Environmental group sues over coal ash plan on Alabama coast
A coastal environmental group filed suit Monday, trying to block a decision by Alabama Power Co. to leave millions of tons of coal ash along a riverside in the Mobile-Tensaw Delta, where opponents say a spill could devastate a huge ecosystem. The company contends however that it is following all applicable laws and standards. Saying, “On April 17, 2015, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency released a final rule for management and disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals (CCRs) from electric utilities. In 2018, the Alabama Department of Environmental Management issued its state CCR rule, which closely tracks the federal rule.” The federal lawsuit by Mobile Baykeeper was filed by the Southern Environmental Law Center, which announced plans to sue the electrical utility in July. The group wants to force Alabama Power to give up what it contends is an illegal plan to permanently leave more than 21 million tons (19 metric tonnes) of coal ash in an unlined pit at Plant Barry, located north of Mobile along the Mobile River. Environmentalists argue the ash pond is polluting groundwater and could destroy a verdant, biologically diverse region should it be breached by heavy flooding, a hurricane, or some other disaster. “Plant Barry is the only coal ash lagoon of a major utility left in a low-lying coastal area of the Southeast that is not already cleaned up or on track to be recycled or removed to safe storage, away from waterways,” Barry Brock, director of the law center’s Alabama office, said in a statement. Alabama Power did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment on the lawsuit, filed in Mobile. It previously declined comment on the group’s plan to sue though it has issued the following details on its website: Closing Ash Ponds Safely and Permanently The company is treating and removing all water from the pond. Material will be excavated and moved farther away from waterways, creating buffers of up to 750 yards from the Mobile River – a distance in some places longer than seven football fields. The size will be reduced by 267 acres, or about 45 percent. Using advanced engineering, Alabama Power will construct a redundant dike system as part of the plant’s increased, robust flood-protection measures. In addition to the redundant dike system, Alabama Power will construct a subsurface retaining wall around the entire consolidated footprint to provide further groundwater protection. The site benefits from a unique, natural solid clay layer that extends up to 28 feet below the ash pond. The retaining wall will extend below ground and tie into the clay layer to effectively seal the material in place. Additionally, an internal drainage system will be constructed around the perimeter of the consolidated footprint to accelerate the removal of water. The company will install a specially engineered barrier over the material to keep it safely in place. Storm water systems will be added to manage rainwater runoff. Alabama Power will monitor groundwater around the facility for at least 30 years to ensure ongoing protection of water quality. Plant Barry opened in 1965 about 25 miles (40 kilometers) north of Mobile. With federal regulators imposing tougher rules on storing coal ash, Alabama Power has been working for several years to close the roughly 600-acre (243-hectare) pond in the process detailed above which includes drying it out, moving material to a smaller site nearby, and covering it with a liner. The company contends moving the material farther away from the plant site would pose a hazard in itself. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Environmental group plans suit over coal ash in Mobile Delta
An environmental group took the first step Wednesday toward filing suit over plans by Alabama Power Co. to leave millions of pounds of coal ash near a riverside within the vast Mobile-Tensaw Delta, which activists say could be devastated by a spill. The Virginia-based Southern Environmental Law Center sent the utility notice of its intent to sue on behalf of Mobile Baykeeper, an environmental advocacy organization. Baykeeper wants regulators to force the company to take additional steps to protect against a spill of ash, a waste product from burning coal, at the site of its Plant Barry near the Mobile River. Such notices are required under the law before a lawsuit can be filed. Mobile Baykeeper contends the ash pond contains 21 million pounds (9.5 million kilograms) of coal ash that is polluting groundwater and could wipe out the lush, biologically diverse region should it be breached by heavy flooding, a hurricane, or some other disaster. The company’s plan for the coal ash “jeopardizes so much of what makes coastal Alabama special,” Cade Kistler of Mobile Baykeeper said in a statement. “The Mobile-Tensaw Delta is one of the world’s most important resources, and is vulnerable to increasing floods, severe hurricanes, and rising water levels. Leaving millions of tons of coal ash on the banks of the Mobile River is a disaster waiting to happen,” said Kistler. Alabama Power spokeswoman Beth Thomas said the utility had no comment. Plant Barry opened in 1965 about 25 miles (40 kilometers) north of Mobile. With federal regulators imposing tougher rules on storing coal ash, the company has been working for several years to close the roughly 600-acre (243-hectare) pond by drying it out, moving material to a smaller site nearby, and covering it with a liner. The company contends moving the material farther away would pose a hazard in itself. Environmentalists contend the plan doesn’t meet regulations and could result in contamination of the sprawling delta wilderness area north of the port city. Utilities in other states are acting to prevent coal ash spills like one that happened in Tennessee in 2008 and Virginia in 2014, they said. “Alabama is an outlier when it comes to leaving toxic coal ash in place,” Barry Brock, director of Southern Environmental Law Center’s Alabama office, said in a statement. “This coal ash should be safely stored in a lined facility away from the river’s edge and out of the groundwater or recycled into cement and concrete, as is being done in other Southeastern states.” Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Lawsuit says Alabama blocking solar power with unfair fees
The fees imposed by the Alabama Power company on customers who generate their own electricity with rooftop or on-site solar panels are now the subject of a federal lawsuit against the state’s regulators. Environmental groups argue that punishing fees are purposely discouraging the adoption of solar power in the sun-rich state. Alabama Power maintains that the fees are needed to maintain the infrastructure that provides backup power to customers when their solar panels don’t provide enough energy. The Southern Environmental Law Center and Ragsdale LLC filed the lawsuit on Monday against the Alabama Public Service Commission on behalf of four Alabama Power customers who installed solar panels on their properties and the Greater-Birmingham Alliance to Stop Pollution, or GASP. “We’re asking the court to require the Commission to follow the law so that Alabama Power will stop unfairly taxing private solar investments,” said Keith Johnston, director of SELC’s Alabama office. “Alabama is being left behind by other Southern states when it comes to solar generation, and the jobs, bill savings, and other benefits that come with it,” SELC’s statement said. “These charges are a significant roadblock to our state’s success.” A spokesperson for the Public Service Commission wrote in an email that “it would not be appropriate for the Alabama Public Service Commission to comment on pending litigation.” Alabama Power charges a $5.41-per-kilowatt fee, based on the capacity of the home system, on people who use solar panels or other means to generate part of their own electricity. That amounts to a $27 monthly fee on a typical 5-kilowatt system. The average solar panel setup for home costs about $10,000, according to the law center, and the fees add another $9,000 or so over a system’s 30-year lifespan, dramatically increasing costs and reducing any financial benefit for the homeowner. Alabama Power maintains that the fees are needed to maintain the infrastructure that provides backup power. A spokesperson for Alabama Power said, “We believe Alabama law and sound rate-making principles were followed in reaching a fair determination of the cost for this service.” “It is important to us that all of our 1.5 million customers are treated fairly. There is nothing about the lawsuit that changes our position – we believe the lawsuit is without merit. Customers who want to rely on the company to back up their own generation should pay their share of associated costs,” Alabama Power spokesperson Alyson Tucker wrote in an email. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rejected the environmental groups’ request to take enforcement action last month against the Public Service Commission. However, two members of the five-member panel issued a separate statement expressing concern that Alabama regulators may be violating federal policies designed to encourage the development of cogeneration and small power production facilities and to reduce the demand for fossil fuels. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Homeowners, group seek action on Alabama Power’s solar fee
Homeowners and an environmental group are asking federal regulators to step in over Alabama Power’s fees on home solar panels, fees they argue purposely discourages the use of solar in the sun-rich state. The petition filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission asserts that the Alabama Public Service Commission violated federal law when it upheld the fees. It asks the commission to initiate an enforcement action against the PSC and direct the state agency to order Alabama Power to sell electricity to solar customers at nondiscriminatory rates. “By imposing one of the highest fees on solar customers of any regulated utility nationwide, Alabama Power’s unjustified solar charges are severely curtailing renewable energy development in our state, and other states are leaving Alabama behind because of it,” Keith Johnston, director of Southern Environmental Law Center’s Alabama office. “We are asking FERC to exercise its authority to enforce federal protections for solar customers in Alabama Power’s service territory.” The action comes after the Alabama Public Service Commission last year upheld the fees and approved an increase. Alabama Power charges a $5.41-per-kilowatt fee, based on the capacity of the home system, on people who use solar panels, or other means, to generate part of their own electricity. That amounts to a $27 monthly fee on a typical 5-kilowatt system. The average solar panel setup for a home costs about $10,000, according to the Environmental Law Center. The fees add another $9,000 or so over the 30-year-lifespan of a system, dramatically increasing a homeowner’s cost and reducing any financial benefit they see from solar. Alabama Power has maintained the fee is needed to maintain the infrastructure that will provide backup power to customers when the solar panels don’t provide enough energy. “Alabama Power is focused on providing customers with safe, reliable, cost-effective energy. This issue was fully examined by the Alabama Public Service Commission, which included a lengthy public hearing, with the plaintiffs choosing not to pursue the case further in state court,” Alabama Power spokeswoman Alyson Tucker wrote in an email. “Customers with on-site generation who want backup service from the grid should pay the cost for that service. If not, other customers unfairly pay the costs for those individuals and businesses,” Tucker said. Experts for environmental groups said the charge eliminates much of the savings that customers expect to realize for their investments in installing solar panels. Teresa Thorne, who had a four-kilowatt system installed on her roof in Blount County, Alabama, told The Associated Press last year that the fees, “cuts my savings in half.” “Alabama Power’s monthly fee makes it extremely difficult for people like me who want to install solar to lower their monthly bills and generate clean energy,” Thorne said in a statement released by the Southern Environmental Law Center. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Alabama Power fees on solar challenged
Jim Bankston installed solar panels on his Tuscaloosa home, he estimated it would trim his electricity bill, and the savings would eventually offset the cost of the hefty investment. After it was running, he noticed fees on his Alabama Power bill that he didn’t understand and learned there was a $5-per-kilowatt capacity charge on customers who use solar panels to produce a portion of their own electricity. “I am having to pay them just to use the photons that are hitting my own roof,” Bankston said. He had estimated the system would eventually pay for itself in 20 years. With the fees included, he said it could be twice that. “I won’t be alive anymore, maybe,” the 45-year-old radiologist says wryly, also noting that it also might be beyond the life span of the panels he installed. The Alabama Public Service Commission will hold a Nov. 21 hearing on a challenge to the fees charged by Alabama Power. The utility says the fees are needed to provide backup power for customers. But critics say the fees are some of the highest in the nation and make it harder for people to use alternative energy sources. “It’s discouraging the use of solar,” said Keith Johnston, managing attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center’s Birmingham office. “We call it a solar tax.” The fee is based on the size of the solar system, so a five kilowatt system would have a monthly fee of $25. The average solar panel setup for a home costs about $10,000, according to the environmental law center. The fees add another $9,000 over the 30-year-lifespan of a system, dramatically increasing a homeowner’s cost and reducing any financial benefit they see from solar, the law group said. Johnston says they haven’t found a large investor-owned utility with fees as high as those being charged in Alabama. “It’s definitely one of the highest.” The petition asks the commission to bar Alabama Power from collecting the fee. Alabama Power is asking utility regulators to dismiss the complaint. They said the $5 fee is actually not enough and are asking to be allowed to increase the charge to $5.42 per kilowatt. Alabama Power said there is an important reason for the fees: The company has to maintain power grid infrastructure to provide backup power if the panels don’t provide enough energy. “There is a cost to having back-up power available to customers, including customers with solar systems who remain tied to the grid for backup service,” Alabama Power spokesman Michael Sznajderman said. He said the capacity reservation charge applies to anyone who has some type of onsite generation and still needs backup from the grid. People who go off grid “avoid any and all costs related to Alabama Power serving them,” he said. He said the company believes it has a compelling case in the upcoming hearing and is “focused on protecting all our customers and ensuring that those who use certain services pay for those services.” The issue of fees has arisen in New Mexico, Arizona and other states, causing clashes between renewable energy proponents and utilities. A power company in Iowa unsuccessfully pushed lawmakers to approve a fee that would require a homeowner with an average solar array to pay about $27 a month. “I think they are really intended to discourage customers from installing solar,” Gwen Farnsworth, a senior energy policy adviser with Western Resource Advocates, a Colorado-based conservation group. Farnsworth said the Alabama charge is “quite high.” Teresa Thorne, 65, had a four kilowatt system installed on her roof in Blount County, Alabama. She wanted to support solar and maybe in the process save a little money on her power bill. The $5-per-kilowatt capacity charge amounts to an extra $20 on her power bill. She said while that doesn’t sound like much, it slashes the savings she expected to see after investing thousands of dollars to install the system. “It cuts my savings in half,” Thorne said. Thorne said she tells people interested in solar for economic reasons that the fees make it not “economically feasible to do it in my opinion.” “I would not have done it if I’d known. That’s the bottom line. If I truly understood it was going to cost me half of the savings,” Thorne said. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Cahaba Beach Road project causing contention between ALDOT and environmental groups
Environmental groups in the Birmingham area have joined together to keep ALDOT‘s Cahaba Beach Road project from being built. The new road would stretch across the Little Cahaba River from U.S. 280, allowing over 8,000 cars a day to travel across an environmentally sensitive area, and cost anywhere from $10 million to $20 million WBHM reported. According to Save the Cahaba, the river is vital for the areas drinking water as the Little Cahaba River is the connection between the Lake Purdy reservoir and the main Cahaba River. “The road would bring Highway 280 cut-through traffic across our drinking water source and is intended to open this sensitive area to private development,” Save the Cahaba said. “This would increase risks from construction, urban runoff, forest loss, heavy traffic, and a direct spill into the drinking water for the Birmingham area.” But ALDOT and other civil engineers say the road will cut down on travel time, improve access to roads on both sides of the river, and improve connectivity between U.S. 280 and the Liberty Park area. According to ALDOT’s “next steps” listed on the project’s website; they will be conducting several different environmental analysis before proceeding with the project. ALDOT is considering several alternatives, including not building the road at all. On Tuesday, ALDOT is conducting a public involvement meeting which several groups, including The Cahaba River Society, Cahaba Riverkeeper, Alabama Rivers Alliance and Southern Environmental Law Center have committed to attend. During the meeting ALDOT representatives are expected to update the attendees on plans for the road, and answer any questions. According to WBHM, anyone interested in the project may comment and indicate whether or not they would like the new road to be built.
Environmentalists challenge Alabama Power’s solar fees
An environmental group claims Alabama Power Co. is wrongly charging fees that increase costs for customers who install solar panels. The Southern Environmental Law Center and others filed a complaint Thursday with the Alabama Public Service Commission challenging surcharges the utility imposes on homes, businesses and schools. The group says Alabama Power’s fees for customers with solar arrays amount to about $300 annually, cutting into savings they’d otherwise receive from using solar. It says the fees add about $9,000 in cost over the lifetime of an average solar system. Critics say the charges are depressing Alabama’s solar-power industry, which trails much of the nation. The petition asks the commission to bar Alabama Power from collecting the additional charge. Alabama Power says it was reviewing the complaint and declined further comment Friday. The utility-regulating Public Service Commission let the charges take effect about five years ago. Most people with rooftop solar arrays also purchase power from utilities, and the fee is charged in addition to customers’ normal bill for electricity. The Southern Environmental Law Center and a Birmingham-based law firm, Ragsdale LLC, filed the complaint on behalf of two people and Gasp Inc., which advocates energy production that reduces air pollution. Gasp executive director Michael Hansen, in a statement, said neighboring states are experiencing business and job growth linked to the solar energy industry that largely is bypassing Alabama because of the utility’s policies. “If solar customers were treated fairly, Alabama would have the opportunity to reap these same benefits,” he said. Alabama Power is a subsidiary of the Atlanta-based Southern Co. Utility regulators in neighboring Georgia rejected a similar solar surcharge proposed there by Georgia Power Co., also a Southern Co. subsidiary, in 2013. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Conservation groups sue over abandoned Alabama mine
Conservation groups are suing the Birmingham-based Drummond Co. over an abandoned coal mine. The federal lawsuit contends the old Maxine Mine is discharging polluted, acidic water into the Locust Fork of the Black Warrior River. The complaint filed by the Southern Environmental Law Center, Black Warrior Riverkeeper and Public Justice. The groups say mine waste has filled in what was once a tributary of the stream. The suit asks a judge to make the company clean up the waste and restore the polluted streams. Drummond hasn’t responded to an email seeking comment. The groups say hundreds of abandoned mine are located in the Black Warrior basin, and the Maxine site is one of the worst. Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
