Chemicals, Viruses Added to List of Known Carcinogens

Seventeen substances have been added to the government’s official list of known cancer-causing agents, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) in Research Triangle Park, N.C. announced today – and several of the new chemicals on the list have been released into the air by industrial facilities in the Raleigh area.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has released its 11th edition of its Report on Carcinogens. New listings include lead and lead compounds, nitrobenzene, compounds found in grilled meats, and chemicals used in textile dyes, paints and inks.

“Among U.S. residents, 1 in 2 men and 1 in 3 women will develop cancer at some point in their lifetimes,” said Dr. Kenneth Olden, director of the NIEHS and the National Toxicology Program, which prepared the report for HHS. “Research shows that environmental factors trigger diseases like cancer, especially when someone has a family history.”

Lead, lead compounds and nitrobenzene were all being emitted into the air by Raleigh area companies in 2002, the most recent year for which government data is publicly available through the Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Explorer Web site.

Mallinckrodt Inc., a pharmaceutical company located at 8801 Capital Blvd., released more than 10,000 pounds of nitrobenzene into the air in 2002.

Other local companies emitting newly listed chemicals to the air in 2002 according to TRI data, were Elster Electricity at 201 S. Rogers Lane (90 pounds of lead), circuit board maker Gultech off of Spring Forest Road in North Raleigh (5 pounds of lead compounds) and electronics manufacturer AVX Corp. at 3900 Electronics Dr. in Raleigh (2 pounds of lead compounds). Gultech last year closed its Raleigh plant and moved to China.

Published every two years, the carcinogen report lists agents in two categories: “known to be human carcinogens” and “reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens.” The report now contains 58 “known” and 188 “reasonably anticipated” listings.

Among the chemicals added to the list of anticipated carcinogens:

* naphthalene (an ingredient in some moth repellants and toilet cleaners);

* lead (used to make batteries, ammunition and cable coverings);

* lead compounds (used in paint, glass and ceramics, fuel additives, and in some ethnic and ceremonial cosmetics);

* cobalt sulfate (used in electroplating, as a coloring agent for ceramics, and as a drying agent in inks and paints);

* diazoaminobenzene (used in the production of dyes and to promote adhesion of natural rubber to steel);

* nitrobenzene (used mainly in the production of other industrial chemicals);

* 1-amino-2, 4-dibromoanthraquinone (a vat dye used in the textile industry);

* 4,4'-thiodianiline (used in the preparation of dyes); and

* nitromethane (used in specialized fuels, explosives and in the synthesis of pharmaceuticals and agricultural chemicals).

Also added to the list of suspects were MeIQ, MeIQx, and PhIP, compounds formed when meats and eggs are cooked or grilled at high temperatures. Oral studies in animals showed they caused cancer in organs including the forestomach, colon, liver, oral cavity, mammary gland, skin, and cecum. In addition, several human studies suggest an increased risk for breast and colorectal cancers from eating broiled or fried foods that may contain these and similar compounds.

For the first time in history, the report lists viruses as known carcinogens. They include hepatitis B, hepatitis C and some human papillomaviruses (HPV) that cause sexually transmitted diseases. Studies in humans have shown that chronic hepatitis infections cause liver cancer, while HPV infections have been linked to cervical cancer in women.

The NIEHS said the full report would be available on the NTP’s Web site here, though that Web site was not functioning through much of the day.

Enviros Urge Legislature to Address Climate Change

The N.C. General Assembly kicked off its new session this week in Raleigh, and it promises to be an important one for the natural world. Environmental advocates will be lobbying elected leaders to address a slate of critical issues including climate change, forest conservation and water pollution.

The session convened just two days after the International Climate Change Task Force issued a report warning that within a decade global temperatures could rise as much as 3.6 degrees F. from pre-industrial levels. At that point they could reach a tipping point beyond which intense droughts, crop failures and a disastrous rise in sea levels are all but certain.

“Global warming is an incredible challenge for North Carolina,” says Michael Shore, an air-quality specialist with the state chapter of Environmental Defense (ED). And it’s not only a concern for coastal communities: Cimate change will also create problems inland, as warmer summers worsen urban air quality, and intensified weather threatens fragile ecosystems.

ED hopes to change the way lawmakers think about the problem. Shore notes that climate change presents economic opportunities for North Carolina, which could choose to take a leadership role in developing energy-efficient technology and renewable energy sources. Growing interest in a market to trade greenhouse gas emission rights could also be a boon for the state.

“Sectors of North Carolina’s economy, such as agriculture, could be suppliers of credits,” Shore points out.

ED is asking the General Assembly and Gov. Easley to work together to set a target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the state and to promote energy efficiency, conservation and development of renewable resources. This is especially important when one considers that North Carolinians are expected to increase energy consumption by about 50 percent over the next 20 years.

“That could mean more coal-fired power plants,” says Shore, “or we could make other choices about where that energy will come from.”

Other items on ED’s legislative agenda include protection of coastal resources, addressing stormwater runoff and hog waste pollution, and promoting conservation of private forestland.

The Conservation Council of North Carolina (CCNC) also has a busy agenda this session. It will be working on protections for Jordan Lake and Falls Lake, promoting recycling of electronic waste and ensuring the state budget adequately supports environmental enforcement. CCNC is also calling on lawmakers to appropriate money for the State Energy Office, which will soon run out of funds. But getting lawmakers to increase or even just preserve current levels of spending won’t be easy, as the state faces a $1 billion gap between revenue and spending.

“Given the budget deficit, we have to assume the legislature will focus like a laser beam on financial issues,” says CCNC lobbyist Mike Nelson. “However, there are folks in the new legislature who really care about environmental issues, so we’re hoping we’ll have a good session.”

(In addition to environmental champions from Raleigh such as former city council member and N.C. Sierra Club activist Janet Cowell and attorney Grier Martin, the legislature’s freshman class also includes ED board member and longtime environmental advocate Mary Price Taylor “Pricey” Harrison of Greensboro.)

CCNC and ED, meanwhile, are also supporting the N.C. Public Interest Research Group’s (NCPIRG) clean car initiative. The group is pressing the state to adopt a clean car standard to reduce smog-forming emissions and toxic pollution, to buy more clean cars and to provide tax incentives encouraging the state’s residents to buy clean cars.

But environmental organizations will need the help of ordinary citizens to accomplish their goals.

“Throughout the session, a steady stream of special interest lobbyists will badger legislators, urging them to support one bill or oppose another,” CCNC wrote in a recent e-mail to supporters. “When they vote, legislators decide based on several factors – what they personally think is right; what powerful interests and party leaders are asking them to do; and what their constituents want. In the long run, constituent views are the most important. All state legislators are deeply conscious that, in just two short years, they will be running for reelection. This is your power as an advocate: you can tell your legislators exactly what you hope they’ll support or oppose, and then support or oppose them when they run for reelection. Because of this, most legislators care what you think, and your emails and calls will make all the difference as we work together to pass the good proposals listed above.”

To find out who represents you in Raleigh, click here.

Southern Exposure Asks: How Natural Are Natural Disasters?

The latest issue of Southern Exposure magazine, published by the Institute for Southern Studies in Durham, N.C., looks at what we generally call “natural disasters” – and considers just how natural they really are.

In his letter introducing the issue, Publisher Chris Kromm observes that the United Nations’ International Strategy for Disaster Reduction challenges the idea that there really are such things as “natural” disasters. “There are only natural hazards, the U.N. says – which only become ‘disasters’ if communities are vulnerable or unprepared for whatever nature has in store,” Kromm writes.

You’ll have to get the print issue to see Hart Matthews’ photos of North Carolina’s hurricane-stricken coast, Penny Loeb’s report on West Virginia residents’ efforts to reform industries that have worsened flood impacts and Ted Steinberg’s account of an earthquake that devastated Charleston, S.C. But you can read my story – about the history of floods in Princeville, N.C. and officials’ failure to prevent future catastrophes – by clicking here.

Political Signs=Pollution?

I got a comment the other day from Benjamin Gatti in response to my post about North Carolina’s plans to sue the Tennessee Valley Authority over interstate air pollution.

For readers unfamiliar with Gatti, some background: He ran for a seat on Lake Park, N.C.’s council in 2003 on a platform to develop public space, complete a walking corridor and help local residents start micro-businesses. But he was arrested days before the election, accused of paying teens to remove from public property political signs, which Gatti considers a form of pollution. He was charged with misdemeanor counts of contributing to the delinquency of juveniles and “injuring notices and advertisements.” He also lost the election.

In his comment, Gatti mentions Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent. That was a 1984 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the city’s right to remove political campaign signs from public property. The case was sparked when municipal workers, armed with a city law banning posting on public property, removed council candidate Roland Vincent’s signs from utility poles. Charging that the law was an unconstitutional limit on free speech rights, Vincent sued in District Court and won. An appellate court upheld the decision.

The Supreme Court, however, sided with the city. “Public property which is not by tradition or designation a forum for public communication may be reserved by the State ‘for its intended purposes, communicative or otherwise, as long as the regulation on speech is reasonable and not an effort to suppress expression merely because public officials oppose the speaker's view,’” Justice Stevens wrote for the court’s majority. “Given our analysis of the legitimate interest served by the ordinance, its viewpoint neutrality, and the availability of alternative channels of communication, the ordinance is certainly constitutional as applied to appellees under this standard.”

The other case Gatti brings up, which is actually Major Media of the Southeast Inc. v. City of Raleigh, is one of many decisions that have upheld the constitutionality of billboard amortization. This was a hot issue during the last session of the N.C. General Assembly, when the billboard industry pushed for a law requiring taxpayers to compensate owners forced by local governments to take down signs. The measure passed, but Gov. Mike Easley vetoed it. Lawmakers then approved a revised version allowing communities to continue existing amortization programs, which allow local governments to order a sign’s removal as long as they compensate owners by letting them keep it up for a time.

I sympathize with people who view billboards and campaign signs as an aesthetic affront. After all, I wouldn’t want my home to overlook some corporation’s garish and possibly even morally offensive marketing materials, nor do I particularly enjoy seeing political advertisements cluttering the roadsides, especially after the election. However, given the extreme threats facing our natural world – life-and-death matters such as climate change, toxic pollution, forest loss, species extinction – battling over signs doesn’t seem to me to be the wisest expenditure of environmentalists’ time and energy.

Raleigh Council Appointments Bode Well for the Environment

The people chosen to take the seats of two former Raleigh City Council members who have moved on to the N.C. Senate have a good track record when it comes to protecting the environment.

Tommy Craven, a principal with the Raleigh land-use consulting firm Priest, Craven & Associates, will replace fellow Republican Neal Hunt. Joyce Kekas, a former member of the Raleigh Planning Commission, will replace Democratic Party mate Janet Cowell.

Hunt and Cowell were among the most outspoken advocates for environmental concerns on the current council – and their replacements also have reputations for taking action to protect the environment.

Craven served on the task force that crafted the tree protection ordinance recently adopted by the council. Serving with him was Neuse Riverkeeper Dean Naujoks.

“I think he’s a great fit,” Naujoks says of Craven. “I don’t think we could have a better replacement for Neal Hunt.”

When the draft tree ordinance was under fire from real-estate developers who complained that it was too burdensome, Naujoks visited a development off Tryon Road where a friend of his lives. The development has storm buffers that surpass the 50-foot requirements and, unlike most of the new developments Naujoks sees, is having virtually no impact on a nearby stream.

He took photos to show skeptics what was possible – only to find out later that the development was designed by Craven.

“I was really impressed by that,” Naujoks says.

Kekas also has a reputation for being a careful environmental steward. As a member of the planning commission, she was cautious about granting zoning waivers and opposed development in the Falls Lake watershed.

For example, when a landowner sought to rezone a North Raleigh property that crossed into the watershed back in 1999, Kekas was part of a planning commission minority that opposed the request.

“I don't believe in toying with the watershed,” Kekas told the Raleigh News & Observer at the time. “There’s too much at stake. It could leave the door open for others behind it.”

Sprawl Imperils N.C. Species, New Report Says

Say goodbye to the rare and beautiful Schweinitz’s sunflower as well as the humble Carolina heelsplitter and Carolina creekshell mussels, if sprawl is allowed to continue at present rates in North Carolina.

That’s the finding of a new report by the National Wildlife Federation, Smart Growth America and NatureServe titled Endangered by Sprawl: How Runaway Development Threatens Wildlife. It found that the paving of natural areas and farmland for subdivisions, shopping centers, roads and parking lots has become a leading threat to America’s native plants and animals.

“Runaway sprawl will deplete wildlife habitat in many metropolitan areas in the next two decades,” says John Kostyack, NWF senior counsel and a co-author of the report. “As Endangered by Sprawl shows, consumption of these critical areas could bring an astonishing number of species up to, or even over, the brink of extinction. If we allow that to happen, both people and wildlife will suffer.”

The Charlotte, N.C. metro area – home to 13 imperiled species – is projected to lose 35 percent of its remaining open space to development over the next 25 years. The report focused only on the 35 fastest-growing large metro areas and thus does not consider the smaller Raleigh region, where sprawl is also a significant concern.

The report recommends ways to halt habitat loss by changing local land use patterns and improving state and federal natural resource and transportation policies.

“As Congress prepares to debate the future of the Endangered Species Act, this study drives home the critical role that better planning must play in both protecting threatened wildlife and improving our cities and towns,” says Smart Growth America Executive Director Don Chen. “To check runaway land consumption, we need to provide incentives for development in existing urban and suburban areas, build new development at higher densities and set aside natural areas as off limits to new development.”

Unfortunately, such efforts face an uphill battle in North Carolina, where the pro-development lobby is one of the state's most powerful political forces. A 2003 study (PDF) by Democracy North Carolina, a nonprofit advocating for campaign finance reform, found that the N.C. Realtors Association and the N.C. Home Builders Association were the top two donors to legislative campaigns in the 2002 election cycle, together giving almost $500,000.

Pro-development interests also hold considerable power at the local level. A November 2003 investigation by Raleigh Eco News found that the state home builders gave more direct contributions to Raleigh City Council candidates than any other political action committee, according to disclosures filed before the September 2003 municipal elections.

And that's bad news for the sunflowers, mussels and other imperiled species that get in the way of the bulldozers.

January Thaw or Global Warming?

The late spring-like weather Raleigh has been experiencing lately – with daytime temperatures in the 70s, nights in the 50s, and forsythia and redbud in bloom – will soon come to a chilly end. Friday night’s temperature is expected to plummet to around 30 degrees, with daytime highs over the next several days reaching only the 40s and 50s, according to the National Weather Service (NWS).

But this month could still break the record for the warmest January on record, previously set in 1950. And this unusually warm January follows a December in which average temperatures in the Raleigh-Durham area averaged .5 degrees above normal, begging the question: Is the recent spate of warm weather just an ordinary January thaw or local evidence of global warming?

Climatologist Ryan Boyles with the State Climate Office (SCO) at N.C. State University cautiously comes down on the side of the former.

“We’ve seen patterns like this in the past,” he says, citing the first month of 1950 and also 1931. “It isn’t extreme – just unusual.”

Not that Boyles disputes the reality of global warming, mind you: He acknowledges there’s a consensus among scientists that climate change is taking place, and that humans are a driving force. “But to what degree and by what actions is still up in the air,” he says. “What percentage is due to pollution? To deforestation? To increased urbanization?”

It’s also unclear exactly how planet-wide changes are manifesting locally. However, Boyles has found evidence indicating that North Carolina’s climate may be heating up. In a study titled “Analysis of Climate Trends in North Carolina (1948-1998)” conducted with N.C. State Professor Sethu Raman that appeared in the journal Environmental International in 2003, he found that the state’s warm season has become longer, while the difference between maximum and minimum temperatures is decreasing.

But new evidence suggests that analysis may have been flawed, Boyles says. That’s because it relied on data from a nationwide network of volunteer temperature takers known as “cooperative observers.” The problem with their data is that sometimes their sensors get moved, or the area where they’re placed changes due to development. That results in a less-than-accurate picture of temperatures over time.

“We still don’t have the kind of data we need to detect long-term patterns,” Boyles laments.

That could soon change, though, thanks to initiatives by the federal government as well as Boyles’ office. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is currently developing the U.S. Climate Reference Network (CRN), which would consist of about 110 monitoring stations nationwide, with headquarters at the National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C. The CRN is now operating in 28 states.

“The CRN will give America a first-class observing network for the next 50 to 100 years that will serve as a benchmark for climate monitoring,” says Gregory Withee, assistant administrator for NOAA’s Satellite and Information Service.

In addition, the SCO is asking North Carolina lawmakers to allocate $500,000 in the next budget to establish weather stations in all 100 counties across the state. Currently the SCO has gauges in only 27 counties, with NWS monitors bringing that total up to 50. The proposal will be considered as part of the broader University of North Carolina appropriations package.

“We’re in a race to get the best science we can to take appropriate action,” Boyles says.

Duke Energy Plans N.C. Test of Plutonium Fuel

The Charlotte Observer today published a must-read story about Duke Energy’s plan to begin testing a controversial new fuel at its nuclear power plant at Lake Wylie, which is on the Catawba River near Charlotte. Mixed-oxide, or MOX as it’s known, contains plutonium from nuclear warheads.

The nonprofit Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League in Glendale Springs, N.C. says MOX is dangerous and is seeking to stop the tests. However, Duke Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission have denied the group access to federal documents that it says it needs to make its case. A hearing on BREDL’s security claims began today at NRC headquarters in Rockville, Md., but it’s closed to the public – including BREDL representatives. Duke and the NRC argue that disclosing too much information could aid terrorists.

The battle over Duke Energy’s proposed tests highlights a larger environmental concern: what to do with materials left over from weapons-of-mass-destruction programs. In 2002, the U.S. Department of Energy acquired 34 metric tons of weapons-grade plutonium stockpiles from the U.S. Department of Defense. In order to dispose of the material, the DOE came up with plans to convert several U.S. nuclear power plants from enriched uranium fuel to MOX.

For more information on BREDL’s Southern Anti-Plutonium Campaign, click here.

Falls Lake Gets Reprieve From Sewage Increase

In a victory for environmental advocates, state officials yesterday put on hold a plan to increase the amount of treated sewage dumped into Falls Lake, Raleigh’s main source of drinking water, the News & Observer reports.

The N.C. Department of Health and Human Services has been seeking permission from state environmental regulators to expand the capacity of the sewage treatment plant in Butner, the Granville County town that DHHS manages.

In a letter to the N.C. Division of Water Quality, DHHS Secretary Carmen Hooker Odom said the department would await the results of a state study on water quality in Falls Lake, according to the N&O. The study is set to begin next summer and could take at least a year to finish.

The Neuse River Foundation, the City of Raleigh and hundreds of citizens have raised concerns about the impact of DHHS’ plan on Raleigh’s water supply.

To read the full story by N&O environmental reporter Wade Rawlins, click here.

Raleigh OKs Watered-Down Tree Protections

The Raleigh City Council yesterday approved by a 6-2 vote an ordinance that aims to preserve trees on undeveloped land. The rule, which takes effect May 1, exempts pre-existing properties less than two acres in size, or about 98 percent of residential lots in the city.

The ordinance was a top priority for Democratic Mayor Charles Meeker, who criticized clear-cutting in his election campaigns. Voting against the measure were Republican Michael Regan, who felt it violated private-property rights, and Democrat Thomas Crowder, who objected to it being weakened in response to opposition from land developers.

The compromise ordinance reduces the amount of land that developers must set aside for tree preservation in some residential areas. While the rule originally would have required as much as 15 percent of land set aside in areas zoned for one to four homes per acre, the measure approved by council requires that much set aside only for land zoned for one or two homes per acre.

The ordinance also exempts planned development districts that have already been approved by the city. For more details on the measure, click here.