WolfeNotes.com

Lambertville – New Hope bridge

As flood-waters recede, following a long established pattern, the press seems to be reporting their wrap up stories on hurricane Irene today (e.g. AP story running in Gannett, see: Big floods renew NJ calls for better controls).

Not surprisingly, none of those stories as much as even mentions the relationship between man made global warming and extreme weather events. You know, the long running debate in the scientific community about the influence of global warming on these events.

But that is not surprising, as the press corps (and Republicans) tend to be science challenged and are always way behind the curve. Plus, media institutions are dominated by powerful corporate and governmental interests who do not want that story out there.

But despite this deep denial on the global warming issues, in NJ’s traditional pattern of lurching from drought to floods – and the repeated shore emergency declarations – the media has always included the role of over-development, sprawl, and land use and environmental protections in the flood stories.

But that hasn’t happened this time around – those issues seem to have fallen off the table.

So, before we all move on to the next disaster, I thought I’d jot down a few obvious talking points for my colleagues, who can’t seem to get on the same page:

1. The storm and the flood are NOT acts of “mother nature” or “natural”.

The storm is an example of an extreme  weather event that is made more frequent and severe by man made global warming. The flood is man made due to pervasive alteration of the natural landscape and its hydrology, inadequate infrastructure to manage impacts of this alteration, and poorly planned over-development. Flood risks are significantly man made.

[Update: 9/5/11 – Is this event an example of a synergistic or interactive effects? Global warming induced drought, wildfires, and tropical storm winds? Maybe if Texas Governor Rick Perry just prays hard enough, it will all go away:

Wind-Driven Fires Kill Woman, Child in East Texas

Authorities say the fires were propelled partly by the high winds caused by Tropical Storm Lee. Thousands of acres were burned in eastern and central parts of the state.

2. Natural systems – like forests, wetlands, stream buffers, and coastal dunes – prevent and minimize flood damage.

What is left of those natural resources MUST BE PRESERVED. [Update: 9/5/11 –beach replenishment story mentions dunes.]

3. NJ is the most highly developed state – more pavement, parking lots, roofs, and driveways make flooding worse.

We must STOP developing in the last remaining natural areas and instead shift all future growth into redevelopment.

4. In order to protect natural resources and re-orient development towards redevelopment, we need stronger regional planning and environmental regulation by State government.

5. Our environmental laws and government agencies are under attack by the Christie Administration.

A systematic pattern of budget cuts, deregulation, privatization, and lax enforcement are MAKING FLOODING AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS FAR WORSE.

Now, that wasn’t so hard guys! I mean, after repeated cycles of lurching from droughts to floods, I would assume that you’d be able to deliver these points in your sleep.

But, none of these points are even on the media, policy, or public radar screens – now why is that?

(I mean, Michele Bachmann sure got an awful lot of press for her causal theory!)

[Update: 9/4/11 – Jeff Tittel of NJ Sierra Club doubles down and digs deeper in this Op-Ed:

Remarkably, Tittel manages to ignore the sole threat to NJ drinking water (i.e. Delaware River from NY and PA fracking) and the major policy decision facing Governor Christie (i.e. whether to support flawed DRBC regulations and lift the current DRBC moratorium, or to oppose them and retain the moratorium.)

Tittel well knows that Christie supports DRBC regs, but he inexplicably ignores this issue entirely. So why won’t Tittel criticize Christie for his most egregiously bad act in support of fracking? It seems that the only reason for not doing so is that it would reveal the sham arguments he offers up.

Lets get real. DRBC regulates fracking. Christie represents NJ on DRBC. Yet Tittel ignores DRBC but finds time to criticize Christie for Energy Master Plan rhetoric in support of gas pipelines? Pipeline routes are federally regulated and preempted by FERC. Those decisions were made long ago. So Christie has little if any influence on or responsibility for them.)

While ignoring all these huge threats and policy decisions in the here and now, Tittel now rests his entire case on a grossly exaggerated long run future theoretical threat from tiny Utica shale deposits in northwest NJ. But that argument is bunk.

First of all, Utica shale natural gas reserves are largely unknown, and the technical and economic feasibility of fracking to extract gas is not remotely known. Utica shale is far deeper, far more costly to drill, and far riskier. In contrast, there is a surplus of known, cheaper, more abundant Marcellus gas, making Utica shale a remote and very long term future possibility

But, even if or when Utica fracking does occur, because the Utica formation lies under the Marcellus, it will happen where Marcellus fracking infrastructure is already in place. Therefore, Utica shale NJ fracking is extraordinarily unlikely to occur in NJ, ever. Here’s a geological assessment:

Future Development of the Utica Shale

Two important challenges for developing the Utica Shale are its significant depth and a lack of information. In areas where the Marcellus Shale is present the Utica Shale is probably going to be a resource of the distant future. The Marcellus Shale is less expensive to develop and companies will focus on it before setting their sights on a deeper target with an uncertain payoff.

However, in areas where the Marcellus Shale has been developed the Utica will have an infrastructure advantage. Drilling pads, roadways, pipelines, gathering systems, surveying work, permit preparation data and landowner relationships might still be useful for developing the Utica Shale.

In areas beyond the Marcellus Shale the Utica has already become a primary target. Leasing and drilling are already occurring in eastern Ohio and Ontario, Canada with some wells capable of yielding commercial quantities of gas.

Look, the NJ ENGO community doesn’t have a lot of bullets. So it is worse than a farce to waste them shooting down straw men. – end update].

Republican Presidential candidate Michele Bachmann has drawn strong criticism in media circles for her remarks in support of drilling for oil in the Florida Everglades.

Here’s a sample of the coverage:

Bachmann sparks furor by calling for oil drilling in the Everglades

WASHINGTON — Presidential candidate Michele Bachmann has reignited an intense debate over energy exploration by calling for oil drilling off the shores of Florida and in the Everglades.

The Republican tea-party favorite, who blames “radical environmentalists” for blocking access to energy supplies, said the nation needs to tap all of its resources when and wherever” it can be done responsibly.

“Whether that is in the Everglades or whether that is in the eastern Gulf region or whether that’s in North Dakota, we need to go where the energy is,” she told The Associated Press on Sunday while campaigning in Sarasota. “Of course, it needs to be done responsibly. If we can’t responsibly access energy in the Everglades, then we shouldn’t do it.”

But – oops! – It turns out that, according to a University of Florida professor, there are no oil or gas resources under the Everglades:

Compared to the millions of barrels of oil Americans consume daily, only a couple thousand barrels of oil are produced there a day, said Edward Glab a professor at Florida International University who has 25 years experience in the oil and gas industry.

And it’s relatively low quality stuff that’s hard to get out of the ground and difficult to clean-up, he added.

“The question in my own mind is whether the juice is worth the squeeze,” he said. “[The Everglades] is an extraordinary important and fragile ecosystem… There are other places we could go that would be far less risky with greater quantities of oil.”

So, Bachmann is calling for oil and gas drilling that will never occur.

So, with that absurdity in mind, let’s do a little thought experiment.

Suppose a bunch of Florida environmental groups convinced Florida’s legislature to pass a bill banning oil and gas drilling in the Everglades (but ignored far more real and more pressing issues in the process).

Would that be a credible environmental campaign? Would it be a smart priority to move on? Would it be an appropriate allocation of their scarce political resources?

Would it be a counter-productive target and needlessly play right into the hands of those Tea Party and Republican wingnuts who blame “radical environmentalists” for blocking access to energy supplies (and high gas prices)?

Now, I have no truck with defending Governor Christie, but Bachmann-like foolishness is effectively what happened here in NJ.

Environmental groups and Legislators fought for a ban of fracking in NJ.

Just like the Everglades are not a target of the oil and gas industry, neither is NJ a target of gas frackers.

Now who would have thought that Tea Party favorite Michele Bachmann and NJ ENGO’s share something in common?

[Update – meanwhile, people are being arrested at the White House.]

“C1 buffers create overwhelming development constraints”

BPG Carter Road – vacancy at existing office park (East Track)

Today, just a brief update on the ongoing litigation in Hopewell Township (Mercer County) on the “Berwind Property Group” (BPG) project.

I will do so in a limited way: my intent is only to illustrate the power of a “Category One” (C1) waterbody designation by DEP, using Berwind’s own legal brief to do so.

This story provides important lessons to those who seek to preserve land and protect water quality. In particular, it highlights the power of regulatory tools to preserve land.

In this case, the “de facto” open space created by the C1 designation was far greater than land preserved under a conservation easement deal. Preservation of the conservation easement lands was provided in a negotiation with local conservationists, in exchange for not objecting to the proposed development under the Berwind GDP.

The C1 designation shows that such compromises are not necessary. Regulatory tools can preserve open space at zero public taxpayer expense!

The Berwind case was appealed to the NJ Supreme Court, where a citizens group won a victory. I will not go into the details here, so for background on the project and issues involved, see:

• Hopewell Citizens Group Wins NJ Supreme Court Victory (January 13, 2011)
• NJ Supreme Court Hears Challenge to Massive Berwind Development in Hopewell Township (October 26, 2010)
• Grandfather Loophole guts DEP Stream Protection Plan (June 5, 2008)

As we have written in detail, when the project was before the Planning Board for the final hearing on preliminary site plan approval on May 29, 2008, my testimony was blocked by Berwind lawyers (see paragraph 89, on page 13).

The June 9, 2011 Berwind brief now confirms everything I previous said and had stated in my written testimony that was blocked (with the exception of the Stream Encroachment permit expiration issue, which I had not addressed). Here is an excerpt, starting at paragraph 33 on page 23 (emphases mine):

33. The Plaintiff in this action contends that BPG’s site plan approvals are invalid because, allegedly, the Board should have delayed its vote on BPG’s application pending effective date of the new C1 rules.

34. If it is determined that BPG’s application should have been made subject to the new C1 rules, it will be impossible to construct the Project as approved under the GDP.

35. Moreover,regardless of whether the Court determines that the new C1 rules should have applied to BPG’s application, the new C1 rules will render the Project infeasible for construction.

36. The Stream Encroachment Permit will expire on November 29, 2012, and as a result of NJDEP’s amendments to the C1 rules, as of the expiration of the permit, BPG will be prohibited from developing within three (300) feet (sic) of the Stony Brook tributaries to the extent such development is not completed or substantially completed.

[37]

38. As shown in Exhibit 1, the C1 areas [stream buffers] create overwhelming development constraints on the East Tract ..

[39]

40. In other words, the total C1 classified area (approximately 179 acres), which will otherwise act as de facto open space, is actually more than the acreage of the entire West Tract (approximately 169.5 acres).

The BPG brief then goes on to detail the specific portions of the proposed development – approved by Hopewell Township under the GDP – that are located in the 300 foot C1 stream buffer: 90% of approved building P-1 (81,900 sq. feet); 50% of building P-2 (45,500 sq. feet): 10% of building P-3 (9,100 sq. feet): 30% of Building P-4 (27,300 sq. feet); along with a substantial portion of the road infrastructure and drainage facilities.

Overwhelming development constraints indeed!

Which is exactly why the Christie DEP has killed the C1 program and why we will see no more C1 upgrades (thanks again Dave Pringle!).

Instead of more C1’s and stronger water quality protections, DEP is now working on a new stream classification scheme – apparently with EPA support – to downgrade protections in order to provide waivers and relief from water quality protections.

More to follow on another troubling problem at DEP.

preserved land, by conservation easement (West Track)

Anne Hoskins, PSEG’s Senior Vice President of Public Affairs & Sustainability, has a pretty good Op-Ed running today at NJ Spotlight, see:

Investing in New Jersey’s Energy Future -Prudent investing recognizes that not all energy sectors need the same amount of help, or any help at all

As traditional fossil/nuke dominated energy companies go, PSE&G is fairly progressive.

The perspective Ms. Hoskins offers in this Op-Ed is on the sane side of the spectrum of the business community’s advocacy effort in the contentious debate on the Christie Administration’s Energy Master Plan (EMP) revisions.

Unfortunately, business interests in this debate are dominated by the usual suspects, I will call a cabal.

This cabal is focusing on a shortsighted, commercial electric rate cutting, irresponsible, global warming denying,  anti-regulatory, anti-investment, race to the bottom strategy.

The cabal is led by the Chamber of Commerce, NJ Business and Industry Association, and what is known as the “Large Power Consumers Coalition” (or somesuch – this is the front group for NJ’s big oil, chemical, and pharmaceutical industries who use significant amounts of power).

So, I thought I’d jot down a few items that could cement PSE&G commitment to investments in a sustainable, carbon free, clean energy future.

Readers should jump in and let me know the stuff I forgot to mention in this note:

Dear Ms. Hoskins – this Op-Ed is a thoughtful and good faith effort. There is much that I agree with.

But we encourage PSEG to take Ten additional more aggressive steps:

1) abandon nuke plans – forever
2) abandon long distance transmission plans – forever
3) abandon support of “clean coal” technologies (IGCC, et al) – forever
4) shut down 2 existing coal power plants (Mercer, Hudson)
5) shift billions of dollars in shareholder investments allocated to #1 – #4 to: a) energy efficiency;  and b) local, small scale, distributed renewable power (including residential rooftop and community solar, not just large scale commercial installations at brownfields/landfills, corporate office parks, etc)
6) pledge to phase out importation of coal generated power in 5 years
7) pledge to not accept frack gas supply contracts for existing gas distribution system (and agree to no further gas pipeline capacity expansion)
8.  phase out current ratepayer subsidies for the recovery of costs that should be borne by shareholders, including dereg stranded costs, coal gas site cleanups, and nuclear decommissioning. As you note, a sustainable policy would shift scarce subsidy resources to efficiency and renewables.
9) use PSEG influence, resources, political power, and lobbying clout to enact legislation, regulation and EMP revisions that:

• Legislatively over-ride the Governor’s exit and get NJ back in a strengthened RGGI program, including lowering the cap by at least 40%, increasing the scope beyond electric sector to all sectors; and making emissions reductions mandatory and enforceable by DEP regulation, similar to the Clean Air Act’s Acid Rain Program many tout as a model for RGGI
• expand RPS beyond 30% (with an annual escalator);
• establish a minimum floor price, long term procurement and contracting process for solar, wind, geothermal, and tidal/wave energy;
• restrict the definition of Class I renewables to exclude garbage incineration and other sham energy recovery technologies;
• expand investment resources by increasing the current Societal Benefits Charge
• develop an electric car infrastructure in a decade or less
• bring back Employer Trip Reduction mandates, with enhancements such as telecommute
• expand public investments in public transit, including dedicated and sustainable funding via energy, carbon, or gas taxes
• public investments in energy technology development, including a pilot tidal/wave energy demonstration/feasibility

10) Develop and invest significant PSE&G shareholder resources in a public education campaign to support and achieve the goals of the Global Warming Response Act

Then I would applaud PSEG and support this op-ed!

(readers – what did I forget?)

Back in June, we lamented a huge lost opportunity – idealistically seeing the Obama’s “Advanced Manufacturing Initiative” as a clean energy means to “pivot” from an austerity agenda to a green jobs agenda.

We wrote:

Again, this is a huge missed opportunity, because Obama could have really used this initiative as a way to pivot from his economic austerity (budget deficit dominated) agenda driven by Wall Street finance and Republican Teabaggers, to a major New Deal like Keynesian  jobs and domestic investment program, and political response to: 1) Depression Era unemployment; 2) huge infrastructure deficits; and 3) tremendous renewable energy opportunities.

Little did we think about the rhetorical devices we used (i.e. “pivot“).

Because now, in the wake of the deficit hostage deal, it looks like the “Obama pivot” has become all the rage!

Last week, driving the nascent beltway conventional wisdom and rhetoric, the Associated Press wrote this: Analysis: Obama pivots to new string of problems

But, as Princeton professor and NY Times columnist Paul Krugman notes, unless there is some honest reflection and fundamental change in Obama and what Krugman calls “policy elite” thinking, the much anticipated “Obama Pivot” to a jobs agenda is really looking much more like a divot.

Krugman reminds us that not only has the focus on deficit and austerity been all wrong, the emerging Obama pivot program is likely to be “symbolic” – making Obama “look ridiculous” – and not even close to the New Deal leadership and programmatic initiative that is required. Krugman wrote:

Earlier this week, the word was that the Obama administration would “pivot” to jobs now that the debt ceiling has been raised. But what that pivot would mean, as far as I can tell, was proposing some minor measures that would be more symbolic than substantive. And, at this point, that kind of proposal would just make President Obama look ridiculous.

The point is that it’s now time ” long past time” to get serious about the real crisis the economy faces. The Fed needs to stop making excuses, while the president needs to come up with real job-creation proposals. And if Republicans block those proposals, he needs to make a Harry Truman-style campaign against the do-nothing G.O.P.

This might or might not work. But we already know what isn’t working: the economic policy of the past two years” and the millions of Americans who should have jobs, but don’t.

Amen, bro.