Home » Policy (Page 2)
Category Archives: Policy
I Love That Dirty Water
The Hidden Damage of Coastal Storms
Irene Targeted 10% of the Nation’s Refining Capacity
When Hurricane Irene headed north late in the Summer of 2011, there was a lot of talk about the effect the storm would have on the nation’s gas prices. Irene’s track put 10% of the country’s refining capacity directly in the bulls eye as the category 2 hurricane steamrolled towards landfall on the New Jersey coast. Disruption of gasoline production at refineries in Delaware, Pennsylvania and New Jersey was a major concern. Irene turned out to be more of a rain-maker for the mid-Atlantic region with modest winds and a storm surge between 6 and 8 feet. While the storm produced record inland flooding resulting from rainfall of up to 15 inches, much of the oil industry’s infrastructure in coastal locations was spared.
The economic damage and turmoil that coastal storms can cause are certainly noteworthy, however, temporary interference with gasoline production is a minor concern compared with the more lasting impacts of severe weather hitting our nation’s industrial production centers. The combination of a changing climate and rising sea-levels is creating the potential for a public health disaster anywhere a tropical cyclone or nor’easter affects the U.S. coastline from Texas to Maine. While the aftermath of Japan’s Fukushima disaster makes headlines and raises fears of a similar incident here in the U.S., a much different, but still highly dangerous, threat lurks below the radar. Oil refineries and petrol-chemical facilities dot the coast along this stretch. The anticipated onslaught of more frequent and more severe storms superimposed upon a higher base sea level places these installations at ever increasing risks of flooding. But the real damage isn’t to the economy or the infrastructure itself, it is to the environment and the population living in proximity to these locations. Additionally, a disproportionate number of the people living in these areas are economically disadvantaged raising issues of environmental justice.
Sandy Headed Right for the Oil Refineries of the Mid-Atlantic
When Hurricane Sandy made landfall in New Jersey, a little over a year after Irene, it brought a storm surge of up to 16 feet to the New York metropolitan area. Unlike Irene, Sandy inundated refineries and chemical plants in New Jersey. There were an estimated 630 storm-related oil spills in New York City. However, New Jersey took the worst blow regarding oil contamination after a significant diesel fuel spill at the Motiva Refinery into the Arthur Kill. According to New Jersey environmental officials, 336,000 gallons of diesel fuel spilled into the waterway after a storage tank ruptured from the storm surge. Major sewage treatment plants were disabled resulting in the discharge of an estimated 11 billion pounds of untreated effluent into the harbor and surrounding tidal rivers and bays. As the floodwaters spread inland, they carried large amounts of chemicals and petroleum products with them. When they receded they left behind a toxic residue that covered the ground, coated homes, and fouled the region’s wetlands and waterways.
In Newark’s Ironbound neighborhood, an area of the city that hosts both industrial plants and a vibrant and ethnically diverse residential community, Sandy’s storm surge pushed the waters of Newark Bay and the Passaic River into areas that had never experienced tidal flooding before. The water carried, not only highly contaminated sediments from these waterways, but chemicals from Superfund sites and industrial plants located along the shoreline. Compounding this, the Passaic Valley Sewage Commission’s main treatment facility, the nearby Newark Bay Pumping Station that handles sewer effluent for much of northern New Jersey, was shut down after being overwhelmed by the storm’s tidal surge.This resulted in 3.1 billion gallons of untreated sewage being released into the water. This noxious brew poured into basements, homes and businesses.
Water and air, the two essential fluids on which all life depends, have become global garbage cans.- Jacques Cousteau
Sandy’s Flood Waters Left Behind A Toxic Residue
Following the storm, once the flooding had receded, people were cleaning, trying to get back into their homes, unaware that there was much more left behind than just water. Information on what people were being exposed to was very difficult to come by. New Jersey’s environmental agency, the Department of Environmental Protection, provided little or no information to residents. Meanwhile, folks were pumping water and cleaning muck that was laden with PCB’s, Dioxin and the residue of raw sewage including high levels of E.Coli and coliform bacteria. Similar issues arose in Louisiana in 2005 following Hurricane Katrina. Just as in Sandy, oil refineries, petrol-chemical installations and Superfund sites were flooded. Sewage treatment plants were knocked off-line and flooding was not just flooding. The damage to the environment and the threat to public health were not immediately recognized and under-reported until well after the storm and people had already been exposed. The National Academy of Engineering released a report in 2006 detailing many of the issues that arose.
The USGS is sampling water in Hurricane Sandy’s aftermath to develop an understanding of the changes in water quality across impacted regions. Contaminants such as pesticides and E. coli in water affect both human and wildlife health. On a longer time scale, excessive nutrients introduced to waterways by increased runoff from the land due to Hurricane Sandy has the potential to cause algal blooms across the region leading to the degradation of ecosystems and increased costs to treat drinking water. Lower oxygen levels caused by bio-degradation of petroleum products can lead to fish kills. There is also the potential for many of these contaminants to become caught up in the food chain. The New York Harbor region is a rich nursery for fish, shellfish and migratory birds and there is a strong likelihood that they will persist in the ecosystem for years. Many of these effects were observed in the Gulf Coast region following Katrina and are likely to be found in the mid-Atlantic now.
What A Mess
The real questions, however, aren’t about what happened. The important issue is what are we going to do to avoid a repeat of these conditions. Storms like Katrina and Sandy are going to happen again. With higher sea levels, even lesser storms may create similar conditions. The next one may make landfall in the Chesapeake region or perhaps along the New England coast. Wherever it may be, there will be sewage treatment plants, industrial facilities and contaminated sites in vulnerable locations. So, while a temporary spike in gas prices will dominate the news in advance of an impending storm, there are much higher costs to be paid in terms of public health and environmental damage.
We can’t make the argument that we didn’t know what could happen. We go to great lengths to protect against industrial accidents or terrorist attacks at many of these facilities. Yet we do little, if anything, to reduce or avoid vulnerability to the much more likely threats of extreme weather events. Requiring refineries and treatment plants to be retro-fitted and hardened against flooding hazards, putting stronger building codes for these installations in place or even moving them out of harm’s way is a relatively minor investment compared with the potential damage that will result from a failure to act. Further, these are not theoretical or perceived dangers. Something like this will occur again. We need to overcome our reticence to invest in infrastructure and prevention (and a significant portion of Sandy recovery money must be spent towards this end) because there is a much higher cost that will result from inaction. -Ben Spinelli
And oh yeah-don’t forget to listen to this!
Are We There Yet?
The Long Road to Recovery
How Far?
I’ve taken a break from this site for the past 8 months. I spent that time working for the President’s Hurricane Sandy Task Force as a Senior Policy Adviser on issues of local government and land use planning. My duties took me to Washington, DC and New York City, but more importantly, to every corner of New Jersey that was impacted by Sandy. I spent a great deal of time speaking with policy makers, government officials, scientific experts, business leaders and ordinary people from the shores of Delaware Bay to the Hackensack Meadowlands regarding their views and experiences both before and after the storm. That work has provided me with a perspective on the complexity and difficulty of dealing with the challenges that recovering from a disaster like Sandy presents. Of even greater significance is the necessity of undertaking these daunting tasks while confronting the reality of a changing world climate and rising sea-levels.
There is a strong urge in human nature to seek comfort. We like familiar surroundings and feel disoriented by change. These instincts are brought to the forefront following disasters. Homes are destroyed, landscapes are altered and lives are changed by major destructive events. Its only natural to want a return to “normal” when major disruptions, like Hurricane Sandy, take place. We want to get back to where we were as soon as possible. In terms of Sandy we can describe this feeling as we want the world of October 27, 2012 back and we want it now. However natural this feeling may be, it’s not a reasonable expectation, neither in terms of how long it will take to re-build or how we should rebuild.
Storms on the magnitude of Sandy have certainly happened before. There are a number of lessons that can be learned from past recovery efforts that are applicable in the aftermath of Sandy to assist in guiding rebuilding. What was unprecedented was the scope of the disaster. The density of the population, the value of property and the existing (and now vulnerable) infrastructure in the storm’s path was on a far different scale than anything that had been seen in the U.S. before. Two things were immediately evident; recovery from this storm was going to take a long time and building things back the way they were was not an option.
How Many Times Does This Have To Happen?
There is a basic premise that we must accept first before embarking on the monumental task of rebuilding. That is, we need to fundamentally alter the manner in which we occupy vulnerable areas of the coast, particularly in the densely populated northeast. The long-standing patterns of development established in an era where climate change and sea-level rise were not recognized threats have placed people, property and infrastructure in harm’s way. Before we put another shovel in the ground, before we spend another dime of public money, before we issue another permit for construction the question needs to be asked if we are simply wasting our investments and creating unreasonable exposure to risk by failing to take this disaster as an opportunity to remake our footprint in these at-risk areas.
If we don’t change direction soon we’re going to end up where we’re going- Professor Irwin Corey
Sea-Level Rise Risk Assessment Mid-Atlantic Region
It may seem like a fairly common sense way of approaching things. However, nothing is ever as simple as it looks. Back before Sandy, the USGS had been modeling the risks of sea level rise for over a decade. In the Spring of 2012 they released a report warning that sea-level rise was actually accelerating beyond their original projections. Then Sandy hit and the theoretical impacts became all too real. People got a first-hand look at what an increase of sea-level in terms of several meters was really like and the devastation and disruption it would bring. This should have been enough to make decisions easy. But it wasn’t. There are politics and economics and generations worth of investment in existing development patterns and the social and emotional impact on people’s lives to contend with. These factors, legitimate or not, exist and they make the path to recovery even more difficult and complex.
Evaluating our decisions going forward requires that we look at the full equation-that means looking at the full cost of everything we do. This includes assessing the cost of infrastructure investments in terms of the price of having to rebuild it again. Looking at the sustainability of the service area of infrastructure. Putting a value on a healthy intact environment. Assigning an appropriate cost measurement to human safety and lives that we might put at risk by failing to change. Accounting for likely conditions that we will face as a result of climate change and sea-level rise. These are the just some of the elements that need to be measured and quantified in order to chart a course forward. Political expediency and narrow selfish interest have no role in the calculation.
Just The Tip of the Iceberg
This discussion barely scratches the surface of the important policy issues we face. Even so, the important questions that exist are clear. As we proceed to rebuild in the wake of Sandy will we be ready to do things the right way? Will we make the right decisions that will reduce vulnerability and avoid future risk? Will we take the long-term view to insure that where and how we build will be sustainable? It won’t be easy. The right way rarely is. If we fail to act responsibly future generations will judge us harshly.and rightfully so.- Ben Spinelli
Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Strategy Report Released
It’s Been 9 Months Since Hurricane Sandy Made Landfall
It’s been 6 months since my last post here on Politics of the Environment. During that time I’ve been busy working on the President’s Hurricane Sandy Recovery Task Force. I’ve been fortunate to have had the opportunity to work with some of the nation’s leading experts on disaster recovery on some of the most important issues facing our nation today. It has been a tremendous experience.
The Task Force has released its rebuilding strategy document, which you can access here. Please take the time to review this report that discusses the difficult issues facing, not just New Jersey, but all vulnerable coastal areas of the country as we confront a changing climate and rising sea levels. The strategy document addresses, not just how to recover from a disaster like Hurricane Sandy, but how to rebuild in a manner that will reduce or avoid the vulnerability of people, property and infrastructure to the threats of future extreme weather events. It is a thoughtful and comprehensive evaluation of the challenges posed as the Northeast continues the long process of recovery in the wake of Sandy.
Sandy revealed the necessity of improving hazard mitigation efforts to alter how vulnerable coastal
areas of the densely populated northeast are occupied. Long-standing land use patterns have placed
people, property, and infrastructure in locations that have significant risk of flooding and storm surge
and that will become more vulnerable as sea level continues to rise. Municipalities need to build
the capacity and expertise to take the steps necessary to reduce that risk. Hazard mitigation and
risk reduction must be a primary goal of recovery efforts in the region even if fragmented land use
authority and governance make this a difficult proposition.-Page 125 Hurricane Sandy Rebuilding Strategy
It’s A Long Road To Recovery
It has been a privilege to work with my talented and dedicated fellow Task Force members as well as with the scores of public stakeholders who generously gave their time to provide the perspectives and insights that helped shape the strategy document. I am so grateful that I had the chance to be a part of this undertaking. It was also an honor to serve New Jersey and the United States by participating in this important effort. I will continue working with the Task Force until the end of September and will resume posting here then. Until that time I wanted to drop a quick note to bring the Task Force strategy document to the attention of readers of Politics of the Environment. I hope you find the report interesting and informative. I’ll be back in October with plenty to say.- Ben Spinelli
Where Do We Go From Here?
You Didn’t Need One Of These
One of These Days
On a warm spring day in April 2008 I checked in to the New Jersey State Police Disaster Response facility in West Trenton. The weather was about as nice as it gets around here with temperatures in the low 70’s, beautiful blue skies and a slight breeze. Inside the building, which as far as I could tell was built to withstand a simultaneous nuclear blast and asteroid impact, it was quiet. The command center, with its banks of desks and computer monitors, was dark and empty. The walls were ringed with high-tech data displays and HD television screens that were blank, save for a single T.V. tuned to the Golf Network showing one of the early rounds of the Master’s. This was not the kind of day this facility was built for.
I spent the afternoon meeting with the state’s disaster response coordinator as part of the background work for creating a new version of the New Jersey State Plan. A long-term assessment for the state, the State Plan was designed to steer decisions on land use, infrastructure investment, capital projects and resource conservation and protection. A large portion of the research involved meeting with each of the state’s agencies and departments to obtain their input and to try to align each agency’s programs with the State Plan to the greatest extent possible. This session focused on two aspects of disaster response: the vulnerability of infrastructure to potential disasters and the nature and direction of recovery efforts. No responsible long-term plan could ignore these issues.
If you want to make enemies-try to change something- Woodrow Wilson
The updated State Plan was going to contain a new section on Climate Change and recommendations for a comprehensive response, from the way we contributed to continued greenhouse gas emissions to preparation and response for the inevitable effects that climatologists, including the Office of the New Jersey State Climatologist, warned we were facing. From hardening our infrastructure to handle the likely flooding, to protecting roads and bridges to, perhaps most importantly, planning to rebuild differently after any disaster, these issues were all explored and incorporated into the long-term outlook for the state. A plan that was eventually buried by the Corzine Administration and outright rejected by the Christie Administration because it contained some hard truths that may not have been politically expedient, it addressed getting ready for the inevitable. Four years later, on October 29, 2012 to be exact, the day the disaster response center was built for arrived. It really didn’t take a crystal ball to know this was coming.
Insanity?
Time for a Change
While the State Police were preparing for every sort of potential disaster from terrorist attacks to chemical spills to nuclear reactor accidents, we knew what the main threat to New Jersey was-the state’s vulnerability to coastal storms. Whether a nor’easter or a hurricane, a strong storm moving up the east coast or making landfall somewhere along the Jersey Shore was clearly the most likely danger facing the Garden State. Rising sea levels made damage from flooding more likely, even from ordinary storms. Bridges and causeways were prone to inundation, cutting off escape routes for residents along the shore. Infrastructure, such as water and sewage facilities, electrical transmission equipment and other necessities of modern life were at risk. Homes, businesses and people in the path of such a storm were in danger. Hurricane Sandy was the first of what will probably be many tests of the resiliency of our infrastructure and the communities it serves.
The effects of sea level rise have been studied. Mapping, like the interactive map that can be found here, clearly indicated where the largest risks existed and continue to exist. Yet we took little or no action. This is as much an environmental issue as it is an economic and social issue and, not the least, an issue of public health and safety. As shore towns undertake rebuilding efforts, the question becomes are we taking the necessary steps during this process to avoid being right back in the same predicament when the next major event occurs. In a rush back to “normalcy” and trying to recover economically will we make the same mistakes again? We never had the excuse that we didn’t know this would happen and we certainly can’t say it now. Sea level will continue to rise, storms will increase in intensity and frequency and the ocean will go where the ocean wants to go. Even though he didn’t really say it, we like to quote Einstein as saying insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Whether Einstein said it or not, its a good way to look at things.
The response to events like Hurricane Sandy will say a lot about us as a society. Our ability to make hard decisions. Our capacity to plan ahead. Our commitment to future generations. The nature and character of our political leadership. All of these things are subjects for consideration and evaluation. These are not abstract or theoretical issues. They have a real-world effect and we have a responsibility to demand that we cease senseless political debate and start to do things differently-and better. There is a lot on the table here. We’ll continue to come back to this topic because of its importance and because it says so much about how we operate as a society. My mission for 2013 is to motivate visitors to this site to take action and hold our leaders accountable. Come back and check in often for discussion of ways to accomplish that. We can make a difference. There are two ways to deal with hitting yourself on the thumb with a hammer. The first is to put some ice on it after you hit it. The other is not hitting yourself in the first place. This was one shot on the thumb. Let’s try not to hit it again. -Ben Spinelli
Time Has Come Today
The Dirty Work of Government
Its Later Than You Think
Now that the election is over, its time to get back to the business of governing. One of the prime functions of government is to provide the infrastructure that makes our society work. Roads, bridges, electrical distribution networks, and water and sewer facilities are all vital components of a healthy society. When it comes to the environment there are two essential elements of infrastructure that have a direct impact- water in and water out – our drinking water supply system and sewage treatment facilities. Infrastructure is probably one of the least interesting subjects to read about, but it may be one of the most important.
Talking about infrastructure may not have the cache’ of other environmental issues but it is the foundation of how our built environment interacts with the natural world. Where and how we obtain the drinking water that is essential to a functioning society is the hub for most environmental policies. What we do with that water and the impact of our methods of disposal of the by-products of our use of this resource is just as important an issue. When you start talking about water lines and sewage treatment plants, most people’s eyes start to glaze over. That’s unfortunate because the time has come (or has it really passed) for a serious discussion about infrastructure investment.
You may delay, but time will not-Benjamin Franklin
Time to Invest in Infrastructure
772 Communities Across The U.S. Still Utilize CSO’s
We get so lost in discussions of taxation and fiscal policy that we have forgotten basic principles of investment and re-investment in society. We are currently living off of the investments made by past generations and we are ignoring or refusing our obligation to pay those investments forward to the next generation. What’s the big deal? Well aside from kicking the can down the road and saddling our children and grand-children with an almost impossible task of renewing the nation’s infrastructure, we continue to inflict enormous damage on the environment. Over drawing aquifers, outstripping the capacity of water supplies, and disposing of improperly treated or untreated sewage effluent in the country’s waterways is taking a toll. In the current economic climate, nobody wants to discuss investing hundreds of billions of dollars into the unglamorous world that largely lies beneath the ground, out of sight and out of mind.
Narraganset Bay Commission’s CSO Project
The Narragansett Bay Commission recently undertook a massive project to solve the issue of CSO outflows that were seriously impacting the health of the bay. Their solution was to build a huge underground storage tunnel to store storm water until it could be safely released into Narragansett Bay. The cost for Phase I of this project was $350 million. The construction of this 3 mile tunnel underneath the City of Providence eliminated the discharge of 2.2 billion gallons of untreated sewage into the bay each year. An expensive endeavor, but was it worth the price? If you care about the health of the environment it certainly was. However, this isn’t the kind of investment where you get something that you can look at or score political points with. It’s just good sound government.
This is a political issue because this is a government responsibility. This is an environmental issue because every day we fail to address deficient infrastructure is one more day that we continue to foul our waterways or dangerously over-draw our water supplies. Every time there is a heavy rainfall, Combined Sewage Outflows (CSO’s) pour millions of gallons of raw sewage into streams, rivers, coastal bays and the ocean. Inadequate and outdated sewage treatment plants dump under-treated or poorly treated effluent into our waterways every minute of every day. The problem is that there is no constituency for this issue. As long as water comes out of the tap and the toilet flushes, nobody pays much attention to why these things actually happen. Meanwhile, we are oblivious to the self-inflicted looming threat that the failure to modernize the lifelines of our society represents. Without advocates, without a well of campaign cash behind it, without a compelling narrative, and with an expensive solution, infrastructure investment is the most important issue that nobody cares about. Good luck trying to get political leaders to address this unwanted step-child of public policy.
Do The Math
And Up Through The Ground Came A Bubblin’….
The infrastructure issue is, at its root, a math problem. Capital investments, by their nature, are long-term propositions. Large expenditures that are paid for over a period of years. The theory underlying these undertakings is that projects with multi-generational life spans and multi-generational benefits will be paid for over multiple generations. It makes a lot of sense. The scope of the necessary investment can be assessed and a rational financial plan for renewing and paying for a modern infrastructure system can be put in to place over a period of years. However, it takes someone to make the initial investment and set the wheels in motion. The problem is that nobody wants to take on the political risk of fulfilling this obligation. If it’s a 30 year undertaking and we waste a year, it’s just become a 31 year project. If we wait another year, it becomes 32 years.
I wish I had some pithy one-liner or a dramatic story to tell you to pique your interest. The problem is that this is just the real nuts and bolts of governing a modern society. Nothing exciting. Nothing glamorous. Unless you’re a water engineer or a long-term planner, you will never give a thought to these issues. Besides, our politicians are just so much more entertaining when they talk about things like taxes, abortion and guns that we forget to demand that they fulfill the real obligations of governing officials-make sure society works and make sure we plan for the future. Unfortunately, we can measure the costs of action fairly accurately. We have a very difficult time assessing the penalties for inaction in terms of dollars. So we obsess about the price of fulfilling our obligations, frightened by the financial investment needed, and in the end, do nothing.
Living on the Edge
NYC’s Water Tunnel #3 Under Construction
There are places where environmental infrastructure is being addressed. Aside from the Narragansett Bay Commission’s CSO project, New York City is in the home stretch of a construction project that started in 1970. The massive Water Tunnel Number 3 is scheduled for completion in 2020. A 50-year, $5 billion project that will insure the delivery of clean drinking water to our nation’s largest city. In all 50 states money from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) is leveraged with state funds for local infrastructure projects that address both drinking water and waste water treatment. Unfortunately, its just a drop in the bucket compared to what needs to be done. In reality, even the Water Tunnel Number 3 project was only undertaken because planners and engineers realized that they couldn’t even perform routine maintenance on the existing water tunnels without turning off the tap to 8 million people. We’re just living on the edge when it comes to infrastructure, just one failure away from serious problems.
So, no, this is hardly the most compelling story to tell when it comes to environmental issues. However, its one that we need to drag from the shadows of policy wonkism and out into the daylight for discussion. The next time you hear some politician droning on about taxes and deficits, ask them what they plan on doing about our pending infrastructure nightmare. What will it take? A massive sewage spill? No, we’ve had those and they have hardly raised an eyebrow. The failure of a major city’s water system? That might get some response. The notion that we need to see a major catastrophe before we act is a sad state of affairs, but also an apt commentary on the current state of our politics and our government.
What can we do? Start demanding answers to questions about infrastructure spending. At the very least you will force political leaders to do some research into an issue they would much rather ignore. This is a ticking bomb. Don’t wait until the tap is dry or the toilet doesn’t flush or you notice that a local waterway has taken on a distinctive new odor before asking for action. Politicians won’t react to this issue unless you compel them to. They need to drink clean water too. Give your state or federal representative’s office a call. Maybe we can start a movement.- Ben Spinelli
Seeing Is Believing
Chasing Ice
Stunning Images of Decaying Glaciers
If you have a friend or acquaintance who is a climate change skeptic or denier, do them a favor and treat them to dinner and a movie. Find out where James Balog’s documentary Chasing Ice is screening near you and take them to see it. At worst, you will have a nice meal and spend an hour and fifteen minutes watching a real-life story of determination, effort and passion that is inspiring. At best, you may be able to cut through the political fog that surrounds the issue of climate change and open the eyes of someone to the transformation of our planet’s climate that is taking place right now. Without a doubt you will see some of the most stunning and beautiful photography ever put on film. It would be difficult for any thinking person to walk out of this movie without believing that climate change is real.
Balog set up automatic cameras in Greenland, Iceland, Alaska and Montana to take time-lapse photographs of retreating glaciers. His project, the Extreme Ice Survey (EIS) was an incredibly ambitious undertaking designed to document the melting ice. He and his team traveled to some of the harshest places on Earth to install and monitor photographic equipment that documented the break-up and melting of glaciers at a pace that is greater than has ever been experienced in modern history. One incredible sequence documents the collapse of a section of an Icelandic glacier that is the size of lower Manhattan. (This footage alone makes the movie worth seeing) The physical and technical challenges that were overcome to to make EIS a reality are as much a part of the story as the evidence collected.
Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!-Leonardo da Vinci
Icebergs Breaking Away From A Glacier in Iceland
There is no heavy-handed proselytizing in Chasing Ice and no real politics. There is very little hard-core science, save for a well done segment explaining the scientific significance of deep ice core samples and the correlation between the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases and temperature. What you will find in this movie is the compelling story of photographer James Balog’s efforts to create a diary of images taken over a period of several years. His images chronicle the alarming changes taking place to glaciers in the Northern Hemisphere that are far beyond what he, or anyone, expected when he undertook this mission. Balog has collected a body of evidence that is incredibly convincing because it is simple, factual and authentic. The photographic record compiled by EIS speaks louder and more clearly than any advocate could ever hope to.
Who Are You Going To Believe-Me Or Your Lyin’ Eyes?
Balog opens his narration of the movie with an analogy comparing climate change denial to a patient with an abscessed tooth who shops from dentist to dentist until he finds a doctor who tells him it’s O.K. to leave the infected tooth in place. I believe that climate change deniers are more akin to someone who, having exhausted their list of doctors, turns to their garbage man for a favorable opinion. Why trust science? Balog makes it clear that there is overwhelming consensus among scientists that climate change is taking place and that it is, at least in part, attributable to the activities of man. His photographic record makes it clear that there are consequences that are occurring now.
Anyone with even a rudimentary idea of how to calculate volume should be frightened by the scope of the changes that are taking place. A few back-of-the-envelope calculations will give you an approximation of the amount of water being released by these glaciers into the world’s oceans. The rising sea-levels that will result should make anyone living near the coast, like say in New York City, take notice. But that’s science and climate change is all about politics, isn’t it? If I get an answer that I don’t like, I’ll turn to Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity for guidance. After all, my garbage man said it was O.K to walk around with a diseased tooth. I’m sure that nasty pain will go away soon.
Balog & Members of His Team At An EIS Camera Site
I saw the movie at the Acme Screening Room in Lambertville, NJ. It was a great place to see a movie but, aside from my wife and I, there were only about 20 other people in the theater. This is a movie that needs to be seen by as many people as possible. One of the things that you take away from this film is the sense that it is time for action. A modest start is to see this movie (and take someone with you). You can find a screening near you here. I guarantee that you will be inspired to do something to make a difference after seeing it. If you have any sense of responsibility to your children or to future generations you will be moved to do what you can. Hopefully, its not too late. -Ben Spinelli
Dark, Cold & Lucky
Ironic That The Storm That Devastated The Jersey Shore Was Named Sandy
Hello, This Is Your Wake-Up Call
One week after Hurricane Sandy made landfall along the New Jersey coast, I’ve been exiled to the Center City Holiday Inn in Allentown, PA. Back in northwestern New Jersey my home is dark and cold. In rural areas no electricity means no heat, no lights, no water, no phone, no internet access and, since many cell towers in the region were knocked out of commission, there is spotty cell phone coverage at best. Electric wires are lying across the front lawn and the lines from the road to my house are hanging from branches in the woods; pulled from the poles by several of the many large trees that fell or were snapped in half by the storm’s fierce winds. Gas stations are mostly closed and the few that are open have long lines and limited supplies. Getting anywhere is an adventure as roads are blocked by downed trees, fallen wires and broken telephone poles.
So, after six days of finding inventive ways to cook everything that was left in the refrigerator on the barbecue grill, chainsawing my way to the road, sleeping in the cold and flushing the toilet with pots of water from the bathtub, it was time to get out-of-town. The closest available hotel rooms were in the Lehigh Valley in eastern Pennsylvania and a trip to a patch of high ground yielded the cell coverage necessary to make a reservation . We packed the car and headed west leaving our venture into the world of Little House on the Prairie behind. Arriving back in the 21st Century, with T.V., high-speed internet, heat, showers and actual modern plumbing, we were able to find that as difficult as our week had been, Sandy had been much harder on other parts of the region. The stunning video of the damage and the effects on the coastline of New Jersey and even in New York City were sobering.
A New Inlet Between Barnegat Bay & The Atlantic At Mantaloking, NJ
The havoc and destruction that the nearly 90 mph wind gusts wreaked on inland NJ were mild compared with the effects that were visited upon coastal areas of the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic U.S. by a record storm surge. My home is intact. My family and friends are well. The rainfall in our area was modest, so flooding was not a problem. Eventually, the electric lines will be rebuilt or repaired. I spent Saturday afternoon at a college football game watching Muhlenberg pull out an exciting 24-17 overtime victory over Ursinus. I then went to a nice warm hotel room where I could enjoy what, after a week in the cold and dark, were the modern marvels of a hot shower, television and, free wi-fi internet access. I’m writing from the relative comfort of a hotel room hanging out with utility workers from Ohio and Indiana who have come to help repair the storm’s damage to the power grid. My interaction with Sandy was annoying and distressing, but at its worst, an inconvenience. I was lucky.
I will skip over the technical analysis of the storm. That’s better left for meteorologists and climatologists, you know, the people who actually know what they’re talking about. We do know that record high tidal surges were recorded all along the east coast. The pictures of the Hudson River pouring into the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel in Manhattan or of swaths of shore homes wiped from the barrier islands speak for themselves. The sight of the roller coaster at Seaside Heights, NJ sitting in the ocean will likely be an iconic image for generations. But the real lessons from this storm won’t be found in the damage. They won’t be found in the words of politicians reassuring victims. They won’t be found in the empty arguments of right-wing talk show hosts. The lessons won’t even come from the deaths of over 100 people in the storm’s path. No, the lessons will be in how we react as a society and whether or not we start to take planning for a changing climate, and a changing world, seriously, rationally and intelligently.
NYC’s Flooded Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel
History doesn’t repeat itself – at best it sometimes rhymes-Mark Twain
So, what does this have to do with politics and the environment? For starters, we better start paying more attention to reality with our policy-making and less to political considerations. Last week when the long-range forecasts first started showing Sandy making landfall along the New Jersey coast I started writing an article about the last great storm to batter the mid-Atlantic in March 1962. 50 years ago, the Ash Wednesday storm lashed the east coast from North Carolina’s Outer Banks to Maine. Although there was serious damage all along the storm’s path, like Sandy, it reserved its biggest impacts for New Jersey’s barrier islands. However, the 1962 storm was much different in character. That storm was a more typical Nor’easter that sat off the coast and caused onshore winds to drive water landward for three days. This was the mid-Atlantic’s storm of record for over half a century. As it became more and more evident that Sandy, along with its storm surge, would indeed make landfall somewhere along the New Jersey coast I put the article aside to await the actual results. While there are many similarities between the 1962 storm and Sandy, there are also significant differences. Those differences are where we need to direct our attention.
After more than 100 years without a land falling hurricane striking the New Jersey coast, there have now been two in two years. We can quibble that Irene, in 2010, fell to just below hurricane strength before coming ashore or that Sandy may or may have not become extra-tropical just before hitting the coast, but the distinctions are only important to the weathermen. Sea level is at least a half-foot higher along the east coast today than it was in 1962 and it continues to rise at a rate of approximately 3 millimeters per year. Summertime ocean surface temperatures in the Atlantic off the northeast coast are rising and remain warmer into the Autumn months. Increased melting of Arctic sea ice has contributed to warmer Arctic air temperatures and the strengthening of high pressure systems in the far north Atlantic that act as blocks for northward traveling weather systems. Theses blocks force the storm track closer to, or actually back towards the East coast of the United States. The intensity and frequency of storms will continue to increase over historic norms and they will affect populated areas again and again. With the higher sea levels, even storms that in the past were ordinary, will begin to have increased effects on coastal areas. We can have all the political arguments we want about whether or not climate change is occurring or if it is the result of man-made activities. Those disagreements will ultimately be resolved, with certainty, by Mother Nature.
Storm Damage Along The NJ Coast From the 1962 Ash Wednesday Storm
When I get back home and things get settled I will return to this subject for a more detailed analysis. Until then, consider the implications from this event for our policies at the national, state and local levels. Our land use practices, infrastructure investments, and the resiliency or redundancy of the structures we rely upon for our modern society all need to be re-assessed. There are an incredible number of cascading consequences from food supplies to adequate drinking water supplies that we must respond to. One storm drove the most densely populated portion of the nation, and our country’s biggest city, back to the 19th Century in a matter of hours. What will happen next time? (And there will be a next time) Before we even begin to address the root causes of climate change and our answers for them, we need to have a day of reckoning where we acknowledge that something is happening and we need to react. That is how rational and intelligent people respond to challenges. One thing that should be clear however is that both time and our luck have run out. Its time to demand that political leaders respond to the reality that we are facing serious and growing threats that we can no longer afford to ignore or treat as just another political issue. The power to make this change lies with us. It’s high time we used that power.- Ben Spinelli
On The Road To Nowhere
Climate Change & Politics
Is There A Difference Between Politics And Professional Wrestling?
Americans have an uncanny ability to politicize almost anything. You can be sure that once politics enters a discussion, no matter how important or complex the subject may be, it’s all downhill from there. There is no better example than the nation’s debate (or perhaps more accurately, lack of debate) over climate change. What began as a serious scientific inquiry into the state of our planet and it’s future has devolved into political theater. A question that cries out for sober and thoughtful inquiry has been reduced to the level of professional wrestling. I’m talking old school, WWF, good guys vs. bad guys wrestling. So, while the rest of the civilized world is engaged in an intelligent analysis of climate change and its potential implications, here in the U.S. we’ve turned the consideration of this issue into the equivalent of a steel cage match between Bruno Sammartino and Superstar Billy Graham.
In politics, stupidity is not a handicap-Napoleon Bonaparte
A recent documentary in the PBS series Frontline entitled Climate of Doubt did a far better job of showing exactly how the issue of climate change became politicized and eventually neutralized as an issue than I could ever do here. You can watch the show online here and it is well worth the hour you will spend. We consider ourselves an educated and progressive society, yet our actions indicate just the opposite. You may find a lot of what you see in this documentary aggravating or disturbing but nothing should be more disquieting than the statement ” the politics have gotten to the point where people just don’t want to listen to science”. That alone should send a chill down your spine.
Politics Will Not Change the Answers
The course that the debate over climate change has taken is just another sorry episode in modern American politics. The notion that a scientific question has a political answer, or more precisely, a partisan political answer, is insulting and dangerous. Basically, the polarization of factions in our country has made it acceptable to reject logic and reason because your political opponents have embraced them. Combine this with a concerted public relations effort made by special interests, namely the powerful oil and gas industry, who stand to suffer some degree of financial harm if the U.S. takes suggested measures in response to the threat of climate change, and we have a situation where scientific inquiry has been reduced to just another opportunity to divide the electorate for the advantage of one side or the other. This is mass national derangement.
The frightening part of this debate is that we have evidence that climate patterns are changing. What we don’t have is conclusive proof that these changes are either induced by human behavior or not part of the normal climate cycles that the Earth undergoes periodically. We just haven’t been able to accumulate enough scientific data over a long enough period of time to come up with answers to those questions with absolute certainty. We also have not had the capability to measure and analyze complex atmospheric dynamics for a long enough period of time. However, that doesn’t mean it’s not happening. Further, the evidence that we do have, including analysis of ancient deep ice core samples, sure does seem to point in the direction that something unusual is happening and that we have a hand in it.
Climate Change Opinions By Party
The ability to exploit this uncertainty has been a boon for the climate change deniers. Combine this with the fact that Democrats were quick to react to climate science and the stage was set for a partisan split. After all, in today’s political world, if Democrats are for it, then Republicans have to be against it. A recent poll by the Pew Research Center showed a wide gap between Democrats and Republicans on the issue. 85% of Democrats, compared with 48% of Republicans felt that there was substantial evidence of climate change. Its amazing. Political affiliation can account for a nearly 40% difference of opinion on a scientific matter. You can check out the full text of the Pew report here. Do you think we could get a similar split of opinion if Democrats came out supporting a study that found that gravity exists?
One of the principles that Jefferson, Madison, Adams and the rest of the men who founded this country wanted to guide our national affairs was the belief and reliance on science and reason. I guess they never accounted for the toxic effects of partisan politics. However, the cynical manipulation of public opinion, primarily for the benefit of a very few, is something quite different. It speaks more to a national failure of critical thinking skills and a pervasive sentiment that the present is more important than the future. As bad as the effort to influence public opinion for political or monetary gain may be, our national susceptibility to that kind of control may be even worse. My, how little we have progressed. It’s hard to believe this is the same country that sent men to the moon and has successfully landed mobile probes on Mars.
This approach is the road to nowhere. We are faced with some real policy challenges and threats that may rise to the level of endangering modern civilization. Yet we are paralyzed by a partisan debate. It’s depressing. Whether or not you believe climate change has anthropogenic origins, you should understand that responding and adjusting to things like sea-level rise, changes in precipitation patterns and threats to the food supply are necessary and responsible. Whether or not you believe climate change is even occurring, reduction in reliance on fossil fuels and atmospheric pollution still make sense. Instead we end up addressing none of these issues. Lost in a nonsensical debate over the politics of the situation, we go around in circles while events progress. With a nod to the Talking Heads I suggest that you click here and allow this song to play while you read this article, it should at least put you in the right frame of mind to contemplate what a foolish course we are choosing as a nation. We have got to get past the politics that divide us.
We have got to demand better from our politicians. The good news in that Pew poll was that over 2/3 of Americans do believe that climate change is taking place. That means our national inaction on this issue is motivated by less than 1/3 of the population. That’s unacceptable. We need to stand up for science and reason. We need to require our representatives to get beyond partisanship and take action, or we need to get new representatives. If we are the educated and thoughtful country that we believe ourselves to be, we will do this. If science and reason really do guide our course of conduct we will take the necessary measures to respond to the threat of climate change. If not, then we haven’t really progressed much from the superstitious Dark Ages and we deserve that fate that awaits us. But I’m an optimist and I’m betting that this is not the future that we should expect. However, it isn’t going to just happen. We need to take an active role in creating change and we need to start now.
Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride
Communism Is Just A Light Rail Ride Away!
What is the latest in crazy conspiracy theories? Well, believe it or not it’s the old conservative notion that planning ahead is a good thing. Planning, especially resource based planning, and anything with the word “sustainability” in it has been identified by right-wing factions of American politics as a part of a grand scheme to take over the United States. Yes, sustainable urban planning is all part of a vast plot to impose the U.N.’s Agenda 21 on our nation, and if it hasn’t already arrived where you live, it’s coming soon. Forget the “Black Helicopters”, the invaders will be using hybrid cars, bike paths, hiking trails and light rail lines to infiltrate our country. If you thought that we had a problem with an inability to appropriately plan development, conserve resources and formulate responsible infrastructure investments you were wrong. Planning apparently IS the problem.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former. -Albert Einstein
The conservative movement in America has managed to turn a legitimate policy debate over land use controls and property rights into fodder for the fringe and a cause celebre for the Tea Party crowd. Instead of having an intelligent discussion over the appropriate balance of societal needs and individual rights, you know, like the debates conducted in the Federalist Papers, they’ve decided to take the conversation somewhere else. There’s no need to conduct a rational assessment of our resource capacity compared to anticipated demand, the right-wing has decided that it would be much better to turn an important issue of public policy into an X-Files episode. They have a problem though, the truth most certainly is out there.
The U.N. Is Behind This! You Can Look It Up.
How far has the right-wing fringe pushed this lunacy? Well, farther than you might think. The Republican National Committee actually adopted a “Resolution Exposing United Nations Agenda 21” in January. The State of Alabama adopted a law in May 2012 prohibiting the state, or any of its subdivisions, from participating in any actions directly related to or traceable to the dreaded Agenda 21. Not to be outdone, a visit to the John Birch Society’s web site will provide you with the following analysis:
…UN’s Local Agenda 21 program may already be in your local community, through your home town or city’s membership in ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability. Agenda 21 seeks for the government to curtail your freedom to travel as you please, own a gas-powered car, live in suburbs or rural areas, and raise a family. Furthermore, it would eliminate your private property rights through eminent domain.
This is, after all, the organization that labeled President Dwight Eisenhower a “tool of the communists”, so their ability to spot infiltration by property stealing Bolsheviks is clearly beyond reproach. Tea Party activists have been on an anti-Agenda 21 binge; writing op-eds, letters-to-the-editor and protesting at planning and re-development meetings across the country. There will be no planning for these guys.
The thing is, you would think that an effort that promotes living within our means, accurately forecasting financial needs and obligations and making intelligent and well thought-out land use decisions would find some favor with conservatives. That’s kind of the traditional definition of conservatism, isn’t it? I guess not. Apparently, since the concept has met with the approval of the liberals among us, it must therefore also be evil. Private industry actually has a term for this approach to conducting your affairs. They call it a business plan. But bring this type of analysis to government and it becomes a U.N. plot. Go figure. If liberals are for it then conservatives have to be against it. Simple, isn’t it? So logic and principals be damned, this is America and you can’t make us be smart if we don’t want to be.
Close Your Eyes & Hope For The Best
So, off we go on Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride. So much more thrilling than if we let those dour planners have their say. Do we have enough water for our future needs? Maybe. Maybe not. Clean air, working sewer systems, adequate roadways, sufficient energy sources? Who knows and who cares? Climate change? I’m not even sure it’s happening and we can’t do anything about it even if it is going on. An intact environment capable of supporting human life and meeting the needs of society? Your guess is as good as mine! I’m getting excited just writing this! Life is really an adventure if you don’t know where you’re headed. Why spoil it by trying to plan ahead. Who needs to go to Six Flags for an exhilarating ride? It’s all about the journey, isn’t it?
The problem is that we actually do know where we are going and that, in all likelihood, disaster awaits at the end of this trip. We live in a world of finite resources and an increasing demand on those resources. We’re not exactly careening off into the unknown. A crisis of public health threats, diminished quality of life and economic ruin lurk down at the bottom of the hill by the town dump where this road is leading us. Rational thoughtful people who look at the circumstances that we are facing and conclude that we need to pay attention to the balance between man and nature, between capacity and demand, between where we’re headed and where we need to go, are not plotting the end of the “American Way of Life”. They’re responding in a manner that anyone with a decent survival instinct should understand. Just because they share their conclusions with others, like scientists and planners from the U.N, doesn’t mean they are conspiring on an agenda. Maybe its just that intelligent sane people looking at similar facts and circumstances come up with similar answers. But I guess that’s just crazy talk.
I Don’t Know,
But I’m On My Way!
With the modest efforts we currently devote to planning a future that works, we barely make headway. Abandoning planning as a tool of competent and visionary government policy-making altogether is sheer folly. It reminds me of the The Little Rascals episode where the gang was careening down a hill in a home-made fire truck. As they raced out of control one of the kids asked Stymie, who was steering the contraption, “where are you going?” His response, “I don’t know, but I’m on my way!” is an apt metaphor for our current state of affairs. However, this is a dangerous and irresponsible way to conduct ourselves.
There has traditionally been a lot of tension between environmentalists and planners. In a lot of ways, the recent insanity of the anti-Agenda 21 attacks on planning efforts may prove to be a very positive development. Although the two groups may approach the puzzle of planning a sustainable future from different perspectives, they share a lot of common ground. The rejection of sustainable planning called for by the Tea Party is an attack on both environmental protection and planning. When the cry goes out that “green is the new red”, both groups are being categorized as un-American. The time is long past for planners and environmentalists to come to terms with their differences and concentrate on the values and goals that they share. They’re going to find that for all of the disagreements that they may have on how to accomplish them, their aspirations are largely the same.
Exactly Which Way Are We Going?
Maybe it’s just that going on a trip without asking for directions, no matter how lost you might be, isn’t only a “man” thing, its the American Way. The problem is that this isn’t a trip that we can afford to be lost on and there aren’t any secret short cuts. With a burgeoning world population putting unprecedented demands on the planet’s systems and resources, we need to come to terms with how we live on the Earth sooner rather than later. Future generations are relying on us having at least some idea of where we need to be and how to get there. Instead of wasting time on an inane and ridiculous manufactured debate over the influence of Agenda 21, we need to get to work. In the words of the esteemed World’s Foremost Authority, Professor Irwin Corey, “if we don’t change direction soon, we’re going to end up where we’re going”. You can be certain that if we don’t pay attention, we’re not going to like the destination. -Ben Spinelli
Has Anyone Seen The Environment?
The Presidential Debates are over. The election is two weeks away. Conspicuous, by its absence, has been any mention of environmental issues during this campaign. Not a discussion of policy differences. Not a debate over environmental protection or regulations. Heaven forbid, not a word about climate change. Not a peep from the pundits. Nothing! The discussion of environmental issues has not merely been marginalized in the current election cycle, it has been excluded.
Have You Seen Me?
Oh, the environment has been a bit player in the campaign. A mention of green jobs here. Used as a scare tactic there. The environment has been exploited in the pejorative sense when candidates are talking about jobs in coal country or “energy independence” in terms of oil and gas drilling. In the fight for votes in the all-important swing states, protecting the environment has no role. You would almost think that we have solved the great environmental challenges facing our country. We can move on to other more pressing matters and leave the annoying and vexing questions about the environment in our rear-view mirror.
Sadly, this is an indicator of just how far environmental protection has slipped in the hierarchy of political issues. Demonized by one major political party, abandoned by the other, the environment is an issue that has lost its patrons in the nation’s political leadership. In the cynical world of modern politics, attention to the environment produces neither the votes nor the money to warrant serious attention during the election cycle. We are left trying to deduce where candidates stand and hope that we can make an educated guess regarding which candidate will best serve environmental issues if elected. That’s a heck of a predicament.
Tell Us-No Matter How Bad It Might Be
To paraphrase the old man in A Christmas Story, What has brought us to this lowly state? Unfortunately, there’s no easy answer. There are some prime suspects. The difficult economy makes job creation a priority and environmental protection seem like a luxury. There is the obscene amount of money pumped into the electoral system, particularly from anti-environmental business interests, following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. The Federal Election Commission. A false debate over climate change has, to a great extent, neutralized it as an effective political issue. No matter what the root cause might be, the more pressing issue is that we are here. And, accepting where we are, the most important question becomes “what are we going to do about it?”
Where do we start? The scope of the task can seem daunting and there certainly seems to be far more questions than answers when it comes to figuring this out. However, we can’t be paralyzed by the sheer difficulty of the challenge. It was never politically acceptable for a candidate to be an opponent of protecting the environment. There may have been substantial policy disagreements between candidates over the nature and extent that environmental protections should take, but it was never O.K. to ignore the environment. It’s a sad state of affairs when Richard Nixon looks like an environmental champion when compared to most current day politicians. So task number one is clearly holding elected officials accountable for their positions, or lack of them, on environmental issues.
Time To Revoke The Free Pass
The days of the free pass for politicians, regardless of political affiliation, need to be over. There needs to be a renewed respect, not only for the protection of the environment, but for the political power of environmental issues. At first glance this may seem an impossibility. How can a sector of the electorate that is primarily characterized by enthusiastic, but chronically disjointed and underfunded champions make an impact? How can you fight the powerful monied interests that have captured the electoral process, particularly at the national level? How can you fight the financial power of the Koch Brothers and Super Pacs? The answer certainly lies in solidarity, organization, cooperation and pooling of resources and the power of the message and information. But it goes a little deeper than that. With a closely divided electorate, where one or two percentage points are everything, incremental shifts in support between candidates can have monumental consequences. If environmental issues are perceived to have the potential of changing a substantial enough block of votes, they will garner attention. Making candidates understand that the edge they seek may lie in adequately addressing environmental concerns is not a far-fetched goal. It can be achieved and, because of the importance of moving the needle of support just a little, can actually negate a good deal of the influence of the hundreds of millions of dollars poured into the election system by special interests. This can be accomplished on a very modest budget.
Making it clear that environmental protection is a bi-partisan issue is another important factor. Can you imagine a debate where the two candidates spend time going toe-to-toe trying to demonstrate which of them is a better choice for promoting protection of the environment? People who consider themselves environmentalists are well-aware of the importance of environmental issues and the long-term consequences of the continued failure to solve or prolonged neglect of the problems we are facing. Transferring that knowledge to political candidates, and translating it to political positions on issues, should not be a heavy lift. Raising awareness of environmental issues with the non-environmental voter is just as important. Making the environmental vote a sought after commodity is a big part of establishing the value of environmental issues. On a very basic level, protecting the environment is the right thing to do. Making it also the politically expedient thing to do is the key to success. No candidate, regardless of party, should be comfortable either neglecting the environment or taking positions that are detrimental to protecting the environment. This will not happen unless voters and candidates both value environmental issues and there are rewards, or consequences, for positions on those issues.
Time Is Running Out On This Election
We’re a little late in the game right now for environmental issues to play a meaningful part in the electoral outcome. That doesn’t mean that an effort shouldn’t be made during the last two weeks of the campaign to demand responses from the candidates to important questions like climate change, air and water quality, resource extraction and other problems that we face as a nation. Thoughtful and intelligent consideration of positions on these issues by candidates should be a minimum requirement, regardless of where they may ultimately stand. However, with the debates over and the points of contention having already been defined, the prospects of the environment becoming a meaningful part of the debate are slim. One thing that should be clear, however, is that this must be the last election where environmental interests are not a major part of the political discussion. Left to their own devices, the candidates will not gravitate to this area of policy on their own. The issues are too complex and the answers too difficult for them to venture into the difficult realm of environmental policies without encouragement or the prospect of political reward.
The consequences of continued neglect of the environment are real and potentially grave. The environmental community needs to solve the puzzle of making environmental politics a factor in our electoral process and they need to come up with the answer sooner, rather than later. When it comes to policy, if you take care of the future, the present tends to take care of itself. Getting our focus on the future and adequately addressing environmental issues as part of that strategy can define our generation. We need to get the “missing” environment off the milk carton and into the mainstream of political discussion. Ultimately, it will be how our generation will be judged. -Ben Spinelli
Politics of the Environment 