Pipeliners spooked by Sierra Club Major Landmark Victory; could shut down Sabal Trail –industry press

Update 2017-08-29: Fourth news roundup: From pipelines to renewable energy and efficiency –Sierra Club 2017-08-29

Update 2017-08-24: Third news roundup: This is wind in our sails and could be the end of Sabal Trail —Suwannee Riverkeeper in VDT 2017-08-24

OilPrice.com calls it “a critical decision yesterday, that could jeopardize the future for pipeline projects across the country”; pipeline companies could be “spooked” and “…the court ruling raises the unsettling possibility that the project may be forced to shut down — after billions were spent putting it in into service.” Other stories say this ‘huge’ win could also affect the Atlantic Sunrise, Penneast, Atlantic Coast, and Rover Pipelines, among others.

Children against Sabal Trail in Juno Beach, 2016-10-14
(L to R) Lea Fox, 4, Finn Ryder Purdy, 4, and Mason Dana, 7, of Lake Worth, sit with gas pipeline protesters outside of Florida Power and Light headquarters on Universe Boulevard in Juno Beach on October 14, 2016. The Sabal Trail Pipeline began supplying FPL’s plants in June. Groups opposed the pipeline that will start in Alabama and bring fracked gas through several counties in Florida’s springs and wetlands. (Richard Graulich / The Palm Beach Post)

Sad for FPL, Duke, Spectra, and all the other pipeline-building purveyors of fracked methane, maybe, but glad for all the landowners whose land was taken, local citizens who don’t want a 500+-mile IED next to their homes, schools, and waterways, and all people who want clean sun and wind energy, not more polluting fossil fuels.

It’s good the industry press agrees with what I told the VDT: “This is wind in our sails and could be the end of Sabal Trail.”

Here’s a news roundup, in addition to the ones I listed yesterday, with a few quotes from each story, organized roughly by themes, and I’m sure I didn’t catch all the stories about this Major Landmark Victory that is spooking the fossil fuel industry.

  • Dave Forest, OilPrice.com, 23 August 2017, Landmark Court Ruling Could Jeopardize This Major Pipeline,

    But elsewhere the news for natgas developers was less rosy. With U.S. courts handing down a critical decision yesterday, that could jeopardize the future for pipeline projects across the country.

    That came from a Washington D.C. Circuit court. Which ruled that the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) must redo its approval of a major natgas pipeline — to consider what happens after the gas arrives at its destination.

    The story describes the judges’ decision, and continues:

    If this decision stands on appeal, it’s going to make it notably more difficult to build natgas pipelines in America. Giving challengers a powerful weapon to strike down regulatory approvals — and leaving bodies like FERC in the difficult position of having to quantify downstream emissions impacts.

    Most problematic is the fact the Sabal Trail pipeline is already built and operating — having been commissioned in July after the initial FERC approval.

    Representatives for the pipeline operating company said flows have not yet been disrupted. But the court ruling raises the unsettling possibility that the project may be forced to shut down — after billions were spent putting it in into service.

    Those kind of loses could spook pipeline developers, and impede growth of new lines needed in places like the Permian Basin of Texas to move rapidly-rising natgas production. Watch for similar legal challenges to other pipeline projects, and for signs of a slowdown in project construction.

    Here’s to looking down the line.

    Yes, let’s look down the line a few years to when FERC’s rubberstamp no longer works to socialize pipeline costs by ignoring externalities like greenhouse gases. To when Sabal Trail is pulled back out of the ground. To when Florida and all other states are powered by sun, wind, and water power and no more pipeline boondoggles.

  • Susan Salisbury, Palm Beach Post, 22 August 2017, Court orders new environmental review of FPL gas pipeline. Apparently FPL didn’t like this story, because the next day….
  • FPL is making desperate excuses. Susan Salisbury, Palm Beach Post, 23 August 2017, FPL: Less natural gas would hurt consumers, increase coal use,

    “If the Sierra Club succeeds in curtailing access to natural gas, Florida consumers would experience increased fuel costs due to more limited availability of natural gas and increased air emissions due to the continued use of older coal-fired power plants,” [FPL spokesman Dave] McDermitt said.

    So get on with deploying solar power, which costs less than any other power source.

    “FPL has been working to phase out three coal-burning plants in Florida, but the Sierra Club’s actions would jeopardize these plans,” McDermitt said.

    Oh, come on, FPL, you’re not even trying! We established a year ago that you already “modernized” those three coal plants without Sabal Trail.

    Unlike most states, Florida has access to only two other major natural gas pipeline systems, McDermitt said.

    And SeekingAlpha determined shortly after Sabal Trail started shipping gas that what goes into Sabal Trail is being taken away from FGT and Gulfstream, so there was never a need for a third pipeline, even to burn fracked methane.

    Here’s more about why there is no need for Sabal Trail.

    You know what Florida has access to more than almost all other states? Sunshine for solar power! Which even you, FPL, admitted a year ago “is now significantly influencing FPL’s resource planning.”

    In 2016 more new U.S. electricity came from solar power than any other source; more than wind; more than natural gas. The solar industry already employs more people in electricity generation than coal, oil, and gas combined, and is creating new jobs a dozen times faster than the economy on average. Here’s more about how solar has already won the economic race.

  • Rich Heidorn Jr., RTO Insider, 23 August 2017, FERC Must Consider GHG Impact of Pipelines, DC Circuit Rules,

    With both of its two major natural gas pipelines near capacity, Florida is at risk of having demand outstrip supply, according to Florida Power & Light and Duke Energy Florida, which have committed to buying nearly all the gas the project can transport.

    FPL admitted in its 2016 Ten Year Plan that there is no demand for new electricty in Florida until 2024 at the earliest.

    The project’s developers — Duke Energy, FP&L parent NextEra Energy, Spectra Energy Partners and the Williams Companies — said increased gas supplies will allow utilities to retire old coal-fired power plants, thus providing a net reduction in GHG emissions.

    See comments on previous story above about how FPL already did that before Sabal Trail. Want to shut down more coal plants, and start shutting down natural gas power plants? Get on with deploying solar power, FPL.

    The American Petroleum Institute, which absorbed America’s Natural Gas Alliance in 2015, said it believes FERC acted properly and is evaluating the ruling. “Regulatory certainty is critical to ensuring that infrastructure is constructed efficiently. Further delays due to needless regulatory hurdles will slow consumer access to reliable, affordable natural gas and opportunities for job creation,” it said.

    So easily spooked, API? Maybe you’ve heard the solar industry already employs more people in electricity production than coal, oil, and gas combined, and is creating new jobs a dozen times faster than other industries? Want to speed job creation? Cancel all new pipelines and get on with solar power.

    The Natural Gas Supply Association, which represents 14 large gas producers and marketers, said it was “disappointed” by the order but had no other immediate comment.

    The rest of us are disappointed in FERC, and now a court has finally done something about it.

  • WLRN (Miami), 23 August 2017, Appeals Court Orders Another Look At Pipeline,

    Utilities have touted natural-gas plants as producing fewer carbon emissions than coal-fired plants. But Tuesday’s majority opinion said the prospect of burning natural gas instead of dirtier coal doesn’t absolve FERC from looking at emissions that would result from the pipeline delivering gas to power plants.

    “In other words, when an agency thinks the good consequences of a project will outweigh the bad, the agency still needs to discuss both the good and the bad,” Griffith wrote. “In any case, the EIS itself acknowledges that only `portions’ of the pipelines’ capacity will be employed to reduce coal consumption. An agency decisionmaker reviewing this EIS would thus have no way of knowing whether total emissions, on net, will be reduced or increased by this project, or what the degree of reduction or increase will be. In this respect, then, the EIS fails to fulfill its primary purpose.”

  • Many venues carried the AP story. Associated Press, 22 August 2017, Appeals court: Energy officials missed in pipeline review
  • WFXL, from AP, 23 August 2017, Appeals court: Energy officials missed in pipeline review.
  • Amanda Reilly, E&E News, 22 August, 2017, Court rules FERC pipeline approval failed to weigh emissions.
  • Emily Flitter, Reuters, 22 August 2017, Court ruling could broaden U.S. government environmental impact studies,

    Deidre Duncan, a partner at Hunton & Williams who represents a number of pipeline companies, said the ruling could foretell “significant” changes to regulators’ permitting duties, forcing regulators to look more broadly at proposed projects before approving them.

    “If not changed on rehearing or ultimately by the Supreme Court, this case has broad implications for multiple industries and agencies in various contexts,” she said.

  • Chris White, Daily Caller, 23 August 2017, Courts Grant Major Victory To Enviro-Led Campaign Against Natural Gas Projects, tries to claim natural gas reduces greenhouse gas emissions, without even once mentioning sun or wind power. Thanks for “Major Victory” in the headline, though.
  • John Siciliano, Washington Examiner, 22 August 2013, Environmentalists win ‘huge’ climate victory over federal pipeline approvals,

    Jeff Tittel, director of the New Jersey-branch of the Sierra Club, one of the more aggressive in going after FERC, said the lawsuit was a “huge win” for the group because “it is the first time the court ruled in our favor on an environmental analysis,” agreeing with it on the grounds that climate impacts should have been included in the FERC analysis….

    The court said climate impacts and alternatives must be evaluated under the National Environmental Policy Act, Tittel said, which will drive their opposition to other pipeline projects along the East Coast that FERC is looking to approve.

    “This will be precedent for pipelines like PennEast and may help stop FERC from rubberstamping the pipeline,” he said. The PennEast Line goes through New Jersey to transport natural gas from the fracking state of Pennsylvania to the Northeast, which historically has suffered from a lack of pipeline infrastructure.

    Suffered? New Jersey has already deployed more solar power than Florida, so northeast suffering from too many pipelines is already approaching an end. And end that may be hastened by this ‘huge’ victory.

  • Samantha Page, ThinkProgress, 22 August 2017, Court hands pipeline opponents a major victory: The permit for constructing Florida’s Sabal Trail project has been vacated.

    The case was one in a slew of cases that the Sierra Club and others have brought against FERC, challenging the agency’s environmental analyses. Challenges to FERC’s failure to examine the greenhouse gas emissions related to natural gas export facilities failed when the court ruled that export terminals were the purview of the Department of Energy. At least three cases against the Department of Energy’s permits are awaiting either hearings or decisions.

    But this is the first case to successfully challenge FERC’s greenhouse gas emissions analysis — and it could have repercussions up and down the East Coast. There are currently hundreds of miles of proposed pipeline on FERC’s docket or under construction, including the Atlantic Sunrise Pipeline, the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, and the Rover Pipeline. Since the Marcellus shale boom in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, natural gas developers have been seeking ways to move the gas to population hubs from Massachusetts to Florida.

    Remember, Atlantic Sunrise is a feeder pipeline for Sabal Trail all the way to Miami and Jacksonville via half a dozen LNG export operations. It would be so sad for that Pennsylvania pipeline to go down with Sabal Trail.

  • Gabe Cavallaro, Staunton News-Leader, 22 August 2017, Judge criticizes FERC environmental review in out-of-state pipeline case,

    FERC a few weeks ago released the final environmental impact statement for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, a review which was considered a positive step toward the project’s final approval by Dominion Energy.

    Pipeline opponents have criticized the federal process in general for approving pipeline’s as well as FERC’s treatment of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline.

    Dominion has maintained that the environmental review for the pipeline has been incredibly “thorough and exhaustive,” taking “unprecedented steps to protect environmental resources and minimize impacts on landowners.”

    FERC swore in two new members on Aug. 10 and has a quorum again for the first time in the last six months. The agency can now vote to approve the pipeline at any time.

    Yeah, FPL and Spectra Energy maintained that, too. And can FERC approve the Atlantic Coast Pipeline now without redoing its EIS? We shall see.

  • Augusta Free Press (Virginia), 22 August 2017, Federal court: FERC must consider greenhouse gas emissions from pipelines,

    FERC will now be required to undertake a new environmental impact statement for the Southeast Market Pipeline Project. SELC calls on FERC to do the same for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline project.

    “This decision further highlights the fact that FERC must go back and revise its draft EIS of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline,” said Southern Environmental Law Center Senior Attorney, Greg Buppert. “This ruling now makes it clear that FERC cannot simply state that it cannot know the level of greenhouse gas emission of the ACP, or any other pipeline, and simply move on.”

  • Ellen M. Gilmer, E&E News, 23 August 2017, Major ruling against FERC shakes up climate law,

    “My assumption is that this decision will be appealed, either for an en banc rehearing or to the Supreme Court,” said Michael Burger, executive director of Columbia Law School’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law. “FERC has long maintained that this is not its responsibility, including during the Obama administration.”

    “Given the split decision an appeal seems almost inevitable,” he added. “So its long-term effects are uncertain.”…

    “FERC provided this litany of excuses for why it couldn’t really take a meaningful look at those greenhouse gas and climate impacts, and today the D.C. Circuit rejected those excuses,” Benson said….

    “It’s huge because this is an argument that’s going to be repeated in many different contexts,” he [James Coleman, a Southern Methodist University law professor who has researched the government’s obligations to consider climate impacts] said. “People are going to make it for new oil pipelines and for every natural gas decision.”…

    ClearView Energy Partners analyst Christi Tezak said the D.C. Circuit’s decision to vacate FERC’s approval of the project on NEPA grounds may be a first. But, she noted, the court has not yet issued its mandate. FERC now has the opportunity to seek rehearing and, if necessary, Supreme Court review.

    “Therefore, while potential suspension of operations on Sabal Trail and the balance of the Southeast Market pipelines is possible, it is not yet a reality,” she wrote in a memo last night.

    Possible is a big deal: it takes away that “regulatory certainty” (of a rubberstamp) that API craves so much. It spooks pipeline developers. Even more, it spooks their investors.

  • And now a word from a sober stock market analyst site. Carl Surran, SeekingAlpha, 23 August 2017, Court ruling could broaden U.S. environmental impact studies, analysts say,
    • While some experts say the ruling means little more than more paperwork for regulators, others believe it could change the way the U.S. government decides which issues to examine in environmental impact studies required under the National Environmental Policy Act.
  • Andrew Caplan, Gainesville Sun, 22 August 2017, Sierra Club wins Sabal Trail ruling,

    Merrille[e] Malwitz-Jipson, an organizer with the Sierra Club, said the ruling sets a precedent for the protection of the environment moving forward.

    “Just because (the pipeline) is on, we know it’s not over until we pull that thing out of the ground,” she said.

  • Julia Conley, Common Dreams, 22 August 2017, This Pipeline Victory Could Have Major Implications for Climate Fights Ahead: The federal commission charged with analyzing climate impacts of major fossil fuel project didn’t do its job, says appeals court,

    While the pipeline’s owners say they are still reviewing the court’s decision, Florida Sierra Club representative Merrillee Malwitz-Jipson says the court’s position matters to people who live in the affected area.

    “This type of outcome shows them that they do have a voice, that they do matter and people do matter,” she said. “Corporations think they can do whatever they want to people on the ground, but the reality is the citizens do matter and do count.”

  • Melissa Hodges, WALB-TV, 23 August 2017, Federal ruling seen as ‘victory’ for pipeline opponents,

    We spoke with one vocal opponent of the pipeline, Albany City Commissioner Roger Marietta, who thinks the ruling could impact the construction of a compressor station, a massive natural gas pump that is planned for construction in Dougherty County in 2020.

    A spokesperson for Sabal said they don’t think the ruling will have “an adverse effect on Sabal Trail’s operations at this time.”

    Georgia ecological groups like the Flint Riverkeeper are saying the decision is a win for them.

    “In terms of what this means for the life of this pipeline and whether or not it will be allowed to continue to operate, that’s an open question. This is not a bad thing, it’s a court victory,” said Gordon Rogers with the Flint RiverKeepers.

    Rogers said the group should have a clearer picture of what the vote means in the next several weeks.

  • Thomas Lynn, Valdosta Daily Times, 23 August 2017, Court decision to impact Sabal Trail pipeline,

    John Quarterman, a member of the WWALS Watershed Coalition, an organization opposed to the pipeline, said the decision will lead to FERC performing another environmental study but might also create a powerful precedent.

    The precedent could mean FERC has to consider greenhouse gases for all pipeline proposals in the future. Quarterman said it could mean energy generators such as solar and wind that don’t produce greenhouse gases would be more heavily favored instead of fossil fuels.

    “This is wind in our sails and could be the end of Sabal Trail,” Quarterman said.

There are things you can do to stop pipelines.

 -jsq, John S. Quarterman, Suwannee RIVERKEEPER®

You can join this fun and work by becoming a WWALS member today!