Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

“Given the Yadkin River’s broad impact on the state, we believe strongly that the state is the most appropriate body to plan use of this invaluable natural resource, to help assure the region’s municipal water supply and quality and to facilitate future growth and development,” Perdue stated.

“Given the Yadkin River’s broad impact on the state, we believe strongly that the state is the most appropriate body to plan use of this invaluable natural resource, to help assure the region’s municipal water supply and quality and to facilitate future growth and development,” Perdue stated.

One of the first legislators to take their side was NC Sen. Fletcher L. Hartsell Jr., who represents Cabarrus and Iredell counties. Hartsell came on board with the Yadkin River Coalition two years ago after meeting with Dick, Jim Nance, a former board member of the NC Department of Transportation, and Stanly County Commissioner Lindsey Dunevant at his legislative offices in Raleigh.

But after he studied the Federal Power Act, he became fascinated with the issue of Alcoa attempting to maintain its monopoly over the 38-mile stretch of the Yadkin. Convinced of the appropriateness of the coalition’s cause, Hartsell signed on and recruited fellow Republican state senator, Stan Bingham.

“As far as I’m concerned, Alcoa got the gold mine and we got the shaft,” Bingham said

“The little town of Denton is having to pay [Alcoa] for the use of the water coming down the Yadkin for drinking,” Bingham said. “The way that’s calculated is they charge because it’s a loss of power generation…. This whole thing was done many, many years ago, and a lot of people didn’t think about the people they were dealing with at the time.”

“Alcoa and others keep talking about it being a ‘taking’ [of property],” Hartsell said. “It’s not a taking; it’s not even close to it. All we’re asking Alcoa to do is to fulfill the obligations that were identified in 1958 that they agreed to.”

“They acknowledged when the license was up, they no longer had the right to use the property,” Hartsell explained. “We’re saying there needs to be an equivalency for the run of our river, and when I say ‘our,’ I mean everybody’s. It’s not a private entity. The feds and the state have had control of the run of the rivers since the beginning of the republic.” The language of the Federal Power Act includes a stipulation that the controlling entity, in this case Alcoa, must estimate the recapture value of the resource in the event it must surrender the rights to that resource, Hartsell said. “There is a statutory formula for how you calculate recapture and Alcoa computed it to be $24.2 million in 2006,” Hartsell said.

Yadkin River Trust Bil

The bill clearly outlines the three primary issues at stake — A) who controls the waters of the Yadkin for the next 50 years; B) the environmental issue related to the condition or quality of the water itself and the immediate environs; and C) the use of the electricity generated by the run of the river.

“[Alcoa] signed an agreement. We’re just asking them to live up to their own word,” he said. “The state of North Carolina intervened 50 years ago on Alcoa’s behalf to assist them to get a 50-year license and operate the plant at Badin, but conditions have changed dramatically. If they’re going to use it, what is the return to the people of the state on the state’s investment in the raw material, which is the water? That water is owned by the people.”

Alcoa’s re-licensing application represents “the mother of all incentives,” Hartsell said. “They want the state to concede they should have $1 billion in benefit over the next 50 years and provide nothing to the state,” he said.

“Why should we give it away?” Hartsell continued. “From an economic development perspective, energy is the major issue associated with job growth and development regardless of the industry.”

“We’re dealing with John Dillinger and Al Capone,” Bingham said. “Alcoa reaps [millions] in profits each year and North Carolina gets zilch.”

An environmental study commissioned by Stanly County and conducted by professor John Rodgers of Clemson University last year established a connection between contami nation of polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, in fish and soil samples taken from Badin Lake near Alcoa’s Badin Works operation. Rodgers’ findings led the Yadkin River Coalition to appeal the waterquality certification issued by the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, or DENR. Administrative Law Judge Joe Webster granted an injunction on May 26 prohibiting DENR from issuing a 401 Water Quality Certification to Alcoa until the full appeal is heard.

The state issued a fish-consumption advisory for Badin Lake between Stanly and Montgomery counties last February due to elevated levels of PCBs found in largemouth bass and catfish

Bingham said Alcoa’s objection to the posting of the fish-consumption advisory speaks volumes about their concern for the people who swim and fish at Badin Lake.

“It just tells me how they do business,” Bingham said. “They fought the fish-advisory signs; they say we’re taking their property and we have no rights to the water. We’re stuck with the bastards, at least for the moment, but I feel good about the direction of the fight we’re taking on in the future.”

Naujoks said he’s concerned about the high concentration of PCBs in the landfills and dumping sites near Alcoa’s four hydroelectric dams. Naujoks said Alcoa has not been entirely forthcoming about the number of waste dumping sites in and around their facilities.

They’re not showing us where all the buried bodies are found. As we start digging down through the layers, we’re going to find much more.”

“Alcoa knows they can’t hide these dumping sites,” Naujoks said

A PROMISING FUTURE Bingham said once Perdue joined the Yadkin River Coalition, it changed everything. “It’s been wonderful; it’s been extremely important,” he said. “We were facing a multi-billion-dollar corporation, but when the governor lis tened to our pleas, they began to take this extremely seriously. They realized they’re in for a fight.”

Bingham said the coalition will never quit until the Yadkin River is returned to the people of North Carolina.

“Our legal case could take years to resolve, but the campaign to support the legislation through the coalition and FERC re-licensing could be decided within the next year,” he said. “We will work on a targeted campaign to unify and strengthen grassroots efforts of local governments, public interest organizations, businesses and individuals to reclaim the waters of the Yadkin River to benefit the public interest.”

Bingham said he can see a day in the near future when the Yadkin is returned to the people and the economy of the 25 counties in the Yadkin River Basin begin to flourish.

The NC Department of Health and Human Services issued a fish-consumption advisory last February on Badin Lake after high levels of PCBs were found in fish tissue samples. Alcoa unsuccessfully filed a legal challenge to the advisory last April. The advisory remains in effect.

We can offer industry power at a reduced rate and that plays a big part in manufacturing,” he said. “That would be a tremendous incentive. For years, we’ve stood by the sidelines and watched industries go elsewhere. We don’t have anything to offer industry

72% of North Carolina registered voters said no to Alcoa being granted a new 50-year license, while 76% stated that they would prefer that a “public trust” control the Yadkin River and use the hydroelectricity as an incentive to bring jobs to North Carolina. The majority of voters (60%) also indicated that they were usually skeptical when a multinational corporation like Alcoa tells a community they will provide permanent jobs. The majority of voters (58%) also agree with the statement “Every effort must be made to protect our water resources, even if it makes recruitment of industry more difficult.”  An overwhelming majority of voters (74%) support Governor Perdue’s opposition to a new 50-year license for Alcoa to control the Yadkin River because she believes the waters of the Yadkin River belong to the people of North Carolina and should be used to help create new jobs and economic opportunity for the region.

We were concerned that the Yadkin relicensing issue was being seen as a local Stanly County issue, and that the opinions of residents throughout the entire river basin were not being heard.  We also see this as a major public policy issue that has implications for the entire state.  The control of water resources is immensely important as we plan for future growth in terms of drinking water, but also for clean, renewable energy. 

And investing in natural and energy resources is a nice way to hedge against future increases in commodity prices, though large-scale resource investment may make some in developed nations nervous.

This is not “compelling”… it is unreasonable.

It is not proper for parties to share incomplete information via the press in these types of proceedings until the discussions yield an agreement or officially cease.  Neither has occurred.

From the beginning, the County’s goals have been to ensure: (1) that the river is environmentally protected for generations to come, (2) that the use of water from the Yadkin River is best determined by citizens of North Carolina, and (3) that the flow of the river is used to maximize the impact of its resources for the benefit of its citizens.  

The goal of environmental protection is being addressed in the state 401 water quality permit process and includes the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Alcoa/APGI, Stanly County and the Yadkin Riverkeeper.

he County believes its intervention in this process will lead to numerous water quality improvements.

(1) The Board of Commissioners is legally responsible for the public health and well-being of its citizens.  These basic environmental protection measures will lead to cleaner surface and ground water for our citizens now and for generations to come.  It is impossible to put a price tag on the value of one citizen’s life or well-being.   (2) The value of water will only increase as growth demands in the Charlotte region, Piedmont Triad and along the I-85 corridor strain our available water resources.  Regional organizations to the east and west of the Yadkin River basin are planning for water use over the coming decades and our citizens need to be doing the same. (3) The water of the Yadkin belongs to the people and has tremendous value from an electrical generation perspective.  The benefits should not simply be given away to a global corporation to support its operations in other states and foreign countries. This simply transfers wealth out of our community and that is unacceptable. 

The County is seeking fair and reasonable compensation for the long-term use of the river.

We, as Commissioners, will continue to seek the best outcome for Stanly County.

  Should our citizens accept a static amount for a settlement when the value of the resource will increase exponentially over the term of the license?

  However, without long-term financial assurances these jobs and the associated taxable investment will remain over the course of a 30, 40 or 50 year license term, it would not be wise to simply drop our reasonable demands.

I’m so proud of (and awed by) the Commissioners for thinking of the bigger picture and the long term needs of the community. This is nothing short of blackmail — and failing that, bribery! –on Alcoa’s part. The only reason they’ve ever offered anything is because of the Commissioner’s strong stand against a massive corporate giveaway. Good for you Commissioners! I salute you.

Stanly County upheld its end of the bargain for 50 years. It’s time to reclaim use of the water for the betterment of all Yadkin Valley communities. Looks to me like Alcoa is the one stalling, not the commissioners.

We must put our fate in our own hands not with a corporation who has no responsibility to our region or our state.

I applaud the Commissioners’ continued resolve to do what is in the best interests of our citizens. Future prosperity in Stanly County depends on the Yadkin hydropower. Since the beginning of time, communities have only thrived because of their access to water …for drinking, recreation, trade and fuel. Had our water not been under the control of Alcoa for the last 50 years, we would be in much better shape economically. By leveraging the Yadkin hydropower, we could have already replaced our lost manufacturing jobs with higher paying jobs that reflect the needs of the 21st century. We would be absolute fools to once again relinquish control of our waters to Alcoa for another 50 years. We need to reserve the flexibility to control our own destiny—not “outsource” it to a multinational corporation that has a poor record of stewardship and corporate responsibility in our region.

“Since the operation of the Badin smelting works is dependent upon the availability of power supply, Carolina Aluminum must regard its smelting activities at Badin to be limited to the term of the license of the Yadkin Project, which is its source of power supply. In formulating its plans, and weighing the advisability of the $37,000,000 program, the management of Carolina Aluminum had to assume, therefore, that power would be available from the Yadkin Project at economically feasible rates only during the original license term. Under Section 14 of the Act, any project may be “recaptured” at the expiration of the license term. In formulating its plans, therefore, the management of Carolina Aluminum could not rely upon any assured source of power supply after the expiration of its license for the Yadkin Project”

The “project properties” are held in trust by the Government for the people. It is the “project properties” that a multi-national, foreign controlled, private enterprise is trying to “hijack” away from “we the people”.

Alcoa has never owned “the riverbed”. The do pay taxes in an attempt to lay claim to the riverbed. The state constitution and federal law does not support their claim. With that said, refer back to the 1958 license agreement. Alcoa gave up rights to the submerged land “the project property” in exchange for the monopoly use of the water as free fuel for a guaranteed profit for 50 years. Article 14 of the The Federal Power Act clearly spells out the option Alcoa gave the Federal Government in exchange for the use of the “peoples waters”.

Now, China appears to be making another bold play to capture the natural resources it needs to fuel its fast-growing economy.

Most of the $14 billion came from Chinalco, which is ultimately controlled by the government in Beijing. Alcoa, which is based in Pittsburgh, contributed only about $1.2 billion to purchase the Rio stake.

"We believe that the Chinese recognize that control will likely be elusive — if not impossible — and that ownership of its raw material resources is key to the future.”

The statement, analysts say, was a hint that the two could team up with other companies or entities, possibly from China, to bid for all of Rio and wage a tough takeover battle with BHP, driving up the price of Rio shares.

partly because of suspicions that the Chinese government could be behind the deal.

Neither Chinalco nor Alcoa have the cash or stock to make a $150 billion bid, analysts say. Shares of Alcoa are worth about $30 billion and Chinalco shares in China are worth about $50 billion.

China’s new venture with Kazakhstan deviates from the “oil-for-loans” formula. The $5 billion loan from CNPC will give Chinese oil firms a 50 percent stake in the joint purchase of MangistauMunaiGaz (MMG), Kazakhstan’s biggest private oil and gas company (Reuters, April 17). This deal is more like a “loan-for-oil assets” transaction than one of “loan-for-promised-oil supply," which characterizes the previous three contracts, and CNPC will receive half of the oil that will be produced by the jointly owned MMG (the other 50 percent will be owned by the Kazak state-owned firm KazMunaiGas).

The recent large energy activities are not the first time Chinese NOCs have entered “loans-for-oil” deals. In 2004, Chinese banks financed Rosneft’s acquisition of Yuganskneftegaz with a $6 billion loan and CNPC received a pledge of long-term supply contracts via rail in exchange (Platts Community News, February 19)

These “loans-for-oil” activities will remain an active component of the Chinese overseas resource acquisition strategy given the current global economic and energy conditions.

In the U.S. public discourse, the big strain in the American-Chinese economic relationship is the yuan, and what many Americans view as the government-manipulated undervaluation of the Chinese currency.

“It is going to be the biggest economy in the world,” Immelt said of China. “The only question is when.”

the American consumer was the definitive driver of the global economy.” But Immelt said the future will be different. For the next 25 years, he said, the American consumer “is not going to be the engine of global growth. It is going to be the billion people joining the middle class in Asia, it is going to be what the resource-rich countries do with their new-found wealth of high oil prices. That’s the game.” A lot of that game will be played in China. At a moment when it is compulsory on the American right to pay homage to the exceptionalism of the United States, Immelt, a life-long Republican, is matter-of-fact about China’s inevitable rise.