Last week, the Philadelphia Inquirer published an outstanding series on Stephen Johnson’s (or, George Bush’s) EPA. Among many other insightful points, John Shiffman and John Sullivan note that for much of the last eight years EPA has shut environmentalists out of the regulatory process, prompting many national environmental organizations to rethink their advocacy strategies. Some have spent more time working directly with major corporations to accomplish pro-environment goals, instead of trying to leverage EPA’s regulatory powers.
A coalition of environmental advocates, including the Rainforest Action Network and NRDC, recently scored a victory by convincing Bank of America to rethink its investments in companies that rely predominantly on mountaintop removal mining to extract coal. For details and quotes from stakeholders, check out Ken Ward’s Charleston Gazette story here. This development provides an interesting study in contrasts.
On the one hand, we have environmental organizations and a major banking organization agreeing that blowing the tops off mountains and dumping the rubble into nearby valleys and streams is unacceptable.
On the other hand, we have EPA marching lock-step with coal companies that rely on just such destructive mining techniques. The day before Bank of America announced its new policy, EPA announced its support for a rule change that will eliminate a 20-year-old prohibition against mining activities that fill valleys or disturb the 100-foot buffer zone around mountain streams.
When Bank of America policy announced its policy, officials with the National Mining Association complained that the bank didn’t consult with them on its policy change. Lucky for them, they didn't have any trouble getting EPA’s attention. NMA was able to schedule a closed-door meeting with OMB before EPA decided on the rule change. (H/T to ProPublica)
In practice, the rule change may be more symbolic than anything. Federal regulators have for years granted mountaintop mining companies exemptions from the buffer zone protections. One EPA study found that from 1985 to 2001 – in large part due to the exemptions – mountaintop removal mining adversely impacted about 1,200 miles of U.S. streams, including complete burial of more than 700 miles. Much of the impact is concentrated in headwater streams, which provide some of the most important ecosystem services. (See Sierra Club’s Where Rivers Are Born).
And, for that matter, the impact of Bank of America’s policy change is hard to predict, too. The Massey Energy and International Coal Groups of the world that are going to lose funding from Bank of America might be able to simply turn to other sources of capital.
But at least someone is putting pressure on the coal companies to use less damaging techniques.
Showing 2,825 results
Matt Shudtz | December 16, 2008
Last week, the Philadelphia Inquirer published an outstanding series on Stephen Johnson’s (or, George Bush’s) EPA. Among many other insightful points, John Shiffman and John Sullivan note that for much of the last eight years EPA has shut environmentalists out of the regulatory process, prompting many national environmental organizations to rethink their advocacy strategies. Some […]
James Goodwin | December 15, 2008
All last week, USA Today published a series of articles detailing the findings of its investigation into the toxic air pollutants afflicting many of the schools throughout the United States. Using models developed by EPA for tracking toxic chemicals, USA Today investigators evaluated and ranked air quality for some 127,800 schools. In particular, these models were […]
Matthew Freeman | December 13, 2008
CPR Member Scholar Catherine O’Neill has posted a blog entry on Marlerblog, discussing the conflict reportedly under way between the FDA and the EPA over whether to stop warning pregnant women against eating mercury-laden tuna. Relying on studies that EPA staff scientists describe as, “scientifically flawed and inadequate,” FDA has forwarded to the White […]
Rena Steinzor | December 12, 2008
President-elect Barack Obama seems close to naming Lisa Jackson, now head of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, to lead the Environmental Protection Agency. Jackson, or whoever ends up getting the appointment, will surely get a raft of advice from friends and closet enemies alike. Most of it will have to do with regulations […]
Margaret Clune Giblin | December 11, 2008
Although it might not quite be the stuff of a Hollywood blockbuster, the tale of the lowly zebra mussel has a critical mass of the ingredients needed for a horror movie – or at least a seriously disturbing documentary. They’re creatures from a different world (that is, ecosystem), they’re amazingly prolific (each female produces 1 […]
Matthew Freeman | December 10, 2008
CPR Member Scholar Frank Ackerman has an interesting piece in the November/December issue of Dollars and Sense magazine. He points out that the opponents of genuine action to prevent climate change have shifted their principal line of argument in an important way. Rather than arguing as they did through much of the 1990s and the […]
Matt Shudtz | December 10, 2008
Sometime this month, EPA is expected to reach a final determination on regulating perchlorate in Americans’ drinking water. Every indication is that the agency will conclude, despite ample advice to the contrary, that there’s no need for a national standard for the chemical – a component of rocket fuel and munitions. That, even though, by […]
James Goodwin | December 9, 2008
One of many areas in which the Bush Administration has sought to throw sand in the gears of the regulatory process is by tampering with the methods of risk assessment used by regulatory agencies as part of their process of gauging how much regulation, if any, is needed in a certain area. More specifically, […]
Matthew Freeman | December 8, 2008
Shortly before Thanksgiving, a quartet of heavyweight health organizations issued their annual “Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer.” The principal finding of the study from the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries is that the […]