Community members in Ohio are fighting against real estate prospectors by buying up property before investors can move in to “flip” them for a quick profit.
Illinois
The Suburbs Keep On Growing
Source: Chicago Tribune, November 29 2007
Massachusetts
Need A Mortgage? Go Green
Source: Boston Globe, November 16 2007
By MIRIAM MOELLER,
Journal Staff Writer
POSTED: November 28, 2007
MARQUETTE — Northern Michigan University students and faculty demanded “no new coal” at a Michigan Department of Environmental Quality hearing Tuesday on NMU’s permit proposal for a power plant that could burn wood, coal and other fuels.
“My professional opinion is that even the potential of burning coal is a step in the wrong direction,” said Ron Sundell, NMU geography professor and director of the environmental science program. “We can do a number of things with alternative energy. It’s a new energy age. No new coal.”
-SNIP-
http://www.miningjournal.net/page/content.detail/id/502196.html?nav=5006
The Task Force was charged with evaluating minority participation in the environmental community and make recommendations for improved participation.
The report addresses four main areas of concerns centered on: 1) the lack of minorities in key policy positions throughout the state government; 2) the lack of attention and funding support that traditional environmental organizations directed at minority issues and concerns; 3) the lack of minority participation in the efforts to protect and restore the Chesapeake and Coastal Bay watersheds, and 4) the lack of public education programs directly connecting minority health issues to the disparate environmental conditions that prevail in some communities. Read the full report here.
Contact:
Vince Leggett
Maryland Department of Natural Resources
410.570.1187
VLeggett@dnr.state.md.us
My friends over at the African American Environmentalist Association have some different views on energy policy (particularly nuclear and coal) than most environmentalists I come into contact with. Although I may not agree with everything they support, they have my utmost respect for their professionalism and courage to swim against the current when they believe necessary. Check out their post and consider what they have to say.
AAEA is the only American environmental organization actively supporting nuclear
power…AAEA is the David fighting the anti-nuclear movement Goliath to allow
this technology to provide the electricity we need while mitigating global
warming…The pro-nuclear movement needs more American environmentalists to
ACTIVELY support nuclear power.
For more click here:
http://aaenvironment.blogspot.com/2007/11/more-american-environmentalists-should.html
From Tom Pelton
Baltimore Sun
Bay and Environment Blog
November 13, 2007
progress to take from one environmental program to give to another?
In this case, does it make sense to take millions of dollars that would be used to preserve forests and fields, and instead hand the cash to farmers and stream reconstruction companies for runoff control projects?
That’s what the Maryland Senate, led by President Thomas “Mike” Miller, is proposing to do, and Gov. Martin O’Malley’s administration isn’t opposed to the concept. But the Maryland House of Delegates isn’t yet on board. And some preservationists think it’s a bad idea — a modern form of robbing Peter to pay Paul — that would undermine a successful and popular environmental program. Moreover, the critics say, preserving forests and open spaces is the best way to filter runoff and stop pollution into the bay. So cutting this effort for the sake of an unproven concept raises questions.
The state Senate recently cast preliminary votes in favor of a bill that would take about $20 million a year that would have gone to the more than 30 year old Program Open Space, which pays to preserve land and build playgrounds. The money would go instead to Senate President Miller’s proposed new “Chesapeake Bay 2010 Fund.” (Until last week, it was called the “Green Fund,” but Miller said that wasn’t going to pass, and he nixed the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s idea of imposing $20 fees on homeowners statewide). Under Miller’s new version of the bay fund, that $20 million would be combined with another $30 million from motor vehicle taxes. The grand total of $50 million a year would go to projects meant to combat runoff pollution into the Chesapeake Bay. Farmers would get money to refrain from using fertilizer while planting cover crops in the fall and winter, as well as money to plant buffer strips of trees to protect streams. Stream reconstruction companies would also be paid to build stormwater control dams and ponds in urban waterways.
The proposal is evolving, with House leaders suggesting that the money all come from vehicle taxes.
Dru-Schmidt Perkins, executive director of a preservation group called 1000 Friends of Maryland, said that taking money from Program Open Space would hurt efforts to keep pollution from flowing into the bay. If land is not preserved through this program, it often is gobbled up by developers, which means more pollution into the bay, she said.
“This program prevents land from being converted into new development. So it makes no sense to raid this program,” said Perkins. “It’s completely unacceptable. We know how urgently funds are needed to preserve open spaces. We are millions and millions short in that fund…It does not help Maryland to shortcut one program that helps the environment to help another. It does not work.”
She noted that Gov. O’Malley, during his election campaigns last year, repeatedly promised to “fully fund” Program Open Space, and not raid the preservation funds, as governors have for years.
“Local governments urgently need these funds to run recreation programs and have ball fields for their kids,” said Perkins.
Rick Abbruzzese, spokesman for Gov. O’Malley, said the governor will work with whatever compromise the House and Senate leaders come up with. But Abbruzesse said the administration doesn’t disagree with the concept of taking from Program Open Space to help pay for bay restoration.
“It’s a valid use of those dollars,” Abbruzzese said. “If you use funds from Program Open Space that restore the Chesapeake Bay, I would argue that you are fulfilling the goal of Program Open Space.”
And he added that the senate is also proposing the closing of a loophole on transfer taxes for corporate properties. That could bring $14 million or more a year into Program Open Space, reducing the size of the cut. Local governments could also get some more money through the closing of this loophole, and they could spend this money on parks if they want, he said.
The specifics may be hammered out in the next few days in Annapolis.
Friday, November 23, 2007
JUSTIN ENGEL
THE SAGINAW NEWS
A top government scientist says a toxic ”hot spot” found in the Saginaw River near Wickes Park in Saginaw could represent the highest level of dioxin contamination ever recorded in the nation’s river and lake systems.
As Midland’s Dow Chemical Co. prepares to clean up the site next week,officials continue to debate the level of danger it represents. ”We don’t believe there’s any imminent or significant human health or environmental threat,” Dow said.
However, officials at the EPA and state Department of Environmental Quality say the public shouldn’t downplay the danger because of the intensity of contamination found in Wickes Park. ”This is beyond the debate of whether there’s an immediate health risk,” said Robert McCann, DEQ spokesman. ”Not when you’re looking at levels that high.”
http://www.mlive.com/news/saginawnews/index.ssf?/base/news-24/1195831284140010.xml&coll=9&thispage=1
I believe that all members of communities should be involved, informed and have the opportunity to participate in issues important to them. With more african americans and other minorities gaining access to the world wide web, It’s critical for messages about our community’s environmental and development policies reach the people they most effect.
In hopes of increasing breadth and depth in topic areas, I’m looking for like minded potential volunteers to contribute commentary and opinion for the blog and perhaps help with maintaining the website with links and news. If you have knowledge or expertise in:
I definitely want to hear from you. I’d like to try to keep a geographic focus on the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, and perhaps New England. No big serious time commitment. Professionals and students alike are welcome!
Thanks and Happy Holidays,
George Jackson
Chief Contributor and Editor
Innovation in Community & Environmental Planning
innovationplanningnow@gmail.com
I’ve designed a new homepage. Innovation in Community & Environmental Planning is a portal for various environment and community planning information. It includes links and resources with RSS feeds from different sources and I will be adding more features over time.
The BICEP Bulletin will still be a mainstay for up to date commentary and opinion in environment and community planning planning issues. The only differences that you’ll notice is that the BICEP will have more original content, be simplified, and focused on issues relating to the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, and New England regions. The homepage will be more of a general resource.
I want to hear from you. I welcome and request any feedback from readers and visitors. Thanks for visiting and Happy Holidays!
Ministers from eight countries yesterday adopted an action plan to restore the Baltic Sea to ecological health by 2021.
“After 18 months of drafting and negotiating, the coastal countries have reached a broad consensus on concrete … measures that are needed to achieve our common goal of a healthy marine environment,” said Mieczyslaw Ostojski, chairman of the Helsinki Commission.
The commission consists of the Europoean Union and the nine Baltic sea countries — Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, Sweden.
Only Denmark has not signed off on the plan, although it is expected to do so after the formation of a new cabinet.
The main threats to the health of the heavily polluted sea are agricultural runoff and untreated sewage, which cause algae blooms, oxygen depletion, murky water and lifeless sea bottoms, according to the commission.
Plans to clean it up include more effective treatment of municipal waste waters, use of phosphorus-free detergents and best practices in agriculture. The commission hopes to reduce the annual level of phosphorus injections into the Baltic Sea from 36,000 metric tons to 21,000 metric tons and lower nitrogen from 737,000 metric tons to 600,000 metric tons.
Environmental groups have criticized the plan as a statement of intention rather than a binding document.
Source:
Greenwire
CONTACT:
William Omohundro, 312-353-8254, omohundro.william@epa.gov
Karen Thompson, 312-353-8547, thompson.karen@epa.gov
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
No. 07-OPA223
(Chicago, Ill. – Nov. 15, 2007) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 enforcement actions in Michigan in 2007 will reduce pollution by more than 45.3 million pounds and result in regulated entities spending more than $200 million on pollution controls to correct past environmental violations and help prevent future ones.
In the past fiscal year, EPA resolved 55 actions against regulated entities in Michigan and assessed a total of $1,723,893 in civil penalties for various air, water hazardous waste, pesticide and community right-to-know violations. As part of the settlement agreements, Michigan companies agreed to spend $3,159,211 on supplemental projects to benefit the environment.
“EPA regional enforcement actions in the last year will result in real health and environmental benefits,” said Regional Administrator Mary A. Gade. “EPA believes in firm and fair enforcement and working with our partners at the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality to ensure cleaner air, water and land for the people of Michigan.”
Among the most notable environmental actions in Michigan were:
* Dow Chemical Co. agreed to three EPA orders issued under the Superfund Act for sediment cleanup on the Tittabawassee River. Under the first order, Dow will clean up approximately 14,000 cubic yards of dioxin-contaminated bottom deposits and sediments in an area of the Tittabawassee River within Dow’s Midland plant property. Under the second order, Dow agreed to remove a dioxin-contaminated naturally occurring levee, as well as cap one upland area and fence off another wetland area located in overbank areas on the northwest side of the Tittabawasee River 3.6 miles downstream of the confluence of the Chippewa and Tittabawassee rivers. Under the third order, Dow will remove dioxin-contaminated sediments in three locations 6.1 miles downstream of the confluence of the Chippewa and Tittabawassee rivers.
* Two companies responsible for the cleanup at the Allied Paper/Portage Creek/Kalamazoo River Superfund site will excavate and dredge about 150,000 cubic yards of sediment, river bank and floodplain soil containing about 4,500 pounds of PCBs from the most upstream source of contamination to the Kalamazoo River. The $30 million removal will occur over a two-year period. Much of the Plainwell Dam will be dismantled, and the river will be re-routed to its original pre-dam channel. For the first time since 1902, fish, kayaks and canoes will be able to navigate freely through this area of the river.
* Cemex has agreed to pay $1,359,422 in a Clean Air Act case involving release of particulate matter from a Charlevoix cement plant that it formerly owned. St. Mary’s and St. Barbara’s, the current operators, committed to installing a baghouse particulate control system costing about $11 million and to investing at least $6.2 million in a supplemental project consisting of a new indirect firing system for the plant’s kiln, which is expected to cut emissions of particulates, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides.
EPA Region 5 coordinates with state environmental agencies in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin to enforce environmental laws. State agencies also have authority to pursue their own enforcement actions.
Nationwide, EPA enforcement resulted in a record $10.6 billion in pollution controls and environmental projects.
For more information about the Region’s enforcement program, go to http://www.epa.gov/region5/enforcement/fy07eoy.htm>www.epa.gov/region5/enforcement/fy07eoy.htm
