As the exuberance for “cheap, domestic” natural gas has heightened, so has pressure to build new pipelines and power plants.  Often lost in the frenzy, however, is the sobering reality that our existing natural gas infrastructure is in need of some serious care and attention.  A recent study highlighted the fact that the pipelines that deliver gas to our homes and businesses are riddled with thousands of leaks.  A large number of those leaks can be blamed on a system that still includes significant amounts of cast iron–some of which dates back to the 1830s.

Explosions in Philadelphia and Allentown, Pennsylvania in 2011 as well as a 2009 explosion in Gloucester, MA were traced to aging cast iron.  Coupled with the massive San Bruno explosion, the issue spurred the U.S. Department of Transportation to issue a “Call to Action” urging regulators and pipeline operators to accelerate the repair and replacement of high risk pipe.  Given this sense of urgency, the estimated timelines for replacement seem interminably long:

•  81% of the remaining cast iron is buried in only 10 states:

• Of these states, seven have implemented programs with deadlines for complete replacement:

• New Jersey – 2035; New York – 2090; Pennsylvania – 2111; Michigan – 2040; Illinois – 2031; Alabama – 2040; Connecticut – 2080; Missouri – 2059.

Really? Decades to get the job done, at best?  And about a century to fully “modernize” pipes in some states? Sad, but true.

Though public safety is the primary driver behind pipe replacement and repair, whether the natural gas industry ultimately delivers on its claims for being less damaging to the climate than oil or coal depends on how well natural gas infrastructure addresses leaks.  In addition, those who are clamoring to blindly forge ahead expanding new natural gas infrastructure before we’ve fully assessed the condition of our current system would do well to remember the lessons that New England has already learned so well about the financial and environmental benefits of looking to efficiency first.  Not only is investment in new pipelines and power plants expensive, but it comes with serious and lasting environmental consequences whose costs are too often discounted or ignored.  Why not maximize opportunities for operating the existing natural gas system more efficiently first, before building (and paying for) more?

Despite the fact that we know natural gas prices are predictably volatile, several states have begun to take action to lock energy customers into long-term commitments to buy natural gas-fired power, thus locking them into paying for the fuel even when the price spikes.  For example, here in Massachusetts, one legislator has championed the idea of providing 10-20 year long term contracts for a new natural gas plant.  The problem with signing a long-term contract for electricity from gas is that while customers benefit when the cost of gas is low, they suffer when the price spikes, as it inevitably does.  That’s notably different from long-term contracts for renewable energy which typically have a guaranteed, fixed price.

Proposals for new massive interstate pipelines are in the works as well.  Spectra, a Houston-based natural gas pipeline company is proposing a $500 million expansion for Massachusetts. And all the lines on the map for proposed expansions of pipeline leading from the Marcellus Shale to the Northeast rival the Griswold Family Christmas lights display.

Before we spend billions on new infrastructure chasing the next gold rush, we must repair and rebuild our existing infrastructure and examine the tried and true tool of efficiency.   A recent study on the potential for natural gas efficiency in Massachusetts showed that efficiency could reduce winter electric demand enough to support the increased use of gas on the system without building new infrastructure:

From Jonathan Peress's presentation at the Restructuring Roundtable on June 15, 2012

But there is a risk that regulators will not fully take these very real benefits into account as they review and approve the latest energy efficiency plans.  Indeed, traditional energy efficiency naysayers are using the low price of gas as an excuse to call for reduced investment in efficiency.

The bottom line is that natural gas does have a role in our energy future, but it  is one that must be carefully managed and minimized over time if we are to have any hope of averting climate catastrophe.  In the meantime, before we jump to expand new natural gas infrastructure, we need to look closely at what we already have in the ground and apply the lessons we’ve learned about efficiency.

On the day after Thanksgiving, an explosion shook the City of Springfield. A natural gas pipeline leak led to the explosion that injured eighteen people and brought down two buildings.  The details behind the cause of this explosion are still being pieced together, but  once again, public confidence has been shaken in the pipeline system that is supposed to transport natural gas safely and reliably to homes, businesses and institutions in communities throughout the nation. Today, CLF is releasing a report on the importance of addressing problems with our aging, leaky natural gas  infrastructure. (You can download a free copy of that report here, and find the press release here.)

In Massachusetts, local distribution companies operate almost 21,000 miles of pipeline—that’s almost enough pipe to encircle the earth. But people seldom give much thought to those pipes that are running beneath their homes, beneath their businesses and beneath their feet.

That has been changing since the explosions that rocked San Bruno, California in 2010 and Allentown, Pennsylvania, in 2011. Shortly afterwards, the Secretary of the Department of Transportation issued a national “Call to Action” to address pipeline safety, but there are still many hurdles to be overcome. One of the toughest obstacles to tackle is the replacement of aging, leak-prone pipelines and the swift repair of leaks on the system. Public safety is the primary driver behind the repair and replacement of aging pipes, but it is also important to recognize the added benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, conserving a valuable resource, and reducing ratepayer costs.

The need for action is particularly acute in Massachusetts where over one-third of the system is considered “leak-prone”—made up of cast iron or unprotected steel pipe. According to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 50% of the cast iron left on the United States distribution system is centered in only four states: Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania. Though Massachusetts regulators have been working to find solutions to this problem, there is more to be done.

This infographic underscores the need for additional work in Massachusetts. So significant are the leaks that the gains from efficiency programs put in place by Massachusetts regulators have been overwhelmed by the amount of gas lost through leaky pipes. The costs of those leaks are being borne not by the utilities, or by the regulators, but by consumers. Utilities pass the cost of lost gas onto ratepayers to the tune of $38.8 million a year.

“Fugitive emissions from aging gas pipelines across Massachusetts are polluting our environment – releasing more greenhouse gases than we are saving through all of our energy efficiency efforts,” said D. Michael Langford, national president of the Utility Workers Union of America. “This is problematic for the environment and the economy, but fixing this problem provides an important opportunity. Putting people to work fixing leak-prone pipelines will save Massachusetts ratepayers money by simultaneously modernizing our pipe infrastructure, improving efficiency and helping to protect the environment.”

Fortunately, there are some clear policy options that could be implemented relatively quickly to prevent this valuable resource from endangering the public and vanishing into thin air.  ”The good news is that not only would these policies increase public safety and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but they also provide an opportunity to create good, local jobs,” according to Cindy Luppi, New England Director of Clean Water Action.  As she points out, “local neighborhoods, as well as first responders, will bear the brunt of impacts if this aging system experiences an explosion.   We hope all public officials will embrace real solutions that value health and safety, ratepayer equity and climate leadership.”

As outlined in our report, Into Thin Air, CLF is advocating for five specific policies to accelerate the replacement of aging pipe and ensure that existing pipeline is properly examined and repaired:

1)    Establishing Leak Classification and Repair Timelines that provide a uniform system for classifying leaks according to level of hazard and require repair within a specified time;

2)    Limiting or Ending Cost Recovery for Lost and Unaccounted for Gas so that companies have an incentive to identify the causes of lost gas and prevent them;

3)    Expanding existing replacement programs and adding performance benchmarks;

4)    Changing Service Quality Standards to include requirements for reducing leaks on the system;

5)    Enhancing monitoring and reporting requirements to give the public and regulators more information.

Over the coming months, we’ll be working with our allies at Clean Water Action and the BlueGreen Alliance to raise public awareness about the need to tackle this issue. We’ll also work with communities to make sure they know how to identify and report gas leaks and talk with them about the benefits of policies that make for a safer, cleaner natural gas system. If you’re interested in joining us, please contact me at scleveland@clf.org.

Today marks the launch of the Coal Free Massachusetts Coalition Campaign to Phase Out Coal, Protect Public Health, and Transition to 21st Century Clean Energy. Across the state, in communities where the remaining coal plants operate, local residents and supporters have joined to call for the end of coal. The campaign issued the following statement:

It’s time to end reliance on coal-fired power plants in Massachusetts according to a new state-wide coalition of environmental, public health, faith and community groups, and elected officials. Citizens gathered in coordinated events across the state in Somerset, Holyoke, and Salem to announce a new Massachusetts campaign to protect public health and communities, renew efforts to make the transition to energy efficiency and clean renewable energy sources, and revitalize local economies to create more jobs.

Coal Free Massachusetts announced the following platform:

• Phase out all of Massachusetts’ coal-fired power plants by 2020;
• Advance energy efficiency and clean renewable energy like responsibly sited wind and solar to
  support the transition from coal electricity generation in Massachusetts
• Partner with and empower community leadership and vision for clean energy and clean-tech
  development for our host communities, including:
• Robust transition plans focused on the long-term health of the community
• Innovative opportunities for growing the green economy
• Support for workers and municipal revenues

Coal burning is highly polluting and devastating from a public health perspective. The coal burning plants in Massachusetts – Salem Harbor Station, Mount Tom (Holyoke), and Brayton Point Station (Somerset) – are the largest air polluters in the Commonwealth. In 2011, coal only provided 8% of the total energy in New England but still emitted more than 8 million tons of CO2 in Massachusetts alone. One in 10 New Englanders suffer from asthma and MA ranks 20th in mortality linked to coal plants. A 2010 Clean Air Task Force report showed that pollution from coal-fired power plants causes 251 deaths, 211 hospital admissions, and 471 heart attacks in Massachusetts every year. Nationwide more than 112 coal plants have announced retirement under pressure from local communities and efforts to protect public health. MA spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually – $252 million in 2008 alone – importing coal from other states and countries, including some places that are hostile to the US.

CLF has long worked to clean up dirty, polluting power plants, and is proud to be part of this continued effort to move Massachusetts away from reliance on coal and towards clean energy resources such as efficiency, conservation and renewable generation.  Click on the links to find out more about what CLF and the Coal Free Massachusetts coalition are doing and how you can join!

A keystone to CLF’s work to secure a clean energy future for the region is completing the transition to a coal-free New England. It is a time of historic progress: cleaner, cheaper alternatives are driving coal out of the market, and old coal plants are closing their doors. But Massachusetts remains a critical battleground for CLF’s work, with two costly old coal-fired power plants continuing to jeopardize public health and stoke climate change.

That’s why we’re delighted to tell you about an event hosted by Cambridge City Councilor Marjorie Decker entitled “The True Cost of Energy: Coal.” Councilor Decker has invited the public to a panel discussing the true costs of coal and a free screening of the critically acclaimed documentary The Last Mountain in Cambridge, MA, on Wednesday, May 9. With stunning footage of the practice of mountaintop removal mining, the film bears dramatic witness to the social, public health, and environmental damage wrought by coal and power companies, and chronicles the grassroots fight against coal in Appalachia and around the country. The New York Times called The Last Mountain a “persuasive indictment” of coal; I think you’ll agree.

The Last Mountain producer Eric Grunebaum will be on hand for a panel discussion to discuss the film and the future of coal-fired power in Massachusetts and New England. I will be available before and after the event to answer any questions you may have about CLF’s work to secure a coal-free Massachusetts.

Please attend:
When: Wednesday, May 9, 2012. 5-8:30 pm.
Where: Cambridge Public Library, 449 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02138 (map).

Bring your friends and family, and email me at scleveland@clf.org with any questions. I hope to see you there!

You can watch the trailer here:

The wait is finally over. There is a clear path to the complete shutdown of Salem Harbor Station by June 1, 2014. Yesterday, ISO-NE presented its preferred option for upgrading the transmission system to relieve any need for the polluting, obsolete, and un-economic coal- and oil-fired plant. The solution is simple, cost-effective, and clean.

Instead of propping up the 60-year-old plant with above-market payments to be on call when electricity demand is highest, a transmission solution would upgrade the lines so they can carry more power into the area. The advantages are clear: by upgrading the transmission infrastructure, ratepayers will reap the benefits of a reliable system for years into the future at much lower cost than continuing to operate an out-of-date plant that emits tons of toxic pollution into the air each year.

The preferred alternative identified by ISO-NE is one of four that it presented in a compliance filing it submitted to FERC in December of 2010. FERC had directed ISO-NE to identify these solutions as the result of a protest lodged by CLF. The presentation yesterday was a result of Dominion’s February 2011 request to retire all four units at Salem Harbor Station. Although ISO-NE determined that Units 3 & 4 may still be necessary for reliability under existing system conditions, it has concluded that the proposed alternative would allow the units to retire without impacting system reliability.

The focus on existing lines, rather than building new ones, would reduce the cost and the timeline for implementation of the solution. CLF is confident that these upgrades can be completed and placed in operation in time to ensure that Salem Harbor Station shuts down no later than 2014, and possibly even earlier. With a confirmed date for shutdown, Salem residents and area ratepayers can better anticipate what’s next for Salem and pursue clean energy alternatives and economic development options now being studied for the site. CLF will work with ISO-NE, the transmission owners, and state agencies to make an expedited shutdown a reality.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (known as “FERC”) has delivered a clear message: the time to plan for a future without coal is now. This comes in response to a protest submitted in October by CLF that challenged a decision by the New England Independent System Operator (ISO-NE) that could have kept the 60 year old Salem Harbor Station running for years longer, despite the damage it causes to public health and the environment and the huge costs it imposes on ratepayers.

CLF argued that ISO-NE, the overseers of the regional electricity system under FERC’s supervision, should have developed an alternative to retaining units at Salem Harbor Station to meet the area’s reliability need.  CLF therefore asked FERC to step in to expedite the planning process. Today, the FERC issued a decision directing ISO-NE to find a solution that would allow shutdown of the Salem Harbor power plant – a dirty, obsolete and unprofitable plant that has long outlived its lifespan and has requested to leave the market.

“We…order ISO-NE to submit a compliance filing within 60 days that either identifies alternatives to resolve the reliability need for Salem Harbor Units 3 and 4 and the time to implement those solutions, or includes an expedited timeline for identifying and implementing alternatives.”

The news that FERC is mandating action to ensure that this dirty coal plant can retire without impacting reliability is a game changing development of national significance. The Chicken Little warning that old coal is needed to keep the lights on—brandished by coal interests primarily to delay long overdue emissions reductions requirements—simply isn’t true.  Today FERC concurred that the sky will not fall – the lights will not go out without old coal – if we envision a future without it and plan for that future.  That future starts here in New England with a concrete plan and timeline for life without Salem Harbor Station.

Students from the Environmental Law Clinic at Columbia Law School provided excellent research in support of CLF’s filing.

In the wake of Dominion’s announcement that it would not be cost effective to continue to operate and invest additional capital for pollution controls at Salem Harbor Station, the Patrick Administration has sent a message to ISO-NE calling for action.  In a letter to the President of ISO-NE, Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs, Ian Bowles, highlighted the need to invest in clean energy instead of propping up old, environmentally obsolete coal plants such as Salem Harbor Station.  Secretary Bowles urged ISO-NE to “quickly implement” a solution to allow Salem Harbor Station to retire.

Clean energy policy has been one of the centerpieces of the Patrick Administration, and this letter signals not only the Administration’s commitment to building clean, new energy infrastructure, but also the important role they have in hastening the retirement of the coal-fired power plants that cause significant damage to public health and the environment.

ISO-NE is responsible for finding an alternative that will remove any need for Salem Harbor Station; however, after 7 years of transmission upgrades and planning, ISO-NE rejected Dominion’s request to remove Salem Harbor Station from the market over concerns that the plant could be needed on the hottest days of the year.  CLF has been pushing ISO-NE to expedite its planning process so that ratepayers will not be forced to bear the costs of keeping this 60 year old coal and oil plant on line despite its continued struggles to meet environmental regulations. 

The Secretary’s letter is particularly timely given that ISO-NE will host meetings on December 15 and December 16 to discuss the planning process for replacing Salem Harbor Station.

Photo credit: Marilyn Humphries

It may come as no surprise that Dominion Energy ‘s spokespeople don’t want to admit that Dominion’s  recent moves to “delist” Salem Harbor Station are signs that Dominion plans to shut the plant down (read recent statements here and here).  Dominion has been spinning stories about the plant to local audiences for years.  But apparently, Dominion CFO Mark McGettrick has no such trouble. At a financial conference at the Edison Electric Institute on November 2, McGettrick confirmed that the plant will shut down within five years. “We have announced that two of our coal plants will shut down in the future when the environmental rules are clear. The first is Salem Harbor in the Northeast. We’ve already tried to delist a few of those units, but the ISO has required the two biggest ones for reliability. But in the near future, certainly within this five year horizon, we would expect Salem Harbor plant to shut down. We will not be investing any capital for environmental improvements at Salem Harbor.”* No mincing words for McGettrick.

So there you have it. Salem Harbor is going to shut down within five years.  Dominion says it will not invest any more money in environmental improvements at the plant. So, if ISO-NE continues to find the plant is needed for reliability, who will pay the price for those improvements? Ratepayers. Specifically, the ratepayers who live in the shadow of this plant in northeastern Massachusetts. That’s why ISO-NE must act now to find an alternative to Salem Harbor Station.  CLF has stepped in to ask the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to order ISO-NE to meet its responsibility, so that ratepayers can avoid these costs.  CLF will continue working to accelerate shutdown to prevent further damage to public health and the environment and to stop Dominion and ISO-NE from forcing ratepayers to prop up this polluting dinosaur of a plant that should have been closed years ago.

*Listen to the announcement via Google Finance
Clip can be found at 22:30

Articles in this morning’s Boston Globe and Salem News describe an important shift in the status of Salem Harbor Station and highlight the need for ISO New England (ISO-NE) to go beyond the analyses it has done in the past so that it can finally identify an alternative that will actually solve the reliability issue that has dogged efforts to retire the plant since 2003.  That is the subject of the recent protest filed by CLF asking the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to require ISO-NE to perform an expedited analysis of the alternatives and establish a timeline for implementation.

ISO-NE’s failure to identify solutions that will relieve the need for Salem Harbor Station has resulted in decisions that will cost ratepayers up to $18.5 million in above market payments in 2012-2013 and up to $16.9 million in 2013-2014. ISO-NE could avoid imposing these costs on ratepayers by implementing an alternative that would allow the plant to retire by 2012.

However, if ISO-NE rejects Dominion’s recent “permanent delist bid” – its latest and most telling signal that it wants to retire the plant – on the basis of reliability, ratepayers face the risk of even higher costs. The reality is that ratepayers pay more per kilowatt for electricity from Salem Harbor Station than they pay for other sources of electricity in the capacity market ranging from natural gas to nuclear and renewable.  This dispels the perception that coal is a cheap source of electricity.   Importantly, these additional costs aren’t spread among ratepayers throughout New England; instead, they are passed on solely to the ratepayers in northeastern Massachusetts, the same people who already bear the costs of additional medical expenses from the heart and lung diseases and other illnesses caused by pollution from the plant.  A study released by Clean Air Task Force concluded that pollution from the Salem Harbor Station causes 20 deaths, 36 heart attacks and 316 asthma attacks every year.

These costs diminish any economic benefits that the City of Salem receives from tax payments and jobs at the plant, and the likelihood that Dominion will retire in 2014 if its de-list bid is accepted makes it more important than ever that an alternative use for the site be developed to replace the facility.

Dominion’s claims that it is not planning to retire the plant contradict its own filings before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  Continuing a tradition of telling the story that best suits its interests depending on the audience, Dominion told the Commission in a 2009 filing that it estimated only three more years of economic viability for the plant.  Dominion spokesman Dan Genest told the Salem News, “We know what it costs us to produce a megawatt of electricity at Salem Harbor Station, and the lower price at auction is not enough to cover our costs to generate electricity.” Despite its claims that it can continue to make profits in other markets, Dominion has said in its own filings that it was likely to lose money in those markets.

The bottom line is that ISO-NE has a responsibility to find an alternative to replace Salem Harbor Station that will cost less.  Now that the threat of even higher costs looms, protecting ratepayers demands a solution by no later than 2014, and the public health and environmental harms caused by the operation of this 60 year old coal and oil-fired relic weighs heavily in favor of shutting down the plant as soon as possible.