North Carolina’s Clean Air Contradictions

The federal government last week announced that it would consider North Carolina’s plea to reduce power-plant pollution migrating into the state from elsewhere – but the action comes as the state is moving to weaken its own rules on power-plant emissions.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is taking action on the petition North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper filed last March under the federal Clean Air Act. In it, Cooper charged that coal-burning power plants in Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia are contributing significantly to air-quality problems in North Carolina.

Indeed, those dirty facilities are a part of the reason why a report from the American Lung Association last year ranked the Raleigh-Durham region as one of the most polluted urban areas in the United States in terms of particle and ozone pollution.

The EPA’s decision, filed as a consent decree in federal court, must undergo a 30-day public comment period before final approval. Presuming it does, EPA will propose clean-up standards for the offending facilities by Aug. 1 and take final action by March 15, 2006.

“This is a win for all of us who want to stop these out-of-state polluters from damaging the air we breathe,” N.C. Attorney General Roy Cooper said in a statement.

Environmental advocates also welcomed the EPA’s decision. The leadership of Cooper and Gov. Mike Easley “deserves applause,” said air specialist Michael Shore of the North Carolina office of Environmental Defense. That group, represented by the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), also filed a petition with the EPA on out-of-state pollution.

“Right now, the air in nearly one-third of North Carolina's counties fails to meet the basic standards for human health,” said SELC attorney Marily Nixon. “This settlement will allow us to protect the health of North Carolina’s 8 million citizens by cleaning up pollution coming from power plants in 13 neighboring states.”

At the same time it’s working to clean up pollution wafting in from other states, however, North Carolina plans to ease regulations on in-state polluters.

Earlier this month, the N.C. Environmental Management Commission – acting on a recommendation from the N.C. Division of Air Quality – voted to weaken state regulations imposing controls at polluting facilities. The proposal is now headed to the state Rules Review Commission for final approval.

“Unconscionable” is how Avram Friedman, executive director of North Carolina’s Canary Coalition, described the DAQ’s recommendation. Friedman has long been a critic of the agency, which he thinks is too chummy with the industry it regulates. In fact, his group last year launched a campaign calling for DAQ reform.

“The DAQ is supposed to be the state agency responsible for protecting the public health from poor air quality,” he said. “This is yet another page in the long history of the DAQ not doing its job.”

Specifically, DAQ wants to ease the state’s New Source Review (NSR) regulations to fit lowered federal standards. Established by the Clean Air Act of 1977, the NSR regulations govern the upgrade of emission control systems in older polluting power plants, factories and refineries when they renovate, modernize or expand production.

Over the protests of environmental advocates, the Bush administration in 2002 revised NSR rules, relaxing upgrade requirements for older facilities. In response, 15 states (not North Carolina) and a coalition of environmental organizations sued the agency, charging that the change jeopardizes human health and unconstitutionally reverses the intent of Congress. The lawsuits are still pending, but a federal appeals court has issued a stay to stop EPA from implementing some changes.

North Carolina’s proposed rule change is not yet a done deal: Scheduled to take effect in April, it must first win approval from the state Rules Review Commission (RRC). That’s why the Canary Coalition is asking citizens who oppose the change to send letters of objection to the RRC.

If the RRC receives at least 10 letters of objection by March 18, it must delay consideration of the rule until the start of the legislature’s short session in 2006. (Friedman is hoping they’ll get hundreds of letters, as that would send a strong message to state regulators.) The delay would give environmental advocates time to work with lawmakers to develop legislation reversing the change. For a sample letter to the RRC, click here and download the Microsoft Word document to your computer.

“We’re taking this to the state legislature because someone has to step in to protect the people of North Carolina,” Friedman said. “The DAQ has become no more than a spokesman for misguided industrial interests. The fox is guarding the henhouse.”

Regan Ends Mayoral Crusade

Raleigh's own Christian soldier has decided not to move onward after all.

City Council member and would-be theocrat Mike Regan has already decided to call off his recently launched campaign for mayor, the News & Observer reports.

"Running for mayor is a whole different level," he told the paper. "The amount of time it would take, the amount of energy it would take, it would put more important things at risk, and I just can't do that."

However, Regan does plan to seek another term representing North Raleigh’s suburban District A. It will be interesting to see how his stated opposition to parks and recreation funding will go over with his district’s soccer moms and dads.

Count Your Backyard Birds This Weekend

People across North America are urged head outside this weekend, count the birds they see and report their findings over the Internet.

The eighth annual Great Backyard Bird Count takes place from Friday, Feb. 18, through Monday, Feb. 21. The National Audubon Society and the Cornell Lab of Ornithology manages the event, one of the biggest volunteer efforts of its kind in the world, with sponsorship from Wild Birds Unlimited storeowners.

Birdwatchers of all experience levels - from absolute beginners to those with years of birding under their belts - are invited to step outside during any or all of the count days to note the highest numbers of each bird species they see. People then report their sightings over the Internet at www.birdsource.org/gbbc.

“We call it the Great Backyard Bird Count to make the point that anyone can participate,” says John Fitzpatrick, director of the Cornell lab. “But really, a ‘backyard’ can be anywhere you happen to be: a schoolyard, a local park, the balcony of a high rise apartment, a wildlife refuge.”

For more details on birds and birding in North Carolina and the Raleigh area, visit the Web sites of the North Carolina Audubon Society and the Wake Audubon Society.

N.C. Toxicologists to Hear About Nanotech’s Pros & Cons

North Carolina is increasingly staking its economic future on nanotechnology, the science of building devices from single atoms and molecules:

* The Research Triangle Regional Partnership last year announced a plan to add 100,000 jobs in the next five years in 10 areas including nanotechnology.

* Earlier this year the W.M. Keck Foundation gave N.C. State University $1 million to help chemistry professors Daniel Feldheim, Bruce Eaton and Stefan Franzen continue research on how the RNA molecule can be used to build inorganic materials.

* In its latest budget proposal, the University of North Carolina system requested $25 million this year and $26 million in 2006-07 for major research initiatives, including nanotechnology.

* Last January the Triangle National Lithography Center – an affiliate of the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network – opened at N.C. State’s Engineering and Graduate Research Center with equipment allowing students, faculty and industry to conduct nanotechnology research.

Nanotechnology’s champions claim it offers tremendous benefits from curing diseases to producing energy to cleaning up polluted groundwater. But the question remains: Are researchers, companies and regulators doing what’s necessary to make sure the materials do not wreak environmental havoc? After all, just because a product is useful doesn’t mean it isn’t hazardous to living things, as experience with other highly touted “miracle” materials such as asbestos, DDT and PCBs has shown.

The benefits and risks of nanotechnology will be the topic of discussion at the N.C. Society of Toxicology’s spring meeting, which is scheduled to take place Thursday, Feb. 17 from 12:30 to 5 p.m. at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Research Triangle Park, N.C.

Titled “What’s the Big Deal About Such a Small Issue?,” the event will feature presentations by Dr. Jim Baker, founding director of the Center for Biologic Nanotechnology at the University of Michigan, and Dr. John Balbus, director of health programs for Environmental Defense (ED) and the founding director of the Center for Risk Science and Public Health at George Washington University.

ED is advocating for increased federal funding for research into potential environmental and health risks of nanotechnology. It’s also calling on industry to develop and adopt “standards of care” for nanotechnology and to that end is participating on multi-stakeholder committees developing risk management standards.

The organization points out that of the billions of dollars being invested in nanotechnology, to date only a few million have been dedicated to understanding the health and environmental effects of nanomaterials. But the limited data available offer cause for concern.

A report released last year by Britain’s Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering, for example, warned that nanomaterials behave in unpredictable ways and can be surprisingly toxic. It recommended that sunscreens and other cosmetics containing nanoparticles be kept off the market until their use on skin can be proven safe – a more restrictive precautionary standard than the assumed-safe-until-proven-otherwise policy embraced by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The report also criticized U.S. experiments in which nanoparticles were spread on the ground, which could pose risks to organisms in soil and groundwater.

“The timing is right for educating the public about nanotechnology’s benefits and potential risks,” according to a statement from ED about Thursday’s meeting. “Although a few nanomaterials are already on the market, there is still time to redirect the trajectory of nanotechnology toward responsible development.”

Regan Offers Christian Theocracy, Environmental Regress for Raleigh

Mike Regan – the first-term Raleigh City Council member who plans to challenge second-term Democratic Mayor Charles Meeker this fall – was the subject of a revealing profile in last Wednesday’s News & Observer. Regan is a Republican real-estate broker who represents suburban North Raleigh’s District A.

Turns out that despite his political ambitions, Regan doesn’t really believe in government. Explaining his vote against a community center expansion in a poor neighborhood, he said he doesn’t “trust government to be the vehicle through which our money flows.”

He does, however, believe in private corporations, which he wants to take over city services. He also believes in Jesus. A born-again Christian, Regan is publicly outspoken about his faith and offers to pray before important council decisions. His beliefs also inform his council positions. For example, when the N&O asked why he opposed anti-crime programs for youth, he said kids don’t need programs – they need “the Lord.”

A member of North Raleigh’s fundamentalist Bayleaf Baptist Church, Regan is no love-thy-neighbor kind of Christian. He led the fight against council’s decision last year to add “sexual orientation” to the list of personal characteristics the Human Relations Commission should disregard on its mission of promoting human dignity, equal opportunity, and harmony. At one public meeting on the matter, Regan denounced homosexuality as “evil” as hundreds of his supporters cheered.*

Regan has not been very kind to the environment, either. Nowadays growing numbers of born-again Christians are embracing environmental stewardship; for example, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) last fall adopted an “Evangelical Call to Civic Responsibility” that stated the importance of protecting the environment and the critical role government must play. But Regan has not used his office to enhance environmental protections.

During the 2003 campaign, he praised the city’s investment in parks and greenways. Once on council, however, he put forth a budget plan that included a $1 million cut for parks and recreation. He also fought the city’s tree-protection ordinance – one of Meeker’s priorities – on the grounds that it violated private property rights. He even cast the lone vote against water-conservation measures put forth by a task force in the wake of a severe drought.

Though Regan’s positions place him outside the political mainstream, that won't stop him from promoting his radical vision.

"I am not running to represent this city," he told the N&O. "I'm running to lead this city. I'm going to be upfront. If you don't like what you hear, don't vote for me."


* The Biblical book that fundamentalist Christians use to justify their condemnation of homosexuality also forbids the eating of pork, but Regan has not yet extended his levitical jihad to North Carolina’s barbecue industry.

Fayetteville Street Mall Demolition Displaces Fish

Raleigh City Council’s decision to tear up downtown’s Fayetteville Street pedestrian mall and convert it into another thoroughfare for automobiles will result in the disappearance of some of the neighborhood’s longtime animal residents.

The koi who for the past 20 years have lived in the fountain outside the Wake County Courthouse will soon get a new home. The fish – an ornamental variety of Cyprinus carpio, a.k.a. the common carp – are being cleared out in advance of next month’s groundbreaking ceremony for the mall-to-street renovation, city officials announced today.

The Parks & Recreation department will relocate the fish to Pullen Park’s Lake Howell, west of downtown. It made the choice “after exploring several options,” according to an official press release on the matter.

The city does not yet have a firm date for the move, but “relocation will occur prior to the start of demolition,” assured Assistant Parks Superintendent Ken Hisler. The groundbreaking is scheduled to take place Monday, March 14, at 11:30 a.m., on the corner of Martin and Fayetteville streets.

Incidentally, in Japanese symbolism koi represent perseverance and strength of purpose. Wonder what their eviction bodes for downtown's future...

Think Globally, Act Locally on Climate Change

“Future historians, looking back from a much hotter and less hospitable world, are likely to play special attention to the first few weeks of 2005,” began a story that appeared Sunday in the London-based newspaper The Independent. “As they puzzle over how a whole generation could have sleepwalked into disaster – destroying the climate that has allowed human civilisation to flourish over the past 11,000 years – they may well identify the past weeks as the time when the last alarms sounded.”

The story details the latest tocsins: First, the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) told a United Nations conference that carbon dioxide, a pollutant that causes global warming, has reached dangerous levels. Then Oxford University researchers who led the biggest study of climate change in history reported that the problem could be twice as catastrophic as the IPCC’s worst predictions.

That was followed with an announcement from an international task force that the world could reach “the point of no return” in a decade. Then the head of Shell Oil’s U.K. division warned that unless governments take urgent action on climate change there “will be a disaster.” And last week, 200 of the world’s leading climate scientists meeting in Britain advised that significant impact from global warming is inevitable and that catastrophe likely.

But the scientists also offered hope: They said that avoiding the worst was technically simple and economically cheap – if governments can be persuaded to take immediate action.

Here in Raleigh, the N.C. Conservation Network is working to persuade the state government to take action, and it needs your help. The group has issued a public alert asking concerned citizens to urge North Carolina’s leaders to address global warming. The alert comes as a coalition of environmental groups is lobbying state lawmakers to address climate change in the legislative session that opened last month.

“Ultimately, addressing global warming will require national and international action – but there are free or inexpensive steps that North Carolina can take now to begin to address the threat: namely promoting non-fossil fuel sources of energy; supporting energy efficiency in industry and government; and planning ahead to position North Carolina to cut our carbon dioxide emissions without damaging our economy,” the alert states.

To send a message to Gov. Mike Easley, House Speaker Jim Black and Senate President Marc Basnight on the need to address climate change, click here. Let’s not sleepwalk into disaster.

George Bush Wants to Tie Roy Cooper’s Hands

The Bush administration apparently does not appreciate N.C. Attorney General Roy Cooper’s aggressive efforts to clean up air pollution, as it’s attempting to take away a legal tool that Cooper and attorneys general in other states have used to target power plants that are fouling the air, BushGreenwatch reports.

The administration’s so-called “Clear Skies” initiative – reintroduced in the U.S. Senate last week – would weaken the interstate air pollution remedy process, known as Section 126 petitions. A state that fails to comply with Clean Air Act standards can file a Section 126 petition asking the Environmental Protection Agency to take action against out-of-state sources that are contributing to its air pollution problems.

Cooper filed such a petition against plants in 13 states last March, and attorneys general from Northeastern states have filed similar petitions against plants in the Midwest and Southeast.

When the EPA acts on a Section 126 petition, it usually gives the polluters about three years to clean up stack emissions. But Clear Skies would block any Section 126 fixes until 2014. And after that, states that want to file Section 126 petitions would first have to show they’ve tried every single more cost-effective measure to reduce pollution – a requirement that environmental advocates say would be virtually impossible to meet.

For more details, visit the BushGreenwatch Web site.