DEP Issues Self Congratulatory Press Release For Recognizing The Urban Heat Island Problem They’ve Ignored For 20 Years
Another Example Of Maximal Rhetoric And Minimal Content
Human Health Impacts
Rising temperatures will increase heat stress, especially for vulnerable urban populations, such as the elderly and urban poor. Climate models predict an increase in the number of days per year with temperatures above 90oF in the New York City metro area, with a potentially significant impact on human health due to heat stress… By the 2020s, climate change could result in an increase in summer heat-related mortality of 55% and a more than doubling in related mortality by the 2050s. ~~~ (NJ DEP, 2004)
The Murphy DEP folks are shameless and they think we are stupid.
Just after DEP bowed to political pressure and abandoned a proposed rule to replace fossil powered boilers (the first step in electrification of buildings), and Gov. Murphy ran away from his Energy Master Plan (and climate commitments), in a transparent attempt to change the subject, last week the DEP issued another self congratulatory and substance free press release:
TRENTON – New Jersey’s Interagency Council on Climate Resilience is seeking public input on how the state should address extreme heat priorities and concerns as part of the Interagency Council’s development of a series of plans outlining how state agencies will incorporate climate resilience into their policies, programs and regulations. …
Research summarized in the New Jersey Scientific Report on Climate Change (2020) and the Climate Change Impacts on Human Health & Communities addendum (2022) shows that New Jersey is warming faster than the rest of the Northeast and the world. During summer 2022, New Jerseyans experienced the third hottest statewide average temperature on record since data collection began in 1895. High temperatures — when heat index values exceed 90 degrees Fahrenheit for more than two or three days — are associated with immediate and long-term health concerns, diminished air quality, and increased pressures on food and water supplies.
Notice how DEP cites studies released in 2020 and 2022, thereby creating the false impression that this is a new problem that they have taken leadership on. There’s a pattern here, see:
This one is going the same way as the State Planning Commission’s “Guidance” on warehouse developments – it’s designed to create the appearance of leadership and action while doing absolutely nothing. Designed to fail.
Maximal rhetoric – minimal substance. That is the Murphy DEP’s motto.
Take credit for the work of others – and make it appear that you invented sliced bread – but take no political or personal risks and do no heavy lifting to actually get anything done. All process, no substance. That is the Murphy Administration and LaTourette DEP’s MO.
So let me break down this latest example.
After decades of scientific consensus on identifying a series of impacts of climate change, in a 2004 rule proposal that “first” regulated greenhouse gas emissions, the DEP finally “first” acknowledged the problem of the “urban heat island effect”.
Here is DEP’s 2004 scientific and legal basis for why GHG are “pollutants” subject to regulation under NJ State air pollution laws – from the 2004 rule proposal:
Air Quality Impacts
Rising ambient temperatures will exacerbate the formation of ground-level ozone, which will further challenge New Jersey attempts to meet national ambient air quality standards for protection of human health and welfare. Climate change models predict a significant increase in the number of days above 90oF, which will increase the frequency of high ozone days and enhance the secondary formation of PM 2.5 under these conditions…
Human Health Impacts
Rising temperatures will increase heat stress, especially for vulnerable urban populations, such as the elderly and urban poor. Climate models predict an increase in the number of days per year with temperatures above 90oF in the New York City metro area, with a potentially significant impact on human health due to heat stress (Kinney et al., Climate Change and Public Health, 2000). By the 2020s, climate change could result in an increase in summer heat-related mortality of 55% and a more than doubling in related mortality by the 2050s (New York Climate & Health Project, Assessing Potential Public Health and Air Quality Impacts of Changing Climate and Land Use, Columbia University, 2000). […]
Did you get that?
DEP documented huge increases in mortality – and that these deaths would be borne disproportionately by the poor and elderly.
So, did the Gov. and DEP declare an “emergency” and take immediate and bold action to reduce the risks? (I guess only exaggerated risks from black bears rises to an emergency with these cowards).
No, DEP did NOTHING FOR 20 YEARS.
Nothing. Despite the fact that greenhouse gas emissions were now legally regulated as “pollutants” and environmental laws and DEP regulations provided authority for DEP to not only regulate emissions, but to mandate “mitigation” of the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions.
DEP issued thousands of air pollution and land use permits over this 20 year period. Every single one of them could have included “mitigation” requirements to offset the impacts of development, including carbon emissions.
That kind of regulatory “mitigation” would include many things, including requirements to plant trees, design buildings, revise development plans, and acquire carbon “offsets” to mitigate carbon emissions and urban heat island effects
But while DEP did nothing to reduce emissions or mitigate the impacts of emissions, DEP did plenty to ignore, deny, downplay the problem and tell the public that they were aggressively responding – and the environmental groups either did nothing or praised DEP for that.
I wrote about that DEP failure a decade ago:
People living in urban areas, especially children, the elderly, and the poor, are most vulnerable to rising heat
In a 2014 followup, I urged that legislation be amended to begin to address the problem:
2. Recognize urban “heat island” and related energy, clean air, public health, environmental justice, and aesthetic benefits of an urban forestry program
The basis for these recommendations is provided here:
3. Establish an urban forestry program and set a time bounded numerical planting goal – 1 million trees in NJ’s cities.
Urban forestry is justified not only by science and public health, but by environmental justice, redevelopment, and aesthetic concerns.
I demanded a commitment to plant a MILLION trees in NJ cities. (That million tree proposal got no support from Legislators or even environmental or environmental justice groups. None.)
And that million tree commitment I demanded was just for funding and planting by the DEP’s urban forestry program. Of course, DEP had regulatory power to “mitigate” far more than this.
So, after 20 years of neglect, one would think that DEP would issue a public apology for failure, not some Orwellian memory holed self congratulatory press release.
Just two weeks ago, DEP issued another press release and held an event in Trenton, using their environmental puppet friends to claim that planting just 1,000 trees in Trenton would be “transformational”. (We blasted that, citing NJ Spotlight’s story:
In Trenton, the city government will work with the New Jersey Conservation Foundation to plant 1,000 trees in neighborhoods that have few or no trees. The project, called Throwin’ Shade – Greening the Capital City, won a grant of almost $1.4 million, and aims to trap carbon, reduce the urban heat-island effect and reduce stormwater runoff.
“We believe this project can be transformative in our capital city where residents are experiencing disproportionate impacts of climate change,” said Jay Watson, the foundation’s co-executive director. “Urban neighborhoods are dealing with the heat-island effect that causes higher ambient temperatures than in suburban and rural areas.”
Once again, a case of maximal rhetoric and minimal substance.
Even worse, not only is DEP attempting to erase the past and falsely claim leadership while doing virtually nothing.
The Murphy Administration’s Interagency Council on Climate Resilience has actually been a huge political and bureaucratic barrier to progress on climate action. They also have emphasized ineffective voluntary, market based, local, and non-regulatory policies and programs.
Let me offer just one example:
Back in 2014, the Pinelands Commission finally pledged to incorporate climate change in the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan (CMP) see this post:
the Pinelands Commission, in The Fourth Progress Report on Plan Implementation (September 2014), first directed staff to develop climate policies and amend the Comprehensive Management Plan (CMP) to address climate risks and impacts. (see Action Plan Table on p. 166):
“The Commission will evaluate what options are available to address climate change through the CMP and in cooperation with other agencies.”
But the Commission still has not delivered on that 2014 commitment. Why is that?
The Commission is a participant in the Murphy Administration’s Interagency Council on Climate Resilience.
Politically, it is not permissible for the Commission to get out in front of the Governor or the Murphy administration on any climate issue.
As a matter of policy, Pinelands Commission regulatory mandates under the CMP are discouraged. That small bore incremental regulatory role is reserved exclusively for DEP.
So the Murphy Interagency Council has effectively blocked and slowed progress on climate by the Pinelands Commission, despite the fact that the Commission is an independent agency under law.
Of course, all this science, history and regulatory reality is obscured by the highly spun and misleading DEP press release.
That’s just how Commissioner LaTourette rolls.
Pingback: WolfeNotes.com » Beyond Gaslighting And Tokenism: NJ Conservation Foundation Flat Out Lying About DEP Urban Tree Grants
Pingback: WolfeNotes.com » Time To Expand NJ’s Lame “No Net Loss Reforestation Act” To Address The Climate Emergency And Environmental Justice