Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Environmentalists not allowed to participate in coal conference in Hope, Arkansas
Powered by
SAVE THIS | EMAIL THIS | Close
Environmentalists excluded from conference on coal power
Thursday, Jul 17, 2008
By John Lyon
Arkansas News Bureau
LITTLE ROCK - Environmentalists have been barred from participating in an industry-sponsored conference that will examine Arkansas' role in the development and use of clean coal technologies, a spokesman for the Sierra Club said Wednesday.
Former House Majority Leader Richard Gephardt and U.S. Rep Mike Ross, D-Prescott, are the scheduled keynote speakers for the Arkansas Clean Coal Technology Conference, set for today and Friday at the University of Arkansas Community College in Hope.
A news release from one of the conference's sponsors, the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, says the conference will focus on "Arkansas' role in the development and deployment of advanced clean coal technologies as well as the associated environmental, economic and public policy concerns."
Glen Hooks, regional representative of the Sierra Club, said the Sierra Club and Audubon Arkansas asked to participate in the conference and provide alternative viewpoints but were told they could not.
"They said that's not what this is about, they've already got the panel set up," Hooks said. "So we were invited to attend but not necessarily to participate in the official part of the program."
There is "not really any environmental representative on the panels at all," Hooks said.
Ken Smith, executive director of Audubon Arkansas, did not return a call seeking comment Wednesday.
Leah Arnold, spokeswoman for American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, said she was not aware that the Sierra Club or Audubon Arkansas had asked to participate, but she said the conference is not a forum on whether coal power should be abandoned.
"We don't think that coal should be taken out. We believe that coal is going to continue - it's going to have to continue - to be a part of Arkansas' energy mix. You can't just do away with 47 percent of (the state's) electricity like that," she said.
The conference will be held about 12 miles from the site of a planned $1.52 billion, 600-megawatt coal-fired power plant Southwestern Electric Power Co. hopes to build near Fulton. The state Public Service Commission has approved SWEPCO's plans, but the state Department of Environmental Quality is still considering whether to grant an air permit for the proposed plant.
Arnold said the conference will include discussion of technology that would allow carbon dioxide emissions from coal plants to be stored permanently underground. The technology is 10 to 15 years away from being a reality, she said.
"Clean coal" technology would not be available when the SWEPCO plant near Fulton goes into operation, but the technology could be added to it and all other power plants when it does become available, Arnold said.
Hooks said America cannot afford to produce additional millions of tons of carbon dioxide every year while waiting for clean coal technology to be developed.
"By all accounts, we're at or near the tipping point when it comes to global warming," he said.
The conference also is sponsored by the Center for Legislative Energy and Environmental Research and the Southern States Energy Board.
www.americaspower.org
www.sierraclub.org
s article at:
http://www.arkansasnews.com/archive/2008/07/17/News/347061.html
SAVE THIS | EMAIL THIS | Close
Check the box to include the list of links referenced in the article.
Monday, July 28, 2008
EPA denying California waiver for air pollution standards tougher than federal rules
EPA denying CA waiver for air pol tougher standards
From: Frances Alexander (fran@deane-alexander.com)
Bush's Puppets
Friday 25 July 2008
by: Bill Becker, Climate Progress
EPA administrator Stephen Johnson neglects his federal oath.
Some of us had high hopes for Stephen Johnson when President Bush appointed him in March 2005 as administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Johnson was not a former oil-industry lobbyist or Halliburton executive. He was a career civil servant who had been with the federal government for 24 years. He was a scientist, not a political hack, and he had served under both Democrat and Republican presidents.
I could relate, although my federal career was the reverse of Johnson's.
I started as a political appointee under President George H.W. Bush, then served the next 15 years as a careerist at the Department of Energy. During that time, I learned that there are a lot of good feds out there - people who work hard and take risks for what they believe is in the public's best interest. It requires backbone at times to resist improper political pressures and to carry out the oath of office that federal employees take, promising to "well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
It now appears that Johnson is not fulfilling that oath. There's new evidence that he has allowed the White House to usurp his duty to enforce one of the nation's most important environmental laws, the Clean Air Act. Under the Act, it is the Administrator of EPA, not the president, who is the decider on enforcement issues. The president does not have the legal authority to dictate what those decisions will be.
But that's not the way the game is played in this Administration. From time to time, we get a glimpse back stage to see that President Bush, Vice President Cheney and their deputies are pulling the strings in a show of raw petro-politics, the law and the contrary advice of experts notwithstanding.
One such glimpse came this week from former EPA official Jason Burnett -- an admitted and unrepentant Democrat. Burnett told Congress that Johnson allowed the White House to overrule him on California's request for a waiver under the Clean Air Act. The waiver would have allowed the state to implement its own standards for greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, in excess of those set by the federal government.
The Clean Air Act specifically allows California to be more aggressive than the federal government on matters like this, so long as the Administrator grants a waiver. Once California is given the go-ahead, other states are allowed to adopt its standards. Seventeen states indicated they would adopt the California standard for vehicle emissions once Johnson signed the waiver.
Instead, Johnson denied the request in February 2008 after sitting on it for nearly three years, an unusual outcome given that EPA had approved all 50 of California's previous waiver applications over the last 40 years.
The denial was Johnson's right under the law, assuming it was his decision and was based soundly on the criteria established by the Act. But Burnett says that Johnson originally intended to grant the waiver, believing it was justified until he was overruled by the White House.
As Robert Sussman of the Center for American Progress has pointed out, this is not the first time that Johnson has pushed key environmental decisions into EPA's black hole or has overruled the recommendations of his former colleagues among the agency's scientists and professional staff. Sussman documents other decisions by Johnson that raise "disturbing questions about his ability to carry out the spirit and letter of the nation's environmental laws and his acquiescence in a White House political agenda seemingly bent on blocking the agency from taking action compelled by court decisions and long-standing Clean Air Act precedents."
The most significant of these has been EPA and White House stalling tactics on climate action since the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling last year that the agency has the authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. To trigger the regulatory process, all Johnson has to do is to declare that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare - an obvious conclusion based both on the Court's decision and on an overwhelming body of scientific evidence.
Nevertheless, 16 months after the Supreme Court ruling, EPA announced earlier this month that it would not proceed with regulation while Bush is still in office.
But back to the California waiver: Last January, Johnson told a congressional committee under oath that "I made the decision" to deny California's request. Burnett's latest testimony indicates otherwise. When a House subcommittee asked Johnson for the real story last May, he refused to talk about his conversations with the White House, claiming executive privilege.
In case there has been any doubt, Burnett's testimony supports the case that public officials such as Johnson (along with the parade of other Administration officials who have recently declared executive privilege or acute amnesia) are merely puppets of the West Wing, even when Congress has delegated them direct responsibility to administer the law.
And in case there has been any doubt, the plot of the puppet-show was made transparent by other Administration decisions in recent days. One lifted the ban imposed by Bush's father on offshore oil production. In another, just announced, the Department of Interior released draft rules to pave the way for oil shale production on public lands in the West. Congress has placed a moratorium on final oil-shale rules, but the moratorium is scheduled to expire on Oct. 1. Interior Secretary Dick Kempthorne is quoted as saying he'll move swiftly to make the rules final when the moratorium expires.
Oil shale production would be a disaster of several dimensions. It is extremely energy and water intensive, and its use would be another major setback to the goal of reducing the nation's carbon emissions. Oil shale production would divert precious water from Western cities and farms, creating another fuel-or-food problem, and sink more money and time into another questionable carbon-intensive resource that will make meaningful climate action more difficult and expensive, if not impossible.
There's no mystery here. The White House is blocking action on climate change while setting the stage for the oil industry to feed America's addiction to that carbon-intensive fuel for many years to come.
With only six months left on stage, the puppet masters are hard at work. It's a disappointment that someone like Johnson, who has made public service his career, is allowing his integrity to be destroyed by a president who shows little regard for him, the nation's long-term welfare, or the law.
--------
Bill Becker is executive director of the Presidential Climate Action Project, an initiative to help the next President of the United States take decisive action on global warming and energy security in his or her first 100 days in office.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. TRUTHOUT HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR IS TRUTHOUT ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.
"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON TO MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.
\
From: Frances Alexander (fran@deane-alexander.com)
Bush's Puppets
Friday 25 July 2008
by: Bill Becker, Climate Progress
EPA administrator Stephen Johnson neglects his federal oath.
Some of us had high hopes for Stephen Johnson when President Bush appointed him in March 2005 as administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Johnson was not a former oil-industry lobbyist or Halliburton executive. He was a career civil servant who had been with the federal government for 24 years. He was a scientist, not a political hack, and he had served under both Democrat and Republican presidents.
I could relate, although my federal career was the reverse of Johnson's.
I started as a political appointee under President George H.W. Bush, then served the next 15 years as a careerist at the Department of Energy. During that time, I learned that there are a lot of good feds out there - people who work hard and take risks for what they believe is in the public's best interest. It requires backbone at times to resist improper political pressures and to carry out the oath of office that federal employees take, promising to "well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
It now appears that Johnson is not fulfilling that oath. There's new evidence that he has allowed the White House to usurp his duty to enforce one of the nation's most important environmental laws, the Clean Air Act. Under the Act, it is the Administrator of EPA, not the president, who is the decider on enforcement issues. The president does not have the legal authority to dictate what those decisions will be.
But that's not the way the game is played in this Administration. From time to time, we get a glimpse back stage to see that President Bush, Vice President Cheney and their deputies are pulling the strings in a show of raw petro-politics, the law and the contrary advice of experts notwithstanding.
One such glimpse came this week from former EPA official Jason Burnett -- an admitted and unrepentant Democrat. Burnett told Congress that Johnson allowed the White House to overrule him on California's request for a waiver under the Clean Air Act. The waiver would have allowed the state to implement its own standards for greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, in excess of those set by the federal government.
The Clean Air Act specifically allows California to be more aggressive than the federal government on matters like this, so long as the Administrator grants a waiver. Once California is given the go-ahead, other states are allowed to adopt its standards. Seventeen states indicated they would adopt the California standard for vehicle emissions once Johnson signed the waiver.
Instead, Johnson denied the request in February 2008 after sitting on it for nearly three years, an unusual outcome given that EPA had approved all 50 of California's previous waiver applications over the last 40 years.
The denial was Johnson's right under the law, assuming it was his decision and was based soundly on the criteria established by the Act. But Burnett says that Johnson originally intended to grant the waiver, believing it was justified until he was overruled by the White House.
As Robert Sussman of the Center for American Progress has pointed out, this is not the first time that Johnson has pushed key environmental decisions into EPA's black hole or has overruled the recommendations of his former colleagues among the agency's scientists and professional staff. Sussman documents other decisions by Johnson that raise "disturbing questions about his ability to carry out the spirit and letter of the nation's environmental laws and his acquiescence in a White House political agenda seemingly bent on blocking the agency from taking action compelled by court decisions and long-standing Clean Air Act precedents."
The most significant of these has been EPA and White House stalling tactics on climate action since the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling last year that the agency has the authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. To trigger the regulatory process, all Johnson has to do is to declare that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare - an obvious conclusion based both on the Court's decision and on an overwhelming body of scientific evidence.
Nevertheless, 16 months after the Supreme Court ruling, EPA announced earlier this month that it would not proceed with regulation while Bush is still in office.
But back to the California waiver: Last January, Johnson told a congressional committee under oath that "I made the decision" to deny California's request. Burnett's latest testimony indicates otherwise. When a House subcommittee asked Johnson for the real story last May, he refused to talk about his conversations with the White House, claiming executive privilege.
In case there has been any doubt, Burnett's testimony supports the case that public officials such as Johnson (along with the parade of other Administration officials who have recently declared executive privilege or acute amnesia) are merely puppets of the West Wing, even when Congress has delegated them direct responsibility to administer the law.
And in case there has been any doubt, the plot of the puppet-show was made transparent by other Administration decisions in recent days. One lifted the ban imposed by Bush's father on offshore oil production. In another, just announced, the Department of Interior released draft rules to pave the way for oil shale production on public lands in the West. Congress has placed a moratorium on final oil-shale rules, but the moratorium is scheduled to expire on Oct. 1. Interior Secretary Dick Kempthorne is quoted as saying he'll move swiftly to make the rules final when the moratorium expires.
Oil shale production would be a disaster of several dimensions. It is extremely energy and water intensive, and its use would be another major setback to the goal of reducing the nation's carbon emissions. Oil shale production would divert precious water from Western cities and farms, creating another fuel-or-food problem, and sink more money and time into another questionable carbon-intensive resource that will make meaningful climate action more difficult and expensive, if not impossible.
There's no mystery here. The White House is blocking action on climate change while setting the stage for the oil industry to feed America's addiction to that carbon-intensive fuel for many years to come.
With only six months left on stage, the puppet masters are hard at work. It's a disappointment that someone like Johnson, who has made public service his career, is allowing his integrity to be destroyed by a president who shows little regard for him, the nation's long-term welfare, or the law.
--------
Bill Becker is executive director of the Presidential Climate Action Project, an initiative to help the next President of the United States take decisive action on global warming and energy security in his or her first 100 days in office.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. TRUTHOUT HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR IS TRUTHOUT ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.
"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON TO MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.
\
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Letters supporting grants to build trails in Arkansas needed NOW!
From: Terry Eastin teastin@lynks.com
Date: July 23, 2008 7:43:08 PM CDT
Subject: Arkansas Trail Fund - last request for letters
Everyone -
Thank you so much for your support of the trail legislation initiative! We are 87 letters strong as of today, July 23rd. A significant number of the mayors of Arkansas' largest cities and many smaller towns have sent well-crafted letters indicating their support for economic, health, and conservation reasons. Many organizations, including those one might not expect (economic and health arenas), have also given this initiative their support. Even more of you individually took the time to share your thoughts and send your letters.
This is the last post I will send requesting letters. The deadline was extended to August 1st last week, but, if letters come in shortly after the deadline, they will be accepted until the packet is finalized. I am expecting the count to extend 100 letters.
Once the project is completed, I send a report to all who helped.
Thank you very much, and please forward this last message. Again, if you have questions, please feel free to contact me at teastin@lynks.com, or by phone at 479-236-0938.
Regards,
Terry Eastin
Co-Chair, 2008 National Trails Symposium
All,
Please distribute the letter below and both attachments to every organization news outlet, email network, agency, mayor, city council, county judge, and trail enthusiast you know. If trail enthusiasts want to see an Arkansas Trails Fund established in the 2009 legislative season, NOW is the time to act! The response date has been extended to August 1, so, please help move this project forward with your letters to me either by email or regular mail. If you have questions, please feel free to contact. We are over half way to our goal of 100+ letters.
Attached is a letter from me explaining the project, a report prepared for the Legislative Committee on Agriculture, Economics, and Forestry, as well as, an Arkansas trail funding summary that illustrates the strong demand for our current minimal trail grant resources.
Even if you have already sent a letter yourself, please forward this request to other trail friends and enthusiasts. Your voices will be heard.
My address is
858 N. Jackson Drive
Fayetteville, AR 72701
teastin@lynks.com
terry@mississippirivertrail.org
Best Regards,
Terry Eastin
Date: July 23, 2008 7:43:08 PM CDT
Subject: Arkansas Trail Fund - last request for letters
Everyone -
Thank you so much for your support of the trail legislation initiative! We are 87 letters strong as of today, July 23rd. A significant number of the mayors of Arkansas' largest cities and many smaller towns have sent well-crafted letters indicating their support for economic, health, and conservation reasons. Many organizations, including those one might not expect (economic and health arenas), have also given this initiative their support. Even more of you individually took the time to share your thoughts and send your letters.
This is the last post I will send requesting letters. The deadline was extended to August 1st last week, but, if letters come in shortly after the deadline, they will be accepted until the packet is finalized. I am expecting the count to extend 100 letters.
Once the project is completed, I send a report to all who helped.
Thank you very much, and please forward this last message. Again, if you have questions, please feel free to contact me at teastin@lynks.com, or by phone at 479-236-0938.
Regards,
Terry Eastin
Co-Chair, 2008 National Trails Symposium
All,
Please distribute the letter below and both attachments to every organization news outlet, email network, agency, mayor, city council, county judge, and trail enthusiast you know. If trail enthusiasts want to see an Arkansas Trails Fund established in the 2009 legislative season, NOW is the time to act! The response date has been extended to August 1, so, please help move this project forward with your letters to me either by email or regular mail. If you have questions, please feel free to contact. We are over half way to our goal of 100+ letters.
Attached is a letter from me explaining the project, a report prepared for the Legislative Committee on Agriculture, Economics, and Forestry, as well as, an Arkansas trail funding summary that illustrates the strong demand for our current minimal trail grant resources.
Even if you have already sent a letter yourself, please forward this request to other trail friends and enthusiasts. Your voices will be heard.
My address is
858 N. Jackson Drive
Fayetteville, AR 72701
teastin@lynks.com
terry@mississippirivertrail.org
Best Regards,
Terry Eastin
Letters supporting grants to build trails in Arkansas needed NOW!
From: Terry Eastin teastin@lynks.com
Date: July 23, 2008 7:43:08 PM CDT
Subject: Arkansas Trail Fund - last request for letters
Everyone -
Thank you so much for your support of the trail legislation initiative! We are 87 letters strong as of today, July 23rd. A significant number of the mayors of Arkansas' largest cities and many smaller towns have sent well-crafted letters indicating their support for economic, health, and conservation reasons. Many organizations, including those one might not expect (economic and health arenas), have also given this initiative their support. Even more of you individually took the time to share your thoughts and send your letters.
This is the last post I will send requesting letters. The deadline was extended to August 1st last week, but, if letters come in shortly after the deadline, they will be accepted until the packet is finalized. I am expecting the count to extend 100 letters.
Once the project is completed, I send a report to all who helped.
Thank you very much, and please forward this last message. Again, if you have questions, please feel free to contact me at teastin@lynks.com, or by phone at 479-236-0938.
Regards,
Terry Eastin
Co-Chair, 2008 National Trails Symposium
All,
Please distribute the letter below and both attachments to every organization news outlet, email network, agency, mayor, city council, county judge, and trail enthusiast you know. If trail enthusiasts want to see an Arkansas Trails Fund established in the 2009 legislative season, NOW is the time to act! The response date has been extended to August 1, so, please help move this project forward with your letters to me either by email or regular mail. If you have questions, please feel free to contact. We are over half way to our goal of 100+ letters.
Attached is a letter from me explaining the project, a report prepared for the Legislative Committee on Agriculture, Economics, and Forestry, as well as, an Arkansas trail funding summary that illustrates the strong demand for our current minimal trail grant resources.
Even if you have already sent a letter yourself, please forward this request to other trail friends and enthusiasts. Your voices will be heard.
My address is
858 N. Jackson Drive
Fayetteville, AR 72701
teastin@lynks.com
terry@mississippirivertrail.org
Best Regards,
Terry Eastin
Date: July 23, 2008 7:43:08 PM CDT
Subject: Arkansas Trail Fund - last request for letters
Everyone -
Thank you so much for your support of the trail legislation initiative! We are 87 letters strong as of today, July 23rd. A significant number of the mayors of Arkansas' largest cities and many smaller towns have sent well-crafted letters indicating their support for economic, health, and conservation reasons. Many organizations, including those one might not expect (economic and health arenas), have also given this initiative their support. Even more of you individually took the time to share your thoughts and send your letters.
This is the last post I will send requesting letters. The deadline was extended to August 1st last week, but, if letters come in shortly after the deadline, they will be accepted until the packet is finalized. I am expecting the count to extend 100 letters.
Once the project is completed, I send a report to all who helped.
Thank you very much, and please forward this last message. Again, if you have questions, please feel free to contact me at teastin@lynks.com, or by phone at 479-236-0938.
Regards,
Terry Eastin
Co-Chair, 2008 National Trails Symposium
All,
Please distribute the letter below and both attachments to every organization news outlet, email network, agency, mayor, city council, county judge, and trail enthusiast you know. If trail enthusiasts want to see an Arkansas Trails Fund established in the 2009 legislative season, NOW is the time to act! The response date has been extended to August 1, so, please help move this project forward with your letters to me either by email or regular mail. If you have questions, please feel free to contact. We are over half way to our goal of 100+ letters.
Attached is a letter from me explaining the project, a report prepared for the Legislative Committee on Agriculture, Economics, and Forestry, as well as, an Arkansas trail funding summary that illustrates the strong demand for our current minimal trail grant resources.
Even if you have already sent a letter yourself, please forward this request to other trail friends and enthusiasts. Your voices will be heard.
My address is
858 N. Jackson Drive
Fayetteville, AR 72701
teastin@lynks.com
terry@mississippirivertrail.org
Best Regards,
Terry Eastin
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Discovery Farms program highlighted on its Web site and in Northwest Arkansas Times story
Please click link to read about
Discovery Farms environmental program in Wisconsin
Please click on link to read
Northwest Arkansas Times story on Discovery Farms environmental program in Wisconsin
Dairy farmer discusses program that monitors environmental data
BY TRISH HOLLENBECK Northwest Arkansas Times
Posted on Tuesday, July 22, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/nwat/News/67369/
SPRINGDALE — Joe Bragger says he believes farmers and nonfarmers can work together to solve environmental and economic problems.
There are fringe groups out there that will never be happy with anything he does, Bragger, a dairy farmer who also raises chickens and beef cattle on his family’s farm in west-central Wisconsin, said Monday.
But then there are the rest of the people who farmers can work with to get things done, he said in an interview after giving a speech about Wisconsin’s Discovery Farms Program during Arkansas Farm Bureau’s 60 th annual Officers & Leaders Conference at the Holiday Inn in Springdale.
Discovery Farms environmental program in Wisconsin
Please click on link to read
Northwest Arkansas Times story on Discovery Farms environmental program in Wisconsin
Dairy farmer discusses program that monitors environmental data
BY TRISH HOLLENBECK Northwest Arkansas Times
Posted on Tuesday, July 22, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/nwat/News/67369/
SPRINGDALE — Joe Bragger says he believes farmers and nonfarmers can work together to solve environmental and economic problems.
There are fringe groups out there that will never be happy with anything he does, Bragger, a dairy farmer who also raises chickens and beef cattle on his family’s farm in west-central Wisconsin, said Monday.
But then there are the rest of the people who farmers can work with to get things done, he said in an interview after giving a speech about Wisconsin’s Discovery Farms Program during Arkansas Farm Bureau’s 60 th annual Officers & Leaders Conference at the Holiday Inn in Springdale.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Papal message in Australia is strong on environment's importance
ABC news report:
Pope Benedict has addressed thousands of World Youth Day pilgrims gathered at Barangaroo who have waited hours to watch his official welcome.
Pilgrims cheered and waved the flags of numerous different nations as the Pope's motorcade was driven towards the stage at east Darling Harbour, where he gave an official welcome.
He was greeted by troupes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander dancers as well as a group from the Pacific nation of Tokelau.
The Catholic Archibishop of Sydney, Cardinal George Pell, also made a short speech to welcome the Pontiff.
Pope Benedict led the crowd in a short prayer and thanked Cardinal Pell as well as Adelaide Archbishop Philip Wilson for their "warm welcome".
The Pope also thanked Aboriginal elders who had welcomed him before boarding a boat from Rose Bay, as well as the Aboriginal dancers who greeted him as he walked up the ramp to the large stage at Barangaroo.
"I am deeply moved to stand on your land, knowing the suffering and injustices it has borne, but aware too of the healing and hope that are now at work," he said.
From the red stage at Barangaroo, which is in similar colour tones to the papal garments, Pope Benedict smiled and waved to the estimated several hundred thousand pilgrims.
The Pope began his address with prayers and blessings, but his speech repeatedly referred to the need to care for the environment, acknowledging that climate change means there will be hard times ahead around the globe.
"God's creation is one and it is good. The concerns for non-violence, sustainable development, justice and peace, and care for our environment are of vital importance for humanity," Pope Benedict said.
"Perhaps reluctantly, we come to acknowledge that there are also scars which mark the surface of our earth - erosion, deforestation, the squandering of the world's mineral and ocean resources in order to fuel an insatiable consumption.
"Some of you come from island nations whose very existence is threatened by rising water levels, others from nations suffering the effects of devastating drought.
"God's wondrous creation is sometimes experienced as almost hostile to its stewards, even something dangerous."
Pope Benedict has addressed thousands of World Youth Day pilgrims gathered at Barangaroo who have waited hours to watch his official welcome.
Pilgrims cheered and waved the flags of numerous different nations as the Pope's motorcade was driven towards the stage at east Darling Harbour, where he gave an official welcome.
He was greeted by troupes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander dancers as well as a group from the Pacific nation of Tokelau.
The Catholic Archibishop of Sydney, Cardinal George Pell, also made a short speech to welcome the Pontiff.
Pope Benedict led the crowd in a short prayer and thanked Cardinal Pell as well as Adelaide Archbishop Philip Wilson for their "warm welcome".
The Pope also thanked Aboriginal elders who had welcomed him before boarding a boat from Rose Bay, as well as the Aboriginal dancers who greeted him as he walked up the ramp to the large stage at Barangaroo.
"I am deeply moved to stand on your land, knowing the suffering and injustices it has borne, but aware too of the healing and hope that are now at work," he said.
From the red stage at Barangaroo, which is in similar colour tones to the papal garments, Pope Benedict smiled and waved to the estimated several hundred thousand pilgrims.
The Pope began his address with prayers and blessings, but his speech repeatedly referred to the need to care for the environment, acknowledging that climate change means there will be hard times ahead around the globe.
"God's creation is one and it is good. The concerns for non-violence, sustainable development, justice and peace, and care for our environment are of vital importance for humanity," Pope Benedict said.
"Perhaps reluctantly, we come to acknowledge that there are also scars which mark the surface of our earth - erosion, deforestation, the squandering of the world's mineral and ocean resources in order to fuel an insatiable consumption.
"Some of you come from island nations whose very existence is threatened by rising water levels, others from nations suffering the effects of devastating drought.
"God's wondrous creation is sometimes experienced as almost hostile to its stewards, even something dangerous."
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Gore lays facts of climate change on the table
Gore Calls for US to Use Renewable Energy by 2018
Friday 18 July 2008
»
by: David Stout, The New York Times
Former Vice President Al Gore introduced an ambitious plan to rely completely on clean, renewable energy within the next decade.
(Photo: Breakthrough)
Washington - Former Vice President Al Gore said on Thursday that Americans must abandon fossil fuels within a decade and rely on the sun, the winds and other environmentally friendly sources of electric power, or risk losing their national security as well as their creature comforts.
"The survival of the United States of America as we know it is at risk," Mr. Gore said in a speech to an energy conference here. "The future of human civilization is at stake."
Mr. Gore called for the kind of concerted national effort that enabled Americans to walk on the moon 39 years ago this month, just eight years after President John F. Kennedy famously embraced that goal. He said the goal of producing all of the nation's electricity from "renewable energy and truly clean, carbon-free sources" within 10 years is not some farfetched vision, although he said it would require fundamental changes in political thinking and personal expectations.
"This goal is achievable, affordable and transformative," Mr. Gore said in remarks prepared for the conference. "It represents a challenge to all Americans, in every walk of life - to our political leaders, entrepreneurs, innovators, engineers, and to every citizen."
Although Mr. Gore has made global warming and energy conservation his signature issues, winning a Nobel Prize for his efforts, his speech on Thursday argued that the reasons for renouncing fossil fuels go far beyond concern for the climate.
In it, he cited military-intelligence studies warning of "dangerous national security implications" tied to climate change, including the possibility of "hundreds of millions of climate refugees" causing instability around the world, and said the United States is dangerously vulnerable because of its reliance on foreign oil.
Doubtless aware that his remarks would be met with skepticism, or even ridicule, in some quarters, Mr. Gore insisted in his speech that the goal of carbon-free power is not only achievable but practical, and that businesses would embrace it once they saw that it made fundamental economic sense.
Mr. Gore said the most important policy change in the transformation would be taxes on carbon dioxide production, with an accompanying reduction in payroll taxes. "We should tax what we burn, not what we earn," his prepared remarks said.
The former vice president said in his speech that he could not recall a worse confluence of problems facing the country: higher gasoline prices, jobs being "outsourced," the home mortgage industry in turmoil. "Meanwhile, the war in Iraq continues, and now the war in Afghanistan appears to be getting worse," he said.
By calling for new political leadership and speaking disdainfully of "defenders of the status quo," Mr. Gore was hurling a dart at the man who defeated him for the presidency in 2000, George W. Bush. Critics of Mr. Bush say that his policies are too often colored by his background in the oil business.
A crucial shortcoming in the country's political leadership is a failure to view interlocking problems as basically one problem that is "deeply ironic in its simplicity," Mr. Gore said, namely "our dangerous over-reliance on carbon-based fuels."
"We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet," Mr. Gore said. "Every bit of that's got to change."
And it can change, he said, citing some scientists' estimates that enough solar energy falls on the surface of the earth in 40 minutes to meet the world's energy needs for a year, and that the winds that blow across the Midwest every day could meet the country's daily electricity needs.
Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, the presumptive Democratic candidate for president, immediately praised Mr. Gore's speech. "For decades, Al Gore has challenged the skeptics in Washington on climate change and awakened the conscience of a nation to the urgency of this threat," Mr. Obama said.
A shift away from fossil fuels would make the United States a leader instead of a sometime rebel on energy and conservation issues worldwide, Mr. Gore said. Nor, he said, would the hard work of people who toil on oil rigs and deep in the earth be for naught. "We should guarantee good jobs in the fresh air and sunshine for any coal miner displaced by impacts on the coal industry," he said by way of example. "Every single one of them."
"Of course, there are those who will tell us that this can't be done," he conceded. "But even those who reap the profits of the carbon age have to recognize the inevitability of its demise. As one OPEC oil minister observed, 'The Stone Age didn't end because of a shortage of stones.'"
Friday 18 July 2008
»
by: David Stout, The New York Times
Former Vice President Al Gore introduced an ambitious plan to rely completely on clean, renewable energy within the next decade.
(Photo: Breakthrough)
Washington - Former Vice President Al Gore said on Thursday that Americans must abandon fossil fuels within a decade and rely on the sun, the winds and other environmentally friendly sources of electric power, or risk losing their national security as well as their creature comforts.
"The survival of the United States of America as we know it is at risk," Mr. Gore said in a speech to an energy conference here. "The future of human civilization is at stake."
Mr. Gore called for the kind of concerted national effort that enabled Americans to walk on the moon 39 years ago this month, just eight years after President John F. Kennedy famously embraced that goal. He said the goal of producing all of the nation's electricity from "renewable energy and truly clean, carbon-free sources" within 10 years is not some farfetched vision, although he said it would require fundamental changes in political thinking and personal expectations.
"This goal is achievable, affordable and transformative," Mr. Gore said in remarks prepared for the conference. "It represents a challenge to all Americans, in every walk of life - to our political leaders, entrepreneurs, innovators, engineers, and to every citizen."
Although Mr. Gore has made global warming and energy conservation his signature issues, winning a Nobel Prize for his efforts, his speech on Thursday argued that the reasons for renouncing fossil fuels go far beyond concern for the climate.
In it, he cited military-intelligence studies warning of "dangerous national security implications" tied to climate change, including the possibility of "hundreds of millions of climate refugees" causing instability around the world, and said the United States is dangerously vulnerable because of its reliance on foreign oil.
Doubtless aware that his remarks would be met with skepticism, or even ridicule, in some quarters, Mr. Gore insisted in his speech that the goal of carbon-free power is not only achievable but practical, and that businesses would embrace it once they saw that it made fundamental economic sense.
Mr. Gore said the most important policy change in the transformation would be taxes on carbon dioxide production, with an accompanying reduction in payroll taxes. "We should tax what we burn, not what we earn," his prepared remarks said.
The former vice president said in his speech that he could not recall a worse confluence of problems facing the country: higher gasoline prices, jobs being "outsourced," the home mortgage industry in turmoil. "Meanwhile, the war in Iraq continues, and now the war in Afghanistan appears to be getting worse," he said.
By calling for new political leadership and speaking disdainfully of "defenders of the status quo," Mr. Gore was hurling a dart at the man who defeated him for the presidency in 2000, George W. Bush. Critics of Mr. Bush say that his policies are too often colored by his background in the oil business.
A crucial shortcoming in the country's political leadership is a failure to view interlocking problems as basically one problem that is "deeply ironic in its simplicity," Mr. Gore said, namely "our dangerous over-reliance on carbon-based fuels."
"We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet," Mr. Gore said. "Every bit of that's got to change."
And it can change, he said, citing some scientists' estimates that enough solar energy falls on the surface of the earth in 40 minutes to meet the world's energy needs for a year, and that the winds that blow across the Midwest every day could meet the country's daily electricity needs.
Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, the presumptive Democratic candidate for president, immediately praised Mr. Gore's speech. "For decades, Al Gore has challenged the skeptics in Washington on climate change and awakened the conscience of a nation to the urgency of this threat," Mr. Obama said.
A shift away from fossil fuels would make the United States a leader instead of a sometime rebel on energy and conservation issues worldwide, Mr. Gore said. Nor, he said, would the hard work of people who toil on oil rigs and deep in the earth be for naught. "We should guarantee good jobs in the fresh air and sunshine for any coal miner displaced by impacts on the coal industry," he said by way of example. "Every single one of them."
"Of course, there are those who will tell us that this can't be done," he conceded. "But even those who reap the profits of the carbon age have to recognize the inevitability of its demise. As one OPEC oil minister observed, 'The Stone Age didn't end because of a shortage of stones.'"
Friday, July 11, 2008
Governor's commission on global warming wants to hear from you
Commissioners
Mr. Aubra Anthony, Forestry
1501 North Jefferson
El Dorado, Arkansas 71730
(870) 862‐3414, aanthony@anthonyforest.com
Pres & CEO of Anthony Forest Products Co.
Mr. Nick Brown, Public Energy
4907 North Lookout
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
(501) 614‐3213, nbrown@spp.org
Formerly with Forest Stewardship Council, worked for World Wildlife Fed.
Rep. Joan Cash, At Large
1301 Thrush Road
Jonesboro, Arkansas 72401
(870) 802‐0406, jcash@ritternet.com
Rep in Ark legislature.
Mr. Steve Cousins, Ark Chamber of Commerce
1000 McHenry, PO Bo x7005
El Dorado, Arkansas 71731
(870) 864‐1120, Steve.cousins@lionoil.com
Chair of Ark Chamber of Commerce.
Dr. Jerry Farris, Scientist
3613 Alabama Road
Jonesboro, Arkansas 72401
(870) 933‐8295, jlfarris@astate.edu
9. Aquatic toxicologist at Ark State Univ, Jonesboro.
Mr. Rob Fisher, At Large
4319 North Lookout Drive
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
(501) 372‐7895, fisher@ecoconservation.org
Hydro-biologist.
Dr. Richard Ford, Economist
17000 Lawson Road
Little Rock, Arkansas 72210
(501) 821‐1700, rkford@ualr.edu
Economist at UALR, Pres of UALR Gen Assembly.
Mr. Miles Goggans, Agriculture
16 Greathouse Bend
Little Rock, Arkansas 72207
(501) 374‐9500, mmg@goggansinc.com
Former chief of staff for Sen. David Pryor.
Dr. Art Hobson, Scientist
525 North Olive
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
(479) 575‐5918, ahobson@uark.edu
Physicist, UA Fayetteville
Mr. Kevan Inboden, Municipal Energy
Post Office Box 1289
Jonesboro, Arkansas 72403
(870) 930-3325, kinboden@jonesborocwl.org
Mr. Christopher Ladner, Sustainable Energy Construction
2919 Shenandoah Valley Drive, Suite 701
Little Rock, Arkansas 72212
(501) 661‐0621, chris.ladner@ecointegration.net
Green Building Council representative.
Dr. Elizabeth (Betty) Martin, Union (AFL-CIO)
2825 East Weston Place
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703
(479) 575‐5840, plantvirology@cox.net
Biological & agricultural engineering. Fayetteville. Plant Pathology.
Dr. Robert McAfee, Climatologist
2610 West Hackett Road
Hackett, Arkansas 72937
(479) 638‐8371, robertmca1@aol.com
An Al Gore trainee.
Mr. Bill Reed, House Appointee
P.O. Bo x927
Stuttgart, Arkansas 72160
(870) 673‐5212, breed@riceland.com
CEO of Riceland Corp
Dr. Cindy Sagers, Environmental Nonprofit
435 North Olive
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
(479) 575‐5547, csagers@uark.edu
UA Dept of biology, former chair of Sierra Club's Ozark Headwaters group.
Mr. Jeffrey Short, Environmental Nonprofit
122 Riverpark Drive
Malvern, Arkansas 72104
(501) 337‐7107, bashman@earthlink.net
Retired AF Colonel, scientist, biologist, organic farmer.
Mr. Hugh McDonald, Industry
HMCDONA@entergy.com
CEO of Entergy Arkansas
Mr. Kevin Smith, Ark Senate appointee
135 Waverly Wood Drive
Helena, AR 72342
(870)816-5122, kasmith@suddenlinkmail.com
Former state senator, did the Al Gore training.
Mr. Gary Voigt, Environmental Nonprofit
23871 North Cold Springs Road
Paron, Arkansas 72122
(501) 570‐2260, g.voigt@aecc.com ,
Works for the Rural Elect Coops.
Rep. Kathy Webb, House Appointee.
14 Pilot Point Place
Little Rock, AR 72205 (501) 412‐6443, kathy@lillysdimsum.com
State Representative, co-chair of GW Commission.
Commission Advisory Body
Mr. Richard Bell
Arkansas Agriculture Department
1 Natural Resources Drive
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
(501) 683‐4851, richard.bell@aad.ar.gov
Mr. Lawrence Bengal
Oil and Gas Commission
301 Natural Resources Drive, Suite 102
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
(501) 683‐5816, larry.bengal@aogc.state.ar.us
Mr. John Bethel
Public Service Commission
P.O. Bo x400, 1000 Center Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72203‐0400
(501) 682‐2051, john_bethel@psc.state.ar.us
Mr. Richard Davies
Parks and Tourism
One Capitol Mall
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
(501) 682‐7777, Richard.davies@arkansas.gov
Ms. Maria Haley
Economic Development
One Capitol Mall, Fourth Floor
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
(501) 682‐2124, m.haley@1800arkansas.com
Ms. Nancy Ledbetter *
Game and Fish Commission
#2 Natural Resources Drive
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
(501) 223‐6318, nledbetter@agfc.state.ar.us
Mr. Lynn Malbrough *
Highway and Transportation
10324 Interstate 30, P.O. Box 2261
Little Rock, Arkansas 72203‐2261
(501) 569‐2000, lynn.malbrough@arkansashighways.com
Ms. Teresa Marks
Department of Environmental Quality
5301 North Shore Drive
North Little Rock, Arkansas 72218
(501) 682‐0959, marks@adeq.state.ar.us
Mr. John Shannon
Forestry Commission
3821 West Roosevelt Road
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
(501) 296‐1941, john.shannon@mail.state.ar.us
Mr. Randy Young
Natural Resources Commission
101 East Capitol Avenue, Suite 350
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
(501) 682‐3961, randy.young@arkansas.gov
*designee
Mr. Aubra Anthony, Forestry
1501 North Jefferson
El Dorado, Arkansas 71730
(870) 862‐3414, aanthony@anthonyforest.com
Pres & CEO of Anthony Forest Products Co.
Mr. Nick Brown, Public Energy
4907 North Lookout
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
(501) 614‐3213, nbrown@spp.org
Formerly with Forest Stewardship Council, worked for World Wildlife Fed.
Rep. Joan Cash, At Large
1301 Thrush Road
Jonesboro, Arkansas 72401
(870) 802‐0406, jcash@ritternet.com
Rep in Ark legislature.
Mr. Steve Cousins, Ark Chamber of Commerce
1000 McHenry, PO Bo x7005
El Dorado, Arkansas 71731
(870) 864‐1120, Steve.cousins@lionoil.com
Chair of Ark Chamber of Commerce.
Dr. Jerry Farris, Scientist
3613 Alabama Road
Jonesboro, Arkansas 72401
(870) 933‐8295, jlfarris@astate.edu
9. Aquatic toxicologist at Ark State Univ, Jonesboro.
Mr. Rob Fisher, At Large
4319 North Lookout Drive
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
(501) 372‐7895, fisher@ecoconservation.org
Hydro-biologist.
Dr. Richard Ford, Economist
17000 Lawson Road
Little Rock, Arkansas 72210
(501) 821‐1700, rkford@ualr.edu
Economist at UALR, Pres of UALR Gen Assembly.
Mr. Miles Goggans, Agriculture
16 Greathouse Bend
Little Rock, Arkansas 72207
(501) 374‐9500, mmg@goggansinc.com
Former chief of staff for Sen. David Pryor.
Dr. Art Hobson, Scientist
525 North Olive
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
(479) 575‐5918, ahobson@uark.edu
Physicist, UA Fayetteville
Mr. Kevan Inboden, Municipal Energy
Post Office Box 1289
Jonesboro, Arkansas 72403
(870) 930-3325, kinboden@jonesborocwl.org
Mr. Christopher Ladner, Sustainable Energy Construction
2919 Shenandoah Valley Drive, Suite 701
Little Rock, Arkansas 72212
(501) 661‐0621, chris.ladner@ecointegration.net
Green Building Council representative.
Dr. Elizabeth (Betty) Martin, Union (AFL-CIO)
2825 East Weston Place
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703
(479) 575‐5840, plantvirology@cox.net
Biological & agricultural engineering. Fayetteville. Plant Pathology.
Dr. Robert McAfee, Climatologist
2610 West Hackett Road
Hackett, Arkansas 72937
(479) 638‐8371, robertmca1@aol.com
An Al Gore trainee.
Mr. Bill Reed, House Appointee
P.O. Bo x927
Stuttgart, Arkansas 72160
(870) 673‐5212, breed@riceland.com
CEO of Riceland Corp
Dr. Cindy Sagers, Environmental Nonprofit
435 North Olive
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
(479) 575‐5547, csagers@uark.edu
UA Dept of biology, former chair of Sierra Club's Ozark Headwaters group.
Mr. Jeffrey Short, Environmental Nonprofit
122 Riverpark Drive
Malvern, Arkansas 72104
(501) 337‐7107, bashman@earthlink.net
Retired AF Colonel, scientist, biologist, organic farmer.
Mr. Hugh McDonald, Industry
HMCDONA@entergy.com
CEO of Entergy Arkansas
Mr. Kevin Smith, Ark Senate appointee
135 Waverly Wood Drive
Helena, AR 72342
(870)816-5122, kasmith@suddenlinkmail.com
Former state senator, did the Al Gore training.
Mr. Gary Voigt, Environmental Nonprofit
23871 North Cold Springs Road
Paron, Arkansas 72122
(501) 570‐2260, g.voigt@aecc.com ,
Works for the Rural Elect Coops.
Rep. Kathy Webb, House Appointee.
14 Pilot Point Place
Little Rock, AR 72205 (501) 412‐6443, kathy@lillysdimsum.com
State Representative, co-chair of GW Commission.
Commission Advisory Body
Mr. Richard Bell
Arkansas Agriculture Department
1 Natural Resources Drive
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
(501) 683‐4851, richard.bell@aad.ar.gov
Mr. Lawrence Bengal
Oil and Gas Commission
301 Natural Resources Drive, Suite 102
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
(501) 683‐5816, larry.bengal@aogc.state.ar.us
Mr. John Bethel
Public Service Commission
P.O. Bo x400, 1000 Center Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72203‐0400
(501) 682‐2051, john_bethel@psc.state.ar.us
Mr. Richard Davies
Parks and Tourism
One Capitol Mall
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
(501) 682‐7777, Richard.davies@arkansas.gov
Ms. Maria Haley
Economic Development
One Capitol Mall, Fourth Floor
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
(501) 682‐2124, m.haley@1800arkansas.com
Ms. Nancy Ledbetter *
Game and Fish Commission
#2 Natural Resources Drive
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205
(501) 223‐6318, nledbetter@agfc.state.ar.us
Mr. Lynn Malbrough *
Highway and Transportation
10324 Interstate 30, P.O. Box 2261
Little Rock, Arkansas 72203‐2261
(501) 569‐2000, lynn.malbrough@arkansashighways.com
Ms. Teresa Marks
Department of Environmental Quality
5301 North Shore Drive
North Little Rock, Arkansas 72218
(501) 682‐0959, marks@adeq.state.ar.us
Mr. John Shannon
Forestry Commission
3821 West Roosevelt Road
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
(501) 296‐1941, john.shannon@mail.state.ar.us
Mr. Randy Young
Natural Resources Commission
101 East Capitol Avenue, Suite 350
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
(501) 682‐3961, randy.young@arkansas.gov
*designee
Thursday, July 10, 2008
American basket flower (Centaurea Americana) blooming on World Peace Wetland Prairie and other unmowed places throughout northwest Arkansas
Please click on image to ENLARGE photo of American basketflower made on July 10, 2008.
American basketflower photos and description˜
American basketflower photos and description˜
Japanese prove that one can leave his carbon footprint at the door
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB121546455572133635-lMyQjAxMDI4MTA1ODQwNjg0Wj.html
>
>
>
> Leave Your Carbon Footprint at the Door
>
> Japanese Model Home Touts
>
> Eco-Gadgets for G-8 Summit;
>
> Air-Washing the Laundry
>
> By LISA THOMAS
>
> July 8, 2008; Page D1
>
> As leaders of the world's most powerful nations discuss climate change at the Group of Eight summit in northern Japan, Japan's big tech companies are displaying some of their most cutting-edge solutions in a nearby "zero emissions house."
>
> The single-story, 2,152-square-foot house generates all the energy required for a family of four, therefore eliminating carbon-dioxide emissions, according to the Japanese government. Products inside, many already on sale in Japan, include a washer that requires no water and an air conditioner that senses where people are in a room and automatically sends cool air in their direction rather than cooling empty space. Yet the eco-friendly products also carry a steeper price tag than traditional appliances.
>
> The house uses a wind-turbine generator and a photovoltaic generation system, which directly converts light into electricity, to produce about 15 kilowatts of energy a day, nearly five times the amount used by a regular household. The government has presented the house as one of its contributions toward helping the world cut greenhouse emissions in half by 2050.
>
> The zero-emissions house is an attempt by Japan's big tech companies to showcase their recent and growing focus on environmental technologies as a future area of growth.
>
>
>
>
> Sanyo Electric
>
>
> This washing machine made by Sanyo Electric Co. uses air to clean clothes instead of water.
>
>
> The waterless washer is Sanyo Electric Co.'s latest Aqua washer/dryer, a three-in-one machine that uses high-powered air, or ozone, to wash clothes without a single drop of water. The process of "ozonation" -- which disinfects bacteria on contact -- can air-wash clothes, removing about 80% of biodegradable stains without using any water at all, says Ryo Hagiwara, Sanyo's spokesman.
>
> The company says a full-cycle of air-wash uses about twice as much electricity as a regular wash, but only one-fifth the total energy of a comparable full wash and dry -- in part because the air wash doesn't need a drying system.
>
> The Aqua washer also has a regular wash setting that can purify and recycle water that had been used for a bath, thus reducing the amount of fresh water required by the machine to a mere half-bucket.
>
> The machine is available only in Japan and Taiwan, but the company says it hopes to make inroads eventually in the U.S. and Europe. Sanyo's Aqua washer costs 228,000 yen ($2,135) or about 80% more than an equivalent washer/dryer on the Japanese market.
>
> Human-Sensing AC
>
> The air conditioner is the new, human-sensing air-conditioner by Mitsubishi Electric Corp., which detects a person's motion and location using heat sensors. The machine, which is available only in Japan, then emits air waves specifically targeting the people. That can save up to 50% in energy use, the company says. Still, the air conditioner, which is built into a wall, costs a lofty 200,000 yen ($1,873), or about a third more than conventional air conditioners.
>
>
>
>
> Sharp Corp.
>
>
> A solar-powered TV made by Sharp Corp. is both thin and efficient, consuming half the energy of current models.
>
>
> There's also a low-energy television set. Sharp Corp., a leading solar-panel producer, is showing one of the world's thinnest liquid-crystal-display TVs, with a thickness of about three-fourths of an inch. The set, not yet on sale, consumes only half the energy of existing models, the company says.
>
> Sharp is also showing a solar-energy array whose solar cells can be made semitransparent, so they can be put into a window.
>
> Some ideas are simple. Sekisui House Ltd. is displaying a roof-top vegetation system that uses a thin film of moss grown on tile plates attached to the roof of the house.
>
> The housing company says the moss, which can be fitted alongside solar panels on the rooftop, can lower the temperature inside the house by one degree Celsius, helping reduce air-conditioning use. The company plans to start sales in Japan soon.
>
> Seeking Dominance
>
> Squeezed both by low-cost competitors from China and Taiwan and innovative companies like Apple Inc., the Japanese companies that dominated the global electronics industry for decades have been seeking ways to play up their technological manufacturing strengths and know-how to stay ahead.
>
> What's more, competition is fierce as rivals jump onto the environment-friendly technology bandwagon. Just last year, Sharp lost its No. 1 position to Germany's Q-Cell AG in global market share of solar panels.
>
> Japan's model home goes one step beyond previous zero-emissions homes by providing a fully furnished home using cutting-edge household appliances.
>
> Last year, the British government presented a carbon-free home that beefed up heat insulation by using triple-glazed windows, solar panels and low-energy lighting, among other things.
>
>
>
> Leave Your Carbon Footprint at the Door
>
> Japanese Model Home Touts
>
> Eco-Gadgets for G-8 Summit;
>
> Air-Washing the Laundry
>
> By LISA THOMAS
>
> July 8, 2008; Page D1
>
> As leaders of the world's most powerful nations discuss climate change at the Group of Eight summit in northern Japan, Japan's big tech companies are displaying some of their most cutting-edge solutions in a nearby "zero emissions house."
>
> The single-story, 2,152-square-foot house generates all the energy required for a family of four, therefore eliminating carbon-dioxide emissions, according to the Japanese government. Products inside, many already on sale in Japan, include a washer that requires no water and an air conditioner that senses where people are in a room and automatically sends cool air in their direction rather than cooling empty space. Yet the eco-friendly products also carry a steeper price tag than traditional appliances.
>
> The house uses a wind-turbine generator and a photovoltaic generation system, which directly converts light into electricity, to produce about 15 kilowatts of energy a day, nearly five times the amount used by a regular household. The government has presented the house as one of its contributions toward helping the world cut greenhouse emissions in half by 2050.
>
> The zero-emissions house is an attempt by Japan's big tech companies to showcase their recent and growing focus on environmental technologies as a future area of growth.
>
>
>
>
> Sanyo Electric
>
>
> This washing machine made by Sanyo Electric Co. uses air to clean clothes instead of water.
>
>
> The waterless washer is Sanyo Electric Co.'s latest Aqua washer/dryer, a three-in-one machine that uses high-powered air, or ozone, to wash clothes without a single drop of water. The process of "ozonation" -- which disinfects bacteria on contact -- can air-wash clothes, removing about 80% of biodegradable stains without using any water at all, says Ryo Hagiwara, Sanyo's spokesman.
>
> The company says a full-cycle of air-wash uses about twice as much electricity as a regular wash, but only one-fifth the total energy of a comparable full wash and dry -- in part because the air wash doesn't need a drying system.
>
> The Aqua washer also has a regular wash setting that can purify and recycle water that had been used for a bath, thus reducing the amount of fresh water required by the machine to a mere half-bucket.
>
> The machine is available only in Japan and Taiwan, but the company says it hopes to make inroads eventually in the U.S. and Europe. Sanyo's Aqua washer costs 228,000 yen ($2,135) or about 80% more than an equivalent washer/dryer on the Japanese market.
>
> Human-Sensing AC
>
> The air conditioner is the new, human-sensing air-conditioner by Mitsubishi Electric Corp., which detects a person's motion and location using heat sensors. The machine, which is available only in Japan, then emits air waves specifically targeting the people. That can save up to 50% in energy use, the company says. Still, the air conditioner, which is built into a wall, costs a lofty 200,000 yen ($1,873), or about a third more than conventional air conditioners.
>
>
>
>
> Sharp Corp.
>
>
> A solar-powered TV made by Sharp Corp. is both thin and efficient, consuming half the energy of current models.
>
>
> There's also a low-energy television set. Sharp Corp., a leading solar-panel producer, is showing one of the world's thinnest liquid-crystal-display TVs, with a thickness of about three-fourths of an inch. The set, not yet on sale, consumes only half the energy of existing models, the company says.
>
> Sharp is also showing a solar-energy array whose solar cells can be made semitransparent, so they can be put into a window.
>
> Some ideas are simple. Sekisui House Ltd. is displaying a roof-top vegetation system that uses a thin film of moss grown on tile plates attached to the roof of the house.
>
> The housing company says the moss, which can be fitted alongside solar panels on the rooftop, can lower the temperature inside the house by one degree Celsius, helping reduce air-conditioning use. The company plans to start sales in Japan soon.
>
> Seeking Dominance
>
> Squeezed both by low-cost competitors from China and Taiwan and innovative companies like Apple Inc., the Japanese companies that dominated the global electronics industry for decades have been seeking ways to play up their technological manufacturing strengths and know-how to stay ahead.
>
> What's more, competition is fierce as rivals jump onto the environment-friendly technology bandwagon. Just last year, Sharp lost its No. 1 position to Germany's Q-Cell AG in global market share of solar panels.
>
> Japan's model home goes one step beyond previous zero-emissions homes by providing a fully furnished home using cutting-edge household appliances.
>
> Last year, the British government presented a carbon-free home that beefed up heat insulation by using triple-glazed windows, solar panels and low-energy lighting, among other things.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Government protection of wetland pathetic
EPA Enforcement Is Faulted
Agency Official Cites Narrow Reading of Clean Water Act
By Juliet Eilperin Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, July 8, 2008; A06
An official administration guidance document on wetland policy is undermining enforcement of the Clean Water Act, said a March 4 memo written by the Environmental Protection Agency's chief enforcement officer.
The memo by Granta Y. Nakayama, EPA's assistant administrator for enforcement and compliance assurance, was obtained by the advocacy group Greenpeace and released yesterday by two House Democratic committee chairmen. It highlights the confusion that has afflicted federal wetland protections since a 2006 Supreme Court decision.
That 5 to 4 decision, known as Rapanos v. United States, held that the Army Corps of Engineers had exceeded its authority when it denied two Michigan developers permits to build on wetland, but the court split on where the Corps should have drawn the line on what areas deserve protection.
A plurality made of up Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. proposed an across-the-board reduction in the Corps' regulatory role, but Justice Anthony M. Kennedy -- who cast the deciding vote -- called for a case-by-case approach in deciding how the government should proceed. That left the ruling open to interpretation.
In his memo to Benjamin Grumbles, EPA's assistant administrator for water, Nakayama wrote that the document the agency issued in June 2007 to guide regulators' decisions under the Rapanos decision is having "a significant impact on enforcement." Nakayama and his staff concluded that between July 2006 and December 2007, EPA's regional offices had decided not to pursue potential Clean Water Act violations in 304 cases "because of jurisdictional uncertainty."
Much of the controversy centers on what sort of waterway and accompanying wetland should qualify for protection. The administration's guidance instructs federal officials to focus on the "relevant reach" of a tributary, which translates into a single segment of a stream. In the memo, Nakayama argued that this definition "isolates the small tributary" and "ignores longstanding scientific ecosystem and watershed protection principles critical to meeting the goals" of the Clean Water Act.
Chairmen Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) of the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee and James L. Oberstar (D-Minn.) of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee sent a letter yesterday to EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson saying they have "grave concerns" about the way the agency is implementing the Clean Water Act.
The two noted that Nakayama concluded that in all, the Supreme Court decision and the subsequent guidance document "negatively affected approximately 500 enforcement cases" in nine months. They also questioned why EPA's Grumbles did not raise the issue when he testified before Oberstar's panel less than three months ago.
"This sudden reduction in enforcement activity will undermine the implementation of the Clean Water Act and adversely affect EPA's responsibility to protect the nation's waters," the congressmen wrote. "Yet instead of sounding the alarm about EPA's enforcement problems, the agency's public statements have minimized the impact of the Rapanos decision."
In response to a question about the congressional inquiry, EPA spokesman Jonathan Shradar said in an e-mail: "We will be reviewing the new request and will work with the chairmen to provide information on our enforcement program."
Eric Schaeffer, who used to head EPA's civil enforcement division and now heads the Environmental Integrity Project, an advocacy group, called Nakayama's memo "very significant. It lays out very clearly why you can't enforce one of the most important parts of the Clean Water Act."
EPA officials are not the only ones growing frustrated with the confusing legal interpretations of the Rapanos decision. Robert B. Propst, a senior judge on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Southern Division, wrote in a Nov. 7, 2007, decision that he was reassigning a wetland case "to another judge for trial. At least one of the reasons is that I am so perplexed by the way the law applicable to this case has developed that it would be inappropriate for me to try it again."
© 2008 The Washington Post Company
Stormwater Management Total Stormwater Management Service Design, Repair & Maintenance www.apexcos.com
Agency Official Cites Narrow Reading of Clean Water Act
By Juliet Eilperin Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, July 8, 2008; A06
An official administration guidance document on wetland policy is undermining enforcement of the Clean Water Act, said a March 4 memo written by the Environmental Protection Agency's chief enforcement officer.
The memo by Granta Y. Nakayama, EPA's assistant administrator for enforcement and compliance assurance, was obtained by the advocacy group Greenpeace and released yesterday by two House Democratic committee chairmen. It highlights the confusion that has afflicted federal wetland protections since a 2006 Supreme Court decision.
That 5 to 4 decision, known as Rapanos v. United States, held that the Army Corps of Engineers had exceeded its authority when it denied two Michigan developers permits to build on wetland, but the court split on where the Corps should have drawn the line on what areas deserve protection.
A plurality made of up Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. proposed an across-the-board reduction in the Corps' regulatory role, but Justice Anthony M. Kennedy -- who cast the deciding vote -- called for a case-by-case approach in deciding how the government should proceed. That left the ruling open to interpretation.
In his memo to Benjamin Grumbles, EPA's assistant administrator for water, Nakayama wrote that the document the agency issued in June 2007 to guide regulators' decisions under the Rapanos decision is having "a significant impact on enforcement." Nakayama and his staff concluded that between July 2006 and December 2007, EPA's regional offices had decided not to pursue potential Clean Water Act violations in 304 cases "because of jurisdictional uncertainty."
Much of the controversy centers on what sort of waterway and accompanying wetland should qualify for protection. The administration's guidance instructs federal officials to focus on the "relevant reach" of a tributary, which translates into a single segment of a stream. In the memo, Nakayama argued that this definition "isolates the small tributary" and "ignores longstanding scientific ecosystem and watershed protection principles critical to meeting the goals" of the Clean Water Act.
Chairmen Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) of the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee and James L. Oberstar (D-Minn.) of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee sent a letter yesterday to EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson saying they have "grave concerns" about the way the agency is implementing the Clean Water Act.
The two noted that Nakayama concluded that in all, the Supreme Court decision and the subsequent guidance document "negatively affected approximately 500 enforcement cases" in nine months. They also questioned why EPA's Grumbles did not raise the issue when he testified before Oberstar's panel less than three months ago.
"This sudden reduction in enforcement activity will undermine the implementation of the Clean Water Act and adversely affect EPA's responsibility to protect the nation's waters," the congressmen wrote. "Yet instead of sounding the alarm about EPA's enforcement problems, the agency's public statements have minimized the impact of the Rapanos decision."
In response to a question about the congressional inquiry, EPA spokesman Jonathan Shradar said in an e-mail: "We will be reviewing the new request and will work with the chairmen to provide information on our enforcement program."
Eric Schaeffer, who used to head EPA's civil enforcement division and now heads the Environmental Integrity Project, an advocacy group, called Nakayama's memo "very significant. It lays out very clearly why you can't enforce one of the most important parts of the Clean Water Act."
EPA officials are not the only ones growing frustrated with the confusing legal interpretations of the Rapanos decision. Robert B. Propst, a senior judge on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Southern Division, wrote in a Nov. 7, 2007, decision that he was reassigning a wetland case "to another judge for trial. At least one of the reasons is that I am so perplexed by the way the law applicable to this case has developed that it would be inappropriate for me to try it again."
© 2008 The Washington Post Company
Stormwater Management Total Stormwater Management Service Design, Repair & Maintenance www.apexcos.com
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Condo developers on Beaver Lake seeking extension of project approval from Benton County
To All ABLE Members,
I am sending this email to galvanize our ABLE membership to take action! The Grandview Heights condo developers are back, this time to request a two-year extension from the Benton County Planning Board. This is a chance to kill this project once and for all!
The Planning board meeting will be at 5:30 on Wednesday, July 16. It will be held in the Quorum Court room (3rd floor), in the Benton County Administration building. This building is just east of the courthouse located on the Bentonville Square. The room isn’t real large, so please get there between 4:30 and 5 if possible. If you are comfortable doing so, please plan on speaking during the public comment period. There is a 3-minute limit per person and of course you don’t have to use the full time. I will provide some talking points below. There are a lot of issues to talk about, so just pick a few points that you are comfortable talking about.
In addition to having people speak during the time allotted for public comment, it would be a good idea to over pack the room. This would send a message to the planning board that there are still many concerned citizens who do not want this project’s developers to do any more damage than they already have. So even if you don't speak, please be there and come early - the room will probably over fill. By the way - if we fill the room by 4:30 or 5 - there will not be room for the condo team to come in and sit down other than their speaker. I don't anticipate very many red shirts coming out to support the condos.
Some background for any of you who are wondering what the meeting is all about:
Grandview Heights was approved in 2005 with a list of 13 required items and a 2 year window in which to pull a building permit. The approval was for a 15-story condo building, and two additional buildings up to 25 stories each. The 2 years expire on July 21st. Now they are asking for a 2-year extension.
The main overriding issue is that the condo project is in such a mess financially; it is unlikely they can get a completion bond – one of the 13 items required by the County. If they can't get the completion bond (which requires a strong financial position) then they can't get a building permit and therefore cannot build the project.
What is the financial mess? They are in foreclosure on the property - 2 entities are fighting over who is first in line to foreclose. A foreclosure is a lawsuit - so both the seller of the property and a group that lent them money are suing the developer. There are also liens against the property for unpaid work done at the site. Neither the dirt work contractor nor the engineering firm has been paid and the team that designed the sewage treatment system also has not been paid. And, it is astonishing to me that the property taxes are delinquent. I'm not surprised the taxes weren't paid - I'm astonished that the developer has the nerve to go in and ask the same County for an extension! This alone should make them ineligible to ask for more time.
There are many other reasons not to give an extension. In 2 1/2 years, they have not completed any of the 13 requirements the County gave this project. The Arkansas Dept. of Environmental Quality denied their request for a sewage treatment facility. and – they never completed a fire study and therefore do not have the required agreement with the fire department.
Ultimately, the developers could not perform, scarred the land, and ripped off some local companies as well as the county taxpayers! Why would this planning board even consider an extension for this project?
The County Planning Regulations (Blue Book) state in Chapter I Section 5 (page 6):
"The planning board may modify, vary, or waive the requirements of this ordinance by an affirmative vote of two-thirds (2/3) vote of the total membership of the Benton County Planning Board. Note: a two-thirds vote of the attending quorum is not sufficient. The criteria to grant such modification, variances, or waiver shall be, without exception, and singularly because strict compliance with any provision of this ordinance would cause exceptional or undue hardship to the land developer. Additionally, extra expense, economic hardship, or additional outlay of capital funds or money shall never constitute grounds for exceptional or undue hardship".
So, someone needs to state that any vote for an extension would require 5 yes votes, and that there is no reason that the developers can give for an extension other than economic hardship, and that is specifically excluded in the Planning regulations as stated above.
If you cannot attend the meeting on the 16th, or do not wish to speak, please email your arguments to the Planning Director and Planning Board members below.
Planning Director Ashley Pope – apope@co.benton.ar.us
Bill Kneebone bkmj@centurytel.net
Caleb Henry chenry@ozarkcivil.com
Heath Ward Heath_Ward@cargill.com
Mark Gray markagray@earthlink.net
Scott Borman Scott.Borman@bwrpwa.com
Tim Sorey trs@sandcreek.us
Adele Lucus unknown
Please participate. Only through all of our efforts will we succeed!
I expect to hear a really slick sales pitch on the 16th from the developer’s attorney. It will probably be something like… “we have investors lined up, but they won’t invest unless you give us the additional time”. The media will all be there. Hope to see you on the 16th at 4:30 (meeting starts at 5:30)!
Doug Timmons
President, ABLE
I am sending this email to galvanize our ABLE membership to take action! The Grandview Heights condo developers are back, this time to request a two-year extension from the Benton County Planning Board. This is a chance to kill this project once and for all!
The Planning board meeting will be at 5:30 on Wednesday, July 16. It will be held in the Quorum Court room (3rd floor), in the Benton County Administration building. This building is just east of the courthouse located on the Bentonville Square. The room isn’t real large, so please get there between 4:30 and 5 if possible. If you are comfortable doing so, please plan on speaking during the public comment period. There is a 3-minute limit per person and of course you don’t have to use the full time. I will provide some talking points below. There are a lot of issues to talk about, so just pick a few points that you are comfortable talking about.
In addition to having people speak during the time allotted for public comment, it would be a good idea to over pack the room. This would send a message to the planning board that there are still many concerned citizens who do not want this project’s developers to do any more damage than they already have. So even if you don't speak, please be there and come early - the room will probably over fill. By the way - if we fill the room by 4:30 or 5 - there will not be room for the condo team to come in and sit down other than their speaker. I don't anticipate very many red shirts coming out to support the condos.
Some background for any of you who are wondering what the meeting is all about:
Grandview Heights was approved in 2005 with a list of 13 required items and a 2 year window in which to pull a building permit. The approval was for a 15-story condo building, and two additional buildings up to 25 stories each. The 2 years expire on July 21st. Now they are asking for a 2-year extension.
The main overriding issue is that the condo project is in such a mess financially; it is unlikely they can get a completion bond – one of the 13 items required by the County. If they can't get the completion bond (which requires a strong financial position) then they can't get a building permit and therefore cannot build the project.
What is the financial mess? They are in foreclosure on the property - 2 entities are fighting over who is first in line to foreclose. A foreclosure is a lawsuit - so both the seller of the property and a group that lent them money are suing the developer. There are also liens against the property for unpaid work done at the site. Neither the dirt work contractor nor the engineering firm has been paid and the team that designed the sewage treatment system also has not been paid. And, it is astonishing to me that the property taxes are delinquent. I'm not surprised the taxes weren't paid - I'm astonished that the developer has the nerve to go in and ask the same County for an extension! This alone should make them ineligible to ask for more time.
There are many other reasons not to give an extension. In 2 1/2 years, they have not completed any of the 13 requirements the County gave this project. The Arkansas Dept. of Environmental Quality denied their request for a sewage treatment facility. and – they never completed a fire study and therefore do not have the required agreement with the fire department.
Ultimately, the developers could not perform, scarred the land, and ripped off some local companies as well as the county taxpayers! Why would this planning board even consider an extension for this project?
The County Planning Regulations (Blue Book) state in Chapter I Section 5 (page 6):
"The planning board may modify, vary, or waive the requirements of this ordinance by an affirmative vote of two-thirds (2/3) vote of the total membership of the Benton County Planning Board. Note: a two-thirds vote of the attending quorum is not sufficient. The criteria to grant such modification, variances, or waiver shall be, without exception, and singularly because strict compliance with any provision of this ordinance would cause exceptional or undue hardship to the land developer. Additionally, extra expense, economic hardship, or additional outlay of capital funds or money shall never constitute grounds for exceptional or undue hardship".
So, someone needs to state that any vote for an extension would require 5 yes votes, and that there is no reason that the developers can give for an extension other than economic hardship, and that is specifically excluded in the Planning regulations as stated above.
If you cannot attend the meeting on the 16th, or do not wish to speak, please email your arguments to the Planning Director and Planning Board members below.
Planning Director Ashley Pope – apope@co.benton.ar.us
Bill Kneebone bkmj@centurytel.net
Caleb Henry chenry@ozarkcivil.com
Heath Ward Heath_Ward@cargill.com
Mark Gray markagray@earthlink.net
Scott Borman Scott.Borman@bwrpwa.com
Tim Sorey trs@sandcreek.us
Adele Lucus unknown
Please participate. Only through all of our efforts will we succeed!
I expect to hear a really slick sales pitch on the 16th from the developer’s attorney. It will probably be something like… “we have investors lined up, but they won’t invest unless you give us the additional time”. The media will all be there. Hope to see you on the 16th at 4:30 (meeting starts at 5:30)!
Doug Timmons
President, ABLE
Friday, July 4, 2008
Downtown General zone? Why not Neighborhood Conservation?
Please click on image of native-stone house and giant catalpa trees uphill from Spout Spring Branch in south Fayetteville, Arkansas. This lot and adjacent blocks in the area would be zoned Downtown General rather than Neighborhood Conservation if the Walker Park Neighborhood Master Plan is not revised.
When I advocated closer study of geography and existing homes in the Walker Park neighborhood before the rezoning plan is approved, I was thinking of many places.
Here is the intersection at the far northeast corner of the Walker Park master plan and it is in blue on the concept plan as "downtown general." I was wrong about that being Mary Carr's house, which is a block north on Huntsville.
IMPORTANT THINGS TO PROTECT In this photo:
Riparian zone of Spout Spring Branch starts part way down this lot this corner lot or it certainly starts in the adjoining lot. Any disruption of soil or anything else on this property would be within what should be the no-build zone to protect the Beaver Lake Watershed and would imperial the quality of the stream.
GIANT catalpa trees are pretty common in this part of town but are being taken down regularly. Here here are examples worth saving.
Native stone houses are disappearing rapidly in this part of town and here is an example worth saving. I know, it isn't of as high quality as the one removed from the land of the late Ray Adams on S. School Ave. to make way for Advance Auto, but it is a wonderful dwelling and of historic value.
Mill Ave., of course, is the extension of E. South Street leading northeastward from the narrow block that was discussed by Tony Wappel in the council meeting this past Tuesday.
Enjoy the holiday!
When I advocated closer study of geography and existing homes in the Walker Park neighborhood before the rezoning plan is approved, I was thinking of many places.
Here is the intersection at the far northeast corner of the Walker Park master plan and it is in blue on the concept plan as "downtown general." I was wrong about that being Mary Carr's house, which is a block north on Huntsville.
IMPORTANT THINGS TO PROTECT In this photo:
Riparian zone of Spout Spring Branch starts part way down this lot this corner lot or it certainly starts in the adjoining lot. Any disruption of soil or anything else on this property would be within what should be the no-build zone to protect the Beaver Lake Watershed and would imperial the quality of the stream.
GIANT catalpa trees are pretty common in this part of town but are being taken down regularly. Here here are examples worth saving.
Native stone houses are disappearing rapidly in this part of town and here is an example worth saving. I know, it isn't of as high quality as the one removed from the land of the late Ray Adams on S. School Ave. to make way for Advance Auto, but it is a wonderful dwelling and of historic value.
Mill Ave., of course, is the extension of E. South Street leading northeastward from the narrow block that was discussed by Tony Wappel in the council meeting this past Tuesday.
Enjoy the holiday!
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
July is buttonbush month in Northwest Arkansas wetland areas and along streams and ditches
PLEASE CLICK ON IMAGE TO ENLARGE PHOTO of Buttonbush inflorescence on World Peace Wetland Prairie on June 2, 2008.
I have been asked why I discourage people from using radical clearing methods on wetland prairies, especially small parcels and urban parcels such as World Peace Wetland Prairie.
One of the main reasons is that some prairie and wetland native species need to grow tall and strong and not be cut bank or burned off if they are to reach their full potential.
The buttonbush is among the easiest to identify in this category at this time of year. The buttonbush is a sure marker of wetland when found growing in the wild. Its value to many species of wildlife is well-documented. And it is among the better native species for protecting riparian zones of streams from eroding.
Read what Texas A&M's Aquaplant Website has to say about the amazing buttonbush.
http://aquaplant.tamu.edu/database/emergent_plants/buttonbush.htm
WWW AQUAPLANT
Plant Identification
Bulrush
Cattail
Buttonbush
Description Management Options Other Photos
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Buttonbush is a woody shrub (3-10 feet tall) that occasionally grows into a small tree and can be found above water or in water up to 4 feet deep. It has shiny dark-green spear-or egg-shaped pointed leaves 3 to 6 inches long. The leaves are opposite or whorled in 3's or 4's along the stem. Flowers of buttonbush are easily identified by their greenish-white tube flowers in dense ball-shaped clusters about 1 inch in diameter. Seed heads are brown.
Submerged portions of all aquatic plants provide habitats for many micro and macro invertebrates. These invertebrates in turn are used as food by fish and other wildlife species (e.g. amphibians, reptiles, ducks, etc. ). After aquatic plants die, their decomposition by bacteria and fungi provides food (called "detritus") for many aquatic invertebrates. Buttonbush seeds are occasionally eaten by ducks but the bush itself is used for nesting by many bird species.
Emergent Plant Index
Alligator Weed
American Lotus
Arrowhead
Banana Lily (Floating Heart)
Blue Flag
Bulrush
Bull Tongue
Buttonbush
Cattail
Common Reed
Cow Lily (Spatterdock)
Dollar Bonnet (Water Shield)
Floating Heart (Banana Lily)
Fragrant Water Lily (White Water Lily)
Frog's-bit
Giant Reed
Horsetail
Lizard's Tail
Maidencane
Mexican Water Lily (Yellow Water Lily) Pickerelweed
Sedges
Smartweed (Water Pepper)
Soft Rush
Southern Watergrass
Spatterdock (Cow Lily)
Spike Rush
Three-Square
Torpedograss
Waterleaf
Water Pennywort
Water Pepper (Smartweed)
Water Primrose
Water Shield (Dollar Bonnet)
White Water Lily (Fragrant Water Lily)
Willow
Yellow Water Lily (Mexican Water Lily)
Back to Top
Copyright (C) 2000-2008 Texas AgriLife Extension Service. All rights reserved.
I have been asked why I discourage people from using radical clearing methods on wetland prairies, especially small parcels and urban parcels such as World Peace Wetland Prairie.
One of the main reasons is that some prairie and wetland native species need to grow tall and strong and not be cut bank or burned off if they are to reach their full potential.
The buttonbush is among the easiest to identify in this category at this time of year. The buttonbush is a sure marker of wetland when found growing in the wild. Its value to many species of wildlife is well-documented. And it is among the better native species for protecting riparian zones of streams from eroding.
Read what Texas A&M's Aquaplant Website has to say about the amazing buttonbush.
http://aquaplant.tamu.edu/database/emergent_plants/buttonbush.htm
WWW AQUAPLANT
Plant Identification
Bulrush
Cattail
Buttonbush
Description Management Options Other Photos
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Buttonbush is a woody shrub (3-10 feet tall) that occasionally grows into a small tree and can be found above water or in water up to 4 feet deep. It has shiny dark-green spear-or egg-shaped pointed leaves 3 to 6 inches long. The leaves are opposite or whorled in 3's or 4's along the stem. Flowers of buttonbush are easily identified by their greenish-white tube flowers in dense ball-shaped clusters about 1 inch in diameter. Seed heads are brown.
Submerged portions of all aquatic plants provide habitats for many micro and macro invertebrates. These invertebrates in turn are used as food by fish and other wildlife species (e.g. amphibians, reptiles, ducks, etc. ). After aquatic plants die, their decomposition by bacteria and fungi provides food (called "detritus") for many aquatic invertebrates. Buttonbush seeds are occasionally eaten by ducks but the bush itself is used for nesting by many bird species.
Emergent Plant Index
Alligator Weed
American Lotus
Arrowhead
Banana Lily (Floating Heart)
Blue Flag
Bulrush
Bull Tongue
Buttonbush
Cattail
Common Reed
Cow Lily (Spatterdock)
Dollar Bonnet (Water Shield)
Floating Heart (Banana Lily)
Fragrant Water Lily (White Water Lily)
Frog's-bit
Giant Reed
Horsetail
Lizard's Tail
Maidencane
Mexican Water Lily (Yellow Water Lily) Pickerelweed
Sedges
Smartweed (Water Pepper)
Soft Rush
Southern Watergrass
Spatterdock (Cow Lily)
Spike Rush
Three-Square
Torpedograss
Waterleaf
Water Pennywort
Water Pepper (Smartweed)
Water Primrose
Water Shield (Dollar Bonnet)
White Water Lily (Fragrant Water Lily)
Willow
Yellow Water Lily (Mexican Water Lily)
Back to Top
Copyright (C) 2000-2008 Texas AgriLife Extension Service. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Walker Park neighborhood rezoning plan to be considered by City Council tonight
Please click on image to ENLARGE.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Missouri legislator finds albino cave fish and crayfish in cave in back yard
Missouri legislator finds rare Ozark underground species in back yard. Please click this link
Associated Press, Arkansas Democrat/Gazette report that Missouri legislator finds rare Ozark underground species in back yard
Please click on images below to Enlarge April 28, 2004, photos from what now is now known as the Hill Place student-apartment development site. These photos were taken looking west between the west border of the Moody property and the Town Branch.
What would workers have found if they had dug here before the floodway on the east side of the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River was cleared of timber and covered with yellow non-absorbent dirt for the Aspen Ridge project in 2005?
Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission fails to add carbon dioxide to state list of air contaminants
Panel denies air-code changes
BY MICHELLE HILLEN
Posted on Saturday, June 28, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/229886/
Saying the request was premature, the Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission on Friday unanimously rejected a request by environmental groups to change Arkansas’ air code to consider carbon dioxide an “air contaminant.”
“I do think this is putting the cart before the horse,” commission member Scott Henderson, explaining that he believes the governor’s Global Warming Commission should have first crack at determining how carbon dioxide emissions should be regulated.
The commission, established last year, is studying ways state agencies can offset factors that might contribute to climate change.
“I don’t agree with the discussion about waiting for the federal government to do it, but I do think the Global Warming Commission has to do its work,” Henderson said.
The Arkansas Sierra Club, Audubon Arkansas and the Environmental Integrity Project had filed a petition seeking to amend definitions included in Regulations 18 and 26 of the state’s airquality regulations. The proposal called for the definitions in both regulations to eliminate carbon dioxide from a list of emissions not considered air contaminants, including water vapor, oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen and inert gases.
The petition cited concerns that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can lead to higher maximum temperatures, more hot days, higher minimum temperatures, fewer cold days, more intense “precipitation events” and increased risk of drought.
Environmentalists argued their proposal wouldn’t immediately require regulation of carbon dioxide by the Environmental Quality Department. But industry and department officials disagreed.
“We are not opposed to the removal of this exemption.... We realize that global warming is a global problem,” department Director Teresa Marks said. “Our concern is unintended consequences, and the practicality of what we would do if the exemption was removed immediately.”
Marks said existing regulations would require the department to regulate anyone who emits more than 25 tons per year of an “air contaminant.” The department today doesn’t have the technology available to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide, she said.
After more than a half-hour of comments from industry leaders and environmentalists, the commission approved an order supplied by the Arkansas Environmental Federation, an organization that lobbies on behalf of companies on environmental matters.
The order states that the request from the environmental- ists was defective for a number of reasons, including that it failed to include an economic impact statement and an environmental benefit analysis. Such statements are required by state law if the proposed change is more stringent than federal requirements.
Glen Hooks, regional representative of the Sierra Club, said he was surprised by the decision.
“I think what these guys have done is stand up and say we know CO 2 is a pollutant, we know it is a contaminant, but we don’t want to do anything about it,” Hooks said.
“They said it publicly, and I found it amazing.”
He said he and other environmentalists expect to bring forward a new petition that addresses the commissioners’ concerns sooner rather than later.
“We’ll be back,” said Ilan Levin of the Environmental Integrity Project.
The concerns can be addressed in a number of ways, including by increasing the allowable emission threshold from 25 tons per year, Levin said.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
BY MICHELLE HILLEN
Posted on Saturday, June 28, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/229886/
Saying the request was premature, the Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission on Friday unanimously rejected a request by environmental groups to change Arkansas’ air code to consider carbon dioxide an “air contaminant.”
“I do think this is putting the cart before the horse,” commission member Scott Henderson, explaining that he believes the governor’s Global Warming Commission should have first crack at determining how carbon dioxide emissions should be regulated.
The commission, established last year, is studying ways state agencies can offset factors that might contribute to climate change.
“I don’t agree with the discussion about waiting for the federal government to do it, but I do think the Global Warming Commission has to do its work,” Henderson said.
The Arkansas Sierra Club, Audubon Arkansas and the Environmental Integrity Project had filed a petition seeking to amend definitions included in Regulations 18 and 26 of the state’s airquality regulations. The proposal called for the definitions in both regulations to eliminate carbon dioxide from a list of emissions not considered air contaminants, including water vapor, oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen and inert gases.
The petition cited concerns that increased concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can lead to higher maximum temperatures, more hot days, higher minimum temperatures, fewer cold days, more intense “precipitation events” and increased risk of drought.
Environmentalists argued their proposal wouldn’t immediately require regulation of carbon dioxide by the Environmental Quality Department. But industry and department officials disagreed.
“We are not opposed to the removal of this exemption.... We realize that global warming is a global problem,” department Director Teresa Marks said. “Our concern is unintended consequences, and the practicality of what we would do if the exemption was removed immediately.”
Marks said existing regulations would require the department to regulate anyone who emits more than 25 tons per year of an “air contaminant.” The department today doesn’t have the technology available to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide, she said.
After more than a half-hour of comments from industry leaders and environmentalists, the commission approved an order supplied by the Arkansas Environmental Federation, an organization that lobbies on behalf of companies on environmental matters.
The order states that the request from the environmental- ists was defective for a number of reasons, including that it failed to include an economic impact statement and an environmental benefit analysis. Such statements are required by state law if the proposed change is more stringent than federal requirements.
Glen Hooks, regional representative of the Sierra Club, said he was surprised by the decision.
“I think what these guys have done is stand up and say we know CO 2 is a pollutant, we know it is a contaminant, but we don’t want to do anything about it,” Hooks said.
“They said it publicly, and I found it amazing.”
He said he and other environmentalists expect to bring forward a new petition that addresses the commissioners’ concerns sooner rather than later.
“We’ll be back,” said Ilan Levin of the Environmental Integrity Project.
The concerns can be addressed in a number of ways, including by increasing the allowable emission threshold from 25 tons per year, Levin said.
Copyright © 2001-2008 Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc. All rights reserved. Contact: webmaster@nwanews.com
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Association for Beaver Lake Environment growing!
From: President@able-ark.org
Sent: Sat 6/28/08 12:51 PM
To: aubreyshepherd@hotmail.com
This is an e-mail from 'Able-Ark.org - Association for Beaver Lake Environment '
Message:
Hello ABLE members,
I wanted to let you know that ABLE hosted a special Town Hall Meeting for Beaver Lake Dock Owners on Monday, June 23, 2008. The purpose of the meeting was to sell ABLE to Beaver Lake property owners, identify/discuss issues affecting and threatening the lake, and to increase ABLE membership. This meeting was very successful! We have signed up many new members, the meeting was standing room only, over 110 people attended!
We also had two guest speakers:
Thad Cheaney from the U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers - discussed dock and shoreline issues.
Nathan Jones, VP of Power Source Solar - discussed solar applications on boat docks.
I have posted the program on the website (www.able-ark.org). Login, click on "Information Library" page, and then click on Town Hall Meetings. You will see the "Dock Owners Meeting". You will need Adobe Acrobat in order to view the program.
Thanks for supporting ABLE!
Doug Timmons
President, ABLE
Sent: Sat 6/28/08 12:51 PM
To: aubreyshepherd@hotmail.com
This is an e-mail from 'Able-Ark.org - Association for Beaver Lake Environment '
Message:
Hello ABLE members,
I wanted to let you know that ABLE hosted a special Town Hall Meeting for Beaver Lake Dock Owners on Monday, June 23, 2008. The purpose of the meeting was to sell ABLE to Beaver Lake property owners, identify/discuss issues affecting and threatening the lake, and to increase ABLE membership. This meeting was very successful! We have signed up many new members, the meeting was standing room only, over 110 people attended!
We also had two guest speakers:
Thad Cheaney from the U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers - discussed dock and shoreline issues.
Nathan Jones, VP of Power Source Solar - discussed solar applications on boat docks.
I have posted the program on the website (www.able-ark.org). Login, click on "Information Library" page, and then click on Town Hall Meetings. You will see the "Dock Owners Meeting". You will need Adobe Acrobat in order to view the program.
Thanks for supporting ABLE!
Doug Timmons
President, ABLE
Friday, June 27, 2008
Petition to protect council-, citizen-initiated forums on government channel
PLEASE KEEP OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT CHANNEL ISSUE FORUMS OPEN!
The City Administration recently cancelled issue forums about Fayetteville High School and Walton Arts Center, although the forums were requested by a City Council member. The City has arbitrarily decided that they will not allow such forums, although they have served our community for over 15 years. Please keep television Channel 16 open to requests by city council members and citizens, so that the channel can continue to help create an open and participatory city government, as called for in Fayetteville Ordinance 4504 and current Government Channel policy.
SIGN HERE TO ENSURE THAT OUR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ALL CITIZENS
CAN CONTINUE TO REQUEST LOCAL ISSUE FORUMS ON CITY 16 TV:
I, being a registered voter, living within the city limits of Fayetteville, ask that the Telecommunications Board and City Council continue the current policy and procedures of allowing City Council members and citizens to request forums, about issues faced by local governments, to be produced and shown on the Government Channel.
Printed Name Signature Address Telephone and/or E-mail¬¬¬¬¬
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Printed Name Signature Address Telephone and/or E-mail ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Printed Name Signature Address Telephone and/or E-mail _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Printed Name Signature Address Telephone and/or E-mail ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The City Administration recently cancelled issue forums about Fayetteville High School and Walton Arts Center, although the forums were requested by a City Council member. The City has arbitrarily decided that they will not allow such forums, although they have served our community for over 15 years. Please keep television Channel 16 open to requests by city council members and citizens, so that the channel can continue to help create an open and participatory city government, as called for in Fayetteville Ordinance 4504 and current Government Channel policy.
SIGN HERE TO ENSURE THAT OUR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ALL CITIZENS
CAN CONTINUE TO REQUEST LOCAL ISSUE FORUMS ON CITY 16 TV:
I, being a registered voter, living within the city limits of Fayetteville, ask that the Telecommunications Board and City Council continue the current policy and procedures of allowing City Council members and citizens to request forums, about issues faced by local governments, to be produced and shown on the Government Channel.
Printed Name Signature Address Telephone and/or E-mail¬¬¬¬¬
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Printed Name Signature Address Telephone and/or E-mail ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Printed Name Signature Address Telephone and/or E-mail _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Printed Name Signature Address Telephone and/or E-mail ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Congress to hear call to punish fossil-fuel industry executives for pretending global-climate change not real
Put oil firm chiefs on trial, says leading climate change scientist
· Testimony to US Congress will also criticize lobbyists
· 'Revolutionary' policies needed to tackle crisis
Ed Pilkington in New York
The Guardian,
Monday June 23, 2008
Article history
James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.
Hansen will use the symbolically charged 20th anniversary of his groundbreaking speech (pdf) to the US Congress - in which he was among the first to sound the alarm over the reality of global warming - to argue that radical steps need to be taken immediately if the "perfect storm" of irreversible climate change is not to become inevitable.
Speaking before Congress again, he will accuse the chief executive officers of companies such as ExxonMobil and Peabody Energy of being fully aware of the disinformation about climate change they are spreading.
In an interview with the Guardian he said: "When you are in that kind of position, as the CEO of one the primary players who have been putting out misinformation even via organisations that affect what gets into school textbooks, then I think that's a crime."
He is also considering personally targeting members of Congress who have a poor track record on climate change in the coming November elections. He will campaign to have several of them unseated. Hansen's speech to Congress on June 23 1988 is seen as a seminal moment in bringing the threat of global warming to the public's attention. At a time when most scientists were still hesitant to speak out, he said the evidence of the greenhouse gas effect was 99% certain, adding "it is time to stop waffling".
He will tell the House select committee on energy independence and global warming this afternoon that he is now 99% certain that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has already risen beyond the safe level.
The current concentration is 385 parts per million and is rising by 2ppm a year. Hansen, who heads Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, says 2009 will be a crucial year, with a new US president and talks on how to follow the Kyoto agreement.
He wants to see a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants, coupled with the creation of a huge grid of low-loss electric power lines buried under ground and spread across America, in order to give wind and solar power a chance of competing. "The new US president would have to take the initiative analogous to Kennedy's decision to go to the moon."
His sharpest words are reserved for the special interests he blames for public confusion about the nature of the global warming threat. "The problem is not political will, it's the alligator shoes - the lobbyists. It's the fact that money talks in Washington, and that democracy is not working the way it's intended to work."
A group seeking to increase pressure on international leaders is launching a campaign today called 350.org. It is taking out full-page adverts in papers such as the New York Times and the Swedish Falukuriren calling for the target level of CO2 to be lowered to 350ppm. The advert has been backed by 150 signatories, including Hansen.
About this article
Close
This article appeared in the Guardian on Monday June 23 2008 on p8 of the UK news section. It was last updated at 10:42 on June 24 2008.
· Testimony to US Congress will also criticize lobbyists
· 'Revolutionary' policies needed to tackle crisis
Ed Pilkington in New York
The Guardian,
Monday June 23, 2008
Article history
James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.
Hansen will use the symbolically charged 20th anniversary of his groundbreaking speech (pdf) to the US Congress - in which he was among the first to sound the alarm over the reality of global warming - to argue that radical steps need to be taken immediately if the "perfect storm" of irreversible climate change is not to become inevitable.
Speaking before Congress again, he will accuse the chief executive officers of companies such as ExxonMobil and Peabody Energy of being fully aware of the disinformation about climate change they are spreading.
In an interview with the Guardian he said: "When you are in that kind of position, as the CEO of one the primary players who have been putting out misinformation even via organisations that affect what gets into school textbooks, then I think that's a crime."
He is also considering personally targeting members of Congress who have a poor track record on climate change in the coming November elections. He will campaign to have several of them unseated. Hansen's speech to Congress on June 23 1988 is seen as a seminal moment in bringing the threat of global warming to the public's attention. At a time when most scientists were still hesitant to speak out, he said the evidence of the greenhouse gas effect was 99% certain, adding "it is time to stop waffling".
He will tell the House select committee on energy independence and global warming this afternoon that he is now 99% certain that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has already risen beyond the safe level.
The current concentration is 385 parts per million and is rising by 2ppm a year. Hansen, who heads Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, says 2009 will be a crucial year, with a new US president and talks on how to follow the Kyoto agreement.
He wants to see a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants, coupled with the creation of a huge grid of low-loss electric power lines buried under ground and spread across America, in order to give wind and solar power a chance of competing. "The new US president would have to take the initiative analogous to Kennedy's decision to go to the moon."
His sharpest words are reserved for the special interests he blames for public confusion about the nature of the global warming threat. "The problem is not political will, it's the alligator shoes - the lobbyists. It's the fact that money talks in Washington, and that democracy is not working the way it's intended to work."
A group seeking to increase pressure on international leaders is launching a campaign today called 350.org. It is taking out full-page adverts in papers such as the New York Times and the Swedish Falukuriren calling for the target level of CO2 to be lowered to 350ppm. The advert has been backed by 150 signatories, including Hansen.
About this article
Close
This article appeared in the Guardian on Monday June 23 2008 on p8 of the UK news section. It was last updated at 10:42 on June 24 2008.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Please urge Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission to classify CO2 at pollutant
Would you write to the Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission (APCE) and tell them you support changing the definition of CO2? Art Hobson describes the petition from Sierra Club, Audubon, and the Environmental Integrity Project, and asks people to write in support, kind of like this:
"Because anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions are causing global warming that is changing our planet and could be disastrous in the future, carbon dioxide needs to be classified as a pollutant, or "air contaminant," in Arkansas. I hope you will change Regulation No. 26 accordingly, as requested in the petition from Sierra Club, and others that will appear soon before the APCE." (Art Hobson)
Instructions for writing APCE are in Art's email below. Thanks to all you moved to write.
Gladys
--- On Mon, 6/23/08, Art Hobson wrote:
From: Art Hobson
Subject: Ask that CO2 be classified as a pollutant
To: ahobson@uark.edu
Date: Monday, June 23, 2008, 2:51 PM
Dear Friends,
You can make a real difference in Arkansas global warming politics. The Ark Sierra Club, Ark Audubon Society, and the Environmental Integrity Project are petitioning the Ark Commission on Pollution Control and Ecology (PCE) to allow CO2 to be declared an "air contaminant" (or pollutant). Their petition is attached. This issue is of crucial importance because the Ark Dept of Environmental Quality (ADEQ, which is PCE's parent organization) must soon either grant or deny a permit to the proposed Hempstead coal-fired generating plant, and ADEQ has been unable to include CO2 as a possible air contaminant in this case because present Ark regulations proclaim that CO2 is not an air contaminant. As you know, human-caused CO2 emissions are now the most deadly pollutant of all, because they can change our planet in large and harmful ways. In a contentious 2-to-1 ruling, the Hempstead plant has already received its Public Service Commission permit to proceed. If ADEQ also grants a permit, Swepco will immediately begin construction of the plant and it will then be impossible to stop. If CO2 is declared a pollutant, ADEQ will need to consider the entire issue of global warming before making a ruling on the Hempstead plant, and there's an excellent change that they will rule against the plant (for confirmation that there are good reasons to rule against the plant, see Judge David Newbern's dissenting opinion in the PSC ruling).
The PCE is a public commission that will hear/read your comments and take them into consideration. Your comment can be long and detailed, or it can be as short as:
Because anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions are causing global warming that is changing our planet and could be disastrous in the future, carbon dioxide needs to be classified as a pollutant, or "air contaminant," in Arkansas. I hope you will change Regulation No. 26 accordingly, as requested in the petition from Sierra Club and others that will appear soon before the APCE.
Feel free to quote me on that.
To submit a comment, go to the ADEQ website, http://www.adeq.state.ar.us/poa/forms/questions.asp. PCE is actually a sub-division of ADEQ. At that website, you'll find a space to make your written comment to both the PCE and to ADEQ. You'll also find a phone number if you'd rather talk with them.
Please pull out all the stops in telling others about this. If we can get excess CO2 classified as the planetary threat that it actually is, it will make a big difference.
Cheers - Art
"Because anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions are causing global warming that is changing our planet and could be disastrous in the future, carbon dioxide needs to be classified as a pollutant, or "air contaminant," in Arkansas. I hope you will change Regulation No. 26 accordingly, as requested in the petition from Sierra Club, and others that will appear soon before the APCE." (Art Hobson)
Instructions for writing APCE are in Art's email below. Thanks to all you moved to write.
Gladys
--- On Mon, 6/23/08, Art Hobson
From: Art Hobson
Subject: Ask that CO2 be classified as a pollutant
To: ahobson@uark.edu
Date: Monday, June 23, 2008, 2:51 PM
Dear Friends,
You can make a real difference in Arkansas global warming politics. The Ark Sierra Club, Ark Audubon Society, and the Environmental Integrity Project are petitioning the Ark Commission on Pollution Control and Ecology (PCE) to allow CO2 to be declared an "air contaminant" (or pollutant). Their petition is attached. This issue is of crucial importance because the Ark Dept of Environmental Quality (ADEQ, which is PCE's parent organization) must soon either grant or deny a permit to the proposed Hempstead coal-fired generating plant, and ADEQ has been unable to include CO2 as a possible air contaminant in this case because present Ark regulations proclaim that CO2 is not an air contaminant. As you know, human-caused CO2 emissions are now the most deadly pollutant of all, because they can change our planet in large and harmful ways. In a contentious 2-to-1 ruling, the Hempstead plant has already received its Public Service Commission permit to proceed. If ADEQ also grants a permit, Swepco will immediately begin construction of the plant and it will then be impossible to stop. If CO2 is declared a pollutant, ADEQ will need to consider the entire issue of global warming before making a ruling on the Hempstead plant, and there's an excellent change that they will rule against the plant (for confirmation that there are good reasons to rule against the plant, see Judge David Newbern's dissenting opinion in the PSC ruling).
The PCE is a public commission that will hear/read your comments and take them into consideration. Your comment can be long and detailed, or it can be as short as:
Because anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions are causing global warming that is changing our planet and could be disastrous in the future, carbon dioxide needs to be classified as a pollutant, or "air contaminant," in Arkansas. I hope you will change Regulation No. 26 accordingly, as requested in the petition from Sierra Club and others that will appear soon before the APCE.
Feel free to quote me on that.
To submit a comment, go to the ADEQ website, http://www.adeq.state.ar.us/poa/forms/questions.asp. PCE is actually a sub-division of ADEQ. At that website, you'll find a space to make your written comment to both the PCE and to ADEQ. You'll also find a phone number if you'd rather talk with them.
Please pull out all the stops in telling others about this. If we can get excess CO2 classified as the planetary threat that it actually is, it will make a big difference.
Cheers - Art
Monday, June 23, 2008
Ozark Highlands Group of Sierra Club to meet with James Burke to discuss fight against dirty coal burning in Arkansas at Smiling Jack's at 7 p.m. Wed.
Our June monthly meeting will be this Wednesday at 7 p.m. at Smiling Jack's just off Dixon Street behind the Dixon Street book shop.
James Burke will be joining us to talk about the coal campaign and the progress we are making in that area. It will be very informal; this is a great opportunity to learn more about what we can do to make sure Arkansas doesn't build any new coal fired power plants. Bring your coal questions for James to answer!
Our Arkansas Chapter chair, Adrienne, will be bringing some yard signs protesting dirty coal if you would like one.
As always, please forward this email along to others you think might be interested.
Molly Rawn
Sierra Club, Ozark Headwaters Group
Intern
(479) 879-1620
James Burke will be joining us to talk about the coal campaign and the progress we are making in that area. It will be very informal; this is a great opportunity to learn more about what we can do to make sure Arkansas doesn't build any new coal fired power plants. Bring your coal questions for James to answer!
Our Arkansas Chapter chair, Adrienne, will be bringing some yard signs protesting dirty coal if you would like one.
As always, please forward this email along to others you think might be interested.
Molly Rawn
Sierra Club, Ozark Headwaters Group
Intern
(479) 879-1620
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Wetland article ignores drawbacks in wetland mitigation projects but provides valuable insight and source of hope for urban wetland protection
Woolsey wetland article in The Morning News
The Woolsey Prairie is adjacent to land where the new wastewater-treatment plant was built. Actually, the plant was built on what might be called the original Woolsey Prairie.
Because the plant destroyed a great many wetland acres, the Corps of Engineers permit required mitigation. There have been many shows on Government channel about the progress of creating the mitigation area over the past couple of years, mostly as a part of shows on progress of construction of the plant itself.
The good news is that the city is "manufacturing" wetland to make up for destruction. That isn't as good as preserving existing wetland exactly as nature made it. However, it is beautiful site.
The bad news is that a plan to allow developers to "purchase" shares in such mitigation land is similar to trading carbon-pollution rights. It means developers can dredge and fill to build on wetland in the city and "mitigate" it by paying for creation of such sites. This is better than nothing. However, it doesn't protect property from flooding downstream from the development. And it allows valuable habitat to be destroyed where it should be kept. It doesn't make stormwater remain where it falls and soak in to keep vegetation healthy and replenish underground aquifers.
That was the first story I ever read by Skip Descant. He appears to be a good reporter.
He wouldn't likely know about World Peace Wetland Prairie or that "keeping the water where it falls" is the contrasting idea that would have had to have been included in the story if his plan was to write a truly multi-source story.
In fact, WPWP is exactly opposite to a manufactured wetland area. It protects habitat and lets water soak in UPSTREAM where it falls. It was saved from development and stands in stark contrast with the Aspen Ridge/Hill Place development site to to its north.
While it has a large population of nonnative species, particularly fescue and Japanese honeysuckle that require constant volunteer effort to remove, it never had its basic seed and root base of native species removed.
Being inside the city and a part of the headwater system of the Town Branch of the West Fork of the White River and thus a significant area that helps protect the Beaver Lake watershed, its soil and plant life (even the invasive nonnative species) are functioning perfectly for stormwater management and protection of water quality.
The already completed Woolsey Prairie serves to catch water NEAR where it falls on the sewage-treatment plant. But adjacent parcels that may be saved as wetland prairie or savannah will be for sale to developers as mitigation for environmentally destruction parcels upstream. That part of the story has been discussed on several Government Channel productions related to the new sewage-treatment plant.
It would be nice to have a map of wetland areas. I frequently offer such information with photos from various parts of the watershed on my blogs and Flickr photo sets. But an overall plan to protect wetland isn't something everyone wants. Such a citywide delineation of wetland areas could prevent developers from buying property that should not be developed on the assumption that they will always get permission to dredge and fill such places simply by buying a share of an already preserved parcel miles away or not even in the same watershed.
Some developers and even some city officials and staff members don't want to acknowledge the existence of more than minimal wetland because public knowledge of the facts of Northwest Arkansas' environment might stifle their desire to build and pave every acre in the city.
More than two years ago, the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association created a booklet with a list of environmentally sensitive areas in the city that the group deemed worthy of protection. That information has never been used by the city in any way, as far as I can tell. During the June 17, 2008, meeting of the Council of Neighborhoods, Bruce Shackleford's presentation on Woolsey Prairie got his ideas out to a lot of people and excited some of the neighborhood advocates to realize the importance of wetland prairie, exactly what we've been trying to do with our photos on Flickr and on our blogspots for the past year and for more than six years on Aubunique.com and for decades in various newspaper and magazine stories.
Fran Alexander and others persevere, but are only voices in the wildnerness, it seems.
Too many of the most outspoken people in the green, "sustainability" movement mostly focus on compromise positions. The paid environmentalists are all about compromise these days. Compromise mostly leads to learning to lose gracefully.
It takes people such as Fran Alexander with passion to get things done. And Shackleford's passion about the prairie wetland can do more to stir fervor in the fight to do the right thing in Fayetteville than some of us have done in decades. A lot of us old "tree-huggers" will be supporting his educational effort in every way we can.
For photos and more information, please use the following online links.
Hill Place/Aspen Ridge set of photos
Pinnacle Prairie set of photos — west side of World Peace Wetland Prairie
World Peace Wetland Prairie collection of sets of photos
Town Branch watershed set of photos
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Eight-year-old news report displays past forum decisions at Government Channel
Please click on image to enlarge:
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Environmental training to be available in September
In September, Ruth Rosenhek (Director of the Rainforest Information Centre) will be travelling through Canada and the US offering several Deep Ecology Facilitation Training Workshops as well as showings of her new film entitled Earth Spirit Action.
We currently have two Facilitation Training workshops scheduled for the West Coast on September 12-13th (Victoria, B.C.) and September 19-20th in Southern Oregon (contact rainforestinfo@ozemail.com.au if you are interested to attend).
It would still be possible to schedule in an east coast training on the weekend of September 5-6th. Let us know if you would be interested to host this.
Also, please let us know if you would like to show Ruth's new inspirational film, Earth Spirit Action featuring Starhawk, Vandana Shiva, Matthew Fox, John Seed and Ruth Rosenhek speaking on topics such as Deep Ecology, the Council of All Beings and Transformation of Consciousness. The film includes beautiful nature footage and a compilation of action footage as well.
It is also possible for Ruth to offer a few one day Earth Spirit Action workshops in follow-up to film showings that will include Despair & Empowerment work and Deep Ecology.
Let us know your thoughts! Please reply to ruthr@ozemail.com.au
for the Earth
Ruth and John
Rainforest Information Centre
Box 368 Lismore
NSW 2480
AUSTRALIA
61 2 66897519
ruthr@ozemail.com.au
www.rainforestinfo.org.au
www.climate.net.au
We currently have two Facilitation Training workshops scheduled for the West Coast on September 12-13th (Victoria, B.C.) and September 19-20th in Southern Oregon (contact rainforestinfo@ozemail.com.au if you are interested to attend).
It would still be possible to schedule in an east coast training on the weekend of September 5-6th. Let us know if you would be interested to host this.
Also, please let us know if you would like to show Ruth's new inspirational film, Earth Spirit Action featuring Starhawk, Vandana Shiva, Matthew Fox, John Seed and Ruth Rosenhek speaking on topics such as Deep Ecology, the Council of All Beings and Transformation of Consciousness. The film includes beautiful nature footage and a compilation of action footage as well.
It is also possible for Ruth to offer a few one day Earth Spirit Action workshops in follow-up to film showings that will include Despair & Empowerment work and Deep Ecology.
Let us know your thoughts! Please reply to ruthr@ozemail.com.au
for the Earth
Ruth and John
Rainforest Information Centre
Box 368 Lismore
NSW 2480
AUSTRALIA
61 2 66897519
ruthr@ozemail.com.au
www.rainforestinfo.org.au
www.climate.net.au
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Global warming called a war-generating machine
Global Warming is a war generating machine. Fight it to avoid more conflict.
Cutting back would hae been gentle if started iin 1990. Sarting cutting back this late, now, if to be successful - it's going to be really drastic. But even so, not as bad as the comnig Runaway Global Warming.
Harry Holloway
------------------------------------------------
Came from
aubrey@gci.org.uk
via GCN@igc.topica.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Various C&C News World Environment Day
[1] “The Age of Stupid”
Simply the best film on climate change ever made. The 'Age of Stupid'
was previewed to a selcted audience in London yesterday.
This full-length climate docu-drama is certainly informative. It is also
authentically hilarious yet gut-wrenching around the folly of our double
standards on the global impacts of poverty and climate change - now and
into the future.
The film's grim prognosis is seen ‘retrospectively’ by the actor Peter
Postlethwaite. He reviews the descent into the hell-on-earth of runaway
climate change from a specially created ‘future-archive for a failed
civilizations’ in the Artic Ocean.
Picking up the words of a Katrina survivor he asks ‘how could we have
been so stupid?’
The film recognises that the only serious proposal between now and that
prognosis-come-true is C&C.
As serious critical journalism, this film ranks with Naomi Klein, Robert
Fiske and a host of eminent others. But for relevance it outranks them
all as it understand the reality in the recent words about climate
change of James Hansen: - “The stakes, for all life on the planet,
surpass those of any previous crisis. The greatest danger is continued
ignorance and denial, which could make tragic consequences unavoidable.”
An extraordinarily effective piece of work. If five-stars is tops this
gets them all.
The general release date has not yet been revealed.
http://www.crudemovie.net/category/film
All this goes straight to the All Party Parliamentary Group on Climate
Change. The news from there is that the UK Climate Bill is back for
'debate' in the UK Parliament next week. Still without any coherent
methodology behind its numbers for emissions control, it is said the
Government want its 'Royal Assent' before summer recess [Mid July].
This UK 'uni-lateralism' is at odds with the debate beginning again in
the US Senate where, the Liebermann 'Climate Act' notwithstanding, the
demand for globality [this equals at least India and China on the
accounts] hasn't gone away and the 'pragmatic' C&C answer to this
stand-off has been upheld on both sides of that divide.
We are now beyond climate denial. So the severe and worsening problem
for us is 'picking emissions control numbers out-of-a-hat' . . . that
don't add up now to a coherently safe and stable ppmv outcome. With
Hansen calling for 350 ppmv [!] all out best local efforts will be
wasted in the large global failure that attends this absence.
As the film upholds, there is a way to address this - its called C&C.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[2] Fair Shares Fair Choice: -
http://www.fairsharesfairchoice.com/
A brilliant local campaign in the UK South West specifically based on
C&C: -
http://www.fairsharesfairchoice.com/the_science.asp
. . . . has reached the support figure of 1,000 MPs and Councillors etc.
Here is the press release from Sustainability South West: -
http://www.gci.org.uk/press/Fair_Shares_Press_Release.pdf
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[3] Nice new website for the indefatigable C&C champion Mayer Hillman: -
http://www.mayerhillman.com/Articles/tabid/101/EntryID/51/Default.aspx
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[4] A very funny and very clever critique of Foot-printing/C&C at ‘Cheat
Neutral’: -
http://www.maxgladwell.com/2008/05/what-is-your-cheating-footprint/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[5] Some more C&C input to Government from: -
http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file30864.pdf [Plaid Cymru]
http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file30744.pdf [Brecon Beacons]
http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file31378.pdf [Welsh Greens]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[6] Derek Wall of the UK Green Party – “C&C is Progress”!
http://another-green-world.blogspot.com/2008/06/permanent-revolution.html
Cutting back would hae been gentle if started iin 1990. Sarting cutting back this late, now, if to be successful - it's going to be really drastic. But even so, not as bad as the comnig Runaway Global Warming.
Harry Holloway
------------------------------------------------
Came from
aubrey@gci.org.uk
via GCN@igc.topica.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Various C&C News World Environment Day
[1] “The Age of Stupid”
Simply the best film on climate change ever made. The 'Age of Stupid'
was previewed to a selcted audience in London yesterday.
This full-length climate docu-drama is certainly informative. It is also
authentically hilarious yet gut-wrenching around the folly of our double
standards on the global impacts of poverty and climate change - now and
into the future.
The film's grim prognosis is seen ‘retrospectively’ by the actor Peter
Postlethwaite. He reviews the descent into the hell-on-earth of runaway
climate change from a specially created ‘future-archive for a failed
civilizations’ in the Artic Ocean.
Picking up the words of a Katrina survivor he asks ‘how could we have
been so stupid?’
The film recognises that the only serious proposal between now and that
prognosis-come-true is C&C.
As serious critical journalism, this film ranks with Naomi Klein, Robert
Fiske and a host of eminent others. But for relevance it outranks them
all as it understand the reality in the recent words about climate
change of James Hansen: - “The stakes, for all life on the planet,
surpass those of any previous crisis. The greatest danger is continued
ignorance and denial, which could make tragic consequences unavoidable.”
An extraordinarily effective piece of work. If five-stars is tops this
gets them all.
The general release date has not yet been revealed.
http://www.crudemovie.net/category/film
All this goes straight to the All Party Parliamentary Group on Climate
Change. The news from there is that the UK Climate Bill is back for
'debate' in the UK Parliament next week. Still without any coherent
methodology behind its numbers for emissions control, it is said the
Government want its 'Royal Assent' before summer recess [Mid July].
This UK 'uni-lateralism' is at odds with the debate beginning again in
the US Senate where, the Liebermann 'Climate Act' notwithstanding, the
demand for globality [this equals at least India and China on the
accounts] hasn't gone away and the 'pragmatic' C&C answer to this
stand-off has been upheld on both sides of that divide.
We are now beyond climate denial. So the severe and worsening problem
for us is 'picking emissions control numbers out-of-a-hat' . . . that
don't add up now to a coherently safe and stable ppmv outcome. With
Hansen calling for 350 ppmv [!] all out best local efforts will be
wasted in the large global failure that attends this absence.
As the film upholds, there is a way to address this - its called C&C.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[2] Fair Shares Fair Choice: -
http://www.fairsharesfairchoice.com/
A brilliant local campaign in the UK South West specifically based on
C&C: -
http://www.fairsharesfairchoice.com/the_science.asp
. . . . has reached the support figure of 1,000 MPs and Councillors etc.
Here is the press release from Sustainability South West: -
http://www.gci.org.uk/press/Fair_Shares_Press_Release.pdf
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[3] Nice new website for the indefatigable C&C champion Mayer Hillman: -
http://www.mayerhillman.com/Articles/tabid/101/EntryID/51/Default.aspx
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[4] A very funny and very clever critique of Foot-printing/C&C at ‘Cheat
Neutral’: -
http://www.maxgladwell.com/2008/05/what-is-your-cheating-footprint/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[5] Some more C&C input to Government from: -
http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file30864.pdf [Plaid Cymru]
http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file30744.pdf [Brecon Beacons]
http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file31378.pdf [Welsh Greens]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[6] Derek Wall of the UK Green Party – “C&C is Progress”!
http://another-green-world.blogspot.com/2008/06/permanent-revolution.html
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Monday, June 2, 2008
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Keep America's Largest Forest Off of the Chopping Block
Keep America's Largest Forest Off of the Chopping Block
Earth Justice Takes Action to Protect Tongass National Forest
The Tongass National Forest in southeastern Alaska is the crown jewel of our nation's wild forests. At 17 million acres, the Tongass is home to a stunning variety of wildlife, including wild salmon, bears, eagles, and wolves. This key piece of our natural heritage should be preserved for future generations to enjoy, yet the Bush administration wants to open up 2.3 million acres of Tongass backcountry for roads and clearcut logging.
Tell the Forest Service that this pristine forest must be protected!
The landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule was established in 2001 to protect natural treasures like the Tongass from exploitation and destruction, but in 2003 the administration announced that it would move to exempt the Tongass from Roadless Rule protections so that its timber industry friends could be free to move in with their chainsaws.
Lawsuits brought by Earthjustice on behalf of conservation groups and Alaska Native villagers were able to expose the flaws of this plan -- including a gross overestimation of timber demand -- and convince a federal court to send the administration's ill-conceived plan back to the drawing board.
But the revised plan still fails to protect 2.3 million acres of pristine forest that provide critical wildlife habitat, world-famous recreation opportunities, and jobs. On May 15, 2008, Earthjustice and many other conservation groups filed appeals with the Chief of the Forest Service seeking to protect these vital places.
Now is the time to tell the Forest Service to adopt a Tongass management plan that restores protections for the 2.3 million acres of wild forest now open to destruction. Our wild forests should be cherished and preserved for future generations, not used as an ATM for the timber industry.
Take action today!
-Earthjustice
Because the earth needs a good lawyer
P.S. Every voice counts! Please tell a friend to take action!
Earth Justice Takes Action to Protect Tongass National Forest
The Tongass National Forest in southeastern Alaska is the crown jewel of our nation's wild forests. At 17 million acres, the Tongass is home to a stunning variety of wildlife, including wild salmon, bears, eagles, and wolves. This key piece of our natural heritage should be preserved for future generations to enjoy, yet the Bush administration wants to open up 2.3 million acres of Tongass backcountry for roads and clearcut logging.
Tell the Forest Service that this pristine forest must be protected!
The landmark Roadless Area Conservation Rule was established in 2001 to protect natural treasures like the Tongass from exploitation and destruction, but in 2003 the administration announced that it would move to exempt the Tongass from Roadless Rule protections so that its timber industry friends could be free to move in with their chainsaws.
Lawsuits brought by Earthjustice on behalf of conservation groups and Alaska Native villagers were able to expose the flaws of this plan -- including a gross overestimation of timber demand -- and convince a federal court to send the administration's ill-conceived plan back to the drawing board.
But the revised plan still fails to protect 2.3 million acres of pristine forest that provide critical wildlife habitat, world-famous recreation opportunities, and jobs. On May 15, 2008, Earthjustice and many other conservation groups filed appeals with the Chief of the Forest Service seeking to protect these vital places.
Now is the time to tell the Forest Service to adopt a Tongass management plan that restores protections for the 2.3 million acres of wild forest now open to destruction. Our wild forests should be cherished and preserved for future generations, not used as an ATM for the timber industry.
Take action today!
-Earthjustice
Because the earth needs a good lawyer
P.S. Every voice counts! Please tell a friend to take action!
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Why we not have?????? Simsbury, Conn., has commission to protect wetland, watershed
Conservation Commission - 09/07/04
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND
AND WATERCOURSE AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING-TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 7, 2004
SIMSBURY TOWN OFFICES- 7:30P.M.- MAIN MEETING ROOM
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Howard Beach, Jr. called the Meeting of the Conservation Commission/Inland Wetland and Watercourse Agency to order at 7:30 P.M. in the Main Meeting Room at Simsbury Town Hall. The following members were present: Margery Winters, Richard Miller, William Nowak, Thomas Sharpless, Christopher Ursini, and Andrew Bucknam.
APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES
None
PRESENTATION (S) AND DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE
A. Application of Kevin and Mary Jo Crimmins, Owners, for an Inland Wetland Permit to construct a one-car garage within the regulated area on property at 32 Walker Drive.
Mr. Kevin Crimmins was present to address the board. They wish to construct a 16-foot one-car garage addition within the 100-foot upland review area. The structure will be approximately 45 feet from the watercourse, and they are proposing installing silt fencing during construction and stabilize with seed upon completion. They propose doing this in October or in the spring. Mr. Crimmins was also before the board in June for the approval of a pool.
Chairman Beach asked about the level of the area. Mr. Crimmins stated that the area is very level. They might have to raise the floor a few inches to match the level of the other floor, but will not change the grade at all.
Chairman Beach asked about material being used. Mr. Crimmins said that they will be digging up topsoil, which he will then use in other parts of the yard to even out.
Chairman Beach asked about the change to the driveway with this addition. Mr. Crimmins stated they will be adding an apron only.
Commissioner Bucknam asked if the watercourse would be described as a low area that gets wet or is there any kind of a stream. Mr. Crimmins answered that it was a low area 20 years ago, when the property next door added a garage and buried the section between the two properties from the road back about 60-80 feet. There is no wetland that is exposed. It is a depression in the ground that is wet in the spring and wet after a heavy rain.
Commissioner Nowak commented that the disturbance then consists primarily of digging a footing a putting a foundation on top of that.
Commissioner Nowak asked why this wasn’t proposed in July with the proposal for the swimming pool. Mr. Crimmins answered that they weren’t sure if they could afford to do both projects.
A motion was made by Commissioner Sharpless that this is a regulated activity by reason of removal of material from the construction site in the upland review area.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Commissioner Sharpless that this is a significant activity, by reason that the activity has potential to cause siltation to a wetland.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Commissioner Sharpless that a public hearing is not required, as there has not been any indication of public interest.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Commissioner Sharpless to grant a permit for the proposed activity with the understanding that town be notified at least 3 days before the proposed activity is to commence so someone can check out the site before the digging can commence.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE
A. Application of Ensign –Bickford Realty Corporation for an Inland Wetland Permit for regulated activities associated with the proposed development of 182 homes within the Powder Forest at Bushy Hill and Stratton Brook Road. (continued from 7/20/04 meeting)
Mr. Donahue was present to address the Commission and introduce the presenters.
He stated that along with permits from the Wetland Commission, they are seeking permits from other boards; a zone change to allow a village cluster, a subdivision of the parcel into a single parcel, and site plan approval. On September 20, 2004, there will be a joint public hearing on this application with zoning and planning. Since last before the commission, they have received enthusiastic approval for the plan from the design-review board.
Michael Klein presented the wildlife corridor information.
Both flora and fauna at the site were looked at, and they identified no state-listed species present. The site has the potential to support and does support some forest interior birds.
Time was spent looking at the reptile and amphibian populations at the site because a report through the natural diversity database found eastern box turtle in the area in addition to the presence or absence of mole salamanders and wood frogs, considered vernal pool indicators. He explained that since the natural diversity database showed evidence of box turtle in the area, a visual search was done, but none were found. There are some isolated repressional wetlands on the site. They did not find any box turtles or mole salamanders at the site. The cluster of the three wetlands supported nothing in the way of frogs and salamanders. The semi-permanent pond does support wood frogs and although they are listed as a vernal pool indicator species, they also breed in many other places. He noted that as for the larger mammals, this patch of habitat is not large enough to support the more wide ranging species like bobcat.
A function and value assessment, broken down in three areas, was done for the wetland. The cluster of small depressional wetland areas is considered low to moderate in quality value. The large significant 12-½ acre wetland area is considered moderate- to high-value quality, however it is not considered high quality fish habitat. The semi-permanent pool does provide amphibian-breeding habitat, and it is valued as moderate-quality value.
Mr. Klein stated that in essence there are indirect impacts to the site, which are related to either construction, or the long-term change in land use of the site. He also noted that there is extensive use of best-management and low-impact development practices that have been incorporated into the plans. For example, rather than a traditional centralized stormwater collection and management system, they have a stormwater management system whereby 15 separate water disbursement areas are used to minimize the use of collection systems to get the water into the ground. The indirect impact to the wildlife habitat will be minimized by limiting development in the vicinity of the semi-permanent pond. Per a recommendation by the commission, they will be removing some of the silt fencing to allow migration coming in and out of the pond.
On the plans, he showed the open space on the site, surrounding properties, and locations of buffer zones for access into and out of the wetland system. He stated that the main concern during the site walk seemed to be with how the larger mammals (deer, bobcat, and bears) will access the space. He showed on the plan where the linkages are so that these mammals are able to move through.
Chairman Beach praised Mr. Klein on his effective job of giving a predevelopment evaluation of the three wetland areas. He asked if Mr. Klein could sum up the postdevelopment value of the wetland, in terms of general wildlife. He also asked him to address the apparent fragmentation of the areas. Mr. Klein explained that the functional evaluation methods are not designed as an impact assessment tool, they are designed as a resource tool. He did say that roads do not deter larger mammals, and that he does not see a dramatic alteration of the wetland-dependant wildlife. Mr. Klein said they try to focus on species of conservation concern as opposed to those that are fairly common.
Chairman Beach noted that other species should be focused on as well, lest they also become species of concern.
Chairman Beach complemented the applicant on the systems put in place (stormwater catch basins, swales etc.) to keep the nutrients away from Hazel Meadow Pond. He likes the fact that they provide swales for bio-remediation.
There was a discussion surrounding the vernal pool and the plants currently growing around it. Mr. Klein stated that hydrologically it is a semi-permanent pond, but it has some vernal pool-like functions in that it provides breeding habitat for wood frogs.
Chairman Beach discussed the bio-diversity study, stating it shows about what the commission is concerned and asked if the walking trail near the vernal pool could be moved. Mr. Ferrero stated that it is an existing path.
Commissioner Miller asked about the invasive plantings. Mr. Klein said the fragmites, which are near the wetland, could cause much damage to it, and will be cut out and the area and the area mowed. The tree of heaven will receive two applications of non-invasive, hand-applied herbicide to remove it. The herbicide will be applied during a non-windy day so as to have minimal drift potential.
The commission voiced concern regarding the closeness of Hazel Meadow Pond and unit/lawn development along its boundary. Chairman Beach asked if there will be enough bio-remediation in the swale to neutralize nutrients in the water before being introduced into the brook, what with the number of units that back up to the area. He also wanted to know about the turf-management system being used. Mr. Ferrero said that it is a small watershed because all of the roots are being removed, and he believes that the swale will be high enough. Mr. Klein stated that he doesn’t anticipate that any products will be used within the swales themselves. Mr. Donahue explained that one company will manage the units’ yards and therefore they will not have the owners themselves caring for the yards/grass.
Chairman Beach asked about the distance between the cutting line and the property line. It was explained that there is a 40-foot building setback and the swale is within that 40 feet.
Chairman Beach said that even small amounts of nutrients can devastate the ecosystem, and asked if there could be a 75- to100-foot no-cut zone beyond the property line since there is very little vegetation around the area. Mr. Ferrero stated that they are not encroaching upon the 100-foot buffer zone within Hazel Meadow Pond.
Commissioner Nowak asked about the wildlife corridor to the west side on Bushy Hill. He asked where the wildlife corridor would be for smaller wildlife such as turkeys, etc.
Mr. Klein answered that the area near Bushy Hill is residential development and that, if small wildlife can move through that area, they will be able to move through the corridor Mr. Nowak speaks about. He stated that it is surprising how tolerant many of the species have become. Mr. Nowak stated that the proposed units are much closer together (18-25 feet apart) than the 1+ acre residential houses where it is easier for animals to navigate. Mr. Klein answered that the property provides more open space. Chairman Beach noted that most of the open space is wetland and couldn’t be built on anyway.
Commissioner Miller asked if the wildlife corridor could be opened up more along Stratton Brook road. A discussion about that ensued.
Chairman Beach asked about possible space available along the road for bio-remediation to reduce the development by 75 feet. Mr. Ferrero said that they don’t want to clear so much vegetation along the road that it opens up a view to and from those units. Chairman Beach applauded their decision to include a buffer along Stratton Brook, but said that, if there were one or two spots, it would help with the hydraulic plan. Commissioner Bucknam said that. if the path is lowered to 80’or 60’ from 100' there will not be much room for wildlife refuge. Mr. Merriam stated that it would be virtually impossible to relocate it.
Commissioner Nowak asked about plantings, and Mr. Ferrero stated they do not currently have a landscape plan, but do know that it will include indigenous species.
Commissioner Miller asked about slope stabilization measures being taken. Mr. Ferrero explained they have gravel slopes. They will rough cut some slopes, stabilize them with erosion control mats and reforest them with Mr. Klein’s help.
Chairman Beach asked about retaining walls. Mr. Ferrero said they will not be using mass retaining walls anywhere on the site, but there are a number of walkout basements. It will be up to the owner whether they wish to have slopes or build 4- to 5-foot high retaining walls instead. On one main slope they proposed building a wall, but it would have been a 6-foot wall, which would be monstrous.
Based on the discussion so far, Mr. Merriam summarized 5 conditions of approval.
No individual application of herbicides and pesticides by the homeowners. One company will do the lawn maintenance of each unit.
A post-construction site visit by the commission.
Come back with a best-management practices plan using organic materials.
Field markings on the site at sensitive areas/points. These markings indicate that, if materials are applied to that site, they could be damaging to the wetland system.
A 2- to 3-year ongoing post-construction monitoring plan implemented, that would take samples of run off and come back and report to the commission. If there are problems, corrective action will be taken.
Chairman Beach asked if there were some kind of performance bond associated with the post-construction monitoring. Mr. Merriam stated that a bond is a good idea and that, if the commission wishes this, the applicant will look into it.
Chairman Beach asked if the post-construction monitoring could go on for 5 years instead of 2 or 3. Mr. Merriam said that, by monitoring the surface runoff, they will know fairly quickly if any material is getting off the site, and said 3 years seems appropriate.
Chairman Beach said three years is a good timeline.
Mr. Donahue confirmed that the streets are private, and will be maintained by a private company. Chairman Beach said he hopes sump-pump issues are covered by the monitoring and maintenance plan.
Commissioner Miller was concerned about Hazel Meadow Pond and if it could be restored even though the applicant is not “responsible” for it.
Mr. Donahue stated that, as part of the land-use process, the applicant is putting out a revised master plan for the site, which identifies the place reserved for Dyno Nobel, and any other site available. It will show what is allowed and what is likely in the future to come forward to zoning.
Commissioner Winters asked if a wildlife corridor section could be widened a bit. Mr. Ferrero said they could look into that.
At this point in the meeting, Chairman Beach closed the public hearing, since no one was present to speak on the issue. Commissioner Sharpless moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Bucknam seconded with all in favor.
Commissioner Sharpless stated there should be a good monitoring plan established, and the commission should be specific about what they want to see being monitored.
Chairman Beach said he is concerned about the possibility of nutrient impact on Hazel Meadow, which is a separate issue. Within the site itself, he is concerned about any evidence of nutrient loading in the second brook. A question was asked of how the water going into Hazel Meadow would be monitored. There was a discussion about how the commission could monitor the Hazel Meadow. Mr. Donahue said that they would seek permission on behalf of the commission to get a sample of the Pond if they so desired.
The Commission concluded that as part of the monitoring plan they would look for nitrate, phosphate, chloride, and vod. Apart from the wetland area they will also monitor road water, storm salts/sand, and stormwater discharge, and sump pumps. This will be monitored for a period of three years, and a performance bond will be issued. Fertilizer will be included in the best-management plan. Also, some of the specified units should be spaced farther apart.
For the next meeting, Mr. Merriam will draw up the monitoring plan, etc., for the next meeting, and will bring in the information Commissioner Miller wanted on the field markings.
A motion was made by Commissioner Ursini to continue this application at the next meeting; it was seconded by Commissioner Miller with all in favor.
CONSERVATION COMMISSION/INLAND WETLAND
AND WATERCOURSE AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING-TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 7, 2004
SIMSBURY TOWN OFFICES- 7:30P.M.- MAIN MEETING ROOM
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Howard Beach, Jr. called the Meeting of the Conservation Commission/Inland Wetland and Watercourse Agency to order at 7:30 P.M. in the Main Meeting Room at Simsbury Town Hall. The following members were present: Margery Winters, Richard Miller, William Nowak, Thomas Sharpless, Christopher Ursini, and Andrew Bucknam.
APPOINTMENT OF ALTERNATES
None
PRESENTATION (S) AND DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE
A. Application of Kevin and Mary Jo Crimmins, Owners, for an Inland Wetland Permit to construct a one-car garage within the regulated area on property at 32 Walker Drive.
Mr. Kevin Crimmins was present to address the board. They wish to construct a 16-foot one-car garage addition within the 100-foot upland review area. The structure will be approximately 45 feet from the watercourse, and they are proposing installing silt fencing during construction and stabilize with seed upon completion. They propose doing this in October or in the spring. Mr. Crimmins was also before the board in June for the approval of a pool.
Chairman Beach asked about the level of the area. Mr. Crimmins stated that the area is very level. They might have to raise the floor a few inches to match the level of the other floor, but will not change the grade at all.
Chairman Beach asked about material being used. Mr. Crimmins said that they will be digging up topsoil, which he will then use in other parts of the yard to even out.
Chairman Beach asked about the change to the driveway with this addition. Mr. Crimmins stated they will be adding an apron only.
Commissioner Bucknam asked if the watercourse would be described as a low area that gets wet or is there any kind of a stream. Mr. Crimmins answered that it was a low area 20 years ago, when the property next door added a garage and buried the section between the two properties from the road back about 60-80 feet. There is no wetland that is exposed. It is a depression in the ground that is wet in the spring and wet after a heavy rain.
Commissioner Nowak commented that the disturbance then consists primarily of digging a footing a putting a foundation on top of that.
Commissioner Nowak asked why this wasn’t proposed in July with the proposal for the swimming pool. Mr. Crimmins answered that they weren’t sure if they could afford to do both projects.
A motion was made by Commissioner Sharpless that this is a regulated activity by reason of removal of material from the construction site in the upland review area.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Commissioner Sharpless that this is a significant activity, by reason that the activity has potential to cause siltation to a wetland.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Commissioner Sharpless that a public hearing is not required, as there has not been any indication of public interest.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Commissioner Sharpless to grant a permit for the proposed activity with the understanding that town be notified at least 3 days before the proposed activity is to commence so someone can check out the site before the digging can commence.
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Miller, and carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING, DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE VOTE
A. Application of Ensign –Bickford Realty Corporation for an Inland Wetland Permit for regulated activities associated with the proposed development of 182 homes within the Powder Forest at Bushy Hill and Stratton Brook Road. (continued from 7/20/04 meeting)
Mr. Donahue was present to address the Commission and introduce the presenters.
He stated that along with permits from the Wetland Commission, they are seeking permits from other boards; a zone change to allow a village cluster, a subdivision of the parcel into a single parcel, and site plan approval. On September 20, 2004, there will be a joint public hearing on this application with zoning and planning. Since last before the commission, they have received enthusiastic approval for the plan from the design-review board.
Michael Klein presented the wildlife corridor information.
Both flora and fauna at the site were looked at, and they identified no state-listed species present. The site has the potential to support and does support some forest interior birds.
Time was spent looking at the reptile and amphibian populations at the site because a report through the natural diversity database found eastern box turtle in the area in addition to the presence or absence of mole salamanders and wood frogs, considered vernal pool indicators. He explained that since the natural diversity database showed evidence of box turtle in the area, a visual search was done, but none were found. There are some isolated repressional wetlands on the site. They did not find any box turtles or mole salamanders at the site. The cluster of the three wetlands supported nothing in the way of frogs and salamanders. The semi-permanent pond does support wood frogs and although they are listed as a vernal pool indicator species, they also breed in many other places. He noted that as for the larger mammals, this patch of habitat is not large enough to support the more wide ranging species like bobcat.
A function and value assessment, broken down in three areas, was done for the wetland. The cluster of small depressional wetland areas is considered low to moderate in quality value. The large significant 12-½ acre wetland area is considered moderate- to high-value quality, however it is not considered high quality fish habitat. The semi-permanent pool does provide amphibian-breeding habitat, and it is valued as moderate-quality value.
Mr. Klein stated that in essence there are indirect impacts to the site, which are related to either construction, or the long-term change in land use of the site. He also noted that there is extensive use of best-management and low-impact development practices that have been incorporated into the plans. For example, rather than a traditional centralized stormwater collection and management system, they have a stormwater management system whereby 15 separate water disbursement areas are used to minimize the use of collection systems to get the water into the ground. The indirect impact to the wildlife habitat will be minimized by limiting development in the vicinity of the semi-permanent pond. Per a recommendation by the commission, they will be removing some of the silt fencing to allow migration coming in and out of the pond.
On the plans, he showed the open space on the site, surrounding properties, and locations of buffer zones for access into and out of the wetland system. He stated that the main concern during the site walk seemed to be with how the larger mammals (deer, bobcat, and bears) will access the space. He showed on the plan where the linkages are so that these mammals are able to move through.
Chairman Beach praised Mr. Klein on his effective job of giving a predevelopment evaluation of the three wetland areas. He asked if Mr. Klein could sum up the postdevelopment value of the wetland, in terms of general wildlife. He also asked him to address the apparent fragmentation of the areas. Mr. Klein explained that the functional evaluation methods are not designed as an impact assessment tool, they are designed as a resource tool. He did say that roads do not deter larger mammals, and that he does not see a dramatic alteration of the wetland-dependant wildlife. Mr. Klein said they try to focus on species of conservation concern as opposed to those that are fairly common.
Chairman Beach noted that other species should be focused on as well, lest they also become species of concern.
Chairman Beach complemented the applicant on the systems put in place (stormwater catch basins, swales etc.) to keep the nutrients away from Hazel Meadow Pond. He likes the fact that they provide swales for bio-remediation.
There was a discussion surrounding the vernal pool and the plants currently growing around it. Mr. Klein stated that hydrologically it is a semi-permanent pond, but it has some vernal pool-like functions in that it provides breeding habitat for wood frogs.
Chairman Beach discussed the bio-diversity study, stating it shows about what the commission is concerned and asked if the walking trail near the vernal pool could be moved. Mr. Ferrero stated that it is an existing path.
Commissioner Miller asked about the invasive plantings. Mr. Klein said the fragmites, which are near the wetland, could cause much damage to it, and will be cut out and the area and the area mowed. The tree of heaven will receive two applications of non-invasive, hand-applied herbicide to remove it. The herbicide will be applied during a non-windy day so as to have minimal drift potential.
The commission voiced concern regarding the closeness of Hazel Meadow Pond and unit/lawn development along its boundary. Chairman Beach asked if there will be enough bio-remediation in the swale to neutralize nutrients in the water before being introduced into the brook, what with the number of units that back up to the area. He also wanted to know about the turf-management system being used. Mr. Ferrero said that it is a small watershed because all of the roots are being removed, and he believes that the swale will be high enough. Mr. Klein stated that he doesn’t anticipate that any products will be used within the swales themselves. Mr. Donahue explained that one company will manage the units’ yards and therefore they will not have the owners themselves caring for the yards/grass.
Chairman Beach asked about the distance between the cutting line and the property line. It was explained that there is a 40-foot building setback and the swale is within that 40 feet.
Chairman Beach said that even small amounts of nutrients can devastate the ecosystem, and asked if there could be a 75- to100-foot no-cut zone beyond the property line since there is very little vegetation around the area. Mr. Ferrero stated that they are not encroaching upon the 100-foot buffer zone within Hazel Meadow Pond.
Commissioner Nowak asked about the wildlife corridor to the west side on Bushy Hill. He asked where the wildlife corridor would be for smaller wildlife such as turkeys, etc.
Mr. Klein answered that the area near Bushy Hill is residential development and that, if small wildlife can move through that area, they will be able to move through the corridor Mr. Nowak speaks about. He stated that it is surprising how tolerant many of the species have become. Mr. Nowak stated that the proposed units are much closer together (18-25 feet apart) than the 1+ acre residential houses where it is easier for animals to navigate. Mr. Klein answered that the property provides more open space. Chairman Beach noted that most of the open space is wetland and couldn’t be built on anyway.
Commissioner Miller asked if the wildlife corridor could be opened up more along Stratton Brook road. A discussion about that ensued.
Chairman Beach asked about possible space available along the road for bio-remediation to reduce the development by 75 feet. Mr. Ferrero said that they don’t want to clear so much vegetation along the road that it opens up a view to and from those units. Chairman Beach applauded their decision to include a buffer along Stratton Brook, but said that, if there were one or two spots, it would help with the hydraulic plan. Commissioner Bucknam said that. if the path is lowered to 80’or 60’ from 100' there will not be much room for wildlife refuge. Mr. Merriam stated that it would be virtually impossible to relocate it.
Commissioner Nowak asked about plantings, and Mr. Ferrero stated they do not currently have a landscape plan, but do know that it will include indigenous species.
Commissioner Miller asked about slope stabilization measures being taken. Mr. Ferrero explained they have gravel slopes. They will rough cut some slopes, stabilize them with erosion control mats and reforest them with Mr. Klein’s help.
Chairman Beach asked about retaining walls. Mr. Ferrero said they will not be using mass retaining walls anywhere on the site, but there are a number of walkout basements. It will be up to the owner whether they wish to have slopes or build 4- to 5-foot high retaining walls instead. On one main slope they proposed building a wall, but it would have been a 6-foot wall, which would be monstrous.
Based on the discussion so far, Mr. Merriam summarized 5 conditions of approval.
No individual application of herbicides and pesticides by the homeowners. One company will do the lawn maintenance of each unit.
A post-construction site visit by the commission.
Come back with a best-management practices plan using organic materials.
Field markings on the site at sensitive areas/points. These markings indicate that, if materials are applied to that site, they could be damaging to the wetland system.
A 2- to 3-year ongoing post-construction monitoring plan implemented, that would take samples of run off and come back and report to the commission. If there are problems, corrective action will be taken.
Chairman Beach asked if there were some kind of performance bond associated with the post-construction monitoring. Mr. Merriam stated that a bond is a good idea and that, if the commission wishes this, the applicant will look into it.
Chairman Beach asked if the post-construction monitoring could go on for 5 years instead of 2 or 3. Mr. Merriam said that, by monitoring the surface runoff, they will know fairly quickly if any material is getting off the site, and said 3 years seems appropriate.
Chairman Beach said three years is a good timeline.
Mr. Donahue confirmed that the streets are private, and will be maintained by a private company. Chairman Beach said he hopes sump-pump issues are covered by the monitoring and maintenance plan.
Commissioner Miller was concerned about Hazel Meadow Pond and if it could be restored even though the applicant is not “responsible” for it.
Mr. Donahue stated that, as part of the land-use process, the applicant is putting out a revised master plan for the site, which identifies the place reserved for Dyno Nobel, and any other site available. It will show what is allowed and what is likely in the future to come forward to zoning.
Commissioner Winters asked if a wildlife corridor section could be widened a bit. Mr. Ferrero said they could look into that.
At this point in the meeting, Chairman Beach closed the public hearing, since no one was present to speak on the issue. Commissioner Sharpless moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Bucknam seconded with all in favor.
Commissioner Sharpless stated there should be a good monitoring plan established, and the commission should be specific about what they want to see being monitored.
Chairman Beach said he is concerned about the possibility of nutrient impact on Hazel Meadow, which is a separate issue. Within the site itself, he is concerned about any evidence of nutrient loading in the second brook. A question was asked of how the water going into Hazel Meadow would be monitored. There was a discussion about how the commission could monitor the Hazel Meadow. Mr. Donahue said that they would seek permission on behalf of the commission to get a sample of the Pond if they so desired.
The Commission concluded that as part of the monitoring plan they would look for nitrate, phosphate, chloride, and vod. Apart from the wetland area they will also monitor road water, storm salts/sand, and stormwater discharge, and sump pumps. This will be monitored for a period of three years, and a performance bond will be issued. Fertilizer will be included in the best-management plan. Also, some of the specified units should be spaced farther apart.
For the next meeting, Mr. Merriam will draw up the monitoring plan, etc., for the next meeting, and will bring in the information Commissioner Miller wanted on the field markings.
A motion was made by Commissioner Ursini to continue this application at the next meeting; it was seconded by Commissioner Miller with all in favor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
