Will New Hampshire Ratepayers be Forced to Pay More for Dirty Energy?

New Hampshire legislators will be voting on September 13, 2018 on whether to override the governor's veto of SB365, a bill that would provide $68 million in subsidies to seven of the state's 13 largest industrial air polluters: the trash incinerator in Concord, and six tree-burning "biomass" incinerators. This would raise the rates of Eversource and Unitil customers by at an estimated $60-75/year (and possibly as much as $120/year), according to state agencies. There is no clean energy in this bill -- only dirty energy subsidies. Please help stop us SB 365, by taking action below.

See our new factsheet: The Double Cost of Biomass Incineration - factsheet on how New Hampshire Senate Bill 365 would subsidize seven uneconomical biomass and trash incinerators in the state, hitting our health AND pocketbooks.

Incinerators are the biggest polluters in nearly half of New Hampshire's counties:

Senate Bill 365 would force Unitil and Eversource customers to pay about $60 more per year according to the bill's own analysis by the NH Public Utility Commission. See pages 6-8 here. The state's Office of Consumer Advocate has indicated it could be as much as twice that amount.

This is to protect seven uneconomical incinerators, six that burn trees, and one in Concord that burns trash, feeding many millions per year to these companies. These facilities are among the state's 13 largest air polluters. Spread throughout half of the state's counties, most are the largest air polluters in their counties, by far. See the factsheet for details.


  1. Sign onto this alert to email your state representatives.
  2. Follow up with a phone call to your state representatives, asking them NOT to override the veto on SB 365.
    Find your reps here.

  3. If you're on Facebook, or other social media, please share this video!

Groups opposing SB 365:

  • Action Collaborative for Transition to Sustainability Now (ACTS Now)
  • Energy Justice Network
  • Partnership for Policy Integrity
  • Seacoast Anti-Pollution League
  • Sierra Club - NH Chapter
  • Toxics Action Center Campaigns
  • Working on Waste

For more background on trash and biomass incineration, see this recent article summarizing biomass health impacts on workers and communities, our Woody Biomass Factsheet, our biomass page and our trash incineration page.

Connecticut: Don't replace incineration with more burning!

Hartford incineratorHartford, Connecticut is home to an aging and very polluting trash incinerator that the state would like to close. This state-run incinerator serves 70 Connecticut towns and is the county's second largest air polluter. Shutting it down is a great idea, but...

Connecticut's Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) only considered three proposals to replace the incinerator -- all of which involved more incineration!

Crayola: Burning Plastic Markers is NOT Recycling!

Click to take action!

Crayola ColorCycle program: Burning markers is NOT recycling!


In 2012, a group of elementary school students started a Crayola: Make Your Mark! petition calling for Crayola to "make sure these markers don't end up in our landfills, incinerators and oceans."  The petition gathered over 90,000 petition signers.  In 2013, Crayola launched their ColorCycle program, but won't admit that the student campaign was the catalyst for this program.

Crayola initially sent these markers to JBI's "plastics to oil" facility in Niagara, New York.  This experimental operation closed down in December 2013 and remains idle, with the company claiming financial reasons (as have similar companies trying this failed plastics pyrolysis technology).

Crayola admits that its whole markers are not recyclable.  They refuse to disclose which companies or facilities are processing the markers collected in their "ColorCycle" program, but claim that their "ColorCycle program repurposes the entire marker and turns it into reusable alternatives such as oil, electricity and wax."

Burning is NOT recycling!

Crayola admits that their initial plastics-to-oil scheme didn't work out, yet is still pursuing polluting and experimental incineration and pyrolysis schemes in communities they refuse to name.

Plastics-to-oil technology (pyrolysis) is very experimental, with various small demonstration facilities usually failing for technical and/or economic reasons, as JBI did.  Pyrolysis is similar to incineration in that it's expensive and polluting, destroying materials, releasing toxins and waste products, and creating new toxic chemicals in the process.

Crayola also indicates that they're sending "ColorCycled" markers to be burned in trash incinerators.  They state that they're using them to "generate electricity in the United States" and refer to "Energy from Waste plants," pretending that they "are a clean, reliable, and renewable source of energy that produces electricity with little environmental impact."  This can only describe trash incinerators, most of which have rebranded themselves as "waste to energy" or "energy from waste" facilities.

In fact, trash incinerators are the most expensive and polluting way to manage waste or to make energy -- dirtier than coal power plants, and dirtier than landfills.  They turn waste into toxic ash (which goes to landfills, anyway) and toxic air pollution.  They release pollutants like nitrogen oxides, lead, mercury, and dioxin that contribute to ADHD, asthma, birth defects, cancer, learning disabilities, reduced IQ, violent behavior and many other health problems.  This is not what a company should be doing if they "believe every child should have a healthy planet for their creative todays and tomorrows" as they claim.

In fact, the elementary school students who initially demanded marker recycling from Crayola specifically called for "Crayola to make sure these markers don't end up in our landfills, incinerators and oceans."

It's time for Crayola to come clean.  Please sign this petition demanding that Crayola:

  • be transparent about the specific facilities and processes where their ColorCycled markers are going,
  • immediately stop supporting trash incinerators and incinerator-like pyrolysis schemes,
  • redesign their markers so that they're refillable and 100% recyclable, and
  • actually recycle the markers they collect.

Please email or call Mike at 215-436-9511 with any questions.

Our first victory of 2017! Hazardous waste incinerator defeated in the heart of gasland.

On March 29th, 2017, a rural township in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania, passed a local clean air law based on one we drafted for them in June 2016. It may be the first in the country to contain a "citizen suit" provision, allowing any Township resident or taxpayer to sue to enforce the ordinance if the government isn't doing its job.

On January 10th, Tyler Corners LP nixed their plans for a hazardous waste incinerator in New Milford Township, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania due in part to a "cold public reception."

In 2014, we helped defeat a related hazardous waste incinerator proposal by "Route 13 Bristol Partners LP" for Bristol Township, Bucks County, PA. Right after that, the same players started working to relocate in Susquehanna County, the heavily fracked rural community in northeastern Pennsylvania from where the Gasland film came. In this latest effort, they were joined by businessman Louis DeNaples, well known as a powerful organized crime figure in the region and owner of a landfill near Scranton.

Pennsylvania College Students Tell Wolf: No New Pipelines, Green Jobs Now

On Monday, students from 19 Pennsylvania colleges and universities delivered a statement to Governor Tom Wolf's Capitol office demanding no new natural gas pipelines and immediate investment in green jobs.

The students are attending Pennsylvania Student Power Spring Break near Harrisburg, an alternative spring break program for students working on social, economic, and environmental justice issues across the state.

Incinerator Victory in Muncy, Pennsylvania!

Just in time for the holidays, residents of the rural town of Muncy, PA just had their local borough council pass into law a set-back distance ordinance we wrote. It prohibits any new facilities requiring a state air pollution or waste permit from locating within 900 feet of an occupied dwelling, school, park, or playground.

This effectively blocks Delta Thermo Energy, a company we've been fighting for several years, having stopped them in 2014 from locating in the City of Allentown, PA. They planned to take 100-200 tons per day of trash and sewage sludge, turn it into "fuel pellets" through a "hydrothermal decomposition" process, then incinerate these waste pellets on-site. Of course, their magical process exploits an EPA loophole, allowing this waste not to be considered a waste anymore, so they can be regulated less strictly -- as a boiler or power plant, not as an incinerator.

They came to Muncy, PA in the summer of 2016, proposing the same, but after facing resistance, the proposal soon became one to just make the pellets, and market them to be burned in coal power plants in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia. EPA's Clean Power Plan, and their Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials ("waste = fuel") rule incentivize this. While the Clean Power Plan is dead for now, the other incentives may continue, and could encourage coal plants to stay open longer than they otherwise would, and become dirtier by starting to burn waste without additional pollution controls.

Delta Thermo Energy has been unusually tenacious. Most companies give up after one or a few times being rejected. We expect to have to beat them again soon, as rumor has it that they may be looking at more sites near Muncy. They brag about having 22 local governments interested between Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and we know of several that have already rejected them. Keep an eye out, and be in touch with us if they (or any other polluters) are coming your way!

Don't try this at home... without our help.

We'd love to work with other communities to get protective local ordinances passed to stop proposed or potential polluters, or to even set stricter requirements for existing facilities where possible. Please be in touch if you'd like to work together on this approach in your community. Do not simply copy ordinances we've had passed elsewhere. While most of the Muncy ordinance is as we proposed, some good things were removed or kept out, and it could have been stronger in some regards. Every community is different, so feel free to check out the resources we have on stopping polluters with local ordinances, but contact us to help develop a strategy that makes sense for your situation. Thanks!

Mapping Change in Median Household Income

I recently updated the Income Layer on Justice Map to use the latest 2011-2015 American Community Survey data.

You can view the data by county or by census tract (roughly 4000 people). While census tracts provide higher resolution that helps us identify areas of environmental injustice, unfortunately the confidence interval is much larger. So there is a lot of noise in the data. If you are looking at the income layer and see a random checkerboard of blue and red - that is noisy data.

As part of this process, I added a Income Change layer that shows the change in median household income between the first period (2006-2010) and a second period (2011-2015).

It is easiest to see the trend in changing income by looking at the counties. The census tract data is even noisier than the regular income data, as the confidence interval is approximately twice as large. However where there are strong trends - like gentrification in DC and Philadelphia you can easily see them at the tract level.

Click on the map to learn how income has been changing in your community!

Change in Median Household Income

Where U.S. Energy Comes From:

Want to know where U.S. energy currently comes from? Check out this new series of charts we just updated, based on data through August 2016, with projections for all of 2016. Find all of them here: www.energyjustice.net/energysources

U.S. Energy Sources


Here are some of the highlights:

  • Overall energy demand peaked in 2007. Energy demand is broken down into electricity, transportation and heating sectors. Electricity and transportation sector energy use also both peaked in 2007. Heating sector peaked in 1970.
  • Oil, gas, then coal are still our top three energy sources, followed by nuclear in 4th place.
  • Coal use is falling dramatically, while gas use is rising dramatically. In 2012, gas overtook nuclear as the second largest electricity source after coal. Gas will soon overtake coal as well.
  • As we predicted, the largest sector of natural gas use is now for electricity (overtaking the industrial heating sector), as we're in the middle of a second wave of construction of gas-fired power plants, with at least 300-some proposed in recent years, many of which are now online. We still import more LNG than we export, so the gas market is largely feeding electric power plants, not exports.
  • Despite several nuclear reactors closing in recent years, nuclear energy use is steady and slightly increasing (existing plants are being run harder).
  • Wind and solar are growing fast, but are still small.
  • Bioenergy is still the largest form of "renewable" energy, even though it's dirty, and worse for the climate than coal. Thankfully, it's stagnating since 2014 and stopped its rapid increase.
  • Heating fuel use is down a lot since 2014, probably due to global warming and record high temperatures, since it's mostly residential and commercial heating. Industrial heating (the largest part of it) hasn't fallen much in that time.
  • Biomass incineration peaked in 2014 and is now falling, thanks in large part to our activist network fighting off so many proposed facilities. Wood for home heating is falling fast, which is also good.

See more at www.energyjustice.net/energysources

Incinerator Victory in Prince George's County, Maryland!

Robin Lewis
Robin Lewis,
Energy Justice Network Organizer

Prince George's County, Maryland -- the nation's wealthiest African-American county, just outside of Washington, DC -- has been courting waste incinerator companies to build a new facility in a community that already has multiple landfills and the state's only sewage sludge incinerator.  Energy Justice Network has been campaigning against this for the past year.  Last month, the county formally withdrew the contract process, abandoning the project altogether!

The contract process in Prince George's County was the result of the county contracting with the notoriously pro-burn solid waste consultants, Gershman, Brickner & Bratton (GBB).  The county spent over $200,000 for GBB to lead them toward a who's who of "waste-to-energy" vendors of every stripe, which got narrowed down to seven, including the two largest incinerator corporations, Covanta and Wheelabrator, plus some companies with experimental technologies such as trash-to-ethanol.  At the end of the day, the county's urgent need for an alternative to their landfill (which was supposed to close by 2020) disappeared as they found they have room until at least 2027, given increased recycling, composting and other positive Zero Waste efforts that divert trash from the landfill.

Energy Justice Network initiated a "Don't Burn Trash in Prince George's County" campaign to inform and engage the public in the activities of the County on this waste-to-energy trash disposal procurement process.  Working with individual activists and other environmental organizations such as Progressive Prince George's, Greenbelt Climate Action Network and the Prince George's Sierra Club, the County officials received numerous requests not to move forward with the Request for Proposals, the next step in the process, which was scheduled to begin in September 2016.

On August 9th, the County decided to cancel the Waste-to-Energy Request for Qualification solicitation, stating in the final notice that "IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT MAY NOT BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COUNTY AT THIS TIME."

The County says it will now schedule public input sessions on the County's Zero Waste Plan.  Last year, the County commissioned SCS Engineers to develop a Zero Waste Plan and a Waste Characterization study of the county's waste.  The Plan and the Study are due to be released to the public some time this fall.  We're working to get the County to develop a comprehensive Zero Waste Plan (a plan that follows our Zero Waste Hierarchy, and does not include burning).

Supporting the fight for Zero Waste Solutions: Robin Lewis is an African-American resident and environmental justice activist in Prince George's County whose work we need to support as we move the county away from incineration and toward genuine zero waste solutions.  If you can help support her work, please donate here: http://www.energyjustice.net/donate

This victory holds some major significance for environmental justice, for trends in Maryland, and around the country:

Environmental Justice Significance: Prince George's County, Maryland is the nation's wealthiest African-American county.  This reinforces the trend that we've documented across dirty energy and waste industries in the U.S. where race is more of a factor than class in terms of where polluting industries are located.  The county is home to the state's only sewage sludge incinerator, multiple landfills and asphalt/aggregate industries, a huge coal/gas power plant, and a cluster of three gas power plants on the way.  The proposed new "waste-to-energy" project (likely an incinerator of some sort) would have been located near the county's landfill and sludge incinerator, in the same place an incinerator was fought off about 30 years ago.

Maryland Significance: Maryland has been on the front lines of incinerator wars.  The state is still the only one to put trash incineration on par with wind power in a renewable energy mandate, where a majority of the state's "renewable" energy has come from biomass and waste burning, and landfill gas burning.  The state has also seen the most significant victories against incineration in the past decade.  Two large proposed incinerators got all of their state permits and yet were defeated by concerted opposition in the past few years, in Frederick and Baltimore.  One would have been the nation's largest, at 4,000 tons/day.  Also, earlier this year, the smallest of three remaining trash incinerators in the state (in Harford, MD) closed for good.  We still have two large incinerators and the nation's largest medical waste incinerator to close down, two of which are in Baltimore, and we're campaigning to close them.

National Significance:

This could happen to you!  GBB has consulting arrangements with city and county governments around the nation.  Unfailingly, they propose "waste-to-energy" vendors.  In Prince George's County, they drafted the Department of Environment's Request for Qualification (RFQ) to pursue waste management solutions from corporations to build one of these types of facilities in the County: incineration, trash-to-ethanol, refuse-derived fuel (trash pellets to be burned in area power plants), or trash composting using "gasification, anaerobic digestion, or other conversion method producing a fuel or energy product, such as electricity, syngas, synfuel, chemicals, steam, useable heat, and/or other commercial energy outputs."

Of the 16 respondents to the RFQ, the County selected the following 7 companies in March 2016 to be on the short list: Abengoa Bioenergy, Covanta Energy, LLC, Mustang Renewable Power, Prince George's County Waste To Energy Recovery Partners, Repower South, LLC, Shanks Waste Management Ltd., Wheelabrator Urbaser, S.A.  While the proposals were not made public, our research into these companies shows that they offer conventional incineration, gasification, trash-to-ethanol, refuse-derived fuel (trash pellets), and anaerobic digestion for municipal waste, with the digested trash either being used as fertilizer or burned for fuel.

Energy Justice Network has an ongoing open records case to try to make this information public.  In the City of Allentown, Pennsylvania, where Energy Justice led the fight that stopped an incinerator just two years ago, GBB is now contracting with the city, pursuing the same sort of "waste-to-energy" contract process.  Allentown, unlike Prince George's County, released the RFQ responses for public review.  The basics of the proposals were released to reporters and can be viewed here: http://www.mcall.com/news/local/allentown/mc-gallery-allentown-trash-proposals-20160609-storygallery.html

GBB brags on their website that they're consulting with these governments:
-Prince William County, VA
-Rutherford County and the City of Murfreesboro, TN
-Lee County, FL

We know of others we suspect they're consulting with as well.  Please reach out to us for support to beat back incinerator threats in your community.