|
|
 COLUMBUS — As of May 4, 2010, Baard Energy had no “contract with any vendor to construct any portion of Phase I, II, or III of the [Ohio River Clean Fuels coal refinery],” according to Anthony Giuliani, an attorney for Baard Energy. The admission came in response to a “Request for Production of Documents” by the Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club as part of litigation over the air pollution permit for the proposed coal refinery. The complete text of document request #14 and Giuliani’s answer follows:
14. Produce a copy of any contract with any vendor to construct any portion of Phase I, II, or III of the ORCF [Ohio River Clean Fuels coal refinery] Facility.
Answer: Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, ORCF states that there are no responsive documents.
In everyday use, “vendor” is a retail salesperson without an established place of business, such as a street vendor or a ballpark vendor. In business, however, “vendor” refers to any company that supplies parts or services to another company.
Ohio Citizen Action obtained a copy of the document through a public records review at the Ohio Environmental Review Appeals Commission.
– Paul Ryder, Organizing Director, Ohio Citizen Action
 CLEVELAND — The air pollution permit for the proposed Baard Energy coal refinery expired two months ago, according to a legal filing with the Ohio Environmental Review Appeals Commission by two national environmental organizations. The Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club note in their brief that Baard Energy had neither begun construction, entered into contracts, nor requested a permit extension from Ohio EPA by May 20, 2010, eighteen months after the permit was granted.
In their motion, the groups ask the Commission to either vacate or revoke the proposed coal refinery’s air pollution permit. Baard Energy has not responded to this filing and the Commission has not ruled on the motion.
Ohio Citizen Action obtained a non-confidential copy of the July 13 motion through a public records review at the Commission.
The Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease law firm had announced in June that it was withdrawing as legal counsel for Baard Energy. On July 1, Christopher Jones and Christopher Ward of the Calfee, Halter and Griswold law firm notified the Commission they would represent Baard in this case. Jones was the Ohio EPA Director under Governor Bob Taft.
The air permit case had originally been scheduled for June but was cancelled when Vorys abruptly withdrew. On July 15, the Commission gave the attorneys in the case until August 16 to file a case management schedule for a February 7, 2011 hearing.
— Sandy Buchanan, Executive Director, Ohio Citizen Action
 Louisville, Kentucky and the Ohio River CINCINNATI — On behalf of Ohio Citizen Action, I strongly urge you to hold a public hearing on the proposed new coal ash regulations in or around Louisville, Kentucky. None of the proposed Public Hearings regarding the Coal Combustion Residuals Rule, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640, are scheduled for locations in the Ohio River Valley area.
The Ohio River Valley is more saturated with coal combustion waste disposal sites than any other region in the country. The most recent Department of Energy statistics show that the Ohio River Valley states of Ohio, Indiana and Kentucky are home to more than 6 million tons of coal ash. According to the most recent Department of Energy statistics, this is more than 30% of the nation’s entire coal waste. In addition, 15 of the 44 EPA high hazard sites are in the Ohio River Valley.
Millions and millions of people in the Ohio River Valley get our drinking water from the Ohio River, making the disposal and storage of coal ash waste in the valley extremely risky. Please reconsider your decision and hold a public hearing in Louisville, Kentucky.
— Rachael Belz, Coal Program organizer, Ohio Citizen Action
Read the letter
The USEPA is also accepting written comments on the proposed rule until September 20, 2010. Ohio Citizen Action is urging the USEPA to regulate coal ash with the stronger of the two proposals, called Subtitle C, rather than the more lax proposal of Subtitle D.
 CLEVELAND — Baard Energy has failed to meet a July 14 court deadline to respond to a lawsuit. for unpaid bills filed by contractor CH2MHill, according to the docket of the U.S. District Court for the Southern Division of Ohio. CH2MHill sued Baard in March for “over $75,000” for work performed for the Baard Energy proposed coal refinery in Wellsville, Ohio. Baard has not only failed to answer the lawsuit, but has not even registered the name of an attorney to represent the company in the case.
CH2MHill is apparently not the only contractor whom Baard has allegedly not paid for its work on this project. In a deposition filed at the Ohio Environmental Review Appeals Commission, a representative of Civil and Environmental Consultants of Pittsburgh claimed the company is owed “a significant amount” of money, estimated at “over half” of its half a million dollar billings.
— Sandy Buchanan, Executive Director, Ohio Citizen Action
 Jimmy Weekley, 70, has been fighting the Spruce 1 coal project for a dozen years. The proposed mine would blast off the tops of peaks and fill in several stream beds above his home in Pigeonroost Hollow. (Todd Heisler/New York Times) BLAIR, WV — “Federal officials are considering whether to veto mountaintop mining above a little Appalachian valley called Pigeonroost Hollow, a step that could be a turning point for one of the country’s most contentious environmental disputes.
The Army Corps of Engineers approved a permit in 2007 to blast 400 feet off the hilltops here to expose the rich coal seams, disposing of the debris in the upper reaches of six valleys, including Pigeonroost Hollow.
But the Environmental Protection Agency under the Obama administration, in a break with President George W. Bush’s more coal-friendly approach, has threatened to halt or sharply scale back the project known as Spruce 1. The agency asserts that the project would irrevocably damage streams and wildlife and violate the Clean Water Act.”
— Erik Eckholm, New York Times
Read the whole story
 Martinsville Mayor Kim Adkins MARTINSVILLE, VA — “Martinsville Mayor Kim Adkins wants city officials and electric customers alike to have the same information about the city’s participation in American Municipal Power (AMP) generation projects…
She said she understands that city residents have a lot of concerns about the city’s participation in the AMP projects. ‘The council shares those concerns, just like the citizens,’ she said. ‘I share the concerns’ as well. She said she wants officials ‘to give the city a complete picture of how the city acquires electricity.’ ‘We need to get AMP to explain every dollar’ that so far has been spent on the projects, said Councilman Danny Turner.
— Mickey Powell, Martinsville Bulletin
Read the whole story
 EAST LIVERPOOL — “The Columbiana County Port Authority has again extended a series of property purchase/option agreements for the Baard Energy project, but this will likely be the last time…
This is the third time the port authority has extended the agreements since it was awarded a $4.5 million state loan in January 2009 to purchase 522 acres outside of Wellsville on behalf of Baard Energy, which intends to build a $6 billion plant that converts coal and biomass into synthetic jet and diesel fuel. The port authority has been forced to extend the option agreements because of Baard’s inability to secure financing for the project.”
— Tom Giambroni, Lisbon Morning Journal
Read the whole story
 WARREN — “Baard Energy and the Columbiana County Port Authority need more time to create one of the largest economic development projects in the world. President Barack Obama appears to be working against them.”
— editorial, Warren Tribune Chronicle
Read the whole story
Five Chicago suburbs and dozens of other Midwest towns in power-plant deal now face the prospect of rising electricity bills
 CHICAGO, IL — “Sold on a promise of cheap, clean electricity, dozens of communities in Illinois and eight other Midwest states instead are facing more expensive utility bills after bankrolling a new coal-fired power plant that will be one of the nation’s largest sources of climate-change pollution.
As the Prairie State Energy Campus rises out of a Downstate field, its price tag already has more than doubled to $4.4 billion — costs that will largely be borne by municipalities including the suburbs of Naperville, Batavia, Geneva, St. Charles and Winnetka.
The communities are locked into 28-year contracts that will require higher electricity rates to cover the construction overruns, documents and interviews show. Municipal officials told the Tribune they expect costs to soar even higher before the plant begins operating next year.”
— Michael Hawthorne, Chicago Tribune
Read the whole story
 One of the homes destroyed by the December 2008 Tennessee Valley Authority coal ash disaster in Harriman, Tenn. Photo by Lyndsay Moseley. WASHINGTON, D.C. — “How would you like to live near a pile of toxic waste that, every time the wind blew, spread its particles into your neighborhood? Or this—how would you like to live near a pond full of toxic waste that had no liner and could be seeping into the groundwater and nearby waterways with no penalty?
This is happening to thousands of Americans right now—and the toxic waste is coal ash, the by-product of burning coal for energy.
Coal-fired power plants produce approximately 131 million tons of waste per year, making coal combustion waste the second largest industrial waste stream in the U.S. Coal ash contains numerous hazardous chemicals, including arsenic, selenium, lead, mercury, cadmium, chromium, boron, thallium, and aluminum.
When coal ash comes into contact with water, these hazardous materials leach out of the waste and contaminate groundwater and surface water. [2] These substances are poisonous and can cause cancer and damage the nervous system or other organs, especially in children.”
— Sarah Hodgdon, Sierra Club
Read the whole story
|
Comment Guidelines Our reader comments section is moderated. We will post constructive ideas, comments, or criticisms on our issues, campaigns, and organization, signed with the reader's own name. We welcome differing points of view. If you are a whistle blower, and do not want to give your own name, the comments section is not for you. In that case, please contact our staff directly, and we will protect your anonymity. If you have questions, please write Angela Oster or call her at (216) 861-5200. |
Recent Comments