Feds May Say "No Climate Change", Mayors Disagree

The Bush Administration may have taken a stance of questioning whether "climate change" is real, but more than 200 mayors across the US have pledged that their cities "will work to reduce fossil fuel emission levels and consider other measures to address environmental impacts." (Mayors Across U.S. Rally For Environment.)

The Mayors Agreement commits cities to:

• Strive to meet or beat the Kyoto Protocol targets in their own communities, through actions ranging from anti-sprawl land-use policies to urban forest restoration projects to public information campaigns;
• Urge their state governments, and the federal government, to enact policies to meet the greenhouse gas emission reduction target suggested for the United States in the Kyoto Protocol - a 7 percent reduction from 1990 levels by 2012;
• Urge the U.S. Congress to pass the bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation, which would establish a national emission trading system.

These mayors seem to mean it: City crafting broad plan to improve livability. And in Utah, Cities better on environment than feds, Rocky tells mayors.

So, I have three questions.

1. If you read the first article above, one St. Louis-area mayor says he's concerned, but thinks there's little to be done at the local level. Is he right?

2. How can this agreement be effective? It's certainly not enforceable or anything, so, it's a declaratory document, an expression of intent and consensus. What's going to happen when or if different communities fail their Kyoto goal, not from an enforcement perspective, but from a motivating perspective? No one can be held to this agreement, though they certainly can be shamed. Will they give up after a year and walk away?

3. Taking a Boston-centric approach: What might public commitment to such an agreement do to, say, future transit plans for the Boston area? (Note: Governor Mitt Romney withdrew Massachusetts from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Iniative (RGGI) in mid-December, but the state legislature will be introducing language to bring Massachusetts into compliance anyway. Not to mention, Mayor Menino has signed on to the Mayor's Agreement.)

The home of the agreement is here, and the text is available here (PDF), and lastly, a list of the current signatories: right here.

It'll be very interesting to see how this unfolds.

CA Goes After Second-Hand Smoke

California Classifies Second-Hand Smoke a Toxic Risk

CA's Air Resources Board "voted Thursday to classify second-hand tobacco smoke as a 'toxic air contaminant,' a first-in-the-nation move that could ultimately toughen state regulations against smoking."

California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment estimates that as many as 5,500 non-smoking Californians die annually of heart disease related to second- hand smoke and as many as 1,100 die from lung cancer caused by second-hand smoke.

Will Massachusetts be next?

Mercury -- Not Just In Old Thermometers Anymore

I pulled this from the latest Conservation Law Foundation newsletter. It highlights the politics behind protecting the environment and public health and the need to NOT take baby steps.

New Hampshire Legislature Allows More Mercury Pollution
CLF Demands Protections for Public Health and Water Bodies

In a blow to public health and New Hampshire's air quality, the New Hampshire House of Representatives killed a bill passed last year by the Senate that would have required reductions in mercury emissions from coal-burning power plants by approximately 50 percent by 2009 and 80 percent by 2013. Instead, the House has taken up a new bill -- negotiated with PSNH -- that does not require interim mercury reductions, with no reductions required before 2013. Instead, this bill calls for sulfur dioxide emissions reductions through a well-known technology that will also reduce mercury emissions.Though supporting lawmakers' efforts to reduce dangerous mercury pollution, CLF is urging New Hampshire to pursue bolder action by setting more stringent mercury reduction targets and tightening deadlines for implementation. The new proposal would allow substantially more mercury to be released into the environment over a longer period of time, and would allow inter-pollutant trading of mercury credits for sulfur dioxide credits. CLF is also calling for a careful analysis of the economic benefits of installing pollution controls as soon as possiblefor rate payers. Based on CLF's preliminary analysis, New Hampshire rate payers would save significantly if sulfur emission controls are installed by 2009-2010. These economic savings must be considered along with the public health and environmental benefits from reducing mercury and sulfur dioxide emissions. New Hampshire lakes have some of the highest levels of mercury in the nation. Mercury pollution contaminates water bodies and builds up in organisms, working its way up the food chain as humans consume the fish living in polluted water bodies. Aneurotoxin, mercury is especially dangerous for developing fetuses and young children. Even low levels of mercury exposurecan lead to neurological damage in children -- including effectson motor skills, learning capacity and memory.
Read more about mercury pollution at:http://ga0.org/ct/odqvh691emPK/

Water as Commodity

"I don't think we should treat water as a commodity."

That's the quote at the end of a Boston Globe article on the MWRA considering selling surplus water, Agency seeks to sell surplus water. The co-director of the "watchdog agency" Water Supply Citizens Advisory Committee said she thought that the surplus water should not be sold to service a debt, and in fact, that it should not be treated as a commodity.

So. Do we pay for water, or water delivery? Doesn't water belong to everyone already? Is it a commons? Is water held in the public trust? Is it so precious that to commodify it is a moral wrong? Might different approaches be more applicable in rural v. urban contexts?

Climate Change and Frogs

Climate-Change Fungus is Wiping out Frogs

The article describes the decimation of frog populations in Costa Rica, allegedly "the first clear evidence that widespread extinction is taking place because of global warming."

The health of frog populations in a region is generally considered a key indicator of the habitat's health. (Check out Frogwatch or Frogwatch USA for a brief rundown of why.)

In this case, warmer temps led to greater cloud cover, which was just what this particular fungus needed to thrive.

What are the indicator species in New England, how are these canaries in our coal mine faring, and what does it mean for us?

Malignant Design Anyone?

I recently finished reading Daniel Quinn's novel Ishmael. The premise was how humanity has created cultural myths to essentially justify civilization - or "how things came to be this way." In the same vein, ways of life that either are in harmony or dischord with nature were said to have parted ways in the Euphrates River Valley when humanity became Homo Sapiens Sapiens (actually Latin for "very wise man") or more modern.

While reading and researching, I came across a few references to Noam Chomsky. You may be wondering how I made the leap to an Intelligent Design article but here's the logic: Noam proposes 'malignant design' - signs that we're headed toward environmental catastrophy.

Here is the article: http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20051006.htm

Thoughts?

Administrivia: Blog Charter and Guidelines

NESL Environmental Law Society Blog Charter

The purpose of this blog is to provide a community forum for the environmentally-minded among NESL alums and students. New England School of Law has an active Environmental Law Society that aims to develop and promote programs for students interested in environmental law as a career and for those generally interested in environmental issues.

Our hope is to share our environmental issues and concerns where we can collectively address key environmental law issues, focus awareness on the legal and policy management of these issues, and provide advocacy on the local, state and federal levels through sponsorship, participation, education, and networking.

We encourage participation through posting blog notes, facilitating discussion boards, and mingles. Dates for gatherings will be posted as they develop.

Posting Guidelines for Our NESL ELS Blog Members

Posts on environmental law, science or policy are particularly welcome, as is any article or comment in line with the Society's environmental focus. The environment is a broad topic, so don't be afraid to bring up something with a convoluted connection to environmental concerns, so long as that connection is reasonably clear in your posted article or comment.

Environmental issues are matters not only of great breadth and depth, but capable of stirring great passion as well. Please post courteously. "Flames" will be deleted.

Questions? Comments? Suggestions?

Please direct information on advocacy opportunities, suggestions for mingles, etc., to Elizabeth Kadlub of the NESL Environmental Law Society, at elkadlub@yahoo.com.

Please direct any technical or "how-to" questions about joining the blog, making posts or comments, using Blogger in general, etc., to Sidra Vitale, at sidra@vitale.net. (Please note that this blog is hosted by Blogger.com. NESL staff, students, and the ELS do not run or maintain Blogger, or the servers used to host Blogger blogs. We will not be able to respond to reports of the Blogger service going down, were it to do so.)

Thank you, and welcome to the NESL ELS Blog!