After my post the other day agreeing with Rep. Chris Lee's move on energy efficiency, I got to thinking about the parts of the energy picture, the ones nobody's talking about. Everyone likes to talk about alternative energy in vague terms like "green economy." What does it really mean for an area like ours, where the new natural resources actually are? And what actions do we need to take to make it practical for individuals, families, and small businesses to take advantage of?
We're diving deep into "geek world" today with a story that combines economic hardball, the periodic table of the elements, and a barely noticed provision of the Defense Authorization Act that seeks to break a monopoly which today gives China near-absolute control over the materials that make cell phones, electric cars, wind turbines, and pretty much every other tool of modern life possible.
If we successfully break the monopoly, we'll be able to create millions of new manufacturing jobs in this country-and if we don't, somebody else owns the 21st Century.
Ironically, the global warming we're trying to fight with new green technologies might be an ally in our efforts to make those very same green technologies happen.
There's a revolution in industrial processing going on, rare earths are at the center of it all...and in today's story, the revolution will be televised.
The long, lazy days of summer are upon us, and it's time to have a little fun-but it's also a great opportunity to volunteer a bit of spare time for a good cause.
So imagine how cool it would be if you could combine the two...and even better, do it in a way that doesn't take a bite out of your wallet...and even better yet, if it was something you and the kids could do together.
Imagine no more, because it has been done; which is why today we are going to be talking about lead in the soil of New Orleans, Operation Paydirt...and Fundred Dollar Bills.
There are certain issues that steal the spotlight for short or long periods of time. Right now, health care is the focus of the media's attention and in Washington D.C., health care is the hot topic right now with Congress looking at reforming our broken system.
But one issue that should not be forgotten is the environment. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand hasn't forgotten about the importance the environment plays and why keeping our air and water clean and addressing the issues with climate change deserve to be a top priority.
But Sen. Gillibrand is hoping that it will pass, but not at the environment's expense. Earlier this month, she spoke out regarding one key element in the House bill that would give coal-fired power plants less regulation and strip the Environmental Protection Agency of its power to regulate those coal plants.
Environmental activists already have complained that the House bill is too friendly to polluters and have been urging the Senate to toughen it by selling more emissions allowances -- rather than donating most of them to businesses initially.
Senate deal-making also jeopardizes some of the last-minute agreements that were key to passage in the House. For instance, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., is worried about a provision added to the House bill that would strip the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate pollution from coal-fired power plants -- language backed by lawmakers in coal mining states.
"The EPA has to have authority to regulate coal plants under the Clean Air Act," said Gillibrand, who has promised "to use every bit of persuasive power" she can to ensure the bill "reflects the needs of New York." Leaders in New York have been concerned about acid rain traced to coal-burning plants in the Midwest.
This provision was criticized by environmental activists for being too lenient on polluters in a bill supposedly touting clean (and green) energy. In response, progressives have led the charge to make sure that such a provision won't survive in the Senate version (and the future agreed upon version) of the bill. MoveOn has a petition you can sign voicing your opposition to the provision and also sent out an e-mail to New York members of MoveOn asking them to send a note of thanks to Sen. Gillibrand for being "one of the very first senators to speak out publicly against rolling back the Clean Air Act."
Here's an excerpt from that e-mail:
For years, New York has had some of the worst air pollution in the country. On top of local pollution, New Yorkers get tons of smog and acid rain blown in from out of state.
Now, coal industry lobbyists are trying to slip a provision into Obama's clean energy plan that would repeal a key part of the Clean Air Act. This would bring about a whole new generation of dirty coal power and make New York's pollution problems even worse.
But not if Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has anything to say about it. She's one of the very first senators to speak out publicly against rolling back the Clean Air Act.
...
Under the Clean Air Act, dirty coal-fired power plants are required to meet standards for their global warming pollution. The Bush administration refused to enforce these rules, but President Obama has already started taking steps to crack down.
That's why coal lobbyists are trying to repeal key sections of the Clean Air Act, letting coal plants off the hook and sticking New Yorkers with lots more pollution.
This rollback is the wrong thing to do, and it certainly doesn't belong in a "clean energy" bill. But the polluters might get away with it if champions in Congress don't fight back.
Sen. Gillibrand is fighting. She told the Albany Times-Union in an article that got picked up nationwide that "The EPA has to have authority to regulate coal plants under the Clean Air Act" and promised "to use every bit of persuasive power" to ensure the bill "reflects the needs of New York" by cutting power plant pollution.
MoveOn also thanked Sen. Gillibrand outside of her office in New York City:
Gillibrand has been at the forefront of many progressive issues during her time as a senator. This isn't the first time, but it is key since this legislation will be taken up by the Senate and there are already debates about what protections should be included (or excluded). Senators from coal-friendly states will be facing pressure to defend the interests of the industry. Gillibrand won't face such pressure, but she isn't going to let the best interests of coal be reflected in a bill that is supposed to be promoting clean and green energy.
You heard yesterday about the parts of Chris Lee's "energy plan" that he didn't feel like talking too much about, the parts lifted straight from George Bush and last year's failed Republican strategy for expanding big oil.
Now, let's have a look at what Lee did see fit to talk up. What follows are a few excerpts from the "plan summary" on Lee's official website, along with my comments.
Congressman Chris Lee announced his "energy solutions" plan yesterday at a press conference in front of a local ethanol plant. Of course it's not really his plan: it's the "American Energy Act" put forward by the House Republicans. I'm not sure whether Lee is ashamed of carrying water for the far right wing of his party, or if he simply doesn't want people to find out the actual details of the "plan" he's pushing. For instance, the fact that it would legally ban any attempts to prevent or regulate climate change and global warming. Or that it gives billions of dollars in new subsidies to the oil and coal industries.
Of course, Lee doesn't admit to any of that on his website, not even the fact that this is a rehash of the same old game. He's out there pushing it as his own, right down to using the same "all of the above" talking point that the GOP sent out with the folders.
If it sounds like "more of the same" would have been a better description, you're not wrong. In fact, the "new" plan is the same one that the Republicans were pushing last year, written by Indiana Congressman Mike Pence: a prominent science denier, and a supporter of the Bush energy plan that gave free ride to strip-miners and oil companies. Even the central theme of their "clean energy" ideas are unchanged from a year ago--drill for more oil off the US coast, drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, give more sweetheart deals to big oil, and assume that it'll work out as well as the deals which gave us $4 a gallon gas.
And when that doesn't work, start strip-mining our national parks for oil shale, even though it's known to poison the air and water.
In fact, somebody did a study and determined that this sort of pro-conglomerate energy plan, when it was used by the Bush administration, ended up costing the average American household an extra $1,100 a year in energy costs: $170 for electricity and $960 for gas. I for one don't have that kind of cash laying around, particularly since the Bush economic plan (which Chris Lee also believes in) cost me my last job. I can't afford more of the system Chris Lee supports.
Indeed, you'd be hard pressed to name the difference between the Lee/Republicans "American Energy Act" and the Bush administration's energy policy. Token words directed at clean energy and green jobs, while funneling taxpayer dollars into the maw of big oil and coal companies. Unless it's the fact that the Bush administration's policy almost looks good in comparison to the even more extreme version that Lee and company are pushing.
Tomorrow I'll dissect some of the public statements on Chris Lee's website, and see how they stack up to the facts.
The Bigger, Better Bottle Bill is getting closer and closer to reality. Today, Senator Antoine Thompson, who serves as chairman of the Environmental Conservation Committee in the New York State Senate, held a public hearing on the bottle bill in Buffalo.
Upon entry to the hearing, you were greeted by a few people holding a variety of signs opposing the Bigger, Better Bottle Bill (BBBB). The signs read, "Don't take my job", "I am worth more than a nickel" and "Don't raise my prices." Inside the hearing, there were more of these signs, so opponents of the bottle bill were out in full force.
However, those who testified were largely in support of the bill. Among those who testified, Carol Ash - Commissioner of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation in New York - expressed her support for expanding the bottle bill. Patrick Hooker, who heads the Department of Agriculture and Markets, did the same.
There were others who testified in support from many conservation groups who play an important role in the state. A few students even stepped up to the plate and announced their support for the legislation.
In all, there were 27 different witnesses who testified today. Out of those 27, 18 said that they favored expanding the bottle bill. Among those who were against expansion were owners of distribution companies, a Tops Markets district manager, management from Coca-Cola and Pepsi and Buffalo's NAACP head Frank Mesiah, who argued that the bottle bill's expansion would have a negative impact on the economically disadvantaged.
Those who testified in favor of the bottle bill discussed how the bill would have a positive effect on the environment while giving people an incentive to recycle their bottles of water, Gatorade and other non-carbonated beverages. According to one witness, non-carbonated beverages make up one-third of all bottles, yet bottles that hold those non-carbonated beverages make up two-thirds of the bottles that are littered.
The opponents of the bill highlighted two things: Handling fees and unclaimed deposits. Right now, beverage companies in New York get to keep unclaimed deposits that are estimated at $140 million a year. Under an expanded bottle bill, those unclaimed deposits would go up to $218 million, according to NYPIRG's figures. The bottle bill would require companies to return unclaimed deposits to the state, which is something that did not sit well with opponents, especially Coca-Cola and Pepsi.
One of the highlights came from a man who came in and sat down next to me with a huge plastic bag full of bottles and cans, along with a separate plastic bag with only a few bottles in it. He ended up testifying and he said that when the first bottle bill was passed, a similar public hearing was held and he did the same thing. He went out and in the immediate area surrounding the building where the public hearing was held, he gathered up a bag full of bottles and cans to show why a bottle bill is needed. This time, he wanted to show us why a better bottle bill is needed. In the bag with only a few bottles and cans in it, he had Pepsi cans, beer bottles and a few other returnable bottles. In the bigger bag, while he did put in some bottles and cans that looked returnable, he also had water bottles, Gatorade bottles and other beverages that aren't currently covered by the bottle bill. The symbolism spoke for itself: We need a better bottle bill to keep these bottles off of the ground.
(I've been meaning to write about this all day but have been otherwise occupied. Not sure that it has much to do with reform per se, but it does stink to high heaven nonetheless. My favorite part is the expressed concern that the rule "might unfairly burden the energy industry." Is Paterson serious? I mean, it's not like all of us haven't been bearing the burden of of the energy industry's pollution for over a century. - promoted by phillip anderson)
The cause of reform in New York State died a little today.
The New York Times is reporting that Governor Paterson (ostensibly a Democrat) is trashing New York's environmental regulations:
At the urging of the energy industry, Gov. David A. Paterson has agreed to reconsider a key rule New York adopted as part of a 10-state pact aimed at reducing the threat of global warming by cutting power plant emissions.
In today's edition we note that the bottling and retail interests who have been vehemently opposed to the Bigger Better Bottle Bill forever have decided to do something they've never done before, take to the airwaves. That's because the bill is closer to passing this year than ever before. For years, the Assembly would pass the bill and the Senate would kill it cold. Now, the business interests opposed to the bill have their very own astroturf advocacy org and a brand new TV spot.
A group lobbying against an expansion of the state's bottle bill is going on the air with the ad below.
The group of bottlers -- called New Yorkers for Real Recycling Reform -- said in a press release that the ad will air in the Capital Region and around the state starting this week. The message is that an expansion of the bottle bill to include water and juice in addition to beer and soda would make those drinks more costly for consumers.
Jon Pierce, a spokesman for the group, said they will spend in the "mid-six figures" to put the air on cable and broadcast T.V. in Buffalo, Syracuse, Albany and maybe New York City.
...
Laura Haight, a NYPIRG lobbyist who has long argued that the bill is good for the environment, said by phone that "they've never done T.V. or radio before, so we must be getting close."
It's still not a slam dunk, but if you wanted some indication that we are indeed getting closer, look no further than your television.
Republicans are clamoring for more oil and natural gas drilling; indeed, they campaigned (and lost) partly on that issue. President Obama is calling for greater use of wind and solar power, and sometimes more hydroelectric power as well. Other groups that only seldom appear on the radar of the mass media are pushing for more nuclear power; they occasionally get lip service from an elected official.
What nobody, or almost nobody, is talking about is the immense and varied benefits that would accrue from yet another relatively little known, clean, renewable, and inexpensive energy source - the ground under our feet.
This energy source actually derives from the fact that while the air temperature gets very hot in the summer and just as cold in the winter, just a few feet underground the temperature remains almost constant. As a result, there is often a large difference between the air temperature and the underground temperature. If the heat from the ground can be made to flow into the cold winter air, and the summer heat in the air be made to flow into the cooler ground, that heat flow can be tapped and converted into a usable energy source.
With all the sturm and drang over the financial services sector and its incessant (and imprudent) gambling habits bankrupting the world, it is easy to forget that even they, lo, Masters of the Universe that they be, are pawns in the Biggest Game. That game-- or, maybe we should say that endgame-- is about oil.
Just found an excellent site that you might enjoy, that offers automated stat tools to help you to visualize federal electeds and their relationships to the Lords of Oil.
Check it out
Of course, no surprise who the Most Oil-favored Presidential Candidate is:
"Drill, baby, drill."
The site has a lot of excellent information... and also good organizing tools. You can look up relationships among legislators and oil company contributions in groups, or, by individual elected. For instance, if you wanted to get across how much money Randy "da Weasel" Kuhl takes from Da Bosses, you could print up a stack of these to give away:
This site was "Web Tool of the Week" at the incomparable Organic Consumers' Association ("Campaigning for Health, Justice, Sustainability, Peace and Democracy")... those folks who also bothered to report that "United Nations Reprimands Monsanto for Trying To Take Over the World's Food Supply"... more here.
Stay alert... but don't lose your sense of humor! A little vinegar beats getting pickled... or joining the Depression.
I subscribe to many newsletters from the Union of Concerned Scientists and receive GreenTips in my e-mail inbox also. Rarely do I share them (I should) but this one caught my eye.
This month's GreenTips focuses on harnessing wind energy and residential wind power. Here in Western New York, we are having debates about the merits of wind energy and the government's role in allowing wind energy companies to move in and receive contracts for erecting wind turbines.
First, a few excerpts from the GreenTips newsletter:
Siting. Most residential wind systems require an acre or more of open property and a minimum average wind speed of 10 miles per hour (see the related links for state wind speed maps). To get the maximum benefit, the turbine should be sited upwind of any buildings and trees, and the tips of the turbine's blades should be at least 30 feet higher (at the lowest point of their arc) than any trees or structures within 300 feet. Local zoning ordinances may impose height restrictions on certain structures.
...
Cost. While residential wind power systems are about 50 percent less expensive to install (on a per-kilowatt basis) than solar photovoltaic panels, the upfront costs are still high: about $3,000 to $5,000 per kilowatt, including installation, according to AWEA.
To reduce the upfront costs, first make your home as energy-efficient as possible so you can purchase a smaller system, then take advantage of state and utility incentives on renewable energy systems (see the related links). An energy-efficient home will also reduce the amount of time it takes for your wind energy system to pay for itself in the form of lower electricity costs.
This is what wind power can do. Wind power can also create jobs and stimulate the economy. If it can save you at least 50 percent of your electricity bill every month or up to 90 percent of that bill, don't you think it's worth the investment and the installation?
The fact sheet on New York shows how green jobs can impact our economy and why green jobs are so significant. According to the fact sheet, there are approximately 615,000 jobs in New York that can benefit from green energy, whether that is mass transit, wind power, solar power or biofuels.
Here are some examples cited in the fact sheet as to what green collar jobs are available.
Building Retrofitting: Electricians, heating/air conditioning installers, carpenters, construction equipment operators, roofers, insulation workers, carpenter helpers, industrial truck drivers, construction managers, building inspectors
Mass Transit: Civil engineers, rail track layers, electricians, welders, metal fabricators, engine assemblers, production helpers, bus drivers, first-line transportation supervisors, dispatchers
Wind Power: Environmental engineers, iron and steel workers, millwrights, sheet metal workers, machinists, electrical equipment assemblers, construction equipment operators, industrial truck drivers,industrial production managers, first-line production supervisors
Solar Power: Electrical engineers, electricians, industrial machinery mechanics, welders, metal fabricators, electrical equipment assemblers, construction equipment operators, installation helpers, laborers, construction managers
Cellulosic Biofuels: Chemical engineers, chemists, chemical equipment operators, chemical technicians, mixing and blending machine operators, agricultural workers, industrial truck drivers, farm product purchasers, agricultural and forestry supervisors, agricultural inspectors
What amazes me is that in my part of New York (and in my county too) there is resistance to green energy and what it can bring. Wind energy is a great example of this. We need these energy sources, not only for the efficient energy it can bring, but also because of the jobs these energy sources can produce. In New York, where jobs are needed, this can be a gateway to economic prosperity.
Governor David Paterson issued an Executive Order that will turn state agencies and departments green and more environmentally friendly.
From the e-mailed press release:
Wrapping up Earth Week, Governor David A. Paterson signed an Executive Order today establishing a New York State "Green Procurement and Agency Sustainability Program," to promote policies within State agencies and authorities that reduce the consumption of materials and energy and reduce potential impacts on public health and the environment. As a result, State agencies will purchase environmentally-friendly commodities, services and technology and develop sustainability and stewardship programs.
"It is critically important that the State of New York take the lead as steward of our environment," said Governor Paterson. "Our State government is a major consumer of products and energy, and our policies should conserve our precious natural resources, protect the public health, and prevent pollution in order to improve the quality of life for all of New York State's residents."
The Executive Order will achieve its goals through three primary initiatives: an interagency committee, environmentally-friendly agency programs and policies, and training State employees to pursue their duties in a manner which is mindful of their impact on the environment.
Interagency Committee on Sustainability and Green Procurement:
The Governor has ordered the creation of an Interagency Committee on Sustainability and Green Procurement ("Committee") to enhance interagency coordination in promoting "green" policies. The Committee will consist of the heads of State environmental, energy, economic development, transportation, budget, health, and operations agencies and authorities, and will be co-chaired by Commissioner of General Services John Egan and Commissioner of Environmental Conservation Pete Grannis. The Committee will work to ensure that State agencies have the direction they need to carry out environmentally-conscious purchasing, planning and contracting.
Sustainability and Environmental Stewardship Programs:
Each State agency and authority will develop and implement programs and policies that will promote environmental sustainability and stewardship. These programs and policies will focus on reducing potential impacts on public health and the environment, by supporting recycling, reducing or eliminating the use and generation of toxic substances, pollution and waste, increasing energy efficiency, and using renewable energy sources. In addition, when it is practical and cost efficient, State agencies and authorities will purchase 100% post-consumer content recycled paper for daily use and for publications. State agencies will also develop programs to separate recyclable materials in order to ensure efficient and effective materials recovery.
Creating a more environmentally sound state is a great priority. We must create less waste and be more efficient.
Governor-to-be David Paterson announced today that New York would be joining seven other states and two provinces from Canada in signing on to the Great Lakes-St.Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact. You can read more about the agreement here.
From an e-mailed press release:
Governor Designate David A. Paterson today announced that legislation has been signed authorizing New York State to join the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact. The Compact is a multi-state agreement designed to protect, conserve, and improve the water resources of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin. The legislation was signed by Governor Spitzer on March 4, 2008.
"The Great Lakes and their bays and tributaries contain approximately 18 percent of the world's supply of freshwater, and 90 percent of the United States' supply of fresh surface water," said Governor Designate Paterson. "Unfortunately, water levels in the Great Lakes have seen drastic declines in the last decade, and it is vitally important that we protect and conserve this essential water resource. The Great Lakes Compact demonstrates the commitment of all of the Great Lakes states to work together to achieve that goal."
In 2001, the Governors of the eight Great Lakes states (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin) and the Premiers of Ontario and Quebec signed an agreement to develop and implement a new common, resource-based conservation standard for the Great Lakes Basin. After several years of negotiation, the Great Lakes Compact was developed.
The Compact would result in the following:
- The creation of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Council, consisting of the Governors of the eight Great Lakes states;
- The creation of a water resources inventory by each member state;
- Periodic assessments of cumulative impacts of water withdrawals from the Basin;
- A prohibition on most new and increased diversions of water from the Basin;
- Registration of water withdrawals in amounts of 100,000 gallons per day (gpd) or greater from the Basin in any 30-day period, and certain regulated diversions of Basin water;
- Implementation of water conservation and efficiency programs by each member state relating to Basin water uses;
- Commitments by member states to promote environmentally sound and economically feasible water conservation measures;
- Consultation between the Great Lakes Council and the Provinces of Ontario and Quebec through "regional review" procedures for any new or increased consumptive uses of at least 5 million gpd in any 90-day period; and
- Preservation of existing diversions, withdrawals, uses, rights and agreements.
Great day for the environment here in New York. Being from a county that borders one of the five Great Lakes, this compact is very important to ensuring that we keep our waterways in top-notch shape.
Governor Eliot Spitzer today announced the selection of the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) as the host of the Pollution Prevention Institute, a cutting-edge research and development center to design and test "green" manufacturing methods and provide technical support to businesses for pollution reduction measures that will help make them more competitive. Governor Spitzer proposed $4 million for the Institute in his 2008-09 Executive Budget, building on the $2 million he and the Legislature included in last year's budget to launch the Institute.
RIT's primary mission will be to promote cost effective pollution prevention techniques so that large and small business can reduce energy costs, hazardous substances, and wastes. Investing in pollution prevention will also promote the competitive advantage of New York's businesses.
The Institute will assist industry in reducing its environmental impact by decreasing the use of toxic chemicals, cutting waste generation, decreasing exposure risks to workers, and promoting more efficient use of raw materials and energy.
The Institute will tap into cutting edge academic research and technology to help bring pollution-reduction processes to market by identifying practical pollution-reduction methods, cost-effective equipment and safe materials. The Institute will work collaboratively with businesses, provide professional education and training and create a pipeline of technical advancements.
"By creating the New York State Pollution Prevention Institute, we are seizing an opportunity to help businesses become greener while improving productivity and reducing environmental damage," said Governor Spitzer. "There is tremendous job creation potential that can come from new innovations from the research efforts of the Institute and its partners. In today's world, there is a shift developing in how we produce, distribute, sell and use goods and services. This transformation is being driven by governments, private organizations, businesses and consumers for a variety of economic, environmental and social reasons."
Here's an interesting fact for you.
In 2005, the federal Toxics Release Inventory revealed that New York companies reported 312 million pounds of toxic chemical waste generated and 42 million pounds released into the environment. These figures point to an untapped opportunity to reduce the impact of toxins on human health and the environment. Moreover, regulations at the State, national and international levels indicate a shift toward reducing toxic and hazardous substances and an emphasis on product recycling. A 2003 report by the New York State Assembly found that the lack of a focused research-and-development center and on-site technical assistance for businesses was a major shortcoming in the State's pollution prevention efforts.
This is great news for RIT and for New York. This will assist businesses become "greener" and will help New York become a much more environmental-friendly place in the process.
Invest in Clean Energy Businesses for Economic Growth: New York currently invests in clean-tech industry initiatives through NYSERDA and the Empire State Development Corporation. In order to support New York's national leadership in clean-tech business growth, the State should continue to enhance and expand these collaborative clean-tech initiatives. The state should increase its funding commitment by a minimum of $400 million over four years through financial incentives to support technology clusters. In addition, the State should: increase opportunities for Minority and Women-Owned Businesses and businesses located in disadvantaged communities; enter into long-term state contracts for transportation and space heating fuels; and review public pension fund investment guidelines and state and local tax policies to stimulate investment.
Build a Sustainable Market for Solar Energy in New York State: The Task Force recommends a comprehensive set of programs to address market needs along with an investment in public/private research to ensure that New York continues to capture the economic benefits of solar energy. Programs will focus on: creating incentives for solar system manufacturers to develop and distribute their products in New York; promoting cost-efficient systems; creating well-paying solar installation jobs; and creating incentives for both homeowners and businesses to choose solar photovoltaic and solar thermal energy. To jumpstart the growth of the solar industry in New York, the State should set a goal to install 100 MW of solar photovoltaic and 1,100 solar thermal systems statewide by 2011.
Develop a Strategy to Reap the Benefits of New York's Wind Energy Potential: Wind energy offers the opportunity for clean, renewable power to be generated in New York State. The Task Force recommends that the state commit to realizing the potential of wind energy by addressing local siting and permitting issues, and conducting studies to address transmission and infrastructure limitations. New York has the most wind energy development potential in the northeast and mid-Atlantic region. The more than 5,000 MW of wind energy that has applied for interconnection to the grid shows the industry's interest in and commitment to New York, and the State should support project development and interconnection efforts.
Other recommendations include extending renewable energy to local governments as well as continuing education regarding renewable energy. Green energy jobs can be a part of the solution here in New York and this task force came back with initial recommendations that could bring green collar jobs to New York.
NY-26 Democratic candidate Jon Powers issued a press release today calling on the Bush Administration to release the Great Lakes Report, a report that hasn't been fully released for public viewing (that link will take you to excerpts of the report obtained by the Center for Public Integrity) and contains information about possible health risks associated with contamination throughout the Great Lakes region.
From the e-mailed press release sent out by the Powers campaign:
The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has withheld a report citing possible public health threats from industrial contamination throughout the Great Lakes and the Washington Post (2/18/08) is reporting that it has done so for political purposes. The report cites two dozen "areas of concern" that may face elevated health risks from exposure to dioxin, PCBs, pesticides, lead, mercury, as well as other hazardous pollutants. Researchers found low birth weights, elevated rates of infant mortality and premature births, and elevated death rates from breast cancer, colon cancer, and lung cancer. It also states that approximately 230,000 children, women of child bearing age, and senior citizens live within one mile of the areas of concern.
...
The Washington Post reports that Chris DeRosa, the lead author of the report, was demoted from his position as Director of the division of toxicology and environmental medicine at the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry in the CDC because the Great Lakes report was "below expectations." DeRosa held his position for 15 years prior to the demotion.
Jon Powers, former captain in the U.S. Army, Iraq war veteran and Democratic candidate for Congress in the 26th Congressional District of New York, is calling on the Bush Administration to release the report and urging his opponent, Tom Reynolds, to join him in the fight to release the information. "The health of thousands of Western New Yorkers could potentially be at risk and the Bush Administration is withholding important information for political purposes. If people are at risk, we should do everything in our power to alert the families and fight for a solution. Politics has no place in this debate."
Tom Reynolds, a career politician who has been running for office for 35 years, now must answer the question of whether or not he will call for the release of the study. Reynolds' career is defined by his 90% voting record with George Bush. The Bush administration is withholding information that may place Western New Yorkers in danger. Will this be the one time Reynolds speaks out against Bush or one of the nine times he supports him?
Great call by the Powers campaign to call the Bush Administration (and Reynolds) on this issue. This is a very important environmental issue. Let's all hope that Reynolds catches on and pushes his pal in the White House to release the full report.
My uncle, now that he has finally retired from NYSUT, has a lot of time to websurf (he outgeeks me by miles, actually). This latest bit he found and sent out to the family is really a shocker, though. You see, my grandparents lived and gardened on Central Ave. in Colonie, right down the street from this plant that, if this article from the UK is correct, spewed depleted uranium around the neighborhood for decades.... depleted uranium that is still blowing around the neighborhood, and being found in the bodies of my dead grandparents' former neighbors.
They say it may be a war crime. Details on the flip.
UPDATE: UK Researcher, working with SUNY Albany Researcher, to appear on this at a news conference at the LOB tommorrow morning!
Report Shows New Yorkers Contaminated With Depleted Uranium Over 20 Years After Exposure; Radioactive Uranium Found in Homes After Federal Cleanup of NL Industries Pollution
ALBANY, N.Y., Nov. 27 (AScribe Newswire) -- The Uranium Test Project today released the following media advisory.
- - - -
A new report documents depleted uranium (DU) can be detected in people more than two decades after exposure when using high sensitivity urine tests. Scientists' data also reveal that significant DU remains in some Albany and Colonie, N.Y., household dust, two months after the federal government ended a "cleanup" of the site and surrounding neighborhood and 27 years after the New York State Supreme Court closed the NL Industries factory for illegal uranium emissions. The isotope measurements, which have never before been conducted on any community in the U.S., are a joint initiative of U.S. and United Kingdom scientists, led by Professor Randall Parrish. The results are being published in an international journal, Science of the Total Environment, in the near future (electronically available on-line).
WHO: Speakers include the following:
Randall Parrish, Professor, Dept of Geology, University of Leicester and NERC Isotope Geosciences Laboratory, British Geological Survey, Keyworth, UK.
David Carpenter, M.D., Institute for Health & the Environment, University at Albany.
John Arnason, Asst. Professor, Earth & Atmospheric Sciences, University at Albany.
Several residents and former NL workers who tested positively for DU.
WHEN: Wednesday, December 5, 2007, 11:00 a.m. EST.
WHERE: LCA Press Room, Rm. 130, Legislative Office Bldg., State St., Albany, N.Y.
WHAT: Biological and environmental test results show a significant proportion of tested individuals have a proven DU exposure from the NL Industries factory near Albany.
NL Industries emitted at least 5 tons of DU aerosols into a residential and commercial area from 1958 to 1982 from its factory at 1130 Central Avenue (Rte. 5), Colonie, N.Y. DU is a toxic chemical due to its heavy metal and radiological properties. NL used DU to manufacture armor-piercing munitions.
CONTACTS: Anne Rabe, 518-732-4538, annerabe@msn.com
David Carpenter, 518-525-2661
