Where there's a Will there's a way

Letter to the editor: Report the facts about fracking pollution, not misleading false balance

2015-07-20T09:15:00.000-05:00

I finally had it with a misleading false balance the press often use when reporting on fracking. The State Journal-Register published my snarky letter to the editor Sunday suggesting a more accurate description of the debate.

A recent Associated Press article published by The State Journal-Register needs correction. It included this claim about fracking: "Opponents fear it can cause air and water pollution and health problems, but industry officials contend the method is safe."

In fact, numerous studies by EPA and others confirm fracking does, in fact, cause air and water pollution that harms public health. To minimize the problem by calling it a mere fear by some opponents misleads readers. A corrected, factual sentence might read: "Multiple objective studies confirm fracking causes air and water pollution which threatens public health, but industry officials continue to lie about it."

Let's hope this reporting cliche is put to rest.

Democratic Congressional Candidates Agree on Climate Science, Differ on Solutions (IL-18)

2015-06-24T11:29:00.000-05:00

The Democrats running in a special election to replace Aaron Schock in Congress both admit the scientific consensus behind climate change but one sounds more serious about tackling the problem.

Check out my latest at Huffington Post Blog.

Candidate Rob Mellon immediately moved the conversation to where it belongs. "We have to realize that climate change is real and there's no debate about that." He took on the latest dodge of climate deniers who claim it's happening due to natural cycles, not man-made pollutants. "The overwhelming majority of scientists are clear about that. That humans play a role."
Mellon, who teaches at Quincy High School, says he agrees with Pope Francis and pointed out that climate change disproportionately hurts the poor. "Individual politicians have to step up to the plate. We have to remove our focus on fossil fuels. These are finite resources, and if we continue to put our resources into drilling, fracking, and pipelines, we're doubling down on a failed policy."

Also posted at Daily Kos and Democrats for Progress.

Hillary Clinton is Taking Democrats Backward on Climate Change

2015-05-28T11:34:00.000-05:00

When Barack Obama announced his Presidential campaign in Springfield, Illinois he spoke of climate change.

Let's be the generation that finally frees America from the tyranny of oil. We can harness homegrown, alternative fuels like ethanol and spur the production of more fuel-efficient cars. We can set up a system for capping greenhouse gases. We can turn this crisis of global warming into a moment of opportunity for innovation, and job creation, and an incentive for businesses that will serve as a model for the world. Let's be the generation that makes future generations proud of what we did here.

Obama was the first major party nominee for President who made climate change a central theme included in every major campaign speech. He even showed politicians how to make it sound poetic. It helped elect him twice. Climate change or clean energy policy was a significant portion of every State of the Union address. That's something environmentalists should celebrate for what it says about the electoral appeal of the issue.

Nearly seven weeks after she announced her campaign for President, Hillary Clinton has yet to make a noticeable statement on climate change. At her first campaign speech in South Carolina Wednesday she didn't mention it all, despite the threat of more hurricanes hitting the state.

The best gesture for the climate movement so far is a tweet from an adviser. It's a disappointing step backward from having climate take center stage.

It's a risky move since Clinton already has a credibility problem on climate. Her most significant actions to date are promoting fracking as Secretary of State and allowing oil industry influence to corrupt the state department process on Keystone XL pipeline. The climate crisis requires bold, aggressive action against entrenched corporate special interests, which isn't a style of politics Clinton is known for.

Clinton will probably have an easy time getting endorsements from beltway green groups hoping to gain influence. But as Pat Quinn learned in Illinois, and Mark Udall learned in Colorado, promoting regulated fracking is a tough sell to environmental voters no matter what endorsements a candidate can brag about. Without a major change to her campaign, primary voters will be forced to look elsewhere for a climate champion.

After making a joke in South Carolina about coloring her hair, Clinton claimed, "you're not going to see me shrink from a fight." But so far, she's ducking the most urgent fight of our time.

Senator Manar Faces Backlash for Press Conference with Coal Lobbyist

2015-05-17T14:34:00.001-05:00

Illinois State Senator Andy Manar is getting pushback from constituents after introducing a bill to help the heavily subsidized state coal mining industry.

A coal industry lobbyist with Foresight Energy joined Manar and other legislators at a press conference for a bill to give Illinois coal an advantage over imports. Roughly 90% of coal burned in Illinois is imported from other states because power plant operators are too cheap to install better pollution controls.

Their press release claims Manar and Senator John Bradley introduced the bill to ensure coal is part of the discussion in negotiations over state energy policy. How sweet of them to look out for poor, overlooked Foresight Energy after it donated only $185,600 to Illinois politicians this year!

Coal is already king of corporate welfare in Illinois. Mining equipment is exempt from the state sales tax, it's heavily subsidized by the Coal Development Office, and it doesn't pay an excise tax levied in other coal producing states. Despite all the extra help, Foresight Energy is still worried their Illinois mines can't compete in a competitive market.

Montgomery county resident Mary Ellen DeClue sent me a copy of a letter she wrote to Senator Manar in response to his coal bill. It's so good I asked permission to share it online.

Dear Senator Manar:
Your interest and concerns about the citizens in central and southern Illinois are appreciated. As you have acknowledged, our citizens deserve community development and an economic improvement plan. Observing the aftermath of coal extraction across the world, the U S, West Virginia, and especially Saline County, Illinois, coal is not the progressive sustainable solution for Illinois counties.

The proposed legislation to jump start the Illinois coal industry is misguided and counterproductive. The coal industry in Illinois needs no promotion or development. The coal industry in Illinois is already entrenched in the political system. This is not due to the positive connections to communities, citizens, and economic benefits, but rather to undue influence of corporate funding and favoritism of Illinois agencies.

The state of Illinois has lost revenue from coal mining. The benefits bestowed on the coal industry have increased profits and liberties to coal entrepreneurs. The quality of life in coal communities is compromised by polluted air and water, damaged farmland, lower property values, higher taxes, unhealthy exposure to coal dust, and inundation and leakage from high hazard coal slurry impoundments.

Coal mining adversely affects communities by extracting more than just coal from them. The citizens realize they have no more control over their daily lives. When a government’s public policy establishes corporate profits over the rights of citizens, the spirit of a community is lost. Communities deserve better.

There are presently 8000 coal jobs and 130,000 jobs in renewable energy in Illinois. If coal miners had a choice of jobs that were not hazardous and did not expose them to black lung disease, don’t you think they would prefer not risking their lives in order to earn a living? Why aren’t there more efforts to increase job choices in central and southern Illinois?

The negative aspects of coal mining have been enhanced by the tragic actions of the Illinois Office of Mines and Minerals. The mismanagement of Shay 1 indicates just how vulnerable citizens in a community really are. The current status of Shay 1 must be a disappointment to you. Off mine-site contamination has progressed over a decade while more coal waste disposal continues. There is no additional monitoring to document contamination from the unknown amounts of imported coal ash and underground injection of coal slurry. West Virginia has a moratorium on coal slurry injection in mine voids because of ground water contamination. Illinois has not only approved underground coal slurry injection at Shay 1, but subsidizes the process. DCEO awarded Foresight Reserves LP, associate of Foresight Energy, a grant of $1,022,602 to use for coal slurry injection, a conveyor train, and safety equipment at Shay 1 starting in 3/1/2014 and ending in 2/28/2016. The state is actually funding ongoing pollution and the regulatory agencies continue to legalize pollution by approving permits that compromise the safety of communities.

Deer Run Mine is a poster example of how a community is blighted by coal with full approval of IOMM and IEPA. The careless disregard for the health and safety of thousands of residents through government actions is very troubling. The community has no recourse to coal dust, contaminated water discharges, threatening inundation from 2 impoundments, permanently placed high hazard impoundments, subsided farmland, destroyed water resources, etc. IOMM never hesitated approving the location of the coal processing plant next to the hospital or the placement of the 318-acre impoundment where upon failure would destroy life and property of several communities. This second impoundment is 200 feet away from the first 80 foot high 140-acre impoundment and both remain forever in Hillsboro. There are no air monitors to document fugitive coal dust so residents do not know what they are breathing. The mine discharges are analyzed for pH, chloride, and sulfate only, so citizens have no idea of what chemicals or what quantities are contaminating their surface waters. The higher conductance of surface waters around the mine does speak to an increase in contaminants. It is unacceptable that the most harmful chemicals found in coal are not monitored, yet are allowed to permeate the community.

The state energy policies do indeed need to be addressed, but I fear the wrong direction for public policy will be endorsed. The photo-op of legislators with Foresight Energy’s lead lobbyist sends a message that investment in Foresight Energy will earn favors in Illinois coal permits. The known contributions of Foresight Energy to Illinois lawmakers are published and part of the public record.“Pay to play” or the perception of such must be addressed by citizens and legislators so that Illinois can climb out of the lack of trust hole.

Most importantly, the citizens of central and southern Illinois need job availability other than the polluting, unhealthful effects of coal production as a new direction for livelihoods and community development.

Sincerely,
Mary Ellen DeClue

Earth week screening of DamNation in Springfield

2015-04-20T15:24:00.000-05:00

A free screening of the award-winning documentary DamNation is happening in Springfield on Thursday, April 23, 7pm. The film will be followed by guest speaker, professor Clark Bullard, who will speak on the locally proposed Hunter Dam. The Liberty Brew & View screening is hosted with Prairie Rivers Network at the Capital City Bar & Grill theater dining room.

This powerful film odyssey across America explores the sea change in our national attitude from pride in big dams as engineering wonders to the growing awareness that our own future is bound to the life and health of our rivers. Dam removal has moved beyond the fictional Monkey Wrench Gang to go mainstream. Where obsolete dams come down, rivers bound back to life, giving salmon and other wild fish the right of return to primeval spawning grounds, after decades without access. DamNation’s majestic cinematography and unexpected discoveries move through rivers and landscapes altered by dams, but also through a metamorphosis in values, from conquest of the natural world to knowing ourselves as part of nature.

Springfield Mayoral Election a Victory for Clean Energy

2015-04-08T11:45:00.000-05:00

Illinois' largest public utility will now be overseen by a mayor who pledged to keep renewable energy as part of its energy mix.

Springfield's Democratic Mayor-elect Jim Langfelder deserves credit for talking about clean energy. Some candidates avoided the topic because it's controversial after a wind power contract became more costly than expected. With most local news outlets focused on utility finances and rate increases, Langfelder could have avoided taking a clear position on where our power comes from.

But voters were given a real choice between a modern energy mix with renewable energy or "we've always done it that way." Scare tactics about clean energy causing rate increases didn't work this time. Springfield is already a better clean energy leader than Chicago and now the progress can continue.

Coal was being mined in Springfield when Abraham Lincoln represented the city in the state legislature. But this year, a new clean energy future was a winning issue in a coal-country election.

Illinois Poll Shows Strong Opposition to Fracking

2015-04-06T12:05:00.001-05:00

Nearly half of Illinois voters oppose fracking, according to a new poll by the Simon Institute. The statewide poll reveals 48.6% oppose fracking while only 31.8% believe it should be encouraged, even if there are economic benefits. Opponents outnumber supporters an all regions of the state, including downstate where fracking is promoted as a jobs plan.

The numbers reinforce that fracking is one of the issues which cost Governor Pat Quinn support among Democrats and independents in his losing re-election campaign. Illinois Democratic voters overwhelmingly oppose fracking with 61.9% against and 19.7% in favor. Independents oppose it as well, with 48.3% against and 30.6% in support.

Any Illinois candidate looking for support from young voters should stand against fracking. A whopping 74% of 18-24 year-olds don't want it.

A solid 54% majority of Chicago residents are opposed. That's a bad sign for Rahm Emanuel who claims his aggregation deal is a clean energy victory, even though it powers Chicago with natural gas from the Marcellus shale fracking fields.

An election analysis released in January by the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute identified low turnout among Democrats, and downstate opposition as reasons for Governor Pat Quinn losing re-election. During the campaign Quinn faced protests against his support for fracking, and as this poll shows, his position is unpopular among the Democratic base. With neither candidate for Governor taking a position against fracking, it left little reason for concerned voters to show up on election day.

There's no issue for which politicians and lobbyists in the statehouse bubble are more out of touch with Illinois voters than on fracking.

After a bill to regulate and launch fracking passed the Illinois legislature, industry lobbyists launched a campaign to portray opponents as a tiny fringe. Overwhelming public outcry against fracking at public hearings provided a reality check. A few accommodating statehouse green groups helped reinforced the false impression that regulation is a consensus middle ground. The Simon poll shows industry claims that fracking opposition is limited to a small group are outrageously false.

Some statehouse Democrats are still out of touch. Central Illinois Senator Dave Koehler recently introduced an amendment to the Illinois Clean Jobs bill that would allow some utilities to pay for converting coal plants to natural gas with a new fee charged to customers. The act creates a market-based carbon auction that may push coal plant operators to make minor upgrades or convert to natural gas. Koehler's amendment would help utilities to keep aging, polluting plants running at ratepayer expense rather than investing in new clean energy.

Most Illinois fracking is on hold, at least temporarily, due to low oil prices. Yet, the issue could play a roll in the 2016 election, particularly in Democratic primaries for U.S. Senate and Congress. Although some Democrats, like Pat Quinn and former Colorado Senator Mark Udall, have supported fracking regulation as a compromise middle crowd, it's a position that alienates voters on both sides of the issue while gaining support from no one but industry donors. Democratic candidates in a competitive primary would be smart to support a ban on fracking.

The poll question adopts a "jobs v. the environment" narrative which assumes fracking would benefit the economy. But, many residents oppose fracking because they don't believe another boom and bust extraction cycle will help the downstate economy. Most people don't want to locate their business or home in a community with poisoned water and air.

Low oil prices and public opposition provide an opportunity for downstate Illinois to build a healthy economy without the destructive impacts of fracking. As the poll shows, many voters are looking for leaders who offer more than empty assurances that regulation will make fracking safe or provide good jobs.

Department of Interior Announces Big Rock Candy Mountain Management Plan

2015-03-20T15:03:00.000-05:00

The U.S. Department of Interior made three announcements today. One establishes rules to protect the lemonade springs at Big Rock Candy Mountain. Second, is a management plan for unicorn populations on public lands.

The third announcement is for rules to produce safe, responsible fracking. Clearly announced on the same day because all three are all equally realistic things that exist in the same world of make believe.

America's Fracking Mayor: Rahm Emanuel

2015-03-19T13:30:00.002-05:00

Sandra Steingraber gave an excellent comment for my new piece about Chicago's energy aggregation contract.

I grew up Illinois coal country, just downwind from a massive, coal-burning power plant that sent all its power north to Chicago. When I was in high school, in the 1970s, that plant was the biggest polluter in the state, and everyone in my home town of Pekin all suffered from breathing its emissions. My 84-year-old mom, a life-long non-smoker, has chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and emphysema. And because that coal, when it burned, sent mercury raining down on our river, the local fish became too poisoned to eat.

Unfortunately, Chicago residents have been sold a bill of goods by officials who misrepresented a switch from coal to natural gas as 'clean' energy. Natural gas, predominately extracted by fracking, is anything but clean, and once again, people far from Chicagoland will suffer so that Chicagoans can turn on the lights. This time, it's Pennsylvania children living in the shale fields, rather than downstate Illinois kids living by the strip mines, whose health will be sacrificed. So, how is that progress?

For the climate, extraction by fracking results in tremendous leakage of methane, a greenhouse gas 86 times more damaging for the climate than carbon dioxide over 20 years. For people, those living near fracking suffer a range of health ailments including respiratory illnesses, birth defects, and the threat of contaminated water and earthquakes. Chicagoans deserve better than false representations of natural gas as a clean power source; they need true leadership that boldly moves to renewable energy.

It's impossible to take Rahm seriously as an environmental leader after he sold fracking as clean energy. Read the rest at HuffingtonPost.

Lincoln loved taxing the rich

2015-02-12T17:29:00.003-06:00

Happy birthday Abraham Lincoln!

When Lincoln anniversaries come around I sometimes enjoy comparing the views of the first Republican president to the Republican party of today. Tax policies offer a stark contrast. Lincoln supported progressive income tax structures that asked the rich to pay their fair share.

As a member of the Illinois state legislature, Lincoln defended a property tax because it would mostly be paid by the wealthy. Paul Simon's book, Lincoln's Preparation for Greatness, quotes Lincoln's letter on the tax.

...I believe it can be sustained, because it does not increase the tax upon the "many poor" but upon the "wealthy few" by taxing the land that is worth $50 or $100 per acre, in proportion to its value, instead of, as heretofore, no more than that which was worth $5 per acre. This valuable land, as is well known, belongs, not to the poor, but to the wealthy citizen.

On the other hand, the wealthy can not justly complain, because the change is equitable within itself, and also a sine qua non to a compliance with the Constitution. If, however, the wealthy should, regardless of the justness of the complaint, complain of the change, it is still to be remembered, that they are not sufficiently numerous to carry the elections.
Very Respectfully,
A. Lincoln

We live in different times. The voice of the wealthy few manage to outweigh the many poor in most elections thanks to unrestricted campaign spending. Illinois' new Republican Governor Bruce Rauner has discussed supporting a sales tax increase that would place a greater burden on the middle class and poor, rather than the 1% Lincoln preferred taxing.

As President, Lincoln created the first income tax. It was so progressive that most Americans paid nothing at all. Republicans today sometimes complain that half of Americans supposedly pay no income tax. That's exactly what Lincoln had in mind when he established a tax on those most able to pay.

Somehow, Lincoln's populist views sound more modern and relevant than today's Republican party that's captured by perpetually complaining billionaires.

Hunter Lake is still the dumbest idea in Springfield

2015-02-10T07:38:00.000-06:00

I can't believe I still have to write about this. Hunter Lake is the dumbest idea going Springfield. Here's why:

1) There are good reasons why the permits were never approved last time and they still won't be approved after more money is wasted trying again. New dams like this one aren't getting built anymore. Anywhere.

2) Water usage is growing nowhere near the growth estimates CWLP used to demonstrate a supposed need. Water efficiency programs are working. And no, those programs have nothing to do with watering your lawn or washing your car.

3) The biggest water hogs in Springfield are the older coal power plants. They have a limited lifespan. When the two oldest coal boilers shut down then water usage will drop. A LOT. Which means there's zero need for a new Hunter mud flat.

4) Sunk cost fallacy. The fact that a lot of money has already been wasted on a bad idea is not a good reason to waste even more. I learned this in my freshman microeconomics course.

There's no good reason to waste millions more on a project nobody needs. Hunter Lake is nothing but a pork barrel project to make money for those who will finance and build it at taxpayer expense. It serves no other purpose.

Turn the land into a top notch nature area instead so Springfield will finally benefit from getting out of this foolish moneypit. We might even recover some of our losses down the road by selling the land to the Department of Natural Resources.

Historic Grassroots Victory Stops Central Illinois Coal Mine

2015-01-20T17:04:00.002-06:00

An eight year battle against a central Illinois strip mine ends in victory for the community of Canton and Orion township. An arm of Springfield Coal Company asked the Department of Natural Resources to terminate their permit for their North Canton Mine before a court hearing challenging errors in permit approval.

"The naysayers told us we couldn't fight city hall and the mine. They have more money. But we stayed the course," said Brenda Dilts, Chair of Canton Area Citizens for Environmental Issues.

The permit challenge hinged on the mine's potential impact to streams and Canton Lake, which supplies water to roughly 20,000 people, but opposition rallied around many ways the community would be harmed, including noise, water well contamination, heavy truck traffic, and airborne pollutants. Only a road and fence would have separated the mine from residents in Orion township, Dilts said. "Now people are free to enjoy their country living and well water."

Dilts wrote a letter to the editor in 2006 after hearing a presentation by the company and the Department of Natural Resources at a city council meeting. "I came home from vacation to voicemails messages full of support for my letter. Only one message was negative. We decided to start having meetings. Twelve people came at first to write letters. Then we had 25 and soon we outgrew our meeting space at the library. We organized until we became a legitimate source of pain for the company."

Read the rest at EcoWatch.

Governor Rauner's Environment & Energy Adviser Represents Many of Illinois' Worst Polluters

2015-01-16T12:26:00.000-06:00

Check out my latest at Huffington Post blog.

One of Bruce Rauner's first appointments as Governor is a troubling sign for citizens hoping he'll protect the public and environment from toxic pollutants. Rauner's new Policy Adviser for Environment & Energy is Alec Messina, previously Executive Director and registered lobbyist for the Illinois Environmental Regulatory Group (IERG).

At IERG, Messina represented the interests of some of the state's largest polluters, including Peabody Energy, ExxonMobil, Chris Cline's Foresight Energy, Prairie State Generating Company, Dynegy Midwest Generation, Ameren, ADM and others.

I write more about the appointment and Rauner's first policy statements on energy at the link.

Also worth reading is Bruce Rushton's article at Illinois Times about some of Messina's actions in the Blagojevich administration.

Can Illinois Learn From New York's Victory Against Fracking?

2015-01-02T11:20:00.000-06:00

Illinois environmentalists are cheering the spectacular success of the movement to ban fracking in New York. The victory is justifiably spurring reflection on how it was done. What happened in New York that Illinois environmentalists can learn from?

Environmental and public health groups made an unambiguous, united push for a ban or moratorium, not regulation.
They kept constant, aggressive grassroots pressure on Governor Cuomo and other politicians, especially during election season.
State government conducted a thorough study on potential public health impacts before fracking began.
They took the fight to small towns and potentially impacted rural areas, not just New York City.
As Mark Ruffalo wrote, "The fact that we didn't let the big greens come in and make back room deals was also important to note."
They engaged in acts of nonviolent civil disobedience, including over 90 arrests near Seneca Lake since October.

Essentially, New York fractivists took the opposite approach of most big green groups active in the Illinois statehouse.

Illinois greens started with a basic chemical disclosure bill several years ago rather than organizing the passionate grassroots desire for a ban. Although there were efforts to ask legislators to pass a moratorium, statehouse green groups remained focused on various regulatory bills. Some of them eventually won a seat at the negotiating table with industry lobbyists to write a regulatory law by ignoring the loud and frequent objection of environmentalists in impacted areas who said regulation cannot make fracking safe.

During the past year, pro-regulation groups joined Governor Pat Quinn in remaining silent about his unpopular support for fracking. Sierra Club even issued a greenwash endorsement of Quinn as a "climate leader" despite his horrible record on fossil fuel extraction.

Several groups continued to engage in the regulatory process without meaningful buy-in or communication with the downstate anti-fracking movement. They tell environmental audiences they prefer a ban, but told legislators they'll settle for regulation. The result is a deeply divided movement that's less effective on all energy issues.

What's next for Illinois?

More fractivists are focusing on county government, like a victory lead by Illinois People's Action to stop a proposed oil drill in McLean county. Union county is forming a group to study the impacts of fracking and conventional drilling at the urging of the Shawnee Sentinels. There's a good reason why Illinois law doesn't allow counties to ban fracking. Some of them would actually do it.

In southern Illinois, lifelong residents and grandmothers are training to engage in nonviolent civil disobedience to stop fracking operations. Additionally, momentum is building to form a coalition similar to New York that will coordinate statewide action between groups.

Illinoisans made their opposition to fracking clear through unprecedented participation in the public hearing process and by choosing not to show up for Pat Quinn on election day. But the industry's farcical campaign to marginalize fractivists as a tiny fringe continues to have lingering influence among legislators and reporters in the statehouse. One result is inadequate coverage given to the anti-fracking movement. Fractivists can't rely on regional news outlets traditionally sympathetic to fossil fuel interests to get our message out.

What the movement does next year won't make the impact it should if most of the public and politicians don't hear about it. That's why the movement needs it's own source for accurate, full coverage of how extraction industries are impacting the state.

Illinois environmentalists had discouraging setbacks in 2014. Resolving to follow New York's example will bring more success in 2015.

Media Bias is 25 Sports Writers and Zero Environment Reporters

2014-12-05T08:00:00.000-06:00

Any news outlet that distributes information unflattering to Republicans or views out of step with conservative ideology will be hounded with cries of "liberal media bias." The badgering will continue until all news outlets are as "fair and balanced" as Fox News. But the most consequential expression of bias in the press is in what stories are covered and what's ignored.

I checked reporting staff listed on four of downstate Illinois' largest newspapers: The Peoria Journal-Star, Belleville News-Democrat, State Journal-Register, and Southern Illinoisan. They list 25 sports writers and editors between them. They name zero editors or reporters primarily dedicated to energy, climate change, and the environment. That's your media bias.

The same problem exists in national news outlets but the impacts hit harder in local news. The most important stories are sometimes covered by reporters who have limited subject background. Fewer environmental stories are covered at all. And when there's news about a fertilizer plant opening in central Illinois, for example, no one mentions that they're some of the most potentially dangerous facilities for workers and the environment.

I should acknowledge that I've been interviewed by a number of excellent reporters who do a good job covering energy issues. In particular, Springfield's alternative weekly, Illinois Times, has been picking up the stories others ignore for years. The Harrisburg Daily-Register doesn't shy away from asking tough questions about the coal industry. The best pro-environment editorials in the Southern are usually from, ironically enough, Sports Editor Les Winkeler.

But it's disappointing that there aren't more exceptions. Many other good reporters are limited by the decisions their publisher and editor make about assigning resources.

Newspapers often write about the influence campaign contributions have on politicians. I'd like to see the same principles of disclosure applied to the news industry. Why not release an annual report about advertising revenue from the fossil fuel industry plus the financial interests of media parent companies? Call me a cynic but I suspect those financial factors have something to do with the for-profit media's failure to focus on pollution and climate change.

What should we do then? There's no shortage of stories to be covered in Illinois with the recent expansion of coal mining, the threat of fracking, the future of coal plants on the line, and clean energy struggling to expand its presence. Twenty-five reporters wouldn't be enough!

This is why I'm launching Illinois Energy Justice. The site will chronicle energy issues from the front lines of the state's energy transition with writing by myself and others. It will also be a collaboration with grassroots groups to highlight their work on coal, fracking and clean energy.

My kickstarter page will fund the launch of a website and expenses for my first round of stories focusing on the work of grassroots groups opposed to fracking. I've broken several stories missed by others, including the state mine safety regulator who was taking political donations from a coal mine operator, and millions in state grants going to coal industry pork projects. I'd like to break many more.

If you're tired of environmental stories and viewpoints not getting the coverage they deserve, now is the time to do something about it by donating.

Profile in Cowardice: Senator Don Harmon Fracks Illinois

2014-11-13T12:39:00.000-06:00

A clip from my latest up at HuffingtonPost.

An industry lobbyist told reporters he was thrilled with the updated rules, while environmental groups were forced to admit they hadn't even seen the changes.
Senator Harmon directed the process as chair of the committee. He could have insisted the rules be made available to the public in advance. He could have insisted that changes be debated in public. He could have asked committee members to explain their vote. He could have done a roll call vote instead of a voice vote so citizens have a public record of where their representatives stand. He could have made the rules stronger or rejected them completely. Instead, he gave the oil & gas industry exactly what they wanted.

The Illinois fracking law was negotiated by lobbyists behind closed doors with no southern Illinois environmentalists invited. The rules were finished the same way, but this time even the pro-regulation statehouse green groups were shut outside.

Thanks for reading and sharing.

It Doesn't Pay to Be a Fossil-Fuel Democrat on Election Day

2014-11-12T16:29:00.001-06:00

My new blog at Huffington Post. Cross-posted at Democrats for Progress and DailyKos.

This was a difficult election for Democrats and it was even worse for Democrats still pushing fossil fuels. The Democratic co-chair of the Congressional Coal Caucus lost his seat along with a slew of others who tried to prove they're as pro-coal, pro-oil, and pro-fracking as any Republican.

There are plenty of examples like Grimes in Kentucky. Or Tennant and Nick Rahall in West Virginia who mimicked conservative talking points on coal in their losing races. Mary Landrieu is expected to lose in a Louisiana run-off. If you can't run on clean energy and climate change in a state that saw Hurricane Katrina and the Gulf oil disaster, then you're an incompetent politician.

No state made the point more clearly than Illinois, where Democrats serious about climate won reelection while fossil-fuel Democrats lost. Governor Pat Quinn once bragged about passing a bill to launch fracking along with lead Senate sponsor Mike Frerichs. Quinn lost reelection after spending months avoiding the issue (and anti-fracking protesters).

Read the rest here and thanks for sharing.

All Illinois Democrats Have to Do for Re-Election Is...

2014-11-11T11:35:00.001-06:00

My new blog at HuffPost. This may be the first Illinois election in years decided by downstate and the suburbs.

Quinn won 64.3% in Cook county, the same percentage he got in 2010. But with turnout down, he earned about 79,000 fewer votes out of Cook than last time. That's enough for a few Chicago-centric thinkers to claim, as they always do, that Cook county made the difference. But, even if Quinn had matched his 2010 turnout in Chicago, he still would have lost this election.

Also at Democrats for Progress and DailyKos.

Southern Illinois asks legislative committee to reject weak fracking rules

2014-11-05T15:42:00.000-06:00

Yesterday Illinois was facing an environmental and economic crisis from fracking that was greenwashed by a Democratic Governor who told us regulation can make it safe. Voters were asked to choose between two pro-fracking candidates for Governor. Bruce Rauner won after many downstate voters decided they didn't like either choice and stayed home.

Illinois is now faced with an environmental crisis to be overseen by a Republican Governor who's unlikely to strictly enforce regulation. There's no more greenwashing fracking in Illinois. No politician can credibly claim they're protecting the environment with the weak law passed by the legislature. It's the state's top environmental threat.

The next politicians who may claim they can make fracking safe are legislators on JCAR. After delaying action until after election day, they're expected to vote on fracking rules Thursday. They must reject the rules to prevent poorly regulated fracking from moving forward under Bruce Rauner. Even strong rules would be meaningless if overseen by state regulatory agencies captured by industry. Passing the rules now, even with improvements requested by a few pro-fracking green groups in Chicago, would guarantee environmental disaster.

After JCAR rejects the rules, Pat Quinn has one last chance to fix his mistake by asking the legislature to pass a ban or moratorium on fracking during the upcoming veto session. It can still be done before Bruce Rauner takes office as Governor.

Southern Illinois grassroots environmental leaders sent the following letter asking JCAR to reject the rules.

November 4, 2014
Dear Members of the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules:

The undersigned Illinois residents urge this committee to reject the Proposed Rules for the Hydraulic Fracturing Regulatory Act. We have identified numerous procedural deficiencies in the rulemaking process for these proposed rules, each of which is serious enough to have tainted the whole process. This Committee has the authority to reject the Proposed Rules, and we respectfully request that you do so at your November 6, 2014 meeting.

We have identified the following violations of Illinois statutory law committed during the rulemaking period for HFRA:
• IDNR failed to publish a summary of the 135 page proposed rulemaking in the regulatory agenda. (5 ILCS 100/5-60).
• IDNR failed to give sufficient notice of public hearings throughout Illinois; one hearing even received zero notice in the Illinois Register. (5 ILCS 100/5-40)
• IDNR failed to make an agency representative available to answer questions at any of the public hearings held in Illinois. (5 ILCS 100/5-40)
• IDNR refused some citizens admittance to the Chicago hearing. (5 ILCS 100/5-40(b))
• IDNR did not allow some citizens to speak at the Ina (Rend Lake College) hearing. (5 ILCS 100/5-40(b))
• IDNR provided an inadequate opportunity for the public to address the factual basis for its rulemaking depriving members of the public of complete participation in the rulemaking process. (5 ILCS 100/5-60)
• IDNR prejudiced the public's opportunity to comment, by making patently false statements in its first notice. (5 ILCS 100/5-40)
• IDNR failed to comply with the requirement of HFRA section 1-97 by not submitting the required report to the General Assembly by February 1, 2014, thereby depriving citizens the opportunity to evaluate that report during the limited time for public input on rulemaking. (225 ILCS 732/1-97)
• IDNR’s Delay in Publishing the Transcripts of the Public Hearings Prejudiced the Public’s Ability to Evaluate IDNR’s Rulemaking (5 ILCS 100/5-35)

In total, the statutory violations described here have deprived the public of its rights under the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act, and when considered cumulatively, the violations also amount to a violation of IDNR’s rulemaking duties under HFRA.

The rulemaking process failed in its essential purpose; the proposed rulemaking violated mandatory statutory and administrative rulemaking procedures and prejudiced the public’s right and ability to participate in this important rulemaking. If JCAR finalizes these rules, then these rules will be incomplete, inadequate, and invalidly enacted to the detriment of Illinois residents who are landowners, mineral interest owners, and members of the communities where high-volume, horizontal hydraulic fracturing would occur.

The undersigned below also believe it is critical for this Committee to realize that at the present time, IDNR does not have an adequate budget nor staff to supervise high volume horizontal hydraulic fracturing under the HFRA or to monitor compliance with HFRA permits and HFRA.

We have been concentrating on the procedural deficiencies of the rulemaking, as described above, but we also have the following concerns about the health and environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing that have been recorded in scientific research: contamination of water supplies, displacement of wildlife, noise and light pollutions, earthquakes and seismic risks, silica dust hazards, low level radiation exposure, and increased burdens on infrastructure, especially in rural communities.

Now is the time for JCAR to acknowledge the procedural deficiencies of this important rulemaking in our State’s history and to do the right thing in the best interest of Illinois residents. Please deny approval of the proposed HRFA rules.

Respectfully,
1. /s/ Ms. Natalie M. Laczek
2. /s/ Ms. Penni S. Livingston
3. /s/ Mr. Vito Amastrangelo
4. /s/ Ms. Tabitha Tripp
5. /s/ Mr. Sam Stearns
6. /s/ Mr. Mark Donham
7. /s/ Mr. Nathan Czuba
8. /s/ Annette McMichaels on behalf
of Southerners Illinoisans Against Fracturing Our Environment SAFE

If you'd like to send your own message to members of JCAR by Wednesday morning you can find their contact information here.

Illinois Wasting Millions on Another Coal-to-Gas Pork Project

2014-10-23T16:50:00.003-05:00

My new blog at Huffington Post is on the latest Illinois coal subsidy fail.

The state of Illinois is throwing millions of taxpayer dollars at another coal-to-gas plant just two years after a similar project ended in failure.
The Coal Development Fund has so far given Homeland Fuels two grants totaling$4.25 million in taxpayer dollars. The first grant was awarded in 2013 to fund a study for the proposed "Coal to Diesel Pilot Project" next to their coal supplier, which will apparently be a nearby Chris Cline-owned mine in central Illinois. The company moved addresses from Hillsboro to Litchfield before receiving a second grant for $3,500,000. There's no indication of how the plant would limit their global warming emissions or other environmental impacts.

Read and share the rest.

More "victories" in Illinois fracking law that are functionally useless

2014-10-21T15:55:00.001-05:00

I'm looking at registration forms submitted to the Illinois Department of Natural Resources by companies that want to frack Illinois.

One company with a notorious environmental record was able to check the box saying it has no history of violations because the form only asks if they had a violation on fracking in the past five years. Have a violation for conventional oil & gas operations? No problem. You've only been operating in Texas where almost no one gets held accountable? No problem.

It's another part of the Illinois fracking law that sounds good but is basically worthless in practice. As a friend wrote; it would be like one of us having a regular driver's license, getting multiple DUIs and speeding tickets, and then deciding we wanted to get a CDL (commercial drivers license). Without having a search on our previous driving record, without having to take a new test, and only having to pay a license fee. Then if we got caught again, all we would have to do is change our name, and we could start with a clean slate all over again.

This reminds me of the Chicago-based green groups who negotiated the fracking law proudly bragging about the supposed victory they won allowing cities to ban it. Yet, the likely impacted areas are mostly rural counties where banning within city limits is no meaningful barrier to frackers. Countywide bans, which would have a meaningful impact, aren't allowed.

On another topic, the fracking registration forms say no permits will be issued until the rules are finally approved. A few groups who are focused on crafting better regulation made a campaign around getting Quinn to not issue fracking permits until the rules are final. Apparently, Quinn's IDNR never considered anything else. That campaign appears to have been a chew toy that kept groups occupied in a way that doesn't challenge Quinn or change the politics around fracking.

Who will be the climate change candidate in 2016?

2014-10-06T16:26:00.001-05:00

Will the climate movement have a serious contender for President in 2016? Now's the time to find someone strong on the most urgent crisis of our time and serious about winning the White House.

Should that candidate be Hillary Clinton? She says the right things. But the most significant actions of her career are promoting fracking as Secretary of State and letting the oil industry influence environmental impact studies for the Keystone XL pipeline.

With a record like that, it's hard to imagine what Clinton can say to convince skeptical primary voters that a politician notorious for having her finger to the wind will suddenly became a stalwart champion against powerful fossil fuel interests. This is the same person who backed off from her signature issue, universal healthcare, for roughly ten years after the '93 setback and retreated to safer talking points about prescription drugs for seniors.

Is it reasonable to believe someone who has played it safe for her entire career will suddenly become obstinate against the most powerful interests in Washington? The cost of taking only small, politically easy steps in classic Clintonian fashion will be many more lives lost in climate change disasters. The future of civilization as we know it depends on electing a President who will take the kind of bold, courageous action that neither Hillary nor her husband (the Neville Chamberlain of the climate crisis) have demonstrated during their careers.

Clinton's approval numbers have nosedived to under 50% since she left the Obama administration and stepped back into the spotlight. Despite the inevitability narrative around Clinton, it's realistic to believe a candidate can challenge her in Iowa and other early primary states. That fear is why her supporters are so determined to discourage anyone else from running.

The dream candidate for the environmental movement who could start with enough money, name recognition, and experience to seriously challenge Clinton is Al Gore. I would love to re-elect Gore, but he hasn't expressed interest in running. Yet.

Bernie Sanders speaks boldly about climate change but it doesn't sound like he's serious about winning the election. Most primary voters and donors aren't interested in wasting time on a campaign that's only trying to raise issues. If we're discussing dream candidates, I'd be excited to see Obama's former Labor Secretar, Hilda Solis bring her focus on environmental justice to the election.

Among those talking about running, Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley has the most impressive record of acting on climate. Stroll through the Climate Change Maryland website to see how other states should do it.

It's not mere window dressing. Maryland passed a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act in 2009, released a plan in 2013, and has set the goal of reducing emissions 25% by 2020.

O'Malley's big test is how he acts on fracking. Some Democratic leaders and big green funders are a little slow to acknowledge that natural gas isn't a realistic solution to climate change. Even if you don't account for methane leaks, switching from coal to another fossil fuel simply can't produce the kind of greenhouse gas reductions required to address the crisis.

Most of the environmental grassroots have a more reality-based position. The movement against fracking is passionate and growing rapidly. If O'Malley supports fracking his previous actions won't help him in the Democratic primary. He'll be just another lackluster candidate with a mixed environmental record.

Among those already running, Martin O'Malley looks like the most likely candidate for the climate change movement to unite behind but he'll have to take a strong stand against fracking.

Congressional candidate Mike Bost says fracking is safe but environmentalists want people to die

2014-09-24T10:00:00.000-05:00

Illinois Republican Congressional candidate Mike Bost has some unusual beliefs about environmentalists and fracking. In a recent radio interview, Bost said about environmentalists:

"...if it was up to them, people should die and everything else should exist. Now, I know because I was in the negotiations with them."

Bost was referring to his role negotiating the law that will open Illinois to fracking. Several groups based in Chicago, including Faith-in-Place, NRDC, and the Environmental Law & Policy Center participated in negotiations and supported the law over the objection of environmentalists in areas that will be most impacted.

Now, I wasn't present for negotiations but I've never heard staff for any of those groups suggest anything remotely similar to the opinion that people should die and everything else should exist. In fact, most climate change and anti-fracking activists are involved to save human life.

Many of us noticed that fracking made North Dakota the deadliest state to work in.

We're bothered that fracking operations use chemicals known to cause cancer respiratory problems, birth defects and other health impacts.

We know the massive increase in trucks transporting dangerous chemicals is yet another unavoidable deadly hazard, especially since toxic spills shutting down I-57 in southern Illinois is already a regular story.

Since fracking contributes to climate change we're also working to reduce climate disasters like extreme flooding in southern Illinois.

But Mike Bost is excited about fracking because it will bring tax revenue and jobs. He's willing to sacrifice human life for the sake of transient temp jobs that will mostly go to out-of-state workers for the profit of out-of-state companies. And he has the balls to accuse environmentalists of not caring about human life?

Surprisingly, this is considered a competitive race. Fracking is highly controversial in the district. A poll taken last year showed southern Illinois evenly split on whether fracking should be allowed, with 54% of independents opposed. That's remarkable considering the same poll claims 80% support coal mining. Opposition is growing but there's a conspicuous absence of regional or statewide polls on the topic since then. His support for fracking will cost Bost support among moderates and independents.

Because I'm pretty certain no real-world environmentalist ever expressed to Bost the views he claims, I have to wonder what imaginary tree-huggers he was negotiating with. Do other people see them? Do they always take human form? Does he typically win arguments with his imaginary enemies or lose? Hopefully someone on his staff can help if these mysterious negotiators make more demands.

Congressman Shimkus faces backlash to deceptive fracking comments

2014-09-19T09:30:00.000-05:00

Illinois' most embarrassing Congressman, John Shimkus, faced an outraged backlash for pro-fracking statements he made on facebook. He's already well known as a climate change denier and conspiracy theorist on the fringe of the energy debate. Although there's a long tradition of coal mining in his district, fracking is very controversial.

Shimkus has a steady stream of constituents who regularly respond to his misleading and foolish facebook posts. But several posts supporting fracking attracted unusually strong pushback.

The first recent post linked a radio interview in which Shimkus says fracking, "isn't really new. Its been around since the 40's." This is a common talking point industry propagandists use to confuse people.

Some forms of vertical fracking have been around for decades. Recent debates and regulation are focused on horizontal, high powered fracking, which people in the industry know was developed in the 90's. Shimkus then says with no irony that "it's difficult to separate what's fact from fiction these days." That's especially true when someone's Congressman is lying to them.

Shimkus then posted a picture of a fracking operation with the comment, "Looking forward to seeing this in Southern Illinois" that generated 85 mostly brutal responses from downstate residents.

Great idea! Let's frack away our future! Goodbye geological stability. Hey...we're going to need more lawyers, doctors, and environmental remediation services in the area to deal with all of the negative impacts of fracking. What a short sighted plan.
Southern Illinois has beauty beyond compare. Crystal clear water to drink. Clean air to breath. Why in the world do you think God would want you to do anymore to this area than has already been done by strip mining and underground mining? Piling shale on the ground making our highways nasty. Please rethink this highway of thinking. You've been there for us in the past, please think of our future.
Proof we have the best congressman money can buy.
I'm not looking forward to such ruin of our region. Ban fracking. Put your support behind wind, solar and energy efficient design please, Otherwise, you do not have my vote.
Can we put one next to your house?
Yeah, because that well is so much more beautiful than Shawnee National Forest and the surrounding land. Idiot.
They are fracking in Central Illinois bypassing the Regulatory Act by staying under the volume that would cause them to wait for the rules to be finalized and by using fluids other than water to frack. See what they can get away with in this state! The Regulatory Act is going to be useless against these companies.
In 2012 the State of Texas reported $1.5 billion in revenues from all fracking activities. That same year the Texas Department of Transportation determined that fracking truck traffic was causing $4 billion in roadway damages statewide annually. http://www.FrackingRoadDamage.com
You support this you will condemn us all .It is your obligation too get the facts. Remember John we live on two fault lines.
"this" should be NO where near Southern Illinois. Trashing the land, air and using precious water to frack the earth? Oh also fracking near New Madrid fault....are you so out of touch you don't see that?
So, will the first "test" sites be in YOUR backyard, contamination affecting YOUR family? Most folks boosting southern Illinois look forward to seeing forests, rock formations, lakes, and... Wineries... This picture does none of those justice. It also makes me want to move for the sake of my baby boy!!!!!!!
You are totally wrong about this issue; Illinois is one of the most beautiful states in the union with some of the best water anywhere. Now you want to ruin it? What the hell is wrong with you? We intend to fight this fight to the end!
You can't restore ruined buildings from earthquakes, and you can't restore polluted water once it has made people sick. You are gambling with people's lives, to make a few dollars for a few people, most of whom don't need it. Shame on you.
Fracking destroys. Fracking destroys wildlife. Fracking destroys tourism. Fracking destroys drinking water. Whoever is for Fracking has no empathy for our planet.
You are either incredibly stupid, incredibly uncaring, or a combination of both if you look forward to seeing this in Southern Illinois. Do you also look forward to the earthquakes that will devastate Southern Illinois? Do you look forward to the land and water being destroyed? What is WRONG with you politicians? Is that almighty dollar that you're getting from all of these people destroying our planet going to be worth it when you also don't have decent air to breathe, water to drink, or constituents to vote for you? I hope all politicians supporting fracking are ousted from office as soon as possible. Fracking in Southern Illinois is a terrible, terrible thing and the fact that you don't know this makes me sick.
With all due respect, Congressman: ABSOLUTELY NOT! No way are the people of southern Illinois prepared for the noise, traffic, and pollution this will create. Take fracking to Chicago!
NO! This is *not* a sight I want to see in Southern Illinois, now or EVER! We live on two active faults. I have friends in many areas that have allowed fracking. They have constant earthquakes. No job, no income, is worth endangering millions of lives. Please re-think this.
why weren't we considered for the Tesla Plant, you have any idea what 6500 decent jobs would mean to this district, well are you trying to bring long term development here? oh and talk to folks in Ohio about fracking jobs, transients living in hotels and apartments leaving on Friday, lots of work for restaurants, bars and gas stations and when the crews move on so do those crappy jobs...

I could copy dozens more.

Shimkus got cute with his response and posted a graphic of outdated and out of context quotes from former and current Obama administration officials. Then another of academics who have worked for the industry claiming there has been no water contamination from fracking.

I added my own comment this time that got 13 likes.

243 cases of drinking well water contaminated in Pennsylvania. Does it bother anyone else to have their Congressman lie to them?
http://triblive.com/mobile/6696428-96/wells-released-gas

Plenty of others chimed in with more stories, studies, and facts to correct Shimkus' attempt to mislead his constituents.

I understand this scientific compendium is not covered in money, and therefore you are not likely to read such things, but you might try reading a peer reviewed medical research that provides a significant body of evidence that fracking is inherently dangerous to people and their community.
http://concernedhealthny.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/CHPNY-Fracking-Compendium.pdf

Why don't you ask these people! Dennis and Tamera Hagy and sons, Jackson County, WV (Equitable gas wells 1,080 feet away)
Exposure: Water – arsenic, lead, barium and Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, radon levels were 1,233 pCi/l with the maximum contaminant level set at 300.
Symptoms: Neurological symptoms, headaches, rashes, and vomiting, eyes burning, oddly tired; one son spitting up blood
or Danny and Sharon Kinney
Location: Salem, WV
Gas Facility: Antero Resources gas well
Exposure: Water – arsenic at .060
Symptoms: Unknown, replacement water or relocated; cracking house foundation
http://www.wboy.com/story/17114653/family-suffers-contaminated-water-well-from-oil-gas-industry-on-neighbors-property

Plus this powerful personal response:

My parents are ranchers. They have lost water pressure at their ranch for the first time in twenty years because three of their neighbors are selling off their water to fracking companies. They were also involved in an auto accident a few years ago because the traffic has gotten progressively worse on the little state highway they retired on. We don't have the cancer clusters mapped out yet, but we will in a few decades time, we'll have the epidemiological connections with silicosis understood to a greater degree too by then; cold comfort to the people who will be suffering from it, and silicosis is a pretty awful way to die. The companies won't disclose the contents of the chemicals they inject into the ground, but they do use known carcinogens. Local communities vote to keep fracking out, yet are over-ruled by state judges, like what transpired in Fort Collins, Co. earlier this year. You quoting EPA and Energy officials is probably not the most disingenuous thing you've done (how many of them are now working for energy companies I wonder?), but sincerely if it were your family, and their livelihood was at stake, would you still call fracking safe?

Shimkus has an incumbent protection district but he's facing a serious Democratic opponent for the first time in his new district, Eric Thorsland. Besides taking a reality-based position on climate change, Thorsland's family owns an organic farm. His website says he "believes food security and water quality issues are top priorities and has witnessed firsthand the effects of a changing climate on his farm."

There's a clear choice between Thorsland, who supports building a long-term sustainable economy, and Shimkus who would sacrifice the regions' future for a few years of transient temp jobs.

Illinois Green Groups Push to Stop Fracking With All Eyes on JCAR

2014-09-13T11:58:00.001-05:00

I have a new blog up at Huffington Post about the latest on the Illinois fracking fight.

The universal response from environmental groups is that Illinois must ban fracking because these rules won't protect the public. Even groups who supported the regulatory law that's designed to open the state to large scale fracking are now pushing for a ban or moratorium.