MINNEAPOLIS -- Opponents of the proposed Line 3 oil pipeline in northern Minnesota say they plan to take legal action in the coming weeks after the project received a round of approval from state regulators.
The pipeline would replace an existing line and would transport twice as much oil, a concern among environmental groups.
And while the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission approved a revised environmental statement, along with two other requests, it wasn't unanimous like the previous vote.
Andy Pearson, Midwest Tar Sands coordinator for the group MN350, says he's hopeful that regulators are giving pipeline opponents' arguments more consideration.
"There's a lot of new information that we've learned about our world, including about our climate," he states. "There's also a lot of new policies, including momentum on electric vehicles that just wasn't there before."
The environmental review was initially approved in March of 2018, but was later rejected by an appeals court.
MN350 says it won't be a party to the legal action, but other groups say a lawsuit will happen.
The company behind the project, Enbridge, says the existing line is too old and needs to be replaced, and that the new one will improve oil transportation safety.
Pearson says project officials haven't done anything yet to convince detractors that this project will benefit the region and won't harm the environment.
"The scope of changes that we would need to make this project a good project would make it not the same project at all," he stresses.
There are still other forms of approval needed for the pipeline.
Enbridge says if it clears all the hurdles, and barring any legal setbacks, it hopes to break ground as soon as this year.
get more stories like this via email
Kentucky House lawmakers are considering a bill that could make it harder to close aging coal-fired power plants.
At the Kentucky Resources Council, Program Attorney Bryon Gary said the bill is part of the larger legislative effort to tip the state's energy planning process in favor of the coal industry.
He explained Senate Bill 349 would create a new "energy planning and inventory" commission tasked with reviewing utilities' plans to retire their aging plants.
"To artificially limit what resources a utility can build," said Gary, "and to artificially require them to keep running power plants that are well beyond their useful life and incredibly expensive to run, is just going to make the problem worse."
The bill's sponsor, state Sen. Robby Mills, R-Henderson, and supporters say the change is needed to ensure the state has a reliable power supply.
Kentucky has several aging coal-fired power plants from the 1970s and 1980s that are no longer economically competitive and are set to be decommissioned within several years.
President of LG&E and KU Energy John Crockett said creating the new commission isn't in customers' best interest.
"It's a group that's almost entirely without expertise in generating or distributing electricity," said Crockett. "And it's designed to promote and perpetuate coal generation outside of a traditional 'least cost reasonable' analysis that has served Kentucky well for decades."
Gary added the bill also would impose a six-month deadline for the state's utility regulator to make decisions for certain types of cases.
He said this could silence voices from low-income communities and other groups affected by rate hikes.
"And would weaken the due process protections for all parties involved," said Gary, "by shortening the timeline for things that are essential to make sure that cases are fully heard and vetted, such as discovery and a hearing and briefing of all the parties."
The Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet and the Public Service Commission warn the bill doesn't allocate funds to cover costs related to the new commission.
They're also concerned about the bill's time limit for fuel adjustment clause proceedings, which help return millions of dollars in utility bill refunds to Kentucky customers.
Disclosure: Kentucky Solar Energy Society and Kentucky Resources Council contributes to our fund for reporting on Energy Policy, Environment, Water. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
New York's state lawmakers are considering a measure that would shake up the way Long Island's power grid operates.
The Long Island Power Authority Public Power Act would make LIPA the sole operator of the grid, ending the long-standing public-private model. Residents feel this model has made communication between ratepayers and their power company inefficient.
Ryan Madden, climate and energy campaigns director for the Long Island Progressive Coalition, said the status quo creates something akin to "a game of unnecessary telephone."
"For example, an issue is raised, and it's brought either from the LIPA board or LIPA staff brings it to the LIPA board," Madden explained. "It then has to be passed along to PSE&G. PSE&G takes weeks, months in order to come back. Then they have to bring in the Department of Public Service of Long Island."
In 2023, numerous groups from Long Island and the Rockaways called for an end to this model, and customers have expressed concerns over how Long Island power responds to bad weather. After Superstorm Sandy, PSE&G replaced National Grid as the third-party manager because people felt the company mishandled power restoration to the area.
Residents have a similar feeling for how PSE&G dealt with the aftermath of Tropical Storm Isaias.
The bill is under review by the Assembly's Corporations, Authorities and Commissions Committee.
Supporters have contended that replacing the public-private model would put more money back in ratepayers' pockets. A 2023 study found that a fully public Long Island grid could save ratepayers around $500 million over the next decade.
Madden said terminating PSE&G's contract would create some of the initial savings.
"There's been some ranges depending on conservative estimates," he noted. "Anywhere from $60 million to $80 million saved in the functioning of the utility, right? So we're getting rid of $80 million in management fees for PSE&G."
Madden said LIPA could use some of the savings to make improvements in the grid, expand programs and increase stakeholder input. He also said he thinks this will help make the grid more climate-efficient in a way that doesn't further disadvantage certain communities.
get more stories like this via email
Minnesota already has a law calling for 100% carbon-free electricity by 2040. Now, there's a similar plan for transportation, and a legislative committee will consider the idea today.
The clean transportation standard has a target year of 2050 for phasing out carbon-intensive fuel sources for cars and trucks.
Producers slow to adapt would have to buy credits, while companies distributing cleaner products would receive incentives.
Transportation accounts for about a quarter of Minnesota's greenhouse gas emissions, and Fresh Energy's Senior Lead for Innovation and Impact Margaret Cherne-Hendrick said this approach could help reduce that total.
She pointed to newer types of biofuels, beyond standards like ethanol.
"For example, winter oil seeds are better for the environment," said Cherne-Hendrick. "They require much less fertilizer. "
University of Minnesota researchers note these seeds could benefit parts of the transportation sector that face challenges in going electric, such as heavy-duty trucks.
Under the bill, fuel sources would be graded on their carbon intensity - to determine where they rate with the standard.
Skeptics, including some environmental researchers, say the plan could have unintended consequences in reducing emissions.
State Senate Transportation Committee Chair Scott Dibble - DFL-Minneapolis - said while there's a strong push for electric vehicle adoption, many people right now still have to buy cars powered by traditional fuel sources.
"The market penetration is still very small for EVs," said Dibble, "and they're going to own and operate that liquid fuel-based car for the coming 20 plus years."
As the EV market takes shape, he said it makes sense to fill these other cars with the cleanest fuels possible.
There's still a lot to sort out in establishing the standard, and Dibble acknowledged it might have to start as a goal, given the current state of fuel technology.
His bill calls for a one-time appropriation of $900,000 for implementation, but Dibble insisted the incentives market would largely support itself in the long-term.
Disclosure: Fresh Energy contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, Environment, Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email