EnviroPolitics Blog

74-year-old retiree helps track down abandonned Pa gas wells

By Kate Huangpu / Spotlight PA / Oct. 7, 2026

BRADFORD — Driving into Bradford, Barbara Laxon tells people to look out for the flare coming from the oil refinery running along the town.

At 74, Laxon spends much of her free time taking people on tours to show the traces of the oil and gas industry in her town — from an oil jack located in the parking lot of a McDonald’s to hidden wellbores near a local elementary school.

After exploring town, Laxon leads people into Allegheny National Forest to find abandoned oil wells. Parking on the side of the highway, she guides visitors carefully through swampy woods, warning them to watch their step.

“We would take the little side roads and just walk up the roads and see if we could see anything,” Laxon said. “You could see the slimy, shiny, brownish stuff trailing down the side of the hill.”

Pennsylvania has thousands of these wells. The full number is unknown, but estimates range from around 20,000 to as high as 750,000. They can emit methane, a greenhouse gas 25 times more potent at trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, and leak toxic substances that pollute their surroundings.

According to state law, operators of wells are responsible for plugging them. When an owner can’t be identified, or when the well is older than the 1984 state law that regulates oil and gas drilling, the Department of Environmental Protection is responsible for the plugging.

But in practice, companies often skip out on their responsibilities, leaving the state responsible for a steadily increasing bill. A 2022 state report found a “culture of non-compliance” in the industry, particularly with regard to “improper abandonment of oil and gas wells.

Enviro groups split over bipartisan clean-energy deal

Environmental trade-offs

By Leslie Kaufman and Zahra Hirji

When Senate negotiators unveiled a sweeping permitting reform deal last week, clean-energy advocates welcomed provisions intended to speed construction of renewable energy and long-distance power lines.

Now, however, many environmental groups are pushing back over what could be sacrificed to get those projects built — and questioning whether the bipartisan deal would deliver enough clean energy in return.

The debate is still in early stages. A Senate vote isn’t expected until after the midterm elections, when the political landscape could look very different, and the 417-page bill could change substantially along the way. But the initial reactions are beginning to reveal some of the biggest fault lines.

Environmental groups have raised concerns that fall broadly into three areas: changes to the Endangered Species Act, rollbacks to Clean Water Act protections and, more fundamentally, whether longstanding safeguards for nature would be lost without securing enough renewable energy in return.

Tidal wetlands near Newark, California. Photographer: Sam Hall/Bloomberg

The Sierra Club cautioned that the deal could also end up boosting fossil-fuel projects more than renewables. “There is no task more urgent than building clean energy and transmission,” the nonprofit’s Chief Program Officer Holly Bender said in a statement. But the legislation “cannot guarantee that more wind and solar projects will actually get built” while the Trump administration continues to block projects, she warned, and other provisions would provide immediate benefits to oil and gas companies.

On Tuesday, more than 200 organizations, including the Center for Biological Diversity and Friends of the Earth, sent a letter to Senate Democratic leaders opposing provisions they say would weaken the Endangered Species Act, one of the country’s foundational conservation laws. Among other changes, the draft bill would alter the “best available science” standard agencies use when deciding whether to list species as endangered and whether federal actions could affect them once listed. It would also allow states to take over some consultations currently handled by federal wildlife agencies.

AI developers, unable to woo Pa opponents on merits, try bribery

By Rudy Miller | For lehighvalleylive.com

Every household in Hazle Township would get $10,000. That’s free money. No strings attached. All residents would have to do is give a thumbs up to a hyperscale data center in their backyard.

In this former Pennsylvania coal community where 17% are living under the poverty level, that money could go a long way and arrive in short order as soon as the first building of the data center receives a certificate of occupancy.

But something extraordinary happened. Hazle Township residents started saying “no.” Lots of them.

“Get it out of here. That’s all I have to say. We don’t want it,” said Hazle Township resident Bob Kusiak.

There seemed a devious overtone to the offer, fellow Hazle Township resident Brian Malloy said, adding “it’s like bribery.”

The tech industry sees data centers as an inevitable consequence of the information age. And they’ve gone to extraordinary lengths nationwide to secure new sites, from backroom deals to NDAs, from paying premium prices for land to running dark money campaigns, all the way to forcing their way into reluctant areas with lawsuits. But in northeast Pennsylvania they’ve tried more carrot than stick.

AI developers, unable to woo Pa opponents on merits, try bribery Read More »

Pennsylvania House Sends Bipartisan Legislation to Expand Battery Storage to the Senate

H.B. 2380 would require electric utilities to set targets and procure grid-stabilizing battery storage as part of their resource planning

HARRISBURG, PA – Today, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives passed legislation that would require electric utilities to set targets for and procure 3.5 GWs of battery storage.

“The nor’easter in September was a good reminder that you prepare for a storm before it hits, not after. The same goes for the electric grid. Battery storage gives Pennsylvania a way to put energy in reserve when it’s plentiful, so it’s ready when demand spikes. That flexibility can help keep the grid reliable, make better use of the infrastructure we already have and keep costs down for consumers,” said Chris D’Agostino, Pennsylvania Principal at the trade association Advanced Energy United.

Acccording to Advanced Energy United:

Battery storage can help reduce the need for additional generation and infrastructure to serve a limited number of peak-demand hours. By shifting electricity use across hours, storage can help utilities better manage system demand, improve grid flexibility and defer costly transmission and distribution upgrades.
Batteries promote affordability, potentially saving $397 million in grid costs, translating to an extra $29 per household per year.
Energy storage reduces blackouts and brownouts: In Texas, the risk of grid emergencies during the summer peak fell from 16 to 1 percent over the course of a year due to increased battery storage deployment

The legislation now heads to the Pennsylvania Senate for consideration.

____________________________________________________
Daily energy and environment updates. Free 30-day subscription

Pennsylvania House Sends Bipartisan Legislation to Expand Battery Storage to the Senate Read More »

Green groups sue Trump over eased vehicle fuel economy rules

By The Associated Press, Updated: 6:11 AM CDT Oct 4, 2026

A group of environmental organizations sued the Trump administration on Friday over its recent relaxation of key vehicle fuel economy rules, a decision that the group says will make vehicles less efficient, contribute to more pollution and increase gas consumption.

Related video: Trump touts G7 plan to release oil and diesel reserves to address high prices

On Monday, the Trump administration lowered Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, standards that set out how far new vehicles need to travel on a gallon of gasoline. The announcement was made as the Trump administration negotiated with Iran over reopening the Strait of Hormuz.

About a fifth of the world’s oil passes through the strait on a typical day, and the fight over its control has sent energy prices soaring across the globe.

The environmental groups filed the petition for review Friday in the U.S. Court of Appeals against Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and Jonathan Morrison, the administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which sets the rules.

“We’re taking the Trump administration to court for this reckless rollback that prioritizes Big Oil and automaker profits over American families,” Katherine Garcia, director of Sierra Club’s Clean Transportation for All program, said in a statement. “It is unlawful for Trump to turn back the clock on fuel-efficient cars, forcing drivers to waste more money on gas and communities to breathe toxic air.”

The Center for Biological Diversity, the Conservation Law Foundation, the Environmental Defense Fund, and Public Citizen, along with the Sierra Club, filed the suit.

You can’t see the forest for the trees, so cut them down

By Jeff Tittel, Jersey Vindicator, Oct 2, 2026

New Jersey has come up with a strange new conservation philosophy: destroy the forest to save it.

The state says it wants to restore Atlantic white cedar in the Pinelands. That goal is important. Atlantic white cedar forests are disappearing, threatened by sea-level rise, saltwater intrusion, altered hydrology, deer browsing, and a long history of logging and development. New Jersey once had roughly 115,000 acres of Atlantic white cedar; today, fewer than 25,000 acres remain.

But if the answer to losing forests is to bring in heavy equipment, clear-cut public forests and use herbicides, we need to ask a very basic question: At what point does restoration start looking an awful lot like destruction?

This is a clear-cut problem

The New Jersey Forest Service’s Atlantic White Cedar Restoration Project is a massive effort: a $20 million, 10-year program intended to restore about 10,000 acres. The money comes from natural resource damage settlements involving groundwater pollution. The state says the project will help restore cedar forests, protect water resources, and increase climate resilience.

But public money recovered because polluters damaged New Jersey’s natural resources should be used with extraordinary care. It should not become a blank check for industrial-style forestry on public lands.

The Pinelands were preserved for future generations. They were not preserved so that commercial logging interests could treat public forests like a timber farm.

Read more here

____________________________________________________
Daily energy and environment updates. Free 30-day subscription

You can’t see the forest for the trees, so cut them down Read More »