Make Beantown a Green Town

Out of sight and out of mind for most city-dwellers, roof tops comprise one third of a city’s total horizontal surface area. Roof gardens like Fenway Farms are making these forgotten spaces the front line for solving some of Boston’s urban environmental problems.

Fenway Park’s green roof uses the natural capacities of plants and soil to sequester carbon, reduce air pollution, and increase local biodiversity and wildlife populations.  In addition, its 10-inch deep layer of soil can reduce stormwater runoff by up to 80% and improve water quality.

Fenway Farms at grows various types of produce on top of Fenway Park

Fenway Farms grows various types of produce on top of Fenway Park. Green Roofs.

Green roofs also have positive implications for energy use. Acting as an additional layer of insulation, roof gardens keep buildings warmer in winter and cooler in summer, and can contribute to a reduction of city temperatures by weakening the urban heat island effect.  In addition, roof gardens hold a lot of potential for urban agriculture. In fact, Fenway’s basketball court-sized garden produces a whopping 4,000 pounds of vegetables for the park and local community each year. Proactively using roof spaces for food production could help provide relief for metro area residents who are food insecure.

If Boston is going to be a green, sustainable city, maximizing the positive contributions of its roof tops should be a top priority. To achieve this end, we must come together and demand that Boston enact legislation that mandates the creation of green roofs on all new construction projects.

Boston is not be the first city to consider such legislation. In 2009, Toronto passed a municipal bylaw requiring roof gardens on all new construction. France and San Francisco followed suit with their own green infrastructure requirements in 2015 and 2016, respectively.

Luckily, Boston city government is already familiar with the benefits of green roofs. In 2009, the mayor’s office undertook a comprehensive study of optimal green roof design for the Boston climate, and even built a 400-square-foot demonstration roof garden on top of City Hall. Yet, a comparison of that garden to the 35,000-square-foot green roof on Toronto City Hall clearly shows that Boston is lagging behind other sustainable cities.

Toronto City Hall's public roof garden

Toronto City Hall’s public roof garden. Toronto Star.

The main hurdle to scaling up green roofs is their construction and maintenance costs. An extensive garden, with simple grass-like vegetation and a thin layer of soil can cost $10-50 per square foot, while an intensive garden that supports large vegetation and a deep layer of soil can cost up to $200 per square foot and tends to have greater irrigation needs. Of course, these initial upfront costs can have their payoffs: the intensive gardens tend to be most effective in stormwater mitigation and building insulation.

If Boston is going to mandate a green roof requirement — and they should — fairness dictates that they also provide incentives to make it easier for those trying to comply. Incentives will also help to ensure the success of Boston’s green roof program in the same way that similar incentives stimulated the growth of solar technology.  In fact, back in 2009 Boston City Council considered a green roof subsidy based on New York City’s existing program, which provided a $5 per square foot rebate up to $100,000 per project; however, the proposal did not pass. Now in 2016, this incentive program is long overdue.

It is clear that action needs to be taken by our city government to make green roofs an integral part of our city. We must act now.

 

What YOU Can Do:

  1.     Contact Your Representatives

Call or send an email to Boston City Council and tell them you want to see green roofs on new construction projects and existing buildings, and that you support financial incentives for green roof projects.

  1.     Get Involved

Organizations around the city are teaching people how nature-inspired solutions, like green roofs, can solve modern day problems. Reach out to groups like Green City Growers and Biomimicry New England to help out with a green infrastructure project in your community.

 

As Mayor Menino once said, “today, more than ever, we have to be creative and innovative when it comes to environmental issues and energy efficiency.” Requirements and financial incentives for green roofs will encourage the rapid and innovative change necessary to help transform the City of Boston into a model sustainable city. A municipal bylaw requiring green roofs on new buildings, paired with financial support, is the push that designers need to begin thinking of ecosystem benefits as an essential goal in their designs, and community engagement and political participation is can make this change happen.

Massachusetts, Let’s Ban Plastic Bags.

Source: Sanctuary Friends Foundation of the Florida Keys.

Source: Sanctuary Friends Foundation of the Florida Keys.

 

Do you have a plastic bag monster living in your house? For most of us, they reside in our kitchen cupboards, cabinets, or closets. They threaten to entangle us every time we reach in, feeding them our recent haul of grocery bags. But, the days of plastic bag monsters might be numbered if you live in Massachusetts.

Massachusetts could join California and Hawaii in statewide plastic bag bans starting August 1, 2018.

A ban on plastic bags is what Massachusetts needs. Plastic bags can cause costly damages and harmful environmental impacts. It’s also hard to do the right thing as a consumer when disposing of a plastic bag.

Only about 5% of plastic bags are actually recycled, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. We keep these plastic bag monsters in our homes and then bring them all the way to grocery store “recycling” bins since they are not accepted at curbside recycling. In reality though, they often are not recycled because there is a minuscule market for recycled plastic bags. The plastic is collected and compacted into large blocks of plastic, and then land filled.

But if you don’t bring your plastic bags to these “recycling” bins, they may end up polluting our oceans and environment. Typical single use plastic bags are hard to control because they are so lightweight. They easily blow off of landfills and garbage trucks.

Plastic bags are the 5th most prevalent debris found on our Massachusetts coastline. These statistics are not so surprising given that we use 100 billion plastic bags every year in the United States.

Source: Mediterranean Association to Save the Sea Turtles

Plastic debris leads to the death of more than 100,000 marine creatures every year. Sea turtles are especially at risk around Massachusetts because five species of juvenile sea turtles come north to feed before returning to tropical southern waters. Sea turtles choke on plastic bags, mistaking them for jellyfish, their main food source.

Given the option of using reusable bags or biodegradable and recyclable paper bags, do we even need the “paper or plastic” choice?

Bill H.4168, the Plastic Bag Reduction Act, would implement a statewide ban of plastic bags and institute a ten-cent fee on recycled paper bags. This ban would only apply to large stores, like grocery stores, or chains with three or more locations, like fast food restaurants.

Right now, the bill is stuck in the House Ways & Means Committee, where it has been since April. This is the fate that befell a similar bill in 2013, which never made it out of committee. But, the outcome could be different this year.

California paved the way for statewide bag bans and has shown that businesses are supportive of one sweeping law. A major driving force behind California’s statewide ban was the confusion caused by 127 different municipal plastic bag laws. Businesses in California actually supported a ban because a ‘patchwork’ municipal approach to regulating plastic bags was more harmful to their business. Massachusetts has similarly become a ‘patchwork’ of regulations.

Jack Clarke, director of public policy at Mass Audubon, told the Boston Globe, “We’re either going to eventually have 351 municipal restrictions on bags, or we’ll have the commonwealth do one standard that all businesses and industries can match.”

Local bag laws in Massachusetts have been gaining momentum over the past three years, making this current bill’s future more promising than its predecessor. In the last three years, there has been almost an eight-fold increase in the number of municipalities passing bans or fees on plastic bags. This year, Cambridge was the largest city on the East Coast to ban plastic bags. Currently, the city of Boston currently has a committee working towards a plastic bag ban.

You can help keep up this momentum and push the Plastic Bag Reduction Act (H.4168)  forward. Similar to 2013, the powerful Plastics Industry is lobbying against the current plastic bag ban bill in Massachusetts. We need to show committee members that this bill has more people lobbying for it than against it so it can finally move past the House Ways & Means Committee.

Contact your local representative and ask them to express their support for the bill to Brian S. Dempsey, the House Ways & Means Committee Chair, Stephen Kulik, Vice Chair, and Benjamin Swan, Assistant Vice Chair. For a list of talking points, here is a fact sheet by the Massachusetts Chapter of the Sierra Club on the impact of plastic bags. Not sure who your Massachusetts House or Senate representative is? Search for them here.

Sleep In: Get Rid of Traffic with a Congestion Charge

In the bleary pre-dawn hours, thousands of Bostonians roll out of bed, shuffle downstairs, and prepare for the day, hoping to beat the morning rush hour. Just as the sky begins to lighten, they are out the door and into their cars, to inch along bumper-to-bumper to the office, the slow torture lasting oftentimes over an hour. The drive back home is rarely any better.

Last week, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation began implementing a new tolling system along the I-90 Turnpike, tearing down manual toll booths and replacing them with electronic tolling. Construction is expected to take about a year, temporarily snarling traffic, but once the new tolls are completed, they will be able to process cars about four times faster than a human being could. Since Bostonians won’t have to slow down to fish some coins out of the glovebox, traffic should flow more smoothly.

 

Cash will no longer be accepted at the new tolls. Flickr/Nicholas Erwin.

 

The most pressing traffic problem is not how quickly cars move, however, it is how many cars are on the road. But what can Boston do to get people to quit driving, which would improve commuting, as well as road safety and general quality of life in their city?

Since 2003, drivers entering central London between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. on weekdays have to pay a congestion charge of £11.50 (around $14). This may seem like extortion, but the payoff has been tremendous: there has been a 30% reduction in congestion, a 14% decrease in travel time, and a 20% increase in bicycling. In the first decade, over £2.6 billion (more than $3.2 billion) was raised from the charge, about half of which has been reinvested in public transit and other sustainability initiatives.

Flickr/mariondo59.

Flickr/mariondo59.

Those that cannot afford the congestion charge or want to avoid paying it have flocked to other types of transportation, such as rideshare, the Underground, and buses. Because of the revenue stream from the charge, these Londoners enjoy increased reliability and speed of the transit network. Additionally, electric cars and plug-in hybrids are exempt under the Green Vehicle Discount, further incentivizing less-polluting alternatives.

Other European cities, like Milan and Stockholm, have introduced successful schemes modeled after London’s. Beijing and São Paulo are aiming to implement similar projects in the near future as well.

In 2014, Boston was ranked the sixth most gridlocked city in the country, coming in behind Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York City, and San Jose. Rush hour traffic, in which the average Boston commuter spends over two-and-a-half days a year, is more than just an inconvenience — it poses serious economic and public health risks. Wasted fuel and lost productivity due to traffic add up to a more than $160 billion drain on the U.S. economy. For the Boston area, this “congestion cost” is nearly $1,400 per commuter each year. Additionally, every thirty minutes of a daily commute increases the chance of obesity by 3%, and every hour triples the possibility of a heart attack.

Traffic is only going to get worse, not better. By 2030, the number of people commuting by car is expected to increase by nearly 5% over 2010 levels, due to projected population growth. The typical response from traffic engineers is to add lanes to existing highways or build entirely new roads. But as any Bostonian knows from the Big Dig, widening and expanding only leads to more demand. The Big Dig, officially known as the Central Artery Tunnel, served 70,000 vehicles per day when it opened in 1959; by the 1990s, that number was in the 200,000s, and today it’s over half a million. In a centuries-old city with little room to spare, this kind of growth is unsustainable.

It’s time to try something new: a congestion charge. It’s worked across the pond, and it can work in our city too. Sign this petition to let Governor Baker and Mayor Walsh know that you support a congestion charge in the greater Boston area, especially since it means you might just get to hit the snooze button.

Act Now: Support a Stronger Child Nutrition Bill

With your help, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm to School grant program could soon see its funding double.

The Senate and House of Representatives are both reviewing versions of a bill to reauthorize and amend the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010. Fortunately, both versions would increase funding for Farm to School grants from the current $5 million to $10 million annually. Unfortunately, the fate of these bills is not assured. If Congress does not act by January, funding will remain unchanged.

Allowing Farm to School funding to remain stagnant would be a disservice to communities around the nation. Farm to school provides schoolchildren with more locally grown, fresh produce in their cafeterias, benefitting students, schools, farmers, and the community. Fruit and vegetable consumption among students increased up to 1.3 servings per day when farm to school was implemented. Moreover, for every $1 spent on farm to school, $2.16 is generated in local economic activity, because local farmers are more likely to spend the money they receive locally.

Demand for Farm to School grants is already more than five times higher than available funding, so the increase in funding is desperately needed. Along with the funding increase, both versions of the bill also propose other improvements to Farm to School. These include increasing tribal schools’ access to culturally appropriate food grown locally by tribal producers and expanding the definition of those eligible for grants to include summer, preschool, and afterschool programs.

Although the changes proposed for the Farm to School program are similar, the bills currently proposed by Congress contain some important differences. The House version of the bill seeks to weaken many of the beneficial changes made by the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act. If you want to ensure that all of America’s children grow up healthy, show your support for the Senate version of the bill. Here’s a quick breakdown of the two bills:

slide1

Both bills propose changes to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program. The Senate version creates a hardship exemption, allowing schools that are unable to acquire or store fresh fruit and vegetables to use canned, dried, and frozen alternatives temporarily. These alternatives will gradually be phased out over the course of 4 years, at which point all of the produce provided through the program will be fresh.

The House version, on the other hand, would make highly contested change to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program. It proposes striking the word “Fresh” from the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable program, allowing schools to use all forms of fruits and vegetables, including canned, frozen, and dried. These changes would be permanent, unlike the temporary exemptions granted by the Senate version.

Another significant drawback of the House version of the bill is that it would drastically reduce the number of schools that are able to provide free meals to all their students. The Community Eligibility Provision, which was created under the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, allows schools in areas where more than 40% of students qualify for federally reimbursable meals to serve meals free for all students. The House bill proposes to raise this to 60%. The Senate version does not propose any changes to this provision, which has been considered successful in reducing hunger, paperwork, and stigma.

Both bills are already more than a year behind schedule. Congress is supposed to create a Child Nutrition Act Reauthorization (CNR) every five years and the last one, the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010, expired on September 30, 2015.

If Congress cannot agree on one version of the bill, farm to school funding will remain stagnant. Debbie Stabenow, a Democrat from Michigan and ranking member of the Senate Agricultural Committee, warns that, “If folks do try to go backwards, there just won’t be a bill, I can assure you.”

What can you do to ensure that the bill is passed?

Email or call your Senators or Representative to let them know you support the Senate version of the bill, the Improving Child Nutrition Integrity and Access Act of 2016 (S.3136). Find contact information for your Senators here and for your Representative here.

Make your voice heard and support increased funding for farm to school today!

Action needed from offshore wind FANS

The United State’s first offshore wind turbines placed off of Block Island, RI

A tiny island off the smallest state in the United States has become the nations biggest leader for offshore wind. Block Island, RI residents will see 5 new offshore wind turbines begin to generate electricity next month as the first commercial offshore wind farm in the United States comes online. Massachusetts has the chance to follow in Block Island’s footsteps, but to do so we need your help.

A legislative victory this summer makes Massachusetts the first state to require offshore wind development. Governor Baker signed this historic energy bill, committing the state to 1,600 megawatts of offshore wind energy by 2027. This overshadows Block Island’s 30 megawatt wind farm. While those turbines will power 17,000 homes, Massachusetts’s commitment will power 240,000 homes.

Offshore wind energy has the obvious benefit of reducing dependence on fossil fuels and combating climate change. This is imperative as climate change is not a future threat; already the United States has its first “climate refugees.” But offshore wind also has more immediate social and health benefits associated with air pollution reduction. Power plants are disproportionately placed in poor, communities of color and are linked to severe health threats of asthma, respiratory diseases, and cancer. One study concluded almost 60% of annual deaths from respiratory disease nationally can be attributed to just 88 coal-fired power plants. Since race, more than income, influences the placement of coal power plants, communities of color breathe 40% more polluted air. Wind energy does not release the particulate matter, mercury, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxide that contribute to these diseases, offering clean energy and clean air to Massachusetts residents while alleviating environmental injustices.

Developing offshore wind is especially important now as the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant will be taken offline by May 2019. This power plant has been an important part of Massachusetts’s electrical grid. If we are to keep it from being replaced with natural gas generation, it is critical that we install the infrastructure for offshore wind energy as quickly as possible.

There is still much work to be done to meet the goals of the new energy bill. As Massachusetts residents there are steps we can take to support offshore wind. Even with the environment and community health benefits, implementing this legislation will be an uphill battle.

Let us ensure that we follow Block Island’s example and put Massachusetts on course to be a national leader in offshore wind development. Here are three ways to support offshore wind:

  1. Opt into 100% wind energy

As Massachusetts residents we can choose to supply out household electricity entirely with wind energy. Committing to the New England Wind program guarantees that 100% of our electricity is generated by New England wind turbines. Opting into this program adds 3.8cents/kWh to your electric bill but the added rate is 100% federally tax-deductible. This adds about $20 per month to your bill or about 74 cents per day. This decision increases the demand for wind energy, which encourages the addition of more wind energy to the power grid. This increases the demand for all types of wind energy, so we must also  support offshore wind projects specifically.

  1. Support Bay State Wind

We must show our support for newly proposed offshore wind projects, such as Bay State Wind. By actively participating in community discussions, you can make your voice heard and demonstrate your support. Remember, the signed energy bill excludes the Cape Wind Project in the Nantucket Sound because of a stipulation that turbines must be placed at least 10 miles offshore. Offshore wind companies are currently surveying sites further offshore and incorporating input from the fishing industry to find the best locations for turbines. Right now, Bay State Wind favors 15 miles south of Martha’s Vineyard in the open ocean, which will be barely visible on clear days. Attend energy forums in your community to voice your support.

  1. Join MassPower Forward

Mass Power Forward is a coalition of more than 140 environmental advocate groups dedicated to advancing statewide energy policies that support renewable energy. It organizes statehouse rallies, letter writing campaigns, and energy policy forums in communities statewide. “Join the fight” by endorsing the campaign and signing up for their email list so you can stayed informed about current energy legislation and local energy actions.

 

Just caring about environmental issues isn’t enough. We must act and act now to ensure that the offshore wind turbines promised in the recent legislative victory become a reality. We are not Don Quixote so let’s support, not attack, our wind turbines.

Save The Sundarbans! It’s MORE than the Tigers, Although They’re Important Too!

**Did you know that the Sundarbans Reserve Forest is the world’s single largest mangrove forest?
**Did you know that mangrove forests are exceptionally important to a biodiversity of species, including the Royal Bengal Tiger?
**Did you know that mangrove forests also serve as a buffer against climatic events and natural disasters such as cyclones, floods, and storm surges for thousands of families?
**Did you know that the Sundarbans Mangrove Forest is the proposed site for a coal-fired power plant project that will release pollutants like carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, and hydrocarbons?

If you answered no to any of these questions, do not fret! Keep reading to learn more!

Map of Bangladesh showing the boundaries of The Sundarbans Mangrove Forest

Figure 1. Approximately 60% of the Sundarbans Mangrove Forest is located in Bangladesh and the other 40% in India.

The Sundarbans is located at the mouth of the world’s largest delta, the Ganges Delta. The sediments of the three great rivers of Bangladesh: the Ganges, Brahmaputra, and Meghna, form the Bangladeshi side of the Sundarbans. The Sundarbans Reserve Forest is broken up into three different sanctuaries: Sundarbans East, West and South, along the islands and chars of the Khulna, Satkhira, and Bagherat Districts. The name Sundarbans derives from the word “Sundari,” which means beautiful. It also happens to be the name of the largest and most available mangrove trees of that area. In 1997, the Sundarbans was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site, and is home to over 49 species of mammals, 315 species of birds, 53 species of reptiles and 8 species of amphibians, many of which are endangered and on the verge of extinction.

The Sundarbans is also home to over 300 species of trees, including mangroves, which are a predominately salt-tolerant ecosystem, with the exception of the Sundari mangrove that is less salt-tolerant. In Bangladesh, the Sundarbans Reserve Forest provides valuable protection for various nearby coastal communities against climate change impacts by creating a buffer against flooding, tidal surges, tropical storms and cyclones. Climate change-induced sea level rise will cause for these delicate mangrove systems to loss their ability to be a shield against stronger, more intense storms. As such, the loss or weakening of the mangrove forest will escalate the disaster risk for these communities against cyclones and storm surges.

So what is happening in Bangladesh? Why should we be concerned about an ecosystem located thousands of miles away?

In 2010, the Indian National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) and Bangladesh’s Power Development Board (PDB) proposed building the 1,320-MW Rampal Power Station. The coal-fired power plant would be constructed within 14 km of the Sundarbans! Fueling the power plant running will require 4.72 million tons of coal each year. As shown in Figure 2, this will create an unprecedented increase in water transportation of various voyages of 80,000-ton freight ships cutting right through the delicate mangrove forest ecosystem! An 80,000-ton freight ship is the equivalent of a fully stocked 18-wheeler trailer truck.

Map that has several areas highlight to represent the areas that will be impacted by the coal power plant

Figure 2. Map of the Projected Coal Transportation Route Across the Sundarbans

Many Bangladeshi environmentalists are concerned about these coal-carrying ships, as they are often the source of high quantities of fly ash, coals dust and sulfur being released into the air, which can negatively affect the nearby mangroves. There is also a higher likelihood of these ships releasing different types of wastes into the water like coal residue, ballast water, oil, lubricant, etc., which can pollute the water the mangroves are trying to filter. Furthermore, the ships traveling along the Passur River will generate more wave activity that can amplify the riverbank erosion already plaguing the area. Communities in the area are already affected by climate change impacts like flooding, riverbank erosion, sea level rise, storm surges, and so this coupled with the potential impacts of the coal-fired power plant will create a difficult environment for the mangroves to remain capable of being a strong buffer for the people living along the chars and coast.

 Considering the environmental impacts, how has the Bangladeshi government approved of the project?

The Bangladeshi government has rejected various Bangladeshi environmental organizations and climate change experts’ allegations that the Rampal Power Station Project will adversely impact the Sundarbans. Their argument is based on the release of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) conducted by the Bangladeshi government, which states that the environmental impacts of the project will be minimal due to the use of “high quality coal” and that the proposed distance from the Sundarbans is not a problem.

Map that shows the distance between the Sundarbans Mangrove Forest and the proposed site for the coal power plant

Figure 3. Map of Distance between Sundarbans and the proposed Rampal Power Plant site.

Because coal-fueled power plants are known to cause serious environmental harm, it is unusual for a country to give permission to set up a large coal based power plant within 20 to 25 km of a forested, agricultural land, protected, or residential area. As is shown in Figure 3, the distance of the proposed Rampal Power Plant is only 14 km from the Sundarbans, a protect wildlife reserve, which the EIA stated to be a “safe” distance. However, because Bangladesh does not have an explicit law or guideline that gives a minimum distance for coal-based power plants to be constructed from reserves, the project is not subject to any legal infractions.

“There are many alternatives for power generation, but there is NO alternative for Sundarban!” What are the Bangladeshi people doing?

Bangladeshi activists have protested and demanded for the Bangladeshi government to listen to the claims of the Bangladeshi people. Many of the communities most affected by the project are working together on a campaign for the Bangladeshi government to see why the Sundarbans must not be disturbed. With climatic events getting worse every year, they are in desperate need of preserving their strongest natural protection.

Many Bangladeshi environmental organizations have pointed out that the project is in clear violation of the Bangladesh Environment Conservation Act of 1995, which protects reserves, like the Sundarbans, from harmful projects. They have also argued that the Bangladeshi forcefully and illegally acquired 1,834 acres from nearby communities for the project before the Environmental Impact Assessment was even completed.
Protestors are demanding for the Bangladeshi government to explore alternative sites for the power plant or to look for alternative energy projects that will not harm the Sundarbans.

What can you do?

Well, there are many options:

  • One way to be part of stopping the construction of the Rampal Power Station and helping protect countless ecosystems is to sign this petition that will be sent to the NTPC in India.
  • You can also send letters to or call:
    Indian National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC)
    NTPC Bhawan
    SCOPE Complex, Institutional Area,
    Lodhi Road
    New Delhi – 110003
    +91 11 24360100
  • Bangladesh’s Power Development Board (PDB)
    Chairman Office
    WAPDA Bhaban (1st Floor)
    Motijheel, Dhaka -1000
    +95 66 061 -5, Ext. 401
  • Check these links out to find out more about what is happening!

In 2013, Bangladeshi protestors released a call for international support on their campaign against the Rampal Power Plant, to learn more read this.

As part of their call for international support, Bangladeshi protestors have also released this second call for international financial institutions to NOT fund the Rampal Power Plant Project.

The Future of Coal: An E360 Report released this article that addresses the harmful ecological effects the Rampal Power Plant will cause for the Sundarbans Mangroves.

If you have any more questions regarding how the Environmental Impact Assessment conducted failed to address the environmental concerns posed by Bangladeshi environmentalists, read this article.
Remember, talk about this very important issue with a sibling, parent, friend, school, classmate, or community! Be part of the change! Stay informed!

The Underdeveloped United States: Support communities still building their basic infrastructure

In the Midwestern United States, two communities within a day’s drive of each other tell an important story.

Both communities are rural, marginalized, and often forgotten despite decades of resilience. One is a historic black community where 44 percent of the residents live below the US poverty line. The other community is in an American Indian Nation where poverty rates reach 53 percent. Both have basic infrastructure: all buildings are connected by miles of pipe which carry away human waste and carry in water to residents.

Yet, in the black community, people note: “We don’t drink the water here. We buy that at the store.” Three young girls play in the yard of their mobile home, while a wet well overflows with human feces down the road. Without adequate water and sewage systems, businesses can’t develop here– the closest place to buy any food, or water, is miles away at a gas station.

In the American Indian Nation, the story is a little different. Much of their system is newly constructed and generally well maintained. They haven’t experienced notable back-ups in years. The residents, and the tourists, drink the water without any complaints. In this town, which is the largest in the Nation, there’s a gas station, a grocery store, a casino resort, and a few restaurants.

How did this American Indian Nation build such strong infrastructure? One major reason is that these Nations have a support system for doing so.

This support system consists of two primary components. First, a subset of the federal Indian Health Service provides technical assistance to Native Nations across the United States. A certified civil engineer guides and trains tribal employees on how to best operate their waste water and water systems. The IHS also financially assists communities so that they can secure the funds to build and maintain their systems. Second, the US EPA works government-to-government with tribes and provides technical and managerial assistance. For example, when it comes to water, this means that EPA provides lab training to tribal employees so that they can effectively test water to make sure that the water is safe for consumption.

This support system for Native Nations is largely rooted in the federal trust responsibility between the US government and Native Nations, which holds the US federal government legally responsible for protecting tribal treaty rights, lands, assets, and resources . For centuries, Native Nations have been fighting for these protections, and while there is still a lot of work to be done, these laws and treaties have established systems of support for Nations to rebuild themselves. “The generally accepted premise of government responsibility to Native Americans is based upon the destruction of Native American civilization and the poverty and disease which followed in its wake,” says Holly T. Kuschell, professor of law at University of Michigan.

But these systems of support do not exist for rural black communities. Even though they have experienced generations of systematic racism rooted in slavery and the attempted destruction of African culture, these communities are expected to develop infrastructure without such support. They are expected to employ highly-trained operators and secure funding themselves. If their water quality does not meet federal standards, communities will receive a letter stating that they are in violation rather than a helping hand to guide them in the right direction.

We need better support black rural communities that are struggling to build and maintain the basic infrastructure their communities need. The precedent already exists with support for Native Nations, and while these efforts could use improvement, we can use them as a framework for action to support predominately black rural communities. Moving forward, we can make strides to establish these systems of support through the following actions:

1. Throughout the United States, we need to recognize that many rural communities, largely communities of color, are still working to build and rebuild their public infrastructure. Too often, individuals make generalizations by saying, “in the US, you can turn a tap and get clean water.” But this is simply not true, and we need to stop pretending it is.

2. At the same time, we need to call on federal and non-profit organizations to be more intentional about who gets funding and technical assistance– they can’t be colorblind. USDA Rural Development provides over 1.5 billion dollars in loans and grants to support the waste water and water systems of rural communities each year. Further, only a few organizations, like Rural Community Assistance Partnership, provide technical assistance to communities in need. However, the only requirement for a community to receive funding or assistance is that they must be classified as rural. We need to call on governmental agencies and organizations to provide more intentional financial and technical support to rural black communities in the US.

3. Further, establishing systems of support for basic infrastructure is a step forward, but we also need to shift perspectives. Today, many people in the US are quick to blame rural communities of color for poverty, crime, and poor infrastructure without recognizing the history of injustice that has led to these circumstances. Instead, it is important to see the other side of the coin. These rural communities of color have persevered through years of discrimination and racial exodus, and it is time we support their visions, hear their voices, recognize their resilience.

Engage With Humans: Carshare, Buses, and Bikes

Comparison of space taken up by cars, buses, and bikes

 

Comparison of space taken up by cars, buses, and bikes

Comparison of space taken up by cars, buses, and bikes

I went to Copenhagen for 4 months to discover why people there are so happy, since Denmark is continuously ranked one of the happiest nations in the world. I want to share with you a bit of that happiness , and convince you how it can be done in Boston. The most important secret I learned is this: design for human connection.

This is different from the way United States design cities. In the United States, cities have been designed around cars, not humans. In 1909, the First National Conference on City Planning was held in Washington, DC. The vision developed there was an urban freeway to promote transportation all across the United States. This set the tone for the years ahead. The rise of automobiles led to the destruction of neighborhoods caused by new highways, creation of suburbs, and design of downtowns to accommodate parking. Since then, cities are marked by bustling highways, honking traffic, and gray pavement.

A car’s function is to get from A to B, rather than experiencing the space between A and B. When metallic  monstrosities on the streets soar past one another, they never stop to exchange conversation. There are no faces, simply tinted glass shields. Cities dominated by cars are impersonal. Seeing people and forming connections is the initial stage to engage in a community. Therefore, cities’ infrastructure need to be characterized by humans not cars.

The best action to improve human connection is to stop driving, yet that is hard to do without help. Here are some action and app suggestions for embracing alternative transportation to that can enrich human engagement:

  1. Get Collaborative and Carpool

Copenhagen has a 200% tax on cars, which incentives people to stop buying cars. They learned that the fastest way to humanize cities is to drive less. Sharing a ride is an alternative. It can decrease congestion in the city, and all it requires is a little planning! Apps like uberPOOL, Lyft, Sidecar, and Coride.com are all useful apps targeted to Boston. To really make a long-lasting difference, make this a habit and become a carpool commuter.

Carpooling can also reduce traffic. If everyone carpooled just one day a week, the traffic on highways and roads in the United States would be reduced up to 20%. A reduction in traffic is a reduction of your time spent in a metal box, as well as the money flying out of your wallet. An average carpooler can save up to $600 each month spent on gas, tolls, parking, and maintenance. Calculate your savings here.

  1. Get Friendly With Public Transportation

Public transport is another way to connect with the people around you in a less direct way. The act of sharing a public space, recognizing common faces, and acknowledging each other’s presence builds community.

Similar to Copenhagen, Boston has various modes of public transportation that can get hard to memorize. OpenMBTA is a free app that gives real-time Boston MBTA schedules. Nextime provides notifications and alerts, and Nexmap shows the bus, rail, and train routes at every stop.

Energy Comparison for Various Modes of Transport.

Energy Comparison for Various Modes of Transport. Source: https://www.exploratorium.edu/cycling/humanpower1.html

  1. Get Personal and Show Your Face

50% of the population in Copenhagen commute by bike every day all year round, even in the snow. Bikes are wonderful for revealing human faces. A study from students at Columbia University found that the average single-trip distance in a car for a U.S. citizen is 5.95 miles–the perfect distance for a bike ride! RideScout is an app that provides real-time transportation routes. Use this app to get comfortable with riding your bike around the city. Safety is extremely important, so Boston University designed an app, BU Bike Accident Toolkit,  to educate people on bike safety, as well as document accidents.

There are numerous other reasons bikes are beneficial. To begin with, biking is the most energy efficient mode of transportation. Driving a car uses 80 times as much energy in comparison to biking. Second, evolutionary, bikes better fit for our senses than cars. Jan Gehl, a Danish urban designer, argues that humans have evolved to experience the world at 3 miles per hour, aka our walking pace. So, cars going at 30 kilometers per hour blurs our senses, and only something of great length is a little bit exciting. Riding your bike does the opposite. When you bike, you can smell the coffee from the cafe, hear the wind whistle through the leaves, and see the faces of every individual you pass. Biking places you in the environment, tingles your senses, and creates a level of intimacy between you and others on the street. Biking brings the city down to the human scale and forces you to be present.

People love seeing people, just look at all the people at the Boston Common. Hopefully these three tips, with or without the smartphone apps, will make your social experience in a city more valuable. In the words of Jan Gehl, “A good city is like a good party. People don’t want to leave early.”And good parties are the ones with a lot of happy people.

 

#REEWillCleanUpWindEnergy

A singular wind farm can consist of as many as 4000 wind turbines alone!

Dear Proponents of Wind Energy,

Does a society that runs on “clean” renewable energy seem like a dream of the distant future? In the United States, the rise of wind energy may be just around the corner. This year, the U.S. Department of Energy estimated that the amount of power produced by the wind industry will increase by over 350% in the next thirty-five years. This transition is only possible thanks to the adoption of President Obama’s Clean Power Plan in August. The plan, which combats global warming, will reduce U.S. carbon dioxide emissions by 32% by 2030. Over half of these reductions will come from the replacement of fossil fuel power plants with carbon-free wind farms.

Unfortunately, the wind turbines that will lead this energy revolution may not be as “green” as you may think. Proper functioning of the wind turbine’s engine depends upon a rare earth element (REE) known as neodymium, a special metal with permanent magnetic properties. Each medium-sized (two megawatt) wind turbine contains approximately 800 pounds of neodymium! In perspective, if all 49,000 of the existing wind turbines in the U.S. were medium-sized, they would contain nearly 40 million pounds of neodymium, roughly 200 times greater than annual U.S. neodymium consumption!

The mining and processing of neodymium is highly destructive. It and other rare earth elements are only found in low concentrations, and often in the presence of radioactive minerals. That means mining and processing them poses significant challenges. Manufacturers use dangerous chemicals such as sulfuric acid to separate miniscule specks of neodymium from mined radioactive ores. The process creates enormous amounts of waste that range from discarded rock and leftover acid to radioactive material. For example, mining just one ton of neodymium generates one ton of radioactive waste. As a result, the “green” U.S. wind industry creates more radioactive waste than the U.S. nuclear power industry in a single year.

What is happening to this dangerous waste? Unfortunately, most of it is dumped directly into the environment – just not in the U.S. This is because 86% of REEs come from China, a country whose enforcement of environmental and human health regulations is often non-existent. China’s dominance in the REE market is no accident; in the late 1990s, they artificially lowered REE prices for such an extended period that REE mining in other countries, including the United States, went bankrupt. While the U.S. temporarily reopened one of its REE mines in 2011, it went bankrupt earlier this year, and U.S. wind turbine producers remain entirely dependent upon Chinese neodymium manufacturers.

In northern China’s Baotou region, where most REE mining takes place, seven million tons of radioactive, acidic waste (including discarded rock, ores, radioactive materials, and acids) are annually dumped directly into a polluted “waste” lake that is already 100 feet high. This toxic waste has destroyed the lives of local farming communities that border the REE mining and processing facilities, because crops and livestock are unable to survive in such a polluted environment. Humans are also affected. Villagers say that their teeth are falling out and they have unusual skin and respiratory diseases.  Childhood cancer is especially high in these regions. These local impacts are not entirely surprising, given that the lake’s radiation levels are ten times higher than in unaffected areas.

The wind industry advertises itself as “green,” and compared to fossil fuel energy producers, it is. For the wind industry to be truly environmentally friendly in all respects, however, it cannot simply outsource American environmental problems to poor, vulnerable communities in China. If we do not act now, the exponential growth of the U.S. wind industry will result in an expansion of neodymium mining, and the poisoning of many more local communities.

As the largest U.S. wind turbine producer, General Electric (GE) is a key player who can redefine U.S. wind turbine manufacturing processes. The company has already identified a solution to alleviate the environmental costs of REE mining. In 2011, GE announced that REE use could be decreased by as much as 80% by simply altering wasteful manufacturing processes. Indeed, the GE Sustainability website describes the company’s commitment to minimize the environmental impacts associated with the entire life cycle of its products, from mining and manufacture to use and disposal. Despite these claims, GE has yet to substantially reduce REEs in its wind turbines, and has not identified the issue as a high priority.

By applying substantial public pressure to companies like GE, you as a consumer have the power to influence the future of the wind industry. Let GE know that consumers care about the environmental damages associated with wind turbines. Flood GE’s social media (@generalelectric on Twitter, or comment on their Facebook page here)! Spread the word to other consumers with hashtags like #REEwillcleanupwindenergy. And contact General Electrics’ communication and media executives (Shaun Wiggins and Kristine Fallon) in the Energy and Power departments. Let GE know that it must target REE reductions in wind turbines as a top priority. We want truly green wind products!

In the upcoming years, the U.S. wind industry will play an essential role in the battle against climate change. In doing so, however, it risks pouring millions of tons of toxic, radioactive waste into the environment. Tell GE today that #REEwillnotoutsourcepollution. Now is the time to reduce our REE consumption and its waste. Now is the time to clean up wind energy.

#ActOnClimate: What you can do to support our most vulnerable communities

Have you been told that in order to help address climate change you should…

 

-Buy a hybrid car?

-Use eco-efficient light bulbs?

-Install solar panels on your home?

 

But what if you’re a college student like me who doesn’t drive cars or own a home? Outside of these conventional measures, is there anything you can do to take meaningful action to address climate change? Can you still be a part of the solution?

The answer is yes! You can make a difference right away through service–specifically in volunteering to build and strengthen resilience against climate change. As we begin to witness record-breaking heat, more frequent and intense storms and rising sea levels, communities everywhere must invest in durable infrastructure and smart mitigation plans. These actions will help cities, towns and villages to become more resilient, meaning that they will not only be able to withstand the physical impacts of climate change, but will also be able to rebound and grow stronger and more capable as a result of sustainable planning.

But these communities, and particularly those that are most imminently at risk, such as those in coastal and urban areas, cannot do it all on their own. Through the spirit of volunteerism, students and recent graduates who want to act on climate can do so by helping communities strengthen their resiliency to ensure that residents and leaders are better prepared to manage the risks. What’s more, service opportunities are primed for students and college graduates because they can help them develop confidence and build leadership skills before entering the workforce. While scientists may not be able to predict exactly where the next big storm will hit, strengthening resilience through service can ensure communities are well informed, prepared and adaptable in the face of a changing climate. Below are just some examples of some of these service opportunities:

Resilience AmeriCorps                                           

The White House, along with Cities of Service, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Corporation for National and Community Service recently announced 10 cities selected for Resilience AmeriCorps (courtesy of citiesofservice.org)

The White House, along with Cities of Service, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Corporation for National and Community Service recently announced 10 cities selected for Resilience AmeriCorps (courtesy of citiesofservice.org)

As part of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan, Resilience AmeriCorps seeks to build resilience in vulnerable communities that are disproportionately affected by climate change. The two-year pilot program will deploy AmeriCorps VISTA members to ten cities nationwide to help address existing economic or health-related challenges while also helping them better prepare against extreme weather events and other climate-induced stresses. The July 2015 announcement reflects the Administration’s increasing attention to resiliency by improving preparedness and ensuring long-term sustainability. To apply or learn more about AmeriCorps and its new pilot program visit: http://www.nationalservice.gov/programs/americorps

 

Habitat for Humanity                                                            

Students involved in a Habitat for Humanity project (courtesy of Flickr)

Students involved in a Habitat for Humanity project (courtesy of Flickr)

                                                          

You may have heard about this non-profit organization through its engaging outreach efforts on college campuses and in communities nationwide. Habitat for Humanity is another great opportunity to help build resilience particularly in communities already hit hard by a natural disaster. By focusing on home building and renovation, Habitat aims to help families in need of affordable and durable housing to ensure that they can physically and emotionally withstand another disaster. Its work in historically vulnerable urban areas such as New Orleans is notable, particularly since Hurricane Katrina inundated the city and many of its poorest residents. If you are interested in connecting with Habitat through your own community or college campus and like to do hands-on work, find you local Habitat at http://www.habitat.org/.

 

Citizens Climate Lobby                                                   

600 volunteers gathering on Capitol Hill for the Citizens Climate Lobby Conference in June 2014 (courtesy of Flickr)

600 volunteers gathering on Capitol Hill for the Citizens Climate Lobby Conference in June 2014 (courtesy of Flickr)

Not sure what specific community you want to work in? Passionate about the environment and politics? If so, then consider joining the Citizens Climate Lobby, a non-profit organization that works with elected local and federal officials to get the most pressing climate issues on the political agenda. CCL empowers citizens to connect with and influence policymakers by rounding up political support and engaging policymakers in climate action. The non-partisan grassroots organization seeks to bring citizens and politicians together by lobbying, making phone calls, and publishing articles and making presentations. If you want to go beyond just one community and help strengthen resiliency for a swath of areas through policymaking, then CCL may be the right opportunity for you. To learn more visit CCL’s website at http://citizensclimatelobby.org/

 

Although service opportunities are great ways for students and college graduates to act on climate, it is important to note that many people, while interested, may not have the time or the finances to formally volunteer. If this is the case, no worries! You can still make a difference simply by having conversations among community members about the impacts of climate change and identifying areas you may believe to be especially vulnerable. A key element of strengthening resilience and adapting to climate change lies in the willingness to promote well being and foster cohesion among community members so that we are all aware and capable of managing the risks. So sure, you can make sure that your future car or home will be energy efficient, but if you are a college student and you want to make a difference now, go out and get involved in a community either on your own or through a service program. Community-based actions will be much more impactful, engaging and rewarding because they will ensure than we are not only protecting ourselves against climate change, but each other as well.