Comments for SPR Environmental Law Blog

Comment on New York Seeks To Foster Offshore Wind Projects by Sylvia

Sylvia — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 21:23:42 +0000

Seriously, it’s so much about time that New York finally gets in deeper progress about offshore wind development. Our friends on the west coast showed us how green energy works and how you set it up quickly.

Comment on EPA Proposes Carbon Dioxide Emissions Standards for New Fossil Fuel Power Plants by Robert Vincin

Robert Vincin — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 21:34:43 +0000

EPA are well versed in the Canadian technology Airborne Clean Energy (ACE) that captures Nox Sox mercury from all coal fired stacks. It twice won the G W Bush best science award and has been installed in USA plants. If USA was a signature to UNFCCC Kyoto the emission capture under carbon trading would fund installation. ACE is now being installed in China to offset its CO2. There is room for a new Federal agency to advise industry. Robert Vincin

Comment on “Power NY Act” Reauthorizes and Modernizes Power Plant Siting Law by Alan Isselhard

Alan Isselhard — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 00:41:12 +0000

COAX (Coalition on Article 10)is a statewide organization opposed to Art. 10 of the Power NY Act of 2011. Please visit the website to discover why Art. 10 is horrible for NYS and illegal. NYS is a home rule state and Art. 10 has ripped municipal home rule regarding energy plant siting out from under local government. Now an unelected, faceless bureaucratic Albany board of insiders will force an unwanted power plant on a helpless community that cannot afford to fight such a calamity. This is wrong!

Comment on Power of Municipalities to Limit or Ban Hydrofracking Through Zoning Front and Center Before the Legislature, DEC, and the Courts by Jeremy Kozin

Jeremy Kozin — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:46:22 +0000

The Fordham Environmental Law Review published an “Essay” in its Spring 2011 issue entitled: “THE EXERCISE OF LOCAL CONTROL OVER GAS EXTRACTION.” Like this blog post, this Essay also provides an interesting look at this complicated legal topic (one that likely will have a significant effect on New Yorkers), and I highly suggest that readers who are interested in the legal issues presented in this blog post also read this Essay.

Citation: 22 Fordham Envtl. L. Rev. 375 (2011).

-Jeremy Kozin-

(**As a matter of disclosure, I was the Editor-in-Chief of the Fordham Environmental Law Review when this Essay was published.)

Comment on Jennifer Coghlan Becomes SPR Partner by William Bronner

William Bronner — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:37:29 +0000

Please convey my enthusiastic congratulations to Jennifer and to the firm. My experience in working with her convinced me that she upholds the highest standards of professional practice, and I am pleased to note that her efforts have been recognized. She will undoubtedly prove an access to Sive Paget and Riesel.

Comment on EPA, Environmental Groups Pursue New Sources of Fracking Regulation by Art Clarke

Art Clarke — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 18:51:31 +0000

The EPA’s proposed rule contains a call for comments on whether third party verification of the 1) data collection; 2) data compilation; and 3)calculations is a proven and effective means of assuring compliance with the proposed NSPS standards. In addition, the proposed rule is asking for comments on whether third party verifiers can be used as a clearinghouse for notifications, records and annual compliance certification regarding well completions. EPA estimates 20,000 well completions per year and it acknowledges that handling the records for this many completions can become an administrative burden on the agency. Completing a well generally consists of installing the well casing, installing the wellhead, and readying the well for production. The third party verifiers would be paid by the regulated industries.

Third party verification is already widely and successfully used as a means to verify and validate GHG reduction claims. These programs work because the verifiers are highly trained and skilled. EPA’s rule is extremely vague on what type of accreditation will be required for verification. As such, the agency must be careful not encourage a system that would fail to produce competent validators. The requirements must contain a rigorous and systematic course of study to train, test and certify individuals as validators. This type of system already exists in GHG validation and mitigation work. This process should be adopted by EPA to avoid spurious and unreliable data and reporting. Unreliable and spurious data and reports generated by under-qualified verifiers will eviscerate the regulatory program. A cost effective and credible administrator of the accreditation system is already in place. ANSI’s voluntary standardization system results in consistent, predictable and unambiguous assessments. ANSI’s GHG accreditation program assures integrity and consistency in emission verification across industry sectors and geographical borders. Additionally, a strict conflict of interest code will need to be adopted by EPA to maintain the independence of the third party verifiers. This type of work cannot be completed by in-house personnel or by State or Federal employees. To use either would create a serious COI issue. Thus, EPA should be very clear on this issue and propose to adopt existing third party GHG verification and validation standards for its verification program in order to avoid these issues and uphold the credibility of its proposed regulatory program.

Comment on New York Proposes Hydraulic Fracturing In Certain Areas Under Strict Controls by Alison Tottenham

Alison Tottenham — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 23:00:34 +0000

I am absolutely amazed that anyone in their right mind could think that the procedure of fracking was OK within 500 feet of a water source or aquifer, no matter who or what that water supplied. I would suggest that 5 miles was more appropriate and even then damage could well be seen, depending on the surrounding geology.

Instead of concentrating on removing the last ounce of hydro-carbons from the ground, it might be a smooth idea to concentrate the energy and brain power on establishing a workable grid and storage system, so that ALL renewable energy produced, could be used; not just chucked because ‘the grid could not cope’.

Comment on New York Proposes Hydraulic Fracturing In Certain Areas Under Strict Controls by Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 27 Jul 2011 18:24:37 +0000

This is an awful idea. Open this up to just a little bit of land and before you know it it will be everywhere.

Comment on New York Proposes Hydraulic Fracturing In Certain Areas Under Strict Controls by Ray Shearer

Ray Shearer — Tue, 26 Jul 2011 13:49:39 +0000

There’s a novel idea. Don’t extract resources from a park or natural area. Just send them all down here to PA. It is a regular environment destroying party going on here! Have fun and don’t forget to buy lots of bottled water!

Comment on Tidal Power Plant in East River Nears Federal Approval by Don Conroy

Don Conroy — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 22:33:23 +0000

Finely. I remember reading about this type of project in the late 1950′s just before I left NYC. I thought that I would not live long enough to see it allowed by the chronic complainers.