Carbon offsets

From this weekend's NY Times- a strange way to compensate for your contribution to pollution:

To people who take the threat of global warming personally, driving a car that spews heat-trapping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere can be a guilt trip.

But to help atone for that environmental sin, some drivers are turning to groups on the Internet that offer pain-free ways to assuage their guilt while promoting clean energy.

It involves buying something known as a carbon offset: a relatively inexpensive way to stimulate the production of clean electricity. Just go to one of several carbon-offset Web sites, calculate the amount of carbon dioxide produced when you drive, fly or otherwise burn fossil fuels, and then buy an offset that pays for an equivalent amount of clean energy.

Of course, emissions could be reduced the old-fashioned way — by flying less, turning off the air-conditioning or buying a more fuel-efficient car. But that would probably require some sacrifice and perhaps even a change in lifestyle. Instead, carbon-offset programs allow individuals to skip the sacrifice and simply pay for the right to pollute...

The rest of the text is here.

Volunteer this Saturday

Just a reminder that the Charles River cleanup is this Saturday, 4/29, from 9-12.
We'll be covering the section near the Dartmouth Street landing. The easiest way to get there is to take the Green Line to Copley Square, walk north up Dartmouth Street towards the Charles River, crossing over Storrow at the footbridge. You will then be on the Dartmouth Street landing! We'll proceed eastward toward the Hatch Shell.
So far only two of us from NESL are going, so please join us if you can!

Alternatives to Toxic Chemicals

From Progress Action Report for today:

FACILITIES VOLUNTARILY REDUCE RISK OF TOXIC TERRORISM:Chemical facilities across the country representing a range of industries have switched to safer alternatives from a variety of hazardous chemicals, producing dramatic security and safety benefits at a reasonable cost, according to a new report. The study released today by the Center for American Progress, in partnership with the National Association of State PIRGs and the National Environment Trust, shows that 284 facilities in 47 states "have dramatically reduced the danger of a chemical release into nearby communities," making roughly 38 million people safer from the "threat of a major toxic gas cloud" affecting nearby communities.

I thought this was a nice followup from last year's Promoting Safer Alternatives to Toxic Chemicals workshop, here at NESL.

The issue is getting framed via a terrorism perspective, but the result is the same: reducing the danger of toxic chemicals.

BBA - Env. Law Section

The Environmental Law Section of the Boston Bar Assoc., and other sections of the BBA, have the following environmental-law-related activities scheduled for April/May (including a CLE course on brownfields).

The Remainder of April

April 24 - Environmental Justice Workgroup 8:30am
April 24 - Air Quality and Climate Change Committee 12:30pm (RSVP requested)

April 25 - Hazardous and Solid Waste Committee 12:30pm (RSVP requested)

In May

May 01 - Wetlands, Waterways & Water Quality Committee 12:30pm

May 02 - Environmental Law Section Steering Committee 8:30-9:30am
May 02 - Land Use & Development Committee 12:00noon

May 04 - Environmental Litigation Committee 12:30pm

May 16 - Environmental Law Section 12:30pm
May 16 - CLE - Brownfields 3:30-6:30pm (registration and fee req'd)

May 19 - Clean Air Committee 12:30pm

May 23 - Hazardous & Solid Waste Committee 12:30pm

May 30 - Environmental Law Section 12:30pm

MA legislation

I stumbled upon this recently. It caught my attention mainly because it is especialy relevant to Massachusetts as the outcome of pending legislation could have some direct results in Waltham...

Geneticists have mixed DNA from the roundworm C. elegans and pigs to produce swine with significant amounts of omega-3 fatty acids -- the kind believed to stave off heart disease.Researchers hope they can improve the technique in pork and do the same in chickens and cows. In the process, they also want to better understand human disease."We all can use more omega-3 in our diet," said Dr. Jing Kang, the Harvard Medical School researcher who modified the omega-3-making worm gene so it turned on in the pigs.Kang is one of 17 authors of the paper appearing in an online edition of the journal Nature Biotechnology.The cloned, genetically engineered pigs are the latest advance in the agricultural biotechnology field, which is struggling to move beyond esoteric products such as bug-repelling corn and soy resistant to weed killers.Hoping to create healthier, cheaper and tastier products that consumers crave, Monsanto Co. of St. Louis and its biotech farming competitors like DuPont are developing omega-3-producing crops that yield healthier cooking oils. Kang said 30 academic laboratories are now working with his omega-3 gene, presumably pursuing similar projects."Consumers have responded pretty positively when asked their opinion of food modified to improve food quality and food safety, just as long as the taste isn't altered negatively," said Christine Bruhn, director of the Center for Consumer Research at the University of California, Davis.Earlier experiments have succeeded in manipulating animals' fat content but most never made it out of the lab because of taste problems.While boosting Omega-3s doesn't decrease the fat content in pigs, the fatty acids are also important to brain development and may reduce the risk of Alzheimer's disease and depression. The American Heart Association recommends at least two weekly servings of fish, particularly fatty fish like trout and salmon, which are naturally high in omega-3s.People already eat genetically engineered soy beans in all manner of processed food, but biotech companies run into what bioethicists call the "yuck factor" when they begin tinkering with animals.The Food and Drug Administration has never approved food derived from genetically engineered animals. Unlike crops, the FDA treats such animals as medicine and requires extensive testing before approval."We understand that this research is in the very early stages," FDA spokeswoman Rae Jones said. "This technology will not likely reach meat counters for many years."The FDA is still considering Waltham, Massachusetts-based Aqua Bounty Technologies' application to market a salmon genetically engineered to grow faster, the only such request pending with the agency. Aqua Bounty began its federal application process about nine years ago and there is no indication when the FDA will rule.

Growth in Green Venture Capitalism

Thought this was an interesting article after reading the post about "Green MBAs" as it seems venture capitalists are finding a lot of promise w/'cleantech' companies and ideas, and starting to invest serious money.
http://www.grist.org/biz/fd/2006/04/11/lee/

W/the business and environmental worlds fusing and people becoming more aware of energy concerns, this has the potential to become a big emerging market ... maybe an interesting niche to get into as an attorney

Kyoto: Is Something Better than Nothing?

Buying Credits, Reducing Emissions

An article poses a criticism of Kyoto. Generally, companies can continue emit carbon beyond their allocated amount if they engage in alternative courses of actions such as investing in clean emissions technology in developing countries or in carbon sinks, or by purchasing additonal emissions credits on the market.

I believe under RGGI, there is a limit to the amount of mitigation projects a company may use to make up for their excess emissions. Kyoto may have similar provisions.

Are companies that invest in mitigation projects elsewhere in leiu of reducing their own carbon emissions really helping to combat global warming? The purpose of Kyoto is to reduce global warming, right? So, what does in matter if global warming is reduced by invest in carbon sinks that will scoop excess carbon rather than cutting of the carbon at the source?

Well, its seems that this option produces problems. First, the idea that well-financed companies and developing nations are on equal footing to for agreements seems suspect--and also seems ripe for projects with unintended consequences. The other problem is that the major polluters need to reduce their own emissions. As far as I know, the initial steps taken to reduce emissions are cheaper than steps taken later. In other words, it seems like rich countries are capitalizing cheap emissions reduction opportunities as a quick fix. On the other hand, there is an argument that much can be done in developing countries where there is enough capital to get the job done.

Keeping in mind that Kyoto is a voluntary program, I suppose any progress is progress, right?

The Bird Flu is Good for Wetlands

Well, sort of. A UNEP reports says that restoring wetlands may help curb bird flu by restoring natural habitat for wild birds (thus preventing infected wild birds from intermixing with birds raised for consumption). This really illustrates how important it is to extend the chain of causation when considering the potential environmental impacts of draining wetlands. Perhaps Rachel Carson rings true, again?

http://news.yahoo.com/fc/health/bird_flu
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2006/2006-04-11-02.asp

This wont contribute to global warming but........Iran claims nuclear tech breakthrough

Iran has produced enough low-grade enriched uranium to power nuclear plants, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced today. "I officially announce that Iran has joined countries with nuclear technology," he said. White House spokesman Scott McClellan reacted to the news by saying Tehran is "moving in the wrong direction." Read more here

Brownfields 2006 Conference - Travel Scholarships

Travel Scholarship Applications Now Available

The International City/County Management Association is sponsoring a
limited number of travel scholarships to the Brownfields 2006 Conference
for community-based stakeholders involved in the cleanup and
redevelopment of brownfields. To be eligible, you must be affiliated
with, or a representative of, a local government, state or Tribal
government, community group, environmental justice organization, or
nonprofit. The scholarship program will help ensure diverse brownfields
stakeholder groups participation in the conference.

Apply on-line by going to http://www.brownfields2006.org. Deadline for
submittal is August 11th.

For more information, please contact Tony Raia of EPA at 202-566-2758.

http://www.brownfields2006.org/en/Article.28.aspx

http://www.brownfields2006.org/en/Scholarships.aspx

Earth Day Charles River Cleanup

Please note that the posters are up for the 7th Annual Charles River Cleanup volunteering event with the Environmental Law Society (through the Charles River Watershed Association.)

The event is scheduled for Saturday, April 29th, from 9am to 12pm. This should be a nice opportunity to get out, get some fresh air and exercise, and take a break from studying for the finals.

Please RSVP if you'd like to attend at ivaziza@gmail.com. I need to provide the organizers with the number of volunteers on behalf of NESL (because of T-shirts, garbage bags etc.)

I hope some, if not most, of you can make it.

Sustainable Business MBAs on the Rise?

(A friend of mine is currently considering getting an MBA in Sustainable Business at one of these schools. Hence my interest.)

I'd never heard of a "sustainable business" MBA, but an article at Greenbiz.com describes them as teaching students to "create and manage successful, profitable businesses that are both socially and environmentally responsible." In this article, the director of the Bainbridge Graduate Institute talks about the "green economy", and how businesses are "embracing sustainability and social ethics as a core business strategy."

Isn't this rather like NEPA's integration of (or attempt to integrate) consideration of environmental impact into the overall decisionmaking process behind an agency's action? Making environmental considerations part of the process from the bottom up?

Sen. Obama

This article is from CNN.com.

Sen. Obama hits administration's energy policies

It is about a speech that Sen. Barak Obama gave regarding global warming, emissions, and Bush's State of the Union speech. What is interesting is that he references bills that he has put forth in the Senate, namely one that would have the government take over health care for automotive factory retirees for company's that take the savings to invest in cleaner cars. That is an interesting technique, could this type of concept be utilized for other industries? Or is this something that would be only industry specific?

At first glance, I'm not sure how it could work for energy plants, coal mines, oil fields, or anything. Perhaps the airlines though. But that is still transportation.