From NC League of Conservation Voters: A special report released on the 40th anniversary of the Clean Water Act of 1972 finds that toxic water discharges still abound, and North Carolina places tenth on the list of states by volume of discharges.
The 48-page report, titled "Wasting our Waterways 2012", was issued by the PennEnvironment Research and Policy Center. It is based on discharge information submitted to the EPA for its Toxic Release Inventory for 2010, the most recent data year available.
The report notes that 53 percent of assessed rivers and streams, and 69 percent of assessed lakes, remain unsafe for swimming or fishing or both. Our nation continues to fall far short of the 1972 Clean Water Act's goal that all American waters should be "fishable and swimmable".
Showing posts with label EPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EPA. Show all posts
3/26/2012
12/19/2009
Death to Your Garden
Contaminated Compost: Coming Soon to a Store Near You
9/4/2009
By Barbara Pleasant
In Santa Rosa, Calif., the folks at Grab n’ Grow have been making compost and planting mixes for 25 years, using organic materials generated in Sonoma County. In 2002, the company detected residues of a potent herbicide called clopyralid in a batch of compost. The next year, Grab n’ Grow manager Don Liepold and his wife saw the herbicide’s trail of destruction in their raised bed organic garden — lettuce that refused to grow, curled and wilted peas, and stunted, gnarled tomato leaves.
As we reported in July 2009, clopyralid and its close cousin, aminopyralid, easily persist, sometimes for YEARS!, in hay, manure and compost. When contaminated materials are used in food gardens, tomatoes, beans and other sensitive crops develop curled foliage that looks like a disease, if they grow at all.
Both herbicides are manufactured by DowAgrosciences, which seems to have no moral or ethical problem selling products which clearly are polluting the public compost stream. Meanwhile, aminopyralid pesticides have been pulled from shelves in the United Kingdom. Liepold, the Rachel Carson Council and MOTHER EARTH NEWS think the U.S. EPA should take the same action here.
“I have been testing and detecting herbicide residues and thus rejecting cow manure, horse manure, turkey mulch, rice hulls, mushroom compost and yard trimmings,” says Grab n’ Grow manager Don Liepold. “I spent $20,000 in lab fees in 2008, and am on the same track for 2009,” he says.
It is extremely difficult to keep contaminated materials out of commercial compost. “One load of contaminated grass clipplings can ruin a batch of compost,” says Eric Philip of Anatek Labs in Moscow, Idaho. Philip has seen so many positive tests for clopyralid residues in compost that he would not use untested compost in his own garden.
“When folks have plants die in their home gardens, their first assumption is that they did something wrong,” Philip says. But with pyralid-laced commercial compost becoming more common, contaminated soil amendments are often to blame.
The source of pyralid pollution can be impossible to trace. For example, a horse stable may use hay brought in from a neighboring state, without knowing that it is laced with pyralid herbicides. If the horse’s manure or stable litter ends up in a garden, disaster is ready to strike. It’s better to be safe than sorry. Liepold stopped making one of Grab n’ Grow’s most popular products, Mango Mulch, for more than a year because he could not find an uncontaminated manure supply. Now he’s getting it from two local organic dairies.
Testing for contamination is a slow, painstaking process that comes at a steep price of $350 (or more) per sample, so most commercially-made compost is not tested.
Both of these herbicides were approved by the EPA before their persistence in compost was known, and before lab tests existed that could detect residues at damaging levels. We think approval of these pesticides should be revoked before the damage gets worse.
To express your concern about this hidden danger to your garden, write to your senators and congressional representatives to make your voice heard. You can also contact Rick Keigwin, director of the EPA’s pesticide review division.
See our earlier report: Milestone Herbicide Creates Killer Compost for lots more background on this issue. [Mother Earth News]
9/4/2009
By Barbara Pleasant
In Santa Rosa, Calif., the folks at Grab n’ Grow have been making compost and planting mixes for 25 years, using organic materials generated in Sonoma County. In 2002, the company detected residues of a potent herbicide called clopyralid in a batch of compost. The next year, Grab n’ Grow manager Don Liepold and his wife saw the herbicide’s trail of destruction in their raised bed organic garden — lettuce that refused to grow, curled and wilted peas, and stunted, gnarled tomato leaves.
As we reported in July 2009, clopyralid and its close cousin, aminopyralid, easily persist, sometimes for YEARS!, in hay, manure and compost. When contaminated materials are used in food gardens, tomatoes, beans and other sensitive crops develop curled foliage that looks like a disease, if they grow at all.
Both herbicides are manufactured by DowAgrosciences, which seems to have no moral or ethical problem selling products which clearly are polluting the public compost stream. Meanwhile, aminopyralid pesticides have been pulled from shelves in the United Kingdom. Liepold, the Rachel Carson Council and MOTHER EARTH NEWS think the U.S. EPA should take the same action here.
“I have been testing and detecting herbicide residues and thus rejecting cow manure, horse manure, turkey mulch, rice hulls, mushroom compost and yard trimmings,” says Grab n’ Grow manager Don Liepold. “I spent $20,000 in lab fees in 2008, and am on the same track for 2009,” he says.
It is extremely difficult to keep contaminated materials out of commercial compost. “One load of contaminated grass clipplings can ruin a batch of compost,” says Eric Philip of Anatek Labs in Moscow, Idaho. Philip has seen so many positive tests for clopyralid residues in compost that he would not use untested compost in his own garden.
“When folks have plants die in their home gardens, their first assumption is that they did something wrong,” Philip says. But with pyralid-laced commercial compost becoming more common, contaminated soil amendments are often to blame.
The source of pyralid pollution can be impossible to trace. For example, a horse stable may use hay brought in from a neighboring state, without knowing that it is laced with pyralid herbicides. If the horse’s manure or stable litter ends up in a garden, disaster is ready to strike. It’s better to be safe than sorry. Liepold stopped making one of Grab n’ Grow’s most popular products, Mango Mulch, for more than a year because he could not find an uncontaminated manure supply. Now he’s getting it from two local organic dairies.
Testing for contamination is a slow, painstaking process that comes at a steep price of $350 (or more) per sample, so most commercially-made compost is not tested.
Both of these herbicides were approved by the EPA before their persistence in compost was known, and before lab tests existed that could detect residues at damaging levels. We think approval of these pesticides should be revoked before the damage gets worse.
To express your concern about this hidden danger to your garden, write to your senators and congressional representatives to make your voice heard. You can also contact Rick Keigwin, director of the EPA’s pesticide review division.
See our earlier report: Milestone Herbicide Creates Killer Compost for lots more background on this issue. [Mother Earth News]
8/19/2009
Mercury Contamination Nationwide
USGS Study Reveals Mercury Contamination in Fish Nationwide
The USGS released a study today that assesses mercury contamination in fish, bed sediment, and water from 291 streams across the nation, sampled from 1998 to 2005.
The report, along with a press release, podcast, and summary of major findings can be accessed at http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/mercury/
Scientists detected mercury contamination in every fish sampled in every stream. About a quarter of these fish were found to contain mercury at levels exceeding the criterion for the protection of people who consume average amounts of fish, established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). More than two-thirds of the fish exceeded the EPA level of concern for fish-eating mammals.
Atmospheric mercury is the main source to most of these streams — coal-fired power plants are the largest source of mercury emissions in the United States — but 59 of the streams also were potentially affected by gold and mercury mining. Since USGS studies targeted specific sites and fish species, the findings may not be representative of mercury levels in all types of freshwater environments across the United States.
For more information, contact Barbara Scudder, bscudder@usgs.gov, (608) 821-3832 or Mark Brigham, mbrigham@usgs.gov, (763) 783-3274.
The USGS released a study today that assesses mercury contamination in fish, bed sediment, and water from 291 streams across the nation, sampled from 1998 to 2005.
The report, along with a press release, podcast, and summary of major findings can be accessed at http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/mercury/
Scientists detected mercury contamination in every fish sampled in every stream. About a quarter of these fish were found to contain mercury at levels exceeding the criterion for the protection of people who consume average amounts of fish, established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). More than two-thirds of the fish exceeded the EPA level of concern for fish-eating mammals.
Atmospheric mercury is the main source to most of these streams — coal-fired power plants are the largest source of mercury emissions in the United States — but 59 of the streams also were potentially affected by gold and mercury mining. Since USGS studies targeted specific sites and fish species, the findings may not be representative of mercury levels in all types of freshwater environments across the United States.
For more information, contact Barbara Scudder, bscudder@usgs.gov, (608) 821-3832 or Mark Brigham, mbrigham@usgs.gov, (763) 783-3274.
5/28/2009
Killer Compost, Orange County
Killer Compost Surfaces in Orange County, North Carolina
Please find information below about Aminopyralid which has turned up in our Mt Sinai Road property and is affecting two other local farmers who source toxic manure in the last four weeks. Here is detail about Forefront that is the Dow Chemical program that was used by an Orange County haymaker and was sold to a local horse breeder who delivered one year old horse manure well-composted to us. The herbicide is pernicious and persistent and is killing our broadleaf plants, and soil remediation is problematic. Here are some details to share:
Aminopyralid has caused problems in gardens in the UK last year and Dow amended their label recommendation to try to eliminate the problem.
Basically the herbicide is used in pastures because it kills thistles, clover and many other dicot weeds. It is very selective to the grass. It has a long half life - 533 days has been reported. It is also very active on leguminous, solanaceous and sunflower crops. A major problem is that the chemicals absorbed to lignins in grass cell walls. It is then released if that grass is digested by a horse or cow. So the manure may influence the growth of sensitive crops, especially if that manure is not well rotted down for a year or more.
If you have the problem there are probably a couple of things to consider.
I would not replant with a sensitive crop this year. Rotavate the soil and plant a non sensitive food or cover crop. I would recommend not returning harvested material as mulch, although the residue levels may be really low. So if you grow a cover crop, mow it off when mature and compost it separately or dispose elsewhere (landfill?).
I think if the area has been well rotovated and keeps moist, you should not have a problem next year; stuff breaks down fast in North Carolina.
Interrogate the compost supplier on his source of manure and ensure he is aware of the issue.
Lobby that EPA withdraws this use of the product and that Dow modifies its label. Cattle farmers love the product and vegetable producers hate it.
Please find information below about Aminopyralid which has turned up in our Mt Sinai Road property and is affecting two other local farmers who source toxic manure in the last four weeks. Here is detail about Forefront that is the Dow Chemical program that was used by an Orange County haymaker and was sold to a local horse breeder who delivered one year old horse manure well-composted to us. The herbicide is pernicious and persistent and is killing our broadleaf plants, and soil remediation is problematic. Here are some details to share:
Aminopyralid has caused problems in gardens in the UK last year and Dow amended their label recommendation to try to eliminate the problem.
Basically the herbicide is used in pastures because it kills thistles, clover and many other dicot weeds. It is very selective to the grass. It has a long half life - 533 days has been reported. It is also very active on leguminous, solanaceous and sunflower crops. A major problem is that the chemicals absorbed to lignins in grass cell walls. It is then released if that grass is digested by a horse or cow. So the manure may influence the growth of sensitive crops, especially if that manure is not well rotted down for a year or more.
If you have the problem there are probably a couple of things to consider.
I would not replant with a sensitive crop this year. Rotavate the soil and plant a non sensitive food or cover crop. I would recommend not returning harvested material as mulch, although the residue levels may be really low. So if you grow a cover crop, mow it off when mature and compost it separately or dispose elsewhere (landfill?).
I think if the area has been well rotovated and keeps moist, you should not have a problem next year; stuff breaks down fast in North Carolina.
Interrogate the compost supplier on his source of manure and ensure he is aware of the issue.
Lobby that EPA withdraws this use of the product and that Dow modifies its label. Cattle farmers love the product and vegetable producers hate it.
5/19/2009
3/05/2009
7/11/2008
Conservation Insider Bulletin, July 11
Conservation Insider Bulletin
Published weekly for the Conservation Council of North Carolina
Conservation News to Peruse & Use
Editor: Dan Besse, cib@conservationcouncilnc.org
July 11, 2008
Bush punts greenhouse gas regulation over to the next administration, plus legislative and judicial news, this week in CIB:
--Washington Watch: No Responsibility on His Watch
--Legislative Watch: Watered-down Drought and Stormwater Bills Advance; Farmworker Protection Approved; Beach Hardening Continues to Lurk
--Judicial Watch: Appeals Court Throws Out CAIR
Washington Watch: No Responsibility on His Watch
In another stunning display of arrogant irresponsibility, the Bush White House has successfully forced a protesting EPA to stall off action on regulating greenhouse gases to the next administration. EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson announced today that the agency would release its draft "advanced notice of proposed rulemaking" together with the explanations from higher Administration sources for its rejection of that draft.
This action is remarkable in that the U.S. Supreme Court declared in April 2007 that (contrary to the Bush Administration's assertions) the EPA has the authority and duty to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Pursuant to that directive, the EPA last December sent to the White House a report laying out the technical support for a draft rule, which concluded that greenhouse gas emissions clearly represent a threat to human welfare and further that it is economically justified to regulate them. The White House uber-bureaucrats charged with overseeing the EPA refused to receive the report, which languished in political limbo while other Administration officials prepared their rejection of its reasoning.
In plain language, what the Bush Administration has done is this: tell the Supreme Court that it doesn't like its decision, won't implement it, and by the time anybody can do anything about the refusal, they'll be gone. Here's a link to today's complete Washington Post story laying the matter out in more detail: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/11/AR2008071101703.html?hpid=topnews.
CIB encourages our readers to check it out: It's breathtaking...pun intended.
Legislative Watch: Watered-down Drought and Stormwater Bills Advance; Farmworker Protection Approved; Beach Hardening Continues to Lurk
Watered-down Drought and Stormwater Bills Advance: CCNC's Director of Governmental Relations Dan Crawford reports that stakeholder negotiations have produced a classic compromise on stormwater rules (i.e., a deal with which no one is happy). Under the compromise bill, which has passed the Senate and been recommended by the House Environment and Natural Resources Committee, coastal stormwater rules would be strengthened from the status quo—but not by as much as the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) rules would have done. In the short run, CCNC is backing the compromise. In the longer run, Crawford says to state policy-makers, "We need to let them [the EMC] do their job!"
Drought management legislation has also been brought forward for consideration in compromised form. HB 2499, "Drought/Water Management Recommendations", would specify the governor's emergency powers during water shortages, and increase the authority of the N.C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to impose restrictions on local water systems during drought. However, the compromise bill fails to include specific mandatory minimum water conservation measures, and is therefore viewed as a major "missed opportunity" by conservationists.
Farmworker Protection Approved: SB 847, "Prevent Agricultural Pesticide Exposure", has been approved by the legislature and sent to the governor for his signature. Toxic Free NC (formerly the Agricultural Resource Project) hailed the bill as a victory for farmworkers, who will gain explicit protection against retaliation for reporting pesticide safety problems. The bill also strengthens pesticide use record-keeping requirements by employers.
Beach Hardening Continues to Lurk: Rumors continue to circulate that some unspecified "compromise" approach may emerge late regarding SB 599, the so-called "Inlet Stabilization Pilot Program" bill. This legislation represents the latest attempt by a small group of wealthy beachfront property owners to carve out exceptions to North Carolina's anti-hardening policies on its ocean shore. The deceptively-named "pilot programs" authorized by the bill are the same old rock groins which have long been conclusively discredited as beach protection tools. These oceanfront hard structures act only to accumulate sand in front of one spot at the expense of down-current areas. Coastal conservationists vigorously oppose this legislation, which passed the Senate last year and has been held in the House since that time. By barring new oceanfront seawalls, groins, and jetties, North Carolina has protected much of its natural beach shoreline for more than 20 years. This is no time to retreat from that sound policy.
Judicial Watch: Appeals Court Throws Out CAIR
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit this week unanimously struck down the Bush EPA's Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). CAIR is a controversial rule which requires 28 states (mostly Eastern states) to reduce air pollutant emissions which travel interstate and affect smog and soot levels elsewhere. Some environmental groups defended the EPA's approach, while others challenged it as too slow and overly reliant on a "cap and trade" pollutant-trading approach.
In its ruling, the Court found that the EPA had exceeded its authority, and ordered the entire rule scrapped. The practical impact of the Court's decision will be to delay final rulemaking on the subject matter until the next presidential administration. As of CIB press time today, most environmental groups' comments on the ruling were not available online, although some were reportedly calling for Congressional action in response. Several North Carolina-based groups had criticized CAIR in 2006 as insufficiently protective of North Carolina's air.
Published weekly for the Conservation Council of North Carolina
Conservation News to Peruse & Use
Editor: Dan Besse, cib@conservationcouncilnc.org
July 11, 2008
Bush punts greenhouse gas regulation over to the next administration, plus legislative and judicial news, this week in CIB:
--Washington Watch: No Responsibility on His Watch
--Legislative Watch: Watered-down Drought and Stormwater Bills Advance; Farmworker Protection Approved; Beach Hardening Continues to Lurk
--Judicial Watch: Appeals Court Throws Out CAIR
Washington Watch: No Responsibility on His Watch
In another stunning display of arrogant irresponsibility, the Bush White House has successfully forced a protesting EPA to stall off action on regulating greenhouse gases to the next administration. EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson announced today that the agency would release its draft "advanced notice of proposed rulemaking" together with the explanations from higher Administration sources for its rejection of that draft.
This action is remarkable in that the U.S. Supreme Court declared in April 2007 that (contrary to the Bush Administration's assertions) the EPA has the authority and duty to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Pursuant to that directive, the EPA last December sent to the White House a report laying out the technical support for a draft rule, which concluded that greenhouse gas emissions clearly represent a threat to human welfare and further that it is economically justified to regulate them. The White House uber-bureaucrats charged with overseeing the EPA refused to receive the report, which languished in political limbo while other Administration officials prepared their rejection of its reasoning.
In plain language, what the Bush Administration has done is this: tell the Supreme Court that it doesn't like its decision, won't implement it, and by the time anybody can do anything about the refusal, they'll be gone. Here's a link to today's complete Washington Post story laying the matter out in more detail: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/11/AR2008071101703.html?hpid=topnews.
CIB encourages our readers to check it out: It's breathtaking...pun intended.
Legislative Watch: Watered-down Drought and Stormwater Bills Advance; Farmworker Protection Approved; Beach Hardening Continues to Lurk
Watered-down Drought and Stormwater Bills Advance: CCNC's Director of Governmental Relations Dan Crawford reports that stakeholder negotiations have produced a classic compromise on stormwater rules (i.e., a deal with which no one is happy). Under the compromise bill, which has passed the Senate and been recommended by the House Environment and Natural Resources Committee, coastal stormwater rules would be strengthened from the status quo—but not by as much as the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) rules would have done. In the short run, CCNC is backing the compromise. In the longer run, Crawford says to state policy-makers, "We need to let them [the EMC] do their job!"
Drought management legislation has also been brought forward for consideration in compromised form. HB 2499, "Drought/Water Management Recommendations", would specify the governor's emergency powers during water shortages, and increase the authority of the N.C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to impose restrictions on local water systems during drought. However, the compromise bill fails to include specific mandatory minimum water conservation measures, and is therefore viewed as a major "missed opportunity" by conservationists.
Farmworker Protection Approved: SB 847, "Prevent Agricultural Pesticide Exposure", has been approved by the legislature and sent to the governor for his signature. Toxic Free NC (formerly the Agricultural Resource Project) hailed the bill as a victory for farmworkers, who will gain explicit protection against retaliation for reporting pesticide safety problems. The bill also strengthens pesticide use record-keeping requirements by employers.
Beach Hardening Continues to Lurk: Rumors continue to circulate that some unspecified "compromise" approach may emerge late regarding SB 599, the so-called "Inlet Stabilization Pilot Program" bill. This legislation represents the latest attempt by a small group of wealthy beachfront property owners to carve out exceptions to North Carolina's anti-hardening policies on its ocean shore. The deceptively-named "pilot programs" authorized by the bill are the same old rock groins which have long been conclusively discredited as beach protection tools. These oceanfront hard structures act only to accumulate sand in front of one spot at the expense of down-current areas. Coastal conservationists vigorously oppose this legislation, which passed the Senate last year and has been held in the House since that time. By barring new oceanfront seawalls, groins, and jetties, North Carolina has protected much of its natural beach shoreline for more than 20 years. This is no time to retreat from that sound policy.
Judicial Watch: Appeals Court Throws Out CAIR
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit this week unanimously struck down the Bush EPA's Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). CAIR is a controversial rule which requires 28 states (mostly Eastern states) to reduce air pollutant emissions which travel interstate and affect smog and soot levels elsewhere. Some environmental groups defended the EPA's approach, while others challenged it as too slow and overly reliant on a "cap and trade" pollutant-trading approach.
In its ruling, the Court found that the EPA had exceeded its authority, and ordered the entire rule scrapped. The practical impact of the Court's decision will be to delay final rulemaking on the subject matter until the next presidential administration. As of CIB press time today, most environmental groups' comments on the ruling were not available online, although some were reportedly calling for Congressional action in response. Several North Carolina-based groups had criticized CAIR in 2006 as insufficiently protective of North Carolina's air.
3/31/2008
12/23/2007
EPA Blocks States
http://environmentamerica.org/news-releases/global-warming-solutions/global-warming-solutions/epa-blocks-states-from-cutting-global-warming-pollution-from-vehicles
6/23/2007
Conservation Insider Bulletin
Conservation News to Peruse & Use
Editor: Dan Besse, earthvote@ccnccpac.org
June 22, 2007
Utilities Try to Use Energy Bill to Renew Old Scam: The leading environmental legislative item this week is the attempted renewal by the electric utilities of a bad old idea whose time has already come and gone: the "construction work in progress" financing gimmick for new power plants.
After lengthy negotiations on the Senate side's version of HB 77, "Promote Renewable Energy / Energy Efficiency", an unlovely hybrid emerged into the light. The new SB 3, renamed "Promote Renewable Energy / Baseload Generation", represents an ugly merger of some of the best ideas of this legislative session and some of the worst ones.
CCNC's legislative bulletin, HotList, comments as follows on the result:
"SB 3 is a crucial first step toward...innovation and energy efficiency, saving the state's consumers money, and creating a cleaner environment for the future. However, the current version of SB 3 includes provisions creating substantial incentives for major energy providers to construct more coal and nuclear plants, a major step backward for any kind of clean-energy plan."
It goes on to explain: "The current version of the bill subsidizes the construction of new nuclear power plants, along with allowing for construction costs to be included in calculations of new electric rates. In addition to this, SB 3 lets utility companies include the cost of their environmental compliance measures in their rate calculations, with little review from state agencies. This allows the utilities to pass on these costs to their customers, and removes an important obstacle to new construction. These provisions encourage the power industry to build more new coal and nuclear plants, a serious step backward. These outdated technologies harm the environment, put citizens' health at risk, and only further entrench the state's dependence on foreign energy sources. The General Assembly should reward industry for responsible behavior, not for building new coal or nuclear facilities."
Citizen environmental groups gave mixed reactions to this perverted merger of measures promoting construction of more coal and nuclear baseload plants with the original concept of steps to promote energy efficiency and renewable energy production. Some groups, such as Environmental Defense, continued to stress the bill's original positive measures. Others, such as Environment North Carolina and the N.C. Public Interest Research Group, declared that the negative additions were so bad that they would have to oppose the bill altogether so long as those provisions remained in it. Even if the revised bill passes the Senate, there will be vigorous efforts to remove the offensive provisions during review by the House.
[Editor's Note: CIB's editor sides with those who say that the "baseload construction" measures must be deleted from the bill. These measures include a return to the kind of "construction work in progress" (CWIP) financing provisions which essentially guarantee that any dollar spent on building a new plant gets added to our electric bills—even if it is cancelled during construction. In our view, this guarantee would represent an environmental and economic disaster in the making.
The reason is simple: If the utilities are guaranteed that ratepayers/consumers will pay for whatever plants they build, they will build more than we need--regardless of what is invested in renewable energy and energy efficiency. Utility profits are based primarily on the interplay between the size of their rate base and their rate of return. Therefore, the bigger their rate base (the value of their plants and other facilities), the more potential they have for high profits to their stockholders.
Transferring the entire risk of new construction from their stockholders to the public ratepayers, via CWIP financing, skews their entire planning process. New baseload (coal and nuclear) construction becomes a vastly more attractive proposition, with little or no downside risk to the corporation.
This form of extreme CWIP financing was repealed by the N.C. General Assembly in 1982. The final cancellation of several unneeded nuclear units which were clinging to life via the artificial life support of guaranteed subsidies followed suit. Today is not the time to return to the bad old policy of total assumption of construction risks by the ratepaying public.]
Hog Warriors Occupy the Mall: As noted in last week's CIB, environmental advocates and other concerned parties converged on the mall area adjacent to the legislative building in Raleigh this week, for a 51-hour "Hog Vigil". Participants kicked off the vigil on Wednesday morning with a news conference and unveiling of a model of a hog farm, complete with miniature sprayfield and waste lagoon. Cleanup advocates got an unexpected and ironic PR boost from officials who warned them that if any of their (real) sample hog waste spilled on the ground, it would be considered hazardous waste and they would be fined. Some of the vigil participants live near working farms and sprayfield mist which crosses onto their properties and homes on a daily basis. They just wish that the state would be as aggressive in protecting them as in protecting the sensitivities of our legislators.
Budget Notes: Final budget negotiations continued all week between House and Senate conferees, aimed at resolving the many and wide differences between the chambers' versions of the budget. Treatment of the State Energy Office remains the most important environmental difference. Advocates continue to press House leaders to stand firm in support of their version of the budget on this item. The Senate version dissolves the State Energy Office altogether. That's no way to treat an agency that has saved state taxpayers tens of millions of dollars through its effective leadership in support of implementing energy efficiencies.
On the positive side, both House and Senate budgets this year contain a provision which conservationists have unsuccessfully sought for years: extra inspector positions for the state Sedimentation Control program. (Not enough new positions, but some—which in this case would represent a noteworthy step forward.)
Washington Watch: EPA Proposes Tougher Ozone Standard
Beyond the General Assembly, the other major news we were following this week came from the EPA in the air quality arena. After months of delay, the agency has proposed a tougher standard for ground-level ozone, the major ingredient of urban smog.
Maybe.
The EPA's proposal actually recommended a standard somewhere within a range from 0.070 to 0.075 parts per million (ppm). However, it said at the same time that it would continue taking comments on "alternative standards" from as low as 0.060 ppm to as high as the current standard, 0.080 ppm.
Non-technicians may well be excused for reacting, "Huh?" And, "Whatever it means, why should I care?"
On these questions, we offer our analysis as follows. EPA's scientists think that a tougher standard is appropriate in order to better protect human health from the harmful effects of ozone. It's an irritant which can harm lungs and bronchial passages, trigger asthma attacks, and place additional stress on people with heart conditions and other cardiovascular ailments. On high ozone days, such health complications and emergency room visits for these problems typically go up in impacted areas.
However, pollution-emitting industries strongly oppose the stronger standards. Many local governments, still working on meeting the existing standards, also find the prospect of a new and higher bar to be frustrating. As a result, the ever-timid Bush EPA is keeping its options open. (Stall long enough, and the clock ticks over to a new president.)
By the way, ground-level ozone is formed through a chemical reaction in the atmosphere. Take "precursor" pollutants like nitrogen oxides from power plants and vehicle tailpipes, mix in volatile organic compounds from human and natural sources, and heat well with the summer sunshine. Soon, it produces an unpleasant soup including that unhealthy ozone. That's why ozone pollution tends to be a seasonal problem, associated with weather conditions in addition to pollution levels.
EPA will take comments on its proposal and alternatives for the next three months. For full details, check out its website: http://epa.gov/groundlevelozone/ .
Editor: Dan Besse, earthvote@ccnccpac.org
June 22, 2007
Utilities Try to Use Energy Bill to Renew Old Scam: The leading environmental legislative item this week is the attempted renewal by the electric utilities of a bad old idea whose time has already come and gone: the "construction work in progress" financing gimmick for new power plants.
After lengthy negotiations on the Senate side's version of HB 77, "Promote Renewable Energy / Energy Efficiency", an unlovely hybrid emerged into the light. The new SB 3, renamed "Promote Renewable Energy / Baseload Generation", represents an ugly merger of some of the best ideas of this legislative session and some of the worst ones.
CCNC's legislative bulletin, HotList, comments as follows on the result:
"SB 3 is a crucial first step toward...innovation and energy efficiency, saving the state's consumers money, and creating a cleaner environment for the future. However, the current version of SB 3 includes provisions creating substantial incentives for major energy providers to construct more coal and nuclear plants, a major step backward for any kind of clean-energy plan."
It goes on to explain: "The current version of the bill subsidizes the construction of new nuclear power plants, along with allowing for construction costs to be included in calculations of new electric rates. In addition to this, SB 3 lets utility companies include the cost of their environmental compliance measures in their rate calculations, with little review from state agencies. This allows the utilities to pass on these costs to their customers, and removes an important obstacle to new construction. These provisions encourage the power industry to build more new coal and nuclear plants, a serious step backward. These outdated technologies harm the environment, put citizens' health at risk, and only further entrench the state's dependence on foreign energy sources. The General Assembly should reward industry for responsible behavior, not for building new coal or nuclear facilities."
Citizen environmental groups gave mixed reactions to this perverted merger of measures promoting construction of more coal and nuclear baseload plants with the original concept of steps to promote energy efficiency and renewable energy production. Some groups, such as Environmental Defense, continued to stress the bill's original positive measures. Others, such as Environment North Carolina and the N.C. Public Interest Research Group, declared that the negative additions were so bad that they would have to oppose the bill altogether so long as those provisions remained in it. Even if the revised bill passes the Senate, there will be vigorous efforts to remove the offensive provisions during review by the House.
[Editor's Note: CIB's editor sides with those who say that the "baseload construction" measures must be deleted from the bill. These measures include a return to the kind of "construction work in progress" (CWIP) financing provisions which essentially guarantee that any dollar spent on building a new plant gets added to our electric bills—even if it is cancelled during construction. In our view, this guarantee would represent an environmental and economic disaster in the making.
The reason is simple: If the utilities are guaranteed that ratepayers/consumers will pay for whatever plants they build, they will build more than we need--regardless of what is invested in renewable energy and energy efficiency. Utility profits are based primarily on the interplay between the size of their rate base and their rate of return. Therefore, the bigger their rate base (the value of their plants and other facilities), the more potential they have for high profits to their stockholders.
Transferring the entire risk of new construction from their stockholders to the public ratepayers, via CWIP financing, skews their entire planning process. New baseload (coal and nuclear) construction becomes a vastly more attractive proposition, with little or no downside risk to the corporation.
This form of extreme CWIP financing was repealed by the N.C. General Assembly in 1982. The final cancellation of several unneeded nuclear units which were clinging to life via the artificial life support of guaranteed subsidies followed suit. Today is not the time to return to the bad old policy of total assumption of construction risks by the ratepaying public.]
Hog Warriors Occupy the Mall: As noted in last week's CIB, environmental advocates and other concerned parties converged on the mall area adjacent to the legislative building in Raleigh this week, for a 51-hour "Hog Vigil". Participants kicked off the vigil on Wednesday morning with a news conference and unveiling of a model of a hog farm, complete with miniature sprayfield and waste lagoon. Cleanup advocates got an unexpected and ironic PR boost from officials who warned them that if any of their (real) sample hog waste spilled on the ground, it would be considered hazardous waste and they would be fined. Some of the vigil participants live near working farms and sprayfield mist which crosses onto their properties and homes on a daily basis. They just wish that the state would be as aggressive in protecting them as in protecting the sensitivities of our legislators.
Budget Notes: Final budget negotiations continued all week between House and Senate conferees, aimed at resolving the many and wide differences between the chambers' versions of the budget. Treatment of the State Energy Office remains the most important environmental difference. Advocates continue to press House leaders to stand firm in support of their version of the budget on this item. The Senate version dissolves the State Energy Office altogether. That's no way to treat an agency that has saved state taxpayers tens of millions of dollars through its effective leadership in support of implementing energy efficiencies.
On the positive side, both House and Senate budgets this year contain a provision which conservationists have unsuccessfully sought for years: extra inspector positions for the state Sedimentation Control program. (Not enough new positions, but some—which in this case would represent a noteworthy step forward.)
Washington Watch: EPA Proposes Tougher Ozone Standard
Beyond the General Assembly, the other major news we were following this week came from the EPA in the air quality arena. After months of delay, the agency has proposed a tougher standard for ground-level ozone, the major ingredient of urban smog.
Maybe.
The EPA's proposal actually recommended a standard somewhere within a range from 0.070 to 0.075 parts per million (ppm). However, it said at the same time that it would continue taking comments on "alternative standards" from as low as 0.060 ppm to as high as the current standard, 0.080 ppm.
Non-technicians may well be excused for reacting, "Huh?" And, "Whatever it means, why should I care?"
On these questions, we offer our analysis as follows. EPA's scientists think that a tougher standard is appropriate in order to better protect human health from the harmful effects of ozone. It's an irritant which can harm lungs and bronchial passages, trigger asthma attacks, and place additional stress on people with heart conditions and other cardiovascular ailments. On high ozone days, such health complications and emergency room visits for these problems typically go up in impacted areas.
However, pollution-emitting industries strongly oppose the stronger standards. Many local governments, still working on meeting the existing standards, also find the prospect of a new and higher bar to be frustrating. As a result, the ever-timid Bush EPA is keeping its options open. (Stall long enough, and the clock ticks over to a new president.)
By the way, ground-level ozone is formed through a chemical reaction in the atmosphere. Take "precursor" pollutants like nitrogen oxides from power plants and vehicle tailpipes, mix in volatile organic compounds from human and natural sources, and heat well with the summer sunshine. Soon, it produces an unpleasant soup including that unhealthy ozone. That's why ozone pollution tends to be a seasonal problem, associated with weather conditions in addition to pollution levels.
EPA will take comments on its proposal and alternatives for the next three months. For full details, check out its website: http://epa.gov/groundlevelozone/ .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)