ELS Connections

The New England School of Law Environmental Law Society Alum-Student Network.

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Spring Lunch Seminars at CLF

This was forwarded to me from Abbie at CLF. Everyone is welcome. Simply contact her at CLF if you would like to attend.

Spring Brown Bag Lunch Series at the Conservation Law Foundation

CLF’s Brown Bag Lunches cover the most pressing environmental issues facing the Bay State and offer a friendly forum in which to share ideas. Bring your lunch and come prepared to discuss!

All lunches are held at 62 Summer Street, Boston, MA at 12:00 noon. Contact Abbie Daniel at 617-350-0990 x727 or adaniel@clf.org to reserve a spot at the table.

Getting the Lead Out!
Friday, March 3, 2006
In Massachusetts and across New England, pregnant mothers, children and babies are living in homes with lead pipes, lead solder and leaded brass fixtures which are exposing them to dangerous levels of this powerful toxin. Many of these Massachusetts residents are from communities of color and/or low-income communities which experience the highest rates of childhood lead poisoning. Learn about this issue and CLF’s work on preventing lead poisoning. Come prepared to explore other environmental issues that disproportionately affect low-income communities and communities of color.

Our Growing Water Crisis
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Eastern Massachusetts is facing an expanding water crisis. Streams and rivers are running at dangerously low levels and water quality is highly degraded. Learn how our water and wastewater management “solutions” have contributed to this crisis and how we can rehabilitate this region’s water resources.

The Bay State’s Transit Future
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Transit is an economic lifeline to those who depend on it. It is also key to reducing air pollution and climate-changing gas emissions. Yet here in Massachusetts, public transit systems are falling into disrepair, causing greater car dependence and sapping our urban centers of their economic vitality. Join us for a look at these issues, the challenges lying ahead, and the ways CLF is helping to solve them.

The Problem of Acid Rain
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Acid rain has a devastating impact on New England’s forests, water bodies and public health. Emissions from power plants that form the ingredients for acid rain blow from west to east, crossing state and national boundaries, causing this environmental crisis. Let’s discuss the problems, ways to curb acid rain and how to begin the process of ecological recovery in New England.

Saturday, February 25, 2006

20th Annual Environmental Leadership Conference

Toxics Action Center and the New England Grassroots Environmental Fund invite you to Environmental Action 2006, our 20th annual environmental leadership conference on March 18, 2006 at Wentworth Institute of Technology in Boston, MA.

The keynote speaker this year is Craig Williams, Director of the Chemical Weapons Working Group and the Kentucky Environmental Foundation. Against overwhelming odds, Craig led a successful grassroots campaign to stop the US Army from disposing chemical weapons with incinerators at four locations across the country. Dr. Marshall Ganz, lecturer in Public Policy at Harvard University, is our featured speaker. Marshall got his start as a civil rights organizer in Mississippi and later as the Organizing Director with Cesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers in California. He now teaches and writes on leadership, organization, and strategy in social movements, civic associations, and politics.
The conference will offer over 35 workshops including:
- Generating Front Page Media Coverage
- Winning the Support of Elected Officials
- Recruiting New Members for Your Group
- Planning a Winning Campaign
- Fundraising and Grant Writing
Other workshops will include hazardous waste cleanup, pesticide-free lawns, safe cosmetics, global warming, liquid natural gas, landfills and trash transfer stations, recycling, land protection, sprawl, greenways and rails to trails, diesel and air pollution, etc.
You will have the opportunity to discuss environmental and public health threats and solutions with experts in the field. You can network throughout the day with other activists and decision-makers, including Bob Golledge, Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, who will be there to answer your questions about any local concerns. You can make connections with other activists at one of the issue summits on pesticides, energy, and solid waste.
See all of the conference workshops, browse the silent auction prizes, learn more about the speakers, see who is cosponsoring the event, register, at www.toxicsaction.org .
Registration is $50 to cosponsor, $30 pre-paid and $35 at the door. Breakfast, a reception, and childcare are included.

Email Jamie at jamie@toxicsaction.org, or call her at (617) 747-4362 with questions.

Friday, February 24, 2006

Volunteering with the ELS

1) The February 25th event I advertised earlier is unfortunately all booked up due to a small number of participants. Here's an interesting survey opportunity that's coming up:

The Massachusetts Environmental Trust awarded both CRWA and the Mystic River Watershed Association (MyRWA) funding to identify, monitor and help eliminate non-point source (NPS) pollution still threatening the health of the two rivers.

The first step in the program is to conduct comprehensive shoreline surveys from Farm Road in Dover to the mouth of the Charles at the New Charles River Dam. The visual monitoring effort will cover over half of the 80-mile river corridor. These surveys will act as a baseline assessment, noting unmapped outfall pipes, erosion problems and other indicators of NPS pollution problems and help identify and prioritize problems of an urgent nature requiring immediate action. Volunteers are needed to conduct these surveys. For more information about shoreline survey work and volunteering, click on the follwoing link (and if that doesn't work, please copy and paste)

Find it and Fix it Program

There's a form to fill out if you're interested. A part of the survey might include pedalling around in a canoe. Should be fun. I'am already signed up.

2) There is a big cleanup opprtunity coming up for the Earth Day, April 29th. This is a Saturday. I am waiting to hear whether the CRW would benefit from another larger group, in which case I'll put up posters on our SBA board. Meanwhile, let me know if any of you are interested- ivaziza@gmail.com. There is a variety of locations, more info at:

Find it and Fix it Program

Thursday, February 23, 2006

China's Environmental Concerns as it gears for 2008

With the upcoming Olympic games in Beijing and China's recent entrance into the WTO, I thought it would be interesting to highlight some of the environmental concerns plaguing China's lands. While this is only a small excerpt taken from Country Analysis Briefs, the full article is far more enlightening. For more information, see http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/chinaenv.html.

China Environmental Issues
INTRODUCTION
China's gradual transition to a market economy, which has been proceeding for two decades, has put China among the world's fastest growing economies. While economic growth has increased incomes and improved health indicators, as well as reduced overall poverty levels, growth has not been totally benign. Environmental pollution from coal combustion is damaging human health, air and water quality, agriculture and ultimately the economy.

New laws establishing comprehensive regulations have begun to curb this environmental damage. On the national level, policies are formulated by the State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA) and approved by the State Council. The role of SEPA, which was established in 1998, is to disseminate national environmental policy and regulations, collect data and provide technological advice on both national and international environmental issues.

Despite government efforts, however, concentrations of most pollutants remain high. In June 2002, China enacted the Cleaner Production Promotion Law, which established demonstration programs for pollution remediation in ten major Chinese cities, and designated several river valleys as priority areas.

Air pollution
A report released in 1998 by the World Health Organization (WHO) noted that of the ten most polluted cities in the world, seven can be found in China. Sulfur dioxide and soot caused by coal combustion are two major air pollutants, resulting in the formation of acid rain, which now falls on about 30% of China's total land area. Industrial boilers and furnaces consume almost half of China's coal and are the largest single point sources of urban air pollution.

In an effort to reduce air pollution in Beijing, the municipal government in 1999 ordered city vehicles to convert to liquefied petroleum gas and natural gas. By 2002, Beijing had the largest fleet of natural gas buses in the world - a total of 1,630 vehicles. Subway and light rail systems in Beijing also are being expanded.
China's national legislature, through its model of "Cleaner Production" and other attempts to reduce air pollution, has significantly altered the Law on the Prevention and Control of Air Pollution, which was revised in 2002. Still, a report issued by SEPA in June 2003 said officials were "still not optimistic" about the overall success of efforts to curb air pollution.

Energy Use and Carbon Emissions
Outside of Japan, energy consumption in East Asia is dominated by one sector in one country - the industrial sector in China. Overall, China's energy consumption accounts for approximately 53% of East Asia's (excluding Japan) total energy consumption. In 2001, China accounted for 9.8% of world energy consumption. By 2025, projections indicate that China will be responsible for approximately 14.2% of world energy consumption.

Of the 39.7 quadrillion Btu of total primary energy consumed in China in 2001, 63.4% was coal, 25.8% was oil, 6.9% hydroelectricity, and 3.1% natural gas. While residential consumption has increased its share of China's energy demand over the last decade, the largest absolute gains in consumption were from the industrial sector.

With 12.7% of the world's total, China is the second largest emitter of energy-related carbon dioxide emissions after the United States. China's share of world carbon emissions is expected to increase in coming years, reaching 17.8% by 2025. Carbon mitigation strategies are focusing on technologies to reduce emissions from industrial boilers and motors. Other mitigation efforts emphasize improving Chinese vehicles' efficiency. Estimates suggest that transportation sector energy consumption could grow by nearly 7% per year as the government pledges major investments in the country's transportation infrastructure. If this growth is not accompanied by improvements in vehicular fuel-efficiency standards and a replacement of outdated technology, carbon emissions from the transportation sector will grow significantly.
Overall, total Chinese energy-related carbon emissions more than doubled since 1980, when the government began implementing energy conservation laws. One study attempting to determine the causes of this increase concluded that China's decrease in energy intensity since 1980 has not been sufficient to counterbalance the large increase in emissions due to economic and population growth. Increased energy demand has encouraged China to accelerate the development of cleaner fuels such as natural gas, coalbed methane and hydropower. Current efforts by China to offset coal consumption include the development of natural gas and coalbed methane infrastructure, increasing the number of combined heat and power plants, adding approximately 3,000 megawatts (MW) of hydropower annually, and developing renewable energy resources such as wind and photovoltaics for electricity generation.

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Speaking of Global Warming

So in an environmental spirit I decided to read Michael Crichton's State of Fear, if nothing else than for a good laugh. Michael, like most one-sided writers brings up points that are true in a vacuum but when placed in a larger context, present problems for the world.

For example, Mr. Crichton proposes that global warming will present longer growing seasons and less use of winter heating oil thus aiding agricultural communities. While that may be true for some countries, Michael fails to consider the other ones that suffer irreversible droughts leading to further desertification. Michael does not even mention desertification in his book; nor did he really present a fair picture of the environmental movement. His champions are the scientists, and his radicals are the environmentalists, forgetting all along that you can't have one without the other.

The unfortunate result is that I happen to agree with what Mr. Crichton calls the "State of Fear" being perpetuated by the media on a daily basis--- fear of catching the flu, of a terrorist attack, of the economy floundering, etc. However, perhaps I have missed something, but it doesn't seem to me that the state of the environment, particularly with respect to global warming, has been given much media attention over the last 6 years now. Can the media really be responsible for putting the general public in a "state of fear" over global warming??? I don't think so.

Nice try Michael, but perhaps you should have tried your theory on something that does receive media attention, like our colorful terror alerts. Maybe then you can discuss this country's "state of fear."

Global Warning--North Pole Won't Be Frozen By End Of Century

I saw this on 60 Minutes the other night. Very interesting and alarming look into global warming issues, ranging from the melting of the North Pole resulting in a sea level rise of three feet to the possible extinction of polar bears.

Monday, February 20, 2006

EPA Set to Close Library Network and Electronic Catalog

EPA Set to Close Library Network and Electronic Catalog

Under Bush’s plan, $2 million of a total agency library budget of $2.5 million will be lost, including the entire $500,000 budget for the EPA Headquarters library and its electronic catalog that makes it possible to search for documents through the entire EPA library network. These reductions are just a small portion of the $300 million in cuts the administration has proposed for EPA operations.
At the same time, President Bush is proposing to significantly increase EPA research funding for topics such as nanotechnology, air pollution and drinking water system security as part of his “American Competitive Initiative.”


The article asks the obvious question: how can the ill-informed by competitive?

Friday, February 17, 2006

Eastern Water Resources Conference

On May 11, 2006 at the Hyatt Regency in Miami, Fl, ABA's Section of Environment, Energy and Resources will be hosting its Eastern Water Resources Conference. This conference will focus specifically on water resource issues facing the eastern U.S. For those of you interested in attending visit the section website at http://www.abanet.org/environ.

Just thought some of you might find this interesting :>)

unpaid opportunity in Texas

I know this won't be something most of you will be able to take advantage of, but figured I should post it just in case someone had a place to stay and a means of support in Texas:

VOLUNTEER LAW CLERKS NEEDED IN GALVESTON

“…we are part of a noble mission. Legal services is not about helping individuals fit into oppressive societal structures…. Legal services is about the war on poverty. And, the war continues.”
7/3/02 National Legal Aid & Defender Association newsletter

Lone Star Legal Aid once again invites applications for four volunteer full time summer law clerk positions for a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to do legal work with poor people in Texas in our office on Galveston Island. The office is located approximately 40 miles from Houston in historic downtown Galveston in a building that survived the legendary 1900 Storm. See www.galveston.com. Texas has the 7th highest rate in the US of residents below the poverty guidelines with 15.6%. Approximately 22.3% of the island’s 57,000 population fall below the federal poverty guidelines.
LSLA is a private, non-profit law firm that works to promote and defend the rights of the poor. We provide high quality legal services and have been successful in establishing important rights for our clients through administrative advocacy and representation in individual lawsuits and impact litigation. Interested applicants should review the law firm’s web at www.lonestarlegal.org. The Galveston office handles a broad range of cases while engaged in the War on Poverty.
The law clerks will report to the managing attorney and will be part of a dynamic legal aid program that is the 4th largest in the country and covers East Texas and Southwest Arkansas. The clerks may receive assignments to assist attorneys from other LSLA offices.
The successful applicant should possess: Sense of outrage at injustice. Strong interest in poverty issues and Constitutional law. Ability to develop and implement non-litigation strategies. Self-motivation and ability to work under pressure. Willingness to work beyond confines of the normal business day when required to do so and to travel when necessary. Computer literacy. Strong interpersonal skills, positive attitude and ability to thrive in a small busy office. Good sense of humor.
Compensation: None. Applicants are expected to obtain a grant or scholarship from their law school or public interest foundation.
We seek to be a well-balanced, multi-cultural office. Please send a cover letter, resume, writing sample, and three references to: Lone Star Legal Aid, Stephen C. McIntyre, Managing Attorney, 306 22nd Street, Suite 202, Galveston, Texas 77550.

Thursday, February 16, 2006

Trail of Tears in 2006?

I have not taken Native American Law yet but somehow I thought an atrocity like Black Mesa. Senate bill S.1003 could not possibly exist in modern society. I learned about the trail of tears (US Gov't forced Cherokee relocation from Georgia to Oklahoma in 1838) as did most American school children. The light in which it was taught to me was one of deep shame of such past acts and a hope/assumption that similar acts could not happen in enlightened present day America. Similarly, when we covered our first case in Property Law, Johnson v M’intosh, one strain of analysis was how the Justices were a product of their time and such a restricting result on the ability of Native people to control their property, while necessary for the European conception of property, may have at least had different reasoning if decided today.

Well, it seems that my ideas were wrong. Although most of this information comes directly from a letter from Black Mesa Indigenous Support, I take them as true. 30 years ago the Public Law 93 – 531, the original Navajo-Hopi Relocation bill, was passed. Now a new bill, Black Mesa. Senate bill S. 1003, "The Navajo Hopi Land Settlement Act Amendments of 2005" is before Congress. The new bill sets a new timetable for the forced relocation of a number of Navajo families. This bill is now on the Senate Calendar. The last major relocation bill was approved by the Senate within a month after being placed on the Senate Calendar and stayed in the House of Representatives less than a week before becoming law. S 1003 may pass the Senate and the House of Representatives within the next few weeks.

This bill will permanently displace the indigenous families of Big Mountain and surrounding communities on Black Mesa from their ancestral lands and will relieve the federal government of any further responsibility for the relocated people. S.1003, sponsored by Senator John McCain (R-AZ), comes as Peabody Coal, the world's largest coal company, is planning to expand its strip mining of American Indian lands, drawing down a high-quality residential aquifer in the process. Only one thing stands in Peabody's way: indigenous people live on the land below which lies billions of tons of low-sulfur coal. As with their ancestors, the land is the basis for the Black Mesa people's traditions, spirituality, and livelihoods. The passage of this bill would effectively devastate these traditional communities of Navajo, or Dineh, stripping them of their identity and way of life which is tied into the land itself.

Fortunately, a small window of opportunity exists to stop the passage of this bill.
Click here to find out more and help.

Although the forced removal of people from their homes for a commercial venture seems insane to me, I guess this case cannot simply be blamed on racism as the Supreme Court last year expanded towns ability to take private property for the benefits of towns in a somewhat similar fashion.

Grizzly Bears meet Admin Law

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service proposed last Fall to remove ESA protections for the Grizzly Bears in Yellowstone National Park.

Since the mid-90s, the bear population has allegedly increased from four to seven percent annually with over 600 bears now living around the Park.

The environmentalist concern is that the proposal is too soon to ensure a thriving population continues without protection and meanwhile agency concerns indicate the proposal as is, is simply too cumbersome and technical.

The Notice & Comment period was supposed to expire yesterday but in response to requests for extension on both sides of the proposal, it has been extended until March 20th.

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

Beware: Roberts May Destroy Wetlands

There are three cases about to be heard by the Supreme Court regarding the reach of the Clean Water Act.
Rapanos v. U.S. - Involves whether the Clean Water Act's prohibition on unpermitted discharges to "navigable waters" extends to distant wetlands and whether Congress' commerce clause power to regulate those unpermitted discharges is exceeded.
Carabell v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Similarly, focuses on wetlands isolated from "waters of the United States" and on Congress' commerce clasue powers.
S.D. Warren Co. v. Maine Board of Environmental Protection - Deals with the issue of whether the mere flow of water through an existing dam constitutes a "discharge" under federal statute.

"Environmentalists are worried in part because of the new chief justice. As a judge, Roberts famously dissented in the case of the 'hapless toad,' the endangered inhabitant of a dry canyon near San Diego. Rancho Viejo LLC v. Norton, 334 F.3d 1158 (D.C. Cir. 2003).
Due to the broad reach of the Endgangered Spieces Act, developers were barred from building there because of the toad. Roberts wondered how the federal jurisdiction extended so far. While the law at issue is different in [the three pending cases, they raise] a similar question on the reach of federal power."
Excerpt from "Going With the Flow" ABA Journal, Feb. 2006.

Tuesday, February 14, 2006

Forum at the Museum of Science

Found this on the Conservation Law Foundation Site:

Rethinking Urban Transportation: A Free Forum at the Museum of Science
Saturday, February 25 from 2:00 - 5:00 pm

• Is your commute exhausting?
• Do you wish the subway went more places?
• Is traffic getting worse?
• Are you paying too much for gas?
• Is parking becoming hard to find?

What will transportation in Boston look like in 20 years?

Join others in your community in a thoughtful and lively forum. In this three-hour session we’ll hear from professionals about technologies and programs that have the power to revolutionize the way we travel in the city. Group activities will help us assess our priorities and explore the future in an informal and collaborative setting.

RSVP: forumrsvp@mos.org, 617-589-4250
Location: Museum of Science, Boston
Registration: limited to 60
Refreshments: provided

http://www.livablestreets.info for more information.

Forum is funded by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, a non-regulatory federal agency within the U.S. Commerce Department's Technology Administration.

LivableStreets Alliance is a non-profit organization committed to developing a sustainable, safe, and reliable multi-modal transportation network that improves the quality of life in Boston.

Monday, February 13, 2006

Pictures louder than words

I found this on the BBC news page. Its about producing Charcoal in Chad. There is more to environmental concerns than the environment I'd say. What do you think?

Fueling the Future: Charcoal in Chad

Saturday, February 11, 2006

ELS Volunteering Event

As it is getting nicer outside and we all need some exercise, the Environmental Law Society will volunteer at one of the upcoming pruning expeditions organized through the Charles River Conservancy.

More info at:

Charles River Conservancy's (CRC) Volunteer Stewardship Program

The most likely date is February 25th, and there will be posters on the SBA board to try to engage students throughout the school.

SCOTUS to hear CWA Cases

This month's ABA Journal highlighted three cases that are to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on February 21st under new Chief Justice Roberts in "Going with the Flow: Wetlands Cases Raise Anew the Question of the Environment and Federal Power".

The first case, Rapanos v. United States, No. 04-1034, turns on whether there is a "hydrological connection" from Rapanos' land to "navigable waters" (Lake Huron) which would extend federal regulation via the Commerce Clause to distant wetlands.

Coupled w/ Rapanos, SCOTUS will hear Carabell v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, No. 04-1384, to determine whether their wetlands are within the Lake St. Clair watershed and therefore subject to "waters of the United States".

Thirdly, the issue of S.D. Warren Co. v. Maine Board of Environmental Protection, No. 04-1527, is whether water flowing through an existing dam qualifies as a "discharge".

The import of these cases draw in the argument of potential over-reaching of federal regulation under the Commerce Clause. Rapanos currently face $13 million in fees and fines because of the broad interpretation of "navigable waters" under the Clean Water Act. However, part of the theory of liability for what Rapanos does with his wetlands is the concern of "tributaries that flow into traditional navigable waters" per U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement.

Another consideration as SCOTUS prepares to hear these cases, is the position of Chief Justice Roberts. As pointed out in the article, Roberts dissented in Rancho Veijo LLC v. Norton, 334 F.3d 1158 (D.C. Cir. 2003), that barred developers from building under the Endangered Species Act, questioning the extent of federal jurisdiction.

It should be interesting to see where our highest court comes down on these cases...

Friday, February 10, 2006

Sports celebrities and environmental advocacy

With the Torino Olympics set to begin today (I think), I thought this might be appropriate.

Sports celebrities and environmental advocacy
By Eric Falt Spokesperson/Director of Communications, UNEP

The year was 1968. A year of new beginnings. At the Olympic Games in Mexico, Bob Beamon astonished an entire generation with a historic jump that would remain in the record books for twenty-three years.

For their part, two other athletes made a decisive jump into politics, a realm few sports figures had entered before. Tommie Smith and John Carlos, fresh from winning the gold and bronze medals in the 200 metre race, made a silent but stunning political statement—heads bowed and fists raised in a gesture that most of us still remember vividly today.

Their act was met with such outrage that they were suspended from their national team and banned from the Olympic Village. Many thought that their stance had no place in the supposedly apolitical Olympic Games, even though Muhammad Ali –formerly known as Cassius Clay—had paved the way for them.

1968 proved to be a watershed year for sport and politics. That same year, the United Nations General Assembly requested all States and organizations “to suspend cultural, educational, sporting and other exchanges with the racist regime and with organizations or institutions in South Africa which practise apartheid.”

Three years later, in 1971, the General Assembly adopted a special resolution on apartheid in sports, calling on all sports organizations to uphold the Olympic principle of non-discrimination, expressing regret that some sports organizations had continued exchanges with racially selected South African teams, and commending the international campaign against apartheid in sports.

Since then, many athletes have taken strong political positions and the Olympic Games have sometimes themselves become hostage to politics. One would only need mention the events of 1980 and those of 1984, which pitted one world against another.

On an individual level, athletes have become a staple of the political scene, and have begun to use their achievements in sport and their celebrity status to make powerful political statements. To use another leaf from the apartheid book, I should quote Vijay Amritraj, the Indian tennis player who took his country to the finals of the Davis Cup in 1974 and 1987 and who was designated in 2001 by Secretary-General Kofi Annan as a UN Messenger of Peace.

Speaking in 1988 at the UN Special Committee Against Apartheid, he said: “Sport is big business now and not just a game any more. Sportsmen and women must realize the world over that with fame and fortune come an incredible responsibility which may affect the lives of people in different countries…. Over the years as a professional, I have been made several offers including vast sums of money to play exhibition matches in South Africa which I have declined. I feel that every individual, important or unimportant, artist, diplomat, professional or sportsman, has a certain responsibility towards his fellow men and if I may add, hopefully, a conscience. It is thus up to each of us to contribute in our own way towards a better world—a world of equality, of dignity, of freedom.”

In fact, many world class athletes have become full time politicians. In the United Kingdom, middle distance running hero Sebastian Coe, who won two gold and two silver medals in the 1980 and 1984 Olympics, has pursued an active career in politics as a Member of Parliament for the past ten years. In France, Guy Drut—the gold medal winner of the 110 metre hurdles in the 1976 Olympics—later became a Minister of Sports in his country, paving the way for Jean-Francois Lamour, the current Minister of Sports and himself a former Olympic champion in sabre fencing in 1984 and 1988. Of course, the list would not be complete without the soccer legend Pele, himself anointed Minister of Sports in Brazil in 1994.

While the association between sport and straight-out politics remains sometimes confused, and acceptable standards of behaviour for athletes are still unclear, their involvement in political causes is now a fairly frequent staple of the evening newscasts and daily newspapers.

In fact, I would like to put to you today that, 35 years after the events of Mexico and as Vijay Amritraj advocated, it is now an accepted reality that sport celebrities can, and even should, be vocal on important political issues.

The question that I would, therefore, like to explore with you today is the following: While the issue of the environment is in itself a political issue, are we—in light of the growing concern for environmental issues among civil society members—about to see the attention of sports celebrities shift more squarely to the environment? Is the issue of the environment about to become a “cause celebre” for athletes the world over? Why has it not already really exploded into their consciousness? Should we even encourage them, as we debate this week how to better link sport and the environment?

There are but a few examples of athletes vocally expressing their views about the environment. Canadian water polo player Kaliya Young, writing in the San Francisco Chronicle in September 2000 (“Why I am skipping the Olympics”), says she gave up her ultimate goal and, six years on, her national team because she had become “deeply troubled by the corporate sell out of the (Games), by the hollowness of Olympic environmental claims.” She mentioned the fact that the environment became the third pillar of the Olympic movement in 1994, along with culture and athletics, and referred to Agenda 21, but denounced our statements as mere grandstanding.
Kaliya Young wrote: “The Olympic movement is a ‘light’ green movement that has raised some public awareness of environmental issues and environmentally friendly initiatives. The Olympic villages use solar water-heating, do water remediation and recycling. While these initiatives address the technical problems of being environmentally friendly, they do not address the truly fundamental value system changes that are needed to prevent global environmental disaster.”

Very few people read what Kaliya Young had to express. She was active in a minor sport and did not command the attention of millions.

So, who among mega-celebrities chooses or accepts to talk about the environment or related issues? Well, I have certainly looked hard over the past few months. Aside from a vague reference in Martina Navratilova’s website that she “loves animals very much” and supports the organization PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) as well as Save the Rhino, I have found virtually nothing. Michael Schumacher’s numerous endorsements of commercial companies would probably put him in conflict with any environmental cause he could ever endorse. And environmentalists would probably never want to be associated with Mike Tyson, who once earned 75 million dollars in one year. So who?

Well, there are a few signs of hope. Two weeks ago, in Tokyo, UNEP launched a picture book prepared with our partners of the Global Sports Alliance during the second edition of our biannual Global Forum for Sport and the Environment.

In this book, entitled Vital Messages, some twenty world class athletes—mostly Japanese but also including the likes of US cycling legend Greg Lemond and tennis player Martina Seles—offer simple thoughts about the need to protect the environment. Japanese surfer Ryu Nakamura, for instance, is quoted as saying: “All I want is a big wave to ride, but not if it came from a melted glacier.”

UNEP also works very closely with the Clean Up The World campaign, which mobilizes every year some 40 million people across 120 countries and aims at ridding the world of the all too familiar sight of garbage. Clean Up the World was the brainchild of Ian Kiernan, an accomplished sailor, who represented Australia in 1986 and 1987 in the gruelling BOC challenge—a nine month round the world yacht race. Ian Kiernan is an outspoken and well known figure in the South Pacific, who has accomplished wonders for the cause of the environment with little budget but heaps of enthusiasm.

In the end, there is one sport celebrity who clearly stood out for his advocacy efforts in favour of the environment. Like Ian Kiernan, also from the world of sailing, he dominated his sport for more than a decade, twice securing the American’s Cup—sailing’s most prestigious trophy—for his native New Zealand, in 1995 and 2000. He also won the Whitbread Round, the World Race in 1989 and took the Jules Verne Trophy in 1994 by sailing non-stop around the globe on a Catamaran in 75 days.

Yes, I am talking about Sir Peter Blake, who was killed by pirates on the Amazon River only five months after UNEP appointed him as its Goodwill Ambassador.

The environment was the other passion of Sir Peter, and he wanted it to be known. At the time of his murder, he was leading a worldwide expedition to monitor global warming and pollution on the seas. UNEP was supporting him with the latest information and scientific advice, helping deliver compelling environmental stories to millions around the world through the “Blakexpeditions” television programmes and internet site.

Sir Peter died tragically on 5 December 2001—almost two years ago to this day. For UNEP and for the cause we are discussing today, nobody has picked up his mantle. The last entry in his diary, written on the very Wednesday of his death, read: “We want to restart people caring for the environment as it must be cared for. We want to make a difference.” Last year, the International Olympic Committee honoured the late Sir Peter by posthumously presenting him with the IOC Olympic Order.

As you see, however, the examples that we can quote are few and far between. The better known global sport celebrities have not really begun to be involved and have not started to harness their celebrity status to attract positive attention onto important environmental issues. Ronaldo and Zinedine Zidane are prominently involved in the fight against HIV/AIDS, but mega-star David Beckham has never spoken on the issue of the environment. Tiger Woods is very conservative about the public questions he addresses.

I searched in vain for any association Cathy Freeman, one of the most impressive Olympic Athletes of recent times on and off the track, may have had with the environment. She made a powerful political statement of the 1994 Commonwealth Games when she took her 400 metre victory lap with the Aboriginal flag draped over her shoulders, but we do not seem to have interested her in wildlife protection or global warming.

I personally think that we ought to be more persuasive and daring in working with sport personalities in defence of the environment. We are all inspired and encouraged by the example of Pal Schmitt, Team epee gold medallist at the Games in Mexico in 1968 and in Munich in 1972, and now Chairman of the Sport and Environment Commission of the IOC. More than anyone in the Olympic movement, he has risen from the ranks of the sporting world to become an effective advocate for the environment.

We need him and others like him to speak out. I invite all of you today to pick up the environmental torch and run with it. Run with it as fast as you can. Carry it as high as you can.

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Career Confusion

Okay, so I had a good talk with an environmental lawyer in Atlanta yesterday, but now I am confused. I am not overly interested in litigation work, I'd rather help people be within the law then slap their hand when they violate the law. So compliance seems more suited for my desire. But the attorney told me that compliance work is done at medium to large firms. I don't want to work at a large firm. Beggars can't be choosers but come on. Finding a job is daunting enough, but faced with working in an 'environment' (couldn't help that) that I wouldn't wish on anyone is quite the mood changer.

I am interested in the policy stuff too. That Apollo Alliance and Environmental Defense Fund seems interesting, the public interest stuff is even more competitive though. The attorney also advised against working for the government.

I am confused now. Any ideas out there? Similar situations? Ways to break in that don't require me to sell my soul to the greenback?

Tuesday, February 07, 2006

Watch where you put your eggs!

The following article was printed in the Washington Post last week, and provides an interesting look into how the EPA regulations and environmental impacts can be found in everyday life. The debate over Teflon and its affect on the environment has been ongoing for a while and I have read a number of things which have held he position that we should all stop using Teflon products. Something to think about as I make breakfast tomorrow......

Copyright 2006 The Washington Post
The Washington Post

February 1, 2006 Wednesday
Final Edition

SECTION: Food; F01

LENGTH: 765 words

HEADLINE: Don't Toss That Teflon Pan -- Yet

BYLINE: Robert L. Wolke, Special to The Washington Post

BODY:
Last week's news about U.S. manufacturers' gradual elimination of a certain chemical from their factory emissions and products with nonstick coating caused home cooks to look askance at some of their kitchen equipment. We asked "Food 101" columnist and chemistry professor Robert L. Wolke for his take on the matter.
Maybe it's a sign of our times, but who would have expected stories about a chemical compound called perfluorooctanoic acid to strike fear in the hearts of cooks?
But the recent news led one authority to say, "I certainly wouldn't use a Teflon fry pan."
What's the connection?
PFOA is used in the manufacture of fluorine-containing polymers, materials such as Teflon that repel water and resist staining by oil and grease. In addition to nonstick cooking surfaces, consumer applications include microwave popcorn bags and pizza delivery boxes.
Although many chemists would be hard-pressed to tell you exactly what PFOA is, it hit the front page of The Post and other newspapers around the world Thursday, after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency asked eight U.S. chemical companies to substantially reduce and eventually eliminate the chemical from its products and plant emissions. They agreed to do so.
Why? Because PFOA -- a synthetic industrial chemical that as far as we know does not exist in nature -- is, according to the EPA, "very persistent in the environment, [has been] found at very low levels both in the environment and in the blood of the general U.S. population, and [has] caused developmental and other adverse effects in laboratory animals." Although research on the environmental and health implications of PFOA has been fragmentary and no correlation between PFOA exposure and human cancer has been found, calls are being made in the United States and as far away as Australia to ban the chemical entirely.
Most nonstick cooking surfaces are made of Teflon, or polytetrafluoroethylene. And PFOA is one of the intermediate chemicals used in the chain of chemical-reaction steps that produce it. But the PFOA is virtually all gone before the final material comes off the production line. Intermediate chemicals of one kind or another are part of virtually all chemical manufacturing processes and are not allowed to contaminate the final product.
Teflon is microscopically smooth and nonporous (one of the reasons nothing sticks to it). Even if it does harbor trace amounts of PFOA, which is all anyone has suggested, the PFOA is unlikely to seep into food or escape into the air in kitchens -- unless, of course, an empty nonstick pan were abandoned on a hot burner, because above 600 degrees or so (a temperature rarely reached in cooking), the Teflon would begin to decompose into toxic fumes.
Before we even see a nonstick pan in the store, its coating already has been heated to high temperatures during manufacturing, partly to get rid of any residual PFOA. In my opinion, PFOA in the environment probably came from factory emissions, perhaps during the high-temperature phases of manufacturing. That's certainly more plausible than blaming me for frying an egg in my nonstick pan.
Susan B. Hazen, acting assistant administrator of the EPA's Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, has been quoted as saying, "The science is still coming in." But she adds that eliminating PFOA "is the right thing to do for our health and our environment."
So should we throw away all our nonstick cookware, eschew microwaved popcorn and stop ordering delivery pizza? Some historical parallels exist. On the theory that the mercury in silver-amalgam tooth fillings causes an array of illnesses, some people have had all their fillings removed. And believing that aluminum causes Alzheimer's disease, some people have thrown away all their aluminum pots and pans. If we also throw away our nonstick pots and pans, how are we ever going to cook food to be chewed by our mercury-free teeth?
I quote from the EPA's Web page (http://www.epa.gov/oppt/pfoa/pfoainfo.htm): "At present, there are no steps that EPA recommends that consumers take to reduce exposures to PFOA because the sources of PFOA in the environment and the pathways by which people are exposed are not known. Given the scientific uncertainties, EPA has not yet made a determination as to whether PFOA poses an unreasonable risk to the public. At the present time, EPA does not believe there is any reason for consumers to stop using any consumer or industrial related products that contain PFOA."
So please excuse me while I go fry an egg in my Teflon pan.

Sunday, February 05, 2006

What Will Global Warming Mean for Alaskan Natives?

With the melting of sea ice in the Artic, officials are concerned as to what will happen in Alaska. I recently found the opinion of an Alaska Native leader on global warming and how it is affecting Native villages in Alaska. This excerpt is taken from the Anchorage Daily News.

Global warming is undermining the social identity and cultural survival of Alaska Natives. As we watch our ice melt, our forests burn, our villages sink and our animals become diseased, we know that our health and our traditional ways of life are at risk.

Our elders, in particular, are deeply concerned about what they are witnessing. Unpredictable weather and ice conditions make travel and time-honored subsistence practices hazardous, endangering lives.

Everything is changing so quickly. Lakes are drying; new insects are appearing; permafrost is melting; berries are disappearing; storms are fiercer; animal populations are changing; our fish are rotting on drying racks; and polar bears are drowning.

Because of massive, record-breaking forest fires, our youths and elders are having trouble breathing. Our ice is so much thinner, or entirely gone. And our coastlines are eroding, washing away ancient artifacts from our ancestors as well as modern infrastructure.

In recognition of this tremendously serious situation, the Alaska Inter-Tribal Council unanimously passed a resolution urging the U. S. Congress and the president to move forward on a national, mandatory program to reduce global-warming pollution and prevent irreversible harm to public health, the economy and the environment.

Traditional knowledge and science both strongly support urgent, meaningful action. For many reasons, Alaska Natives are the Paul Reveres of global warming. From first-hand experiences and observations we know: "The BTU's are coming; we are being threatened; and we must take action to protect current and future generations now." There is so much at stake in Alaska and, of course, in the entire nation.

For more information, please see Global warming threatens our future

I think sometimes we forget that global warming is not just about the polar ice caps melting and the next "ice age" but rather, is an issue that holds real concerns for people who do not have anywhere else to go. The Inter Tribal council passed a resolution urging Congress to recognize the issue, but the President will not vocalize it in the State of the Union address. Alaska is the Union, and instead we are reminded to curb our oil addiction.

What will happen when these villages are now the new environmental refugees?

Saturday, February 04, 2006

South End's biosafety lab receives federal approval

BOSTON -- The government has approved Boston University's controversial plan to build a biosafety lab in the city.

The lab will be working with some of the most dangerous viruses in the world.

B.U. will build the 190,000-square foot bioterror lab in the city's South End. Researchers will "use the state of the art facility to safely find treatments and cures for some of the most dangerous infectious diseases that threaten Boston, the nation and the world," according to a statement from Dr. Mark Klempner of the Boston University Medical Center.

Opponents of the lab, however, said the lab itself threatens Boston, from a health standpoint and as a security risk.

"Now that we've found out that there's an active culvert and canal that runs under the proposed site, then that poses another security threat, terrorist attack threat," Democratic State Rep. Gloria Fox said.

The lab will house hundreds of scientists to handle deadly viruses such as smallpox, ebola and anthrax and will reportedly be a security marvel, using extraordinary measures to keep those deadly agents in. But opponents are not convinced.

"We already know that Boston University in the past year has had accidents associated with potentially deadly disease agents. Tularemia, for example. So, we are not reassured," Philip Warburg, of the Conservation Law Foundation, said.

"And you can tell that they didn't look at it from an environmental standpoint or they couldn't have come out with the decision that they made, so we challenge that, and we will challenge that," Fox said.

The challenges are likely to come in court, even as B.U. breaks ground on the new lab this month. The targeted completion date is the summer of 2008.


Here's an interesting fact from the Alternatives for Community and Environment site:
"There are three BSL4 laboratories in the United States: Centers for Disease Control on the outskirts of Atlanta, GA; the Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research on the outskirts of San Antonio, TX; and the US Army Research Institute on Infectious Diseases at Ft. Detrick on the outskirts of Frederick, MD. In addition to funding the BU lab, the federal government is also funding the construction of a BSL4 lab by the University of Texas Medical Center on an island in Galveston, TX, and is building its own BSL4 lab at Rocky Mountain Laboratories in Hamilton, MT. Traditionally, these labs have been placed away from population centers."

Friday, February 03, 2006

Public hearings on the Storrow Drive tunnel

Two Public Meetings have been scheduled to introduce the project to Beacon Hill and
Back Bay residents, local business owners, and users of Storrow Drive and the
Esplanade. Department of Conservation and Recreation will describe the condition of the tunnel and ask the participants to comment on proposed criteria for reviewing the repair options.
The Public Meetings are scheduled as follows:
• Monday, February 13, from 6:30 to 8:30 PM, in Gardner Auditorium at the
State House, Boston
• Wednesday, February 15, from 6:30 to 8:30 PM, in the Auditorium at
Shriners Hospital for Children, 51 Blossom St. (off Cambridge St.)
The same information will be presented at both meetings. Two evening meetings are
being offered for the convenience of the participants. DCR plans to hold a series of Public Meetings and Open Houses throughout the design and environmental review process, which is expected to take about 14 months. Detailed options will be presented to the community at meetings in March.
###

Recycling at NESL

The Environmental Law Society is working on expanding the school's recycling program. From having talked to the head of maintenance, I believe that the school has a contract with a recycling company, and that the paper at the library gets recycled.
I am not sure about the faculty floor or the administrative offices on Church Street. And there definitely aren't recycling bins on 3rd and 5th floor, except for the one in the lounge.

Does anybody else have any ideas/suggestions about where else there should be access to recycling? We would like to see plastics recycled as well, because of all the soda bottles. I am meeting with Mr. Moussali soon, so any suggestions and ideas are welcome.