PIPELINES

new nodes, see also xl, Keystone XL

dapl

see oil chem spill, gulf spill,

see critical infra

===

---

Trump just declared an 'energy emergency.' Here's what it ...

The Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com › 2025/01/20 › trump...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2025/01/20/trump-day-one-executive-orders-energy/)

2 days ago — In a Day 1 executive order, President Donald Trump withdrew from the landmark climate accord. Additional orders on energy are expected.

NO LNX WAPO

Trump just declared an ‘energy emergency.’ Here’s what it means.

In Day 1 executive orders, President Donald Trump withdrew from the landmark climate accord and pushed to dismantle his predecessor’s environmental agenda.

January 20, 2025

By Maxine Joselow, Chico Harlan and Evan Halper

During his first moments as the nation’s 47th president Monday, Donald Trump moved to withdraw the United States from the Paris agreement, boost domestic fossil fuel production and reverse many of former president Joe Biden’s signature efforts to combat climate change and other pressing environmental problems.

The flurry of executive orders drew cheers from the fossil fuel industry but raised fears among U.S. allies about the future of global climate initiatives. The United States ranks as the largest historical emitter of planet-warming greenhouse gases, and its exit from the Paris accord threatens to derail emissions-cutting efforts during a critical four-year period.

Nations pledged in 2015 to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels — a crucial threshold for averting the most catastrophic climate impacts. But scientists recently confirmed that 2024 was the first year to surpass this threshold — and the hottest year on record.

Trump signed an executive order pulling out of the Paris climate accord during an event with supporters at Capital One Arena in D.C. He slammed the accord as “unfair” and “one-sided,” prompting loud applause from the crowd.

Later on Monday in the Oval Office, Trump signed additional executive orders declaring a “national energy emergency,” boosting oil and gas drilling in Alaska, “unleashing American energy” and stopping new offshore wind projects in federal waters. It was not immediately clear what government actions the energy emergency would entail, although Trump allies have suggested it could allow federal agencies to quickly approve pipelines and other fossil fuel infrastructure deemed important to national security.:

In the orders, Trump directed agencies to review dozens of Biden’s environmental policies and, if possible, quickly reverse them. He instructed the Energy Department to end the Biden administration’s pause on approving new facilities that export liquefied natural gas, and he instructed the Interior Department to lift restrictions on oil and gas drilling across millions of acres of federal lands in Alaska, including in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

“We will drill, baby, drill,” Trump declared in his second inaugural address Monday, adding that the United States has “the largest amount of oil and gas of any country on Earth, and we are going to use it.” (In fact, Venezuela and Saudi Arabia have the biggest oil reserves, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.)

It is common for presidents to sign executive orders on their first day that reverse some of their predecessors’ decisions. But the contrast between Biden’s climate legacy and Trump’s energy agenda is particularly pronounced, heralding a seismic shift in policy across the federal government.

Some of the steps outlined in Trump’s executive orders, such as ending the pause on new LNG exports, will take effect immediately. Other efforts, such as rewriting complicated regulations, could take months or even years.

For instance, it could take years for the Environmental Protection Agency and the Transportation Department to weaken fuel-efficiency standards for cars and light trucks, which Biden strengthened. Though Trump has described these rules as an “electric vehicle mandate,” they do not ban the sale of new vehicles powered by gasoline or diesel.

In some cases, market forces could have a greater impact on the nation’s energy landscape than the new administration’s policies. The price of oil, for instance, tends to dictate companies’ decisions about major new investments in drilling and refining.

Trump had made no secret of his energy agenda for his first day in office, frequently boasting about his plans after his November victory over Biden.

“I will sign Day One orders to end all Biden restrictions on energy production, terminate his insane electric vehicle mandate, cancel his natural gas export ban, reopen [Arctic National Wildlife Refuge] in Alaska — the biggest site, potentially anywhere in the world — and declare a national energy emergency,” Trump said in December.

Former North Dakota governor Doug Burgum, Trump’s pick for interior secretary and “energy czar,” also suggested during his confirmation hearing Thursday that the incoming administration could consider declaring an energy emergency because of soaring electricity demand.

“This is part of a larger crisis our nation is facing around electricity,” Burgum told the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

The energy emergency declaration relies heavily on concerns about the nation’s power grid not being able to keep up with surging demand, particularly from tech companies developing artificial intelligence. It stresses that the nation’s “ability to remain at the forefront of technological innovation” requires more energy.

In a call with reporters Monday morning, officials with the incoming administration stressed that the order is focused, in part, on keeping the United States ahead of China in the AI arms race.

The tech companies building these data centers had initially planned to power them solely with clean energy. But new wind and solar generation is not keeping up with the needs of the immense AI infrastructure, and tech companies are routinely being told their projects will have to wait years to come online.

Pulling out of Paris again

Among Trump’s initial climate moves, the decision to exit the Paris agreement stands as the most internationally consequential, reinforcing a sense that the United States is an unreliable partner in the global effort to reduce emissions. That sense had been growing even before Trump’s election, as the United States expanded its oil and gas production after joining other nations in pledging to phase out fossil fuels.

“We are back to countries performing actions in their narrow, short-term interests,” said Li Shuo, director of the China climate program at the Asia Society Policy Institute. “That will inform the judgment of all the other political capitals in the world that the zeitgeist of global climate action is not where it should be.”

In Beijing, China’s Foreign Ministry expressed concern over Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris agreement.

“Climate change is a common challenge faced by all of humanity. No country can stand apart from it or stay unaffected,” said Guo Jiakun, the ministry’s spokesman. “Upholding the concept of a shared future for mankind, China will work with all parties to actively tackle the challenges of climate change and jointly advance the global transition toward a green and low-carbon [future],” Guo said at a press briefing Tuesday.

Though Trump announced a similar action in 2017, at the start of his first term, the circumstances then were different: A rule stated that parties could withdraw from the accord, which came into force in 2016, only once it was three years old. Because the withdrawal process takes a year, the United States technically remained a member of the agreement until Nov. 4, 2020 — one day after voters awarded the presidency to Biden.

This time, the United States will be able to exit the accord more quickly. And the move will come at a perilous time for global climate efforts.

Right-wing parties, particularly in Europe, are gaining traction by pushing back against green policies. Wealthy countries are falling well short in financing climate-related projects in poorer nations, swelling a sense of injustice between the Global North and Global South — and leaving some countries worried about the viability of future global negotiations.

“A lot of countries could use [the U.S. exit] as an excuse to do little,” said Linda Kalcher, a former U.N. climate adviser and the founder of Strategic Perspectives, a Brussels-based climate policy group.

At the same time, many countries see an economic case for the clean-energy transition — and a political opportunity to fill a power vacuum.

China might have the most to gain, policymakers and experts predict. Already, China’s share of global solar panel manufacturing exceeds 80 percent. And Chinese-made EVs are surging in competition against those of American and European automakers. The United States’ withdrawal from the Paris accord could further cement a perception of Beijing as the superpower that can help the world cope with climate perils.

When Trump pulled out of the Paris agreement the first time, a group called America is All In announced that dozens of states, cities and corporations were still committed to the pact. Gina McCarthy, the former White House climate czar under Biden and the managing co-chair of America is All In, promised in a statement to continue that fight.

“Our states, cities, businesses, and local institutions stand ready to pick up the baton of U.S. climate leadership and do all they can — despite federal complacency — to continue the shift to a clean energy economy,” she said.

carbon dioxide pipeline rupture in the small village of Satartia, Mississippi, sent nearly 50 people to the hospital with “zombie”-like conditions in 2020, and now another major leak from a pipeline in Sulphur, Louisiana, has once again exposed the risks carbon dioxide pipelines pose to communities in their path.

Soon, pipelines like this could be coming to cities and towns throughout the country. Spurred by federal tax incentives from the Biden Administration, the fossil fuel industry is planning to build tens of thousands of miles of carbon dioxide (CO2) pipelines across the United States for experimental carbon capture and storage — a process aimed at sequestering carbon emissions from power plants, sending it through pipelines, and injecting it underground.

While regulators are working to craft updated safety rules for these pipelines, major fossil fuel companies and their trade groups — including Chevron, ConocoPhillips, the American Petroleum Institute, and the Liquid Energy Pipeline Association — have launched a lobbying blitz to scale back regulations and target the regulators themselves so they can construct new pipelines as quickly as possible.

Carbon dioxide is an asphyxiant. Upon entering the atmosphere during a pipeline leak or rupture, it can travel long distances, shut down vehicles, and sicken, suffocate, or even kill people and wildlife.

Only about 5,000 miles of carbon dioxide pipelines currently exist across the country, largely operating in states across the Midwest and Gulf Coast. Many communities, landowners,and environmental and public health groups have staunchly opposed and, in some cases, successfully prevented their build-out, such as eliminating the proposed 1,300-mile Navigator pipeline that would have crossed through five Midwestern states.

But now, this pipeline network could be greatly expanded. According to the U.S. Department of Energy and financial industry estimates, it could take up to 96,000 miles of new carbon dioxide pipelines — enough to wrap around the earth four times — to transport just 15 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, the federal agency tasked with pipeline safety, announced in 2022 that it would update rules for carbon dioxide pipelines.

The agency, which is overseen by Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and was implicated in the train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, is itself up for reauthorization, meaning Congress will reconsider its lawmaking mandates and funding. Now the pipeline industry, represented by its main lobbying group, the Liquid Energy Pipeline Association, is using both the rule-making and reauthorization processes to push its agenda forward.

“There is no need for adding a host of punitive provisions on the pipeline industry,” reads written January testimony from Andrew Black, the lobbying group’s president and CEO, to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has proposed a bill on the pipeline safety agency’s reauthorization. “The data just does not support those who wish to impose harsh new mandates or penalties on pipeline operators.”

On March 6, the Liquid Energy Pipeline Association arranged a meeting with the White House Office of Management and Budget, which is currently reviewing the draft carbon dioxide safety rules. Also present at the meeting were representatives from ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron, Marathon, TC Energy, Kinder Morgan, Phillips 66, and Valero, along with representatives from the Department of Transportation.

“THE ADMINSTRATION [sic] SHOULD AVOID AN OVERLY BROAD OR UNSUBSTANTIATED CO2 PIPELINES RULEMAKING THAT RISKS DELAY AND IMPERILS FINALIZATION,” reads the all-caps intro to the lobbying group’s talking points for that meeting.

In response to a request for comment, Liquid Energy Pipeline Association’s president and CEO Andy Black offered several reasons “why we think a measured approach to pipeline safety legislation is appropriate.” According to Black, federal data shows “the number of CO2 pipeline incidents is flat over the last 5 years,” and “Federal regulation imposes dozens of safety requirements on interstate CO2 pipelines on everything from design and construction to inspection, maintenance, and emergency response.”

Robin Rorick, one of the American Petroleum Institute's vice presidents, said in an email, “The safe use and development of CO2 pipelines will be critical as our industry and the nation as a whole advances its emissions reduction efforts. API will continue to work with [Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration] and industry experts to safely accelerate the widescale, responsible deployment of CO2 pipelines while protecting the environment and communities where we live and work.”

An Invisible Menace

The urgency of this issue reemerged this month after a carbon dioxide leak from a pipeline in Sulphur, Louisiana, co-owned by ExxonMobil and Denbury, a carbon capture developer that owns the country's largest carbon dioxide pipeline network.

Residents within a quarter mile of the leak received a phone notification to shelter in place. But others only received the news from a Facebook post by local officials, citing a “bust” in Exxon’s high-pressure carbon dioxide pipeline in Sulphur and warning residents to shut their doors and windows, turn off any ventilation, and wait.

While the proper procedure is to evacuate, local fire chief Todd Parker said changing winds near the leak made that impossible. “For the homes that were affected, they had to drive through the release to be able to get out, so we couldn’t evacuate them,” Parker explained. He said it took more than two hours for pipeline operators to stop the leak, which was called in by a resident who reported seeing “white clouds” coming from the pipeline.

In the meantime, Roishetta Ozane, a Sulphur resident and local environmental justice organizer, began fielding calls from panicked residents.

“People were reaching out asking me about what CO2 is,” Ozane said. But as a mom of six children, she was also scared and confused. “We know that this is colorless and odorless, so I just kept my children inside and made sure they were OK,” said Ozane. “Pipelines leak, CO2 leaks, and you don’t know it’s happened until tragedy has struck.”

She remembered the incident in Satartia, where another Denbury carbon dioxide pipeline rupture caused mass asphyxiation, turning people into dazed and unresponsive “zombies,” with some losing consciousness. As hundreds rushed to evacuate, vehicles became paralyzed, since cars need oxygen to burn fuel. Some residents still face serious health issues years later.

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration slapped Denbury with the second-largest fine in its history after the Satartia disaster for neglecting to address hazards to its pipeline system and notify emergency responders of the leak or train them to address such an accident before it happened.

The leak in Sulphur is “a very sobering introduction to how the companies will probably try to handle similar incidents,” said journalist Dan Zegart, who reported in depth on the Satartia disaster. “I say ‘similar incidents’ not even really knowing what [kind of leak] we’re talking about here, which is a perfect example of what we’re worried about in the future.”

No injuries have been reported so far in Sulphur — regulators are still investigating the leak and the local municipality said it did not have records to provide — but the bewildering incident highlights the uncertain future for residents in the path of the carbon dioxide pipeline build-out.

“It is alarming that we have been organizing, educating the community, educating ourselves, and trying to get answers from the government on [carbon capture and storage] in Louisiana for three years now, and we still did not have the information or frankly relationships necessary to get real-time information on what was happening [in Sulphur],” said Jane Patton, a campaign manager at the nonprofit advocacy group, the Center for International Environmental Law.

“[The Liquid Energy Pipeline Association] supports Congress mandating and [Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration] imposing new safety requirements on CO2 pipelines reflecting the lessons learned from the Satartia, MS pipeline incident,” said Black, the lobbying group’s president, in his email to The Lever. He added that the organization “looks forward to the results of Sulphur, LA pipeline incident review and any recommendations it produces for how to improve CO2 pipeline safety further.”

A Carbon Capture Future?

ExxonMobil — which purchased Denbury last year — is planning to build carbon capture infrastructure throughout Louisiana, where about a third of the nation’s carbon capture projects have been proposed.

Exxon did not respond to requests for comment.

“We’ve got plans to grow our carbon capture business and really focus on emitters all along that Denbury pipeline,” Exxon CEO Darren Woods told Louisiana newspaperThe Advocatein February. “What we’re doing is taking advantage of the ability to pump carbon dioxide back into the ground, and store it very safely. It’s isolated from the rest of the community.”

Patton says that such statements are just “another lie that we're being sold” by the fossil fuel industry.

“Louisiana is magic, and I want to be able to pass this magic onto the next generation behind me,” she said. “We deserve a future here and that future is not in carbon capture.”

Scientists have been sounding the alarm that carbon capture and sequestration is not an effective way to reduce emissions and is most often used for enhanced oil recovery, which means accessing more fossil fuels to be burned. The Department of Energy just announced it would invest $23 million in two projects to evaluate the potential for enhanced oil recovery using captured carbon dioxide.

In internal company documents, the oil and gas industry has privately admitted that though CCS is “complex, costly, and will require additional power,” it will “enable the use of petroleum and natural gas” well into the future.

But thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act, which ratcheted up tax credits available for carbon capture technology, the race is on to build out carbon dioxide pipelines.

Meanwhile, advocates say their concerns are being ignored. “You’ve got communities, NGOs on pipeline safety, governmental experts on pipeline safety all raising alarm about the hazards of what is being planned,” said Monique Harden, director of Law and Policy at the Deep South Center for Environmental Justice. “What you don’t have is the response of protection or response that validates those concerns. Instead, what you have is silence.”

Last week, U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary Brad Crabtree told the Illinois newspaper The Springfield State-Journal Register, “I would argue that our electric transmission and distribution infrastructure, it’s essential to modern life, but it also results in injuries and fatalities… But as a result of those risks, we do not have people saying we shouldn’t have electric transmission and distribution… CO2 pipelines are no different in that regard.”

Many of the proposed pipeline projects would run through communities like Sulphur — low-income communities of color already burdened by polluting petrochemical and fossil fuel facilities. These communities often have minimal resources to respond to worsening extreme weather events, like a tornado that destroyed the office of Ozane’s disaster-relief and environmental justice nonprofit not far from Sulphur just days after the leak.

“On top of the fact that this is taking public money, it is essentially a program where the federal government pays the oil and gas industry to deal with its own waste product in a way that burdens communities and makes us demonstrably less safe,” said Patton. “Accidents that happen along CO2 pipeline routes are going to become more common and much more dangerous if this program is allowed to move forward.”

While significant public resources are being deployed to develop this technology, understanding of carbon dioxide pipeline leaks — how they happen, the extent of their damage, and how they should be addressed — lags far behind.

“Often you need the knowledge gaps to be filled before you can fully fill the regulatory gaps,” said Bill Caram, executive director of Pipeline Safety Trust, an organization that advocates for stronger regulations on pipeline safety. “Right now, CO2 pipelines are relatively rare and relatively rural, and we’re moving toward building a lot more CO2 pipelines closer to communities. I don't think we are ready to do that safely.”

Current carbon dioxide pipelines are largely located in small communities with underpaid or volunteer fire departments, many of which lack equipment to respond to and monitor for carbon dioxide leaks. In Sulphur’s case, the fire chief said he had not seen an emergency response protocol from the company until after the leak occurred.

Environmental and public health groups are pushing federal regulators for additional pipeline safety provisions, including updated “dispersion modeling” requirements, which show how carbon dioxide moves and would help emergency personnel respond to accidents, and adding odorants to the carbon dioxide to warn community members of a leak.

Groups are also advocating for new limits on contaminants in the pipelines that can lead to corrosion; mandates for training and coordination between pipeline operators and first responders; and additional rules for transporting gaseous and liquid carbon dioxide, which are currently unregulated.

Pipeline Pushback

But companies, and the lobbying groups that represent them, are pushing back. Since the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration announced its intention to make new rules on carbon dioxide pipelines in 2022, records show that Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Enbridge, Marathon, Shell, and Targa, along with trade associations like Liquid Energy Pipeline Association, American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, the American Petroleum Institute, have been lobbying the agency on pipeline infrastructure, rule-making, and safety, and/or lobbying on the agency’s reauthorization, among other issues.

During their March meeting at the White House Office of Management and Budget, fossil fuel interests appeared to push for rulemaking that prioritizes secrecy and expediency over safety and transparency.

“Any emergency response requirements should ensure the protection of sensitive information and be aligned with industry current best practices,” reads API’s talking points from the meeting. “The rule must be technically feasible and set realistic timelines for implementation to ensure it supports rather than hinders the build-out of this additional CO2 pipeline infrastructure.”

Maggie Coulter, senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute, said advocacy groups are particularly concerned about the industry’s attempts to keep data about potential pipeline leaks hidden from the public. One of the bills being considered for Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s safety reauthorization, which has received broad support from industry trade groups, contains a provision for the “protection of sensitive information in responding to a public request for information regarding carbon dioxide dispersion modeling.”

“There’s an additional cost in doing things safely, and increased public scrutiny when you’re affirmatively tasked with informing first responders and members of the public,” said Coulter. “Right now we just have to trust the company.”

Black, president of the Liquid Energy Pipeline Association, said in his comment to The Lever that his organization “supports operators sharing the results of pipeline modeling with state and local emergency planning officials and first responders,” but advocates for “limiting general public sharing of security sensitive information, as is the current approach for crude oil pipelines, to prevent bad actors from misusing this information to harm surrounding communities.”

Black did not respond directly to questions about evidence showing that pipeline operators have failed to communicate with first responders ahead of and properly respond to CO2 pipeline disasters in the past.

Caram of Pipeline Safety Trust said that given the risks that carbon dioxide pipelines pose to communities across the country, the companies involved shouldn’t be allowed to dictate their own safety standards.

“It's like the difference between a speed limit of 55 MPH as opposed to a sign saying ‘please drive safely,’” Caram said. “We need something specific to hold them to.”

exxonknews 4 24

===

Feds Approve Expansion of Northwestern Gas Pipeline Despite Strong Opposition Over Its Threat to Climate Goals

BY GRANT STRINGER

Democratic leaders, tribes and environmentalists say the increased delivery of Canadian gas to Washington, Oregon, Idaho and California would jeopardize state and national emissions reduction targets.

===

icn 5 21

protesting in front of a private residence in Florida could soon land someone 60 days in jail and a fine of up to $500 under a bill signed into law Monday by Gov. Ron DeSantis.While the new law is in reaction to demonstrations over abortion rights, it reflects a larger effort by Republican lawmakers to limit the ways Americans are allowed to protest, which could have broad and lasting consequences for the climate movement.

The legislation, which takes effect in October, makes it a second-degree misdemeanor to protest with the intention of harassing or disturbing someone in their home. It’s the latest effort to crack down on protesters by DeSantis, who pointed to recent demonstrations outside of the homes of Supreme Court justices living in Virginia as justification for the law.

Those demonstrations came earlier this month after the leak of a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito overturning 50 years of abortion rights guaranteed by Roe v. Wade touched off a political firestorm. “Sending unruly mobs to private residences, like we have seen with the angry crowds in front of the homes of Supreme Court justices, is inappropriate,” DeSantis said in a statement Monday. “This bill will provide protection to those living in residential communities and I am glad to sign it into law.”

Florida’s legislation is similar to a growing number of “anti-protest” laws being enacted by Republican legislatures across the country in recent years that impose harsh new penalties on demonstrators, including Indigenous and climate activists who are protesting fossil fuel pipelines and power plants.

Social justice and environmental advocates have increasingly turned to protest and civil disobedience as a way to call for change in response to a spate of high-profile police killings of unarmed Black people and a lack of government action on climate change. Since 2017, at least 38 states have enacted such laws, according to the Informational Center for Not-For-Profit Law. Many impose harsh penalties on protesters, including making it a felony to trespass on property where “critical infrastructure,” such as fossil fuel pipelines and power plants, are operating, ICN’s oil and gas reporter Nicholas Kusnetz reported last year.

Those bills emerged after a pair of stinging losses for the pipeline industry. Activists had used civil disobedience and mass arrests to draw attention to the Keystone XL and Dakota Access projects, and the Obama administration eventually blocked both. States’ critical infrastructure legislation raised the stakes for protesters by increasing penalties for acts like blocking access to a construction site, in many cases converting the offenses from misdemeanors to felonies. Some laws allow prosecutors to seek 10 times the original fines for any groups found to be “conspirators,” prompting concerns from civil liberties advocates and environmental groups, who fear they could be roped into trials and face steep fines for having joined with broader coalitions that include an element of civil disobedience.

Left unchallenged, some legal experts say these laws could jeopardize climate protests in particular, just as more and more environmental advocates grow frustrated by political roadblocks to climate action and turn to public demonstrations and civil disobedience out of desperation. The Biden administration has pledged to enact sweeping climate reforms, but many of those have stalled as Republicans and right-leaning Democrats continue to raise hurdles.

Last fall, demonstrations amassed around the houseboat of West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a conservative Democrat who has impeded much of President Biden’s climate agenda. In October, nearly 50 people were arrested for protesting outside the office of Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, another centrist Democrat who has blocked much of Biden’s environmental efforts. And last month, more than 1,000 scientists from around the world staged demonstrations to decry a lack of action to address global warming, including several U.S. researchers who were arrested for locking their bodies to private property.

Florida’s new law should be especially concerning for climate activists, considering DeSantis’ popularity in the Republican party and his past attempts to limit free speech on progressive issues.DeSantis, who is seen as a possible contender with Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election, signed an “anti-riot” protest law in 2021 that granted civil immunity to drivers who hit protesters blocking roadways. That law was later blocked by a federal judge, who said the bill was vague, overbroad and criminalizes “vast swaths of core First Amendment speech.”

“While there may be some Floridians who welcome the chilling effect that this law has on the Plaintiffs in this case,” U.S. District Judge Mark Walker wrote in his ruling, “depending on who is in power, next time it could be their ox being gored.”

===

Biden:

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/21032022/ferc-natural-gas-pipeline-emissions/

doing EJ now?!

===

mourned on twt by api meg bloomgren:

PennEast Pipeline Cancelation Could Signal ‘End of an Era’ for Unnecessary Fossil Fuel Projects

The pipeline would have crossed more than 88 waterways, 44 wetlands, 30 parks, and 33 conservation easements. Experts say the cancelation demonstrates that federal regulators must stop approving gas pipelines that fail to show they are needed in the first place.

PennEast Pipeline Cancelation Could Signal ‘End of an Era’ for Unnecessary Fossil Fuel Projects

By Nick Cunningham on Sep 30, 2021

a major natural gas pipeline in Pennsylvania was canceled this week in the face of a thicket of legal obstacles and intense local opposition. The cancelation may punctuate what could be the end of a decade-long pipeline building frenzy in the U.S. as federal regulators begin to heed calls from activists and local communities to increase scrutiny over unneeded pipelines crisscrossing the country.

The PennEast pipeline would have carried Marcellus shale gasfrom Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, across the Delaware River and to Mercer County, New Jersey. But the developers of the project canceled it on September 27, citing its inability to obtain state-level water quality permits from New Jersey. The decision came three months after the company won a case before the U.S. Supreme Court related to the corporation’s ability to seize state land using eminent domain authority.

PennEast would have crossed more than 88 waterways, 44 wetlands, 30 parks, and 33 conservation easements, according to the Sierra Club New Jersey Chapter. The state of New Jersey, including Governor Phil Murphy, has long opposed the project — and the threat the pipeline posed to water quality always meant that it faced a steep uphill climb in obtaining local approval.

The cancelation highlights the obstacles that several other high-profile projects currently face. For instance, the Mountain Valley Pipeline in West Virginia and Virginia still needs state-level environmental permits, as does the Pacific Connector gas pipeline in Oregon, which would feed the Jordan Cove liquefied natural gas export project. The Mountain Valley Pipeline is under construction but still faces many more hurdles standing in the way of its completion. Jordan Cove is all but dead.

===

asked for ppe covid $?

https://theintercept.com/2021/08/27/enbridge-line-3-pipeline-police-training-intelligence/

a corp can substitute video for a live cop in tresspass law?!

intercept 921 eileen brn?

POLICE RESPONSIBLE FOR public safety surrounding the construction of an oil pipeline in Minnesota have repeatedly denied having a close relationship with Enbridge, the company behind the controversial energy project. According to records obtained by The Intercept through public information requests, however, Enbridge has provided repeated trainings for officers designed to cultivate a coordinated response to protests.

By the time construction on Line 3, a tar sands oil pipeline, began last December, a working relationship had been established between Enbridge and police officers. A public safety official even invited the company’s Line 3 security chief to regular intelligence sharing meetings. In one case, the official passed along intelligence to Enbridge’s security chief for Line 3: a list of people who attended an anti-pipeline organizing meeting.

Line 3 opponents have long raised concerns about payments made to law enforcement by Enbridge to cover pipeline-related policing. A special account set up by the state of Minnesota has distributed $2.3 million in Enbridge funds to public safety agencies so far.The records shed new light on the level of close coordination between law enforcement agencies and the Canadian oil company to police the Indigenous-led movement to stop Line 3.

:{

“Local law enforcement has become the brutal arm of a Canadian corporation.”

}:

“Local law enforcement has become the brutal arm of a Canadian corporation,” said Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, director of the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund’s Center for Protest Law and Litigation and an attorney representing opponents of the pipeline. “It’s highly inappropriate for law enforcement to target people based on First Amendment activity, collect identity information and then deliver that information to their political opponents.”

The effort to halt the Line 3 pipeline is the latest flashpoint in the movement to end development of new fossil fuel infrastructure amid a growing climate crisis. In Minnesota, members of the Indigenous-led resistance, known as water protectors, have turned to tactics that directly disrupt construction, sometimes trespassing on private property, blocking roads, or locking down to pipeline company equipment.

"Community police and sheriff deputies are responsible for public safety,” Enbridge spokesperson Juli Kellner told The Intercept. “Our security call the police when a disturbance occurs. Officers decide when an individual is breaking the law — or putting themselves or others in danger.”

How law enforcement responds to the protest movement is a matter of training and discretion.The documents obtained by The Intercept suggest that Enbridge has stepped in to influence officers’ choices.

Water protectors point to the close working relationship between Enbridge and law enforcement to explain escalating police tactics, with rubber bullets and other “less-lethal” weapons deployed in recent weeks.

Plans to Coordinate

Emails between Enbridge and members of the Northern Lights Task Force — a group consisting of sheriffs and public safety officials coordinating plans for expected protests against Line 3 — describe several joint training exercises and other coordination meetings set up by the energy firm. The largest of the trainings was in Bemidji, Minnesota.

In October 2020, according to emails, Enbridge organized an all-day training at the company’s Bemidji Emergency Operations Center. According to an email sent a day before the event, dozens of Enbridge employees, public safety officials, including local sheriffs along the pipeline route, and an FBI agent were invited to attend. A primary goal for the event: “Coordination between Line 3 project team and L.P.” — an acronym that typically refers to “local police.”

Indigenous Water Protectors Face Off With an Oil Company and Police Over a Minnesota Pipeline

The email sent out ahead of the training included a series of “Incident Briefing Maps” laying out scenarios where Enbridge and law enforcement might need to coordinate a response. The various scenarios had something in common: They all involved protests.

The list of scenarios — which were drawn up by the Response Group, a controversial crisis management firm that works for the energy industry — laid out four possible events: demonstrators blocking traffic, the breach of a construction site, “swarming” of a pipeline hub while streaming on social media, and project opponents locking themselves to the gate of an Enbridge office.

Training participants would be asked to come up with a plan to respond to each of the scenarios, as well as to develop an “Information and Communication Strategy” to keep government agencies, the public, and the media informed of what was happening, according to a list of exercise objectives. Enbridge planned to discuss providing local law enforcement with a project radio, according to an email describing the exercise.

It wasn’t the first conversation of its kind. In advance of a smaller version of the exercise, back in April, members of the Northern Lights Task Force filled out a questionnaire for Enbridge. The public safety officials noted that it was a “priority” for law enforcement to obtain access to Enbridge security camera feeds. It also referenced the possibility of placing an Enbridge liaison inside the two law enforcement emergency operations centers, as well as a law enforcement liaison in Enbridge’s emergency operations center.

The Northern Lights Task Force’s communications team did not answer a detailed list of questions. Aitkin County Sheriff Dan Guida, a member of the task force, said his office never received a project radio nor saw other agencies with one. Guida said that the scenarios served to show law enforcement how Enbridge runs its emergency operations center. “It was for Enbridge to learn. We didn’t get trained by Enbridge,” he said, adding that law enforcement might carry out a similar exercise with a bank. “We assisted them and told them this is how we do it, you do your own thing.”

It’s not clear how many officers attended the trainings offered by Enbridge. Clearwater County Sheriff Darin Halverson was copied on the invite and RSVP’d that he would attend an additional Enbridge security exercise as well as a “sensitive security information” meeting. He told The Intercept that he did not attend any of the gatherings.

Sharing Intelligence

By the time construction on Line 3 began, a comfortable working relationship appeared to have been established between Enbridge and some of the public safety agencies invited to the company’s meetings. Public officials repeatedly expressed interest in exchanging information on pipeline opposition with Enbridge.

In December 2020, a St. Louis County sheriff’s deputy distributed language to be used by officers issuing dispersal orders during protests against Line 3 and also sent a list of potential charges that could be applied to pipeline protesters. Another officer responded, noting that it would be legal to arrest water protectors even if they trespassed without a law enforcement officer present. “Hopefully Enbridge security would be videotaping when able,” the officer said. Other documents affirmed that Enbridge security would be wearing body cameras.

The Northern Lights Task Force, the group of public safety officials, occasionally suggested that Enbridge should be excluded from planning, the documents show. In November 2020, Guida, the Aitkin County sheriff, copied Enbridge public information officers on an email about the task force’s public messaging strategy. Another sheriff advised that the corporate representatives did not belong in the group: “It is not a good idea to have Enbridge employees in our group, but they would certainly be good contacts to have to know what info is being put out,” wrote Carlton County Sheriff Kelly Lake. (Guida told The Intercept he copied Enbridge on the email so that law enforcement and the company could avoid mixed or duplicate messages.)

In other cases, public safety officials actively sought out Enbridge security to assist with law enforcement officers’ efforts, inviting an Enbridge representative to share space and attend meetings. St. Louis County Emergency Management Coordinator Duane Johnson copied Enbridge’s security lead for the Line 3 project on an email inviting first responders to work out of the law enforcement emergency operations center as they monitored intelligence on a potential direct action the next day. “There is considerable intel on something brewing tomorrow. Let me know if you’d like to come over and work out of the EOC tomorrow just in case something pops,” the official wrote, referring to the emergency operations center.

In another email, Johnson requested that Enbridge’s Line 3 security lead attend regular intelligence meetings. “We have missed you on our 0900 intel meetings. Is there another time that would work better for you?” asked the emergency management coordinator in a January 2021 email. “It would be nice to have someone from your company on.”

The Enbridge security officer was kept in the loop. The next day, Johnson copied him on another email, forwarding a list of names of water protectors who had attended a “Line 3 Organizing Meeting” the night before.

“It was all I really got from last night,” Bruce Blacketter, emergency management director for the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, wrote to Johnson in the forwarded email. “Well, this and a slight ‘back of the head’ headache from the musical performances and guided breathing/stretching exercises.”

St. Louis County did not respond to a request for comment, and the Fond du Lac Band declined to comment.

===

ransomware attack? 521 led to shutdown

===

an 721

'Triumph for environmental justice': Oil companies scrap pipeline plans amid grassroots pressure

Pax Ahimsa Gethen [CC BY-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)]

Julia Conley and Common Dreams July 04, 2021

Community activists in Memphis, Tennessee and northwest Mississippi celebrated a grassroots victory on Saturday after two oil companies canceled plans to build a pipeline that would have run through wetlands and several low-income, majority-Black neighborhoods.

Valero and Plains All American Pipeline had long planned to construct the Byhalia Connection pipeline, which would have been 49 miles long and linked two pipelines that transport crude oil to refineries on the Gulf of Mexico.

The two companies announced they were canceling the project "due to lower U.S. oil production resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic," but opponents of the pipeline noted that the announcement followed grassroots organizing by climate action advocates, homeowners, and elected officials at the local and federal levels.

"This is a win for the entire community of Memphis, Tennessee, but especially those in the Black community who fought it courageously," Rev. Dr. William J. Barber II, co-chair of the Poor People's Campaign, tweeted.

Community members in Memphis neighborhoods including White Chapel, Westwood, and Boxtown objected to the pipeline project, which would have run over the Memphis Sand Aquifer—leading to fears that an oil spill would pollute the drinking water of about one million people.

Local organizations Protect Our Aquifer and Memphis Community Against the Pipeline (MCAP) led rallies and garnered the support of former Vice President Al Gore and Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), while the Memphis City Council weighed an ordinance to make it harder for the companies to begin construction.

MCAP leader Justin J. Pearson organized canvassers and lobbied the city council, and called Friday's announcement "an extraordinary testament to what Memphis and Shelby County can do when citizens build power toward justice."

A representative of the two oil companies sparked local outrage when they said South Memphis, where the Boxtown community was established in the 1860s by people who had been enslaved, had been identified as "the point of least resistance."

"We've shown them that we aren't the path of least resistance," said Pearson. "We are the path of resilience."

Lawyers for the two companies began legal proceedings against local landowners who refused to make deals with project officials; they planned to invoke eminent domain against the property owners. Last week, the Supreme Court ruled in a separate case in New Jersey that a company could use eminent domain to build a natural gas pipeline on state land.

"Their playbooks are the same everywhere," Pearson said on Twitter on Friday. "Find the poor. Appease the rich and politically powerful. Misinform the community. Make local leaders afraid to stop them. Exploit the poor. Reap billions in profits from the deaths of the poor and marginalized."

The Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), which helped landowners fight the two companies in the legal battle, called Friday's announcement "a triumph for environmental justice."

"We are so inspired by the people of Boxtown, Westwood, and White Chapel, and the work of our amazing partners MCAP and Protect Our Aquifer, for showing what is possible when a community stands together," said Amanda Garcia, director of the SELC's Tennessee office.

FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES

The grim truth about Biden's plan for the border - Alternet.org ›

Teachers union makes move that will make Republican heads ... ›

'Keystone XL is dead!': Climate movement secures major victory ... ›

This is a really, really big deal': Michigan Gov. moves to shut down Line 5 pipeline

Jessica Corbett Common Dreams

November 14, 2020

Environmental and Indigenous activists celebrated Friday after Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer took action to shut down the decades-old Enbridge Line 5 oil and natural gas pipelines that run under the Straits of Mackinac, narrow waterways that connect Lake Huron and Lake Michigan—two of the Great Lakes.

Citing the threat to the Great Lakes as well as "persistent and incurable violations" by Enbridge, Whitmer and Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Director Dan Eichinger informed the Canadian fossil fuel giant that a 1953 easement allowing it to operate the pipelines is being revoked and terminated.

The move, which Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel asked the Ingham County Circuit Court to validate, gives Enbridge until May 2021 to stop operating the twin pipelines, "allowing for an orderly transition that protects Michigan's energy needs over the coming months," according to a statement from the governor's office.

The Great Lakes collectively contain about a fifth of the world's surface fresh water. As Whitmer explained Friday, "Here in Michigan, the Great Lakes define our borders, but they also define who we are as people."

"Enbridge has routinely refused to take action to protect our Great Lakes and the millions of Americans who depend on them for clean drinking water and good jobs," the governor said. "They have repeatedly violated the terms of the 1953 easement by ignoring structural problems that put our Great Lakes and our families at risk."

"Most importantly, Enbridge has imposed on the people of Michigan an unacceptable risk of a catastrophic oil spill in the Great Lakes that could devastate our economy and way of life," she added. "That's why we're taking action now, and why I will continue to hold accountable anyone who threatens our Great Lakes and fresh water."

MLive noted that the state attorney general's new filing "is in addition to Nessel's lawsuit filed in 2019 seeking the shutdown of Line 5, which remains pending in the same court." Nessel said Friday that Whitmer and Eichinger "are making another clear statement that Line 5 poses a great risk to our state, and it must be removed from our public waterways."

The "bombshell news," as one Michigan reporter called it, elicited applause from environmentalists and Indigenous leaders within and beyond the state.

"This is a brave and just decision for the Great Lakes," Mike Shriberg, the National Wildlife Federation's regional executive director for the Great Lakes, told MLive. "It's going to benefit the Great Lakes by removing what is probably the single biggest threat to water quality in the region."

As the Detroit Free Press detailed Friday:

Enbridge was responsible for one of the largest inland oil spills in U.S. history—a major leak on one of its large oil transmission lines near Marshall in July 2010. That spill fouled more than 38 miles of the Kalamazoo River and took four years and more than $1 billion to clean up. Enbridge in 2016 agreed to a $177-million settlementwith the U.S. Justice Department and Environmental Protection Agency, including $62 million in penalties, over the Marshall spill and a 2010 spill on another of its pipelines in Romeoville, Illinois.

A similar spill disaster on Line 5 in the Straits would devastate the Great Lakes shoreline communities and the Michigan economy, critics of the pipeline have long contended. Enbridge officials have countered that Line 5 is safe.

"Line 5 should have never been built in the first place," Shriberg told the Free Press. "Gov. Whitmer is now bravely, and correctly, standing up for the Great Lakes."

"This is a legacy-defining action by the governor," he added. "She is standing on the side not only of clean water, but clean energy and the jobs that go along with the transition to a renewable energy economy."

Dallas Goldtooth, Keep It In The Ground Campaign organizer for the Indigenous Environmental Network, welcomed the "huge news" in a series of tweets that acknowledged the years of campaigning by tribal nations against the Line 5:

"We are thrilled and thankful for Gov. Whitmer's decision to revoke the easement for Enbridge's pipeline to run beneath the Straits," Bryan Newland, president of the Bay Mills Indian Community, said in a statement from Earthjustice. "Enbridge has consistently shown that it only cares about its profits and not about the communities of the Great Lakes. This is a monumental first step in rectifying the harm that the company has already inflicted upon Bay Mills and other tribal nations for decades."

The shutdown notice is "an enormous victory for the climate, and for incredible organizers who have fought for many years!" declared activist and author Bill McKibben, who co-founded 350.org. After thanking both Whitmer and "the indefatigable organizers," he added that "it's not often enough we Shut Stuff Down!"

Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) also welcomed the development in a statement Friday. Peters, who secured a narrow reelection victory last week, is a member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, which oversees the federal agency responsible for pipeline safety.

"There's no question an oil spill in the Straits of Mackinac would have catastrophic and long-term consequences to the economic and environmental health of Michigan and the Great Lakes," Peters said. "Unfortunately here in Michigan, we already know from the Enbridge pipeline leak in the Kalamazoo River just how devastating and costly spills are to our state."

"Given the structural integrity and age concerns around Line 5—particularly in recent years—and Enbridge's failures and inability to be transparent with Michiganders, it's clear that Line 5 poses too serious of a threat and must be removed in the coming months," the congressman continued, vowing to work with the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and the State of Michigan "to swiftly evaluate alternatives to Line 5 while continuing to hold Enbridge accountable."

Judge rules that Dakota Access Pipeline must be shut down and emptied Matthew Rozsa / Salonan 720

===

1020

Atlantic Coast Pipeline, a 600-mile project that would have crossed the Appalachian Trail, was recently abandoned thanks in part to the tireless organizing of climate justice advocates. The pipeline was planned to fragment some of the most intact, forested landscapes and cut through rivers, streams, and wetlands. It also would have forced people of color to continue to bear the brunt of the risks posed by the nation's power infrastructure. And the project was pushed by Dominion Energy, one of the most powerful energy monopolies in America, and its leader, Tom Farrell.

===

~EJ

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/04062020/trump-pipeline-sign-amid-racial-justice-coronavirus

With the nation convulsed by multiple crises, President Donald Trump returned to a favorite stand-by of his presidency—asserting his authority to sweep aside environmental restraints and speed up construction of oil and gas pipelines.

But the executive order that he signed Thursday night—the third of his presidency aimed at expediting pipelines—is destined to spur more of the type of litigation that has rendered his previous directives ineffective so far.

The White House invoked the same legal authority the president has to expedite hurricane and flood response actions to declare an "economic emergency," that requires the waiving of environmental reviews and other regulations.

"This order will be a sitting duck for the sorts of legal challenges that have been so successfully brought against other Trump environmental rollbacks," said Michael Gerrard, founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. "Few developers or lenders will risk millions on starting construction in reliance on this order surviving in court."

The White House provided few details on the order before the scheduled signing at 4:30 p.m. "I can tell you it does have to do some of the permitting and energy as it relates to rebuilding this country," said presidential spokesman Hogan Gidley in a brief noon appearance before reporters.

By 6 p.m., the White House had provided no copy of the order. There was no live streaming of any signing, nor any public appearance by Trump at the White House, where workers spent the day erecting tall metal barricades around the perimeter of the complex. Outside, crowds of protestors flanked the presidential residence in one of the demonstrations for racial justice that have proliferated in cities across the nation since the police killing of George Lloyd.

Finally, after 6:15 p.m., the White House made copies of the order available.

"From the beginning of my Administration, I have focused on reforming and streamlining an outdated regulatory system that has held back our economy with needless paperwork and costly delays," Trump said in the document. "Antiquated regulations and bureaucratic practices have hindered American infrastructure investments, kept America'sbuilding trades workers from working,andprevented our citizens from developing and enjoying the benefits of world-class infrastructure. The need for continued progress in this streamlining effort is all the more acute now, due to the ongoing economic crisis."

The president's critics were quick to point out that his order was poorly timed, since minority communities would be disproportionately affected by his move to waive theenvironmental review mandated under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

"Today President Trump is dealing another blow to the Black community, during a worldwide pandemic and nearly a week into nationwide Black Lives Matter protests against police brutality and structural racism," said Raúl M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.), chair of the House Natural Resources Committee, in a statement. "Gutting NEPA takes away one of the few tools communities of color have to protect themselves and make their voices heard on federal decisions impacting them."

The second executive order of Trump's presidency, issued in January 2017 (after his plan to repeal Obamacare), was a directive to expedite oil and gas pipelines. In his speeches, he often repeats a line about creating 48,000 jobs in his first week in office by reviving the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada and the Dakota Access pipeline in the midwest.

In fact, environmental opponents of the Keystone project have so far been successful in preventing its advance with legal challenges to its water permit. And although the Dakota Access pipeline was completed, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in March won a court order for a sweeping new environmental review of the project; the judge is now considering whether the flow of oil should be stopped while the review is completed.

Legal experts expressed doubt that Trump's latest order could directly affect the outcomes in the Keystone XL or Dakota Access litigation. In the future, such litigation by states and tribes may be made more difficult by rules that the Environmental Protection Agency finalized this week in response to a 2019 Trump executive order.

Sen. Thomas Carper (D-Del.), the highest ranking Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee,said in a statement that it was clear that Trump is seeking to cut communities out of the process.

"By allowing projects to plow ahead without public engagement or input, this executive order will fast-track projects that could tear through communities, harm air quality, endanger drinking water sources, destroy critical habitats and threaten endangered species," said Carper. "Under the guise of immediate relief, this executive action will cause long-term damage that will not be easily undone."

Legal experts noted that Trump's use of the economic downturn to invoke environmental waivers was unprecedented. "These emergency exemptions have traditionally been used for necessary fast responses to disasters, such as clearing away debris after a hurricane, or building field hospitals," said Gerrard in an email. "They have not been used as a backdoor way of creating construction jobs."

Jayni Foley Hein, natural resources director at New York University Law School's Institute for Policy Integrity, said Trump's novel legal theory could have an effect that is precisely the opposite of what the White House intends. "In a strange way, this could create more uncertainty for project developers, as their approvals will be on shakier legal footing," Hein said.

"It's hard to say if it's bluster and posturing or if it's wishful thinking or some combination," Hein said.

But so far at least, despite his repeated efforts, Trump has been singularly unsuccessful in building pipelines with a stroke of his pen.

PUBLISHED UNDER:

ew 620

Pipeline giant Kinder Morgan is cutting a 400-mile line across the middle of Texas, digging up vast swaths of private land for its planned Permian Highway Pipeline. The project is ceaseless, continuing through the coronavirus pandemic. Landowner Heath Frantzen said that dozens of workers have showed up to his ranch in Fredericksburg, even as public health officials urged people to stay at home.

===

https://www.desmogblog.com/2020/05/03/keystone-xl-future-pipeline-permits

On April 15, Judge Brian Morris nullified water-crossing permits in Montana that were granted for the Keystone XL, a major setback for the long-embattled tar sands oil pipeline. The ruling came just days after Keystone XL owner TC Energy, formerly known as TransCanada, obtained billions of dollars in subsidies from the Alberta government as global oil prices plummeted.

The oil and gas industry has taken notice. Seemingly just a ruling on Keystone XL — the subject of opposition by the climate movement for the past decade — the ruling could have far broader implications for the future of building water-crossing pipelines and utility lines.

In his decision, Judge Morris cited a potential violation of the Endangered Species Act when he ordered the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to do a deeper analysis of potential impacts to protected species. Morris required the Corps to demonstrate whether or not it could construct the pipeline without harming endangered species, such as the Pallid Sturgeon or the American burying beetle. Instead, the Army Corps “failed to consider relevant expert analysis and failed to articulate a rational connection between the facts it found and the choice it made,” Morris ruled, when the Corps gave Keystone XL the initial green light.

The original July 2019 complaintin that case — filed by Northern Plains Resource Council, Bold Alliance, Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Center for Biological Diversity — also argued that the Army Corps had violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in using an obscure regulatory lever to fast-track the review process.

Known as Nationwide Permit 12, the permit only requires a short environmental analysis compared to the more robust environmental impact statement required under NEPA for other major infrastructure projects. But Morris also wrote that the decision applied not just to Keystone XL, but to all major federal projects aiming to utilize Nationwide Permit 12, calling for it to be “vacated pending completion of the consultation process and compliance with all environmental statutes and regulations.”

Just two days after this decision, Army Corps regulatory program Chief Jennifer Moyer wrote in an email obtained by the Associated Press that the agency should suspend the program indefinitely “out of an abundance of caution” until the issue is resolved legally.

The Trump administration has already requested a procedural halt on implementing Morris’ decision until its potential appeal weaves its way through the legal system.

“The Court has eliminated Nationwide Permit 12 for use by any utility line project anywhere in the country, which has extraordinary and immediate implications for numerous projects,” the U.S. Department of Justice attorneys wrote on behalf of the Army Corps.

The American Petroleum Institute (API), the lobbying and advocacy voice of the oil and gas industry, has also filed an affidavit in favor of putting a procedural halt to Morris’ ruling.

“The ability to provide reliable energy is even more important now during this sensitive and challenging time brought on by COVID-19,” Robin Rorick, Vice President of Midstream and Industry Operations for API, wrote in the affidavit. “The Court’s Order could threaten API’s members’ ability to continue numerous energy and infrastructure projects, affecting the health of numerous companies and job security in an already-strained economy.”

API also joined North America’s Building Trades Unions and Interstate Natural Gas Association of America in denouncing the ruling along similar lines.

'Single and Complete'

Nationwide Permit 12 historically was used for small “single and complete” projects crossing water parcels half an acre in size or smaller.

But in the aftermath of protests and civil disobedience actions taken against Keystone XL, the Obama administration began using that permitting process to split pipelines into hundreds or thousands of half-acre pieces. The process was a way around the more robust and democratic National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulatory process, which involves both a public commenting and public hearing phase. Nationwide Permit 12 was also used to push through the Dakota Access pipeline, as well as the southern leg of the Keystone XL, both greenlighted by President Barack Obama.

During the Obama era, environmental groups decried this as a form of “segmentation” and a way out of complying with NEPA, which they routinely challeneged in court with some success—though not enough to undo the legal lever. The bedrock environmental law is now under further attack by President Donald Trump, with the administration trying to remove climate change contribution as a factor analyzed under the law for major projects and aiming to narrow the scope of and time it takes to complete these environmental impact reviews.

[vid]

Since March 2017, the Trump administration has utilized Nationwide Permit 12 over 37,000 times, the AP reported. As it stands today, the Army Corps’ decision to halt use of the Nationwide Permit 12 fast-track tool has put 360 permit applications on hold.

“The reason that matters is that the public and the communities and everybody that lives there has the chance to get involved in the process,” Eric Huber, Senior Managing Attorney with the Sierra Club's Environmental Law Program, told DeSmog. “Otherwise, these special permits just allow a pipeline company to go out and start construction without notice to anybody or to take private property and just proceed and blast this through regardless of how the local community thinks of it.”

External corporate attorneys, too, have taken notice and expressed their own concerns about the ruling.

“The decision puts in limbo thousands of infrastructure projects nationwide that rely on [Nationwide Permit] 12 for the construction, maintenance, or repair of utility lines and poses particularly acute problems for the oil and gas industry, which relies on the permit to facilitate projects ranging from large interstate pipelines to smaller gathering lines at exploration and production sites,” wrote attorneys fromBrownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, a firm with close ties to the Trump administration, in one such reaction to the ruling.

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck’s fossil fuel industry lobbying clients include the American Petroleum Institute, American Public Power Association, Freeport LNG, Talos Energy, Jordan Cove LNG, WPX Energy, and the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association.

Another firm heavily involved in fossil fuel industry litigation and lobbying,Steptoe & Johnson, also weighed in on the ruling and wrote that it could have the impact of “extending permitting time frames for these types of projects” going forward. The firm’s fossil fuel industry lobbying clients include American Gas Association, Gas Technology Institute, and Peabody Energy.

Permian Highway Pipeline in Texas

The legal precedent set in the Keystone XL case is already playing out in federal courts.

On April 30, the Sierra Club filed a lawsuitin the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas against the Army Corps of Engineers over another controversial pipeline. The complaint says the Army Corps did not comply with NEPA in issuing a Nationwide Permit 12 to the 428-mile Permian Highway gas pipeline. It also argues the agency is not currently in compliance with the order in the Keystone XL case because it has continued to allow pipeline construction under the contested Nationwide Permit 12 program.

“It is outrageous that the Corps approved this project without public notice or opportunity to comment on their permits,” Rebecca McCreary, a Sierra Club attorney, said of the Permian Highway pipeline in a press release. “Nationwide Permit 12 allows for no public hearings or participation by the local communities before the Corps permits construction to start, nor is there public notice or comment on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permits allowing harm to the endangered species along the route. The Corps should stop this project immediately.”

Owned by Kinder Morgan, Permian Highway is a pipeline slated to carry gas obtained via hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) in Texas’ Permian Basin east across the state. Kinder Morgan told DeSmog it was aware of the lawsuit, but declined to comment on it and the broader Nationwide Permit 12 issue.

Permian Highway has already seen issues with spills into water systems, with one late March incident spilling 36,000 gallons of drilling slurry — including a carcinogenic additive — into groundwater.

[twt]

Responding, the Hays County Commissioners Court voted on April 22 to rescind road permits given by the Texas county to allow Kinder Morgan to drill underneath county roads as it builds the pipeline. And Kinder Morgan, too, has suspended construction on this portion of the pipeline as it “determines the best path forward” in the aftermath of the spill, the company told Houston Chronicle.

The City of Austin, City of San Marcos, Hays County, Travis County, and others also filed their own Endangered Species Act lawsuit in February,arguing that the pipeline could threaten protected Golden Cheeked Warblers, two salamander species, and their habitats.

Keystone XL Decision Looms

In the Keystone XL case in Montana, Morris recently deniedthe Army Corps a procedural stay in the case. TC Energy, for its part, wants the decision struck down as it applies both to its own pipeline and for the permitting program at large.

“If TC Energy does not receive authorization from the Army Corps by early July, its construction plans will be significantly impacted,” Gary Salsman, a TC Energy vice president for the Keystone XL project, wrote in his April 29 affidavit. “Currently, TC Energy is evaluating potential options that would be available to it in that circumstance, each of which have significant adverse consequences.”

Those “potential options,” Salsman wrote, include a potential construction delay across Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska; a change in construction plans this year to avoid the waters it is currently slated to cross that are impacted by the vacating of Nationwide Permit 12; or ending construction all together. He added that if construction does not begin in 2020, it could cost the company $750 million to $1.3 billion.

Morris could make a decision on how broadly his Nationwide Permit 12 decision applies as soon as May 8. Regardless of the outcome, Morris' next move will likely face an appeal from either side.

TAGS:

Permian Highway Pipeline

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck

Kinder Morgan

Army Corps of Engineers

American Petroleum Institute

National Environmental Policy Act

Clean Water Act

endangered species act

===

3/25

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/25032020/dakota-access-pipeline-under-review-federal-court

In a major victory for opponents of the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline, a federal judge ruled on Wednesday that prior environmental assessments failed to fully consider the impact of the project. The Army Corps of Engineers will now have to undertake a more thorough review.

The pipeline crosses the Missouri River just upstream from the reservation of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of North and South Dakota. The tribe gained international attention starting in the summer of 2016, as thousands flocked to the reservation in support of the tribe's opposition to the pipeline. The project was approved by the Trump administration and completed in June 2017.

It remains unclear however, whether the 1,200-mile pipeline, which ships crude oil from North Dakota to Illinois, will have to be shut down during the new assessment by the Corps, a process that could take years....

===

no lnx

https://buffalonews.com/2019/04/19/bob-mccarthy-the-gops-unknown-power-broker/

apr 2019

Charlie Joyce finds his way out of Wellsville every once in a while – even all the way to Crosby, Tx.

That’s where the oil and gas supply executive and major GOP donor turned up a few days ago, right next to President Trump, who likewise found his way out of Washington to sign an executive order easing regulations on energy pipelines. And when Fox News reported the event back on April 12, there was Joyce at his side offering applause and wearing a major smile.

As The Buffalo News reported back in 2016, Joyce may be the most influential New York Republican you never heard of. That’s because he goes about his business in a quiet and unassuming way, even if he has been good to Catholic Charities, Southern Tier causes, and nearby universities like Alfred and St. Bonaventure.

He remains one of only two New Yorkers on the Republican National Committee, and has been a member of the Executive Roundtable of the Republican Governors Association. He travels in lofty money circles like the RNC’s Regents, the National Republican Senate Committee’s Majority Makers Club and the National Republican Congressional Committee’s Chairman’s Club.

President of Otis Eastern, the big pipeline and oil supply firm in Allegany County, Joyce feels more comfortable in some oil field and mud spattered coveralls than black tie Manhattan fund raisers – where he’s also a regular. He’s an official “lay low” guy, who quietly goes about his business but can end up standing next to the president.

“This something I’ve been lobbying for,” Joyce said last week, referring to the executive orders Trump signed at the Texas ceremony expediting oil and gas pipeline projects. It’s the kind of action Joyce wishes his own state government would embrace, but knows won’t happen. He has long complained that he must dispatch his large workforce across the border to Pennsylvania’s oil fields because of New York’s strict prohibitions against fracking.

So, while he was also traveled to Texas to continue support for the new, international training center for oil and gas workers established in Crosby by the industry and its unions, Joyce was a natural to witness the presidential signature.

“I really didn’t expect to be up there standing next to him as he signed it, but there I was,” he said. “It was cool.”

At the ceremony, Trump’s jabs at New York and Gov. Andrew Cuomo over its pipeline regulations stemming from environmental concerns brought another smile to Joyce.

“He mentioned New York State several times as one of the states where we can’t move our product, blocking energy growth,” he said. “And he mentioned Cuomo – rather strongly.”

The governor, meanwhile, didn’t spare his own jabs at Trump. He thinks states should have a say in regulations that protect rivers and streams from pollution.

“States must have a role in the process for siting energy infrastructure like pipelines, and any efforts to curb this right to protect our residents will be fought tooth and nail,” Cuomo responded.

Trump might as well have aimed his pen at Cuomo while signing his executive orders. In 2017, the state Department of Environmental Conservation rejected a National Fuel permit for the Northern Access pipeline, though a federal appeals court in Manhattan invalidated the DEC’s action on Feb. 5. Now the company still needs approvals from the Army Corps of Engineers and faces lawsuits....

guts NEPA xl

1/9/20 NEPA rollback

omfg

https://www.democracynow.org/2020/1/10/headlines/trump_seeks_to_exempt_large_projects_from_some_environmental_review

Trump is proposing changing the nation’s oldest environmental law to exempt large infrastructure projects, such as pipelines and power plants, from environmental review. If enacted, the changes would exempt agencies from considering the cumulative environmental impacts of projects, which could include studying the climate crisis.

DHS dire warning of eco-terror violence my militia?!

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Diamond_Oil_Pipeline

Environmental organization Arkansas Rising has led numerous protests of the Diamond Pipeline, including acts of civil disobedience.^[6]

In January 2017, almost 50 police and fire vehicles responded to a protest of the pipeline located off of Interstate 55 south of downtown Memphis, Tennessee, led by environmental groups such as Arkansas Rising.^[3] Twelve people out of approximately 40 protesters were arrested.^[7]

On March 20, 2017, water protector Tyler Hamilton locked down pipeline equipment at a construction site in Pope County, Arkansas, disrupting construction for several hours.^[6]

Clarksville, Arkansas city officials expressed concern over the pipeline's impact on drinking water supplies and frustration at the process, in which they only learned of the pipeline's planned route from media stories rather than the project developers.^[4] The pipeline's planned route took it within one-half of a mile of the city's intake valve that supplied drinking water for roughly 30,000 people, which the pipeline's lead engineer Stephen Lee said was overlooked because it was not on the maps used to plan the route.^[8]

At Big Piney Creek in Dover, Arkansas, one family was hit with a three-month temporary condemnation after refusing to allow the pipeline developers to survey their private property.^[4]

---

wiki

The Diamond Pipeline is an oil pipeline system that runs from Cushing, Oklahoma to Memphis, Tennessee in the United States.^[2] In 2016, the engineering plans, permits, and construction will commence, anticipating to finish construction of the pipeline in 2017.^[3] According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the pipeline will cross approximately 500 bodies of water including streams and rivers. The pipeline will also cross approximately 11 drinking water sources.^[4]

activ suppress IN THE NAME OF nat'l sec

https://www.alternet.org/2019/08/leaked-audio-shows-oil-lobbyist-bragging-about-success-in-criminalizing-pipeline-protests/

no lnx

Leaked audio shows oil lobbyist bragging about success in criminalizing pipeline protests

Written by Jake Johnson / Common Dreams August 20, 2019

As a growing number of states move to pass laws that would criminalize pipeline protests and hit demonstrators with years in prison, an audio recording obtained by The Intercept showed a representative of a powerful oil and gas lobbying group bragging about the industry’s success in crafting anti-protest legislation behind closed doors.

Speaking during a conference in Washington, D.C. in June, Derrick Morgan, senior vice president for federal and regulatory affairs at the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), touted “model legislation” that states across the nation have passed in recent months.

AFPM represents a number of major fossil fuel giants, including Chevron, Koch Industries, and ExxonMobil.

“We’ve seen a lot of success at the state level, particularly starting with Oklahoma in 2017,” said Morgan, citing Dakota Access Pipeline protests as the motivation behind the aggressive lobbying effort. “We’re up to nine states that have passed laws that are substantially close to the model policy that you have in your packet.”

Friends of the Earth

Big Oil is now using its political power to try and criminalize protests of oil & gas infrastructure.

"This legislation has potential to punish public participation and mischaracterize advocacy protected by the First Amendment."https://theintercept.com/2019/08/19/oil-lobby-pipeline-protests/ …

Oil Lobbyist Touts Success in Effort to Criminalize Pipeline Protests, Leaked Recording Shows

In leaked audio obtained by The Intercept, AFPM conceded its behind-the-scenes role in crafting state laws to criminalize oil and gas pipeline protests.

theintercept.com

The audio recording comes just months after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law legislation that would punish anti-pipeline demonstrators with up to 10 years in prison,a move environmentalists condemned as a flagrant attack on free expression.

“Big Oil is hijacking our legislative system,” Dallas Goldtooth of the Indigenous Environmental Network said after the Texas Senate passed the bill in May.

As The Intercept‘s Lee Fang reported Monday, the model legislation Morgan cited in his remarks “has been introduced in various forms in 22 states and passed in… Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Missouri, Indiana, Iowa, South Dakota, and North Dakota.”

“The AFPM lobbyist also boasted that the template legislation has enjoyedbipartisan support,” according to Fang. “In Louisiana, Democratic Gov. John Bel Edwards signed the version of the bill there, which is being challenged by the Center for Constitutional Rights. Even in Illinois, Morgan noted, ‘We almost got that across the finish line in a very Democratic-dominated legislature.’ The bill did not pass as it got pushed aside over time constraints at the end of the legislative session.”

===

Indigenous and Green Groups Fighting Against Pipeline Urge 2020 Democrats to Take 'NoKXL Pledge'

// Our ch T

also LNG export

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/11042019/trump-pipeline-executive-order-environmental-review-keystone-xl-clean-water-act-states-rights

Trump signed a pair of executive orders Wednesday that aim to speed approval and construction of fossil fuel projects, including the long-delayed Keystone XL pipeline, by limiting environmental reviews. While the measures are part of a broader effort to use his executive authority to push through oil, gas and coal development, they also mark a new attempt to shield the president's actions from review by the courts.

One of the orders appears to target the Keystone XL pipeline in particular, declaring that the decision to permit infrastructure crossing international borders "shall be made solely by the President" rather than the State Department, to which previous administrations had delegated the authority. Trump issued exactly such a permit in March for Keystone XL, and both the permit and the new order appear to be attempts to sidestep a legal challenge and allow the project to proceed.

Critically, having the president issue the permit directly, rather than going through the State Department, could make it more difficult for environmental and indigenous groups to challenge cross-border permits under the National Environmental Protection Act, which subjects major federal agency actions to careful review.

The second order signed Wednesday aims to limit the ability of states to review and reject pipelines and other projects under a section of the Clean Water Act. States have used that law to slow or block several pipeline projects, as well as proposed terminals to export coal and natural gas. The order also directs the Transportation Department to update regulations for exporting liquified natural gas, an increasingly important product for the energy industry.

Trump's orders drew wide condemnation from environmental groups.

"States must be able to protect communities from the polluting corporations that threaten them and their waterways," said Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, in a statement. "The Sierra Club will fight these executive orders with every tool at our disposal."

Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, vowed to "fight this tooth and nail."

The Western Governors' Association, whose members include the Republican governors of the nation's top energy-producing states, also questioned the move to limit states' authority. It issued a statement saying the governors "have concerns" about the order but are ready to work with federal officials on the new guidelines.

Clearing the Way for Keystone XL...

===

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/09082019/epa-fast-track-pipeline-permits-clean-water-act-rule-change-trump-executive-order

The Trump administration is proposing changes to federal regulations that could fast-track the approval of natural gas pipelines and other energy infrastructure. Environmental advocates say the move will weaken the ability of states and tribes to protect their waters.

The proposed changes to Clean Water Act permitting rules, announced Friday by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, would limit the amount of time states and tribes can take to review new project proposals to a "reasonable period" of no more than one year, with the definition of "reasonable period" left to federal agencies to determine and the clock starting from the inital request for a permit, with no pauses or restarts.

It also would limit states to considering only water quality and allow the federal government to override states' decisions to deny permits for projects in some situations.

"This proposed rule change would hobble the most important tool that states have to protect significant waters, from prized trout streams to essential drinking water sources," said Bradley Campbell, president of the Conservation Law Foundation.

States need time and access to information to properly analyze the potential water quality impacts of proposed infrastructure projects, particularly pipelines. "Putting limitations on that and the types of information they can consider is a problem," said Matthew Gravatt, deputy legislative director for the Sierra Club.

Gravatt said the changes also would limit states' authority to protect their waterways from effects such as erosion and sedimentation by restricting their permit decisions to only considering the potential for discharges into the water from a point source. When Washington state rejected a water quality permit for a coal terminal in 2017, it cited several environmental repercussions of the project, including air pollution and the findings in an environmental impact statement that included climate change.

The proposed rule changes follow an executive order President Donald Trump issued in April directing his administration to accelerate and promote the construction of pipelines and other energy infrastructure.

Specifically, Trump directed the EPA to propose revisions to the rules for permits issued under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, which gives states and some tribes the authority to assess the potential impact infrastructure projects might have on rivers and other navigable waters within their borders.

"Our proposal is intended to help ensure that states adhere to the statutory language and intent of [the] Clean Water Act," EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler, a former fossil fuels lobbyist, said in a written statement. "When implemented, this proposal will streamline [the] process for constructing new energy infrastructure projects that are good for American families, American workers, and the American economy. "

Industry groups said the rule change would provide project developers with greater regulatory certainty.

"A well-defined timeline and review process for water quality certifications are integral to developing infrastructure that reliably provides clean and affordable energy to American families and businesses every day," said Robin Rorick, vice president of midstream and industry operations at the American Petroleum Institute.

Sen. Tom Carper, the top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, blasted the proposal.

"President Trump and EPA Administrator Wheeler like to tout that this administration has made 'crystal clear water' a top priority," Carper said in a written statement. "But the only thing today's proposed rule makes crystal clear is that this administration prioritizes the false promises of 'energy dominance' over clean water, even if it means defying the intention of Congress, undermining the Clean Water Act and abandoning all pretense of cooperative federalism to do so."

Expect Legal Challenges

Once finalized, the proposed changes face inevitable legal challenges.

The EPA's plan conflicts with decades of legal precedents, said Jennifer Danis, a staff attorney at Columbia Law School's Environmental Clinic. "There is a vast body of precedent that confirms the critical importance of states' primacy over and expertise in protecting their own waters," she said.

Carper and two other Democratic senators, Tammy Duckworth of Illinois and Cory Booker of New Jersey, expressed similar views in a letter to the EPA following Trump's executive order this spring.

"After nearly five decades and multiple opportunities to amend the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Congress has never seen the need to significantly revise Section 401(d)—even after the Supreme Court's 1994 decision explicitly affirming state authority to impose conditions based on state law," the letter stated.

"Our concern is that your purported deference to states and tribes flies in the face of your mandate to speed up federal permitting, and there is nothing cooperative about robbing states and tribes of the time and careful analyses they require to protect their invaluable water resources," the senators wrote.

A New York Pipeline Rejected Over Water Issues

Significant delays in pipeline projects due to state water permits are rare, with most projects certified by the state and federal regulators within a year, Danis said.

"I think any delays in the large gas infrastructure projects are largely a result of shoddy and incomplete applications or route selection that's going to imperil fragile and protected resources," she said.

Wheeler, in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, pointed to the Constitution Pipeline, a proposed 124-mile pipeline that would transport natural gas from Pennsylvania into New York, as an example of a pipeline that was stopped. The project was denied a water quality permit by state officials in New York, a decision that has since been appealed by the Williams Companies, Inc., the project developer.

Christopher Stockton, a spokesperson for the company, praised the proposed rule changes.

"Williams supports efforts to foster coordination, predictability and transparency in federal environmental review and permitting processes for energy infrastructure projects," Stockton said in a written statement.

EPA will accept public comment on the proposed rule changes for the next 60 days. In his executive order, Trump wrote that the EPA should have the rule change finalized by May 2020.

Published Aug. 9, 2019

PUBLISHED UNDER:

===

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/04/10/yet-another-handout-dirty-fossil-fuel-industry-trumps-newest-assault-environment

no lnx

Wednesday, April 10, 2019

byCommon Dreams

"Yet Another Handout to the Dirty Fossil Fuel Industry": Trump's Newest Assault on Environment Draws Anger From Green Groups

"This is a massive abuse of power that does nothing other than line the pockets of Trump's fossil fuel billionaire friends, all at the expense of our democracy and our safety."

byEoin Higgins, staff writer

Donald Trump's war on the environment will continue Wednesday as the president aims to make it easier to build pipelines—angering environmental groups.

An executive order designed to loosen regulations around pipeline construction and ensure the country continues to rely on fossil fuels for its energy needs is expected to be announced by the president during a visit to Texas Wednesday.

The order will allow Trump—and any of his successors—to be the decider on pipeline project approvals, currently the responsibility of the secretary of state due to the cross-border nature of the infrastructure.

Trump is also expected to announce an executive order streamlining the permitting process for infrastructure projects, a thorn in the side of energy giants that are frequently stymied by state resistance.

"So much for the virtues of federalism," said Washington Post columnist Catherine Rampell.

Environmental groups reacted to the news of the order with anger and disappointment.

"This is a disastrous idea, one that exposes the hypocrisy of the Trump administration and threatens to undercut the ability of state leaders to determine how best to protect their rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands," the Natural Resources Defense Council told The Washington Post on Tuesday.

The anger continued on Wednesday in advance of the expected announcement.

"This is yet another example of this [administration] lining polluters' pockets while the burden of dirtier air and polluted water is placed on the American people," said green advocacy group Friends of the Earth in a tweet.

Friends of the Earth added in a statement Wednesday that Trump's decision to make the announcement in Crosby, Texas—which, as Common Dreams reported Monday, was the site of a chemical plant explosion just last week—only added to the president's dismissive approach to the victims of his environmental policies.

"These directives are yet another handout to the dirty fossil fuel industry at the expense of our public health and the environment," the group said. "Making this announcement in Crosby, weeks after a deadly chemical plant explosion, underscores Trump's complete disregard for the safety of the American people."

Environmental organization 350.org added to the fray, calling for a more robust opposition to the administration's assault on the planet.

"This is a massive abuse of power that does nothing other than line the pockets of Trump's fossil fuel billionaire friends, all at the expense of our democracy and our safety," said the group's executive director, May Boeve, in a statement. "Trump can try to rewrite regulations in favor of Big Oil, but he can't stop people power and our movement."

===

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/28032019/pipeline-protest-crackdown-state-law-legislation-south-dakota-conspirators-riot-boosting

This story was updated with a lawsuit filed March 28 over the South Dakota law.

Bills to clamp down on pipeline protests have spread to at least nine new states this year, part of an industry-backed push that began two years ago to heighten penalties for activists who try to block fossil fuel infrastructure projects.

Several of the bills also allow prosecutors to go after people or organizations as "conspirators" or "riot boosters" for merely supporting or coordinating with others who violate the law.

Civil liberties advocates argue that these vague and far-reaching provisions risk violating free speech protections under the First Amendment, and they have already started launching legal challenges.

The latest government move came on Wednesday in South Dakota—one of the states the planned Keystone XL pipeline is slated to cross—whenRepublican Gov. Kristi Noem signed a law that enables state and local governments, as well as "third parties," to seek civil damages from people or organizations that engage in "riot boosting."

Lawmakers in North Dakota, a hub of oil and gas development, also passed a bill this week that stiffens penalties for anyone who interferes with the construction or operation of pipelines and other "critical infrastructure." Once the Senate approves some minor changes, it heads to Republican Gov. Doug Burgum, who has not said whether he will sign it.

The North Dakota bill was based on a law that was enacted in Oklahoma in 2017 and then circulated by the industry-backed American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Versions of that legislation have now been introduced in at least 15 states, three of which have enacted it: Oklahoma, Louisiana and Iowa. A version of the bill passed the Indiana legislature this week, too, though the Senate there must also approve some amendments before sending it to the governor.

While the details vary from state to state, the bills generally increase penalties for trespassing on or tampering with a range of facilities, including pipelines, oil storage tanks, railroads and utility infrastructure. Several of them, including North Dakota's, also include language assigning higher penalties—up to $1 million in some cases—for any group found to be a conspirator in violating the law.

The South Dakota law is different. Rather than imposing new penalties for interfering in pipeline construction, the bill enables state or local governments—or a third party working with government—to seek compensation from anyone who engages in "riot boosting," which includes encouraging or directing someone to engage in a riot, defined by the state as the use of force or violence by three or more people acting together.

Someone can qualify as a "riot booster" even if they reside out of state and act indirectly "through any employee, agent or subsidiary." Anyone found liable would be responsible for three times the ordinary penalty.

The bill was introduced at the end of the legislative session and approved over the course of four days, with only one hearing.

Environmental and civil liberties advocates, as well as many Native American tribes, say the bills are an attempt to stifle legitimate protest by creating harsh penalties for minor infractions and by trying to scare off advocacy groups. An organization that holds a nonviolence training, for example, might be targeted under the law if attendees are later part of a protest that ends in a clash with private security forces or police.

"'Riot boosting' is an unusual and new term. You might be asking yourself what that means, and I think protesters will too," said Vera Eidelman, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Unionwho has tracked the bills. "I think it poses a unique threat to speech and appears to be targeted at protests. It uses words like 'encouraging' and 'advising' that are very broad and refer to a category of protected speech."

On Thursday, the ACLU sued South Dakota officials in federal court on behalf of indigenous and environmental groups, arguing that the new law and two related statutes violate the Constitution by suppressing free speech and failing to describe what actions could qualify as violations. In a statement, the group said "such vague and broad language invites arbitrary enforcement, will chill protected speech, and will result in indiscriminate targeting of peaceful organizers."

Industry-Backed Group's 'Model Legislation'

The legislation is part of a wave of state bills introduced across the country since President Donald Trump's election in response to high-profile protests like those against the Dakota Access Pipeline on the Standing Rock Reservation in North Dakota in 2016 and 2017.

Oklahoma state Rep. Scott Biggs said he was responding to those protests when he introduced a bill in 2017 to impose harsh penalties on people or groups who interfere with "critical infrastructure." After ALEC adopted the bill as model legislation, versions quickly spread across several states with active pipeline projects.

The bills' supporters have said they make it easier for prosecutors to go after protesters or vandals who violate the law, and that they do not target free speech.

Advocates have pointed out that the actions in question—trespassing, vandalism—are already covered by existing laws. Instead, they say, the aim of the bills is to intimidate protesters who draw attention to their concerns through civil disobedience, including minor infractions like blocking the gates of construction sites. Advocates say these protests are part of a long tradition of American civil disobedience dating back to the Boston Tea Party.

"Even where these bills are simply introduced, even if they do not move, even if they do not become law, they have potential to chill free speech and curtail activism," said Maggie Ellinger-Locke, a staff attorney with Greenpeace. "We're hearing from people on the frontlines of activism in these states that these bills frighten them."

Pipeline Companies Register Their Support

Energy companies and associations have supported the bills and have continued to push the legislation this year, according to documents compiled by Greenpeace.

TransCanada, the Canadian company behind the Keystone XL pipeline, registered its support for the bill this year in Missouri along with the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers and other industry groups. In Illinois, TransCanada was joined by Enbridge and Energy Transfer, two other leading pipeline developers, as well as the American Petroleum Institute.

Sen. Janne Myrdal, who sponsored the North Dakota bill this year and is a member of ALEC's energy task force,did not respond to requests for comment. But she told the Associated Press that she introduced the bill in response to a protester who in 2016 broke into a control site for the existing Keystone pipeline that cuts through the state and manually closed one of the valves.

"There was frustration from law enforcement and residents that there wasn't enough teeth in current law to go after these people and the organizations that support them," she said.[pix]

The protester, Michael Foster, was convicted and sentenced to three years in prison, though two of those years were suspended. He ended up serving about half a year.

In South Dakota, Gov. Noem's office did not answer emailed questions about TransCanada's role in drafting the bill, but Noem said in February that she had met with representatives of the company to discuss her legislative package, which also includes a bill that requires pipeline developers to contribute to a fund that would help pay for government costs associated with construction.

"I fully support the freedoms of speech and assembly, but we must also have clear expectations and the rule of law," Noem said in a statement issued Wednesday. "My pipeline bills make clear that we will not let rioters control our economic development."

Terry Cunha, a spokesman for TransCanada, said in an email that "we appreciate the efforts of Governor Noem and her administration to help advance Keystone XL construction and other pipelines," adding that "any legislation that deters unlawful activities and encourages the advancement of critical infrastructure projects is a positive step."

Is It Stifling Dissent?

Some activists say the bills are part of a wider effort by the oil and gas industry and its allies in government—through lawsuits, public relations campaigns and legislation—to paint protesters as criminals and even terrorists.

"All of these things I think incorrectly mischaracterize protesters and respond to a powerful pushback against pipelines and other protests, not by trying to engage on the issues but by trying to stifle dissent," Eidelman said. "I think this is really part of a broader trend."

Last year, the ACLU sued the federal government, accusing several agencies of withholding documents detailing preparations for the potential construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. The group had submitted records requests seeking information about the preparations, and the documents that did emerge, mostly from state agencies, showed that law enforcement agencies were conducting trainings for potential protests. The ACLU said the activities risked treating activists as criminals even before protests broke out. State officials have said they are simply doing their jobs.

In January, The Intercept reported on similar concerns in Minnesota, where police had been preparing for a year and a half for protests against Enbridge's proposed Line 3 pipeline expansion project by identifying groups opposed to construction and monitoring some activists.

The ACLU and other civil liberties groups said they are continuing to evaluate the state bills and considering whether they may challenge them as unconstitutional. So far,Louisiana is the only state where protesters have been arrested under the new laws. Bill Quigley, a lawyer who is representing several of the activists, said prosecutors have two years to press charges and have yet to do so.

PUBLISHED UNDER:

ACTIVISM

OIL SPILLS/PIPELINES

REGULATION

===

3/19

Conservative powerhouse takes on pipeline land feuds

Pamela King, E&E News reporter

Published: Friday, March 15, 2019

Can a pipeline developer use private property without first paying landowners?

---

scotus

Environmental lawyers are all watching to see whether the court takes up Hawai'i Wildlife Fund v. County of Maui, a case with major implications for the reach of the Clean Water Act.

"If they do take Maui, that becomes very important," Cruden said. "What they say has enormous ramifications."

At issue is whether the law applies to pollutants that reach a federally regulated body of water via groundwater with a "direct hydrological connection." A separate pending petition to the court raises a similar question related to a Kinder Morgan Inc. pipeline.

desmog

Student Reporters in West Virginia Find Atlantic Coast Pipeline Offers Only Two Dozen Permanent Jobs

It’s hard for anyone to miss a “help wanted” sign like this: “13,000 Union Workers Needed for Atlantic Coast Pipeline Project.”

That’s how the website Oilfield Job Shop described the opportunities created by the $7 billion Atlantic Coast pipeline, planned to carry shale gas 605 miles from West Virginia into Virginia and North Carolina. Its builders, a group led by Dominion Energy, say all told, the project will support 17,000 jobs — no small amount of work anywhere, but especially in parts of West Virginia where the economy has long relied on coal mining.

So, when high school students working with PBS NewsHour's Student Reporting Labs in Morgantown, West Virginia, set out to find out what “opportunity” looks like in 2019, they quickly zoomed in on pipeline jobs

===

https://www.ecowatch.com/mountain-valley-pipeline-construction-2609999282.html

Communities along the 300-mile proposed route for the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) heard some good news this week. On Tuesday, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously voted to vacate a permit required by the Clean Water Act, which was previously issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The ruling stated the Army Corps lacked the authority to substitute one type of construction for another for the natural gas pipeline, which would crisscross rivers and other sensitive aquatic ecosystems hundreds of times between northern West Virginia and southern Virginia. The case—brought by the Sierra Club, the West Virginia Rivers Coalition, and other citizen organizations—does not kill the project outright, but it is a significant roadblock.

MVP is one of two pipelines (the other is the Atlantic Coast Pipeline) that have drummed up fierce public backlash across the region. Concerned residents have been peacefully protesting the projects for months, sometimes among the trees they would be helping to save.

...

https://www.ecowatch.com/mountain-valley-pipeline-construction-halted-2593256634.html

FERC Halts Work on Mountain Valley Pipeline

On Friday, the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) ordered work stopped on the controversial Mountain Valley Pipeline that would carry fracked natural gas along a 303-mile route from West Virginia to Virginia, Reuters reported.

The order is the consequence of a legal victory for pipeline opponents July 27, in which three federal appeals judges revoked two permits for the pipeline to cross the Jefferson National Forest, ruling that the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management had not properly reviewed the project before issuing the permits, The Washington Post reported. The judges ordered the agencies to redo the permits.

"Should the agencies authorize alternative routes, (Mountain Valley) may need to revise substantial portions of the project route across non-federal lands, possibly requiring further authorizations and environmental review," FERC said in explaining its decision to halt construction, Reuters reported.

TheSierra Club, one of the environmental groups that brought the suit against the pipeline, applauded the FERC's decision.

"We have said all along that we can't trust polluting corporations to protect our water and we're relieved to see construction temporarily halted along the entire route of the MVP," Sierra Club senior attorney Nathan Matthews said in a statement. "This order is a victory for everyone who values clean water and a wake-up call for those who think they can put profits over people. There is no right way to build these dirty, dangerous fracked gas pipelines and we will continue to fight them until construction is stopped permanently."

Natalie Cox, spokesperson for EQT Corp., the company leading construction on the pipeline, told Reuters in an email that the company "respectfully disagrees with the breadth of the August 3 stop work order."

"We will continue to work closely with all agencies to resolve these issues and look forward to continuing the safe construction of this important infrastructure project," Cox said.

Opponents of the Mountain Valley Pipeline have been fighting it with a combination of tree sits and lawsuits.

In June, the FERC announced that the pipeline had to stop construction more than 591 streams and wetlands in West Virginia following another appeals court decision in favor of environmental groups.

Opponents hope a mass of legal victories can stop the project all together, and shine a light on an FERC approval process that goes too easy on developers.

"We hoped this case will put a brake on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission which is running roughshod over the environmental planning process," Wilderness Society conservationist Hugh Irwin told The Washington Post of the lawsuit that led to the current stoppage, to which his organization was a party. "Significant environmental concerns were brushed aside and inadequately analyzed," he said.

The Mountain Valley Pipeline is seen by opponents as a particularly egregious example of a project that ignored environmental and community concerns.

"Quite frankly, Mountain Valley Pipeline has become a good example of bad energy development," The Appalachian Trail Conservancy said in a statement. "Currently the steep mountainsides near Roanoke are being carved, gashed and ripped up. Unusually heavy rainfall this year has, from when the earthmovers first fired up, exposed the recklessness of this pipeline developer," they wrote.

The Pipeline Would Increase Tar Sands Exports

In anticipation of the decision, pipeline opponents blocked one of the streets outside the Public Utility Commission's building in St. Paul on Thursday with a sign reading "Expect Resistance."

When it became clear that the commission would approve the pipeline, Tania Aubid, a member of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, stood and shouted, "You have just declared war on the Ojibwe!" the Associated Press reported from the scene.

Enbridge spokesperson Jesse Semko declined to comment on the decision, saying the company was waiting until after the hearing.

The new pipeline would allow for a significant increase in exports of Canadian tar sands crude oil, which is difficult to extract, costly to transport and has a high carbon footprint compared to other crude oil. Currently2.5 million barrels of tar sands crude is exported from Canada each day, and the region has an oil glut exacerbated by years of opposition to building new pipeline capacity.

5/18

https://www.ecowatch.com/canada-kinder-morgan-pipeline-2573283566.html

yikes kinder morgan

===

https://www.ecowatch.com/new-york-constitution-pipeline-2564902494.html

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected a petition filed by Constitution Pipeline to challenge New York state's denial of a water quality certification for the natural gas project.

Natural Gas Intelligence reported: "The petition was distributed for conference, or discussion, on Friday, but the justices simply denied it."

The ruling leaves in place the August 2017 judgment of the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which sided with the state. This is a big win for the attorney general's office and the state's authority to protect its waters and natural resources.

...

https://www.ecowatch.com/rover-pipeline-spill-2526282302.html

Rover Pipeline Spills Another 150,000 Gallons of Drilling Fluid Into Ohio Wetlands

Energy Transfer Partners' troubled $4.2 billion Rover pipeline has spilled nearly 150,000 gallons of drilling fluid into wetlands near the Tuscarawas River in Stark County, Ohio—the same site where it released 2 million gallons in April.

The 713-mile pipeline, which will carry fracked gas across Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio and Michigan and Canada, is currently under construction by the same Dallas-based company that built the controversial Dakota Access pipeline.

Horizontal directional drilling work to lay the pipe beneath highways and rivers was temporarily halted in the wake of the major April spill, but work was allowed to resume in December. Energy Transfer Partners said it is continuing to follow a plan approved by the federal government and the state EPA, WOSU reported.

According to Kallanish Energy, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency inspected the horizontal directional drilling site on Jan. 10 and reported 146,000 gallons of drilling fluids "lost down the hole," referring to the pilot hole installation under the Tuscarawas River. Three attempts to seal the hole have failed, the state agency said. No inadvertent returns have been detected.

...

===

clipper tar sands

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/19102017/tar-sands-oil-pipeline-approved-line-67-alberta-clipper-enbridge-keystone

https://www.ecowatch.com/youth-climate-intervenors-2500282730.html

enbridge minnesota

https://www.alternet.org/environment/energy-transfer-partners-company-behind-dakota-access-pipeline-strong-armed-landowners

Four Pennsylvania residents filed a federal lawsuit this week against Texas-based pipeline company Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), claiming the Fortune 500 company and its subsidiaries violated their constitutional rights by engaging in illegal surveillance and harassment against landowners and pipeline protestersand caused emotional distress and other harm.

The suit, which seeks compensatory damages, also names ETP's private security provider, North Carolina-based TigerSwan, as well as local law enforcement officers who arrested pipeline opponents on charges that ultimately were not prosecuted. It claims that energy companies like ETP are increasingly relying on de facto public-private partnerships with government to "strong-arm" opponents into silence with false arrests and malicious prosecution.

"Since May of 2015, every day of my life has been affected by the plans to build this pipeline, and the lengths that Energy Transfer Partners will go to in the pursuit of profit," said plaintiff Elise Gerhart, who lives on property that will be crossed by the pipeline. "We've been needlessly harassed by agencies and violently threatened by individuals who've been intentionally incited and mobilized."

The lawsuit centers on ETP's Mariner East 2 pipeline project that would carry fracked gas from the Marcellus and Utica shale regions of West Virginia, Ohio and western Pennsylvania to refineries near Philadelphia, with much of the product to be exported overseas for making plastics. ETP is also behind several other controversial petro pipeline projects including the Bayou Bridge pipeline in Louisiana, the Trans-Pecos in Texas and the Dakota Access in North Dakota, the target of massive demonstrations last year in which Native American protesters and their supporters faced attack dogs, rubber bullets, mace and water cannons. Pipelines are a growing concern across the South: Of the 56 interstate pipeline projects that have sought permits from federal regulators since 2013, 31 run at least partly through Southern states.

Elise Gerhart's mother, Ellen Gerhart, also a plaintiff in the lawsuit, has owned a 27-acre property in central Pennsylvania's rural Huntingdon County with her husband, Stephen, since 1983 and has cared for it according to the principles of the state's forest stewardship program, which encourages private landowners "to implement sound forest management practices." In 2015, Sunoco, which has since merged with ETP, filed a declaration of taking in county court in order to gain access to a wooded part of the property to begin clearing trees for the planned pipeline. The court granted the company's request in March 2016, establishing an easement on the property and barring the Gerharts from interfering with access. There's currently a lawsuit working its way through the state courts over whether the taking was legal; it comes at a time of growing controversy over how pipeline companies are gaining access to private lands.

At the time the court granted Sunoco/ETP access rights to the Gerhart property, the Mariner East 2 project had neither the necessary state permits for construction nor what's known as "possessory interest" in the easement, which wasn't granted by the county court until April 2017. The lawsuit claims that, without possessory interest, the company had no legal right to exclude anyone from the easement — but that's not what happened.

Arrest to silence?

In late March 2016, shortly after the court granted the easement, the Philadelphia-based environmental advocacy group Clean Air Council posted a public event to Facebook encouraging people to oppose the tree-cutting planned for the Gerhart property. On March 29, 2016, dozens of protesters arrived and set up an encampment,with some sitting in trees to block their removal.

Agents of ETP/Sunoco bearing chainsaws also arrived on the land, escorted by state police and officers from the local sheriff's department. They were eager to begin work as U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regulations prohibit cutting trees on the Gerhart property after March 31 to protect migratory birds and an endangered bat.

Three of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit were arrested that day:

Protester Alex Lotorto of Milford, Pennsylvania, claims he was using a walkie-talkie to let other protesters know where the tree cutters were but law enforcement officers accused him of using it to disrupt work at the site. Arrested and charged with disorderly conduct and criminal contempt, he was held on a $200,000 bond he could not afford to pay and stayed in jail for three days. Once the tree-cutting stopped on April 1, his bond was reduced to $5,000 unsecured and he was released.

Protester Elizabeth Glunt of Altoona, Pennsylvania, entered the easement only briefly to warn tree cutters that they were getting too close to tree-sitting protesters, according to the lawsuit. She was charged with disorderly conduct and criminal contempt. Held in jail until her family raised the money to pay her $100,000 bond, Glunt was strip-searched and claims she suffered emotional distress as a result.

The lawsuit states that Ellen Gerhart approached but did not enter the easement area to warn tree cutters that they were too close to tree sitters. She was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct and indirect criminal contempt and released on a $5,000 unsecured bond.

Just over a week later, on April 7, 2016, Ellen Gerhart was arrested again on the same charges when tree cutters returned to her property unannounced and she approached them to warn that they were violating federal wildlife regulations. Elise Gerhart was also arrested for climbing a tree and charged with disorderly conduct.

Smears of Russian ties

All of the charges against the plaintiffs were ultimately dismissed.The lawsuit says that's because the arrests weren't part of a legitimate pursuit of justice but rather an effort to "arbitrarily and maliciously send a message to the Gerhart family and their supporters to discourage their opposition to the pipeline and its construction and thereby chill their First Amendment rights."

The lawsuit also takes aim at TigerSwan, ETP's private security provider, based in the town of Apex near Raleigh, North Carolina. The company was founded in 2008 by retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel and Delta Force operator James Reese.

According to company documents obtained by The Intercept, an investigative news outlet whose reporting is cited in the lawsuit, TigerSwan's tactics against pipeline protesters in five states — North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Illinois, and Texas — included military-style counterterrorism measures such as aerial surveillance, radio eavesdropping, and infiltration of camps and activist circles.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit say similar tactics are being deployed against Mariner pipeline opponents, who cite helicopters and drones flying low over the Gerhart property outside of the easement, and unmarked vehicles parking nearby and shining high-beam lights onto the land. TigerSwan has been operating in Pennsylvania at least since April 2017.

The suit further charges that ETP and TigerSwan have repeatedly sent an agent to the Gerhart property to attempt to infiltrate the protest encampment. While there, the lawsuit says, the agent took photos that were later posted to the Facebook page of a shadowy group called PA Progress to identify Ellen and Elise Gerhart. Other PA Progress posts called Elise Gerhart an "anarchist" and falsely accused her of sabotage. The lawsuit suggests that the page, which has since been taken down, was connected to TigerSwan.

The campaign against the protesters also deployed misleading propaganda in other ways. For example, the chair of TigerSwan's advisory board, retired Army Major General James "Spider" Marks, had an op-ed published on the news website PennLive.com in May warning that Mariner pipeline opponents would engage in violence and cause environmental damage. However, he did not identify his connection to TigerSwan and its interest in the pipeline project. The website has since added a note to the op-ed disclosing his position and stating that Marks' work will not appear there again.

The lawsuit further claims that the Gerharts were the targets of misinformation spread online, which it also connects to TigerSwan. For example, it points to posts atBlack Badger Report — a pseudonymously written website that claims to be concerned about the proliferation of "fake news" but whose front page features just six stories since June, all of them critical of pipeline protesters except for one condemning The Intercept of Communist ties — falsely accused Elise Gerhart and other protesters of being fronts for Russian government attempts to disrupt U.S. energy markets. The lawsuit ties the online attacks to TigerSwan through a web of internet connections involving TigerSwan Vice President Derek Borror.

The inaccurate posts not only caused "reputational harm," the lawsuit says, but "have incited commenters to threaten to injure or kill Elise Gerhart and her supporters," which in turn have caused her "mental anguish and emotional distress."

The plaintiffs are asking for a jury trial. Neither ETP nor TigerSwan responded to a request for comment.

Sue Sturgis

===

https://www.ecowatch.com/ohio-epa-rover-pipeline-2488296855.html

https://www.ecowatch.com/transcanada-tar-sands-2482964658.html

TransCanada May Abandon Energy East Tar Sands Pipeline

TransCanada wants to suspend and may even cancel its proposed $15.7-billion Energy East pipeline, which would carry tar sands oil across most of the Canadian continent.

The pipeline giant—the same company behind the controversial Keystone XL—is seeking a 30-day pause on the project in order to do a "careful review" of the National Energy Board's (NEB) tough, new climate standards.

The NEB, Canada's pipeline regulator, announced last month it was widening the scope of its Energy East and Eastern Mainline Project assessment to consider upstream and downstream, or indirect, greenhouse gas emissions.

As the National Observer explained, the NEB's new rules are a departure from its previous practice of only reviewing the impact of pollution caused during pipeline construction and operations—it also considers the impact of pollution caused by the production and consumption of the oil to be shipped by an operator.

NEB also said it will provide "more visibility" to the evaluation of risks associated with accidents such as oil spills.

TransCanada said the NEB's expanded pipeline standards could affect the "costs, schedules and viability" of its Energy East project. NEB said it will make a decision on the company's request "in a timely manner."

TransCanada's announcement is a win for environmentalists who have long protested the project.

According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the proposed Energy East pipeline would transport 1.1 million barrels per day of mostly tar sands oil from Alberta to St. John and would bring a significant increase in carbon pollution—the equivalent to the annual emissions of as many as 54 million passenger vehicles—and lock in high-carbon infrastructure expected to operate for at least 50 years.

As 350.org founder Bill McKibben tweeted: "Whoa! Transcanada may abandon its #energyeast pipeline because it doesn't want to confront the climate implications"

...

===

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/22082017/court-rejects-ferc-pipeline-approval-orders-climate-environment-impact-review-sabal-gas

2nd ct win

===

oct 2016 5 ppl 5 pipelines?!

https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-activists-shut-down-tar-sands-pipelines-2039873407.html

rebut dapl bs champagne

http://bridgethegulfproject.org/blog/2016/letter-st-charles-parish-sheriff-greg-champagne-response-comments-about-standing-rock

===

many art'ls eg pipeline protest bayou

explosions

http://www.researchandideas.com/index.php?title=Phillips_66:_Ponca_City_Refinery

===

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/8/18/headlines/exxonmobil_escapes_responsibility_for_role_in_massive_tar_sands_oil_pipeline_spill

ExxonMobil has won a major court case over its role in a 2013 pipeline spill in Arkansas when more than 200,000 gallons of tar sands oil flowed through a residential neighborhood of Mayflower,Arkansas, and nearby waterways. U.S. pipeline regulators had fined Exxon $2.6 million and ordered the company to revise its pipeline safety procedures. But now a federal appeals court has sided with Exxon, overturning much of the regulator’s decision.

http://www.alternet.org/environment/two-arrested-after-shutting-down-kinder-morgan-terminal-escalating-protests-against

Trump Approves US-Mexico Pipeline 'That'll Go Right Under the Wall'

President Donald Trump has approved the construction of a new U.S.-Mexico pipeline that will go "right under" the controversial border wall.

According to The Hill, the New Burgos Pipeline will carry up to 108,000 barrels per day of refined petroleum products per day and cross the border between McAllen, Texas and Reynosa, Tamaulipas, Mexico. The project is a joint venture between NuStar Energy LP and PMI, an affiliate of Mexico's state-owned oil and gas company Petroléos Mexicanos.

Trump made the remarks during his speech at the Department of Energy's "Unleashing American Energy" event on Thursday. Vice President Mike Pence, Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke, Energy Sec. Rick Perry and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt also stood on stage with the president.

"[The pipeline] will further boost American energy exports, and that will go right under the wall, right?" Trump said, as he glanced over to his cabinet members and made a swooping motion underneath the imaginary structure with his arm. Some in the audience clapped and laughed at the gesture.

"We have to dig down a little deeper under that section," he added.

Trump's 17-minute speech centered around the theme of America's "energy dominance." But as Newsweekreported, he did not once mention the rapidly growing renewable energy sector, not even his now-infamous "solar" border wall proposal. Rather, he touted "clean, beautiful coal," reducing restrictions on natural gas, and expanding offshore oil and gas development. He dismissed concerns about fossil fuels as "a big beautiful myth" and "fake."

Additionally, POTUS touted his executive order to push the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines forward while falsely claiming that there was no opposition to his decision. He underscored his decision to withdraw the U.S. from the "one-sided" Paris climate agreement.

Environmental groups have spoken out against Trump's speech this week as well as his administration's intention to unleash more fossil fuels.

"The 'energy dominance' tagline should be called out for what it is: another manifestation of the president's misogynistic, hyper-masculine, abusive outlook on the world," David Turnbull, campaigns director at Oil Change International said. "It reveals an attitude toward our environment and energy policy that would destroy communities and our climate in order to feed his own desire to feel powerful over others."

"Want to know what Trump's idea of energy dominance looks like? Look no further than his crony cabinet," Turnbull continued. "Thanks to this administration, Washington is more dominated by Big Oil, Gas and Coal executives and their shills than ever—and they're having their way with American democracy. Someone should put the leash back on Donald Trump, while the rest of us keep working to make America the leader it needs to be in renewable energy innovation and job creation."

The Center for Biological Diversity criticized Trump's plans to expand offshore drilling, which replaces the Obama administration's plans to protect the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic oceans.

"Trump just planted a big 'for sale' sign in America's oceans. But oil executives who think they'll have a free pass to drill at will need to know that coastal communities are fighting back," said Kristen Monsell, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Selling off our seas for short-term profits is a bad deal for Americans, wildlife and our changing climate."

Lena Moffitt, senior director of the Sierra Club's Our Wild America Campaign, had similar sentiments.

"Expanding drilling off our shores would put our coastal communities' health, economic well-being, and environment at risk, and continue to ignore the impacts of climate change across the nation," Moffitt said. "Opposition to this administration's polluter-friendly agenda will only grow as they take yet another step to prioritize oil and gas industry profits over the health and safety of the American people."

Greenpeace USA's senior research specialist Tim Donaghy said, "Trump is kidding himself if he thinks opening up the Arctic and Atlantic to offshore drilling is going to be easy."

"People in this country demanded that President Obama protect public lands and waters from offshore oil and gas development, and communities from Alaska to South Carolina will do it again," Donaghy continued. "Research shows that expanding offshore oil drilling will lead to increased global greenhouse gas emissions and higher costs that will be borne by Americans for decades to come."

Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, called on local governments to spur clean energy development.

"A better vision for American energy exists, but it isn't coming from the White House," she said. "Climate leadership and the transition to renewable energy will come from the local and state level, and we must continue to pressure elected officials around the country to commit to a transition to a clean energy future, starting now."

FERC Releases 'Utterly Insufficient Review' for Mountain Valley Pipeline

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) released its Final Environmental Impact Statement Friday for the Mountain Valley Pipeline, a controversial 303-mile pipeline that would carry two billion cubic feet of fracked gas per day from West Virginia through Virginia.

As has been the pattern at FERC, the review fails to adequately assess whether the pipeline is needed in the first place, while sweeping aside the project's serious threats to water resources, the safety of communities and the climate.

Oil Change International research analyst Kelly Trout had the following response to FERC's deeply flawed climate assessment:

In this utterly insufficient review, FERC ignores both science and economics to sweep aside the Mountain Valley Pipeline's significant climate impact. FERC severely undercounts climate pollution by ignoring methane leakage across the gas supply chain, which makes gas as dirty or dirtier than coal, and by omitting emissions from upstream fracking. FERC also wrongly assumes that gas supplied by the project is likely to replace coal, when it's just as likely to lock out the clean energy and efficiency alternatives we urgently need.

If FERC was doing its job, it would find the Mountain Valley Pipeline will cause an unacceptable increase in climate pollution and reject this dirty project. A proper analysis shows that this pipeline will cause as much climate pollution as 26 coal plants per year. This project is the last thing we need in the face of worsening heatwaves and flooding, and when clean alternatives are readily available now.

Concerned residents continue to fight this dirty pipeline because it's a clear threat to local livelihoods, clean water and our climate. It's time for FERC to completely overhaul its pipeline review process to prioritize the safety of communities and our climate, not the profits of corporate polluters.

In a recent study, Oil Change International found that the Mountain Valley Pipeline will cause nearly 90 million metric tons of greenhouse gas pollution per year, which is the equivalent of 26 coal plants or 19 million vehicles on the road. The study applied a gas pipeline climate methodology that is based on the latest analysis of the lifecycle pollution of fracked gas from the Appalachian Basin.

===

https://www.ecowatch.com/ferc-reject-rover-pipeline-2423146874.html

etp

===

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/5/10/headlines/ohio_epa_fines_energy_transfer_partners_over_18_pipeline_spills

xl back on

trump russian steel

===

http://www.globalpossibilities.org/100772-2/

The amount of crude oil that spewed near Belfield, North Dakota from the ruptured Belle Fourche pipeline in December was vastly underestimated.

The original estimate was around 176,000 gallons of oil. After further review, pipeline operator True Companies now reports about 12,615 barrels (529,830 gallons) of oil spilled, spokeswoman Wendy Owen told Inforum. The cause of the leak has not been determined.

The spill contaminated a hillside and Ash Coulee Creek which empties into the Little Missouri River. The break was also significant because it happened less than 200 miles away from the Oceti Sakowin Camp, where Water Protectors were protesting the heavily contested Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL).

The new number makes the Belle Fourche spill one of the largest in state history and perhaps the largest oil pipeline spill that contaminated a North Dakota water body, Bill Suess, spill investigation program manager for the state’s Department of Health, told Inforum.

https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/02/28/trump-american-steel-russia-putin-fracking

tmk chubais putin

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/2276/all-info#cosponsors

S.2276 - PIPES Act of 2016

oddly no sponsor

Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ]*	11/10/2015
Sen. Daines, Steve [R-MT]*	11/10/2015
Sen. Peters, Gary C. [D-MI]*	11/10/2015
Sen. Boxer, Barbara [D-CA]	02/23/2016
Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA]	02/24/2016

===

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2016/12/pipelines-of-funds-support-allies-of-dapl/

When the Army Corp of Engineers announced Sunday it would block construction of an essential part of theDakota Access Pipeline Projectand study alternative routes, thousands of protestors at the site — members of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, environmentalists, veterans and others — joined hands in jubilation.

Concern about potential damage to the tribe’s sacred lands and leaks that could poison the water supply led to the outcry; a semi-permanent encampment of RVs, teepees and tents sprang up in recent months as the ranks of the objectors grew.

But they’re not breaking camp just yet. The forces behind the $3.8 billion pipeline, which is expected to carry Bakken Shale oil from northwest North Dakota through South Dakota and Iowa to connect to an oil reserve in Illinois, have a lot of sway with President-elect Donald Trump, who could order the Corps to reverse course, and those around him.Trump indicated his support for the pipeline, including the segment that has triggered the controversy, on Monday.

North Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D), who has been mentioned as a possible Interior secretary under Trump,has avoided taking a position of the pipeline per se, but encouraged the protestors to go home: “When you look at it, we know one thing for sure: When the administration changes, the easement is going to be approved,” Heitkamp said Monday. “I understand the frustration of the protesters, I just think that this fight is not winnable.”

A member of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, Heitkamp and her leadership PAC have raised $8.7 million since 2011, with $277,879 from the oil and gas industry. That includes $1,500 from the political action committee of Energy Transfer Partners, which owns Dakota Access, LLC, the key player in the project.

Fellow North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven (R), who recently came out supporting the pipeline, also received $5,000 from the PAC during his re-election campaign this cycle. With seats on the Energy and Natural Resources and Indian Affairscommittees, Hoeven’s single biggest financial supporter throughout his senatorial career has been the oil and gas industry, which has given his campaign $673,030 since 2011.

In total, Energy Transfer Partners’ PAC donated $128,000 to federal candidates this in the 2016 cycle.

Trump’s interest in the pipeline has been more than just tangential: His 2015 financial disclosure report showed he owned Energy Transfer Partners stock valued at between $500,000 and $1 million. Trump’s latest financial report, filed in May 2016, shows he reduced his investment to somewhere between $15,000 and $50,000, but also revealed an investment in Phillips 66 of between $100,000 and $250,000. Phillips 66 owns about 25 percent of the pipeline, making it the biggest partner in the project after ETP. Trump sold all his shares in companies in June, including the investment in ETP, according to his spokesperson, though no documentary evidence of that has been shared.

Energy Transfer Partners CEO Kelcy Warren showed his strong support for Trump in late June by donating $100,000 to his joint fundraising committee, $3,000 of which went straight to his campaign.

Like many big donors this cycle, Warren flirted with other presidential prospects first, most notably former Texas Gov. Rick Perry. The pro-Perry super PAC Opportunity & Freedom I got a $5 million donation from Warren soon after Perry announced his bid last year — but Warren received a refund after Perry dropped out of the race a few months later. Perry, it turns out, is on the board of Energy Transfer Partners. National Republican party committees also received $203,400 from Warren this election cycle.

:{At the state level, Warren donated [$250,000](http://followthemoney.org/show-me?f-fc=2%2C3&d-eid=11563260&f-eid=11281947&d-cci=33#[{1|gro=y) to Texas Gov. Gregg Abbott (R) in this election cycle and [$10,400](http://followthemoney.org/show-me?f-fc=2%2C3&d-eid=11563260&s=LA&f-eid=16072644&d-cci=33#{1|gro=y,f-eid) to Louisiana Public Service Commissioner Scott Angelle, who oversees public utilities in the state. Angelle, the onetime head of the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, is a board member of Sunoco Logistics Partners, a subsidiary of Energy Transfer :(style="background-color:#ffff66;"):}:and one of the smaller owners of the pipeline project. Angelle faces a run-off election for Louisiana’s [3rd Congressional District seat on Saturday, and his single biggest supporter has been the oil and gas industry, which has contributed $103,150 so far.

Warren doesn’t skimp: He has donated over $2.4 million to candidates, parties and committees at the federal level since 2007 and [$1.7 million](http://followthemoney.org/show-me?f-fc=2,3&d-eid=11563260#[{1|gro=f-eid,d-cci,s) at the state and local level in the last decade.

Energetic support

Heitkamp is only the latest addition to the list of oil executives and pro-development politicians being considered to run the Interior Department, overseeing the nation’s wildlife and natural resources.

Trump’s key energy advisor and Continental Resources CEO Harold G. Hamm, in particular, has been the mastermind of the energy policies of the president-elect.

Hamm and his wife Sue Ann Hamm have donated nearly $1.9 million to federal candidates and committees over the years. This election cycle, individuals (including the chief executive) and the political action committee of Continental Resources donated $15,226 to Trump as well as $10,300 and $10,200 to Heitkamp and Hoeven, respectively. The oil billionaire who was at the forefront of the fracking boom in North Dakota was also considered a leading contender for the top job at the Department of Energy, but recently denied any plans to join Trump’s cabinet.

In a Wall Street Journal column published Monday, another key energy adviser to the Trump campaign, Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) — who also received $7,400 from Continental Resources this year — censured the protesters. He, too, counts the energy and natural resources sector as his biggest source of financial support, especially the oil and gas industry: The sector has given his campaign and his leadership PAC $932,925 throughout his congressional career, including his unsuccessful 1996 campaign. Oasis Petroleum, whose well leaked more than 67,000 gallons of crude oil last year, endangering a tributary around the Missouri River, topped Cramer’s donors, giving $68,500. North Dakota-based Armstrong Corp and Koch Industries also have given Kramer $32,800 and $33,000, respectively.

While members of Congress have voiced their views on the high-profile project, the permitting process has mostly been in the purview of the states. Both the Iowa Utility Boardand the North Dakota Public Service Commission have been key here.

Unlike IUB members, who were all appointed by Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, the three North Dakota public service commissioners — Julie Fedorchak, Randy Christmann and Brian Kalk — were elected to their six-year terms and boasted strong financial support from the energy and natural resources sector. Combined, they brought in a total of $117,550 from those interests. The North Dakota Petroleum Council forked over a total of $15,900 to the three. Hamm, of Continental Resources, gave them $1,000 each.

And energy and natural resources donors have been crucial to Branstad, too, accounting for over $1 million out of $1.8 million total contributions to the governor since 2010.

Unfortunately for protesters, the Dakota Access Pipeline is not the only pipeline plan that could be revived by the new administration.

Cramer — formerly a North Dakota Public Service Commissioner who helped approve the original Keystone Pipeline in 2010 — has been a leading voice in reviving the fourth phase of the Keystone project, which would add North Dakota and Montana to its route.

Called the Keystone XL, the pipeline proposal was a top election issue in 2014. The Obama administration rejected it last year, but Trump says he backs it to free America from dependence on foreign oil. Beneficiaries of the pipeline would be American oil moguls operating in the region, like Hamm and the Koch brothers.

Keystone XL’s biggest owner, TransCanada, appears to be stepping up its political game. Contributions from the company’s employees and PAC jumped from $4,600 in the 2014 cycle to $243,226 this time around. Ohio Gov. John Kasich received $11,000, while Cramer and Trump received $5,000 and $4,136 each. Even Hillary Clinton, who publicly opposed the extended pipeline, received contributions totaling $1,639.

Categories: Campaign finance Congress Congressional Committees Environment Oil & gas Politicians & Elections

Tags: b3, Continental Resources, Dakota Access Pipeline, energy transfer partners, harold hamm, Heidi Heitkamp, John Hoeven, Kelcy Warren, Keven Cramer, Keystone Pipeline, north dakota, Rick Perry, Scott Angelle, soorin kim, transcanada

http://www.alternet.org/environment/whos-funding-dakota-access-pipeline-bank-america-hsbc-ubs-goldman-sachs-wells-fargo

GOODMAN: Juan, in a moment we’re going to be talking about the Attica prison uprising, but right now we’re going to be looking at the banks and who is funding the $3.8 billion pipeline, the Dakota Access pipeline.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Yeah, we’ll continue to—on Wednesday in Minneapolis—what we want to do is continue to cover the coverage of the standoff at Standing Rock over the $3.8 billion Dakota Access pipeline with a look at who is profiting off of it. On Wednesday in Minneapolis, dozens protested at U.S. Bank Plaza, demanding U.S. Bank stop funding the pipeline. According to an investigation published by LittleSis, U.S. Bank has extended a $175 million credit line to Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind the pipeline.

AMY GOODMAN: Meanwhile, Saturday was the first day of a two-week call for actions against the financial institutions that are bankrolling the Dakota Access pipeline project. We turn to Part 2 of our conversation with Hugh MacMillan, a senior researcher with Food & Water Watch whose new investigation reveals the dozens of financial institutions that are bankrolling what’s called DAPL, the Dakota Access pipeline. I began by asking Hugh what’s most important to understand about the corporate structure of the pipeline company.

HUGH MACMILLAN: Dakota Access, LLC, is a joint venture of Phillips 66 and a joint venture of two members of the Energy Transfer family—Energy Transfer Partners and Sunoco Logistics. Enbridge and Marathon Oil have bought into this, this joint venture. Together, they now have about a 37 percent stake in the pipeline, in the Dakota Access pipeline.

AMY GOODMAN: How are the banks involved?

HUGH MACMILLAN: Well, that’s—they are banking on this company and banking on being able to drill and frack for the oil to send through the pipeline over the coming decades. So they’re providing the capital for the construction of this pipeline.

AMY GOODMAN: And explain what the banks are. Which banks are they? And how are they involved?

HUGH MACMILLAN: Well, I’ve got a list of the 17 banks that are specifically providing financing for this project. And it’s also coupled together with a Energy Transfer—Energy Transfer Partner project to convert an existing pipeline that would connect to the south end of the Dakota Access pipeline and run oil all the way down to the Gulf Coast, where there are refineries and also export infrastructure. AMY GOODMAN: Can you tell us that list of 17 banks?

HUGH MACMILLAN: I can. Citibank is the bank that’s been running the books on the project, and that’s the bank that beat the bushes and got other banks to join in. So, we have Wells Fargo, BNP Paribas, SunTrust, Royal Bank of Scotland, Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, Mizuho Bank, TD Securities, ABN AMRO Capital, DNB First Bank—and that’s actually a bank based in Philly; it’s not the DNB Bank based in Norway, which is actually provided several hundred million to the Energy Transfer family separately—and ICBC London, SMBC Nikko Securities and Société Générale.

but...

http://www.alternet.org/environment/during-paris-climate-summit-obama-signed-exxon-koch-backed-bill-expediting-pipeline

===

http://www.southernstudies.org/2015/11/institute-index-dirty-tar-sands-oil-flows-to-south.html

...wapo

7/15

For now, the campaign disclosed only the names of lobbyists acting as bundlers, as required by law, showing that eight raised a collective $228,400 for Bush during the second quarter of 2015.

The top bundlers were William P. Killmer of the Mortgage Banking Association, who raised $36,200; Dirk Van Dongen of the National Association of Wholesalers, who raised $33,900; and Ignacio Sanchez, co-chair of the lobbying practice at DLA Piper, who raised $32,400.

Bush’s rivals for the GOP nomination — even long-shot candidates lagging in the polls — were also able to tout big fundraising hauls, thanks to their outside allies. Former Texas governor Rick Perry raised just $1 million for his campaign but has generated more than $16 million in super PAC money, largely from three wealthy backers. The biggest sum came from his campaign finance chair, oil pipeline executive Kelcy Warren, who donated $6 million.

[Rick Perry’s $6 million man]

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who pulled less than $600,000 during his first official week as a candidate, will benefit from three different groups — a super PAC and two nonprofits — that have collected more than $8 million so far.

Brad Todd, the GOP strategist running the pro-Jindal Believe Again super PAC, said an expanding universe of donors has helped fuel the big takes....

===

http://www.southernstudies.org/2015/05/texas-company-behind-california-oil-spill-a-repeat.html

Texas company behind California oil spill a repeat offender

California declared a state of emergency this week following Tuesday's spill from an onshore pipeline into the Pacific Ocean in Santa Barbara County. Responding to reports of an overwhelming smell, the local fire department discovered crude pouring into a culvert from a ruptured 24-inch pipeline that carries oil produced offshore from an Exxon Mobil processing plant to a pump station and then on to refineries.

As much as 105,000 gallons spilled, with an estimated 21,000 gallons ending up in the ocean. The oil has contaminated some nine miles of coastline, including Refugio State Beach, and it's injured birds and fish and at least one sea lion. The spill occurred in the same area as a 1969 oil spill disaster that helped shape the modern environmental movement.

The cause of this latest spill remains under investigation. But the company responsible — Plains All American Pipeline, headquartered in Houston — was already on federal regulators' radar as an operator with a history of problems.

The company has been the target of 20 federal enforcement actions since 2006,

according to an analysis of U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration data by the Center for Biological Diversity, a nonprofit conservation group. In all, Plains racked up 175 infractions in that time — mostly for spills, many involving pipeline corrosion control and maintenance issues.

A Los Angeles Times analysis of the same federal data calculated that Plains' rate of incidents per mile of pipe is more than three times the national average. Only four companies reported more infractions. Among the states where Plains' pipelines were cited for problems wereMississippi and Alabama. The company also has operations in other Southern states including Arkansas, Louisiana, South Carolina and Texas.

Plains' various mishaps have caused more than $23 million in property damage. But even though the company has total assets valued at over $22 billion, it was assessed a total of just $115,600 in civil penalties.

Miyoko Sakashita with the Center for Biological Diversity called Plains' record "disturbing." The group noted that the company had five incidents in California in 2014 alone, including the one that dumped oil into a Los Angeles neighborhood.

Coming soon to a beach near you?

Pipeline breaks are among the many risks that come with offshore oil and gas development.

An analysis of federal pipeline data commissioned last year by the Center for Biological Diversity tallied almost 8,000 serious pipeline breaks nationwide since 1986. They spilled more than 80 million gallons of pollution into waterways and caused more than 2,300 injuries and nearly $7 billion in property damage. Most of those incidents involved oil pipelines.

Residents of the Southeast Atlantic Coast could soon be facing these risks: Earlier this year, the Obama administration proposed opening an area off the coast of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia to drilling. A recent Facing South investigation found that a coalition of coastal state governors led by North Carolina's Pat McCrory (R) has been working closely with politically powerful oil and gas interests to make that proposal a reality.

The governors' pro-drilling efforts got a boost earlier this month with the introduction of bills in the U.S. Senate to expand offshore oil and gas development. Sens. Bill Cassidy and David Vitter of Louisiana, Thad Cochran and Roger Wicker of Mississippi, and John Cornyn of Texas are sponsoring a measure to extend drilling to the Eastern Gulf. Sens. Mark Warner of Virginia and Tim Scott of South Carolina introduced similar legislation targeting the Atlantic, while Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska sponsored legislation to expand drilling in the Arctic. All are Republicans except Warner, a Democrat.

But the Senators face opposition from within their own ranks: U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, a Florida Democrat, introduced a billthis week that would extend the current moratorium on oil drilling in the Eastern Gulf. In a floor speech, Nelson pointed to the unfolding disaster in California to illustrate what's at stake.

"Drilling off the coast is not what the people of Florida want," he said. "We want fishing vessels hauling in prize catches, not Coast Guard vessels skimming oil."

As if you needed any more reason to believe that oil companies might not be the most moral players in the modern economy, Dakota Access LLC allegedly offered an southeast Iowa landowner the services of a “$1,200 teenage prostitute” in exchange for letting the company run a pipeline through his yard. Can we all — regardless of political stance on whether oil strengthens the economy or whatever — officially agree that that is just not OK? Yes? Good!

Hughie Tweedy of rural Montrose told reporters Monday that a regional representative of Dakota Access LLC on three separate occasions offered “the sexual services of a woman” if Tweedy would allow the pipeline to run through his property.

The giant Dakota Access Pipeline would run 1,134 miles, carrying 450,000 barrels of crude oil per day from the Bakken region of North Dakota to Pakota, Ill., and will cost approximately $3.8 billion to construct. If the oil company in question, Dakota Access (a subsidiary of Energy Transfer), gets its way, the line would cross the entire state of Iowa, in addition to parts of Nebraska, North Dakota, and Illinois.

Tweedy is a libertarian who doesn’t want the company (or the government, dammit!) to force him to give up his land for development. Although he blew the whistle on the prostitute bribe currently being investigated, KCRG reports that he isn’t refusing the pipeline altogether — just not in or around his land:

===

http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/17/home-rule-fracking-pipelines/

Across the country, battles are raging as communities attempt to protect the air, soil and water within their borders and the safety of their residents. These battles are taking the form of debates about whether state regulations can or should erase local home rule.

Colorado and Texas are engaged in such high-profile battles after voters in communities likeDenton, Texas and Boulder, Longmont and Fort Collins, Colorado, passed fracking bans. That has opened up ongoing maneuvers and lawsuits as state governments work with oil and gas companies to uphold the exploration and extraction interests of the latter despite citizen concerns about environmental pollution, noise, traffic and infrastructure stress.

ut with communities and citizens becoming more and more determined to have their say, fossil fuel interests put out one blaze only to find a dozen more flaring up. Many of those communities are using a strategy developed by the Pennsylvania-based Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF) to address environmental issues: a community bill of rights. Now oil and gas companies are working to suppress those bills of rights.

They were successful in Ohio last week where a judge in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) struck down the community bill of rights passed by suburban Broadview Heights voters by a 2-1 margin n November 2012 to keep additional drilling operations out of their community. The decision is considered significant because it’s the first community bill of rights in Ohio to get a legal review. Judge Michael Astrab found it in conflict with state law. Many other Ohio cities have passed or attempted to pass such bills of rights, including Youngstown and Kent where they were defeated and Columbus, where activists are working to put a city charter amendment on the ballot. Oberlin and Athens have passed them.

According to the *Akron Beacon-Journal*, “Astrab said the city’s community bill of rights conflicts with state law that gives the Ohio Department of Natural Resources sole authority to regulate drillers since 2004.”

Broadview Heights resident Tish O’Dell of Mothers Against Drilling in Our Neighborhoods(MADION), said, “We now see that at least one Court is not prepared to uphold our right to protect our health and safety. Instead, the court prohibited our city from protecting us. If no branch of our government is going to protect us from these corporate harms, then our government has ceased to be legitimate.”

Out in Oregon, citizens are fighting the same battle in a different way: they want to put it in their constitution so a judge can’t overturn it. The Oregon Community Rights Network (OCRN) is working to collect signatures to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot in November 2016 that would protect the right of communities to make decisions about what goes on inside their borders and the legality of those decisions even if they conflict with corporate interests.

“It is clear that the current legal structure allows corporations to treat our communities as property,” said Eron King, board president of OCRN. “We—the people –have become mere tenants of the corporations. It’s time we change that by changing our constitution to reflect that our right to local, community self-government is above corporate control.”

Among the issues OCRN cites as areas where corporations’ rights can erase those of the community are growing GMOs, transporting oil and gas, spraying pesticides and building natural gas pipelines.

[img]

On the other side of the country in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, pipelines are the issue as citizens in Martic Township mobilize under the banner of Martic SOUL (Save Our Unspoiled Land) to prevent a natural gas pipeline from passing through their community.

“In October 2014, Martic Township Supervisors announced their opposition against the construction of the proposed Atlantic Sunrise Project,” the group Lancaster Against Pipelines posted on its website. “Following this announcement, residents in Martic as well as Conestoga Townships, requested that the supervisors pass an ordinance for a Community Bill of Rights. This Community Bill of Rights proposed the ban of construction of natural gas pipelines within the respective townships and the rights to local governance, sustainable energy, clean air, clean water among other things. The proposed ordinance was shot down, in both townships.”

The group is running seven anti-pipeline candidates in a May election for members of the local Government Study Commission and has turned to CELDF to help it with a Community Bill of Rights to protect home rule.

In an editorial posted at Lancaster Online, Martic resident and activist Emily Weinstock-Collins announced the launch of Home Rule in Martic Township and support for these candidates, writing, “We are dedicated to protecting our residents and securing the future of Martic Township; home rule is our next step toward achieving these goals. True democracy gives power to the people, not to the highest bidder. Home rule is a step towards that democracy.”

A pipeline is also outraging citizens in southern New Hampshire, where communities are mobilizing against a large-scale natural gas pipeline, the Northeast Energy Direct (NED), that would cut through their towns. Three of the five towns impacted have already voted to take action against pipeline company Kinder-Morgan with the other two set to vote this week, following extensive community protests.

“For too long, decisions related to energy have been controlled by corporations and individuals motivated by financial and political interests rather than by the public good,” New Hampshire Pipeline Awareness.org posted. “This project is more of the same. The prospective benefit to the fossil fuel industry is clear, but the alleged public need has not been demonstrated.”

“One thing I love about New Hampshire is that we are politically devoted to local control,” said Medicine Story, a Wampanoag Indian and longtime resident of Greenville, one of the impacted communities, told the Monadnock Ledger-Transcript. “If this pipeline was something that most people in the area wanted, then that’s what everyone would work toward. Clearly, that isn’t the case here.”

PIPELINES

Plans to Coordinate

Related

Indigenous Water Protectors Face Off With an Oil Company and Police Over a Minnesota Pipeline

Sharing Intelligence

This is a really, really big deal': Michigan Gov. moves to shut down Line 5 pipeline

Judge rules that Dakota Access Pipeline must be shut down and emptiedMatthew Rozsa / Salonan 720

'Single and Complete'

Permian Highway Pipeline in Texas

Keystone XL Decision Looms

Clearing the Way for Keystone XL...

Expect Legal Challenges

A New York Pipeline Rejected Over Water Issues

Industry-Backed Group's 'Model Legislation'

Pipeline Companies Register Their Support

Is It Stifling Dissent?

Conservative powerhouse takes on pipeline land feuds

FERC Halts Work on Mountain Valley Pipeline

The Pipeline Would Increase Tar Sands Exports

Rover Pipeline Spills Another 150,000 Gallons of Drilling Fluid Into Ohio Wetlands

TransCanada May Abandon Energy East Tar Sands Pipeline

Trump Approves US-Mexico Pipeline 'That'll Go Right Under the Wall'

FERC Releases 'Utterly Insufficient Review' for Mountain Valley Pipeline

S.2276 - PIPES Act of 2016

Texas company behind California oil spill a repeat offender

Judge rules that Dakota Access Pipeline must be shut down and emptied Matthew Rozsa / Salonan 720