected]
James Jensen, Executive
Director, [email protected]
Derf Johnson, Program Associate,
[email protected]
Sara Marino, Development
Director, [email protected]
1. Join MEIC’s monthly giving program
The Pledge Program is a simple but very effective way you can support MEIC. You
design the program to best fit your budget and lifestyle. You can pledge any annual
amount you choose and make payments in 12 or fewer installments. You could
pledge $240 for the year, and pay just $20 a month—that’s only 66 cents a
day! And it gets even easier. You can sign up to pay monthly with your credit card,
or by automatic withdrawal from your bank account, and MEIC will take care of
the rest. Pledge members help provide the staying power that keeps MEIC at the
forefront of environmental advocacy in Montana.
I want to help protect Montana’s environment by:
2. Leave a bequest to MEIC
❑ $250 (Sustainer) ❑ $45 (Family)
You can provide the financial security and long-term stability MEIC needs to
weather unpredictable and cyclical funding by contributing to MEIC’s Permanent
Fund, our endowment. All gifts to the Permanent Fund are invested. Only the
income earned on these investments is spent, and all of it goes to MEIC. Here are
two ways you can contribute to MEIC’s endowment:
❑ $120 (Donor)
1) The Permanent Fund accepts cash or property including stock, real estate, and
life insurance. These contributions can be made directly to MEIC and are deductible
as charitable contributions.
City_______________ State___ Zip______
2) MEIC also has an endowment account at the Montana Community Foundation,
which greatly expands the ways you can help MEIC while taking advantage of a
Montana State income tax credit. Call the Montana Community Foundation at 406443-8313 for more information.
3. Encourage others to join MEIC
❑ Joining MEIC.
❑ Renewing my MEIC membership.
❑ Donating to MEIC’s endowment.
❑ Giving a gift membership.
❑ Making a special contribution.
Here are my dues or gift membership:
❑ $30 (Individual)
❑ $60 (Supporter) ❑ Other $ __________
Name _____________________________
Address_____________________________
E-mail _____________________________
Mail this form to:
MEIC
P.O. Box 1184
Helena, MT 59624
Thank you!
Members are the heart and soul of MEIC, and who better to spread the word than
you. Tell your friends and family why you joined MEIC and about the difference they can make for Montana’s environment by joining with you. Every
member means a lot. Ask about our 2-for-1 program when you renew your MEIC membership!
Adam McLane, Business
Manager, [email protected]
Join or Renew Today.
Gail Speck, Office Assistant,
[email protected]
Kyla Wiens, Energy Advocate/
Lobbyist, [email protected]
(406) 443-2520 • www.meic.org
Clean & Healthful.
It’s your right, our mission.
Down to Earth is
published quarterly
by the Montana
Environmental
Information Center, a
nonprofit environmental
advocate.
Volume 37, Number 4
Or use the postage-paid envelope enclosed.
Cover photo: Colstrip
Power Plant. Photo by
Anne Hedges.
November 2011
2
Protecting Montana’s natural environment since 1973.
MONTANA
ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION
CENTER
MEIC Helps Ranchers Fight
Coal Mine Water Pollution
C
oal mines can have a significant impact on
ground and surface water. Neighboring
property owners and ranchers are largely
at the mercy of the mining company and State
regulators. They depend on the State to protect
their water, land, and livelihoods. They also depend on a federal law called the Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA). SMCRA
is a federal law that is enforced by the states. It
is designed to protect water and land from the
destructive impacts of coal mining.
But what if the State doesn’t do its job? That
is exactly what happened with the Rosebud
mine near Forsyth in southeastern Montana,
which provides coal to the Colstrip power
plants, and at other Montana coal mines as well.
And the livelihoods of the mine’s neighbors,
in this case ranchers, are at risk. SMCRA and
Montana law require the Montana Department
of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to ensure that
mining companies have plans to protect water
quality and quantity before the mines are
permitted. It appears that DEQ has repeatedly
issued coal mining and mine expansion permits
without properly considering or mitigating the
impacts the mines will have on water quality
and quantity nearby.
S p e c i f i c a l l y, M EI C’s
investigation found that DEQ
has repeatedly failed to consider
the impacts of the Rosebud
mine on water resources in the
surrounding area. As Colstrip
area rancher Doug McRae says:
“DEQ is failing in its duty to
prevent water loss and quality
degradation to Montana’s water
in coal mining areas.”
DEQ’s failure goes beyond
the Rosebud mine. The problem
is pervasive and exists at every
coal mine in the state. DEQ simply has not done
the analysis required to guarantee that water
quantity and quality around coal mines will be
protected.
A s a result of
that investigation,
“Specifically, MEIC’s investigation found
and on b ehalf of
that DEQ has repeatedly failed to consider
neighboring ranchers,
the impacts of the Rosebud Mine on water
MEIC and Sierra
resources in the surrounding area.”
Club, represente d
by the Western
Environmental Law Center, notified DEQ in
September 2011 that unless it corrected the
problems and conducted a proper water analysis
at mines around the state, a lawsuit would be filed.
Ellen Pfister, a rancher in Yellowstone
County, whose operation is directly affected
by the Signal Peak mine (see article on page
6), said: “It is time for DEQ to get serious about
protecting Montana’s waters. We have good
laws on the books, but without enforcement
they are meaningless. We’ve asked DEQ to take a
comprehensive approach to protecting ground
and surface water, but they have forced us to play
this hand. Now the choice is up to the agency.”
DEQ has until the end of November to
respond to MEIC’s notice of intent to sue.
Clean & Healthful. It’s your right, our mission.
Rosebud Mine. Photo by Kestrel Aerial Images.
by Anne Hedges
3
November 2011
Tar Sands Mega-loads to
Use Interstate Highways
by Kyla Wiens
T
he “impossible” has suddenly become possible. A year ago Imperial Oil—a large subsidiary of ExxonMobil—planned to transport
over two hundred massive loads of tar sands mining equipment manufactured in South Korea on
two-lane highways through Idaho and Montana.
The project is called the Kearl Module Transportation Project (KMTP) because the destination for
these loads is the Kearl Oilsands development in
northern Alberta—one of the largest tar sands
mining sites in the world. Imperial insisted that
the only feasible route for these “mega-loads”
was along U.S. Highway 12, Montana Highway
200, and U.S. Highway 287. These are winding
and narrow roads that traverse the iconic Lochsa
River in Idaho and the Blackfoot River and Rocky
Mountain Front in Montana. Imperial insisted
it could not use interstate highways for these
massive loads because, it said, it was impossible
to reduce the height of the loads to fit under
interstate overpasses.
Well…surprise! What a difference one year,
overwhelming public opposition, and successful
litigation make. On November 4, 2011, Imperial’s
hauling contractor, Mammoet, submitted a request
to the Montana Department of Transportation for
The new mega-load route. Map provided by the Mammoet
proposal to the Montana Department of Transportation.
continued on page 12
November 2011
4
Protecting Montana’s natural environment since 1973.
MONTANA
ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION
CENTER
Tar Sands Pipeline - To and From Hell
by Jim Jensen
T
he proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which
is intended to run from the tar sands of
Alberta to the “Cancer Alley” of refineries on the Houston Ship Canal, has become
a focus of worldwide attention. The Obama
Administration’s decision (made by the State
Department because the pipeline crosses the
international border) whether to grant a license
to the pipeline became a litmus test for many of
his environmentalist supporters. The proposed
route crosses Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska,
Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas.
The human and wildlife impacts from the tar
sands development in the Athabasca River Valley
of Alberta are tragically similar to those that have
been suffered in the Houston Ship Canal area for
decades. Toxic air and water pollution are having
devastating effects in both places, poisoning
citizens and devastating wildlife populations.
The pipeline would also enable what Dr.
James Hansen, the renowned NASA climate
scientist, calls “game over” in the world’s attempt
to prevent the earth’s climate from getting so
warm that it cannot be managed.
Thousands of Americans have joined
protests in Washington, DC, to express their
opposition to the pipeline, and many media
reports have suggested that key financial
backers of Obama have withheld support
pending the government’s decision.
In contrast, labor unions and the oil industry
have unleashed all their political muscle in favor
of the pipeline. They contend that the temporary
construction jobs and taxes it would create
trump all other concerns. Montana Governor
Brian Schweitzer is also a strong supporter.
In response to some of the concerns,
the Administration recently asked for an
examination of alternative routes through
Nebraska, where many ranchers, farmers,
and other citizens, along with the Republican
governor and many conservative politicians, are
opposed to its crossing the Sand Hills region
and the Ogallala aquifer, one of the largest
aquifers in the world. This request will delay a
final decision until early 2013, according to the
State Department, thereby
allowing the president to
avoid the hard political choice
during an election year.
Some environmental
leaders hailed the delay as a
victory because the pipeline’s
owner, TransCanada Corp.,
had said previously that
such a delay would kill the
project. TransCanada has now
changed its tune, however,
saying that the pipeline will
still be built when the new
route is identified.
MEIC Board Vice-President Zack Winestine being detained during a
protest of the Keystone XL pipeline in front of the White Wouse. The
protest lasted over a two-week period in which over 1,000 people
were arrested in a peaceful demonstration of civil disobedience.
Clean & Healthful. It’s your right, our mission.
5
November 2011
Foreign Intrigue Right
Here in Little Old Montana
by Derf Johnson
W
Train hauling coal from mine site to power plant.
Photo by the U.S. Department of Energy.
hat does a Russian company named
Gunvor, that is based in Switzerland,
registered in Cyprus, uses a PR firm with
a representative in Kazakhstan, and maintains
financial arrangements with a shipping terminal in Canada, have
“Gunvor wants to increase the production at the to do with Montana?
It is now the proud
mine to approximately 15 million tons annually, part owner of a large
and it wants to convert the operation to an open- amount of Montana
pit strip mine. These two changes . . . would make coal – and may represent an omen of what
Signal Peak the 13th largest fcoal mine in the
Montana can expect
United States, and 2nd largest in Montana.” more of in the future.
Pinesdale, LLC, a
subsidiary of Gunvor
November 2011
Group Ltd., recently purchased a 33% interest
in the Signal Peak mine for $400 million. The
Signal Peak mine is an underground coal
mine in the Bull Mountains near Roundup in
central Montana. It is capable of producing
approximately 10 million tons of coal per year.
The mine has been in operation since 2009, and
already has a very checkered history filled with
law violations, mine cave-ins, and employee
injuries and death.
Gunvor’s interest in the mine is entirely due
to its desire to export coal to Asian markets,
utilizing its own international commodity
trading expertise. Gunvor wants to increase
the production at the mine to approximately
15 million tons annually, and it wants to convert
the operation to an open-pit strip mine. These
two changes, if implemented, would make
Signal Peak the 13th largest coal
mine in the United States, and 2nd
largest in Montana.
Gunvor is one of a small club
of very wealthy and secretive
international energy commodity
trading organizations, almost all
of them known for questionable
financial practices and extremely
high profit margins. Commodity
trading organizations have been
accused of market manipulation
and profiteering off developing
nations, and receive very little
governmental oversight due to
their private ownership. Gunvor
has been accused of utilizing its
connections to Vladimir Putin, the
once and future prime minister
of Russia, to achieve its meteoric
success, although the company
and Putin deny the allegations.
Gunvor is estimated to have
revenues of over $80 billion in 2011,
derived mainly from its oil exports.
continued on page 13
6
Protecting Montana’s natural environment since 1973.
MONTANA
ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION
CENTER
Fundamental Rights
at Stake in Otter Creek
n a beautiful Fall day at the end of September 2011 a State district court room in
eastern Montana was packed. The hearing
was focused on Otter Creek coal and Montanans’
constitutional rights. MEIC and Sierra Club, represented by Earthjustice attorney Jenny Harbine,
argued that the State Land Board should have
been required to consider the environmental
impacts of mining and burning 1.3 billion tons
of coal before it could issue a lease to Arch Coal
Co. The State Land Board, comprised of the top
coal. MEIC believes that only during the leasing
process does the Land Board have the necessary
flexibility to deny, or sufficiently condition, a lease
to mitigate environmental impacts such as global
warming. After the lease is issued, the Land Board
might be bound by the exact terms of the lease
document.
MEIC believes that the State’s lease with Arch
Coal for the Otter Creek tracts was very restrictively
written in an attempt to prevent the Land Board
from subsequently imposing any conditions on
the coal mining. Such a restriction is inconsistent
with the Montana Constitution, and very unwise in
five elected official in the State, had approved
leasing the coal in March 2010 by a 3-2 vote.
The specific question before the court
was whether it was constitutional for the 2003
Legislature to exempt the Land Board from the
Montana Environmental Policy Act when it leases
reality since burning the coal will result in 2.6 billion
tons of greenhouse gases entering the atmosphere.
The State and Arch Coal argued that, even after
the lease was signed, the Montana Department
of Environmental Quality (DEQ) must still issue
a coal mining permit, so that there would be
by Anne Hedges
Otter Creek, Montana. Photo by Kestrel Aerial Images.
O
continued on page 12
Clean & Healthful. It’s your right, our mission.
7
November 2011
Congressional Republicans
Try to Thwart EPA
by Anne Hedges
A
Colstrip Power
Plant, the 2nd
largest coal fired
facility west of the
Mississippi River.
Photo by
Anne Hedges.
November 2011
8
fter eight years of Bush Administration delay
and subversion, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency seems poised to start
once again protecting the environment and public
health from pollution. But Congressional Republicans, and even some Obama Administration
officials, are trying to keep that from happening.
When President Obama took of f ice
he appointed Lisa Jackson to head EPA.
Jackson was known for her courage, and her
determination to right past wrongs. Recently,
however, Republicans in Congress have
proposed legislation to prevent EPA from doing
its job. And as if that weren’t enough, Jackson
has been forced to delay EPA’s attempts to
establish new ozone standards and regulate
greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.
Here are some of the important proposals
that are under attack:
Hazardous air pollution from coal-fired
power plants. While most industrial plants in
the U.S. are required to control their emissions
of mercury, lead, arsenic, and over 100 other
toxic air pollutants, coal-fired power plants
have been getting a free ride. The Bush
Administration did everything it could to allow
those plants to continue emitting massive
volumes of toxic air pollution. It went so far
as to adopt a rule that was clearly illegal and
eventually thrown out by the courts.
In March 2011, Jackson’s EPA proposed
requiring coal plants to control toxic air emissions.
This step was hailed by environmentalists and
public health advocates because these plants are
the single largest source of mercury emissions
nationwide, and have very high emissions of
other toxins as well. The final version of the
rule was supposed to be issued on November
16th, but has now been postponed for a month.
The electric utility industry is doing everything
possible to fight back. Its best hope is asking
Congress to act. In September 2011, the U.S. House
of Representatives, with the support of Montana’s
Rep. Denny Rehberg, passed a bill that would
prohibit EPA from regulating these emissions. A
similar bill was introduced in the Senate in March
by Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) and Sen. Mike Johanns
(R-NE), but has not been voted on.
Leaking coal ash ponds. Coal ash is the
second largest industrial waste stream in the U.S.,
yet there are no federal requirements to protect
water resources from coal ash
contamination. Ash ponds across
the nation hold billions of tons of
toxic coal waste, and many of them
leak, including, for example, the ones
at Montana’s Colstrip plant. Some
ash ponds have had catastrophic
failures, destroying homes and
causing colossal damage to nearby
ecosystems. EPA administrator
Jackson is trying to protect the public
from this extremely dangerous
and toxic waste stream, but – no
surprise – the coal industry is flexing
its muscles again.
Montana’s Rep. Rehberg
recently joined other House
Protecting Montana’s natural environment since 1973.
MONTANA
ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION
CENTER
Republicans to block EPA from regulating coal
ash. Now the Senate is considering a similar
measure. S. 1751. Montana’s Senators Max Baucus
and Jon Tester are under intense pressure from
the coal lobby to stop EPA from doing its job.
They both need to hear from Montanans that a
waste stream this toxic needs strict government
regulation. Voluntary controls haven’t worked
yet and never will.
Nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and particulate
air pollution. Older coal-fired power plants emit
large quantities of these pollutants, whose public
health impacts are well known. For example,
Montana’s Colstrip plants emit about 60 million
pounds of just these three pollutants each year.
These pollutants harm people’s ability to breathe.
With newer technologies, these pollutants can
be controlled. Newer coal plants have tougher
emissions standards – by an order of magnitude
– than older plants. Montana’s most recently
permitted coal plants have emission limits that
are a fraction of Colstrip’s, even adjusting for the
size of the plants.
EPA is required
to consider whether “Montana’s Senators Max Baucus and Jon
t h e r e a r e c o s t - Tester are under intense pressure from the
effective technologies
coal lobby to stop EPA from doing its job.
available today that
could be used at older They both need to hear from Montanans
plants such as Colstrip that a waste stream this toxic needs strict
to limit these harmful government regulation.”
air pollutants. EPA is
required to release its pollution control plan for
Montana in January 2012.
Again Congress is poised to interfere. H.R.
3379, introduced by Rep. Rick Berg (R-ND),
would allow states to ignore the EPA rule. A
similar measure is anticipated in the Senate. The
coal industry knows that it has more political
sway in individual states than it does with
EPA, and is counting on the states being less
interested in protecting public health.
How does the cost
of coal stack up?
Is coal really a cheap source
of electricity? This graph from
the Public Service Commission
compares the unit cost of different
electric power resources acquired by
NorthWestern Energy—Montana’s
largest utility. Coal-fired electricity
from Colstrip Unit 4 is the most
expensive at $67.84/mWh. This is
over $20.00 more expensive than
power from Judith Gap wind facility.
The Judith Gap cost includes the cost
of “firming” wind power with natural
gas. Energy efficiency (DSM) is by far
the cheapest energy “resource” at
$14.32/mWh—about one-fifth the
cost of electricity from Colstrip Unit 4.
Source: Historic Residential Electric Rates, Supply Portfolio and Unit Prices of NorthWestern Energy, Montana Public Service
Commission. September 2011. Citigroup provides electricity from unidentified sources to NorthWestern through spot-market,
bundled contracts. PPL provides electricity from its mix of generating sources (i.e., hydro, coal, etc.).
Clean & Healthful. It’s your right, our mission.
9
November 2011
A Peek into the Underground
World of Fracking
by Derf Johnson
M
November 2011
10
Oil well in eastern Montana.
ontanans can now obtain a partial look
at the chemicals that are being injected
into the ground under the controversial
oil and gas recovery practice known as hydraulic
fracturing, or “fracking.” This opportunity is the
result of an imperfect
“So far, of the eleven wells whose operators have disclosure regulation
provided any information to FracFocus, eight recently adopted by
the Montana Board of
have taken advantage of Montana’s trade secrets Oil and Gas Conservaexemption.” tion (BOGC).
Fracking is the
practice of injecting
large volumes of water, sand, and chemicals into
the ground to stimulate oil and gas production.
Many of the chemicals currently used in fracking
are toxic to human health and the environment.
Under the new rule, companies engaging in
fracking are required to report the chemical
make-up of fracking fluids
they use. Well operators
are able to repor t the
inf o r m ati o n e i th e r to
BOGC or to FracFocus
(www.fracfocus.org). So
far all the companies that
have reported have chosen
to post what information
they provide on FracFocus.
The biggest flaw in the
BOGC regulation is that
it includes a very broad
“trade secrets” exemption.
Companies do not have to
report the chemical makeup of any fracking fluid
whose constituents they deem to be a trade secret.
That term is not defined in the regulation. So the
exemption is self-regulating, meaning there is
no application process for an exemption and no
approval required from the State. The companies
are free to report what they want.
The most alarming aspect of fracking is that
it is a largely unregulated practice. Congress
exempted the fracking process from the Safe
Drinking Water Act through the so-called
“Halliburton Amendment,” an exemption
born out of Dick Cheney’s vice-presidential
Energy Task Force. Many states impacted by
fracking are now having to take matters into
their own hands and are taking a hard look at
regulations that would put reasonable side
boards on the industry. Safeguards for the
public are essential, especially considering the
sheer volume of wells that are being fracked
in the U.S. – fracking now accounts for nearly
half of all U.S. gas production.
The three wells in Montana for which
detailed information has been provided
reveal why Montanans should watch the
fracking industry very carefully and consider
bolstering our current disclosure regualtions.
Many of the chemicals reported are toxic or
carcinogenic, including methanol, naphthalene,
glutaraldehyde, and benzyl chloride. Given the
nature of these chemicals, and the likelihood
that they will contaminate ground water
in the area where they are used, there is
no justification for not requiring complete
disclosure of all fracking fluid constituents.
Protecting Montana’s natural environment since 1973.
MONTANA
ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION
CENTER
Habitat Conservation Plan:
Will it be a Legacy or a Loss?
by Kyla Wiens
O
There is still time to contact members of the Land
Board and recommend crucial changes. Here are
the most important
changes that need to “It has taken seven years for DNRC to
be made:
develop the HCP, but the plan still needs
• A n a d a p t i v e
m a n a g e m e n t several changes to ensure that it passes
strategy should scientific and legal scrutiny.”
be developed that
adequately describes the threats climate
change poses to those species, and how DNRC
will adjust its management activities based
on potential impacts.
• Road densities should be capped in terms of
miles of road per square mile of land, or at
the very least a no-net-gain policy should be
adopted for open roads.
• The streamside buffers should be widened
beyond a 50-foot no-cut buffer to at least
100 feet, and the numerous exemptions for
logging, road building, and gravel mining
within the buffer zone should be eliminated.
• Grizzly bear “core security” habitat should be
maintained or increased. The current plan
replaces core security areas with much weaker
“quiet” areas where roads and other human
disturbances would be allowed.
• A thorough technical and scientific review of
the HCP should be required after 25 years to
see if its management strategies have been
biologically effective.
ver a year ago, the Montana Department
of Natural Resources and Conservation
(DNRC) published its final Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). This 50-year HCP covers over
500,000 acres of forested State school trust lands
in western Montana, and five imperiled wildlife
species including endangered grizzly bears,
Canada lynx, and bull trout. The geographic
scope, duration, and number of species make
this one of the most far-reaching HCPs in the
United States. This plan will be a lasting legacy
for both DNRC and the Land Board, and it is up
to both entities to decide whether the HCP will
be a legacy of habitat conservation or one of
minimal protection for sensitive species.
Now the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service needs
to review the HCP and write its Biological Opinion.
Then it will be up to the State Land Board to
approve or reject the plan. The USFWS review
and Land Board decision were supposed to be
completed several months ago. The delay provides
an opportunity for DNRC to incorporate changes in
the HCP so that it complies with the Endangered
Species Act and “minimizes impacts to imperiled
species to the maximum extent practicable.”
The delay is also an opportunity for Land Board
members to urge DNRC to make these changes
before they vote on the plan.
It has taken seven years for DNRC to develop
the HCP, but the plan still needs several changes
to ensure that it passes
scientific and legal
scrutiny. Incorporating
Contact Land Board Members:
these changes may take
several months, but
By e-mail:
making these changes
Governor Brian Schweitzer: [email protected]
now is crucial because
Attorney General Steve Bullock: [email protected]
several decades of
State Auditor Monica Lindeen: [email protected]
wildlife conservation
Superintendent of Public Instruction Denise Juneau: [email protected]
on Montana’s school
Secretary of State Linda McCulloch: [email protected]
trust lands are at stake.
By USPS mail at:
State Land Board
Attn: Lucy Richards
P.O. Box 201601
Helena, MT 59620-1601
Clean & Healthful. It’s your right, our mission.
11
November 2011
Big Rigs (continued from page 4)
oversize load permits to move 300 half-height
loads across western Montana using Interstates 90
and 15, instead of the preferred two-lane highway
route (see map). The final transportation plan for
the interstate route indicates that it will take from
November 2011 until late March 2012 to move
the 300 loads through Montana. Mammoet will
transport most of the loads between 11PM and
6AM. The largest of these smaller loads will be 25
feet wide, 11 feet high and weigh 175,000 pounds—
without the haul trailers. Maximum travel speeds
will be 35 miles per hour.
Imperial’s new permit application is its
response to the groundswell of citizen opposition,
and the success of MEIC, the Montana Chapter
of the Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation
and Missoula County in obtaining a preliminary
injunction from a Montana district court. This
new route represents a significant victory for MEIC
and other individuals and organizations who have
worked so hard to prevent Imperial from turning
pristine river valleys and landscapes into industrial
transportation corridors.
An important battle has been won over the
route for these loads, but the war over extracting
dirty oil from tar sands is far from over. It is
important to remember that the impacts of tar
sand development extend far beyond the borders
of Idaho, Montana, and Canada. Tar sands extraction
could strip-mine 2,000 square miles of Canada’s
boreal forest. Refining crude oil produced from tar
sands emits up to 40% more greenhouse gases than
conventional oil, and the Kearl strip mine project
will be responsible for an average of 3.7 million tons
of greenhouse gases per year! These long-term
devastating environmental, social, and climate
change impacts will continue as long as companies
like Imperial can use Montana and other states as
conveyor belts to move mining equipment to the
tar sands, and to move tar sands oil to refineries
using massive pipelines such as Keystone XL (see
article on page 5).
Otter Creek (continued from page 7)
Otter Creek,
Montana.
Photo by Kestrel
Aerial Images.
November 2011
12
another opportunity to study and mitigate
environmental impacts. But DEQ has no authority
to deny or condition a permit based upon global
warming concerns, and the
Land Board’s authority to
deny or impose conditions
after the DEQ permit analysis
is uncertain at best.
The Land Board has – as
do we all – a constitutional
dut y to maintain and
i m p r ove a cl e a n and
healthful environment. It
should have considered the
environmental impacts of its
leasing decision, and imposed
mitigation measures, before
it entered into a lease that
gave Arch the right to ask DEQ for a mining permit.
DEQ’s authority is limited, whereas the Land Board,
as the trustee of all natural resources dedicated
to supporting the State School Trust, has broad
authority to control how, and even whether, the
coal is mined.
When the district court judge asked Arch
Coal’s attorney if he thought the Land Board
retained the right at the permitting stage to deny
the permit, or to condition it in a way that required
the coal to be burned at a plant that sequesters its
carbon dioxide emissions, the attorney “hemmed
and hawed.” The State’s lawyer said she believed
the Land Board retained that right.
It will be up to the judge to decide if the
Land Board lost an opportunity to reject the
lease or mitigate the environmental harm, or if
the Land Board retains its broad authority under
the Constitution in spite of the narrow language
in the lease. Judge Joe Hegel said he would rule
by the end of 2011.
Protecting Montana’s natural environment since 1973.
MONTANA
ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION
CENTER
Foreign Intrigue (continued from page 6)
It is now, apparently, turning its attention to
the international trade of coal.
The most concerning aspect of what is
happening is not that this particular secretive
international commodity trader now controls
a part of Montana’s economic destiny, but
rather that this agreement may be a bellwether
of things to come. Coal developers across the
United States, and especially in Montana and
Wyoming, are chomping at the bit to obtain
the higher profits offered by selling to Asian
markets. As coal becomes unpopular and
expensive in the United States, economic
powerhouses such as China may start importing
much more coal from the Powder River Basin.
Not only does this offer a precarious economic
development policy for Montana due to the
price volatility of trading coal internationally,
but it continues the dangerous reliance on a
polluting and climate-changing energy source,
and moves the state back toward what it once
was – a natural-resource-exporting colony for
the rest of the world.
Just before the agreement between Signal
Peak and Gunvor
was announced, the “As coal becomes unpopular and
U.S. Bureau of Land expensive in the United States, economic
Management (BLM)
powerhouses such as China may start
ha d ap p rove d th e
lease sale of 2,600 importing much more coal from the
acres of federal coal Powder River Basin.”
adjacent to Signal
Peak, to allow for expanded operations at the
mine. In connection with the sale, the BLM only
prepared a cursory environmental assessment,
not a full environmental impact statement. The
assessment did not even address the impact on
the global climate of burning more Signal Peak
coal. MEIC is now evaluating whether to bring
a lawsuit in federal court challenging the sale
because of the BLM’s flawed analysis.
Goodbye to an “Old” Friend and Hello to New Ones
MEIC’s most heartfelt thanks go out to Sarah Merrill, who has retired as MEIC’s president and
as a member of the Board of Directors. Her enthusiasm, dedication, and sunny personality will be
missed. She took over as president at an awkward moment and carried off her duties with aplomb
and grace. We know that her activism and commitment to keeping Montana’s environment clean
and healthful will ensure we continue to see, and hear from, her often.
MEIC is happy to have directors Gary Aitken (Ovando) and Anne Johnson (Bozeman)
elected to additional terms on the board, and to have former board member Steve Gilbert (Helena)
elected to the Board once again. And we’re very pleased to add three new members to the Board,
who bring a variety of skills and experiences that will serve us well in the years ahead: Myla Kelly
(Bozeman); Tom Steenberg (Missoula); and Michelle Tafoya (Whitefish). We are looking forward to
working with all of them to advance MEIC’s mission to protect Montana’s natural environment for
generations to come.
And thank you to all the MEIC members who cast their votes in the election.
Clean & Healthful. It’s your right, our mission.
13
November 2011
President’s Letter
by Roger Sullivan
The board and staff
of MEIC recently spent
a weekend doing longrange planning for the
organization. Of course
o u r c o nv e r s a t i o n s
involved the enormous
issues that we face in
fulfilling our mission
to protect Montana’s
natural environment –
global warming and energy policy, coal mining,
the threats to air and water quality, staying
abreast of legislative and agency proposals
impacting the environment, and more. But
we also discussed issues of organizational
health and sustainability, including the need
to develop more effective communications
with, and greater involvement of, the so-called
“Gen X” and “Gen Y,” otherwise known as our
children and grandchildren. All of this has had
me doing a lot of thinking and soul-searching.
Our society has never been good at longrange planning. One need only attend a local
government meeting devoted to formulating
a growth policy to get a sense of the familiar
and still dominant paradigm, which is devoted
to the protection of individual property rights
even to the exclusion of other important values,
such as preserving the quality of life for future
generations.
We now are seeing other indications of
this problematic paradigm. The wealth gap
between older and younger Americans is
now the widest ever, according to a report
released in early November by the Pew Research
Center. And a focus of the Occupy Wall Street
movement has been the enormous disparity
between the wealthiest 1% of Americans and
the other 99%, many of whom are young. They
are struggling to find work and put food on the
table, let alone pay off mortgages on properties
far underwater because of the short-sighted
but highly profitable manipulations of the
“too big to fail” corporations – some of which
have been bailed out at the expense of future
generations through enormous government
deficits and decreased spending on education
and the environment. This same paradigm has
brought us global warming and prevented the
implementation of measures needed to avoid
the looming climate crisis. Yet our appeals
to the scientific facts have been as blithely
ignored as the economic facts demonstrating
the increasing disparity in wealth between
young and old.
There is a compelling moral issue receiving
too little attention in the face of these disturbing
trends: the responsibility of each generation of
adults to leave to future generations a healthy
and sustainable environment and economy.
Our founding mothers and fathers of the 1972
Montana Constitution solemnly recognized as
inalienable (i.e., can’t be bought and sold) the
rights to a clean and healthful environment
as well as to the acquisition and protection
of property. But they did something else as
well, sagely mandating that “in enjoying these
rights all persons recognize corresponding
responsibilities.” One of the most important
responsibilities of the adult members of any
society, a sacred trust from one generation to
the next, is making sure the society, and the
environment which sustains it, goes on.
T h i s s e n s e o f i n t e r- g e n e r a t i o n a l
responsibility, and an attendant sense of
gratitude for the blessings of this special place,
are beautifully and powerfully expressed in the
Preamble to our Constitution: “We the people
of Montana grateful to God for the quiet beauty
of our state, the grandeur of our mountains,
the vastness of our rolling plains, and desiring
to improve the quality of life, equality of
opportunity and to secure the blessings of
liberty for this and future generations do
ordain and establish this constitution.” Some
native cultures are said to manifest this sense
of moral responsibility to future generations
by considering the impacts of their present
actions even unto the seventh generation yet
to come.
Out beyond the war of talking heads
that dominates our media with the drama
of the moment, I believe that many seeming
ideological adversaries share a concern for the
quality of life that we are leaving our children
continued on page 15
November 2011
14
Protecting Montana’s natural environment since 1973.
MONTANA
ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION
CENTER
Thoughts from the Executive Director
by Jim Jensen
Over the last few weeks much media
attention has been devoted to the fact that
the number of humans beings has reached 7
billion – a very big number.
Pulit zer Prize -winning author Jared
Diamond wrote in 2008 in a New York Times
guest editorial: “The average rates at which
people consume resources like oil and
metals, and produce wastes like plastics and
greenhouse gases, are about 32 times higher
in North America, Western Europe, Japan, and
Australia than they are in the developing world.
That factor of 32 has big consequences.”
Especially for energy consumption and
global warming.
Diamond pointed out that “much American
consumption is wasteful and contributes little
or nothing to quality of life. For example, per
capita oil consumption in Western Europe
is about half of ours, yet Western Europe’s
standard of living is higher by any reasonable
criterion, including life expectancy, health,
infant mortality, access to medical care,
financial security after retirement, vacation
time, quality of public schools, and support
for the arts. Ask yourself whether Americans’
wasteful use of gasoline contributes positively
to any of those measures.”
Obama Administration chief science
advisor Dr. John Holdren (a former president of
the American Association for the Advancement
of Science) wrote an article over a decade ago
in which he explained
what determines
our total energy
co nsu m p ti o n . I t is
obvious.
“ To t a l e n e r g y
consumption, for a
country or the world,
equals population size
times the average per
capita energy use. So
if E = total energy use,
P = population size, and e = energy use per
capita, we can say E = P x e.”
There is no getting around this simple math.
It means we have no chance of conquering our
energy and environmental challenges if we
ignore either of the two factors--per capita
consumption or population.
It is precisely because the impact of U.S.
population growth is magnified by our high
per capita consumption rates (remember that
number 32) that many experts call the U.S.
population problem the worst in the world.
With regard to oil use, for example, at current
consumption levels, adding one person to the
U.S. population is equivalent to adding about
15 people in China.
Virtually none of our national political
officials are willing to mention either population
or per capita consumption, let alone engage a
discussion of them. We need to change that.
Now.
President’s Letter
(continued from page 14)
and grandchildren. We need to find ways to
give creative and effective voice to this unifying
concern. While recognizing the claims of the
“Me Generation” and “Gen X” and “Gen Y,” we
must also fulfill our moral responsibility for the
condition of the earth that we leave to “Gen
7th.” In essence this is what MEIC is about, and
I’m honored to be a part of it.
Find us on Facebook:
www.facebook.com/MTEIC
Clean & Healthful. It’s your right, our mission.
15
November 2011
Nonprofit
Organization
U.S. Postage
PAID
Permit No. 93
Livingston, MT
MONTANA ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION CENTER
P.O. Box 1184
Helena, MT 59624
CHANGE SERVICE REQUESTED
‘Tis the Season!
Happy Thanksgiving, and best wishes for the upcoming holiday season, to you and your family! As the
year comes to a close, many people choose to make gifts to family, friends, and charitable organizations. Are you tired of buying more and more stuff that others really don’t need? How about giving
the gift of a clean and healthy Montana instead? Here’s how you can do it:
•
•
•
Double your money – and impact – by responding to MEIC’s challenge grant fundraising appeal
with a generous gift. MEIC has the exciting opportunity to receive a $10,000 grant – but only if
members like you match it dollar-for-dollar by December 31st.
Give an MEIC membership to friends, family, or co-workers. This gift will keep on giving all year
long to protect clean water and air, and healthy landscapes. As you know, members are the heart
and soul of MEIC – the larger our numbers, the stronger we are!
Join MEIC’s monthly giving program! It’s often difficult to give one large gift, so this way you can
spread your giving out in smaller amounts over the year. Monthly giving also provides MEIC with
a source of predictable income throughout the year.
In this season of giving, won’t you please take this opportunity to give back to the rivers and streams,
big skies, and wild places that have enriched your lives. Please give as generously as you can. You may
use the enclosed postage-paid envelope, donate online at our website, www.meic.org, or call the MEIC
office at 406-443-2520.
Thank you for your past and continued support!