The Greener Apple https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple Where Students Hold the Government Accountable for the Environment Fri, 18 Dec 2009 20:33:29 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3 https://files.eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/wp-content/uploads/var/www/webroot/ROOT/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2016/01/15140022/mhc_logo_NEW-favicon.png The Greener Apple https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple 32 32 INFORM https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/2009/12/18/inform/ Fri, 18 Dec 2009 20:33:29 +0000 http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/?p=318 image001by Mya Marshall

Who is INFORM?

“INFORM is a non-profit environmental organization dedicated

to educating the public about the effects of human activity

on the environment and on public health.”

– www.informinc.org

image003INFORM is a New York City based non-profit organization that was founded in 1973 by Joanna D. Underwood (right), under who the organization became one of the major forces in influencing decision makers about the need for active measures regarding environmental issues. After leaving INFORM in 2004, Underwood went on to become the founder and president of Energy Vision, another non-profit organization that analyzes and promotes “ways to make a swift transition to pollution-free renewable energy sources and clean, petroleum-free transportation fuels for the green cities of the future.” (Energy-Vision.org).

As is stated on INFORM’s website, the organization is dedicated to educating people on environmental issues and practices that can make a difference in our ecological footprint. INFORM researches various environmental issues, their causes and their effects and then creates various educational resources, such as reading materials and videos, to increase awareness, spreading the word to the public, businesses and governmental outlets. INFORM also creates resources that can give people the opportunity to create meaningful changes within their lives and businesses.

Who is involved in INFORM?

INFORM consists of a small staff of people, including many with histories of involvement in environmental efforts and non-profit organizations, utilizing their experience to make INFORM’s mission a success. Two of the organization’s more important team members are Virginia Ramsey, INFORM’s Executive Director, and Bette Fishbein, INFORM’s Senior Fellow.

Virginia Ramsey began with the organization in 1975 working as the assistant to founder, and then president, Joanna Underwood. Ramsey returned to INFORM in 2004 as the Director of Development after working for various other non-profit organizations and tackling issues such as hunger relief, low-income housing, as well as the environment. When Joanna Underwood resigned from her leadership position in 2004, the Board of Directors chose Ramsey to become the new leader of the organization, anticipating the positive changes her experience would be able to bring to the organization.

image005Bette Fishbein joined the INFORM team in 1990 and has directed various research projects since, including waste prevention and public policy programs to promote reduction and recycling. Fishbein has written and contributed to numerous INFORM publications, some of which have led her to become considered one of the leading experts on the concept of extended producer responsibility (EPR), a “cradle to grave” concept. Her long-term experience and expert leadership of INFORM’s programs make her a valuable asset for the INFORM family.

In addition to a devoted and experienced staff, INFORM makes strides in their environmental efforts through working in conjunction with a number of various other environmental organizations, including the National Wildlife Federation, World Wildlife Fund and various educational outreach organizations.

What environmental issues do INFORM tackle?

INFORM has developed numerous programs over the years targeted toward addressing specific environmental issues. One of INFORM’s ongoing initiatives is to promote extended producer responsibility (EPR). A “cradle to grave concept,” EPR deals with the responsibility of a company to know about a product during all the stages of its lifecycle, through production, transportation, treatment, storage, and most importantly disposal of a product.

Another one of INFORM’s initiatives, called Cleaning for Health, was geared toward protecting the environment, as well as building occupants, against the dangerous effects caused by hazardous chemicals found in cleaning products. INFORM joined forces with the American Lung Association of New England, Association of Vermont Recyclers, Alliance for a Clean and Healthy Vermont, Coalition for a Safe and Healthy Connecticut, the RI Committee on Occupational Safety & Health, Healthy Schools Network, the American Federation of Teachers, and others to carry out efforts for this program. An important resource involved in this initiative was the toxic chemical report Cleaning for Health: Products and Practices for a Safer Indoor Environment, issued in August of 2002.

image007An important part of the Cleaning for Health program was the Cleaning for Healthy Schools Toolkit webinars (web-seminars) series. These webinars serve as informative resources to protect children in schools by reducing their exposure to toxic chemicals with the use of green cleaning products. Each webinar has a slightly different target audience, reaching out to all of the parties involved in creating cleaner school environments a successful endeavor. The series of webinars are: Cleaning for Healthy Schools- What is it? – For all audiences, Getting Started- The school building walk-through; tips for parents and communities, In-School: Initiating a Cleaning for Healthy Schools Program- what schools need to know, and Chemicals/Hazard Communication: your health and right to know – for workers.image010

Between 2004 and 2005 the Cleaning for Health program succeeded in helping “77 institutions in the Northeastern prevent over 56,000 pounds of toxic chemicals from entering the waste stream.” (Informinc.org). The Cleaning for Healthy Schools Toolkit can be accessed at http://www.cleaningforhealthyschools.org/.

How does INFORM accomplish it’s mission?

Since it’s founding in 1973, INFORM has compiled over 100 informative reports and fact-sheets addressing various environmental issues such as business and environmental integration, preventing industrial toxic hazards, and trends in alternative fuel use. Post-dated reports and fact sheets are available to the public on the INFORM website. The organization has also released various publications on issues such as cell phone waste and sustainable transportation. All of INFORM’s publications target a range of audiences from individuals, to communities, even to businesses and policy makers. More recently, INFORM has been utilizing media tools such as video and their website to aid their activism efforts.

image012The Secret Life Series is a relatively recent video series targeted toward consumers to expose the shocking lifecycle of everyday products and show the extreme impacts of the use of these products and their lifecycles. Aside from providing perspective on pressing environmental issues, these videos also offer simple ways for the everyday consumer to use less and recycle more with suggestions such as using a sponge to clean up a spill instead of a couple of paper towels, or buying FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) approved recycled products. So far in the video series, INFORM has released The Secret Life of Paper, and The Secret Life of Cell Phones. The Secret Life of Beef is scheduled to be completed this winter.image013

In June, The Secret Life of Paper was one of only two environmentally based films chosen to be one of the 12 films in the 9th Annual Media That Matters Film Festival (a film festival screened nationally and internationally for a full year and reaching an estimated worldwide audience of 1 million). The festival also awarded the film with The Rethinking Resources Award.

image016INFORM also plans to launch a new public education campaign in the end of this year. The campaign, titled INFORM on the Move/Do you want to know a secret?, would be targeted to New York City’s more than 200,000 public transportation commuters. Using advertisements with striking graphics and shocking statistics, INFORM hopes that this campaign can increase public awareness to environmental issues and spur more people to take action.

All of the resources that INFORM develops are targeted to promote knowledge in both public and private sectors, as well as attempt to spur meaningful action, responsible consumerism, and recycling.

INFORM Menus for Change

One of INFORM’s efforts at increasing public awareness to environmental topics is the Menus for Change event, a breakfast or luncheon at which a discussion of an important environmental issue is discussed. Past Menus for Change topics have included The Politics of Climate Change, Environmental Threats to Children’s Health, and Shareholder Action: Moving Corporations Toward More Responsible Environmental Practices. INFORM works together with organizations like As You Sow, The New York League of Conservation Voters Education Fund, and the Environmental Protection Committee to coordinate these events and recruit members to speak about the selected topics.

How is INFORM involved in environmental public policy?

INFORM’s research, programs, and reports have triggered various strides in environmental public policy, oftentimes being one of the first parties to call attention to various issues. Some of the more notable influences that INFORM has had in public policy were their suggestions resulting in the creation of the EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory, “a publicly available EPA database that contains information on toxic chemical releases and waste management activities reported annually by certain industries as well as federal facilities.” (EPA.gov), and various INFORM chemical research having led to the 1990 Pollution Prevention Act, which required “the Environmental Protection Agency to establish an Office of Pollution Prevention, develop and coordinate a pollution prevention strategy, and develop source reduction models. The act requires owners and operators of manufacturing facilities to report annually on source reduction and recycling activities, and authorizes EPA to collect data collection on pollution prevention.” (EOEarth.org)

What’s so great about INFORM?

INFORM’s environmental research and efforts have created a real impact and fostered a much greater awareness among the public about the environmental issues that we are facing everyday. Various federal agencies and prominent organizations have recognized INFORM’s achievements. The following are just some of the awards granted to INFORM between 1976 and 1997.

1976: National Energy Foundation Award:

Received for Energy Futures, the first in-depth public report on 200 companies involved in researching and developing new energy sources.

1987: US EPA Region 2 Environmental Quality Award

1992: US EPA Administrator’s Award

Received for national leadership in pollution prevention, especially for inspiring the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 and recommending the creation of the Toxic Release Inventory in 1986.

1992: US EPA Region 2 Environmental Quality Award

1993: President’s Council of Environmental Quality Award

Received for planning the first 100 percent natural gas bus fleet in the US.

1994: Consolidated Edison of New York’s Enlightened Energy Award

Received for energy conservation efforts, which included implementing energy efficiency improvements in their own office.

1994: City Club of New York’s Earth Day Award

Received for leadership in finding solutions to the city’s municipal solid waste problem.

1997: American Society for Public Administration, New York Metropolitan Chapter’s Excellence in Public Service-Outstanding Organization Award

How does INFORM get people involved?

Being very focused on getting the public involved in the environmental effort, INFORM offers many ways in which people can become involved. Firstly, INFORM has a subscription list that people can sign up for to get regular updates about the organization’s campaign progress, recent news, events, and ways to become involved. The organization also has contact information posted on their website for people who are interested in volunteering directly with INFORM. Past volunteers have helped with event planning, fundraising, communications, research, and media outreach.

On a smaller scale, INFORM offers tips on how anyone can become an “everyday environmentalist” by doing small things and simply becoming better educated. Some of the suggestions they offer on their website are to reduce the amount of resources you use, recycle things that can have a prolonged lifespan, and to spread the knowledge you learn to others to make small-scale impact become large-scale. Some other tips they give are to give back to the environment by volunteering with an organization like Million Trees NYC, shop organically to know that your products were brought to you in an environmentally friendly manner, and to by a conscious consumer by researching online about products you use to see what kind of an impact they have on you health and the environment. INFORM also lists green businesses that people can turn to for greener service and to produce a greener impact on the environment.

INFORM’s environmental impact is vast and covers many fields. Engaging public, private, and policy sectors of the population with information and research, the organization is succeeding in its attempt to do its part to tackle our environmental issues, in addition to getting others involved. Thanks to INFORM, we are a few steps closer to tackling all of this:

image017

]]>
Council on the Environment of New York City https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/2009/12/18/council-on-the-environment-of-new-york-city-2/ Fri, 18 Dec 2009 20:19:25 +0000 http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/?p=305 Council on the Environment of New York City
by Sharon Steinerman

The Council on the Environment of New York City, better known as CENYC, was formed in 1970 by an Executive Order of New York City Mayor John Lindsay. It is a non-profit privately funded citizens organization in the Office of the Mayor. Committed to improving New York City’s environment, CENYC focuses on four special areas of interest. CENYC is dedicated to making New York City’s neighborhoods greener through the creation of various gardens around the city, has created greenmarket and new farmers development projects, educates students on the importance of environmental activism, and advances waste prevention and recycling programs (CENYC FAQ Website). Through these four areas of activism and the programs that have gone towards meeting these goals, CENYC aims aim to make a positive impact in the lives of New Yorkers and the various communities of New York City.

CENYC has put a lot of effort into making New York City’s communities greener, literally. There are several programs of CENYC that work towards the goal of creating parks and gardens in New York City. CENYC’s Open Space Greening (OSG) program enables communities to “build, manage, and sustain community gardens and other open spaces” (CENYC Open Space Website). The Open Space Greening program was founded in 1975 by Liz Christy. Since then, the Open Space Green program has worked to create and rejuvenate over 60 community gardens across New York City. Today, the OSG program works with high schools, public housing associations, and community organizations to turn empty spaces into community centers, such as parks, gardens, and playgrounds. People from the same communities as well as from different neighborhoods are encouraged to work together to build these areas up and to interact with one another in these spaces, once they are completed. The OSG program holds workshops that show people how to plan and create these parks and gardens, and also provides services, tools, donated plant material, and open space planning/mapping information, as well as other services. In addition, the OSG program has begun bringing rainwater harvesting to many community gardens since 2001 (CENYC Rainwater Website). Partnering with GreenThumb, CENYC founded the Water Resources Group, which aims to promote water conservation in New York City. The program is responsible for building rainwater harvesting systems in gardens around New York City; to date, 48 community gardens in all five boroughs have had rainwater harvesting systems installed. Rainwater harvesting is a system that collects rainwater from nearby roofs and uses it to water the plants in a garden, which is a convenient system for gardeners and reduces the strain on the city’s water supply. In addition, rainwater harvesting can help lessen the level of storm runoff. In all, the rainwater harvesting systems divert over 500,000 gallons of rainwater each year. In 2006, CENYC’s rainwater harvesting builders received the Environmental Excellence Award from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. The Open Space Greening Program and its use of the rainwater harvesting system is one of the ways that CENYC is turning New York City into a greener place.

image002image004

In addition to the OSG program and its implementation of the rainwater harvesting system, there have been several other programs started by CENYC that are turning New York City into a more garden-friendly area. CENYC’s Plant-A-Lot (PAL) Project works “to build, maintain, and rejuvenate community gardens and other neighborhood open spaces” (CENYC’S PAL Website). This project helps with the design, construction, planting advice, and other technical assistance needed to create and maintain community gardens. In addition, the PAL project provides materials such as soil, trees, flowers, vegetables, benches, tables, gazebos, and other materials to these gardens. The PAL project is responsible for the creation and maintenance of over 60 gardens in New York City. The PAL project also hosts an annual plant and bulb sale, which enables community gardeners to purchase plants at wholesale prices. Over a hundred organizations purchase various plants from this sale, that go towards community gardens and other public green projects. Another program started by CENYC is the Grow Truck (CENYC Grow Truck Website). The Grow Truck delivers and loans out garden tools and plants to community gardeners, schools, and neighborhood block associations in all five boroughs, and can be used to deliver donated materials to various neighborhood gardens and green spaces. Currently, CENYC is working on three gardens: Phoenix Gardens in Brooklyn, Wishing Well Garden in the Bronx, and Generation X Garden in Manhattan (CENYC Current Projects Website). CENYC works on bringing gardens to New York City in numerous ways, including the Plant-A-Lot project and the Grow Truck.

image005image007

CENYC is also responsible for the creation of farmers markets in New York City, through its Greenmarket program. Greenmarket is a program run by CENYC that “promotes regional agriculture and ensures a continuing supply of fresh, local produce for New Yorkers” (CENYC Greenmarket Website). Founded in 1976, the Greenmarket program helps support local business by giving New York’s farmers a chance to sell their produce. In addition Greenmarket preserves farmland and helps provide fresh farm-grown products to New Yorkers. One of the most famous farmers markets started by Greenmarket is the farmers market in that operates four days a week in Union Square. Currently, almost 200 farmers make use of the various farmers markets started by Greenmarket around New York City. There are 46 markets in the five boroughs, 16 of which operate year-round. Over 250,000 people frequent the markets every week in peak season. As a part of the Greenmarket program, the New Farmer Development Project (NFDP) was created in partnership with Cornell Cooperative Extension’s NYC Program in 2000. The NFDP “identifies, educates, and supports immigrants with agricultural experience” by enabling them to become local farmers and assisting them in the purchase of small areas of land on which to start farming (CENYC’S NFDP Website). The NFPD provides training and education, small loans, mentorship, and a system of support for immigrant farmers. Currently, farmers who have taken part in NFPD sell their produce at over 40 farmers markets. The Greenmarket program has worked with New York City’s youth, by creating Youthmarket in 2006 (CENYC’s Youthmarket Website). Youthmarket both enables New York City’s younger generation to plan and operate a farm-stand business and educates them about the importance of a nutritious, healthy diet. Youthmarket brings fresh produce to neighborhoods in the five boroughs that may have limited access to these items, and also allows children to earn money and learn skills needed for running a small business. Currently, Youthmarket includes nine markets around New York City. Through the Greenmarket program, which has expanded to include the New Farmer Development Project and Youthmarket, CENYC has brought various farmers markets to New York City.

image009image011

CENYC also has taken a role in providing an environmental education to students in New York City. In addition to the Youthmarket program, which teaches students about small-business maintenance and healthy living, two other programs created by CENYC provide students with an environmental education (CENYC’S Environmental Education Website). Created in 1978, Training Student Organizers (TSO) teaches students in grades 6-12 to “organize and participate in environmental improvement projects in their neighborhoods, schools, and homes.” Students study issues such as climate change, water and air quality, urban sprawl, and resource conservation. Students then use this information to work on projects to benefit their communities. In the 2007/2008 school year, 825 students from schools in four boroughs and the Catskill Watershed participated in TSO. They worked on projects such as planting trees and other plants, removing invasive species of plants from city parks, studying bird patterns, surveying the city for hazardous conditions, building solar energy houses, and distributing information about the important of alternative energy and energy conservation to members of their community. In addition, students who participate in TSO learn skills such as public speaking and letter writing, and learn about how city government functions. Another education program started by CENYC is the Learn It, Grow It, Eat It program. This program, which was started three years ago, is currently housed in four high schools and three community gardens in the Morrisania section of the South Bronx. The program focuses on improving student’s health through education about healthy eating and nutrition, and provides students with healthier food options in their schools and communities. Students are encouraged to improve their diets. In addition, students are taught to educate others in their school and community about eating healthy and where to get healthy foods. In 2006, 48% of students who participated in the Learn It, Grow It, Eat It program increased their consumption of healthy food items, while 86% decreased their consumption of unhealthy food items. As part of the Learn It, Grow It, Eat It program, students also learn about health and food safety issues, such as pesticides and pollution, and focus on alternatives to mainstream food distribution, such as farmers markets and growing food in community gardens. Students also are given spaces in community gardens to begin growing their own food, and, in the past, have planted garlic and vegetables. CENYC’s education programs, Training Student Organizers and Learn It, Grow It, Eat It, have taught New York City’s youth about the importance of environmentally friendly living and eating.

image013image015

CENYC has also been instrumental in encouraging New Yorkers to recycle, and in teaching them about why recycling is so important. The Office of Recycling Outreach & Education (OROE) was formed in 2006 when New York’s City Council passed Mayor Bloomberg’s Solid Waste Management Plan, which also included plans to transport New York City’s waste out of the city on barges, instead of by truck (Waste Age Magazine Website). OROE works in all five boroughs of New York City (CENYC’s Office of Recycling Outreach and Education Website). The program makes an effort to get New Yorkers to participate more actively in the city’s curbside recycling programs. This is done on a community-by-community basis. In each neighborhood, members of OROE work “to identify the specific challenges to recycling in a neighborhood and address those needs with targeted workshops for tenants and supers, community events centered on education, and special collection programs for textiles, electronics, and compost.” The program also works to increase awareness of recycling and waste prevention in general. OROE offers several free services. One free service is the providing residential buildings with Residential Recycling Audits, which are used to help evaluate the building’s current recycling programs and identify areas where these programs can be improved. Another free service OROE provides is recycling workshops, which teach the tenants and staff of apartment buildings the “best methods, requirements, and importance of recycling.” In addition, these workshops provide information on waste reduction, reuse, and composting programs offered in New York City. OROE also conducts special seminars for building superintendents on the importance and methods of recycling. In addition, since 2007, OROE has created clothing and textile recycling collections. These drop-off sites, located at some of CENYC’s Greenmarket locations, have diverted thousands of pounds of material from landfills. OROE has also been instrumental in the establishment of community “stop ‘n swaps.” These are community-based events where people can come and trade old, unwanted items and clothing. This encourages material reuse and helps with waste prevention. Items left over after the event are either recycled or donated for reuse. In addition, OROE, in a partnership with Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer’s Go Green programs in three neighborhoods, has begun a CFL recycling program. This program, making use of a grant from Next Level for Recycling, makes it easier for New York City residents to recycle their used, unbroken CFLs (compact fluorescent bulbs) by creating several locations in Manhattan specifically for CFL recycling. OROE is also responsible for hosting many events around the five boroughs that teach people the importance of recycling, and the best and easiest ways to do so. OROE, started by CENYC, has been a major force when it comes to teaching New York City residents the importance of recycling.

image015image017image019

As has been illustrated, the Council on the Environment of New York City, better known as CENYC, has been instrumental in environmentalist action in New York City. It is responsible for many programs that have made New York City more environmentally friendly. Its focus on community gardens and open green spaces has led to the creation of many community gardens and parks around the five boroughs. CENYC’s creation of farmers markets around New York City has improved small businesses and helps provide fresh produce to people living in the city. CENYC’s educational programs have taught students how to eat healthy and the importance of being environmentally friendly. Lastly, CENYC’s recycling programs have made recycling a more prominent issue, and have taught people around the five boroughs the importance of recycling. All in all, CENYC has been an instrumental group in New York City, and its environmental practices and policies have been important in making New York City a much greener place.

“Community Gardens.” CENYC. Web. 02 Nov. 2009. <http://www.cenyc.org/openspace>.

“Current Projects.” CENYC. Web. 02 Nov. 2009. <http://www.cenyc.org/openspace/plantalot/latest>.

“Environmental Education.” CENYC. Web. 02 Nov. 2009. <http://www.cenyc.org/ee>.

“Frequently Asked Questions.” CENYC. Web. 02 Nov. 2009. <http://www.cenyc.org/about/faq>.

“Greenmarket Farmers Markets.” CENYC. Web. 02 Nov. 2009. <http://www.cenyc.org/greenmarket>.

“Grow Truck.” CENYC. Web. 02 Nov. 2009. <http://www.cenyc.org/openspace/growtruck>.

“NFDP.” CENYC. Web. 02 Nov. 2009. <http://www.cenyc.org/greenmarket/nfdp>.

“Office of Recycling Outreach and Education.” CENYC. Web. 03 Nov. 2009. <http://www.cenyc.org/oroe>.

“Plant-A-Lot.” CENYC. Web. 02 Nov. 2009. <http://www.cenyc.org/openspace/plantalot>.

“Rainwater Harvesting.” CENYC. Web. 02 Nov. 2009. <http://www.cenyc.org/openspace/rainwater>.

Ursery, Stephen. “New York Mayor Unveils Solid Waste Management Plan.” Waste Age Magazine. 8 Oct. 2004. Web. 03 Nov. 2009. <http://wasteage.com/news/New-York-Mayor-Solid-Waste-Management-Plan/>.

“Youthmarket Farm Stands.” CENYC. Web. 02 Nov. 2009. <http://www.cenyc.org/youthmarket>.

]]>
Natural Resources Defense Council https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/2009/12/18/natural-resources-defense-council/ Fri, 18 Dec 2009 20:03:18 +0000 http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/?p=303 Natural Resources Defense Council

]]>
Greenpeace International https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/2009/12/18/greenpeace-international/ Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:56:39 +0000 http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/?p=298 Kleercut: Kleerly a Success
by Melissa Williams

Nothing on Earth is infinite and we all should do our part to sustain and preserve Mother Earth. As one of the many species that occupy this planet, we should come together to find ways to keep the Earth clean. Environmental Sustainability is an important aspect of protecting the Earth. This term is defined as devising sustainable developments for the environment, which consists of the compromise of environmental, social, and economic demands, which are also known as the “three pillars” of sustainability. In correlation, environmental sustainability takes into account future generations and making sure that developments that are intended to help the environment do not compromise their needs. Environmentalists that work to preserve the environment ultimately work towards fulfilling this concept of environmental sustainability. Many professionals contribute an immense amount of their time and energy to aid environmental protection efforts.  Many individuals focus on preserving particular ecosystems and environmental species and others focus on the entire preservation of the Earth. These individuals go on to establish successful organizations. One organization that has made a tremendous impact on the environment and peacefully continues to make a difference in all parts of the world is Greenpeace International. As this organization grows each day, more and more people join and contribute to combat various environmental issues.

Greenpeace International was created in 1971 by a small group of environmental activist from Vancouver, Canada who shared the vision of a “green and peaceful world”[1]. The very first issue that they decided to take action against was the harmful United States nuclear testing that was occurring in Alaska. By putting their lives in danger and peacefully protesting an act that they deemed harmful to the environment, they were able to bring attention to this issue and gain the backup of other activists and ordinary people around the world.

One particularly important issue that Greenpeace decided to take action against was the depletion and destruction of forests around the world. Large and powerful companies are obliterating old forests that have been around for millions of years. The large industries that destroy the environment in order to make a profit, work hand-in-hand with the government.

image001

The Boreal Forest in Canada, Greenpeace ©

The government is able to use the money the industries make for political and economical advantages. Large companies are almost always synonymous with wealth and many politicians necessitate the money that these companies produce in order for the economy to thrive. A flourishing economy also comes with alarming environmental consequences. Nations that have struggling economies are the ones that depend upon industrialization the most. As a leading nation, America’s big business contributes 4 billion pounds of toxic chemicals that are released into the air, the top ranked industry being Red Dog OPS in Kotzebue, AK, which produces 481,578,816 pounds of TRI (Toxic Chemicals Inventory) chemicals into the environment.[2] TRI is a “…public database of annually reported toxic chemical releases and management from certain manufacturing or processing facilities.”[3]

Forests all around the world are disappearing and these losses eliminate wildlife habitat and disrupt biodiversity. Deforestation releases tons of greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change caused by global warming. Greenpeace has fought hard to protect the tropical rainforest all around the world and the volunteers that contribute to this cause work diligently to protect the environment.

On November 18, 2004, four Greenpeace activists from Canada rallied several volunteers to ask for the cooperation of the Kimberly-Clark Corporation, manufacturers of Kleenex tissues, to help save the rainforest. Kleenex is one of the most popular brands of tissue products in the world, and it is one of the paper producing companies that obliterates valuable rainforests. The Kimberly-Clark Corp. was unwilling to improve their practices, continuing to rely on paper and pulp made from clear-cut (removal of all trees from a given piece of forest) trees. The forest in particular that had been subjected to this maltreatment is the Boreal forest in Canada. “The Canadian Boreal Forest is North America’s largest ancient forest, providing habitat for threatened wildlife such as woodland caribou and over 1 billion migratory birds.” [4] But clear-cutting doesn’t just wipe out the biodiversity of a forest; it wipes out an essential carbon storehouse. Canada’s Boreal Forest stores an estimate 186 billion tons of carbon, 27 times the world’s annual fossil fuel emissions.

image003

Volunteers helping to protest Kimberly-Clark Corp. Greenpeace©

“Less that 20% of the pulp that the Kimberly-Clark Corp. uses for its disposable tissue products comes from recycled sources. The rest is made from forests, many of which have existed for thousands of years.”[5] Kleenex tissues are not made from recyclable materials. These resources are called virgin fibers, which make up 100 percent of the Kleenex tissues. The virgin fibers are extracted from the trees and are unable to decompose because they are not supposed to be used to make fabrics. After the forests are clear-cut, left behind is a barren wasteland that is unsuitable for the survival of many wildlife species. On the Kimberly-Clark Kleenex website it states, “Kleenex Facial Tissue is made from 100 percent virgin fiber and contains no recycled fibre. Virgin fibre is used in our tissue because it provides the superior softness consumers expect from a premium facial tissue product.”[6] The view that the company has and the excuse that it uses to justify its use of virgin fibres is only one of many. Recyclable fibers that can be reused are less expensive to obtain and more accessible. The New York Times published an article titled “Mr. Whipple Let It Out: Soft is Rough on Forests” on February 25, 2009 describing the amount of tissue Americans use per year.

In the United States, which is the largest market worldwide for toilet paper, tissue from 100 percent recycled fibers makes up less than 2 percent of sales for at-home use among conventional and premium brands. Most manufacturers use a combination of trees to make their products. According to RISI, an independent market analysis firm in Bedford, Mass., the pulp from one eucalyptus tree, a commonly used tree, produces as many as 1,000 rolls of toilet tissue. Americans use an average of 23.6 rolls per capita a year.[7]

The deforestation and clear cutting of forests leads to global warming and drastic climate changes. “Between 25 and 30 percent of the greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere each year – 1.6 billion tons – is caused by deforestation.”[8] Trees are consisted of 50 percent carbon. When they are burned, the C02 escapes into the air over saturating the atmosphere with molecules that collide and thus produce heat and raising temperatures. According to the FAO (Food and Drug Organization), almost 13 million miles of forests worldwide are lost every year, almost entirely in the tropics.[9] Ancient forests, such as Boreal, store much more carbon than younger ones, holding the carbon in their branches, trunks, roots, and leaves, as well as in the soil. After the trees are cut into logs the process of decomposition of carbon stored in the older forest continue for many years. Forest soils usually contain three to four times as much carbon as plants that grow in forest floor. Compared to old-growth forests, researchers have found it takes about 200 years for a replanted forest to store just as much carbon. Clear-cutting and global warming both interact to worsen the effects of one another. The practice of clear-cutting results in erosion, which then causes increased run-off of rain to occur earlier in the springtime. Simultaneously, as the temperature has risen due to global warming, the polar ice caps have decreased in many recent years and have melted earlier in the spring than usual.[10]

Congressional interest in Environmental Sustainability has increased over the decades. There have been numerous bills introduced in current and previous government officials to ban the use of clear-cutting. However, the use of clear-cutting is not the only issue, Congress also has to focus on how to make sure that the system devised to protect the forest and the implementation of these practices will achieve the stated goals for public land and resource management.

Since the government was unwilling to d anything about powerful businesses ruining Mother Nature, Greenpeace continuously contacted the representatives and CEO’s of the company in order for immediate action to be taken place. They requested that the people at Kimberly-Clark, drastically increase the amount of recycled fiber that they use for all their tissue products including Kleenex brand toilet paper, facial tissue and napkins, and only buy virgin fiber from Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) eco-certified forests.

Many alternatives to virgin fibers are already being used and ancient forest friendly tissue products are sold in stores across North America. These products contain either recycled fiber or fiber from forests that are taken care of and restored or both. Virgin fiber tissues and tissues made from recyclable fibers are equal in quality and in price. As the demand for forest friendly tissue products increases, the availability of these products will also continue to expand. For example, the fourth largest manufacturer of tissue products in North America, Cascades, has recently committed to producing all forest friendly tissue products by 2007. Companies, like Kimberly-Clark, must not use pulp and it is vital that corporate commitments like these are being carried out.

Christy Ferguson, one of the Greenpeace forest campaigners chained inside the building said…

“Kimberly-Clark’s executives want to continue on with business as usual. Unfortunately, business as usual for this company means taking one of the last great forests on Earth, one of our best defenses against global warming, and turning it into Kleenex and toilet paper. That can’t continue. We simply won’t let it. If companies and governments don’t change soon, they’re going to see large-scale action and controversy in Canada’s forests.”[11]

image005

Campaign Ad from Kleercut Campaign promoting forest preservation Greenpeace©

Recently in May of 2009, Kimberly-Clark has set a goal of obtaining 100 percent of the wood fiber used in its products, including the most popular brand Kleenex, from environmentally responsible sources. Kimberly-Clark has agreed to assure that 40 percent of its North American fiber is either recycled or certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), which is over 600,000 tons of fiber. The corporation also agreed that by 2011 they will remove any fiber from the North American Boreal Forest that is not FSC-certified. “The revised standards are proof that when responsible companies and environmental advocates come together, the results can be good for business and good for the planet,”[12] said Scott Paul, Greenpeace USA Forest Campaign Director. Because of Kimberly-Clark’s place in the paper products market, the company’s new policy will send a strong signal to its competitors, Procter & Gamble and Georgia Pacific, that creating a policy that protects ancient forests is a key element of sustainable business. In the Environmental Protection and Concern portion of the Kimberly Clark Corporate Policy it states… “It is the policy of Kimberly-Clark to conduct its affairs at all times with a sincere balanced and proper regard for the environment. For these purposes, the word “environment” includes all the conditions, circumstances and influences surrounding and affecting the development of people and all other living things which are directly or indirectly impacted on by the company’s affairs.”[13]

“Deforestation causes global warming.” FAO: FAO Home. Web. 19 Nov. 2009. <http://www.fao.org/newsroom/EN/news/2006/1000385/index.html>.

“History | Greenpeace USA.” Greenpeace | Greenpeace USA. Web. 19 Nov. 2009. <http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/about/history>.

Kleenex® Tissues: It Feels Good to Feel?. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. <http://www.kleenex.com/NA/Default.aspx>.

“Kleercut – Case closed! | Greenpeace USA.” Greenpeace | Greenpeace USA. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. <http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/forests/kleercut>.

“Kleercut – Case closed! | Greenpeace USA.” Greenpeace | Greenpeace USA. Web. 19 Nov. 2009. <http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/forests/kleercut>.

“New Kimberly-Clark policy is a victory for Ancient Forests | Greenpeace USA.” Greenpeace | Greenpeace USA. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. <http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/new-kimberly-clark-policy-080509>.

New York Times. LESLIE KAUFMAN, 25 Feb. 2009. Web. <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/science/earth/26charmin.html?_r=2>.

Welcome to Kimberly-Clark, Web. 18 Nov. 2009. <http://www.kimberlyclark.com/…/Corporate%20policies_2008Sustainabilityreport.pdf>.

Scorecard Home. Web. 19 Nov. 2009. <http://www.scorecard.org>.

“Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Program | US EPA.” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 19 Nov. 2009. <http://www.epa.gov/tri/>.


[1] “History | Greenpeace USA.” Greenpeace | Greenpeace USA. Web. 19 Nov. 2009. <http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/about/history>.

[2]Scorecard Home. Web. 19 Nov. 2009. <http://www.scorecard.org>.

[3] “Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Program | US EPA.” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 19 Nov. 2009. <http://www.epa.gov/tri/>.

[4] “New Kimberly-Clark policy is a victory for Ancient Forests | Greenpeace USA.” Greenpeace | Greenpeace USA. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. <http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/new-kimberly-clark-policy-080509>.

[5] “Kleercut – Case closed! | Greenpeace USA.” Greenpeace | Greenpeace USA. Web. 19 Nov. 2009. <http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/forests/kleercut>.

[6] Kleenex® Tissues: It Feels Good to Feel™. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. <http://www.kleenex.com/NA/Default.aspx>.

[7] New York Times. Leslie Kaufman, 25 Feb. 2009. Web. <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/science/earth/26charmin.html?_r=2>.

[8] “Deforestation causes global warming.” FAO: FAO Home. Web. 19 Nov. 2009. <http://www.fao.org/newsroom/EN/news/2006/1000385/index.html>.

[9] “Deforestation causes global warming.” FAO: FAO Home. Web. 19 Nov. 2009. <http://www.fao.org/newsroom/EN/news/2006/1000385/index.html>.

[10] http://www.stopclearcuttingcalifornia.org/html/forestcarbon.html

[11] “Kleercut – Case closed! | Greenpeace USA.” Greenpeace | Greenpeace USA. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. <http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/forests/kleercut>.

[12] http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/new-kimberly-clark-policy-080509

[13] Welcome to Kimberly-Clark. Web. 18 Nov. 2009. <http://www.kimberlyclark.com/…/Corporate%20policies_2008Sustainabilityreport.pdf>.

]]>
Environmental Advocates of New York https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/2009/12/18/environmental-advocates-of-new-york/ Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:47:51 +0000 http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/?p=297 Environmental Advocates of New York
by Alfred Garcia

The Environmental Advocates of New York (EANY) is a non-profit organization based in Albany, NY. The organization’s stated mission is ďto protect our air, land, water, and wildlife and the health of all New Yorkers.Ē The organization strives to achieves this mission statement by monitoring the New York state government, evaluating proposed laws in the Legislature, and by ďchampioning policies and practices that will ensure the responsible stewardship of our shared environment.Ē The EANY also maintains an affiliation with the National Wildlife Federation and is a member of the State Environmental Leadership Conference.

According to its official website, the Environment Advocates of New York has its roots in the creation of the Environmental Planning Lobby in 1696 by a small group of environmentalists. EANY claims that it’s efforts were crucial in the passing of some important environmental laws in New York state, such as the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), the Hudson River Estuary Management Act, the Clean Indoor Air Act, and the 1996 Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act to name a few.

The current policy goals of the Environmental Advocates of New York revolve around three policy issues: Air & Energy, Water & Natural Resources, and Fiscal Policy.

According to the EANY official website: energy use -including electricity, transportation, and heating- is the most significant source of air pollution that is changing our climate and causing smog, acid rain, an toxic mercury pollution, among other serious environmental problems. The EANY supports policies that will improve air quality and reduce global warming causing pollutants, as well as supporting policies that increase energy efficiency, support conservation of natural resources, and accelerate the development of clean energy. One important aspect of EANY’s air and energy policy is its involvement in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), in which the State of New York is a member of. The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) is a 10-state partnership whose purpose is to ďstabilize and reduce carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.Ē The member states include states from the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region. They are: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Maryland. The RGGI implements a ďcap and tradeĒ program that sets a region wide limit on the amount of C02 emitted collectively by power plants larger than 25 megawatts each year.  The cap is currently set at around 188 million tons. The short-term goal of the program is to stabilize CO2 emissions from power plants during the first six years. After the first six years, the plan is to achieve a 10% reduction from 2009 levels by 2018; however, the cap will be implemented only after a 3-year control period, the purpose of which is to set a base line which would be used to compare emissions following the implementation of the cap. RGGI is a mandatory program in which power plants must comply with program requirements or face penalties. New York has decided that instead of giving CO2 allowances (permits to pollute) to power generators for free, all of the allowances are to be auctioned off to power plants. The idea is to make power plants pay for the right to pollute and to have a source of revenue that would be used to support programs that help stabilize and reduce energy demand and develop clean, renewable sources of energy.

With regards to the additional revenue New York State has received with the RGGI’s cap and trade program, the EANY has been fighting for a better plan to spend the money the state has made than the one currently set. Currently, auctions, allowances and revenues are managed by the New York State Energy & Research Development Authority, a public benefit corporation charter by the state. NYSERDA’s current operating plan covers a three-year period and defines how $525 million of the RGGI auction proceeds will be spent. $230,620 million is to be spent in the residential, commercial, industrial & municipal sector; which would focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the near term. Only about ¼ of the proceeds will be dedicated to longer-term investments. The EANY argue that the investments are spread too thin, which would dilute their impact. While NYSERDA has decided to revisit the spending plan and make changes (if necessary), there is no legal requirement to do so. The EANY have been championing the idea that in order to use the RGGI funds responsibly, the state should create a statute that forces these funds to be appropriated to a ďfocused suite of programs.Ē The EANY argues that the state should establish an apparatus for discussing and debating questions about how the revenues are allocated. The EANY reasons that because state agencies are not directly accountable to the people of the state, residents would be unable to express their concerns. The EANY propose that RGGI spending should be tracked and accounted for by the State Comptroller, thereby allowing residents the ability to monitor spending and projects infused with these funds. This would make sure that the investments would be made in a timely manner and would minimize the risk of funds being misallocated for budget relief or projects unrelated to reducing climate change.

The EANY have also been making the case for relaxing current laws regarding net metering. Net metering is when consumers sell excess electricity produced back to the grid, through which the consumer receives its electricity. Under net metering, electricity produced by clean energy technologies can flow into the grid, thus spinning the meter backwards and giving the consumer ďfull retail value for the electricity they produce themselves.Ē Under current New York law, residential systems are allowed to net meter and receive money from their local power authority; however, commercial businesses cannot net meter, despite the fact that the commercial and industrial sectors use roughly two-thirds of the electricity produced. One positive effect of an expanded net metering policy is that it would allow additional electricity to flow during hours of peak demand, it would reduce the stress placed on transmission lines, and it would reduce pollution generated by the burning of fossil fuels. Another positive effect is that net metering encourages development in renewable technologies. By providing an economic incentive, consumers would be more likely to invest in renewable technologies that would pay for themselves in less than a decade and after which would provide ďfreeĒ power. Not only would net metering help New York meet its rising power demand (which is projected to increase by 400 megawatts each year), it will also reduce our reliance on imported fossil fuels, which make up more than ½ of electricity production.

The EANY states that ďprotecting New York’s water and natural resources is the foundation for our economic development and quality of life.Ē Part of their Water & Natural Resources program is the protecting of the Great Lakes and watch-dogging water quality in New York. The EANY supported the drafting of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact, which consists of a number of requirements for withdrawal and diversion projects. In 2008, the governors of the states of New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, as well as the Premier of Ontario signed the Compact, which amended the Great Lakes Charter, a 20 year old treaty that oversees the economic and ecological issues involving the Great Lakes. In New York State, the state government charged a group called the Great Lakes Advisory Council with recommending ways to implement the Compact. Yet, when the Council released its draft report, EANY, in conjunction with the National Wildlife Federation, filed recommendations on the opinion that the Council’s report ďfailed to make the strong, protective recommendations necessary to manage one of our most precious resources.Ē EANY suggests that a permitting program be established in which new withdrawals or those that are 50,000 gallons per day be given mandatory permits. This system would require that applicants for water withdrawal permits provide specific information such as the purpose of the proposed water withdrawal, the location and source, any threatened or endangered species and their habitats and various other requirements presented in their report of recommendations.

Where as the Compact requires New York State to develop water conservation and efficiency programs, EANY implores the State to implement other options as well. EANY recommends making conservation and efficiency standards mandatory throughout the state, including industry. In the case of water conservation, EANY recommends that the State use a full-cost pricing policy, which would include calculated environmental costs and loss of resource in monetary terms. One problem with this suggested policy is that it would have a greater negative impact in low-income communities. This is why the EANY also suggests a block pricing program, in which ďusers are charged a higher-unit price as consumption rises; block pricing has been used in Seattle, Washington as well as Sharon and Wayland Massachusetts. When it comes to providing incentives for conservation, EANY recommends the creation of a New York ďWater SenseĒ program, which would identify companies, suppliers and products that follow stringent conservation practices. This would publicly congratulate and encourage withdrawers that practice conservation. In the case of suppliers, including conservation as a criteria to receive funds from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund’s Intended Use Plan. Not only would this send a strong message about New York’s commitment to water resources, but it would also encourage suppliers to run their systems more efficiently. Another idea is to lower interest rates for suppliers that practice effective conservation programs; this could also be expanded to other sectors that usually apply for various state grants or loans i.e. industry, agriculture, etc.

In the case of watch-dogging, EANY have released a report title ďMuddying the Waters: The Unknown Consequence of New York’s Failed Water Pollution Permit ProgramĒ, which makes the case that the State currently renews thousands of water pollution permits without substantive review. The EANY has been working to expose the state’s irresponsibility and flawed approach in issuing the water pollution permits. In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act was made law; its purpose was to pursue the goal of ending all discharge of pollutants in the nation’s water by 1985. To achieve this, the States were required to regulate water pollution by ďclosely scrutinizing polluters activities and conducting comprehensive review of the permits that authorize the discharge of pollution.Ē The report posits that not only is the State failing to meet its environmental obligations with the EPA, but it is also breaking the law. In New York, there are about 8,000 facilities that discharge tens of billions of gallons of waste into the State’s waters. Each of these facilities are required to have permits that limits the type and amount of pollutants discharge into waters. These permits are required to undergo technical review every five years, yet EANY says that 90% of facilities with permits, which dump their wastes into rivers, lakes and streams, do not undergo the stringent review required by the Clean Water Act. The EANY report says that the problem began with the staff reduction and hiring freeze across state agencies during the Pataki administration. According to the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), which oversees the distribution and review of the water pollution permits, ďwe simply did not have enough staff to grind out extensive technical reviews every five years for all permits.Ē The EANY report recommends the hiring of additional staff; currently, there are 15 permit reviewers. Also, the DEC must immediately stop renewing permits to facilities that are discharging in state designated ďimpaired waters.Ē

As the bedrock for EANY’s current fiscal policy program, EANY released a report titled ďSaving Green: Addressing New York State’s Fiscal Crisis & Protecting the EnvironmentĒ which outlines ďa few simple ways to responsibly ‘green’ state spending and address the state’s fiscal crisis while protecting our natural resources.Ē EANY has cited a seemingly contradictory policy of the State offering tax breaks for the use of dirty fuels, more specifically bunker fuel. Bunker fuel is the end product of the oil refining process, in which crude oil is transformed into gasoline and other types of fuels. This leftover waste (bunker fuel) is then burned by marine vessels as an energy source. The burning of bunker fuel release gargantuan amounts of pollutants, which include CO2, sulfate particles and particulate matter. EANY estimates that because of this tax exemption, New York has lost $34 million annually and $300 million since 1994. The EANY recommends for New York to repel the tax exemption so that the State would improve New York’s air quality, with the $35 million in new taxes, and for tougher regulations to force ships to use cleaner fuels as they move through New York state.

In the ďSaving GreenĒ report, the EANY also argues the State’s Power for Jobs program is of questionable efficiency with regards to keeping jobs in New York. The 1997 Power for Jobs program gives 400 megawatts of low-cost power to businesses and nonprofit corporations that committed to create and/or maintain jobs in New York. However, by using data supplied from the New York Power Authority, which is charged with paying for the cash rebates of the program, the EANY posits that several companies that fail to fulfill the job requirement still receive full subsidies and were listed as being ďin complianceĒ with the program standards. EANY reports that this program has resulted in a $20 million lost of revenue in 2008 and that without a reform of the program, loses are projected at $100 million for the next five years. The report recommends that an overhaul of the program is in order, such as eliminating tax credits, require program recipients to undergo and energy audit, and that recipients must invest in energy efficiency improvements.

The Environmental Advocates of New York have said in their 2009 press release that ďNew York State is neglecting its environmental responsibilities. Years of static appropriations and short staffing means the DEC no longer has the resources to safely monitor water pollution or clean up hazardous waste.Ē The EANY has also showed that the DEC is relying more on general tax dollars to support its programs while polluters in the state pay a smaller share in relation to its benefits. The EANY is calling on state leaders to increase polluter fees in next year’s budget. Throughout its history, the EANY has shown that it has played a crucial part in the environmental policy implemented in New York, form offering constructive criticism, detailed analysis of failing projects, and well thought out recommendations to improve the effectiveness of said policies. In its mission to protect New York’s air, land, water, and resources, it has improved the lives and health of New York’s residents.

]]>
Al-Gore https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/2009/12/18/al-gore/ Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:45:22 +0000 http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/?p=295 Al Gore

]]>
Majora Carter: Greening the Ghetto https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/2009/12/18/majora-carter-greening-the-ghetto/ Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:22:47 +0000 http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/?p=285 Majora Carter: Greening the Ghetto
by Patrick Lee

“Why would someone leave their homes to go for a brisk walk in a toxic neighborhood?”[1] Majora Carter asks at the onset of her TED talk. However, these toxic neighborhoods are a reality for many poor New Yorkers. Growing up in the South Bronx, which at the time “handled more than 40% of the entire cities’ commercial waste” and was home to “a sewage treatment pelletizing plant, a sewage-sludge plant, 4 power plants, the world’s largest food distribution center, as well as other industries that [brought] more than 60,000 diesel truck trips to the area each week,” [2] Carter gained a firsthand account of some of the atrocities of living in the ghetto.

image001

http://www.elephantjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/picture-921.png

The heavy industrialization of less wealthy urban centers contributes to the abysmal health of many of its inhabitants. The brunt of our pollution problem is unequally being placed on the lower social and economic classes of America. In the South Bronx, “50% of [the] residents live at or below the poverty line” and “25% are unemployed.” In addition, “One out of four South Bronx kids has asthma. [The South Bronx’s] asthma hospitalization rate is seven times higher than the national average”[3].

image004

Abandoned lot in the South Bronx

The air we breathe is a mixture of various gases with a myriad of particles suspended in it. The hairs in our noses filter larger particles, but are unable to keep smaller particles from entering our lungs. It is there that these fine particles can become lodged inside of us, which lead to a host of problems such as asthma or even cancer. An unacceptable amount of these particles leads to low air quality, as is the case in the South Bronx. This manifests itself in the high asthma rates, some of the highest in the nation, for children who reside in this area. In addition, the lack of trees, parks, or green open spaces only exacerbates the problem.

Studies have found a negative correlation between the number of tree-lined streets and asthma rates. “Columbia University researchers found that asthma rates among children aged four and five fell by 25% for every 343 trees per square kilometer”[4]. Trees act as natural filters. They take in pollutants, such as CO2, and emit cleaner air. It stands good reason then that planting more trees is a valid solution to air quality and asthma issues, which is the very basis of one of Carter’s visions.

The South Bronx has one of the “lowest ratios of parks to people in the city”[5] while still being one of the most polluted. However, Majora Carter has been at the forefront of changing that. During a jog with her dog, she discovered an abandoned dumping lot at Hunt’s Point, which overlooked the Bronx River. She had a vision that ten years later would be come reality. In August 2001, “Carter founded Sustainable South Bronx (SSBx).”[6] With the support of the community, the initial city investment of $10,000 to cleanup Hunt’s Point and to build the first riverside park in the Bronx in 60 years ballooned to more than $3 million. Hunt’s Point Riverside Park was opened in 2007 to great success. On top of that, the city plans to connect Hunt’s Point Riverside Park to a network of parks along the Bronx River, a project totaling $70 million.[7] This transformation of a once bleak ghetto will have untold benefits for the community. The increases in trees will likely help ease pollution and lower asthma problems. Kids now have an area to play sports and for general recreation which will combat high obesity rates. It also removes an eyesore from an up and coming community.

image006

Hunts Point Riverside Park

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2328/2441942882_4d5040fe18.jpg

Another project Carter is working on is a water front esplanade with bike paths running throughout the South Bronx. Her desire is to promote physical activity in order to stem the high rate of obesity among the population. She hopes a healthier environment will lead to healthier people. She has already secured $20 million for this project.[8]

image007image009

Lexington Avenue in the South Bronx

Carter is also leading the Bronx Ecological Stewardship Training program. It “provides job training in the fields of ecological restorations, so that folks from our community have the skills to compete for these well-paying jobs… then the people [] have both a financial and personal stake in their environment.” [9]

Participants of this program are working on creating cool roofs and green roofs on Bronx buildings. These cool roofs are used to combat the urban heat island effect. This effect is an increase in the temperature of cities as a result of a variety of sources that trap heat rather than letting it dissipate into the night air. One cause is the prevalence of asphalt and concrete, which “have significantly different thermal bulk properties (including heat capacity and thermal conductivity)… than the surrounding rural areas. Waste heat from automobiles, air conditioning, industry, and other sources” exacerbate the problem.[10] With the rising temperatures expected due to global warming, the heat island effect could become even more detrimental. It indirectly leads to higher energy consumption, which leads to more pollution and cyclically a stronger greenhouse effect. Another implication, albeit not as well studied, is the fact that petroleum based materials can degrade under constant sunlight and get into the air. This is a possible cause of many cancers.[11]

image012

Green roofs in the South Bronx

Carter is somewhat a visionary for her implementation of such a simple idea. Her program “built New York City’s first green and ‘cool-roof’ demonstration project on top of [their] offices.”[12] Cool roofs use reflective material, rather than absorptive material like asphalt and concrete, to reduce the amount of heat taken in. Even painting a building white instead of black can cause a significant improvement. A green roof consists of vegetation. It has been found that such vegetation can vastly decrease the heat island effect and, in addition, improve air quality for all residents. It is nature’s coolant. “A hypothetical “cool communities” program in Los Angeles has projected that urban temperatures could be reduced by approximately 3 °C… giving estimated annual benefits of US$170 million from reduced air-conditioning costs and US$360 million in smog related health savings.”[13] In addition, “Green roofs also retain up to 75% of rainfall, so they reduce a city’s need to fund costly ‘end of pipe’ solutions.”[14]

Carter has found her niche in being a neighborhood environmental justice activist rather than concerning herself with the global scale.

“No community should be saddled with more environmental burdens and less environmental benefits than any other. Unfortunately, race and class are extremely reliable indicators as to where one might find the good stuff, like parks and trees, and where one might find the bad stuff, like power plants and waste facilities.”[15]

She has chosen to focus on areas that need it the most, like the South Bronx and New Orleans. These are the places that suffer the most from bad public policy. Science seems to dictate, by the 3-Level Model of Pollution Transport, that problems in one area will lead to problems everywhere. For example, pollutants emitted in the South Bronx will eventually find its way to Tribeca through changing wind currents and other factors. For this reason good public policy should encompass environmental justice. This is not the case in many places, as those with money and influence can pull resources from those who need it most. As factories, highways, and power plants are placed into poor communities the health of the impoverished declines. As a result “Poor people are not only still poor, they are still unhealthy.”[16] This comes at a huge cost to taxpayers, in the form of higher healthcare costs, including the wealthier ones. A problem among poorer communities will dissipate to wealthier ones. Carter’s message is not that we should care about environmental justice for the sake of environmental justice or some type of higher morality. She believes we should care just because it makes sense. Greening poorer areas is beneficial to everyone. In the long run it will cost taxpayers less, improve our mutual environment, and improve quality of life.[17]

Carter is by no means anti-development like many environmentalists have been stereotyped to be. She believes that it is possible for developers to make money without forsaking the environment or the health of the people. She has seen it done and mentions the city of Bogota, Columbia as an example. The city suffered a misallocation of resources as money was poured into building roads and highways when most residents did not own cars. A visionary mayor, despite initial public backlash, transformed the city into a green area. Bike lanes were built, public plazas were added, and improvements were made. The city has seen a resurgence in its economy as a result.[18]

image014

Bogota, Columbia

It has been psychologically shown that improvements in peoples’ environment, however small they might be, do lead to big changes in their behavior. If you give people crowded, dirty, and ugly spaces their behavior will reflect their environment. Crime will increase, litter will increase, and a host of problems will occur. However, if you give them green spaces, clean areas, and places to congregate things suddenly start to turn around like in Bogota.[19]

This is the basis of Majora Carter’s work and one of the reasons she is so good at it. She focuses on small changes that impact peoples’ lives immediately rather than vague concepts that they will never hear about. She gives them green parks today in hopes they will invest in a greener world tomorrow. She provides them with green employment, a financial incentive, in hopes that it will follow throughout their lives. She sees the practical problems, the science, then finds an acceptable solution that still motivates people, the public policy, but never forgets that everything must be based on environmental justice, the activist policy. Her brand of tangible activism serves as a model for underprivileged communities everywhere.


[1] “Majora Carter’s Tale of Urban Renewal,” TED. June 2006, 3 December, 2009 <http://www.ted.com/talks/majora_carter_s_tale_of_urban_renewal.html>

[2] Ibid

[3] Ibid

[4] “Tree lined streets ‘cut asthma,’” BBC News. 1 May 2008, Columbia University, 3 November 2009 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7374078.stm>

[5] “Majora Carter’s Tale of Urban Renewal,” TED. June 2006, 3 December, 2009 <http://www.ted.com/talks/majora_carter_s_tale_of_urban_renewal.html>

[6] Ibid

[7] Block, Dorian, “Newly-opened Hunts Riverside Park already a hit,” New York Daily News. 4 September 2007, Daily News, 3 November 2009 <http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/bronx/2007/09/04/2007-09-04_newlyopened_hunts_point_riverside_park_a-1.html>

[8] “Majora Carter’s Tale of Urban Renewal,” TED. June 2006, 3 December, 2009 <http://www.ted.com/talks/majora_carter_s_tale_of_urban_renewal.html>

[9] Ibid

[10] “Urban Heat Island,” Wikipedia. 3 November 2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_heat_island#Causes>

[11] “Majora Carter’s Tale of Urban Renewal,” TED. June 2006, 3 December, 2009 <http://www.ted.com/talks/majora_carter_s_tale_of_urban_renewal.html>

[12] Ibid

[13] “Urban Heat Island,” Wikipedia. 3 November 2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_heat_island#Causes>

[14] “Majora Carter’s Tale of Urban Renewal,” TED. June 2006, 3 December, 2009 <http://www.ted.com/talks/majora_carter_s_tale_of_urban_renewal.html>

[15] Ibid

[16] Ibid

[17] Ibid

[18] Ibid

[19] Gladwell, Malcolm, The Tipping Point (United States: Little Brown, 2000).

]]>
Majora Carter & Sustainable South Bronx https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/2009/12/18/majora-carter-sustainable-south-bronx/ Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:11:26 +0000 http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/?p=284 Majora Carter & Sustainable South Bronx: Saving the Local Urban Environment through an Ethical Framework
by David Weinberger

Founded in 2001 by Majora Carter, Sustainable South Bronx is a policy and activist organization that is dedicated to bringing environmental justice to disadvantaged minority groups in New York City. Through urban design and grassroots activism, the organization looks to reverse the historical preference for profitable development in an effort to instate an equitable planning scheme in the South Bronx, through which both the people and the environment are protected.

Growing up in the South Bronx, Majora Carter experienced urban decay firsthand. As a child, exposure to gang violence, prostitution, drug trafficking, and other signs of economic degradation bred strong cynicism and resentment in Carter. Determined to rise above her socioeconomic circumstance, she focused on excelling in her studies and ultimately earned entry to Wesleyan University, where she studied film (CNN). After receiving her degree, Carter returned to live at her home in the Bronx, this time as a graduate student at New York University (CNN). During her tenure at NYU, Carter reacquainted herself with her neighborhood, taking time to explore the community in which she had grown up, and which had worsened in her time away (TED).

As she spoke with her neighbors, Carter learned that the South Bronx community was yearning for safety, security, and a growth in employment (CNN). At the same time, many members of the community were battling with health disorders caused in part by pollution from nearby manufacturing facilities (CNN). Carter also noticed a general resentment toward the waste-producing facilities in the area which, despite providing jobs for a good portion of the population, also posed a detriment to the community’s environment. To Carter, the community’s cycle of poverty, violence, and illness seemed to be the result of an external pressure placed by industry on the community, which is comprised largely of minority groups. Carter thought it to be no coincidence that the environmentally hazardous facilities were placed near a place with a high rate of poverty and a high concentration of minorities; big business was exploiting the neighborhood, utilizing its high supply of cheap labor and dumping waste on it with no fear of repercussions from a community that needed the jobs.

To combat industrial predominance that came at the expense of community members, Carter saw a need to mobilize the grassroots, to energize her neighbors and fight back against the industrial exploitation that had plagued members of her community for decades. In 2001, Carter organized a local campaign to halt the construction of a newly authorized waste facility in the South Bronx, a region that already handled about 40 percent of all municipal waste in the city. Through stakeholder engagement and empowerment, Carter successfully blocked construction of the facility, marking a monumental victory for both Carter and for the people of the neighborhood.

On the back of this success, Majora Carter founded Sustainable South Bronx, the area’s first nonprofit environmental solutions corporation with a focus on the defense of environmental justice. At the center of this new organization’s mission was that “people shouldn’t have to move out of their neighborhoods to live in a better one” (CNN). This message of equal opportunity, though broad in scope and somewhat indeterminate, was a resounding symbol of hope for change in the community. The organization valued environmental justice as a framework through which it could effect real policy action. Carter’s vision, now partially realized through the work of Sustainable South Bronx, included a South Bronx that would coincide with, and not contradict, the democratic value of equal access to opportunity. Carter defines environmental justice with a mantra: “no community should be saddled with more environmental burdens and less environmental benefits than any other” (TED). This idea of inherent equity is the defining framework through which Sustainable South Bronx approaches any policy problem. Indeed, the consequences of policymakers and others not subscribing to this mantra have proven to be the environmental and economic degradation in the South Bronx.

With one success already under her belt, Carter put the newly formed Sustainable South Bronx to work, embarking on plans in 2002 to revitalize the South Bronx’s underused, heavily polluted waterfront. She took the initiative to draft a successful $1.25 million grant proposal for Federal Transportation funding for the creation of a South Bronx Greenway (CNN).The construction of the SBG afforded new opportunity to residents of the community, which had previously fallen victim to urban planning founded in prejudice and exploitative industrial practices. Safe recreation, green jobs, and clean industry were introduced to the afflicted area, which in turn served to unite the people of the neighborhood in a new era of economic and environmental recovery.

From the South Bronx Greenway, Sustainable South Bronx shifted its focus to broader policy issues, embarking on technical research aimed at establishing a legitimate scientific platform to compliment the organization’s largely ethical mission. The organization turned out a series of reports on public health in the area, a study on the urban heat island effect, and a feasibility report of green roof technology installation projects in the South Bronx (Sustainable South Bronx). Following the publication of these supporting documents, the nonprofit began to take up new missions, including, quite appropriately, green roof installation projects to reverse the harmful consequences of the urban heat island effect (Sustainable South Bronx).

The success of Carter’s model for economic growth and public health can no doubt be attributed to its inherent simplicity. Carter identified the core issue at hand, the poverty cycle, and derived its causes from historical analysis and through discussions with community members. In a 2006 speech entitled “Greening the Ghetto,” Carter discusses the history of the South Bronx, suggesting that the prevalence of poverty in the area can largely be accredited to discriminatory lending practices and neglectful urban design.

According to Carter, in the 1960s, areas of the Bronx with high concentrations of minority groups fell victim to banks’ “red-lining” policies, which discouraged capital investment in areas with what the financial sector deemed a small chance for return (TED). As a result of this lack of investment, property owners found it more profitable to set fire to their buildings and collect insurance than to attempt to sell (CNN). Abandoned buildings and empty lots became abundant in the area, and the neighborhood plunged into poverty.

After Robert Moses, an urban planner who, in the mid-twentieth century designed a national highway system that served to bisect the South Bronx in an effort to expedite the passage of vehicles from Westchester County into Manhattan (TED). This massive construction project led to the displacement of 600,000 residents, an imposition on the community from which it would have quite some difficulty recovering (TED). Displacement of residents, paired with the low inflow of real estate and development capital, led to poverty, and poverty to crime and desperation. The South Bronx’s local economy was not a factor that had been internalized in Moses’s planning process, arguably due to its then-growing minority composition. The needs of the minority community were summarily ignored in favor of industrial and majority interests. The neighborhood was seen as an obstacle to, and not a partner in, progress for the city.

In her speech, Carter aptly identifies the downward spiral of degradation that occurs as a result of ill-conceived notions of investment and poor urban design: “[…] from a planning perspective, economic degradation begets environmental degradation, which begets social degradation” (TED). Because no worth was placed on the minority communities of the South Bronx in both the public and private policymaking processes, the neighborhood economy suffered severe economic repercussions that left it vulnerable to industrial exploitation. What ailing community, for example, would ever fight back against the installation of a new waste facility that would promise steady employment to its residents? And so what if the facility dumped excessive waste into the community’s air and water? Local industry saw desperation and economic turmoil and moved in for the kill, and essentially overloaded the neighborhood with pollution.

As a result of the dangerous levels of air pollution to which the excessive industry in the area yielded, the prevalence of chronic conditions like asthma skyrocketed, particularly among the community’s youth. The South Bronx has an asthma hospitalization rate that is seven times as high as the national average, largely due to the disproportionate number of pollution-causing facilities in the area. As air quality declined in the neighborhood, the propensity to leave home dwindled and residents chose to stay indoors in order to avoid the toxic air. This forced idleness contributed to a 27 percent rate of obesity and high frequency of diabetes in the community.

Despite the detriment to the public health that the facilities present, abusive design schemes remain common. Speaking statistically, the high concentration of dirty facilities near a minority community is not a phenomenon. Indeed, according to Majora Carter, an African American is twice as likely as a white to live within close proximity to a plant that poses a threat to his or her health (TED). He or she is five times as likely to live within close walking distance of a waste facility or power plant (TED). It would seem that urban planning in the South Bronx, then, had not then been simply founded in convenience, but in underlying and guiding prejudices as well.

The environmental impact of these waste facilities in the neighborhood have had lasting effects on the community: the financial, emotional, and physical detriments posed by health concerns have severely limited the economic prospects for a large number of families looking to rise above the poverty line. Environmental degradation has contributed significantly to the rate of poverty in the area which, as of 2006, was 50 percent (TED). By 2006, the exploitative capitalist values that had governed the paradigm of urban planning and industrial waste control since the time of Robert Moses had trapped South Bronx residents in a downward economic spiral that served to debilitate residents and leave them essentially voiceless, without any real political agency.

To combat design flaws that led to the degradation of the environmental and socioeconomic circumstances of the neighborhood, Carter decided that Sustainable South Bronx would try its own hand at urban planning. Carter saw drafting an alternative design as an essential part of effecting change in her community (TED). Rather than simply protesting the exploitation she saw, she proposed an entirely novel and concrete policy solution to the problem that took equity, economic development, and popular interest into account. The organization took on issues in the community ranging from the placement of traffic lights to the development of parks and recreation in the area. Sustainable South Bronx, in its first years of operation, took on a number of public policy and urban planning battles with the aim of bringing opportunity and access to the neighborhood’s residents (Sustainable South Bronx).

Majora Carter does not see environmental protection and economic development as two diametrically opposite goals. To Carter, sustainable development protects what she calls “‘the triple bottom line,’” and has “[…] the potential to create positive returns for all concerned: the developers, government and the community where these projects go up” (TED). Carter posits that the social and public health costs of industry and neglectful urban design should be internalized in the policymaking process (i.e. public as well as private), and that this internalization is key to achieving environmental equity. As most private sector policy stands at the moment, the cost of exploiting an economically vulnerable community for the sake of profit does not take into account popular interest, but rather it adheres to economic self-interest that leads to local societal degradation.

In her 2006 speech, Carter reassures her audience that she is not indeed anti-development (TED). While recognizing a basic need for an internalization of social costs of industry and the promotion of equity in the public and private sectors, Carter stresses also the need for economic development and growth in a vulnerable community. Equity in a capitalist context cannot mean the discouragement of industry. On the contrary, to achieve environmental justice, there is a need for industry reform, and not for the eradication of industry on the whole. Economic revitalization and the return of economic feasibility to the neighborhood are at the core of Carter’s and Sustainable South Bronx’s mission. The issue, then, as Carter defines it, is not the private sector itself, but rather the exploitative practices that have become the norm for industry and the government’s zoning, development, and other regulations that act as catalysts for this exploitation (TED). She stresses stakeholder engagement on every level. If decision-makers would engage in discussions with community members and gauge demographics, the industrial bottom line would remain intact while the socioeconomic interests of the surrounding community were being considered. Granted, this dialogue in itself does not constitute internalization of costs, but through the opening a channel of communication between the developer and the developed, the community is able to have more oversight and is empowered to protect itself from exploitation.

The environmental justice movement stops neither at the Harlem River nor at the northern border with Westchester. Indeed, it is a national and even international movement toward fair and sustainable development. Founded in the principles propelled by Carter, it is a philosophy that informs the policy work of organizations like Earth Justice, a prominent environmental protection and public interest law firm, and Green for All, a grassroots organization that works toward the widespread implementation of urban programs like the one initiated by Majora Carter in the South Bronx. These organizations have had successes on both the ground and administrative level, using grassroots community activism to make an impact on public policy. While Sustainable South Bronx focused primarily on the interests of a specific locality, environmental justice groups nationwide have had a tremendous impact on state and federal policy, successfully pushing for the incorporation of language in legislation that specifically addresses the needs of what Carter calls “environmental justice communities,” or communities of color that are disproportionately affected by industry, pollution, and socioeconomic degradation (TED).

The Green Jobs Act, a provision of a bill passed by Congress in 2005, authorized millions of dollars of funding for the establishment of green sector training programs in environmental justice communities. This piece of legislation, though incredibly inclusive and fiscally sustainable, has gone unfunded to date. However, full funding for this program and smaller programs like it has been included in both the House and Senate proposals for climate change legislation, and it does not seem likely that these provisions will fall victim to political deliberation and the subsequent nullification that often occurs as a result of compromise.

However significant federal and even state-level legislation may be in the realm of environmental policy reform, the work of Sustainable South Bronx is a remarkable demonstration of the political might that exists at even the most local level. Carter’s organization has restored a voice to those who have fallen victim to environmental injustice and has placed a neighborhood on an upward track toward socioeconomic prosperity, health, and general welfare.

The successes of Majora Carter and Sustainable South Bronx signify that environmental protection, preservation of public health, and the defense of public interest need not exist separately. Indeed, the philosophy of environmental justice mandates that policy be founded at the intersection of ethics, practicality, and stakeholder protection.

“Biography: Majora Carter.” CNN.com. CNN. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/06/05/carter.bio/>.

Carter, Majora. “Greening the Ghetto.” TEDTalks. Monterey, CA. Feb. 2006. YouTube. 6 Jan. 2007. 1 Mar. 2009 <www.youtube.com>.

Sustainable South Bronx. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. <http://ssbx.org/>.

Web.

]]>
Million Trees NYC https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/2009/12/18/million-trees-nyc/ Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:07:43 +0000 http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/?p=280 Million Trees NYC
by Diana Duque

It’s safe to say that New York City is the top city in the world. Known for business, fashion, and tourism, among other things, the Big Apple definitely never sleeps. People here are always on the run and have many concerns, however, environmental needs never seem to top anyone’s’ lists.  As the city continues to grow it is important to make sure that all its surroundings are well equipped to adjust to the various changes and growth constantly taking place. Fortunately, there has recently been an increased awareness of the importance of valuing the Earth’s resources.  By using media and well-known faces, spreading the word on the green movement hasn’t been too difficult. Many different people and groups are playing their part to help the Earth but not all are well-recognized activists.

PlaNYC is the most extensive plan yet, designed to bolster New York City’s urban environment. Mayor Michael Bloomberg unveiled the proposal in April 2007 in hopes of creating the first environmentally sustainable 21st century city. The plan focuses on every aspect of New York’s physical environment, which includes transportation network, housing stock, land and park systems, energy network, water supply and air quality but its main objective is to achieve ten specific goals to create a more sustainable New York by the year 2030. In order to keep the city as open and as welcoming as ever, enough housing for almost a million more people will be created and ways of making housing more affordable are being thought up. In order to modify the city, it will also be ensured that every resident be within a 10-minute walk of a park and additions will be made to the capacity of the regional mass transit system.  In creating a sustainable environment it is important to also take into consideration future generations, that is why PlaNYC has thought of ways to not only maintain New York City’s current infrastructure but ensure it is good for the future as well. Critical back-up systems for the water network are being developed, ensuring a dependable source of water into the next century. This is vital because many people don’t realize that our resources are finite and more importantly image002that dumping trash into the water doesn’t magically remove it. A full “state of good repair” will be reached for the roads, subways, and rails for the first time in history. The energy infrastructure will also be upgraded to provide a cleaner, more reliable power for every New Yorker. This thought to preserve and improve the environment consists of reducing global-warming emissions by more than 30%. Global warming is occurring on a grand scale due to the emission of numerous greenhouse gases. The main gases that enter the atmosphere because of human activity consist of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases.  The Earth is trapping their heat in the atmosphere causing the incremental temperature raises. Another proposal is to achieve the cleanest air quality of any big city in America and clean up all contaminated land within the five boroughs. Contaminated land is especially harmful during periods of rain, when it is carried down streets, further polluting many places. Another issue with contaminated land is that if the land remains polluted for long periods of time, the soil will begin to absorb the impurities, causing damage not only to the surface but underneath as well. Lastly, ninety percent of the bodies of water will be opened to recreation by reducing water pollution and preserving natural areas.

Million Trees NYC is just one of the many initiatives by PlaNYC, launched by the Parks Department and New York Restoration Project; it is a collaboration of many partners. It has a single ambitious goal, which is to not only plant, but also care for one million new trees across the five boroughs over the next decade. Planting trees is not only beneficial but it is cost-effective as well. In achieving this goal, we will be increasing New York City’s so-called “urban forest” by 20%. The urban forest is known to be our most valuable environmental asset composed of street trees, park trees, and trees on public, private and commercial land, adding up to a grand total of over five million trees and 168 species.  The plan is to plant 60% of the trees in parks and other such public spaces and the other 40% will come from private organizations, homeowners, and community organizations.

By successfully achieving the proposed goal, the primary benefits provided in the three key areas of the urban forest will flourish. The first benefit provided by our forest lies in the environment. This consists of a slowing global climate change, water quality protection, improved air quality, lower summer air temperature, natural resource conservation, and wildlife habitat. Trees contain tissues that are composed of three basic groups. These groups are dermal tissue, which is present in the bark, ground tissue, present in the roots, and vascular tissue, under the bark. Dermal tissue is responsible for controlling environmental issues that continually affect the outside of the tree, by capturing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere there is a reduction in the rapid climate change that is currently occurring, simultaneously helping to reduce the amount of energy used by buildings and reducing carbon dioxide emissions from fossil-fuel based power plants. It is noted that our trees remove over 42,000 tons of carbon each year. Apart from capturing carbon dioxide, trees also capture rainfall on their leaves and branches, acting as natural storm water capture. Retaining water doesn’t only save money, by decreasing the importation of water for harvesting it also helps limit street flooding which can

Annual Benefits Total

($)

$/tree

$/capita

Energy

27,818,220

47.63

3.41

Air Quality

5,269,572

9.02

0.65

Stormwater

35,628,224

61

4.36

CO2

754,947

1.29

0.09

Aesthetic/Other

52,492,384

89.88

6.43

Total

121,963,347

208.82

14.94

potentially lead to run-off. Aiding in the improvement of air quality, trees remove dust and other pollutants from the air. In New York

Total Annual Benefits of Street Trees in NYC

City alone, the trees remove about 2,200 tons of air pollution per year, valued at $10 million annually. Leaves absorb gaseous pollutants and air-borne particles; they also prevent the release of many airborne pollutants by reducing energy generation. In addition to this, the ability of trees to lower temperature reduces ground level ozone, a contributor to greenhouse gas formation.  This is largely favorable in decreasing pulmonary illnesses such as asthma. Another great use of trees is simply for shading buildings and concrete and thus returning humidity to the air through evaporative cooling. This modification of temperature profits us not only on an individual level but also helps reduce the amount of fossil fuels used for cooling and heating by homeowners and businesses. Lastly, as is commonly known, nature provides food and shelter for many species of birds, insects, and other wildlife, as well as educational resources for all people. Economically speaking, the growth of the urban forest is also highly beneficial to New York City. Over the years, the city has invested millions of dollars and in return, trees provide $5.60 in benefits for every dollar spent. The benefits a tree provides are directly proportional to the size of a given tree. In New York City, the most common type of tree is the London planetree and it is usually only around 0-6 inches in diameter but just this one tree makes a big difference. A significant link also exists between the value of a property and its proximity to green spaces as does between the appeal of a business district and the perception of an area. Lastly, but most importantly, by achieving the million-tree goal, New York City residents are guaranteed to have better health. Evidence exists to prove that trees help reduce air pollutants, as previously mentioned, that can cause asthma and other respiratory sickness. In addition to this, by creating green spaces we are also creating places for increased physical activity.

An interesting fact about MillionTreesNYC is that it calls for everyone’s help. Anyone can participate in this movement by either planting a tree on their own time, by taking part in volunteer planting and tree care outings, or even by joining educational training and workshops. Individual requests are being accepted to plant a tree in front of a given home or building, it is especially important for “target blocks” or blocks with little to no vegetation to begin planting trees. Just like anything else, trees don’t last forever and so the Parks Department is also automatically replacing trees after its removal. Besides just planting single trees, the Parks Department is also examining existing forests as a reference for creating new ones. There are certain sites that are currently unused that can serve as perfect green spaces. The sites need to first be prepared by removing matter that is not useful such as dead plants. Then volunteers and hired contractors can begin the beautification process.

Planting a million trees will surely help the urban environment greatly but the next step in fulfilling the mission is to establish care and maintenance networks for the newly planted trees, provide education programs to establish links between schools and the initiative, and offer green employment training for disconnected youth. There are programs already designed in which people can participate to make New York City more green. A few of these are the MillionTreesNYC Stewardship Corps, Education Program, and MillionTreesNYC Training Program. The Stewardship Corps is designed to involve New Yorkers of all different ages in the collective effort to not only maintain but also protect urban street trees. They offer workshops to committed individuals, and community based groups interested in planting, weeding, landscaping, and soil maintenance practices. The training program offers practical learning in tree care, ecological restoration, and landscape design and gardening. This program is great because it doesn’t only seek to better the environment it also seeks to provide youth with the professional skills needed to attain future employment. Everything sounds well established, and it is, but some difficulties do exist in achieving this goal. One image004obvious issue is that of competition for space, which exists in the city. Rapid residential and commercial developments reduce existing and potential tree habitat. Between 1984 and 2002 alone, 9,000 acres of green open space were lost to competing land uses. Along with the growth of population there is also an increase numerous pollutants, new construction, and vehicle and foot traffic. Construction damage, invasive species, soil compaction and degradation, drought, flooding, air pollution, vandalism, and pests such as the Asian long horned beetle are all detrimental factors to the progression of the urban forest. Hopefully by promoting awareness and engagement of all New York City residents, these trees can overcome the difficult conditions and provide benefits to all.

Sustainability is achieved by making sure a balance exists in which the environment is preserved for the need of future generations. The triple bottom line approach is a current sustainability issue as is the ecological footprint. The triple bottom line approach attempts to balance societal, economical, and environmental needs in order to maintain equilibrium.  The ecological footprint stresses the importance of using short life span resources that don’t leave a long lasting negative imprint on the image006environment. In addition to these matters, the Clean Air Act was proposed to control air quality. The problems with not only this act, but also many other laws that are imposed are that they are not enforced and so it is as if they did not exist in the first place.  The New York City Department of Buildings adopted two new policies as a result of the impact of MillionTreesNYC. The first requires that every new surface parking lot constructed within the five boroughs be planted with trees in order to reduce heat. Dark asphalt is known to reflect heat and so by planting trees in parking lots more shade is created, limiting the amount of incoming sunlight. The second policy requires that upon construction of any new building, new street trees must be planted every 25 feet around the structure. The initiative is also working with the City Council to advance zoning changes that protect existing large trees located on private properties.

The three level model of pollution transport tells us that pollution at a local source is actually pollution on a global scale. Similarly to this, a step in a positive direction is beneficial not only in its immediate location but for the world. MillionTreesNYC is an impressive initiative formed to better New York City but it will also have a positive global effect. By planting a million trees in the city, the urban forest will grow providing New Yorkers with better air and a better overall lifestyle. The planting of trees will especially contribute to environmental, economic and health and lifestyle benefits throughout the city. It is important to acknowledge that we have failed to maintain a sustainable environment but we must embrace propositions to make a change for the better.

Sources:

“Economic Benefits of Trees – NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation.” New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Web. 14 Nov. 2009. <http://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/40243.html>.

Environmental Protection Agency. “Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” U.S Environmental Protection Agency. 15 October 2009.  EPA. 4 November 2009. <http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/index.html>.

“MillionTreesNYC.” MillionTreesNYC. 2009. 2 November 2009. <http://www.milliontreesnyc.org/html/home/home.shtml>.

Nix, Steve. “A Tree’s Tissue.” The Complete Forests, Trees and Forestry Home Page. Web. 14 Nov. 2009. <http://forestry.about.com/od/treephysiology/a/tree_tissue.htm>.

NYRP. “Greening & Sustainability.” New York Restoration Project. 2009.  NYRP.  3 November 2009. <http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_your_park/trees_greenstreets/treescount/index.php>.

“Trees Count!.” New York City Department of Parks & Recreation. Web. 14 Nov. 2009. <http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_your_park/trees_greenstreets/treescount/treecount_summary.php>.

Tree People. “Benefits of Capturing Rainwater.” Tree People. 2009.  Tree People. 3 November 2009. <http://www.treepeople.org/benefits-capturing-rainwater>.

]]>
Clean Ocean Action https://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/2009/12/18/clean-ocean-action/ Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:59:39 +0000 http://eportfolios.macaulay.cuny.edu/thegreenerapple/?p=271 Clean Ocean Action

by Joanne Cheung

Environmental crises, such as climate change and resource depletion, continually threaten the well-being of humans, animals, and the non-living world on a global scale. While humans have undeniably contributed to the degradation of the natural world, several environmental activists have made great strides in helping the Earth recover. In fact, many widespread environmental movements can be traced back to the efforts of a small community. One such instance would be the establishment of Clean Ocean Action (COA)—a local organization in New Jersey that combats water pollution along the New York and New Jersey Bight. COA aggressively engages in scientific research, public policy, and citizen involvement to further its cause for an overall healthier marine ecosystem.

COA’s main mission is to “improve the degraded water quality of the marine waters off the New York and New Jersey coast”. It developed in 1984 as a partnership among 125 organizations, ranging from surfing to fishing and diving groups. Within this dynamic network, all members share the common goal of investigating the causes of ocean pollution and providing solutions for a richer marine environment. As a key strategy, COA utilizes “research, education, and citizen action to convince our public officials to enact and enforce strict laws to protect our marine resources for today’s and future generations.”

Contaminated sediments, wastewater discharge, strip-mining, oil and gas drilling, and storm water runoff all play a role in causing local coastal pollution in the New York and New Jersey waterways. The NY/NJ Bight used to be a diverse stretch of water that was home to “more than 300 species of fish, nearly 350 species of birds, 7 species of sea turtles, and many marine mammals, such as 10 species of whales and several species of seals and porpoises.” In terms of human resources and social benefits, this region provided many natural advantages for multi-billion dollar businesses.

image002The abundant sea life, however, dramatically declined as the “New York-New Jersey metropolitan area became one of the most populated and polluted coastal regions in the United States” . There were eight ocean dumpsites set aside for sewage sludge, dredged spoils, construction wastes, acid wastes, wood burning, toxic wastes, and industrial wastes. COA has since contributed to the passing of federal law that prohibits the disposal of refuse into the Bight.

Though those barbaric days are behind us, there are those who, looking to exploit the sea’s riches and threaten its ecosystem, view this living resource as a cheap disposal ground. The Bight is still at the receiving end of the most densely populated urbanized area in the country, belching a steady toxic tide of poisons into the water. The fertile waters of the Bight are suffocating under the rainy day deluge of sediment, pesticides, petroleum, and sewage. (Mecray)

Despite some of the progress made, it is clear that there is more to be done. Research shows that “materials from diverse sources have added large amounts of metals, carbon, bacteria, and organic contaminants to the sea floor over the last century” . While these metal concentrations become diluted over time, they often contaminate the sediments at the bottom of the ocean. These polluted sediments can, then, travel from the dumpsites and impose hazards to benthic creatures. Furthermore, biological processes and regional currents continually redistribute contaminants and bring in additional wastes from the land.
In the past, COA has successfully directed several campaigns to cope with these continuous threats to water quality. In terms of plant and animal biodiversity, COA supports New Jersey’s artificial reef program as a valuable way of providing crucial habitats and feeding grounds for fish. Artificial reefs imitate natural ecosystems and are built to “be pollutant-free and long-lasting to ensure biological diversity and richness”. Ships and military tanks have actually been used to create sturdy habitats that could last for decades. In 2006, an artificial reef was placed in Townsends Inlet with “500,000 tons of rock and eight vessels ranging in size from 31 to 178 feet long, as well as 17 sponsored patch reefs”. COA also established a monitoring system with New Jersey Council of Dive Clubs to examine the durability and usefulness of the reef materials.
image004In the political arena, COA helped campaign for the “New York Clean Ocean Zone Bill” to permanently protect and preserve the Bight from activities like “ocean dumping of contaminated sediments, permanent extraction of offshore sand by industrial strip-miners, and offshore gas and oil exploration.” Some goals that were set include prohibition of new ocean dumpsites, reduction of storm water pollution, and support for maritime activities that depend on a healthy ocean. COA argued political action was slow and unproductive, and thus urged for more effective techniques from elected representatives. In June 2009, President Obama established an Open Policy Task Force to compile different suggestions for a national ocean policy. COA contacted the Task Force and offered some proposals for enforcing unified public regulations.
In light of coastal water quality issues, COA attended a New Jersey joint hearing on the critical situation of Barnegat Bay on July 2009. The main solutions proposed were to reduce polluted runoff from existing areas and to request the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station to install a close cooling system instead of using 1.7 billion gallons of water to cool their plant. COA also advocated new sources of funding to help decrease water pollution. Enforcing existing laws on litter and sediment pollution could provide “needed revenues for addressing storm water problems and improving water quality.”

image007In September 2005, U. S. Representatives invited COA to testify before a joint legislative hearing on the Marine Debris Bill. The bill aimed to reduce ocean debris by establishing a waste prevention and removal program that would “reduce and prevent the occurrence and adverse impacts of marine debris on the marine environment and navigation safety.”
COA, the only environmental group in the country to present an oral testimony, provided an overview of the Floatables Action Plan, which is a marine debris control program currently operating in the NY/NJ region. The project involves multiple agencies to identify and remove debris before it leaves the NY/NJ Harbor, and to eliminate waste that washes up on the beaches. COA also offered a written testimony to members of the Subcommittee on Fisheries and Ocean and the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
COA is currently involved in projects against liquefied natural gas facilities and offshore drilling operations. Liquefied natural gas (LNG) is natural gas that has been temporarily condensed into a liquid form for easy storage and transport overseas. Last year, the New York Draft State Energy Plan was released with provisions that support LNG facilities. Atlantic Sea Island Group (ASIG) and Exxon Mobil are a few private companies that plan to construct man-made islands for LNG operations. ASIG’s deep-water port will be located less than 20 miles off the coast of New York and New Jersey, which includes marine areas that are “home to endangered species and is prime for fishing grounds”. The project requires about 140 acres of seafloor and 14 million tons of fill to create the offshore island. What’s even more astounding than these numbers is the fact that ASIG has no experience in offshore construction and LNG management.
In response, COA has compiled a comprehensive, 60-page study that highlights the environmental impacts of importing LNG. The report confirms that LNG ruins fish habitats, damages the seafloor, and threatens endangered species in the oceans. It’s also responsible for 40% more greenhouse gas emissions than domestic natural gas and “steers us in the wrong direction away from existing conservation, efficiency, and renewable energy needs”. Large numbers of COA groups also went to a hearing in Farmingdale and Brooklyn to oppose these dirty foreign fossil fuel ports. They proposed a green vision for renewable domestic energy and conservation technology. In addition, COA is currently urging citizens of all ages to sign an online petition opposing these three offshore industrial ports.

image010LNG not only increases the carbon footprint, but it also leads to offshore oil and gas drilling. In 2006, a federal plan—called the Environmental Impact Statement—was proposed to open the country’s coasts for oil and gas drilling. When the plan became open for public commentary, COA submitted a report in hopes of deterring any offshore drilling operations. The report explained the risks that drilling would pose in New York and New Jersey. For instance, it defended the waters as an ecologically unique ecosystem and rich feeding habitat for migratory birds. The currents could potentially carry the pollutants from offshore drilling to the shorelines and threaten the diversity of oceanographic species of the Bight.
COA also voiced concerns against some economic consequences, specifically in the tourist and recreation sectors. The “economic lifeline for coastal communities is fueled by tourism and commercial and recreational fishing”, providing enormous financial benefits both in food production and the job market. In 2003, New Jersey received $700 million dollars in retail sales from recreational fishing, while New York received about $1 billion dollars.

In light of the Bight’s environmental and economical dependence on fresh ocean waters, COA found it crucial to exclude the New York and New Jersey coast as a drilling site. The battle, however, is current and ongoing. COA is still encouraging the public to actively express their support for an oil-free ocean by writing letters to editors of local newspapers, calling US Senators and US Representatives, and spreading the word to friends and family. In terms of public policy, having local, state, and federal leadership on implementing real energy conservation and alternate energy sources is an effective tool.
image012COA further promotes active participation by organizing a bi-annual Beach Sweeps event, where participants remove litter and other marine debris from the beaches and waterways in New York and New Jersey. The Beach Sweeps program was introduced in 1985 as a relief project for sea animals that were suffering the deadly effects of litter buildup. Whales, birds, and fish would ingest or get entangled in objects that they would mistaken for food.
In fact, plastic bags, fishing line, and cigarette filters are still found in the stomachs of birds and fish. Plastic litter has lasting negative effects on the wildlife, because plastic can take up to several hundreds of years to decompose. Though it may not seem apparent at first, litter in the waterways can even affect humans’ enjoyment of the beach.
Participants from different cleanup sites in New York and New Jersey “collect and record valuable data about debris, which is then presented in annual reports and used to advance federal, state, and local programs to reduce litter.” The data is then collected onto a spreadsheet and uploaded onto the COA website for easy accessibility for other coordinators to use across the nation. Divers also administer underwater cleanups. Volunteers of all ages and groups participate in this grassroots program, including schools, boy and girl scouts, and businesses.
The first Beach Sweeps was held at Sandy Hook with 75 volunteers, who wore different colored tee shirts based on the garbage items they were to collect. The major waste materials at the time were: plastic, glass, metal, wood, and foam plastic. In 1993, Beach Sweeps expanded into a statewide event with over 2,500 volunteers who collectively removed 130,000 pieces of litter from the beaches that year, including syringes and plastic tampon applicators.
Throughout the history of Beach Sweeps, cigarette filters have been the most commonly collected items from across the nation. In 2005, nearly 42,000 cigarette filters were found. The filters are made of cellulose acetate, a plastic that degrades at a very slow rate. Furthermore, they are designed to gather chemicals and particulate matter, which eventually leaks out and poses a biohazard to aquatic species. The Beach Sweeps event is constantly evolving and expanding, and now includes the cleanup of rivers, lakes, and streams. Today, Beach Sweeps is actually one of the longest running cleanups in the world.
In 1988, COA developed a storm drain stenciling program as a way of educating the public about storm water run-off and reminding communities that litter and pollutants from storm drains can end up in our streams, rivers, lakes, and oceans. Storm drains are designed to direct the flow of rainwater from the streets into pipes that lead to a waterway. Often times, there is no filtration system in place to treat the contaminated rainwater before it enters the waterway. This leads to issues of contaminated drinking water, bioaccumulation, fish kills, and wildlife endangerment. While there may be a creek or ditch that collects the rainwater, the creek eventually widens into a pond, lake, or ocean. Much of the dirt, debris, rubber, and chemicals that the water picked up from the roads can “pollute our water supply and also threaten marine life living within the water bodies that receive the water.”
image015 In 1993, storm drain stenciling officially became a bi-annual event where individuals paint a stencil onto a storm drain to convey the idea that whatever enters the drains eventually travels into the environment, affecting all aspects of life. For example, participants may paint a stencil of a fish and the words, ‘No Dumping’. As an outreach program, COA hopes visitors will find the message compelling and invite their own communities to do the same. Moreover, COA provides vinyl stencils, brochures, and activity packets for teachers as educational resources. COA’s activist movement continues to grow both on a societal level, as with the beach sweeps, and on a personal level, as demonstrated by these storm drain stenciling programs.
In 1999, the U. S. Library of Congress presented a national endeavor to “document distinctive cultural traditions for future generations of Americans and provide ‘snapshots’ of everyday life in America at the turn of the century.” COA’s Beach Sweeps was nominated as a “Local Legacy” and earned the honor of sharing the science, history, and purpose of its marine cleanup efforts.
The combined efforts of passed legislation and community involvement has brought about incredible improvements in the NY/NJ Bight. The beaches are cleaner, water quality of the waterways is improving, and public demand for healthier oceans are growing. Man-made disasters have long disrupted the Earth’s sensitive equilibrium, but COA has tried to correct that wrong by focusing on the fragile nature of our planet’s waters.

Clean Ocean Action: Be the Solution to Ocean Pollution. Web. 19 Nov. 2009.
.

Mecray, Ellen L. “FS 99-114: Contaminants and Marine Geology in the New York
Bight.” USGS Publications Warehouse. Web. 19 Nov. 2009.
.

]]>