Critical NC Energy Bill | Eastern North Carolina Now

Stan:

    Sorry to bother you again, but the NC political scene will be hot and heavy for a few more weeks, and then we can all chill out.

    Yesterday was black day for NC politics.

    The most important energy/environmental bill of the year (H298) received a setback in the Utility Committee hearing -- when 18 legislators (6 Rs + 12 Ds) voted against the Affordable and Reliable Energy Act!

    At the hearing there were zero legitimate reasons put forward against this important bill. Although several special-interest people spoke against H298, no citizens spoke in favor of it...

    That might have been the deciding factor.

    See this story for more specifics. Hopefully H298 may be resurrected.

    Next week the House Finance Committee will have a hearing on H484, the second most important energy/environmental bill of the year. [Tuesday at 8:30 AM, LOB 544]. This is the last House hearing for this bill.

    I fully support the good intentions behind this very needed statewide industrial wind energy permitting bill. Unfortunately, a little digging reveals that there are a LOT of misunderstandings (among legislators, public, military, and media) about what H484v3 will and will not do.

    Example #1: Will H484 give NC military base commanders the ability to stop a wind project from being constructed in certain areas that adversely impact them from fulfilling their mission?
    • NO, not only due to the words in H484, but also due to the restrictions in federal law HR 6523 (pp 62-66).

    Example #2: Does H484 require objective and meaningful environmental tests be done?
    • NO, as H484 has the applicant hiring their own source to do the testing -- which will guarantee a favorable result. (E.g. that is exactly what happened in the Desert Wind situation, near Elizabeth City.)

    Example #3: Does H484 require impartial and relevant human health tests be conducted?
    • NO, as H484 allows the applicant to define what testing is done, and then to hire their own person to do it.

    Example #4: If serious problems happen to be uncovered in health tests, can those be the basis for rejecting the permit application?
    • NO, as the words in H484 do not identify health or safety issues as grounds for denying a permit.

    A good example of the prevalence of these misunderstandings is an email received this week from a prominent House legislator. It said:
    "I have been assured by DENR that all health and safety issues will be part of the permitting process."

    As explained above, health and safety issues will not be adequately investigated, and even if they are, they are not a basis for denying a permit.

    We need interested citizens to attend and speak up at this committee hearing. What we are advocating is digested down to one page.

    None of these are unreasonable conditions, and all will provide more protection to the NC public. An additional major consequence of these improvements is that NC military installations will have extra protections.

    Please let me know any questions.

    Please pass this on to other interested NC citizens.

    Regards,

    John Droz, Jr.
     Physicist & Environmental Advocate