Dirty Money: Emerging Cryptocurrencies & Morgantown's Secretive 'Science Center'

Jenna Ablak, India Bender, Olivia Berarducci, Seth Mullins, Evonni Tatum

January 11, 2022. DEP Public Comment Meeting

After learning of the proposed Science Facility, I attended a virtual Department of Air Quality (WVDAQ) meeting where community members had the opportunity to express air-quality concerns. Right off the bat, the mayor of Morgantown, Jennifer Selin, expressed her discomfort with the rapid permitting process—she felt that the city and its constituents did not have a fair chance at civil procedure. Mayor Selin also provided critiques of Marion Energy Partner's (MEP) proposed development project: “This permit does not specify the methods, the industry it’s operating in, or the regulatory practices of whatever industry it is. Marion Energy needs to work toward transparency. I’d like to see the proposal made more specific."

Paula Hunt, a resident of South Park, brought up a case in Upstate New York where a project similar to MEP's was approved. She stated: “These machines are polluters, be it water or air, and are noise polluters. They are energy hogs. Even Elon Musk won’t accept Bitcoin as currency anymore because of how dirty it is. The ‘miners’ aren’t being paid because they aren’t people, they're computers, and it doesn’t benefit the local economy through taxes. […] Also, it's near one of Morgantown’s elementary schools. With the lack of specifications in this proposal, I don’t feel it is safe to go forward.” Ms. Hunt then called for an extension of sixty days for comments, since there is new information coming out every day about the impacts of these data facilities.

After Hunt spoke, Nyoka Baker-Chapman took to the floor. Baker-Chapman noted that there are discrepancies in emissions reports relating to this project and others similar to it. She also brought up questions related to the Paris Climate Agreement, as well as public health concerns, namely, greenhouse gas sources may bring about a localized increase in cancers. One of the more prominent figures given at the meeting was shared by Baker-Chapman: in her research, she found that facilities with similar engines can be heard from five miles away. “This is louder than a freight train, which clocks in at about eighty-five decibels, while the facility’s is ninety-two to ninety-five.”

There seemed to be a few powerhouse speakers in a row, and that held true for the next speaker, Duane Nichols, a former engineer. He dug into the specifics of the proposal: the engines, catalyst fouling, hazardous gasses. “I predict significant problems related to the lubricant oil fluids in water from the engines. Local pollutants have the potential to dramatically increase without the protection equipment realizing it. We could have a big problem on our hands. This company, and its parent company, have no experience in this field or its safety and they do not have any partner companies nearby to dig them out of any problems.”

Morgantown City councilmember William Kawecki spoke next. He brought about a point that I found to be very anthropological in its nature: civic literacy. “Our locals are forced to become experts in industry in breakneck amounts of time. It’s just inaccessible to understand.” Civic science is an important part of grassroots advocacy (Wylie 2018). Having small amounts of time to comprehend industry-specific proposals is oftentimes inaccessible to those who must understand it for their own health and well-being. Those in opposition of the Science Center must jump through hoops brought about by multiple agencies on top of learning engineering jargon. The accessibility of resistance becomes increasingly difficult when the opposition must first become experts in the field of engineering, then work to jump through the hoops of bureaucracy.

DEP Response to comments: March 7, 2022

In reading this document, it became evident that bureaucracy informs the hiccups and the specificities of permitting processes. There are many stipulations, such as the 'Best Available Control Analysis', ambient air quality standards, and noise. The Department of Air Quality described jurisdictional roadblocks in the case of noise pollution. It was made abundantly clear within this document that noise pollution was not of their concern, but of the county's planning commission. It was mentioned at the January meeting that this commission has empty seats, and hasn't taken a case in a couple of years.

On page 8 of the official response, the concern of unprocessed natural gas was addressed. This concern was brought about by Duane Nichols, former engineer, at the meeting in January. The response outlines that in natural gas processing, the goal is to recover hydrocarbons. The pipeline itself has its own gas quality standards, apart from regulation. “EPA does not establish natural gas quality standards for the pipeline operators or gas producers. However, EPA does define what is “natural gas” and “pipeline natural gas” as applied under the Clean Air Act.” The document then shows a table of the gas analyses provided by Marion Energy Partners LLC. West Virginia State Delegate Barbara Fleischauer mentioned that it seemed ‘sketchy’ that the permittees were providing their own gas samples. But it seems to me that, since the regulation is apparently null, this wouldn’t make a difference, unfortunately. And since the DEP already allows Marion Energy Partners LLC to be responsible for self-reporting their emissions, why not the contents of their natural gas as well?

This brought about another question from Duane Nichols (a thorn in the side of Marion Energy Partners) of Gas Quality Monitoring, which is found on page 11 of the document:

“Several comments expressed concerns about the lack of fuel quality monitoring and that spikes in salts and ethane can cause issues with the catalysts. Gas producers from horizontally fracked wells usually (emphasis added) have sand traps to remove sand and salts from field gas before routing it to a gas processing unit (gpu). If left untreated, the sands and salts would cause numerous issues in operating their gathering pipeline system (e.g., plugged and foulage issues) before the gas could be shipped to another facility or end users. In addition, the gas analysis methods used in the industry to determine the gas quality are not capable of detecting salts.”

The final determination was released the same day as the response to comments, drafted by Edward Andrews, Project Engineer. It outlines that the comments submitted did not sway the acceptance of the permit, though it did not include the dates for which comments were accepted. It is also written that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did not have any comments that pertained to the draft permit. The Department of Air Quality shall issue the permit unless:

“a determination is made that the proposed construction, modification, registration or relocation will violate applicable emission standards, will interfere with attainment or maintenance of an applicable ambient air quality standard, cause or contribute to a violation of an applicable air quality increment, or be inconsistent with the intent and purpose of this rule or W. Va. Code 22-5-1, in which case an order denying such construction, modification, relocation and operation shall be issued. The Secretary [Harold D. Ward] shall, to the extent possible, give priority to the issuance of any such permit so as to avoid undue delay and hardship” (3).

Several commenters did ask that the emissions of Marion Energy Partners LLC’s project be combined with nearby emissions, like nearby gas wells, but this was not approved by the DAQ. These gas wells are only a half-mile away, and yet they are not being considered into the Ambient Air Quality as a unit. It is as if these polluters exist in a vacuum. Basically, unless Marion Energy Partners LLC becomes a permitted major source of criteria pollutants, the permit stands. As for the Science Center being an alleged Bitcoin mining operation, there was an especially interesting paragraph addressing this in the final determination document:

“Several commenters expressed or made claims that the Science Facility was going to be used for Bitcoin Mining Operations. The applicant had presented the proposed facility as four natural gas fired engines to be used to generate electricity for a 'data center' in the application. At this time, DAQ has found no evidence that the applicant is going to construct any emission units other than what is proposed in the application. The DAQ has no explicit authority to request the applicant to disclose the function of the 'data center'. None of the oral comments provided during the public meeting suggested that additional emission units would be necessary to operate a 'data center'" (9).

It does not matter to the DAQ if it is to become a Bitcoin mining operation, because their jurisdiction is air emissions. Not noise, not function, just air emissions. And even these requirements for emissions are limited. Marion Energy Partners LLC may operate their data center as long as they do not exceed air emission standards set forth by the DAQ. These emissions are not taken into account alongside nearby polluters.