COLUMBUS, Ohio – The controversy surrounding the nomination of President Barack Obama's pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency has individuals from both sides of the aisle saying good governance should trump politics.
Thursday, a Senate committee backed the nomination of Gina McCarthy along party lines, a week after Republicans boycotted a scheduled hearing on the matter.
McCarthy served five Republican governors, including former Massachusetts Gov. Jane Swift, who says McCarthy’s work on clean air regulations focused on process and outcomes, not politics.
"She makes sure that the business community is heard and they have a legitimate position,” Swift says. “She listens to legislators and she gets the job done in a bipartisan way, and to me, we need more of that in Washington right now."
Efforts by Republicans to stall the nomination had focused on the EPA's policies rather than McCarthy herself. The nomination now moves to the full Senate, but there's no word on when the vote will be held.
David Green, president of the Lordstown chapter of the United Auto Workers, says fuel standards put into place while McCarthy worked at the EPA are putting people to work in Ohio. He says there’s a need for leaders who support a stronger focus on the environment, because a good environment is also good for the economy.
"It's what people want and there's a stronger focus on our environment today than there ever has been,” he says. “I think it's only going to increase as time goes on. So, that's the right thing, is to have the proper people in place."
As assistant administrator for the EPA's Office of Air and Radiation, McCarthy worked on new policies that will nearly double the fuel economy of new cars and light trucks and cut carbon pollution of vehicles in half by 2025.
Swift was disappointed by the Republican boycott last week. She says both McCarthy and the president deserve an up or down vote on the confirmation before the full Senate.
Swift points out that it was a Republican president who established the EPA, because both parties understood the importance of cleaning up and protecting the air, water and land.
"Protecting the health of Americans,” she says, “is frankly, and should be always, an issue of good governance not an issue of partisanship and political point-scoring."
get more stories like this via email
A new report found four dams in the Columbia River Basin are big emitters of methane.
Research from the organization Tell The Dam Truth showed the four lower Snake River dams in eastern Washington emit the equivalent of 1.8 million metric tons of carbon dioxide each year.
Robin Everett, deputy western region field director for the Sierra Club, said it undercuts some of the claims the dams are helping provide the region with clean energy.
"It's really clear from this report that we have to take this a lot more seriously that there are some real impacts as far as emissions go from these dams," Everett asserted.
The reports showed the dams produce the equivalent emissions of burning 2 billion pounds of coal annually. Defenders of the dams counted they are important for barging and irrigation for the area's agricultural lands.
But Everett pointed out the dams have another effect on the region: they block the dwindling population of salmon and steelhead from traveling upstream on the Snake River. She noted it not only hurts fish populations but the tribes relying on them.
"We have an obligation for them to be able to fish and if there are no fish to fish, we have broken the treaties," Everett contended
Chinook salmon are also an important source of food for orca on the West Coast. Everett added protecting salmon is important for tribes and the region as a whole.
"Our moral obligation to the salmon and the orca that depend on them are met as well," Everett concluded.
Disclosure: The Sierra Club contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, Environment, and Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
A proposed pumped-storage hydroelectric facility for Cuffs Run near the Susquehanna River in York County has been challenged by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.
The foundation filed a motion to intervene in the proceedings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is considering granting a preliminary permit to build a 1.8-mile-long dam for the project.
Harry Campbell, science policy and advocacy director for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, said they are working to stop the project in order to protect the unique Cuffs Run area and its ecological benefits for future generations.
"If approved, this project would destroy it about 580 acres of prime farmland, fields and forests, some of which have not been disturbed in about 100 years," Campbell pointed out. "Those farms, fields and forests exist harmoniously with and in support of a plethora of plant and animal life."
The foundation is circulating an online petition and encouraged Pennsylvanians to provide comments before Sunday.
The stream is home to naturally reproducing brook trout. Advocates worry the $2.5 billion project would also be harmful to the Susquehanna River. Campbell noted about 40 families would be displaced.
"For those who call Cuffs Run home, it's more than just a place to live. It's their heritage and they want it to be part of their legacy," Campbell asserted. "This project just simply is the wrong idea in the wrong place. In order to honor that heritage and that legacy, we need to preserve this area."
Campbell emphasized the Cuffs Run project is about 993 acres of land draining into a 2.5-mile unnamed tributary. He added in terms of stream habitat, the rocks, pebbles and woody material have been identified as among the best in the region for supporting critters living in the water.
Disclosure: The Chesapeake Bay Foundation contributes to our fund for reporting on Energy Policy, Rural/Farming, Sustainable Agriculture, and Water. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Tennesseans want more say in how the Tennessee Valley Authority plans for their future electricity needs and a bill now in Congress could give the public more influence.
The "TVA Increase Rate of Participation Act," would require a more open decision-making process for the utility.
Brianna Knisley, director of public power campaigns for Appalachian Voices, said the TVA is currently developing its new Integrated Resource Plan to meet future energy demands. The bill would require more public participation in the plan's proceedings.
"Right now the stakeholders who get to provide input early on in the IRP process are all hand-selected by TVA," Knisley pointed out. "You can't choose to be in that IRP working group. And those are the only folks who get substantial input in the architecture of the IRP, as it's being designed."
The utility serves more than 10 million people across six states. The TVA said it is reviewing the legislation. A draft of the plan will be published at a later date. The TVA said it already has a "robust stakeholder engagement plan."
After the plan is released, Knisley noted public input happens during what's known as the scoping phase of the National Environmental Policy Act. Open houses are set up, where the TVA answers questions from the public. Knisley encouraged Tennesseans to raise any of their concerns during the public and virtual hearings.
"I think additional public input into our region's long-term energy plan is only going to strengthen outcomes," Knisley contended. "And make that long-term energy plan better meet the needs of the Tennessee Valley, as a whole."
She added it is important for Tennesseans to work with Congress on the best way to improve public input in the TVA decision-making process.
Disclosure: Appalachian Voices contributes to our fund for reporting on Energy Policy, Environment, Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email