text:
ISO New England
Archived Posts from this Category
Archived Posts from this Category
Posted by karlmeyer on 24 Jan 2019 | Tagged as: Canada, Connecticut River ecosystem, Connecticut River Refuge, Connecticut River shortnose sturgeon, Conservation Law Foundation, Endangere Species Act, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Federal Recovery Plan, federal trust fish, FERC, FERC Commissioner Neil Chatterjee, FERC licensing process, First Light Hydro Generating Company, FirstLight, Greenfield Community Television, ISO New England, MA Division of Fish and Wildlife, Maura Healey, Natalie Blais, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, NMFS, Northfield Mountain, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project, Paul Mark, Public Comment period, public trust, Rock Dam, shad, Treasury Board of Canada, Turners Falls dam, USFWS, Vermont, Vermont Yankee, Yankee Rowe Nuclear Plant
While federal fisheries stakeholders from the US Fish & Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service are shut out of the FERC relicensing process by the government shutdown, Canada-owned FirstLight Hydro Generating Company has maneuvered to split its assets on the Connecticut River. This is a slick move, and a punch in the gut to all that have been working in good faith on the understanding throughout–since 2012,that these long-co-run plants were to be covered by a single new license: per the power company's standing, 5 year-old request.
Copy and paste link directly below to see a half hour on this suspect 12th hour maneuver, filmed for later airing on Greenfield Community Television.
NOTE: FERC has extended the COMMENT, PROTEST, and INTERVENTION deadline for Stakeholder to file Motions with them until February 8, 2019. Go back to www.karlmeyerwriting.com/blog and see second blog post following this on this one on how to submit at FERC.gov on Ecomments.
Comments Off on CONNECTICUT RIVER ALERT: FERC deadline looms
Posted by karlmeyer on 26 Oct 2016 | Tagged as: American shad, climate change, Connecticut River, Connecticut River ecosystem, Connecticut River Watershed Council, Daily Hampshire Gazette, ecosystem, Entrainment, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, federally-endangered Connecticut River shortnose sturgeion, federally-endangered shortnose sturgeon, FERC, fossil fuels, Greenfield Recorder, ISO New England, MA Division of Fish and Wildlife, National Marine Fisheries Service, NMFS, NOAA, Northfield Mountain, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Reservoir, nuclear power, Public Comment period, public trust, pumped storage, Relicensing, shad, shortnose sturgeon, Society of Environmental Journalists, The Recorder, Turners Falls power canal, US Fish & Wildlife Service, USFWS, Vermont, Vermont Digger, Vermont Yankee
Copyright © 2016 by Karl Meyer
(Note: this essay appeared in September and October in these MA and VT media and newspaper outlets: Vermont Digger, www.vtdigger.org ; The Daily Hampshire Gazette; and The Recorder.)
The de-watered CT below Turners Falls Dam that few people see. (Click, then click again to enlarge.)
Rolling over on a river
Since time began rivers have been the Earth's arteries—the foundation of its ecosystems. Here in New England it's "last chance†time for our Great River. On April 30, 2018 the fate of the long-foundered Connecticut River migratory fisheries restoration—and the survival of a four-state river ecosystem, will be decided for what's essentially forever. New Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hydro licenses are expected to be signed then by government agencies and the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board–latest purchaser of the Turners Falls and Northfield Mountain projects. That company's stated investor mandate is "to maximize investment returns without undue risk of loss.â€
Over two generations ago public-trust mistakes were made favoring power companies, fish hatcheries, and high-end salmon-fishing interests that rendered eight miles of the Connecticut in Massachusetts a massively-suctioned, partially-dewatered flush sink. Sanctioned by fisheries agencies and non-profits, those decisions, severed an ecosystem in two. They forced all migrating fish into a deadly power canal, leaving three emptied miles of riverbed below Turners Falls Dam, while four turbines at the Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Station five miles upstream consumed massive amounts of nuclear energy to suck a river backward and uphill to a mountaintop reservoir.
Those turbines were built to run on the promised endless supply of overproduced juice generated nightly at the local, now-closed, Vermont Yankee nuke, 15 miles away. Today, running on giant slugs of imported fossil fuel, they continue to spin, sucking the river up in endless gulps into a 4 billion gallon pool a mile up Northfield Mountain. That daily suctioning creates riverbank eroding "tides†higher than those at Hyannisport, MA—with some rivaling the ten-foot fluctuations of Fundy Bay.
Back then, predecessors of today's National Marine Fisheries Service, the US Fish & Wildlife Service, Massachusetts' Fish & Wildlife and the Connecticut River Watershed Council signed off on an agreement with the Federal Power Commission and Western Massachusetts Electric that strangled the river in northern Massachusetts. It resulted in the failure of migratory fish passage and a promised renewal of the river's ancient seafood resources upstream to Vermont, New Hampshire, and northern Mass. Few American shad emerged alive after diversion into that canal. It also failed the shortnose sturgeon—this river's only federally endangered migratory fish, leaving it without flow or monitoring at its only documented natural spawning site.
Upstream at Northfield the destruction was yet more complete. The suck and gush appetite of that nuclear-charged contraption virtually disassembled the river. It gulped flow at a rate of 15,000 cubic feet per second, often for hours at a time—drawing on the river pool above Turners Falls Dam where, 70% of the time, the Connecticut's natural routed flow is less than 15,000 cfs. Boaters a mile downstream could find themselves drifting upriver via Northfield's unearthly pull. All fish and organisms drawn up through the sphere of that suction were deemed "functionally extirpated‖dead to the ecosystem by virtue of being sieved twice through the turbines. It was evolution in reverse, a river ripped away from its eternal run to the sea.
Today, climate-blind FERC labels Northfield as a source of "renewable clean†energy—but there's nothing clean, renewable or sustainable about its imported, twice-produced, peak-priced electricity crippling this river. ISO New England, FERC's Northfield-cheering, ever-energy-hungry cousin, also ignores climate and its environmental dismemberment. "Pumped storage†is not hydropower—not even by the industry's own technical terminology. Northfield-produced power in fact represents the heavy planetary burden of fossil fuel used to push a mountain of water uphill, merely as a weight to produce high-cost, second hand electricity. It cares nothing of rivers, fish or ecosystems.
If bureaucrats again fail the public trust and don't demand critical habitat protections, flows, and the day-to-day monitoring needed to fulfill U.S. environmental statutes, Canadian pension speculators will be left as the de facto controlling interests on our river. The new owners have asked FERC to merge two separate licenses for Northfield and Turners Falls into a single new license dubbed the "Northfield Project.†What's represented as mere bureaucratic streamlining would actually enshrine, by precedent–next time and forever, river-killing pumped storage.
Any responsible environmental agency should deny this single-license merger, and seek to have Northfield kept in use as emergency infrastructure only—with the ultimate remedy it's dismantling in tandem with a move to a decentralized, far less vulnerable system than today's expanding mega-grid. Massachusetts legislators are currently signing onto backroom energy deals for a glut of future hydropower from Quebec. Some 1,200 megawatts of those penciled-in imports could easily replace the few hours of daily juice Northfield puts out–while keeping it available for rare emergencies. Though the new Canadian power imports largely ignore conservation and innovation, they could be employed to end the river carnage here and begin restoring a future for a critical New England ecosystem.
(Note: timely public comment on licensing issues is carefully considered by FERC. Go to: http://ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp and use "E-Comment.†Check "Hydro†and address to Secretary Kimberly D. Bose, using the required identifiers "P-2485†and "P-1889†for Northfield and Turners Falls.)
Karl Meyer lives in Greenfield MA. He is participating in the FERC relicensing process and is a member of the Society of Environmental Journalists.
Comments Off on Rolling over on a River: the real cost of pumped storage energy
Posted by karlmeyer on 15 Jan 2016 | Tagged as: American shad, climate change, Connecticut River, Connecticut River shortnose sturgeon, Daily Hampshire Gazette, endangerd shortnose sturgeon, Endangered Species Act, Energy Capital Partners, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, federally-endangered shortnose sturgeon, FERC, FirstLight, fossil plant, GDF-Suez FirstLight, ISO, ISO New England, MA Division of Fish and Wildlife, National Marine Fisheries Service, New Hampshire, NMFS, NOAA, non-renewable, Northfield Mountain, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Station, Rock Dam, shortnose sturgeon, The Greenfield Recorder, The Pioneer, The Recorder, Turners Falls dam, Uncategorized, US Fish & Wildlife Service, USFWS, Vermont
The following piece appeared in the Daily Hampshire Gazette(www.gazettenet.com) and the Recorder(www.recorder.com) in the first week of January 2016.
Copyright © 2015 by Karl Meyer
Ever dreamed of owning your own bank? I got a deal for you! Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project is for sale again, along with the Turners Falls canal and dam—and a string of little assets down in Connecticut. But Northfield's the cash cow. Fourth time in a decade they're unloading this golden calf–always at a tidy chunk of change. A quickie corporate win-win! It's really like an A.T.M., run at the expense of the Connecticut River ecosystem.
Place works like a giant toilet–suck huge amounts of the river backward and uphill, then flush it all back and—viola, money spews out the other end. Could be ours! They're holding bidder tours as we speak. I just need a few partners with ready credit. We go in on short-money and cash-in on the no-brainer electricity "spot market†for a few years. Then, with inflated power-price futures in play, we offload this puppy for a final cash-out of 30%–maybe 50%!
Here's how it goes down. With the cheerleading of Northfield's not-so-silent partner, ISO New England–the "independent†system operator (created by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission), we simply slow dance this darlin' past the banks, the FTC and FERC. Then, in 2016, its sweet business-as-usual—maybe with new shirts for employees.
Trust me, this works every time. Everyone walks away with full pockets—without the public knowing what hit them. Northfield got wholesaled in 2006 by Northeast Generations Services(formerly WMECO—formerly of Northeast Utilities, now Eversource—you follow?) They grabbed a quick $1.34 billion for the package, slipping it to a trio of Jersey venture capitalists, Energy Capital Partners. ECP renamed their little project FirstLight Energy. Those smartest-guys-in-the-room hung-in and grabbed Northfield's peaking spot-market profits for two years, before off-loading it for a nifty $1.89 billion in that crazy year, 2008.
With that, GDF-Suez, third owner in four years, swept in–the world's largest private energy corporation, based in France. They've been gobbling up contracts to run water systems across the US under the name Suez United Water. But GDF-Suez recently did a clever name-change to Engie, keeping the public totally confused. They got game! The true costs of these premium-priced plant sales get buried in the list of acronyms on electric bills. It's like owning a 25-mile stretch the Connecticut River to dip into for cash any time you please.
This is a turn-key operation–with us, the new guys, pushing the buttons. The joke is that the public thinks Northfield is a hydropower operation, while this baby has never produced a single watt of its own energy. It's imported!–huge swatches of bulk electricity now run-in from outside the region to suck a mountain's worth of flow from the Connecticut up to a reservoir. Then, dump it out on the power lines when prices peak. It's hugely inefficient, now largely carbon-based—and massively damaging to the river. But amazingly profitable!
That's where we come in. Sure it was built as a sister to the region's nukes to gobble up their monstrous stream of unused electricity–because nukes can't shut down their feverish output at night. That's how you get to put in a giant straw and suck the Connecticut uphill at a rate of 15,000 cubic feet per second–more than enough to pull the river backward for a mile downstream under low flow conditions. But who's watching? When the region's last nuke shut down, nobody said 'boo!' with Northfield going fossil. What climate change?
And when it became clear years back that Northfield operations were imperiling spawning success for the federally-endangered shortnose sturgeon at the Rock Dam in Turners Falls–their singular natural spawning site going back into pre-history, again, nobody came forward. Not the US Fish & Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service or the MA Division of Fish & Wildlife—or any river protection group. No bureaucrats, no suits–nobody. At Turners Falls—instead of 70% of migratory fish heading upstream toward Vermont and New Hampshire, they squeeze out 4%. We have it made!
Still skeptical? ISO and FERC are addicted to Northfield—even though its power-flush characteristics might come into play maybe a handful of times a year, if at all. For this they let owners cash in on the river whenever y they want. In 2012, the owners of this "asset†collection of 1500 megawatts(of which over 1100 MW derived from Northfield alone) told investors a full 40% of their profits were realized from "Capacity Fees.†What that means is you get paid for holding back the Connecticut! They're not required to use it at all if they don't want to—just flush when prices are high. Paid for being you! Of course another 50% of profit comes from generating, though the public doesn't know it only operates a few hours a day when prices are highest.
Here's the kicker: in 2014, after a cry-wolf energy deficit winter that never materialized, FERC–with ISO as cheerleader, sanctioned the doubling of those "capacity feesâ€. Plants are now collecting 2X the amount they were two years back, for having the potential to dump some power on the lines—not for actually generating. Paid for being you! With 1100 potential megawatts at Northfield, how quick can you say "windfall at the public's expense?†Lastly, Northfield petitioned FERC the last two winters to increase its reservoir storage by a full 25%, with ISO their biggest cheerleader. FERC agreed, twice. Double-dip with a cherry, anyone?
This thing's a cinch! Even with all the nukes shut—when this should have been moth-balled to emergency use as more climate-warming, spent nuclear junk, it soldiers on as a virtual river monopoly with the blessings of FERC and ISO. Trust me, no one goes to court. Ecosystem damage, costs to the public? Fuggetaboutit!
Got credit? Give a call!
Posted by karlmeyer on 10 Nov 2015 | Tagged as: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC licensing process, FirstLight, forward market power auction, ISO New England, Mt. Tom Coal Plant, Northfield Mountain, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Reservoir
The following are comments submitted to FERC concerning what would be an unvetted and potentially precedent-setting mid-license power uprate for FirstLight's Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Station.
Karl Meyer, M.S.
Greenfield, MA, 01301
October 29, 2015
The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
88 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20426
PROTEST against the granting of application for Amendment for Minimum and Maximum Reservoir Elevation for P- 2485-070, FirstLight Hydro Generating Company's Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Station.: Application for Temporary Amendment of Minimum and Maximum Reservoir Elevation Requirement, filed September 1, 2015.
Dear Secretary Bose,
In the 43-year operating history of the Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project a full assessment of the project's impacts on the public's river and terrestrial resources has never occurred. It has long been understood that NMPS significantly impacts some 50 miles of the Connecticut River's riparian, stream bank, farmland and flood plain habitat from Vernon, VT to Holyoke, MA. The application before FERC requests a major, mid-license expansion of this facility's storage and generating capacity without a full vetting of its impact on public resources.
If granted, the proposal before FERC represents a license to benefit—unrestricted and at profit, from a full 25% increase in generation capacity from NMPS's Upper Reservoir for a 120 day period each fall, winter, and early spring, until 2018.
Given that NMPS is in the midst of its first-ever relicensing studies to gauge the impacts of its operations, it is not in the public interest to see this ongoing, 3 year, "temporary†storage amendment granted. Doing so without a full vetting of the emerging science and without the full participation of all stakeholders would amount to an Ex parte ruling—basically a precedent-setting gift to the power company during its run-up to a relicensing decision on April 30 2018.
NMPS has been granted extra cold season storage capacity only four times over its 43 year history. Each of those–save 2014, was restricted to extenuating circumstances where ISO would request NMPS to pump and generate beyond its mandated parameters after a trigger was reached. In requesting and being granted extra-limital storage last year, ISO and FirstLight appear to have entered into a new partnership of open-ended, unrestricted use of the public's Connecticut River resources. This request is being made without investigation or any recompense to the public's benefit beyond what both the utility and ISO refer to as "flexibility†in times of limited on-line capacity or restricted generation.
However, neither ISO or FirstLight has supplied any information as to how NMPS was used in any "emergency†capacity last winter—a winter that was prematurely touted as one with a tight energy market. Though a price squeeze was visited upon the public last winter in the form of vastly inflated energy bills, the predicted energy shortage never materialized. Both Northfield and ISO like to tout NMPS's "black start†capability. However, to my knowledge the plant has only been used in that manner once, during the August 2003 Blackout, and increased storage capacity was not a factor in its use at that time.
ISO has in the past been tagged by FERC Board Members as supporting stilted judgements and sanctioning Foreward Market Capacity auction results that were clearly only in the interest of the power company—costing the public millions. That included 2013, when they sanctioned results from market bids by Energy Capital Partners(former owners of NMPS), who had unloaded their massive Somerset Coal Plant causing a dip in the future winter capacity outlook, sending energy bid prices soaring for ECP.
FirstLight has put itself in line to benefit from the same situation. They did not mention in any application that their Mt. Tom Plant was shuttered recently, and they stand to benefit if NMPS is granted open-ended generating privileges on the heels of a planned shutdown of one of their assets.
Further, it should be noted that FirstLight submitted only limited information on water levels in the CT River at their Turners Falls Dam and further downstream at the Montague USGS Gauge. No information was provided on how often, and by how much, the river fluctuated daily in the Turners Falls Pool due to their pumping and generating. They contend they generally strayed little from the average elevations in the TF Pool. Daily up-and-down figures during winter freezing, wetting, thawing, and rewetting, are wholly lacking.
FirstLight offers that it generated less in winter 2014/2015 than in many other years, but that tells only their story. When, and under what circumstances they generated, and at what profit, are really what's required for a full assessment of the plant's public good. Offering that "we only used a little†see?—is not any reasonable way to assess what might happen with an open-ended license to benefit from "peaking†spot market fluctuations this winter–or in 2016, 2017, and 2018.
Further, NMPS's ownership changed hands three times over the last decade. Granting a mid-license capacity uprate to this plant could lead to speculation and instability in the deregulated market, causing a bubble in its asset value. If GDF-Suez decides to sell their NMPS plant in the interim, only merchants will benefit—with the public left in the dark on impacts, price, and profits.
I protest the granting of FirstLight an amendment to increase its minimum and maximum storage capacity for the remainder of its license. Further, FERC should not grant a one-year amendment without requiring a public accounting of how the plant was used in any "emergency†fashion—if any, last winter, and how its increased generation was harvested for profit on a daily basis last winter. If these are not provided, the amendment should be denied. Any amendment granted NMPS should include a capacity trigger from ISO, so as to ensure the public is not being gouged by winter fear-mongering.
Karl Meyer, M.S.
Greenfield, MA, 01301
Posted by karlmeyer on 06 Jan 2015 | Tagged as: 5-year FERC licensing process, Drew Huthchison, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC, FERC license, FERC licensing process, fracked gas licensing, GDF-Suez FirstLight, ISO New England, Kinder Morgan, Kinder Morgan pipeline, Mt. Tom Coal Plant, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project, shad, shad larvae, Turners Falls power canal, US Fish & Wildlife Service, US Geological Service's Silvio O. Conte Anadromous Fish Lab, USFWS, Vermont Yankee, Yankee Rowe Nuclear Plant
In mid-December I was interviewed on Greenfield Community Television's Local Bias feature by Mark Wisniewski, former Greenfield City Council President. In a wide-ranging talk we discussed my experiences with the ongoing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission licensing process as both a journalist and stakeholder in the hydro projects at Northfield Mountain and the Turners Falls Power Canal on the Connecticut River. The FERC licensing process is a cumbersome and lengthy ordeal–transpiring over a 5- year swatch of time.
Anyone interested in–or involved as a citizen in, the deluge of FERC projects currently affecting our region, might gain some insight by tuning in: from fracked-gas pipelines, to hydro, nuclear, climate and ecosystem impacts.
Local Bias airs beginning Wednesday, at 5:30 pm, and repeats on Thursday and Saturday nights at 9 pm throughout the month of January 2015.
Local Bias is produced and directed by Drew Hutchison.
Try the link below,.. or go to look up GCTV, Local Bias to connect to a copy of the show.
Comments Off on A look inside the FERC licensing process
Posted by karlmeyer on 04 Dec 2014 | Tagged as: American shad, Connecticut River, Connecticut River ecosystem, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, federal trust fish, FERC, FERC license, FirstLight, GDF-Suez FirstLight, ISO New England, Mt. Tom Coal Plant, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Station, USFWS
On November 26, 2014, FERC issued an "Order Granting a Temporary Amendment" for P-2485, the Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Station to increase its storage capacity by 25%, and generate electricity during times of peak demand–or peak prices on the electricity "spot" market, without restriction.
In its power uprate application GDF-Suez FirstLight stated that this extra capacity was necessary due to power plant closures in Vermont and coastal Massachusetts and a predicted cold winter–a forecast for the Northeast that has now been re-evaluated, with a warmer winter now predicted. GDF-Suez FirstLight did not mention in its application that it was shuttering its own 130 megawatt Mt. Tom plant in Holyoke in October. Another factor that may have played a part in the power uprate bid: GDF-Suez North America Hydro had had its bond rating downgraded in the prior fiscal year.
Given the unprecedented power hike granted Northfield, with ISO-New England formally jumping in the middle and cheering on the process with a formal letter to FERC, I thought I might republish testimony I sent to FERC last spring, when FirstLight submitted–then subsequently retracted as a "mistake," testimony it posted on behalf of their plant's storage flexibility cited the wind and solar benefits of a pumped storage plant in Ludington, Michigan.
If you read through the testimony you'll see how devastating to the ecosystem and fisheries that Ludington Pumped Storage Plant has been. That plant, though significantly larger, has a similar timeline–first started in the early 1970s, and currently undergoing relicensing. The big difference has been that local non-profits and agencies didn't let them off the hook for the massive habitat destruction during their first licensing period–actually winning a $172 million dollar settlement from the owners some 20 years back. Sadly, it was too late to shield their ecosystem or save their fisheries.
So, Northfield will pump more this winter. It seemed a good time to re-post what the STUDIED damages were at another pumped storage plant over a similar time frame. Sadly, we can't know what we've lost across the decades here on the Connecticut River.
Read below:
Posted by karlmeyer on 21 May 2014 | Tagged as: American shad, Bellows Falls, Connecticut River, Connecticut River ecosystem, ecosystem, Endangered Species Act, EPA, ESA, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, federal trust fish, GDF-Suez FirstLight, Ludington Pumped Storage Plant, New Hampshire, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Station, shad larvae, Turners Falls power canal, US Fish & Wildlife Service, USFWS, Vermont Edit This
The following Stakeholder Comments were filed today, 5/21/2014, with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission respecting Connecticut River fish mortality investigations at Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage station (NMPS)
Karl Meyer, M.S., Environmental Science
85 School Street, # 3
Greenfield, MA 01301
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
88 First Street, N.E.
Washington, DC 20426
Stakeholder Comments, RE: FERC P-2485-063, and P-2680-108: relevance of FirstLight Hydro Generating Company's document submission issued by FERC as "Conference/Meeting Transcript issued in FERC P-2485-063, et al†on May 9, 2014 for Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage project (NMPS). The inclusion of "Transcript of the April 17, 2014 FERC Scoping Meeting held in Pentwater, Michigan re Consumers Energy Company's et al Ludington Pumped Storage Project under P-2680-108†offers an incomplete, unsubstantiated and confusing picture of its applicable connection to the relicensing of NMPS on the main stem of a four-state river system in Massachusetts.
Dear Secretary Bose,
Please consider the following comments respecting the relevance of FirstLight Hydro Generating Company's recent document filing as it seeks a new license for the Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage station. I testified as a Stakeholder in the NMPS Study Dispute Panel Technical Conference along with officials from the USFWS and Trout UnLimited on Tuesday, April 8, 2014. The Dispute Panel was convened out of concerns that no study of the entrainment of eggs and larvae of migratory American shad was being required as part of a relicensing bid from GDF-Suez FirstLight Power for NMPS. I find no clear context provided by FirstLight for the inclusion of a transcript for the April 17, 2014 FERC Scoping Meeting for the Ludington Pumped Storage Plant–a lakeside Michigan-based facility, as part of the NMPS relicensing proceedings.
NMPS's pumping/generating impacts are known to reach downstream to Holyoke Dam at river-mile 86 and affect spawning-run migratory fish that utilize Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont habitats upstream to Bellows Falls Dam at river-mile 172. It is critical to the relicensing of any pumped storage generation on this four-state river to have robust studies with measurable outcomes to protect the public's interest in a balanced and functioning Connecticut River ecosystem.
NMPS impacts migrating and spawning anadromous fish in a four-state ecosystem that has been the focus of a federal fisheries restoration program begun in 1967, "to provide the public with high quality sport fishing opportunities in a highly urbanized area, as well as provide for the long term needs of the population for seafood.†NMPS, completed in 1972, has been shown to have direct impacts on migratory fish entrainment and fish passage from northern Massachusetts to central Vermont and New Hampshire.
The US Fish & Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and fisheries directors in MA, NH, VT, and CT are all charged with protecting these resources for the public. Federal and state laws, licenses and statutes governing these mandated protections include the federal Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and federal-trust fish protections beginning with the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act of 1965. FERC authority also mandates licensee compliance and protections for the public's fisheries resources and restoration projects. FERC itself is mandated to comply with federal environmental law.
The Ludington Pumped Storage Plant is a FERC licensed facility sited and operating within a single state on a lakeshore well over 100 miles from it closest bordering state—and situated with 118 miles of open water at its back. Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage, situated adjacent to the Connecticut River, operates on the Navigable Waters of the United States in Massachusetts just 10 miles from where the Connecticut River passes out of Vermont and New Hampshire. NMPS pumps and generates from a narrow ribbon of river that is less than 1,000 feet wide—during warm seasons it sometimes draws more water than the river's natural output.
In short, these are two very different animals, operating in very different habitats.
However, there are similarities in the long-term environmental impacts of these far-flung pumped storage facilities. They both kill large quantities of the public's fish. Unfortunately, those impacts were not cited or included in FirstLight's submission to FERC in either Dispute Resolution Panel documents or its license application documents. In 1995 the owners of the Ludinton Plant agreed to a $172 million dollar settlement for its killing o fish during the previous two decades. The public there at least had the minor benefit of one-time study that showed LPSP "in a single year, killed 440,000 salmon and trout, 85,000 perch and millions of forage fish that served as food for valuable game.â€
Unfortunately, to date, we have no such data from a study of NMPS, nor any compensation for the long-term damage to a public resource and a long-term fisheries restoration project. In Michigan, a US-based entity was required to pay restitution and undertake remedial action. Here at NMPS the plant operator is a transnational corporation, based outside the United States, that is "taking†an unknown quantity of a public resource without compensation or required analysis. If a US Citizen were to do this they would be subject to legal action.
Please see below: Ludington Daily News, August 13, 1987: "Federal agency rules on fish kill, Ludington hydro plant must comply within 60-90 days.â€
The Ludington plant had begun operations in 1973, and had been the subject of legal proceedings from that time forward. The State of Michigan had filed a suit in Ingham County Circuit Court seeking more than $147 million in damages, and the National Wildlife Federation had won a federal court order that Consumers needed a pollution discharge permit for the plant.
In summary here are several excerpts from that article defining the impacts at that time including references to a single study that found the plant killed millions of native fish in a single year, species that are today disappearing, or have essentially disappeared, in Lake Michigan waters:
"Environmentalists and state officials Wednesday hailed a federal ruling designed to end the fish kills at the Ludington Pumped Storage Facility operated by Consumers Power Co.†(Co-owned with Detroit Edison Co.)
"Finally, after 14 years of negotiations and litigation, and the destruction of millions of Lake Michigan sports fish, we're going to see an end to this needless waste of an important resource,†said Thomas Washington, executive director of the Michigan United Conservation Clubs.
"The MUCC, National Wildlife Federation and Department of Natural Resources have negotiated fruitlessly for years with Consumers Power to stop the fish kills.â€
"The plant, in operation since 1973, pumps Lake Michigan water uphill into a reservoir, and generates electricity during times of high demand by letting it flow back to Lake Michigan through generators. In the pumping process, it kills millions of fish.â€
"The MUCC said that a study commissioned by Consumers Power showed the plant, in a single year, killed 440,000 salmon and trout, 85,000 perch and millions of forage fish that served as food for valuable game.â€
However, it took another eight years of environmental damage and drawn-out court proceedings before a settlement—totaling $172 million, was finally reached in 1995. See: Ludington Daily News, March 7, 1995: "Local groups urged to begin working on projects for fish kill settlement plan.â€
"While 12 to 18 months more may pass before the settlement, valued at $172 million, becomes final state officials urged local groups not to wait to prepare proposals for enhancing local fishing.â€
"Many audience questions fielded by the five-person panel concerned the perception the settlement doesn't do much for Ludington area fishing specifically—the fishing most affected by the fish kill at the plant.â€
It was only after 1995 that some of the large-scale impacts of Ludington Pumped Storage Plant began to be addressed. Ultimately, a FERC-sanctioned 2-1/2 mile long (12,850 ft) barrier net was deployed across hundreds and hundreds of acres of riverbed and bank.
Sadly, it seems that net did not mitigate or resolve the loss of local fisheries in the Ludington region. Its deployment was either ineffective or far too late for a regionally- and culturally-important sustained harvest of local- sourced and eaten native yellow perch and lake trout. Those perch have now essentially disappeared in the Ludington-Manistee region—which is noted in Stakeholder Testimony supplied for the Ludington Scoping Meeting on April 17, 2014 where Mr. Richard Underwood testified that past Michigan DNR creel surveys had found: "close to a quarter million perch†in Ludington habitats. "In the last few years, four years, we have had a total of zero count of perch in Ludington, and that's how it has affected.â€
The giant Ludington barrier net appears to be one key player in the puzzle of the missing perch. It appears to act as a fish trap. According to Mr. Underwood that net, along with an artificial reef constructed nearby, attracts a giant collection of cormorants that feed on the fish trapped within the confines of the net, "There were so many birds on the reef and inside the barrier net you couldn't count them. I estimated there were 3,500.â€
Ironically too, in recent years, federal hatcheries in the Connecticut River basin have been producing lake trout to supplement the now-crippled and dwindling native population of lake trout on Lake Michigan.
Another similarity in these two relicensing proceedings is that FERC's Scoping Site Visits at both the NMPS plant and LPSP were scheduled either before the PAD had been given to Stakeholders, as it was NMPS, or—as noted in state fisheries testimony at Ludington, the Site Visits are not scheduled to take place until well after Study Requests and Stakeholder Comments are due.
Both of these processes deprived the public and officials the ability to visit, witness, and develop an understanding of the complex impacts of these pumped storage plants before submitting testimony, comments, and informed study requests.
Similarly, both plants have deployed barrier nets as a means of diminishing their fish kills and entrainment/mortality impacts. And, at both sites the fishing is poor and with stocks deteriorating.
The difference on the Connecticut River is that migratory fish here are forced to encounter two entrainment opportunities through FirstLight facilities. The first occurs seven miles downstream, when they are deflected by attraction flows into the Turners Falls Power Canal, with Cabot Station turbines operating on the downstream end.  The small percentage of fish that manage to survive the 2-1/2-mile, 8-day (average) transit to the head of that canal—and the even smaller number that actually exit upstream(1-10%), then get the chance to be culled by NMPS turbines, just five miles further upstream.
In its filing of the Ludington Scoping Meeting documents, GDF-Suez FirstLight seems to be suggesting some link between the large-scale wind power facilities built by LPSP owners Consumers and DTE, and a key, future role for renewables here in sucking the Connecticut River backward and pulling it uphill into the Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage reservoir.
That connection is tenuous, at best. Consumers and its partner DTE now own and operate a large-scale wind farm consisting of some 56 turbines. Its deployment required the purchase or easement rights to 16,000 acres of Michigan property, most of it to trench-out underground power lines to reach back to their grid and pumped-storage plant. Their large-scale wind operations are due to the presence of 118 miles of open Lake Michigan at their back, as well as a flat, open, prairie landscape to site giant turbines on.
FirstLight seems to be implying that NMPS will be similarly employed at some future date—its ecosystem impacts ignored because of the huge amount of surplus, cheap, local, renewable energy available to pump a river uphill at night. But solar doesn't generate at night; and available local hydro here is modest and run-of-river—it would not constitute a "renewable†source to be tapped to pump water uphill. And, wind power opportunities here are spotty, small scale, and generally available on isolated ridge tops.
Clearly the Connecticut River Valley has none of the necessary features that might facilitate the large-scale wind renewables/pumped storage relationship found at LPSP. Nor, has FirstLight proposed plans for any large-scale wind projects in the region. No other entity has either. Cape Wind, whose large scale deployment will be installed miles off the Atlantic shore, is not proposing a pumped storage plant be built above the Truro Cliffs in order for its renewable energy megawatts to be consumed. Here, there just aren't flatland mega-farm acres available, and only a few ridge tops here have proven suitable for siting isolated turbines.
GDF-Suez Manager John Howard stated at the Dispute Resolution Panel: "We can manage fluctuations in energy schedules with wind, solar, and imports from Canada and New York, primarily. And then the ability to respond very quickly to energy and operating reserve needs of the power system, any time of the day or calendar year.†He states that "We can manage…†But there is nothing backing up the statement. Nothing that proves there is a surplus amount of renewable energy reaching NMPS to state clearly that "We do manage…†or "We will be managing…â€Â  The implication is that NMPS is a necessity here in order to implement renewable energy in the region. Where is the science to back that up? Solar is not around at night. And the region is sub-marginal for large-scale wind, as well as lacking in opportunities for securing thousands of acres of right-of-way here. So, where is the implied connection between these two facilities—beyond fisheries destruction?
Michigan, with its open face to the winds—which do blow at night, apparently ignores the to damage to its Great Lake ecosystem and fish, and tallies the wind-energy driving Lake Michigan waters and uphill to its pumped-storage plant as "renewable.†We don't have that wind here, and solar power generation is a whole different animal–not in any way the high-octane source needed to push a river uphill at NMPS. FirstLight has built a 2 MW solar installation atop the 11 acres of land it was mandated to construct for silt-settling ponds by the EPA in 2010 after being sanctioned for massive infractions of the federal Clean Water Act by dumping up to 45,000 tons of pumped storage reservoir silt and sludge into the Connecticut River , the company has not included any information on how that solar facility connects to, and interacts with, and powers its pumped storage operations. Unlike large-scale wind, solar does not deliver its energy at night–when NMPS asserts that it will do most of its pumping.
Pumped storage can only be deemed "renewable†energy in a generating environment where ecosystem impacts are not considered. Pumped-storage itself was a net-loss bargain that was ill-considered even back when there was actually surplus nuclear available in the region. Now this taking-of-a-river is mostly accomplished at NMPS by climate-warming, non-renewable fossil fuels. This is a lose-lose situation for renewable energy use–and for an ecosystem.
GDF-Suez FirstLight's NMPS plant does feature "black-start†capabilities, and does offer FERC and ISO the ability to accomplish load-leveling at certain critical times. However, these attributes must be balanced against long-standing federal and state efforts to complete a forty-seven year old migratory fisheries restoration on the Connecticut, and the public's long-term need to have a sustainable Connecticut River ecosystem. NMPS operations also need to adhere to federal and state environmental law.
In 1995, Consumers and DTE paid the public $172 million for their past fish kills of the previous decades. Thus far, the public has not been compensated for the on-going taking of fish at NMPS on the Navigable Waters of the United States, nor have citizens in MA, VT, NH and CT been able to reap the benefits of anything near the stated goals of a four-state fisheries restoration program targeting recreation fishing and harvestable seafood.
Studies with measurable results are required for a fair relicensing process. Stated steps in the FERC relicensing process should be followed to allow the public a contextual look at the operations before the need to suggest studies or prepare testimony. To facilitate a fair process, FERC should require context and full disclosure of all submitted documentation on the part of the applicant, as well as phone conference transcripts to allow an understanding of the ongoing dispute procedure.
Placing a net in front of LPSP and NMPS has not stopped the fish kills at either plant. A band-aid should not be applied to a gaping wound. Complete and proper studies of all life stages of fish mortality are needed for NMPS relicensing. Regulatory pumping and generating restrictions that protect the public resources of US citizens are overdue and necessary there. The studies needed to accomplish this should take place before any new license allows this ongoing "take†to continue through 2048.
End of Formal Comments
Thank you for this opportunity to participate in improving license requirements and protecting the Connecticut River ecosystem for future generations.
Karl Meyer, M.S.
Comments Off on FERC grants Northfield "temporary" Power Up-rate: the downside impacts of a studied pumped storage operation, re-posted.
Posted by karlmeyer on 10 Oct 2014 | Tagged as: Connecticut River ecosystem, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC, GDF-Suez FirstLight, ISO New England, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project
*The following Stakeholder Comments were submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on October 2, 2014.
Karl Meyer, M.S. Environmental Science
85 School Street # 3
Greenfield, MA, 01301
413-773-0006 October 2, 2014
The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
88 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20426
COMMENTS: on P- 2485-065, GDF-Suez FirstLight Hydro Generating Company's:
Application for Temporary Amendment of Minimum and Maximum Reservoir
Elevation Requirement.
Dear Secretary Bose,
The Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project is currently undergoing
studies under the 5-year FERC relicensing process in order to continue
plant operations beyond 2018. NMPS was built as a peaking power plant—
making use of the surplus power generated from a cluster of Western New
England nuclear power facilities: Yankee Atomic, Vermont Yankee, and
Haddam Neck. Yankee Atomic and Haddam have long-since ceased operation,
and VY will close on December 29, 2014.
After that date, NMPS is requesting to remain in service as an entirely
different entity: a peaking plant, with no surplus regional nuclear power
to draw on. It will then be relying on coal, oil, gas, and imported
hydro to pump water uphill—a very expensive and inefficient process,
consuming what amounts to baseload energy to create peaking generation.
This will be bought on the open market; then resold to ratepayers at
peaking-market prices. The first question that must be asked is: is it
fair to consumers?
Why should such an open-ended power up-rate be allowed when stakeholders
are deep in the discovery phase of the relicensing process? Studies just
months down the road will help determine the current operational,
commercial and environmental impacts of NMPS.
This open-ended request uses NMPS's "emergency†capabilities as a veil.
In truth, as ISO-NE well knows, it can—and does, take over NMPS on rare
emergency occasions, paying market rates to GDF-Suez for the plant's
output. Thus, hiding behind an "emergency†goodwill intention is not a
forthright argument from FirstLight, and should not be accepted rationale
for granting NMPS an open-ended and, unstudied, 20-plus percent power
generation capability increase.
Looked at head-on, this is an attempt to turn a plant into a facility
that would now generate using legacy fuels to supply ratepayers with
peaking-priced, spot-marketed power in a quasi-baseload producer fashion.
If FERC were to allow such an increase for a full one-third of a year, it
would be creating a whole new animal in the energy market—without a
requisite public process.
FirstLight's argument in its generation and storage capacity increase is
that it will be available for "emergency†situations which might arise in
winter markets. The reality is—request aside, NMPS is and has always
been a station prescribed for emergency use. That has been a chief
selling point since it opened 1972. And, it is still available as such—
without any amendments to its current license. Thus, no changes should
be made to current operational limits, as the plant can be called upon
under unusual-event circumstances by ISO within all currently sanctioned
Allowing NMPS to begin generating as a baseload plant
without study or understanding of the full impacts of longer pumping and
generation would be an abrogation of FERC's public responsibilities.
Under current operating conditions, NMPS creates what amount to erosive
tidal conditions in the Turners Falls Impoundment that exceed the daily
tides experienced at Hyannisport, MA. The requested new pumping and
expanded limits at NMPS during winter months will undoubtedly result in
an increase in erosion and sediment load in the river and at the NMPS
reservoir. Daily increases in freezing and thawing along sensitive
riverbanks dictate that.
In 2010 FirstLight attempted to clear its reservoir of sediment and failed
to accomplish the task. The result was a complete outage lasting seven months,
with NMPS unavailable for any emergency output. Most troubling was that
FL attempted to clear its reservoir and intakes by shoveling the silt and muck
directly into the Connecticut River. The EPA issued a cease and desist order in early
August, and FL was found to be in gross violation of the federal Clean
Water Act for polluting the navigable waters of the United States.
It should also be helpful to know that NMPS has never successfully
discharged the silt from its reservoir in its entire history without
experiencing a partial or full outage in its turbine battery. Given that
history, allowing NMPS to potentially create more siltation in the CT
River at their plant should not be allowed until they have proven it will
not impact emergency operations.
Further, attempts by a previous owner to utilize more of the NMPS
reservoir in the 1980s were turned back by a public process that
shed light on the fact that increased pumping of the Connecticut River
would result in significant impacts to the ecosystem. That request—to use
the Connecticut River as a drinking water source to be shifted up to the
NMPS reservoir and then transferred out of basin tothe Quabbin Reservoir,
was ultimately not implemented. In fact, it resulted in the implementation of
a new law, the Inter-Basin Transfer Act, which would only allow water to be
taken from the river in an emergency situation, after all logical engineering
steps were taken to plug holes and eliminate waste in the Boston water delivery
That should be the situation going forward. NMPS remains in service as
currently licensed—available for use in specifically defined emergency
situations by ISO-NE, until studies are complete.
Lastly, is important to note that GDF-Suez FirstLight made no mention of
the closure of their own 135 megawatt Mt. Tom coal plant in Holyoke this
20141002-5022 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 10/2/2014 8:40:09 AM
fall, when they listed several outlier plant closures as reason for their
request to help as fill -in for a tight winter market. At the very least
that is disingenuous. Some might see it as market manipulation.
Thank you,
Karl Meyer, MS
Comments Off on Stakeholder COMMENTS to FERC on Northfield Up-rate Request


text:
In reference to Jim Kenney's Mayoral candidacy:.
Is the candidate involved? For the members of the East Passyunk Crossing Civic Association, Jim Kenney is pretty much the man. Joseph F. Marino, co-chair of the group's board of directors, said Kenney — a now-former at-large city councilman — attended the group's first community meeting nine years ago and has had a presence ever since. Marino noted that Kenney often stays in the background and allows the neighbors to make decisions, but Marino recalled that after the association's first organizing meeting, Kenney approached him and said: "I like your style. You're like a benevolent dictator."
What the neighborhood wants from its next mayor: Marino said members of the civic association and neighbors have expressed their biggest concern, and it's not all that unique: Education.
"I don't think there's a Philadelphian who's not concerned about how our education system is working," Marino said. "Everything from grade schools and librarians to higher degrees, colleges students, graduates and doctoral degree students."
He added that neighborhood members are also of course concerned with crime rates, trash, recycling and streets — "the same issues every citizen is concerned about" — but educations falls highest on that list.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
FileChucker is an AJAX-based web application that lets you accept file uploads on your own website. It's simple to install (just one file), packed with features, fully configurable, nice looking, and very handy for when you want to share files with anyone. And during uploads FileChucker shows a progress bar & table, so the user knows how much time is left before the upload is complete. FileChucker can also function as a full-fledged online file manager for your server: it can allow moving/renaming/deleting of uploaded files & folders right in the browser. Of course these features are configurable and password-protectable so you can customize FileChucker however you'd like. To top it all off, FileChucker works in all major browsers (Moz/FF, IE, Opera, Safari), and runs on virtually any server (Apache, IIS, OS X Server), with no programming required!Visit publisher site: FileChucker
Listing Details
- Version:
- 3.0
- Filed in:
Scripts / CGI & Perl / Scripts & Programs / File Manipulation / Upload Systems
- Publisher:
- Encodable Industries Other listings by this publisher
License & Pricing Information
- License Type:
- Commercial
- Price:
- Additional Info:
- This is the Single Personal Website License. A free trial version is available.
- License Type:
- Commercial
- Price:
- Additional Info:
- This is the Single Non-Personal Website License. A free trial version is available.
User ReviewsAdd/Edit Your Review
Displaying 1-1 out of 1 reviews
I started using Filechucker from when it was a freebie and have to say there is nothing else like it around. The product is great but the support is even better. I suggested loads of features and saw them within days (hours in some cases). Overall a great product at a great price. Worth looking!


text:
French postcard c 1940s - bonne annee
A charming piece of ephemera. Circa 1942.
Size:14cm x 9cm
The photograph of the front and reverse of the postcard form it's description. Please take careful note of the content and condition of this antique card. All of our vintage ephemera is carefully sourced and wherever possible is of Museum quality.
French postcard c 1940s - bonne annee
Regular price $15.00


text:
Marine data from Natural Resources Wales (NRW) Technical Support (Research & Monitoring) Contracts, Wales
Natural Resources Wales
This dataset is comprised of a collection of marine species sightings collated since 1993 from marine surveys, technical support contracts and research, and monitoring contracts. This dataset is currently maintained and managed by Natural Resources Wales (NRW). The surveys focus on benthic habitats (often referred to as 'biotopes') in intertidal, inshore (typically within 3 nm) and subtidal areas. Original copies of all the surveys are now held in NRW's Marine Recorder database.
Geographic Description
All Wales.
The purpose of this data capture was to aid coastal zone and sea-use management and to contribute to the identification of areas of marine natural heritage importance.
Data quality
High. The majority of surveys are carried out by an experienced marine biologist. Volunteer surveys are checked by NRW staff. Historical data, however, may have lower precision and accuracy and may not be verified.
The contract surveys were collected according to different methodologies. These include methods described in the Marine Nature Conservation Review (MNCR) Rational and methods report and Countryside Council for Wales' (CCW) marine monitoring techniques described in CCW Contract Science Report No: 380 (Sanderson et al, 2001). As of April 1st 2013, data is held and managed by Natural Resources Wales (NRW).
No citation information available.
Information withheld
A public version of the Marine Recorder Snapshot (from which this data is extracted) is available from the JNCC website. For further details and information please visit http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-1599
Usage statistics
Digitised records
Looking up... the number of records that can be accessed through the NBN Atlas. This resource was last checked for updated data on 26 Oct 2017. The most recent data was published on 26 Oct 2017.Click to view records for the Marine data from Natural Resources Wales (NRW) Technical Support (Research & Monitoring) Contracts, Wales resource.
Metadata last updated on 2017-11-10 12:36:34.0


text:
Nationals send Ozzie Guillen autographed Bryce Harper bat as a joke
Ozzie Guillen's epic and pedantic fuss over the amount of pine tar on Bryce Harper's bat on Sunday was perhaps the highlight of the weekend.
Ozzie Guillen's epic and pedantic fuss over the amount of pine tar on Bryce Harper's bat on Sunday was perhaps the highlight of the weekend.
Cam Newton had an excellent rookie season last year. That came on the heels of leading Auburn to a national title during his lone year with the Tigers, a year in which he also won the Heisman.
Rob Gronkowski's nonstop party of a life has been undeniably amusing to follow from afar.
Back in April, around the same time rapper Kanye West started dating person Kim Kardashian, we told you about a song released by Kanye formerly titled "Theraflu" (now titled "Cold
Your browser does not support iframes.
Scary moment at Yankee Stadium on Sunday when Mark Teixeira's bat went flying into the stands in the bottom of the first against the Angels.
"Yo Soy Fiesta" es no mas.
The Patriots have reportedly put the kibosh on the ongoing party (circus?) that is Rob Gronkowski's life.
Jeremy Lin has a three-year, $25 million contract lined up with the Rockets. The Knicks, whenever they feel like checking the fax machine, have the right to match that offer and retain Lin.
As the Knicks sort through their Raymond Felton-Jeremy Lin mess, they have a new one on their hands.


text:
We carefully review the best online poker rooms that give the ultimate poker experience tailored for American players
- First deposit bonuses that are generous and accessible
- Healthy player pools consisting of a good ratio of 'fishes'
- Minimal friction when withdrawing your poker earnings
An expertly reviewed list of the best US poker sites as of March 2020:
Top 7 USA Approved Poker Sites
- Trusted by US Players Since 2001
- Huge Bad Beat Jackpots
- Fully Licensed and Regulated
Ignition Poker
Juicy Stakes
Intertops Poker
Americas Cardroom
What to Expect From Our American Friendly Poker Sites
Here you'll find all the top US poker sites that are first and foremost, legal and safe, and perform exceedingly well in all of our other ranking criteria, including fast payouts, a huge library of games, generous bonuses and more.
Once you get started with any of the card rooms on our recommended list, you will soon realize that finding and playing legal poker in the USA isn't as difficult as you may think.
Our team at OnlinePokerAmerica.com takes pride in the fact that we are just like you – passionate online poker fans – and for that reason, we know exactly what it is that you want and need from a top online poker site.
With that in mind, we've searched the internet far and wide to find all the best poker rooms out there, both real money and free play sites. No matter which you prefer, every brand you choose on the list above has aced our strict vetting process and is 100% 'OPA approved' – In other words, not only will these sites meet your expectations, they'll surpass them and blow you away!
When searching the web for real money poker sites, it's important to read carefully into any terms and conditions, especially in relation to bonuses and cashouts. There are usually clauses and minimum play time required before you can do anything with your added bonus and potential winnings.
This is the single area in which most novice gamblers fall victim to. Many shady sites lure gamblers by offering eye-watering bonuses, but what they don't make clear is the usually horrendous play through requirements that are attached to these unobtainable bonuses. Knowing this, we pay special attention to all bonuses and peruse the Ts and Cs to make sure that they are realistic and reasonable.
As long as you're playing from a top US poker site listed by us, you are in good hands and won't have to worry about bonus traps.
Latest Poker News
Poker in Pennsylvania Remains Timid in February, PGCB Reports
With Pennsylvania's online gambling revenue up in February, poker players would have expected the card game to pick up some steam as well. Alas, poker has turned out to be the chronic underperformer, bringing hardly any value to the table. The Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) has released its numbers for February 2020, posting solid […]
- Industry
Live Poker Events And Cash Games Extinct Due To Covid-19 Spread
During these times, when state after state order non-essential businesses to shut down to enforce the social distancing initiative and help curb the spread of the coronavirus /Covid-19/, live poker looks almost non-existent, as casinos and poker rooms shut doors for clients. The fewer casinos that remained open will be forced to close doors by […]
- Headline
Las Vegas Poker Rooms Close To Reduce Covid-19 Spread Risk
The global spread of coronavirus /Covid-19/ has already impacted the casino industry, as the general approach towards limiting the outbreak is to prevent people from gathering. Live poker has already been affected, too, with a number of high-end tournaments around the world being taken off the calendar due to the pandemic virus spread. In Las […]
- Industry
- 1 Top 7 USA Approved Poker Sites
- 2 BetOnline.ag
- 3 Ignition Poker
- 4 Juicy Stakes
- 5 Intertops Poker
- 6 Americas Cardroom
- 7 Bovada
- 8 Sportsbetting.ag
- 9 What to Expect From Our American Friendly Poker Sites
- 10 Quality Standard Guarantee
- 11 Latest Poker News
- 12 Poker in Pennsylvania Remains Timid in February, PGCB Reports
- 13 Live Poker Events And Cash Games Extinct Due To Covid-19 Spread
- 14 Las Vegas Poker Rooms Close To Reduce Covid-19 Spread Risk
- 15 Verified Bonuses for American Players
- 16 USA Poker Sites with Freerolls
- 17 Join Online Poker Tournaments
- 18 A Look into US Legislation and Online Poker
- 19 Legal US Poker Sites for Real Money in 2020
- 20 Governing the American Poker Market: Meet the Regulators
- 21 Will the Wire Act Opinion Affect Online Poker in the US?
- 22 What Will the Wire Act Mean for Online Poker in the USA?
- 23 Current Legal State of US Poker Sites
- 24 Top 5 Free Play Money Poker Sites
- 25 Fresh Deck
- 26 Zynga Poker
- 27 Replay Poker
- 28 WSOP - Play Money Poker
- 29 Full Tilt Poker
- 30 An Optimistic Outcome for Poker in America
- 31 What Does 2020 Hold for Online Poker Payment Services?
- 32 Enter Cryptocurrencies
- 33 Featured Blacklist – March 2020
- 34 Frequently Asked Questions
Verified Bonuses for American Players
It's easy to find a great poker bonus in the USA. All operators we explore will offer a sign-up offer that allows you to start earning more from the moment you join the real money games. This applies to both the regulated state websites as well as the offshore ones.
You will notice that most regulated marks usually keep the sign-up bonuses within reasonable sums, although BetOnline's online poker portal offers dozens of superb choices when it comes to promotions. On the other hand, if you're looking for some great no deposit poker options, we also have you covered.
USA Poker Sites with Freerolls
There are many offshore websites that provide US players with freeroll poker options, including tournaments. One of the most interesting models has been developed by Global Poker which launched back in 2016.
Global Poker has introduced a great way to circumnavigate the inherent difficulties that come hand-in-hand with being a grey market operator. By introducing a virtual currency for gaming, Global Poker's players can participate in real money games.
You need to purchase Gold Coins which fetch you the play currency known as $weeps Cash. Any $weeps Cash you manage to win can then be exchanged with WorldPay for real money.
Although Global Poker is restricted to No-Limit Hold'em and Pot-Limit Omaha, the site also comes with great leaderboard opportunities.
Join Online Poker Tournaments
Poker players in the USA have some decent options when it comes to online and live poker. State-based tournaments are usually more modest in the way of monetary reward. In New Jersey, we saw the prize pool guarantee reach $125,000 during the $320 Coast 2 Coast III #2, but not much above that.
Conversely, WSOP.com's summer championship is the world's crowning poker event, but it must be attended in person, though the online series have picked up some steam. Thankfully, 888 Poker provides you with sufficient options to qualify while playing poker online in any of the regulated US states.
Offshore Poker Brings Bigger Rewards
Because of the limited number of states regulating online poker in the USA, many people have been turning to offshore operators. Websites such as Ignition and Americas Cardroom offer millions worth of prizing money, usually varying between $2 million and $4 million.
The numbers fluctuate, though and the prize pool is spread across various types of contests, including:
- Sit & Go
- Multi-table tournaments
- Knock out tournaments
- Satellite
- On-demand tournaments & more
It's worth noticing, though, that the US-friendly offshore poker sites have a substantial player base that allows tournaments to run in most hours, with weekends amassing the biggest crowd.
A Look into US Legislation and Online Poker
Playing poker games with real cash at online poker sites in America has always been legal. This fact is meant to address rumors from both outsiders and insiders who claim that enjoying online poker in the country is a crime.
The reality is that it is not illegal, even though online operators are legally restricted from providing real cash poker games to USA-based players. Regardless of the strict laws that have been plaguing online poker providers, players are in no way affected by these restrictions and thus can continue to enjoy their poker games on trustworthy international online poker sites.
The past decade transformed online poker into some sort of grey area with the passage of the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA) back in 2006. Before then, compared to what we have witnessed in the past couple of years, online poker was thriving and both the players and the operators were satisfied with the completeness of the arrangement – they both benefitted from online poker in one way or the other.
Fortunately, this grey area is slowly fading away and things in the US are looking brighter.
Legal US Poker Sites for Real Money in 2020
Online poker in the USA in 2020 has been doing rather well and while we will discuss the issues the industry is currently facing in detail, we want to draw your attention to the best US poker sites first.
Played in three states and a forth on the way (launch date set for July 15), poker is currently available on a dozen fully-regulated websites based in approved markets. Let's have a look:
Nevada (NV)
Nevada was the first state to surface back from the legal limbo introduced by the adoption of the UIEGA in 2006. With the state passing its own online poker laws, legal real money poker websites were re-introduced for the first time in the United States.
The first operator to enter the sector was Ultimate Poker which arrived on April 30, 2013, but it gradually lost all its customers, plagued by a number of technical issues.
On September 17, 2013, the World Series of Poker's website made its entry. WSOP.com has been the flagship provider of legal poker in Nevada. Today, the WSOP events are the envy of the poker world and every serious player takes it upon themselves to attend the event in person.
Nevada was instrumental to the introduction of the shared liquidity scheme that went live in March 2015, including the state of Delaware and New Jersey joining only recently in April 2018. Today, you can play poker at two established online portals in NV:
- WSOP.com
- Real Gaming
New Jersey (NJ)
New Jersey joined Nevada shortly after the Silver State introduced its own online poker. The decisive move came on November 21, 2013, when online poker was officially signed into law. Borgata and Partypoker got a head start and they were joined by WSOP and 888 later on.
- Borgata Poker
- Partypoker
- 888 Poker
- PokerStars
The list doesn't stop with these, however, and there have been new additions, specifically playMGM Poker and Pala Poker.
In general, insofar as the best online poker websites in the USA are concerned, New Jersey's operators are the brands gamers associate the most with.
Delaware (DE)
Delaware is the smallest state to offer online poker in the United States and it's also part of the shared liquidity scheme introduced in 2015. Today you can play poker at three websites in the DE:
- Dover Downs
- Delaware Park
- Harrington Raceway
Pennsylvania (PA)
Pennsylvania is technically regulated, but no casino has launched online poker yet. However, quite a few properties have obtained a license already including noteworthy business such as Harrah's Philadelphia, Parx Casino, SugarHouse and others.
The number of brands launching online card rooms in PA has reached 13 online casinos that have paid for a license.
Governing the American Poker Market: Meet the Regulators
There are a number of regulatory commissions that have been formed to govern online poker websites in the US, both within and outside the United States. We suggest you familiarize yourself with them before you start playing.
A number of online sites within the state of Nevada have applied for and have been granted full online gambling licenses. The board is the same one that oversees all licensed gambling venues or casinos in all of Nevada which, therefore, means that the online poker sites under its jurisdiction are highly regulated for the good of the players.
This board works for both the states of New Jersey and Delaware where poker enthusiasts will find fully licensed online gambling sites where they can play online poker with real cash locally and legally. The sites are therefore of the highest standards and thus every poker game or event that players partake in is completely fair and random.
This is among the few online gambling jurisdictions that are responsible for licensing a decent number of reputable US poker sites that are available for American players. Online casinos and online poker sites under this jurisdiction allow players to not only fund their accounts in US dollars but also participate in tournaments using the same currency.
This is another licensing jurisdiction that applies to poker players who are not lucky enough to be living in the three states where online poker is legal. If you are one such unlucky player who cannot access online poker sites then an offshore-operated online casino or an international poker site with a Costa Rica license would be a great option.
Will the Wire Act Opinion Affect Online Poker in the US?
To understand which way online poker in the United States is headed, we will have to allocate some time explaining the most recent saga around the legalization of the industry – the revised Wire Act Opinion of 2011.
Since January 15, 2019, the Wire Act reversal has been hanging over online poker in the United States like a Damocles' sword. The Department of Justice's OLC Opinion poses an existential threat to poker, but we're still unable to pinpoint the exact implications, because of DOJ's own lack of clarity on the issue.
What we know, though is the order in which events happened.
A Chronology of Events
The chronology of events, is easy to pinpoint and it clearly depicts the evolution of the Wire Act – from a rumored bogeyman to an existential threat for the poker industry.
- In January, 2019, the revised Wire Act opinion is issued by the Office of Legal Counsel and Assistant Attorney General Stephen Engel at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ);
- US Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein signs the Wire Act into law, giving states three months to comply;
- Pennsylvania and New Jersey's General Attorneys Gurbir S. Grewal and Josh Shapiro make a joint statement warning DOJ that the states will sue;
- The New Hampshire Lottery Commission launches an official lawsuit against DOJ challenging the Wire Act reversal;
- The DOJ announces a 60-day delay on the implementation of its Wire Act Opinion pushing the deadline back for mid-June.
The possible consequences of the WA have been the subject of much speculation. When US Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein signed the act into law, the 90-day grace period started running. With the deadline originally set for April 15, the Wire Act has just been pushed back by another 60 days in the face of mounting opposition from states, such as New Hampshire, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
As a result, the Act won't come into effect until June 14, 2019 but will this give enough time to states that are most threatened to rally and take action?
Another thing we know is how these changes would affect the best US online poker sites. Pressuring existing operators, though, is only one of the things industry experts are worried about. The WA might as well kill the momentum for the wider legalization of the industry.
What Will the Wire Act Mean for Online Poker in the USA?
The first blow that the Wire Act would deal to online poker in America is to suspend inter-state games. New Jersey, Nevada and Delaware would no longer be able to pool their money together to offer better prize, cash and availability of products.
Delaware only has 1 million residents. If the Wire Act suspends cross-state gaming, then DE will likely see its online poker industry die as there won't be enough players to keep an online poker portal going.
The new Opinion will most likely dovetail the Wire Act with UIEGA, which will in turn limit the availability of banking options.
Reduced prize pools is the least of the worries states presently face, but it's going to be among the ones to be noticed first.
If the Wire Act is implemented successfully and it leads to high-profile shutdowns, hopes to legalize poker in places like New York, California and elsewhere in the US will most likely come to a halt.
In light of recent developments, Pennsylvania has said it would defer the expansion of online gambling, and poker for that matter, until June 15, with the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) needing more time to review the Wire Act.
A revised WA will complicate matters for all parties involved in US online poker. Even today, players in Nevada and New Jersey get their transactions rejected as financial institutions find reasons to shut down payments that are linked to card rooms. Inter-state transactions have been the source of much preoccupation for banks and some payment processors lest they come under the hits of the DOJ and other regulators.
On the flipside, there are payment processors that wouldn't give up to DOJ's demands and exit the marked quietly. A handful of operators have invested quite a bit to give up without a fight, including:
The DOJ is leading a multi-faceted offensive against poker. On the one hand, it's threatening states head-on, on the other – it's applying pressure on payment processors. In the case of PayPal, this is likely to work, as one of the world's most famous e-wallets is known to cave in the face of government pressure.
One thing that is certain is that the DOJ didn't expect to be faced with so much opposition. So far, three lawsuits have come from New Hampshire:
There has been a strong push from New Hampshire, but it has mostly been linked to the online lottery the state has run successfully for years now. NeoPollard Interactive supplies the state's lottery with interactive and innovative solutions. iDEA Growth is a trade group that focuses on the expansion of iGaming in the United States.
Current Legal State of US Poker Sites
We have already discussed the available legal US poker websites. The three states that are already offering legal regulated online poker are:
The newly added Pennsylvania is still in the process of launching its own industry, delaying an early Q1 launch to mid-June. Originally, Pennsylvania was on track to release its iGaming and poker industries in early 2019, but this has changed after the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (PGCB) met in late February and decided to defer the legalization of the industry to better assess the recent changes in legislation.
Legalizing Poker Across the Country
The growth of these online gambling markets have reignited interest in other states, including California, New York, and Iowa that have been looking into tapping into the endless benefits that regulated online poker could bring to them. U.S states are now beginning to try and regulate online poker mainly because they have the mandate to enact their own unique laws.
Regardless of the fact that the UIGEA is still in place, its days are numbered since it will essentially be overruled once individual states pass bills allowing online gambling. As such, online poker in America still stands a fighting chance and more states could allow regulated online poker in 2019, thus giving poker players more local options when it comes to the best US poker sites.
For any of this to come to realization, however, we will have to wait and see how the Wire Act plays out in mid-2019. While it helps to be optimistic, there are inherent difficulties to playing on online poker sites in the US, and we should be well aware of these problems that include issues as various as;
- Declined payments
- Restricted states
- Slow payouts
- Lack of players
- Lack of online options
Poker's problems are equally likely to precipitate. If the Wire Act hits in full and DOJ attorneys manage to win the ensuing battles in court, they will be able to wreak a lot of havoc across the board, suspending interstate activity and bleeding poker networks dry of players and funds, leading to a natural collapse of the industry.
This is a possibility but one unlikely to unfold. With so many businesses and jobs on the line, the amount of litigation that would ensue from a bid to shut down online poker in 2019 would necessitate the DOJ to pull off a super-human effort to just be able and keep track of all lawsuits piling up against it.
And yet, the anti-Online Gambling Coalition, which has been reportedly pulling the strings in DOJ, may only be seeking to introduce havoc and kill endorsement for poker in places like New York and California where lawmakers have been trying to introduce an active legislation for almost 10 years now.
Regardless, if you reside in a state which has yet to legalize online poker or you just want to play for fun, you can choose from any of our highly recommended play money websites below. This is a great method to practice with play chips and test out our tips covered in our ultimate poker strategy guide which covers all the basics and more.
Top 5 Free Play Money Poker Sites
Fresh Deck
- Real money cash prizes and promotions
- Turbo speed tables and tournaments
- Buddy lists to keep you connected
Zynga Poker
Replay Poker
WSOP - Play Money Poker
Full Tilt Poker
An Optimistic Outcome for Poker in America
The United States legislature has been having some promising legislative talks regarding online gambling at an intrastate level. The implication here is that states that have allowed regulated online poker will be able to share players – this will not only link the entire country but will also assist in bringing a much-needed rush of liquidity.
The promise of better prize pools hasn't managed to attract online players and NJ's numbers have sunk to record low between October and December, 2018, with the player base still struggling to gain momentum in the first quarter of 2019. Meanwhile there are definitely many reasons to want to legalize online poker:
- Source of additional revenue to plug state deficits;
- Better customer and data protection for players
- Increased prize pools for participants
- Full implementation of laws restricting offline websites
- More balanced payouts for all participants
Nevada's poker has picked up. With preparation for the World Series of Poker (WSOP) in full blast, some fear that New Jersey's players might be excluded because of the WA Opinion, which would be a huge blow for the event, that has decided to increase its prize pools and introduce more WSOP bracelets for its 2019 edition.
What Does 2020 Hold for Online Poker Payment Services?
One thing that is rather clear is the fact that for the past couple of years depositing and withdrawing funds from US poker sites has gotten easier, even though 2019 may now offer a few unique challenges related to the Wire Act reversal. Established offshore or international sites have been upping their game in so many different ways to ensure that customer experience is not ruined by payment systems that do not work.
The cashier staff, for instance, have been working tirelessly in finding alternative solutions for deposits and withdrawals that are intended to cater for even those cringe-worthy times when players' credits cards are declined when they try to make deposits. The new and improved deposits methods have proven to be very successful in providing fast and secure transactions for players, and poker rooms have grown significantly due to this. Bigger poker rooms imply that there is a bigger collection of cash tables, bigger prize pools as well as much bigger promotions and specials too.
While it is certainly true that funding your online poker account in the United States can sometimes be quite challenging, international online poker sites have found suitable workarounds that will work perfectly until online gambling is finally legalized. These include options such as Visa Credit Card, American Express, MasterCard Credit Card, MoneyGram and even Player-to-Player Transfer.
Visa is a universal payment method that comes with nominal fees and the highest clearance rate. This is a preferred option among card players from the United States who are playing at one of the legal options or heading over to an offshore online venue.
American Express is one of the most common payment options. Offering a mix of security and convenience, AmEx is a preferred way among some card players to make deposits or withdraw their money.
MasterCard is trusted for anything from e-commerce to online gambling. Just as you probably know, you can use this method to charge your card room balance and play at one of the best US poker websites online.
MoneyGram used to be a very comfortable way of depositing and withdrawing money from a poker card room in the US. This has changed due to restrictive laws ushered in by the enforcement of UIEGA in 2006.
Enter Cryptocurrencies
Decentralized digital currencies are perhaps one of the biggest, if not the biggest, invention of the decade. Crypto has proven that it is here to stay and when people are not speculating on their prices or selling them, online poker players are tapping into its potential as a payment method. Many of the best US poker sites now allow for payments to be made in Bitcoin and some have even gone as far as making it their primary payment method.
Bitcoin has always been associated with volatility and technicality but neither of these is a trait that is cast in stone. They happen but to keep you convinced of their usefulness, once you deposit into your poker site account your Bitcoin is converted into USD depending on prevailing rates. Poker sites that accept Bitcoin are often located offshore, as they find the cryptocurrency to e a smart way of avoiding complications when it comes to cashouts for customers.
Featured Blacklist – March 2020
Online Poker Sites to Avoid
Our expert review team extensively vets hundreds of online poker sites each month and makes an effort to not only recommend trusted poker rooms, but to also warn players of unreliable brands. We strongly advise you to stay clear from those listed below as they do not adhere to the review standards built from our years of experience.
- Linked to cPays Group
- Bad reputation
- Payout issues
- Founder arrested
- Suspicious activity
- Bitcoin Only
- Mass complaints
- Late payments
- Huge fees
- Unreliable practices
- Bad reputation
- Unsecure
- Black Friday
- Money laundering
- Fixed games
- Suspicious site
- Bad customer service
- Fails to payout
As of when you see this list, some sites may have been shutdown or they may still be running. Regardless, we recommend that you avoid visiting or involving yourself with activities associated with these brands to stay safe. We may leave certain sites on this list so people who are new and unaware stay informed.
Frequently Asked Questions
It all depends on the state you're in. Refer to our responsible gambling age table.
Many states don't even define gambling let alone address specific legal real money online poker laws! Check our legal states poker map for your state.
Unfortunately you need to be physically playing from a legal even for real money online poker but there are alternatives such as play money poker rooms that are legal and only classed as games and not a form of gambling.
If there are deposit options or payment methods on a poker site; it will use real money so be cautious and make sure you're playing within the legal rights of your state and/or region.
Some real money poker rooms such as 888 Poker will have mobile-compatible software so check the site first before making a deposit so you know the site is iPhone-friendly. Check out our approved iPhone poker sites for more information.
Similarly to iPhones, iPad users can check their real money poker rooms for compatibility before depositing real money for real money poker. Check out our approved iPad poker sites for more information.
Real money poker sites for android devices work the same way as iPad and iPhone users – players just need to look for mobile compatibility on the real money poker site and they should be good to go. Check out our approved Android poker sites for more information.
There is no best real money poker site as it all comes down to reference but if you check the real money poker sites list we regularly update at the top of this page; it should hopefully give you a good, unbiased and independent place to start.


text:
Price: $10.00
Quantity: 1 available
Book Condition: Very Good
Hardcover, 5 by 7 1/2-inches, x, 342 pp. Green cloth with gilt spine and cover titles. Light wear to the corners and head and tail of the spine, a few small spots and scuff marks. Previous owner's name, date (1900) and city in pen on ffep and the same person's lovely custom bookplate depicting a knight praying before a bookcase on the front pastedown. Religious tales based on everyday scientific phenomena like geodes, sunspots, corals, cucumbers … and a sction of "Printer's Parables" that include "Justifying," "Weak Chases," "As to Offsetting," etc. First Edition.
Title: Sermons in Stones and in Other Things: Some Practical Lessons for Life Drawn from Everyday Surroundings
Categories: Religion,
Edition: First edition
Publisher: New York, Doubleday & McClure Co.: 1899
Binding: Hardcover
Book Condition: Very Good
Item: 1.00 Item
Seller ID: 562


text:
This year on Phoronix there has been more than 3,700 original Linux/FLOSS news posts, benchmarks, hardware reviews and more. Here's how that compares to prior years.
With the year ending out this week, here's a look at the article statistics on Phoronix compared to prior years... For those curious and with me simply being so into numbers and benchmarks.
First up is a look at our "featured articles", mostly the in-depth benchmarks and Linux hardware reviews and other multi-page articles.
This year we'll have hit an average of at least one featured article per calendar day (a few more are still on the way this week). That's generally always been my goal for now the past nearly 14 years, simply a matter of not always hitting that based upon timing with news articles and some benchmarks/reviews taking dozens of hours per article, so this number overall hasn't fluctuated too much over the years. There is more this year than 2016 due to all the activity happening in the open-source graphics driver scene, Vulkan maturing and becoming more widely adopted, the very exciting Ryzen / Epyc / Coffee Lake CPU launches, Vega providing an interesting test target, etc.
When it comes to the shorter news articles on the site, this year will have been close to 3,400 original stories. This is slightly more than last year and the past few years. It's largely been plateaued the past few years due to time constraints with writing 99% of Phoronix content myself and generally around 10 articles per day being the peak interest level before feeling burning out. This number is also a function of the amount of interesting Linux/FLOSS desktop'ish and server/workstation happenings each day and at least that number on a yearly basis isn't slowing down. And unfortunately increasing ad-block users preventing additional contributors from working on the site as was the case years ago. The last single calendar day without any new original content on Phoronix even with weekends/holidays was back in February 2013.
If you would like to see more interesting, quality articles on Phoronix in 2018, consider showing your support by joining Phoronix Premium to enjoy the site ad-free, multi-page articles on a single page, and priority feedback to me for any future test requests, etc. During this holiday week you can also participate in our end-of-year premium deal to help Phoronix go strong in 2018 with premium subscriptions being the second source of revenue to allow this site to continue after pay-per-impression advertisements on the site.


text:
AMS Removals #1 Movers In Manchester
Moving house can be a stressful process, which is why we aim to make it as smooth and problem free as possible.
We tailor our services to your requirements.
We operate at hours to suit you, and can provide any level of service from a complete house packing service including furniture dismantling and assembly, to simply collecting packed items and delivering them to your new address.


text:
Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar!
View Active Topics View Your Posts Latest 100 Topics Mobile Theme Dark Theme
80 is the new 65 when it comes to retirement, survey says
Discuss issues related to business, finance, taxes, investments, cost of living in different countries, etc.
Moderators: jamesbond, fschmidt
Post Reply
4 posts • Page 1 of 1
80 is the new 65 when it comes to retirement, survey says
CHICAGO (Reuters) - When it comes to retirement, many middle class Americans said 80 is the new 65 and plan to delay retirement because of worries over money, according to a new survey.
Wells Fargo bank asked 1,500 Americans who earned between $25,000 and $99,999 and ranged in age from 20 into their 70s questions about retirement, savings and Social Security for its seventh annual retirement survey.
Three-fourths of those surveyed said they expect to work in their retirement years. One quarter said they will "need to work until at least age 80" to live comfortably in retirement.
Of Americans who will work in retirement, "47 percent said that they are going to continue in the same job or a similar job of similar responsibility," Joe Ready, Well Fargo's director of Institutional Retirement and Trust, told Reuters Insider.
"That raises a lot of social and economic implications. Will they have the physical ability to work, the mental capacity? What does that mean for the younger work force in terms of coming through and looking to get ahead?"
Three-fourths of Americans said it is more important to have a specific amount saved before retirement, regardless of age, while only 20 percent said it is more important to retire at a specific age regardless of savings.
In terms of saving for retirement, 53 percent of those surveyed said they need to significantly cut back on spending now to save for retirement.
"People are overwhelmed. They're not saving enough," Ready said.
On average, Americans have saved only seven percent of their desired retirement nest egg, with a median of $25,000 saved versus a median retirement goal of $350,000.
"For several years now, we've seen that Americans are undersaving for retirement and a majority do not trust the stock market as a place to invest for retirement," Ready said.
"We did find a bright spot among middle class Americans - more than three quarters do not want to retire with mortgage debt. This is an important goal, particularly for younger Americans," said Laurie Nordquist, director of Wells Fargo Institutional Retirement and Trust.
Eighty-six percent of respondents said it's important to own their home debt free by retirement.
On the issue of Social Security there was an age divide. Those in their 60s expect Social Security to provide 46 percent of their retirement funding. But more than a quarter of Americans in their 20s and 30s expect no income at all from Social Security during their retirement.
(Editing by Greg McCune)
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/80-65-comes-re ... 25734.html
Check out our Dating Sites and International Romance Tours!
Expat Relocate: Not sure which Country/City is right for you? I Will Help You Decide!
"I have a PhD in biochem (graduated at 25 yo in late 80s) I am 47 now single dad with two teenage daughters, one in college. I will work well into my 80s then be completely dependent on Social Security, that is if it even exists.
Despite the education and always being employed I never made more the 80k/yr and presently make around 50k. The jobs went into decline in the early 2000, in the biotech and pharmaceutical areas they started the great decline in 2001. This working into the 80s is not due to lack of education or motivation for many of us, the jobs with a decent income simple are not there no matter how educated you are.
In my 30s I had thought to be a home owner now closing in on my 50s I realize I will never be, on the positive side the hosing market crash had little effect on me other then rent being too high for my income. Today for most of us car ownership is a problem and home ownership is not even a consideration."
"How can anyone retire when the government and schools keep hitting you with ever increasing taxes (property & school taxes)?? I believe taxes are also taken out of your social security check. Everyone has to live within their means except the government it seems. If this is a democracy why don't the people get to vote on property tax increases?? You know the definition of income used to be what you made working in another country, not here in the USA .. but over the years the crooks have changed that to "income is whatever we say it is! now fork it over, sucka!" I think it is a disgrace that retired folks have to continue to pay property taxes and school taxes when they are living on a fixed income, and if you don't pay it well the mafia comes with guns to get you out of the house you worked 30 years to pay for and then they put it up for sale. Rest assured if you continued to vote for Democans and Republicrats you'll get soaked even more."
"We cannot afford to retire. The big financial institutions ended that dream when the screwed up the economy. They got a bailout and big bonuses, we got shafted."
"Between my divorce and the economy, I have been put back to my mid-twenties 401K levels (I'm 53). I have no hope for my future in regards to ever being able to retire. I'm practicing saying "Welcome to Walmart" and "Do you want fries with that?". And I'm an IT tech at a major corporation. But since I'm not a government worker, I only pay for other people's pensions. Not mine. Irony at it's finest."
Post Reply
4 posts • Page 1 of 1


text: Image 0 Rocking Christmas Eve Almost Christmas and Mia is all set to rock this Christmas Eve. I'm really excited to celebrate this year with Mia's very first Christmas. Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Like this:Like Loading... Related


text:
I was recently interviewed by CUTS the Magazine about my brand and I was so excited about the opportunity. I have given them copies of certain images they could use along with in-depth answers to interesting questions. You can see the entire interview at their website and it's totally worth the visit. http://www.cutsthemag.com/2016/07/09/cuts-interview-and-she-saw-stars
I've included excerpts here for your pleasure. Hope you like them. I've been really busy with getting my work more exposed and out into the public to include other publications. I'm always looking for other venues to showcase my work. I have more images being published via iMirage magazine. All of this is part of the package of trying to make it. Wish me luck folks! Traveling spritely as usual.