WolfeNotes.com

We’re Now: “Holding Polluters, FAUX GREEN, And Government Accountable”

“Conservation Resources, Inc.”

Take a good look at the above schematic “business model”. At best, it’s a corrupt and conflict ridden kick back scheme – rife with opportunistic self dealing and public manipulation. That’s how our “intermediary” NJ environmental and conservation groups now interact with DEP and various corporate polluters and developers. This business model was created by one of NJ’s leading “conservationists”, Mike Catania. It’s not from an FBI indictment or mob handbook. More Wall Street finance than Ecology 101.

I’ve long criticized the overt fundraising driven corporate corruption that dominates groups like NJ Audubon (corruption right out in the open and made explicit in their “Corporate Stewardship Council” – and unapologetic “partnership” with and praise of Trump golf courses).

But although I’ve used the phrase “Green Mafia” to describe the corruption, those criticisms were largely anecdotal, not systematic and they were limited to the worst examples and groups (e.g. NJ Audubon, Sustainable NJ, NJ Future, NJ LCV, ALS, et al).

But now, the fundraising and corporate greenwashing model I’ve criticized has been institutionalized and become the governing model of virtually the entire NJ environmental community, with the NJ Chapter of Sierra Club becoming the latest example.

A former corporate lawyer as DEP Commissioner and a former ExxonMobil hack as CEO of NJ Audubon is really bad, but for the NJ Chapter of the Sierra Club to capitulate completely to this corporate agenda takes things to a whole new level of corruption.

Unfortunately, the institutionalization of this abuse forces me to alter the mission and motto here, to expand out accountability work explicitly to include FAUX GREEN:

“Holding Polluters, FAUX GREEN, And Government Accountable”

The schematic above, created a decade ago by Green Mafia Don Mike Catania (of Duke Blood Money), has become the operating business model of virtually the entire NJ environmental community.

The priorities and issues they work on, the issues they don’t work on, the positions they take, the messages, tactics, and strategy they use, the decision-makers they target, etc, virtually everything these groups now do is either directly dictated by, driven by, or unduly influence by three things:

1) corporate and/or Foundation money and fundraising;

2) government grants; and

3) the politics of access – to: a) invitations to the Gov.’s press events; b) to DEP secret meetings; c) to quotes in DEP press releases; d) to appointments to Stakeholder groups or Legislative Task Forces; e) to the “reasonable” voices that get quotes in NJ Media (like NJ Spotlight, who also is beholden to some of the same Foundation and Corporate donors and fundraising objectives).

[Update: the same dynamics have corrupted “the corporate University”:

Academic freedom and free speech on campus serve corporate university imperatives.  It reflects a brand it wishes to sell. For Christian or conservative colleges as for private or public liberal institutions, whose speech and viewpoint is protected or privileged is a byproduct of which students it wants to recruit or donors or foundations it wishes to solicit.   Protecting students from ideas that offend them is less about ideology than it is about recruitment for a target market.

The free speech or academic freedom that is protected is the one that furthers the bottom line of the specific school in question.  Few schools, if any truly have enough money to really be neutral, and in truth, do not want to be. They are selling a viewpoint or perspective and hoping that it will further their market niche.~~~ end update]

I am so glad that Mike Catania’s business model flow chart above depicts the flow of money, issues, access, and policy in green arrows.

That so honestly depicts exactly what is going on, as regulated corporate polluters and Foundation donors “sponsor”, fund and use “Faux Green” groups as intermediaries with the DEP – and the relationships are all reciprocal and transactional.

DEP has the same political motives as the corporate polluters: fund and use the Faux Green groups for green cover.

They even hang out with each other socially now (Eileen Murphy of NJ Audubon is a former long time career DEP staffer and Anjuli Ramos at Sierra Club is also a short term DEP staffer). Look at the smug smiles on their faces:

Does Doug O’Malley – who participated in DEP’s secret briefing to manufacture Green cover on the BASF NRD sweetheart deal – even know that his predecessors and NJ PIRG successfully sued DEP and Ciba Geigy under the Clean Water Act to shut down the illegal chemical discharge to the ocean? (Hello Ed Lloyd – perhaps you should give Doug a call).

The recent controversies over the Pinelands Preservation Alliance and NJ Conservation Foundation aggressively supporting and doing coordinated media events in support of DEP’s logging plan and that DEP BASF secret briefing were perfect examples of how corporate polluters, DEP and Faux Green groups use each other under Catania’s business model.

But the BASF/Ciba-Geigy sellout by Sierra Club was really the last straw for me.

• What The Hell Is Going On At NJ Chapter Of Sierra Club?

And it wasn’t just Jeff Tittel’s leadership that Ms. Ramos-Busot betrayed – the Sierra Ocean County/Shore Group volunteers had long been involved at that site. I was aware of that battle in the 1980’s while I worked at DEP and got involved with Sierra by fighting the Whitman DEP budget cuts that would have eliminated the DEP laboratory that isolated and identified the unregulated chemicals that caused the childhood cancer cluster.

It is remarkable that Ramos-Busot went along with DEP and BASF in sweeping a childhood cancer cluster under the rug, while whitewashing the entire issues of the health risks of unregulated chemicals.

There’s a longtime and huge and legacy of leadership and activism that Ms. Matos casually just threw under the bus to suck up to her corporate DEP Commissioner friend.

I proudly worked at Sierra for almost 7 years as Policy Director (including as Acting Director over a year before Tittel arrived).

Sierra was a leader on so many issues and had enormous influence for good.

I really find it hard to believe that Sierra members and volunteers support the complete co-optation of the organization under its new “leader” Ramos. Here’s an email I got from a Sierra member complaining:

On the logging issue, she has been completely bamboozled by Eileen Murphy in an attempt to form a better relationship with NJAS.  She is now totally aligned with NJAS and repeating their false-science arguments.

Here’s a letter to Sierra National complaining:

I received your membership renewal letter.  While I support the many causes Sierra Club addresses, I will longer continue to contribute at any level, due to the NJ Chapter support for logging in NJ. 

I am very dismayed to see the NJ Chapter of Sierra Club decide to change course on the issue of logging on NJ public lands.  Under Jeff Tittel, the Chapter was clearly and adamantly opposed to this practice.  Now, under Rich Isaac and Anjuli Ramos the NJ Chapter has clearly (and even enthusiastically) stated its support for logging for “ecological” benefits even though the science clearly shows this to be of great ecological harm in many ways and of minimal to no value for even the purported benefit of songbird biodiversity.  Unfortunately, Chapter Director, Anjuli Ramos, who claims to be guided by science, has accepted the false biodiversity arguments of the New Jersey Audubon Society and ignored the science based arguments of SC members and other experts demonstrating the need to prioritize maximal carbon sequestration in order to address climate change, the false notion that ecological restoration requires removal of wood from NJ public forests and the net damage caused by so-called ‘ecological’ logging.

I predicted that NJ Audubon would expand its mission and corporate whoring, but I never thought they could capture and co-opt Sierra, see:

• Under the Leadership of Former Exxon Mobil Hack, NJ Audubon Expands Into Climate And Regulation of Toxic Chemicals

Take a look at the new face of Faux Green – celebrating a BASF corporate PR stunt in East Newark – the guy on the right is DEP Commissioner LaTourette. The attractive women third from the left is Gov. Murphy’s wife. The un-named US Senator next to the DEP Commissioner should be in federal prison.

Murphy DEP Ignores Risks Of Chemical Fires, As They Exaggerate Pinelands Wildfire Risks

(Courtesy Twitter user @bergonfire ) (sic)

The people of Passaic City and emergency responders dodged a deadly chlorine chemical fire bullet last year at the Qualco chemical storage plant.

The Bergen Record reported that the fire could have been “one of the biggest disasters in the Country”:

• Keeping Passaic fire from chlorine prevented ‘one of the biggest disasters in the country’

The fire exposed huge gaps in NJ’s chemical safety and emergency response laws, known as the Right To Know Act (RTK) and the Toxic Catastrophe Prevention Act (TCPA).

I wrote Chairman Smith on Jan. 18, 2022 to urge that those gaps be closed:

Dear Chairman Smith:

I am writing to urge that you direct an independent investigation, conduct open public legislative oversight hearings, and sponsor much needed legislative reforms to strengthen chemical safety and emergency response management planning and regulation, as recently exposed by the chemical fire in Passaic NJ.

As you will recall, as Chairman of an Assembly Committee, you held oversight hearings in the wake of the 1995 Knapp Technologies explosion in Lodi, NJ that killed 4 workers and put the community and emergency responders at risk.

Since then there have been a number of related incidents that strongly suggest the need for strengthening NJ’s chemical safety programs, including the toxic train derailment that forced evacuation of the community in Paulsboro, NJ. …..[…]

On June 2, 2022, Senate Environment Committee Chairman Bob Smith and Senator Pou introduced legislation to close exactly the main loopholes I wrote about  (but not the environmental justice law loophole) and mandate reforms to DEP’s chemical “Right To Know” program, see S2739

Following a pattern, Gov. Murphy responded with a minor and largely symbolic Executive Order #284, that was long on rhetoric and short on substance (while his DEP Commissioner ignored all that and held multiple press events and Zoom press briefing calls exaggerating risks of Pinelands wildfire, while spouting drivel about his deep commitment to environmental justice. I can hardly imagine a greater injustice than a chemical fire that killed people and burned down a city.)

The bill was fast tracked and quietly released from the Senate Environment Committee with no testimony or discussion or media coverage.

But, just as we predicted, it went to Senator Sarlo’s Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee to die, see:

• Did Chemical Industry Lobbyists Kill The Passaic City Fire Loophole Legislation?

So today, we wrote to urge Senate President Scutari to break the logjam in Sarlo’s Committee, post the bill for Senate vote, and get the bill on the Gov. Murphy’s desk:

Dear Senate President Scutari:

We are approaching the one year anniversary of the major chemical fire in Passaic City at the Qualco chemical storage site.

The people of the City and emergency responders dodged a deadly bullet, in what could have been a deadly chlorine fire, described by emergency responder as what could have been ‘one of the biggest disasters in the country’ (Bergen Record).

The fire exposed huge gaps in NJ’s chemical safety laws.

Senators Pou and Smith responded with legislation, see S2739.

The bill was released by the Senate Environment Committee but is now stalled in the Budget and Appropriations committee.

I am writing to urge that you talk to Chairman Sarlo and get the bill moving through the Senate and on the Governor’s desk ASAP.

Let’s not risk another possibility of experiencing “one of the biggest disasters in the country'”.

Respectfully,

Bill Wolfe

(retired DEP planner)

Public Comments Blasted DEP’s Failure To Seriously Tackle The Climate Emergency

DEP Blames PJM For DEP’s Lax Carbon Standards And No Methane Requirements

DEP Revives Debate About a NJ Exit from PJM Grid

After caving to big oil & business community opposition and abandoning proposed boiler upgrade requirements – a positive but very small first step in a necessary building electrification program – on Monday, the Murphy DEP quietly adopted proposed new rules on carbon dioxide emissions from a small set of large power plants.

There was no spun press release touting the DEP’s “historic” achievement on this one.

From what I can tell, the NJ press corps – and especially the self described leading energy and climate policy journalistic outfit NJ Spotlight  – have not reported the story. I guess it’s not allowed to criticize DEP over at NJ Spotlight (they did a second! puff piece on invasives today) – so I guess we must bring you the bad news.

You see, this story can not be written without exposing the total sham of Gov. Murphy’s climate commitments and Executive Orders, repeated DEP press spin, and the toothless Global Warming Response Act.

We explained why the proposed rule was weak in this post last December 2021:

• Murphy DEP’s Proposed New Greenhouse Gas (CO2) Emission Rule Is Far Weaker Than Obama EPA Clean Power Plan

We won’t repeat that criticism here today, other than to warn of one serious mistake a small NJ media outfit already made regarding the carbon emission standards DEP adopted.

• N.J. implements new rules targeting power plants

The DEP’s 860 pound emission standard is exactly like Joe Biden’s marijuana pardon – it applies to no one and will have no impact on greenhouse gas emissions.

For today, we’ only post the “highlights” from the DEP’s response to a storm of criticism in the public comments.

Basically, DEP claimed that the PJM grid made them do it – that PJM has a gun to NJ’s head and will not allow NJ to adopt real carbon restrictions on the power sector.

If that claim is true, then it is a strong argument for NJ to leave the PJM grid and establish its own State grid, an issue that was discussed a few years back and abandoned, see:

• Fierce debate over NJ’s clean-energy goals centers on possible abandonment of regional power grid

Here are the critical public comments and DEP’s response that blames PJM – the business community comments also blasted the DEP proposal for having very little impact on greenhouse gas emissions.

(Note: the number after the comment identifies the commenter – see the list of names and numbers at the outset of the document. Read the complete DEP adoption document and response to all public comments. Boldface mine.)

EGU Emission Reductions

133. COMMENT: The rules will achieve only a small percentage of the emission reductions needed to meet the 80×50 and 50×30 goals. (31, 40, 43, 63, 86, 88, 108, 125, 138, 140, 144, 155, 163, 181, and 196)

134. COMMENT: Not only will the rules fail to meet the greenhouse gas emission reduction goals set by the GWRA and the Governor’s 50×30 goal, but the rules are counter-productive to those goals. (7 and 65)

135. COMMENT: The rules will not achieve an 80 percent reduction in the State’s greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 (80×50 goal). (3, 5, 8, 32, 44, 66, 68, 73, 81, 91, 93, 94, 99, 105, 108, 113, 120, 141, 142, 158, 182, and 192)

136. COMMENT: The rules only achieve three percent of the reductions needed to reach the 80×50 goal, and the bulk of those reductions would take place after 2030. (9 and 130)

137. COMMENT: The rules will not achieve a 50 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions below 2006 levels by 2030 (50×30 goal) established by EO 274. (5, 8, 43, 52, 67, 68, 69, 74, 76, 79, 104, 120, 126, 133, 138, 143, 152, 172, 173, and 196)

138. COMMENT: The rules only get three percent of the reductions needed to achieve the 50×30 goal and are mostly backloaded for 2035 and beyond. (3, 32, 34, 64, 66, 73, 91, 94, 99, 104, 105, 142, 147, 174, 182, 191, and 192)

139. COMMENT: The rules will be nowhere near effective enough to reduce carbon emissions by 50 percent by 2030. (115, 133, 154, and 191)

140. COMMENT: The Department must propose a better rule in order to meet the 50×30 goal set forth in Governor Murphy’s Executive Orders. (52, 62, 64, 74, 100, 121, 125, 130, 162, 164, 172, 174, 183, 188, and 191)

141. COMMENT: The rules do not even mention the 50×30 goal. (3, 32, 34, 66, 68, 73, 91, 94, 99, 105, 108, 112, 113, 125, 142, 147, 182, 184, 192, and 196)

142. COMMENT: The rules will achieve only four percent of the needed emission reductions. (75 and 143)

143. COMMENT: The rules will not achieve the high level of greenhouse gas emission reductions that science indicates is necessary to address the climate change. (5, 10, 65, 66, 67, 74, 86, 107, 138, 167, 172, and 196)

144. COMMENT: The existing New Jersey mandates, per the 2019 New Jersey Energy Master Plan (EMP) Figure 1 Reference 2 curve, do not bring New Jersey anywhere near the target of 100 percent clean electric and 80 percent greenhouse gas emission reductions by 2050. (51 and 119)

145. COMMENT: The rules do not meet or beat the Federal greenhouse gas emission reduction goals. (58, 93, 108, and 135)

146. COMMENT: The Department must strengthen these rules to achieve greater reductions sooner. (9, 40, 93, 98, and 140)

147. COMMENT: The Department should develop rules that will result in net zero emissions from the electric sector by 2035. (81 and 135)

148. COMMENT: The State needs a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions to real zero, not net zero, by 2030 or 2035. These rules fail to meet the needed reductions. (37)

DEP RESPONSE TO COMMENTS (@ page 69)

… as the Department and other State agencies work together to implement comprehensive policies and rules to transition the State’s electric generation sector to net zero, variables, such as the availability of renewable electric generation in New Jersey and the PJM region, storage capacity, and increased or decreased electricity demand must be considered. Ibid. Reducing emissions from the electric generating sector is a complex process, in part because New Jersey is part of a regional grid. For example, even if the Department implemented an emission limit that 90 percent of the State’s EGUs could not meet, demand for electricity in New Jersey would not change. Consequently, PJM, the regional grid, would be required to supply that demand to avoid compromising the reliability of the grid. Demand would likely be met with either a request from PJM that an in-State EGU(s) continue operating beyond its announced retirement date (“Reliability Must Run” or “RMR”) to maintain reliable operation, or with electricity from out-of-State generation that is likely to have a higher rate of CO2 emissions; either outcome would result in greater carbon emissions. The latter is known as leakage. For this reason, the Department has pursued a measured approach to the emission limits. This approach included consideration of an estimated projection of the PJM CO2 marginal rate (as compared to the proposed emission limits), as well as the proposed timing of new renewable energy sources, such as offshore wind. 53 N.J.R. at 1947. A measured approach is necessary to avoid simply shifting electricity supply from in-State to out-of-State EGUs.

That means that PJM has a gun to our heads and that PJM – not the NJ Legislature, Gov. Murphy, or the BPU and DEP – sets energy and climate policy in NJ.

That means that public comments are meaningless.

And in addition to dictating NJ’s carbon and energy policies, PJM’s “capacity based location” rules impose over $1 billion surcharge annually on NJ consumers, which is far more than the cost of RGGI carbon allowances and more than the allegedly huge subsidies NJ provides to solar you read about constantly in NJ Spotlight coverage – combined! Worse, that billion dollar surcharge goes to corporate profits and stockholder dividends, not investments in the grid or renewable energy, see:

• The $1.5 Billion Tax You Never Heard Of

That is not democracy, it’s corporate fascism, folks (few people realize that PJM is a private corporation not a public entity, see:

• The Game Is Rigged – PJM In Bed With Fossil Power Corporations

The whole NJ DEP climate program is a sham, as this rule response to comments document itself proves.

Spinning Out Of Control And Believing You Own Bullshit

Murphy DEP Commissioner LaTourette in the creepiest Zoom background ever.

Sometimes my skepticism and sometimes cynicism gets overwhelmed by the Orwellian reality.

Anyone who has been paying attention – and I don’t mean the NY Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, CNN, MSNBC,  NPR, et al – has come to realize Ukrainian President Zelensky is a propaganda artist and gaslighter who has zero credibility among academics and serious people.

His latest stunt before the US Congress was the final act for him, as he destroys his country “fighting Russia to the last man”.

So, today, we create our own inaugural Zelensky Award – and I personally nominate this statement for First Prize:

“Every natural resource of our state belongs directly to the people of New Jersey, and as the trustee of their natural resources, it is our job to make sure that when pollution damages our environment, the people are paid back for the harm to their natural resources,” DEP Commissioner Shawn LaTourette said in a written statement.

“A true turnaround story, this settlement would transform one of New Jersey’s most notorious polluted sites into one of our biggest environmental success stories—one that delivers the natural resource quality that every community deserves, shoulder-to-shoulder with a good corporate citizen determined to repair the environmental damage of our shared industrial past. My sincere thanks to BASF and every partner that contributed to this success for the people of New Jersey.”

It’s a “story” all right – and it is shameful for a DEP Commissioner to elevate a narrative “story” over facts, science, history, and policy.

A “story” dutifully transcribed by Ocean County “news” outlet WOBM:

https://wobm.com/new-jersey-ciba-geigy-update/

We welcome endorsements, testimonials, and additional nominations from our readers and will award the prize on April 1.

Dispatch from the Sonoran – Over and out.

DEP Failed To Consult With And Blindsided Toms River Community 

DEP Whitewashed Childhood Cancer Cluster

DEP Literally Used Green Cheerleaders As Media Promoters

The more I learn of the Murphy DEP’s sweetheart deal with corporate chemical giant BASF at the Toms River Ciba-Geigy Superfund site, the more it stinks to high heavens.

According to DEP documents, DEP provided a “privileged and confidential” power point briefing to select friendly environmental group leaders on Friday afternoon, December 2, 2022, just prior to the DEP’s Monday December 5 press release announcing the deal. Invited and attending the briefing were: 1) Eileen Murphy, NJ Audubon; 2) Taylor McFarland, NJ Sierra Club, 3) Dave Pringle, Consultant for Clean Water Action, 4) Doug O’Malley, Environment NJ, and 5) Stan Hales, Save Barnegat Bay and 6 of their associates. NJ Audubon and NJ Sierra were later provided quotes praising the deal in the DEP’s December 5, 2022 Press Release.

The environmentalists were invited to the briefing by a November 30, 2002 email, which explicitly demanded that the conduct and contents of the meeting be kept secret and “STRICTLY EMBARGOED” (caps in original, boldface mine):

By way of this email, you are invited to a confidential briefing on the proposed Natural Resource Damages Settlement Agreement concerning injuries to natural resources resulting from discharges of hazardous substances at the Ciba-Geigy Superfund Site in Toms River. ….

Please note that the information contained in this email and the additional details that will be provided at the briefing are STRICTLY EMBARGOED until the proposed announcement is published in the New Jersey Register on Monday, December 5.

Let’s break that down before we proceed further:

1) a DEP secret briefing with hand picked environmental leaders is flat out wrong and possibly illegal.

2) DEP conducting a secret briefing with hand picked environmentalist – after failing to consult with or involve the community and local officials in settlement negotiations – is totally unacceptable and possibly illegal.

3) it is corrupt for environmental leaders to participate in such a secret meeting.

4) it is corrupt for environmental leaders to agree to secrecy and to “EMBARGO” information and keep the briefing secret. The whole concept of an EMBARGO for environmental groups is absurd. An “EMBARGO” is a tool for media and agreed to by willing press hacks.

5) it is, at best, extreme DEP gaslighting and total manipulation, to invite environmental leaders to a secret briefing of a final NRD restoration plan after over 3 years of negotiations on and final agreement on the contents of the plan, which is to be released in final form 3 days later.

6) Obviously, environmental groups willingly and knowingly allowed themselves to be used.

[Update – a knowledgeable Trenton source writes to advise that there’s more involved than merely being used as a media cheerleader – NJ Audubon will economically benefit via consulting contracts (that explains all the emphasis in the DEP Plan on butterfly and bird habitat):

Audubon is an active participant they will do consultation on the the site and sierra knew better and wants to suck up. ~~~ end update].

I obtained the DEP briefing documents, meeting invitation, and attendance list for the briefing by filing an Open Public Records Act (OPRA) request to DEP, based upon a Trenton’s source’s heads up leak about the meeting.

As far as I know, based on news reports of criticism of the DEP’s deal by local elected officials, the Toms River community was unaware of and blindsided by the DEP’s deal, and played no role in the DEP’s settlement negotiations with BASF, which according to the briefing documents I obtained, began in 2019 and continued or over 3 years.

Repeat: DEP secretly negotiated this deal with corporate giant BASF for over three years, yet never solicited the input of the Toms River community or the public at large.

Then, after over 3 years of secret negotiation wit BASF, on the Friday afternoon before the DEP issued a Press Release publicly announcing the deal, the DEP hand picked friendly environmental group leaders, provided them a secret briefing, and literally used them as DEP press agents (EMBARGO) and quoted NJ Audubon and NJ Sierra Club praise in the text of the DEP press release!

Finally, by labelling the presentation “Privileged”, DEP attempted to skirt OPRA public record laws and keep the whole thing secret. I only got a heads up by a Trenton leaker. This is disgusting.

All this is a pattern of egregious misconduct and totally unacceptable.

We’ll post the full briefing presentation in our next post, with some initial thoughts about it soon.