Nuclear plant developer suing enviros over 'slur'

Alternate Energy Holdings, Inc, which is seeking to build a nuclear power plant in Idaho, has filed a defamation suit against the SnakeRiver Alliance, an environmental group opposed to the project, after the enviro group's director called the company "scammers."

"We have passed two independent financial audits and if anything were even slightly amiss, we'd have heard about it," said AEHI President and CEO Donald Gillispie. "These radical groups are allowed to make almost any claim they wish, regardless of the facts, and the media rarely questions them. Someone has to hold them accountable. "

If corporations in New Jersey filed suit every time critics like the Sierra Club's Jeff Tittle said something nasty about them, the court calendar would be clogged with defamation actions. Tittle would be so busy answering interrogatories that the state's media would have to file an amicus brief in hopes of preserving their most cherished source of story-making quotes.

Hey, maybe that's the point. The Big Chill. Close down the opposition through legal intimidation. Bleed your opponents dry with court costs. Send them to the sidelines, regardless of the merits of your case, while your project chases its permits.

Or maybe the environmental Davids have gone overboard in using a compliant media to slay corporate Goliaths. Maybe the tactics that win you easy headlines--hyperbole, half-truths and sometimes outright inaccuracies--are beginning to take their toll on the environmental movement's credibility.

What do you think? Click on the "comment" line below and share your thoughts.

NOTE: While attribution is admired, you can choose to answer anonymously if you're afraid of a corporate lawsuit or an environmental tongue-lashing.

A Call for a Summit on the Delaware Estuary

Jennifer Corbett/News Journal

The governors of Maryland, Virginia and Pennsylvania convene every year to evaluate the progress of joint efforts to insure a positive environmental future for the Chesapeake Bay.

W. Michael McCabe, who served as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Mid-Atlantic regional administrator and deputy administrator from 1995 to 2001, thinks it's time that the states devote equal attention to the Delaware River and its estuary.

In an Aug. 24 op-ed piece in the (Wilmington) News Journal, McCabe notes that 50 years ago industrial pollution had turned the Delaware River into "a biological dead zone," so bad that the U.S. Navy was able to reduce ship maintenance by anchoring vessels its waters "because it was so polluted nothing would grow on the hulls."

But times have changed. Marine scientists from the University of Delaware College of Marine Studies and Rutgers University recently discovered a colony of sponges and reef-building worms stretching for more than a mile along the bay floor.

McCabe says the fact that rich pockets of aquatic life still exist in what once was one of the nation's most polluted industrial rivers is
"a tribute to pollution control laws and the tenacity of nature."

Additional progress is noted in a recent report by the Partnership for the Delaware Estuary which examined not only just the Delaware River and Bay, but the whole estuary system, including the tributaries that feed into it.

News Journal file photo

McCabe says the study found "dramatic reductions in oxygen-robbing sewage and chemicals and dangerous toxins."

Anyone who's tempted to run up a "Mission Accomplished" banner should note that the State of the Estuary Report also found that "run-off from pesticides, fertilizers, sediment and transportation-linked pollutants" are now the greatest threat to the estuary's water quality and that "contaminants derived from chemicals that aren't regulated under water quality programs -- such as pharmaceuticals and personal care products" are an emerging concern.

In addition, the Partnership reports that the Delaware's extensive wetlands are under tremendous pressure from development, with an analysis showing a 12 percent loss of tidal marshes over the last decade.

Delaware residents will select a new governor in November who will face a number of important issues relating to the river, including "a proposal to deepen the ship channel to 45 feet, the location of a disposal site for dredging the Port of Wilmington, and recent lawsuits requiring industry to use the best available technology to limit the discharge of heated wastewater."

McCabe recognizes that the Delaware River "is not only a living resource supporting a diverse environment, but also a working river supporting a population of almost 8 million people and the commerce they generate."

The challenge for the incoming governor will be to balance all interests while engage neighboring states in a cooperative effort to assist the river's environmental rebound.

Anyone for a summit meeting?

Court ruling could shake up garbage flow

A federal appeals court ruled this month that Lebanon County, PA and its affiliated Greater Lebanon Refuse Authority (GLRA) did not act improperly when they required a private municipal trash hauler to use the county's landfill even though there were cheaper disposal alternatives outside the county.

The ruling that could have impacts in both Pennsylvania and New Jersey where so-called "waste-flow" rules directing all haulers to specific county transfer stations or landfills have been the subject of numerous challenges in federal court.

The landmark "Carbone" decision in 1994 invalidated the bulk of government waste-flow plans as violations of interstate commerce, but subsequent decisions have allowed local governments to direct waste to their facilities under certain conditions.

James J. Kutz, Esq., a Partner in the Harrisburg Office of Philadelphia-based law firm Post & Schell, P.C., which defended GLRA in the complaint brought against it by hauler Lebanon Farms Disposal, Inc., of Schaefferstown, Pa., said the ruling reverses a July 2006 U.S. District Court decision that found the county's comprehensive solid waste plan unconstitutional because it discriminated against interstate commerce.

"The appeals court decision constitutes a clear change in Third Circuit (Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey) precedent," commented Kutz. "Counties can now require that all waste generated within the county be disposed of at their municipal landfill.

"Previously, counties were prohibited from imposing such a restriction absent compelling circumstances." Kutz added, "The ruling gives the Commonwealth and its counties a new, reasonable option with which to finance, monitor, and enforce environmentally sound waste disposal practices without running afoul of the federal Commerce Clause." He noted that the appeals court remanded the matter to the lower court.

For more, check out: Appeals Court Sides with County on Where to Dump Waste

This blog counts among its subscribers numerous environmental attorneys and consultants who are experts in the area of solid waste management. If you're one of them, we'd love to hear your

opinion on the decision and its possible impacts in Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

To share your views with our readers, click on the "comment" line below.

If you're not already a subscriber to our blog, sign up today by sending a blank email to: epfreeblog@aweber.com There is no cost or obligation and you can cancel at any time.

NJDEP escapes worst of early retirements

The Department of Environmental Protection was one of the sectors of state government sweating the most when New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine signed legislation on June 24 offering extra pay and health benefits to state workers who would agree to take early retirement as a way of reducing overall state spending.

Two months earlier, DEP Commissioner Lisa Jackson had candidly told members of the Assembly Budget Committee that, unlike in the previous tight budget year when she testified that her Department could learn to "do more with less," this time she faced a "do less with less" situation.

Jackson's projected operating budget of $230 million for FY 2009 was taking a hit of $19.6 million from the previous-year level and, though she didn't mention it, she had to be well aware that the governor's early retirement proposal held the potential for real disaster.

In all, 85 percent of the DEP's workforce would have been eligible for early retirement under the governor's original plan which would have been open to qualified workers as young as 52.

Fortunately for the DEP, the Legislature raised the qualifying age to 58, which shrunk the size of the potential retiree pool. And then something happened that few expected--the offer failed to interest anywhere near as many as workers as the governor's staff had anticipated.

In fact, only a little more than one-third (1,488) of the eligible 3,828 state workers overall took the deal, leaving Corzine with some 6,540 more employees than he had hoped for.

At the DEP, 121 of 250 eligible workers said adios, leaving the department with about 3,090 employees, almost 300 short of its total when Jackson took over for Bradley Campbell on Feb. 28, 2006.

The retirements will hurt the agency for sure. Gone are 24 permit writers in its land use section which gets 7,000 applications each year. But it could have been much worse.

"We could have lost the entire seasoned cadre in our air quality section," a senior DEP official told us, "but only one--Lou Mikolajczyk--took the offer."

Of the 121 who will be departing, most are not high-profile names recognizable in the business community. Exceptions are Frank Coolick, who had served as administrator of the Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Program, and Frank Peluso, a long-time member of the Department's Office of Recycling. Another, Barker Hamill, who has a national reputation in water supply circles, also is departing but has agreed to a seven-month extension.

Cleaning up New York's Brownfield law

The idea behind state brownfield laws has always been to encourage the development of former industrial sites and other contaminated properties which otherwise would sit idle or abandoned.

Through state subsidies and tax credits, developers could clean up stagnant properties and return them to the local tax rolls as shopping centers, office complexes, sports facilities...you name it.

One of the major problems with New York State's brownfield law, according to Gibbons attorney Eileen D. Millett, was that "credits for cleanup and development had been lumped together, so a company that spent the bulk of its money on redevelopment rather than cleanup would still get a lucrative package," according to Gibbons attorney

"Companies thus had little incentive to go beyond minimum standards for cleanup. Indeed, the old program had not achieved the desired result in struggling areas, and had provided large windfalls to large projects that were not meeting the state’s goals of assuring environmental cleanup while spurring economic development," Millett writes in an alert to her firm's clients. (You can read it here.)

To fix this and other problems with the cleanup program, state lawmakers passed S-8717 prior to leaving Albany for their summer recess. The measure is designed to overhaul the cleanup program by tilting incentives more toward cleanup and less to redevelopment.

In signing the legislation, Governor Peterson said:

"The purpose of the brownfields law was to clean up the environment, not clean out the state treasury."

MORE:
New Law Turns Brown Into Green for New York State (NY Times)
Governor Paterson Signs Brownfields Reform Legislation (NYDEC)

New Jersey's epic beach-access battle

[Updated with additional news clippings on 8/21 and 8/23/08]

One of the longest-playing environmental soap operas in New Jersey involves a cast of rich oceanfront property owners, out-of-towners seeking to claim their DEP-given right to enjoy a day in the sun (especially if it involves ticking off the rich property owners in the process), and local mayors forced to plop port-a-pottys up and down their pristine beaches.

The story plays out against a backdrop of devastating hurricanes, a rapidly eroding shore line and the threat of rising tides spurred on by melting polar icecaps. But wait…it also includes (bugle call in the distance) the chance of a last-minute rescue by an army of slide-ruler-wielding engineers driving bulldozers.

A bit over the top? Perhaps, but this, after all, is New Jersey and things tend to be a bit more dramatic here.

A bit of history...and then a request for your opinion.

For almost eight years now, Garden State residents have been following media accounts of state and federal efforts to encourage, entice, educate and, when necessary, threaten those holdout property owners along Long Beach Island who are still resisting all entreaties to cede legal access (easements) to their properties for a massive program of beach replenishment and dune building.

The $72M project, experts say, will stabilize beaches and dunes where eroding sands have left some homes perilously perched over the sea. It also may help save many more properties along the barrier island when the next major hurricane hits--an event some forecasters say is overdue.

Why would a property owner not jump at the chance to allow the government to save their properties?

Well, some are afraid that higher dunes will block their view of the ocean. Others fret about the noise and mess of construction (such a nuisance, after all, during afternoon cocktails) or the possibility of a lawsuit if a worker is injured on their property. Some just don’t trust government. A smaller number, we suspect, are just plain ornery.

Government, however, holds the trump card. It won’t allow the Army Corps of Engineers to pump one grain of new sand onto on beach in any town unless and until every oceanfront property owner therein grants the access.

The prospect of all your neighbors’ properties being washed out to sea because of your intransigence likely would, on its own, bring even the staunchest hold out around. But New Jersey went and upped the ante

Its Department of Environmental Protection decided that protecting the Shore and its valuable tourism economy (and, yes, all those million-dollar-plus, property-tax-paying homes, too) might be all in a good day’s work. But they also seized on the threat of withholding beach-replenishment funds as an effective tool to implement the social-equality goal of “equal beach access for all.”

So the DEP constructed a beach-restoration policy that not only requires towns to get everyone to waive their property rights when it comes to beach paving and dunes-building but also to provide for easy public access (including parking availability and toilet facilities) to all beaches--including those in residential neighborhoods and at private beach clubs and marinas.

The resulting regulations mandate public access to the beach at ¼ mile intervals along the island’s entire length--and the installation of restroom facilities every ½ mile.

The best argument for this policy is that the ocean belongs to everyone and that millions of dollars of in tax money should not be spent to protect properties that block access to it.

But it clearly has stiffened the opposition among some of the access holdouts. Many of them claim that the DEP is overstepping its role as environmental protector and is now pursuing a social-engineering mission.

Some argue that a person who has worked hard enough to afford a two million dollar home in an upscale town like Loveladies, in the northern half of the island, has earned the right to enjoy its traditional exclusivity—and that this privilege extends to not having port-a-potty placed alongside their property so that out-of-towners can frolic in the surf there instead of at any of the island’s numerous public beaches. Those public beaches, they add, already provide parking and rest rooms--in addition to the restaurants, shops, amusements and marinas that make for the traditional Jersey Shore experience.

What do I think? I think that I shall never make enough money to afford a seaside property in Loveladies (or anywhere else for that matter). But I don't resent those who do, and I don’t expect the state to assure me access to every nice thing that super successful people enjoy.

How about you? Click on the “comment” line below and share your opinion.

MORE:
It may appear private, but it's for everybody (Atlantic City Press - 8/23)
Beach-lane privacy may not be enforceable (Atlantic City Press - 8/21)

How did a group of Delaware shore communities manage to secure enough easements to complete a multi-million dollar beach replenishment project? (Atlantic City Press-8/12)

Beach replenishment on hold (Associated Press - 7/20)

Wind, solar energizing Pennsylvania's economy

Pennsylvania is still sitting on sizable deposits of coal--perhaps more than 300 years worth, according to some estimates. And coal is still the primary fuel source for most of the state's power-generation.

But two new alternative energy players --wind and solar--are off to impressive starts. Why? In large part due to the financial and regulatory encouragement received from state leaders who recognize the new industries' potential--not only to generate electricity without coal's pollution--but also to create new manufacturing and service-sector jobs.

A few days ago, we tipped our hat to the state's new wind-energy industry in A cleaner puff of Pennsylvania is on the way. Today, Philadelphia Inquirer writer Sandy Bauer, in a story detailing the industry's emergence, declares that wind has become "the dominant renewable-energy fuel in Pennsylvania."

Pennsylvania already has nine commercial wind farms with a total of 175 turbines and a capacity of 294 megawatts - enough to power 78,000 households, Bauer reports in Wind power gains momentum.

"Five more wind farms under construction will double that by year's end. About 70 more projects are in development."

Perhaps as important as energy production is the industry's potential benefit to the state's economy. Gamesa Technology Corp. Inc., part of a Spanish company that's one of the world's largest turbine makers, already has 600 workers working round-the-clock, six days a week, at its $34M plant on the former U.S. Steel site in Bucks County (and a second in western PA).

Orders for the parts they're making are sold out through 2010.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The state's other alternative energy industry--solar--made headlines this week with announcement of plans for the largest solar energy farm east of Nevada. Funded through private investment (and some state support) it would be located in the Carbon County community of Nesquehoning, an area suffering the ravages of decades of coal mining.

For coverage, see: Inquirer Standard Speaker Morning Call

Dubbed “Pennsylvania Solar Park,” it would be the largest solar energy plant in Pennsylvania and one of the largest in the U.S., generating enough electricity to power 1,450 homes and eliminate more than 320,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions within 30 years of operation.

Both solar and wind developers have benefited from a requirement that 18 percent of the state's energy come from alternative and renewable sources by 2020.

Electric utilities are already looking to enter into contracts with alternative energy providers in order to meet that deadline.

Hmmm. Big hungry customers looking for your service. Not a bad way for a fledgling industry to get started.

NJ enviros, planners clash over Highlands

It's a rare occurrence--New Jersey environmental and "smart-growth" planning organizations disagreeing in public.

But the future of the Highlands Council's regional master plan is apparently important enough to send both sides onto the media battleground.

The first salvos were fired immediately after members of the Highlands Council on July 17 adopted a final version of their long-debated plan which sets the rules for all future development and preservation in the Highlands region. That territory covers 88 municipalities in seven counties in much of the state's northwest quadrant.

The New Jersey Sierra Club, NJ Environmental Federation and others immediately denounced the plan and demanded in the media that Governor Corzine reject it. A Corzine spokesman says the governor is reviewing the plan. He has 30 days to act.

Yesterday, three organizations--NJ Future, the Regional Plan Association and SmarthGrowthNJ--released a letter to the press in which they urged Corzine not to veto the minutes of the July 17 meeting as the environmental groups have urged.

They called the concerns of those urging a veto "exaggerated, empirically unsubstantiated and certainly do not warrant such a
rash action."

The Sierra Club's Jeff Tittel fired back today, characterizing the
three organizations as "lobbyists for massive sprawl."

Today's issue of EnviroPolitics has more on the debate. For a free copy, send a blank email to:
recentissue@aweber.com

A cleaner puff of Pennsylvania is on the way

"Pennsylvania makes lots of power from old coal plants -- so much that our pollution from these plants is more than from New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island and part of Maryland combined. "

That disturbing statistic comes from Thomas Tuffey, Ph.D., director of The PennFuture Center for Energy, Enterprise and the Environment in an op-ed piece promoting wind energy that appears in today's Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

But Tuffey writes to praise Pennsylvania, not to bury it. He reports that the Keystone State's efforts to develop wind farms "is bringing in good-paying manufacturing jobs... and producing thousands of new jobs and millions in investment in just a few years."

That's good environmental news--not only for Pennsylvania but also for downwind states like New Jersey and Delaware.

Despite its inventory of old coal plants, Pennsylvania is way out ahead of New Jersey and neighboring states in the development of wind power. The Keystone State has the advantage of more lightly populated, windy mountain ranges than the Garden State but strong encouragement and financial support from Governor Ed Rendell has benefited the wind industry most.

So far, New Jersey has only a few wind turbines operating in Atlantic City but the state is reviewing competing plans from private companies for large-scale wind farms off its coast.

In a state where NIMBYites hold sway, that's probably their best-hoped-for location.

MORE:

PA WINDMAP: A Guide to wind-energy resources in Pennsylvania
Wind energy: A cost-effective, fuel-free resource

Commercial Wind Power in Pennsylvania
SMALL WIND in Pennsylvania

Delaware co-op makes deal with PA wind farm

'First State' in offshore wind energy, too?

0-for-3 offshore wind power tries Jersey

A big new wind blowing out of Texas

Surprise - Jerseyans favor oil drilling off coast

I admit that I was surprised. Were you?

A Monmouth University/Gannett New Jersey poll on Sunday reported that 56 percent of Garden State residents said they favor drilling for oil or natural gas off the Jersey Shore, while only 36 percent opposed the idea.

The conventional wisdom has long been that coastal drilling--and the attendant risk of an oil spill--poses too great a risk to the Jersey Shore's fishing, boating, beaches and wildlife.

Does the new poll simply reflect a temporary, knee-jerk reaction to $4-a-gallon gas prices? Or does it signal a more fundamental shift, reflecting New Jerseyans' concerns over the nation's inchoate energy policy, fuel dependency on sometimes hostile foreign governments, or even reemerging memories (for those old enough) of gas rationing and alternate-day waits in long lines at the service station?

In their initial reactions to the poll, environmentalists and political leaders seemed to discount the findings. Senator Frank Lautenberg, running for re-election, said: "The way to bring down gas prices ... is to stop speculators from driving up the price of gas, force OPEC to stop hoarding oil and end price gouging."

Governor Corzine's spokesperson said: "New Jersey's coastline is the lifeblood of our economy and a fragile environmental treasure that helps shape our way of life, and the governor intends to fight any attempt to jeopardize it."

"People are always looking for easy answers to complex problems," said NJ's Sierra Club director Jeff Tittle.

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama had been saying similar things until national polls showed growing public support for offshore drilling. In more recent pronouncements, his opposition to the drilling has been more moderated.

Is is possible that New Jersey politicians might steer a similar course if the polling winds stay strong? Only time will tell. But it does appear that the public memory of the horrific 1989 Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska is fading.

Meanwhile, two other polling questions, which received less media attention, may play an even more significant role in New Jersey as the state moves to develop and implement a new Energy Plan.

Forty one percent of those quizzed said they favored building another nuclear power plant in New Jersey, but 51 percent are against such construction. And 82 percent of those polled say they favor the construction of power-producing wind turbines off the coast, while only 12 percent oppose them.

Currently, New Jersey meets 40 percent of its energy demands through nuclear power and the state's draft energy master plan leaves the door wide open to additional nuclear capacity to meet future needs.

If nothing else, the new polling results should signal to the state's largest energy utility, Public Service Electric and Gas, that it has a lot of public relations work ahead if it decides to move from the speculation stage to the construction stage on an additional reactor in South Jersey, where it already has three nuclear generating stations.

MORE:

Drilling off the Jersey Shore gaining support, poll says

Corzine opposes drilling off N.J. coast

Obama shifts, says he may back offshore drilling

Jimmy Margulies cartoon (Bergen Record)

Bush raises stakes for drilling off Jersey Shore

Top environmental/political news: July 28-Aug 1

Every day, we select a few of the top environmental and political stories appearing in our newsletter,EnviroPolitics, and post them to our website for free public use.

Click the links below to view stories for New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York--and beyond-- that appeared during the past week.

Aug 1 2008
July 31 2008

July 30 2008
July 29 2008

July 28 2008

To receive free daily alerts when our Environmental & Political News page is updated, send a blank email to: eptopdailynews@aweber.com

Try EnviroPolitics, the daily environmental newsletter, Free for an entire month!

An environmental business news source and outlet in NJ, PA & NY

Tip #1: EnviroPolitics, a paid-subscription, daily newsletter, provides free daily updates of environmental business news in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York and beyond. Check out the publication's Enviro-Business News page and add it to your favorites list. It's available 24/7

Tip #2: More conveniently, you can sign up to receive free alerts whenever the page is updated. To get on the alert list, just send a blank email to: enviro-biznews@aweber.com
Be sure to click on the link in the confirmation email you'll receive.

Tip #3: Get your company's or organization's environmental news published in EnviroPolitics. You don't have to be a subscriber to the newsletter to take advantage of this free service. Send your information to:
Editor@EnviroPolitics.com

If you're not in charge of public relations at your organization, pass this tip on to the person who is. They'll appreciate the referral.