This post was written by Nick Engelfried, a volunteer for Sierra Club and one of the organizers of the Paint Past Coal event.

On Tuesday students and supporters involved in the Beyond Coal campaign used art to put our vision of Oregon’s clean energy future on canvas as part of an event titled Paint Past Coal.

In the morning a group of tending-toward-young activists set up a seven-foot canvas in Portland’s Waterfront Park and invited passersby to join us painting a depiction of the transition to clean energy in Oregon. At noon we walked to Portland General Electric’s customer service station, where we asked PGE to replace the Boardman Coal Plant with cleaner energy sources by 2015, the shortest timescale recommended by the Department of Environmental Quality.

Everyone from small children to grandparents took time to pick up a paint brush and add some color to a wind turbine being erected, or a community garden in the foreground. It took four hours to finish the painting, and then we walked to PGE’s nearby Portland offices. During a sidewalk rally outside we showed off the completed painting, while from the building people emerged to see what was going on. This was an important lesson from the day’s work: while just a crowd of people with signs might have turned onlookers away, a colorful painting on a giant piece of canvas made them want to stop, look, and learn more.

Students at the sidewalk rally spoke about the importance of this moment for Oregon’s clean energy future, the impressive degree to which student groups have already weighed in on the Boardman Coal Plant issue, and the value of art for envisioning the future. Security personnel from the building kindly accepted a petition urging the Boardman Coal Plant’s speedy retirement, and promised to deliver it to PGE president and CEO Jim Piro. The take home message from the day was that we will keep pushing clean energy solutions for as long as it takes. If PGE needs a picture to make the image hit home, we’re more than happy to oblige.

Related Story:

Game Changer: DEQ Takes A Fresh Look At Shutting Down Boardman

On Tuesday, they’re holding a Paint Past Coal event in downtown Portland. What’s it all about? Here’s a quote from their latest email.

8am – 11:45am: We’ll be at Waterfront Park, filling in a painting that depicts the transition to clean energy in Oregon. We will meet at 8:00 at SW Salmon and Naito Parkway, but will still be in the park nearby if you arrive after that time.

Shortly before noon we will head over to PGE’s Portland offices for a sidewalk rally and press conference. Student speakers will explain why this event is so important in the fight for clean energy.

You can get some more information from the event’s Facebook Page. When I last checked, 35 people said they were going to show up and another 100 were on the “Maybe” list. If you trust the National Weather Service, it’ll be a lovely 65 degrees when the event starts but will rise to 80 degrees just in time for the Noon press conference.

Coal Free Oregon is just one of the groups trying make sure state regulators close the coal-fired Boardman power plant well ahead of the current 2040 deadline. Along with the Sierra Club and other environmental groups, they support a plan by Oregon DEQ to close the plant in either late 2015 or early 2016. In return, PGE would avoid paying about $465 million in new pollution controls.

On the other hand, PGE is still aiming for a 2020 closure, but only if it can skip about $500 million worth of pollution controls.

Whatever happens, any plan need the approval of both DEQ and the state’s Public Utility Commission.

For More Information:

DEQ: Proposal For Early Shutdown of Boardman

Portland General Electric: Boardman Plant Air Emissions

Related Story:

Game Changer: DEQ Takes A Fresh Look At Shutting Down Boardman

The Hart Mountain Antelope Refuge in Oregon. From Wikimedia Commons. Photographer unidentified.

The company behind Oregon’s newest natural gas pipeline will donate at least $22 million for conservation projects in our state and across the West.

It’s the result of a three-way deal between the Oregon Natural Desert Association, Western Watersheds Project and El Paso Corp. The money will be used to undo some of the environmental damage that results from building the Ruby pipeline, and to preserve sagebrush habitat.

Brent Fenty, ONDA Executive Director, tells me his group is expecting somewhere between $7 and $12 million for conservation projects in the Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge in southeastern Oregon and the Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge in northwestern Nevada.

The ultimate goal is to restore sagebrush areas and help the species that live there. Some of the projects include:

• Expand the refuges by buying up private land from willing sellers. Could be as much as 10,000 acres.
• Reduce grazing and stress on the land by paying ranchers to retire their grazing permits.
• Remove fences to make it easier for wildlife to migrate through the region.
• Restore habitat around springs.

The money doesn’t actually go to ONDA. The group and the Ruby pipeline company are forming a new non-profit to oversee the work. The donation will be paid out over 10-years.

Western Watersheds has a similar arrangement for about $15 million.

Fenty says between Oregon and Nevada, about 5 million acres of land will benefit. “I can’t think of another agreement in this region,” he says, “with the potential to do as much restoration work as this one.”

About The Pipeline

The Ruby Pipeline runs 675-miles from southwest Wyoming to Malin, Oregon. But only a small portion of the line runs through our state. The pipeline just received right-of-way permission from BLM and is awaiting the final green light from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Construction will probably start very soon. Most of the natural gas will be sold to utilities in California.

But here’s what else makes the pipeline really interesting, from an environmental point of view.

The pipeline competes for the same markets as the proposed Jordan Cove LNG project near Coos Bay. But instead of bringing in imported LNG, Ruby will supply cleaner and cheaper natural gas from domestic sources in the Rocky Mountains. The bankruptcy of Bradwood Landing is a sign that the LNG industry is on shaky ground. The Ruby pipeline just might kill off Jordan Cove.

So let’s start with the one that hasn’t been reported.

The proposed site of the Oregon LNG terminal. Photo from Oregon Sierra Club.

The Oregon Sierra Club and Bark are trying to overturn a complicated lease deal between the state of Oregon, the Port of Astoria and the Oregon LNG company. Oregon LNG leases 96-acres of state owned land along the Columbia River near Warrenton. That’s where the company wants to build an LNG import terminal.

Opponents say Oregon LNG is being way undercharged. The company pays $418 per acre, per year, to lease the land. Contrast that with the lease for the Jordan Cove LNG project near Coos Bay. Jordan Cove pays $11,000 an acre. If both companies were paying the same rate, Oregon LNG’s rent would jump from about $40,000 a year, to more than $1 million.

Sierra Club and Bark say the Department of State Lands made a mistake last month when it extended the lease for another 30-years. The groups filed an appeal, saying DSL should reconsider. They argue:

• DSL failed to evaluate whether the lease was in the public interest, as required by law and the Oregon Constitution.
• DSL failed to hold public hearings, even though an LNG terminal would have a major impact on the state.
• DSL undervalued the land, by appraising it as a golf course instead of heavy industrial marine site.

It appears the enviros hope the state will cancel the lease, which could mean Oregon LNG will have no place to build a terminal. Or the price will be jacked up so much, the company may not be able to afford the rent.

Don’t underestimate the impact of these kinds of tactics. The Bradwood Landing LNG project went into bankruptcy just a couple of weeks after enviros won an appeal of the Clatsop County planning process.

A Pipeline On Hold

A one-page letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission created quite a stir this week. The company behind the Palomar natural gas pipeline says it’s reviewing the project to, “reflect potential changes in its commercial arrangements.”

The letter goes on to say, “Palomar continues to seek additional commercial underpinning for the project.”

What’s happened is that Palomar is suddenly without one of its big partners in the project. The pipeline was supposed to bring in natural gas from the defunct Bradwood Landing LNG. Now that supply of gas is gone and Bradwood owes Palomar more than $17 million.

Bark and Hey! NW Natural jumped on the news and called it a win in their campaign to kill Palomar. “Palomar’s initial schedule had them cutting trees this summer,” says Bark Program Director, Amy Harwood. “Every day the pipeline hasn’t been constructed is another day of victory. There’s just too much stacked up against this project.”

Palomar is looking for ways to continue with the eastern half of the pipeline, the part that wasn’t dependent on LNG. Running from Maupin to Molalla, that segment could conceivably be used to bring in natural gas from the Rocky Mountain states. Environmental groups are opposed because building the pipeline would leave a 47-mile long path of clear cut through the Mt. Hood National Forest, impacting endangered species such as the Northern Spotted Owl and the Columbia White Tailed Deer.

Palomar isn’t dead. But as the environmental groups note, the Forest Service has stopped working on the project.

PGE's coal fired Boardman Power Plant. Photo from Ted Timmons

The news must have landed at PGE like a ton of coal.

Oregon DEQ says its looking at three options for an early closure of PGE’s coal-fired power plant at Boardman. They call on the utility to spend millions more to keep the plant running, or shutting it down a lot earlier than PGE wants.

The Big Picture

To see where this is going, let’s back up for a moment. There’s only one approved plan – so far – that allows PGE to continue operating the Boardman power plant. It allows the plant to generate electricity by burning coal until 2040. But PGE would have to install about $500 million in new pollution controls to bring down emissions of nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide.

This doesn’t include any controls on greenhouse gases. None are required for now, but pretty much everyone expects they will be required in the near future. Since Boardman is the state’s biggest single source of greenhouse gas, the costs of new controls could be substantial.

PGE, no surprise, would like to avoid having to pay for all that. So earlier this year it proposed a plan where it would shut down Boardman by 2020, and only have to spend about $40 million on pollution controls. That proposal was rejected by DEQ a couple of weeks ago.

DEQ’s Options

The 2020 Plan: Boardman shuts down by the end of 2020, and PGE spends $320 million on reducing pollution.

The 2018 Plan: The plant closes by the end of 2018, and PGE pays about $100 million for new controls.

The 2015-2016 Plan: Boardman shuts down in late 2015 or early 2016. The cost of pollution controls drops to $35 million

DEQ says it chose these options because it thinks they can be approved by the EPA. It’s now taking comments from the public, plans on holding hearings in September, with a goal of approving a final plan before the end of the year.

Environmental Reaction

Oregon Sierra Club, which has been leading the campaign to shut down Boardman, is praising DEQ for the new proposals. The group wants Boardman closed in 2014. While DEQ doesn’t go that far, it does get us closer.

In a statement, Cesia Kearns of the Coal Free Oregon Campaign writes:

“The options DEQ has proposed demonstrate clearly that PGE can and should phase-out their dirty and dangerous Boardman coal-fired power plant earlier than the 2020 they are currently proposing. We already know that it is better for public health and the environment in Oregon if Boardman is phased out soon. The options offered by DEQ today further detail how it will also be cheaper to phase the plant out sooner than PGE is currently considering.”

PGE Reaction

The utility is not happy with the DEQ options. It wants to keep Boardman running until 2020, but at a lower cost. It says it needs the extra time to plan and develop cleaner sources of electricity to replace the plant.

According to PGE President and CEO Jim Piro:

“We put forward a plan for Boardman that we believe reached a good balance between cost, risk and environmental benefits. We’ll do a complete analysis, but we’re disappointed that DEQ didn’t allow that plan to proceed. On the face of it we believe the new options DEQ put forward today may reflect an extreme interpretation of federal rules that won’t make sense for our customers or our state. We want to work with DEQ to find a better way to transition this resource around the 2020 timeframe.”

The Next Steps:

DEQ sets up an advisory committee to do further study, which starts meeting in July. An updated version of this plan would be ready for public hearings in September. But the agency is taking comments now and they can be emailed to, deqoptionspge@deq.state.or.us.

For More Information:

Draft DEQ Proposal for Early Shutdown of the PGE Boardman Plant

PGE Reaction

Sierra Club Reaction

Hands Across the Sand at Neptune State Park. Photo by Gus Gates, Oregon Surfrider.

If you missed the weekend protest against offshore oil and gas drilling, here’s a way to experience it on your computer.

We’re getting video and photos from some of the Hands Across the Sand events in Oregon. There were 17 of these gatherings in Oregon on Saturday, part of a national movement to draw attention to the dangers of offshore drilling, and to promote clean and renewable energy.

Oregon Surfrider says about 100 people took part in the Hands Across the Sand event at Neptune State Park near Yachats. Gus Gates says they saw whales spouting off the beach, a timely reminder of what’s at stake in this debate.

“The message of the event was clear, NO to offshore oil drilling, YES to clean energy renewables. Oregon’s ocean, waves and beaches are one of our greatest natural resources, one that contributes significantly to our coastal and state economy through recreation, tourism, fishing, and scenic enjoyment,” says Gates.

Meanwhile, we’re getting reports that about three dozen people showed up at the Corvallis event, and that several dozen lined up along the Columbia River in Vancouver.

Video: Hands Across the Sand at Neptune State Park near Yachats, from Kristi Gott.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYpvvkfphLU

Slideshow: Hands Across the Sand events in Oregon, from Flickr.

It’s called Hands Across The Sand. More than a dozen events are planned across the state.

What’s this all about?

The idea is pretty simple.

Starting about Noon on Saturday, people will hold hands, face the ocean and form long lines on the beach. It’s a symbolic “line in the sand” against offshore oil and gas drilling. The event will last about 15 minutes and if enough people show up, should be an amazing site.

Organizers will form lines at ten locations all along the Oregon coast. Another seven “solidarity events” will be held in the Willamette Valley, from Eugene to Portland.

The idea kicked off earlier this year in Florida when thousands of people came together to make a statement against offshore oil drilling in the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf.  This was long before the BP fiasco near Louisiana.

Tomorrow, the event goes national. Here along the West Coast, something like two dozen events are planned in Washington. And I can’t even count how many there will be along the California coast.

What’s The Status of Offshore Drilling In Oregon?

There’s not much of a threat here in Oregon.

Several months ago, the legislature passed a law banning offshore drilling in Oregon’s territorial waters for ten years. It was one of the few environmental victories of the special session. The law only protects the first three miles of ocean off our coast. Beyond that, the federal government is in charge.

Even before the spill in the Gulf, the feds were not planning on issuing offshore drilling leases in Oregon and Washington. The last auction was in 1964. There’s so little gas and oil off our coasts that the feds say they’re not going to bother to try again, at least not for the “foreseeable future.”

Environment Oregon has told me that having a state ban in place sends a message to the federal government that offshore drilling isn’t welcome here, and that the are paying attention. Getting thousands of Oregonians to line up on the beach will put some power behind that message.

For More Information:

Hands Across The Sand, Oregon webpage

Hands Across The Sand, Oregon Facebook page

Video: Hands Across The Sand In Destin, Florida from February, 2010.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r54kRnZ1b2k

PGE's coal fired Boardman Power Plant. Photo from Ted Timmons

Hearings before the Public Utility Commission are usually pretty dull events. But Wednesday’s hearing in Portland promises to be very, very different.

That’s because environmental groups are rallying the troops, urging them to show up in huge numbers.

Their message to the PUC? Shut down the Boardman coal-fired power plant by 2014.

The hearing could be a climatic moment in the campaign to close Oregon’s only coal-fired power plant. Boardman’s reputation as a source of dirty power is well deserved. It’s the biggest single source of carbon emissions in the state, a major contributor to the haze you see in the Columbia River Gorge and elsewhere, and spews 15,000 tons of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide and over 200 pounds of mercury annually.

So What Do We Do About It?

There are three options before the PUC. Here’s a brief look at all of them.

Closing Boardman by 2014: This is the option favored by environmental groups. Under this scenario, PGE (which owns most of Boardman and operates the plant) would have to spend about $40 million in 2011 to reduce emissions of mercury and nitrogen oxide. But Boardman would have to be completely shut down three years later, and PGE would have to find other sources of electricity.

Arguments in favor: Best results for the environment by taking the state’s only coal-fired power plant off line. Robin Everett of the Oregon Sierra Club says Boardman has been allowed to operate for too long. “It’s the biggest polluter in the state. It’s time for them to clean it up. And the best way to do that is to shut it down.”

Arguments against: Steve Corson of PGE says a 2014 closure doesn’t give the utility enough time to find other sources of power. One possibility is replacing Boardman with a natural gas fired plant. But Corson says the utility also wants to explore other ideas such as converting Boardman into a plant that runs on biomass. A few more years, says Corson, also lowers the costs of shutting down the plant and finding those other sources.

Allowing Boardman to operate until 2040: If PGE were continue operating the plant for another 30-years, it would have to install more than $520 million in new pollution controls.

Arguments in favor: No one is enthusiastic about this option. It’s PGE’s second choice and environmental groups are appalled by the idea.

Arguments against: There’s a lot of uncertainty in a 30-year plan. New carbon controls under consideration by the EPA – or if Congress acts on climate change legislation – both could significantly raise the costs of operating Boardman. PGE customers could be on the hook for higher electricity bills to pay for pollution controls way beyond the $520 million already in the works.

Closing Boardman by 2020: PGE’s favorite option. The utility would still have to reduce emissions of mercury, nitrogen oxide and sulfur. But it would avoid paying the $520 million costs of new controls needed to keep the plant running until 2040. This option, also requires approval by Oregon DEQ. The agency recently rejected PGE’s 2020 plan, but says it’s studying other options.

Arguments in favor: Corson says this gives PGE enough time to explore a variety of replacement sources of power, keeps down the costs of shutting the plant and finding those new sources, and avoids an unknown future of new carbon controls.

Arguments against: The Sierra Club says PGE is working off flawed information. It says the utility overestimates the future costs of natural gas, and underestimates the savings from investments in efficiency. They say it’s wrong to keep putting money into coal generated electricity.

Details On The Hearing:

The hearing starts at 6:30pm in the auditorium of the Portland Building, 1120 SW 5th Ave. But environmental groups are holding briefing on the issues for the public starting at 5:30pm, and a press conference at 6:00pm. They’re also hoping people will show up early to sign up to testify.

I’ve written before about attempts by environmental groups to protect Steens Mountain from energy development.

Environmental groups wanted the state to add Steens Mountain to a list of places in Oregon where energy development is prohibited. But the Energy Facility Siting Council – which decides where large wind farms are located – recently rejected the idea.

The decision is a blow to the Oregon Natural Desert Association, Portland Audubon and other groups trying to keep wind turbines and other types of energy development away from the slopes of this Southeast Oregon icon.

The most immediate threat – in their view – are plans by Columbia Energy Partners of Vancouver to build three wind farms near Steens in Harney County. The three projects are located next to each other, totaling more than 300 megawatts of power and 120-180 turbines. Environmental groups say they should be treated as one single large project, instead of three smaller ones.

Oregon has a list of official State Protected Areas where energy development is off limits. It includes the Columbia River Gorge Scenic Area. ONDA and Audubon argued that Steens Mountain deserves to be on the list, too. They say large scale wind development threatens the wildlife and scenic values of Steens.

ONDA Executive Director Brent Fenty says, “There are appropriate places for energy development in Oregon’s high desert but Steens Mountain is not the right place. Steens is an area that the public has made clear should not be developed, but instead should be permanently protected for its iconic vistas and incredible wildlife habitat.”

It probably didn’t help matters that the EFSC meeting where the issue was decided was held in Harney County. Local officials are big supporters of the proposed wind farms because of the jobs they’d create during construction and operation of the facilities.

Related Story:

Wind Farms, Sage Grouse, And Loopholes

An LNG protest sign from FERC's December 2009 field trip in Washington County.

If LNG opponents were hoping for a new angle in their fight against Oregon LNG, this isn’t it.

A report by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) clears the company of any serious wrongdoing in how it dealt with landowners along the route of its proposed pipeline in Northwest Oregon.

“No Misconduct”

At three public hearings in April, landowners along the pipeline accused Oregon LNG of trespassing, harassment and retaliation. They complained about not being notified about important meetings and about changes made to where the pipeline would be located.

The hearings were held in front of FERC Administrative Law Judge Bobbie McCartney. In her report, McCartney finds little or no evidence to support those charges.

Her conclusion? That while FERC and Oregon LNG could do a better job communicating with landowners, “the evidence of record does not support a finding of misconduct as to any of the allegations.”

A Closer Look At The Charges

Threats and Retaliation: Some of the landowners accused Oregon LNG of changing the route of the pipeline to punish them for not cooperating with the company. McCartney says she couldn’t find any evidence of that. Instead, she says, company officials offered “compelling testimony” that changes were made for environmental reasons.

On the other hand, she does list threats and intimidation made by landowners against Oregon LNG officials.

Trespassing: McCartney says there’s little evidence that Oregon LNG officials trespassed on private land. Getting to the truth on this issue was made more difficult – she says – because landowners were also dealing with officials from the Palomar pipeline and may have been confused.

The GPS Incident: During a field visit by FERC and Oregon LNG staff in December of 2009, one of the company officials recorded GPS data of the location of a well on private property. Doing that was a direct violation of the agreement giving the company access to the property. But McCartney portrays the incident as an honest mistake, noting the data was quickly erased and that the official apologized.

Security Guards With Guns: One of the stranger stories out of the hearings was about the presence of armed security guards at a public information meeting at Banks High School in May of 2008. Landowners called the experience intimidating and offensive. One of the witnesses testified he was told by FERC Chairman Jon Wellinghoff that Oregon LNG hired the armed guards.

But the report concludes that company didn’t do any such thing. Instead, McCartney finds that the armed guards were requested by the school.

In conclusion, McCartney writes:

“It should be noted that at the heart of many of the concerns raised by the participants in this proceeding is the compelling and quite understandable fact that most landowners don’t want an LNG pipeline project to come across their property or otherwise adversely impact their quality of life. In fact, many participants readily admitted that they were availing themselves of the opportunity to provide testimony affirming their opposition to all of the proposed liquefied natural gas terminals and associated pipeline projects. However, while the evidence of record does not support a finding of misconduct, the concerns and frustrations the participants have expressed in their testimony are very genuine and have been captured in the record of this proceeding for the Commission’s consideration.”

Related Stories:

VIDEO: Protests, Frustration And Apologies At The Final Day Of FERC LNG Hearings

FERC LNG Hearing: Guns, Trespassing and Intimidation