CHARLESTON, W. Va. - The federal agency that approves or denies gas pipelines is oriented against the concerns of landowners and communities, according to people working on the issues.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) will decide on the huge pipelines competing to bring natural gas through West Virginia and Virginia to eastern markets.

Spencer Phillips, chief economist for Key-Log Economics, studied the impact of the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP).

He estimates it will hurt folks along the line to the tune of more than $8 billion. But Phillips says FERC is not designed or inclined to consider those costs.

"FERC's approval process for the Mountain Valley Pipeline is really a rigged game," says Phillips. "The agency's procedures themselves, as well as their track record, mean that they ignore some really important cost to people and communities."

According to a Washington lawyer who specializes in cases like these, FERC's orientation is built into its legal DNA.

Carolyn Elefant, an energy attorney in Washington D.C., says the 1930s Natural Gas Act was passed at a time when the government wanted to encourage the development of needed infrastructure.

She says it gave regulators the power to use eminent domain to overcome landowner opposition.

So, Elefant says FERC now assumes if most landowners make a deal with the developers, the folks along the line have received fair compensation.

"That's very inaccurate," says Elefant. "Many times people enter into the agreements because they feel like they have no choice, they're not going to be able to fight a huge gas company, and they figure they might as well take what they can get."

Elefant says the federal agency may seem intimidating to ordinary folks. But she stresses that even when it seems that way, it's still worth trying to make your case the same way pipeline developers do.

Phillips says when it comes to determining if there is a need for the MVP, it's still unclear if the agency will listen to the landowners and local communities, or just the power company.

"The firm obviously wants to make money for its shareholders," he says. "However, it has not been demonstrated that there is any public benefit, outside of the corporation itself, that there would be any public benefit."

The pipeline developers argue the lines are justified to meet future public demand for gas in North Carolina and coastal Virginia.

FERC says it does balance impacts and demand when determining overall "public convenience and necessity."


get more stories like this via email

Environmental groups are seeking greater input as California puts the finishing touches on its application to become a hub for hydrogen fuel production. This is billed as a big step toward a zero-carbon emission future. The project is being managed by a public-private partnership called the Alliance for Renewable Clean Hydrogen Energy Systems, known as ARCHES.

Monica Embrey, energy director for the California Sierra Club, called this a good opportunity to advance climate progress but only if certain guardrails are put in place.

"If they use existing pipelines, they would have to really upgrade them quite a lot. And we want to make sure that those have safety mechanisms in place so that communities get to say whether or not a pipeline near them actually gets used for hydrogen. We want leakage monitoring, we want really strict standards," she said.

Hydrogen is extremely explosive and is a major greenhouse-gas pollutant if it leaks or is burned and will not be used for homes or commercial buildings, but instead will be targeted to medium and heavy-duty vehicles, ports and power plants, which are especially difficult to decarbonize, ARCHES said.

In addition, ARCHES said hydrogen will be produced using renewable power and will not be blended with natural gas within pipelines.

SoCal Gas and Chevron have been consulting on the application. The ARCHES website calls for meaningful engagement with community groups and environmental justice advocates.

Bahram Fazeli, director of research and policy with the nonprofit Communities for a Better Environment, said the planning process has been vague to date.

"They have done a very poor job of prioritizing environmental justice or public health in their process. They're not open to California's open-meeting laws and public participation. They only have one environmental-justice representative on the 11-member board, " Fazeli said.

The application to the Department of Energy is due April 7th. New hydrogen hubs could bring more than a$1-billion in federal investment to California, supporters said.

A bill designed to fight price-gouging at the gas pump is expected to pass the California State Assembly today and be signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom soon after.

Senate Bill X1-2 would create a watchdog at the California Energy Commission empowered to set a "reasonable" profit margin for gasoline and assess penalties for price-gouging.

Meghan Sahli-Wells, former mayor of Culver City and California director of the group Elected Officials to Protect America, said oil companies must be held accountable.

"What we've seen is behind these price hikes aren't the external forces that the big oil companies have blamed for the humongous price spikes," Sahli-Wells asserted. "What we've seen are refineries that have doubled their profits."

The Western States Petroleum Association has slammed the bill, blaming high gas prices on a supply shortage linked to a lack of investment in refining capacity and necessary infrastructure.

Gas prices last summer and fall hit an average of $6.42 per gallon in California, more than $2.50 higher than the national average.

The oil and gas industry is behind a ballot measure to roll back a California law passed last year requiring new drilling permits to include setbacks from homes and schools. Sahli-Wells argued the state needs to cut air pollution from burning fossil fuels, adding she does not like recent mailers blaming higher gas prices on state regulation.

"The industry itself is going hot and heavy on propaganda to scare people into dialing back environmental protection," Sahli-Wells contended. "It does feel somewhat like an 'oil war' is happening in California. But we know that if we are to win, that oil must lose."

The new watchdog would also have the power to subpoena business records in order to root out price manipulation.

California lawmakers hold a hearing in Sacramento today on a bill to hold oil companies and gasoline refiners accountable for alleged price gouging.

According to the Office of Gov. Gavin Newsom, gas prices in California hit an average of $6.42 per gallon last fall, which was $2.61 more than the national average. And it happened even as crude oil prices dropped and state taxes and fees remained unchanged.

Farrah Khan, mayor of Irvine, said she supports Senate Bill 2, which would establish an independent watchdog within the California Energy Commission.

"It's going to establish a new division to provide independent oversight and analysis of the market," Khan explained. "This new division would have the power to subpoena information deemed necessary to root out and address any of the abuses of market power."

The Western States Petroleum Association said in a statement, "This new windfall penalty in this proposal is actually worse than the original bill. The Legislature would be giving away all its authority to a group of unelected bureaucrats who will have the power to set gasoline prices and impact fuels markets. [This] will likely lead to the same unintended consequences as his initial proposal - less investment, less supply, and higher gasoline prices for Californians."

Steven Hernandez, mayor of Coachella, said it is a matter of fairness to the families who live paycheck to paycheck.

"People struggle to afford gas and rent, and to pay medical expenses," Hernandez pointed out. "When we're mindful of the working class, I think we're better off as a society."

The California Energy Commission watchdog would analyze data to look for patterns of misconduct or price manipulation. The bill would also start a rule-making process at the Commission, to set a reasonable profit margin and impose a penalty for price-gouging above the margin. Any fines would be returned to taxpayers.


get more stories like this via email