Eco-Justice

A water weary reporter recently asked me why people should pay attention to the State Water Resources Control Board’s public trust flow recommendations, due to be finalized next week. “I mean, isn’t this just another report to sit on another shelf?” It’s a fair question, but adding more paper to more shelves was certainly not the intent of the lawmakers who fought hard to keep this key aspect of last fall’s Delta legislation intact.

Others are seeing value in the Board’s work as well. As the San Francisco Chronicle put it last week, the Delta “is not a bottomless well.” The Chronicle went on to say that the Water Board’s draft public trust flow analysis is a “bell-ringing reminder of the obvious,” that our 70-year trend of increasing diversions from the Delta is not sustainable and that “California can’t keep tapping the Delta without harming it.”

The San Jose Mercury News reached similar, if even more pointed, conclusions opining that, “The first, second and third priority for the future of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast, is preserving its health.” This is no wild-eyed green diatribe, but the view from the Valley, Silicon Valley, that its economic future is linked to ensuring the health of the Bay-Delta. The Mercury News connected the dots from last fall’s water deal to tomorrow’s water costs, noting – perhaps with a touch of irritation – the disparity between what is being asked of cities versus agriculture: “The agreement [in the Delta legislation] demands that urban water users reduce their consumption by 20 percent. How much does it ask of the agriculture industry, which grabs 80 percent of the water used by California? Zero.”

And of course the flow criteria will not stay shelf bound if the fishing industry has any say in the matter. The always colorful Zeke Grader (you have admire anyone who can find a way to use “horse manure” and “reflexive mendacity” in the same article) makes the point that in many ways the Board’s determination that we are over-diverting from the Delta is not new, but echoes prior draft findings that did not make their way to Board adoption. In the view of Mr. Grader and many of his compatriots, nothing less than the future of salmon fishing in California may be at stake.

The Board and its staff have done the hard part, pulling together years of science and piles of studies demonstrating that the higher flows are needed to restore and preserve the health of the estuary. Adopting this report and its flow criteria should be easy. Editorial boards and salmon fishermen are noticing the significance of the announcement, and you can bet that legislative leaders and others will notice too. The Board’s findings will be a significant data point for key water policy decisions going forward, including the Bay Delta Conservation Plan process. Californians are beginning to recognize that we need to conserve our water resources for the future. A weary corps of water reporters may just have some significant news to look forward to next week.

Main Feed - Environmental Defense Uncategorized

By Stacy Small, Ph.D.   

Like crude oil, scientific comparisons can be slippery. When Americans first hear that “only” 2,900 dead birds have been collected and tallied in the Gulf of Mexico following the BP oil disaster, they can be forgiven for initially thinking that the Exxon Valdez spill was worse for wildlife. By the time the full story unfolds, this media myth may prove to be untrue.    

For several reasons, the official daily casualty report is an incomplete account of wildlife damages in the Gulf of Mexico, especially for birds, and shouldn’t be the only metric used to describe the wildlife impact.     

• The daily casualty report represents only the number of collected and captured animals, which may only be a fraction of the birds left to die in the wild. 
• Oil and chemical-exposed birds may die and be scavenged or sink in Gulf waters, uncounted, and a dynamic environment of winds and currents decreases the likelihood that carcasses will wash ashore. 
• Open waters and coastal wetlands can be particularly challenging environments to access and survey, compared to rocky shorelines. 
• Finally, assessing wildlife damages goes beyond counting individual animals; ecosystem impacts like habitat damage and persistent toxins may only reveal themselves through long-term studies of population and food web dynamics.

It is very encouraging that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, state and federal wildlife agencies, and non-governmental organizations are working pro-actively with farmers in the region to create emergency habitat for shorebirds and waterfowl as fall migration season approaches. To evaluate the success of these programs, trained wildlife biologists should be employed to observe and report on how these and other alternate habitats are being used, compared to the oiled coastal areas.    

To openly assess the full damage to fish and wildlife, we need independent, long-term, and widespread surveys that systematically monitor and publicly report:   

• Habitat use in damaged, restored, and alternate emergency habitats;
• Short- and long-term effects of the disaster on  animal populations and the entire food web; and
• The fate and transport of oil  and chemical dispersants from the Deepwater Horizon oil rig.

This view was reinforced by Dr. Robert Spies of Applied Marine Sciences, Dr. Erik Rifkin of the National Aquarium, and Stanley Senner of the Ocean Conservancy in their testimony on July 28 before the Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. They all stressed the need for ecosystem studies in the Gulf that are long-term, independent, and peer-reviewed, and they emphasizing the importance of scientific rigor and transparency in the Gulf Natural Resource Damage Assessment.   

Dr. Stacy Small is an EDF wildlife ecologist who specializes in bird populations.

Main Feed - Environmental Defense Uncategorized

By Stacy Small, Ph.D.   

Like crude oil, scientific comparisons can be slippery. When Americans first hear that “only” 2,900 dead birds have been collected and tallied in the Gulf of Mexico following the BP oil disaster, they can be forgiven for initially thinking that the Exxon Valdez spill was worse for wildlife. By the time the full story unfolds, this media myth may prove to be untrue.    

For several reasons, the official daily casualty report is an incomplete account of wildlife damages in the Gulf of Mexico, especially for birds, and shouldn’t be the only metric used to describe the wildlife impact.     

• The daily casualty report represents only the number of collected and captured animals, which may only be a fraction of the birds left to die in the wild. 
• Oil and chemical-exposed birds may die and be scavenged or sink in Gulf waters, uncounted, and a dynamic environment of winds and currents decreases the likelihood that carcasses will wash ashore. 
• Open waters and coastal wetlands can be particularly challenging environments to access and survey, compared to rocky shorelines. 
• Finally, assessing wildlife damages goes beyond counting individual animals; ecosystem impacts like habitat damage and persistent toxins may only reveal themselves through long-term studies of population and food web dynamics.

It is very encouraging that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, state and federal wildlife agencies, and non-governmental organizations are working pro-actively with farmers in the region to create emergency habitat for shorebirds and waterfowl as fall migration season approaches. To evaluate the success of these programs, trained wildlife biologists should be employed to observe and report on how these and other alternate habitats are being used, compared to the oiled coastal areas.    

To openly assess the full damage to fish and wildlife, we need independent, long-term, and widespread surveys that systematically monitor and publicly report:   

• Habitat use in damaged, restored, and alternate emergency habitats;
• Short- and long-term effects of the disaster on  animal populations and the entire food web; and
• The fate and transport of oil  and chemical dispersants from the Deepwater Horizon oil rig.

This view was reinforced by Dr. Robert Spies of Applied Marine Sciences, Dr. Erik Rifkin of the National Aquarium, and Stanley Senner of the Ocean Conservancy in their testimony on July 28 before the Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. They all stressed the need for ecosystem studies in the Gulf that are long-term, independent, and peer-reviewed, and they emphasizing the importance of scientific rigor and transparency in the Gulf Natural Resource Damage Assessment.   

Dr. Stacy Small is an EDF wildlife ecologist who specializes in bird populations.

Main Feed - Environmental Defense Uncategorized

By Julia Li, 2010 Climate Corps fellow at Procter & Gamble, MBA candidate at Michael G. Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Member of Net Impact

Sometimes doing the right thing feels like a drop in the bucket.  Such was the sentiment when I first became an EDF Climate Corps fellow at Procter & Gamble.  I wondered how much of a difference I could make at such an industry giant.  On the other hand, a leaky faucet can waste twenty gallons of water a day.  Suddenly those drops start to add up.

Unlike most fellows who were looking for savings in office buildings and data centers, I was staring down a 37-acre beast of a manufacturing facility—the Pringles plant in Jackson, Tennessee.  P&G’s many sustainability teams and experts again made me wonder what kind of contribution I could make.  Feeling trepidation, coupled with excitement at this unique assignment, I ventured forth.

P&G has been eager to show its dedication to sustainability.  I have been fortunate enough to travel to Jackson twice since I started my fellowship five weeks ago.  At the site, I have full access to the people, plant and other resources necessary to make my evaluations—not to mention all the crunchy Pringles I could ever want to eat!

What I found were opportunities for improvement and potential for major savings in three overarching areas: lighting, roof coating and rebates.

Lighting

The Pringles plant has vast square footages of support space, utilities rooms, mechanical rooms, and production rooms that operate twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week.  I realized quickly that they didn’t all need to be lit 24/7.  I donned my hairnet and my steel-toed shoes to uncover the spaces that could benefit from lighting timers, occupancy sensors and daylight photosensors.  My growing list currently has over 100 spaces, each another drop in my proverbial bucket.

Roof Coating

Then I took my search up onto the roof, where I discovered an expansive—and more importantly, black-colored—roofing cover.  Standing up there on a hot summer day, I considered frying an egg on that surface.  One could only imagine the amount of extra energy load this adds to the HVAC system.  Fortunately, modern technology has made roof coatings available with high reflectivity and emissivity.

Rebates

In addition, I discovered a financial incentive from the Tennessee Valley Authority that is only about a year old: the Major Industrial Program.  This incentive is available on energy efficiency projects for large industrial facilities that have a combined payback period of over two years.  Since P&G is already vested in these projects, this is just icing on the cake.

I have learned in the last five weeks that there are plenty of potential savings in any company, regardless of size, available resources or existing sustainability initiatives.  All it needs is a fresh set of eyes, perhaps belonging to an EDF Climate Corps fellow, to make those savings pop.  And once you pop, the fun don’t stop.

Main Feed - Environmental Defense Uncategorized

Our last case study in this week's Catch Share Conversation about harvesting cooperatives comes from the Gulf of Alaska. In 2007, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council implemented a five year pilot cooperative program in the commercial sector of the Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Fishery. The program was designed to address problems of overcapacity and derby fishing and to meet various additional goals. After three years, the pilot program is meeting its goals of ending the race for fish, improving product quality, protecting shore plants and communities, and decreasing bycatch and discards.

Read the full post�

Main Feed - Environmental Defense Uncategorized

Our last case study in this week's Catch Share Conversation about harvesting cooperatives comes from the Gulf of Alaska. In 2007, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council implemented a five year pilot cooperative program in the commercial sector of the Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Fishery. The program was designed to address problems of overcapacity and derby fishing and to meet various additional goals. After three years, the pilot program is meeting its goals of ending the race for fish, improving product quality, protecting shore plants and communities, and decreasing bycatch and discards.

Read the full post�

Main Feed - Environmental Defense Uncategorized

The results are in from the 10^th Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) poll on Californians and the Environment.

Despite economic conditions, Golden State residents overwhelmingly support the state’s clean energy and clean air measure. What’s more, they strongly believe that aggressively pursuing cleaner energy and environmental protection is a ‘win-win’ proposition that will create jobs.  Twice as many respondents predict that AB 32, California’s landmark Global Warming Solutions Act, will create rather than cost jobs.    

Two thirds support AB 32, which is no surprise given Californians’ deeply held environmental values coupled with the job growth and investments flowing into start-up companies across the state.

Support for AB 32 has held steady over the last two years. This is good news for those who support it and bad news for the Texas oil companies bankrolling Proposition 23. Considered by many to be the battle royal among November’s initiatives, this cynical effort to kill our clean energy and air quality programs appears headed for defeat, if these numbers are any indication. The message is clear—we don’t want out-of-state polluters to slow our booming green economy and keep us addicted to their dirty, polluting products.  

Californians do want AB 32, believing it is key to getting people working on energy solutions to increase our independence, help us compete in a trillion dollar global market and protect public health and our way of life. 

See you at the polls in November.

Main Feed - Environmental Defense Uncategorized

WASHINGTON (July 29, 2010) – In front of a giant inflatable rubber duck meant to illustrate how even the simplest items can contain unsafe chemicals, a crowd of scientists, health professionals, parents, children and advocates participated in the inaugural “Race for the Cause” on the National Mall today.

NRDC: News/Media Center Feed Uncategorized

WASHINGTON (July 29, 2010) -- EPA today denied petitions from a rogues gallery of climate deniers who had asked the agency to reconsider its scientific finding that greenhouse gases endanger public health and the environment.

NRDC: News/Media Center Feed Uncategorized

WASHINGTON (July 29, 2010) -- Legislation introduced today by Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) seeks to reduce truck-borne pollution in and around our nation’s shipping ports, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council. The federal legislation will protect port authority to implement stronger environmental standards on trucks and protect the pioneering Clean Truck Program established in October 2008 by the Port of Los Angeles.

NRDC: News/Media Center Feed Uncategorized