Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCFE agenda 041017AGENDA Orange County Commission for the Environment April 10, 2017 7:30 p.m. Solid Waste Administration Building 1207 Eubanks Road, Chapel Hill Time Item Title 7:30 I. Call to Order 7:32 II. Additions or Changes to Agenda 7:35 III. Approval of Draft Minutes — March 13, 2017 The CFE will consider approval of minutes from the last meeting. (Attachment 1) 7:40 IV. CFE Annual Work Plan Discussion with BOCC CFE officers will discuss meeting with BOCC on March 28tH 7:50 V. Carrboro Climate Action Plan Update Jeannette will present an update concerning the Carrboro Plan. (Attachment 2) 8:10 VI. Orange County Climate Resilience Assessment Brennan will provide an overview of this process to the CFE. (Attachment 3) 8:15 VII. CFE Committee Meetings The committees will review their priorities and determine how to proceed (Attachment 4). 9:15 VIII. Updates and Information Items Staff and /or CFE members will provide updates on the following items: ➢ Continuing Action Items from previous CFE meetings • SOE 2019 Planning (Attachment 5) • CFE Facebook page ➢ DEAPR Earth Evening event, April 28th, 2017 ➢ Clean Energy and Air Op -Ed (Attachment 6) ➢ "Climate Change Reality" Mailing (Attachment 7) ➢ CFE Climate Change Articles (Attachment 8, 9) ➢ WaPo Climate Change Article (Attachment 10) ➢ Sierra Club Analysis of Federal Budget on NC Environment (Attachment 11) ➢ Any other new information from CFE members and staff 9:30 IX. Adjournment • Next Meeting; May 8, Richard Whined Facility, 300 West Tryon Street, Hillsborough • PLEASE NOTE; The June 12, September 11 and November 13 CFE meetings will be held at the Animal Services Building, 1601 Eubanks Road, Chapel Hill CFE Meeting Ground Rules (Adopted 9112111) 1. Keep to agenda topic under discussion 2. Share relevant information 3. One person speaks at a time after recognition by the Chair 4. Everyone is invited to participate in discussions / no one person should dominate discussions ,. Strive to reach consensus first before voting Activities the CFE expects to carry out in 2017: • Continue to write news articles on environmental issues of importance to Orange County, including climate change, energy conservation, and other important topics • Continue to explore ways to improve the County's ability to foster local sustainable energy production and energy efficiency strategies, including making Orange County an even better place for appropriately -sited solar energy generation, including developing incentives for increasing energy efficiency in new construction • Recommend ways to reduce the County's "carbon footprint" and implement the County's Environmental Responsibility Goal (BOCC Priority #10) • Continue to help with public outreach and management efforts related to hydrilla in the Eno River • Participate in a County effort to identify and preserve important landscape corridors that connect significant natural areas and open space (BOCC Priority #1) • Co- sponsor the annual DEAPR photography contest (The Nature of Orange) • Help plan for and participate in County's annual Earth Evening event Concerns or emerging issues the CFE has identified for 2017: • The CFE will continue to advocate for an expansion of the County's commercial food waste pickup and composting services to reduce food waste in the solid waste stream • The CFE remains interested in developing incentives for increasing energy efficiency in new construction • The CFE will continue to learn more about environmental justice matters and incorporate relevant information and considerations in the next State of the Environment report (2020) and its other activities • The CFE will continue to follow the Solid Waste Advisory Group's discussions of how to improve the handling and disposal of Orange County's solid waste, and will advocate for better long -term solutions • The CFE will continue to advocate for increased efforts to gather information related to water resources in Orange County and to increase public awareness and understanding of water supply sources, related concerns, and what steps can be undertaken to maintain or improve the quantity and quality of Orange County water supply resources • The CFE will continue to address, as appropriate, the critical environmental issues for Orange County as enumerated on page 3 of the 2014 State of the Environment report, which include potential adverse effects from a) invasive, non - native, plant and animal species; b) reductions in State -led collection of water resources data; c) potential drilling for natural gas in the Deep River basin; d) urban sprawl; and CFE support for e) the responsible deployment of clean and appropriately -sited renewable energy and reductions in energy use to help fight climate change Orange County Commission for the Environment IIIIIIIIII'� VIII " " " "' "" "11111 "" Meeting Summary March 13, 2017 Richard Whitted Facility, West Tryon Street, Hillsborough Present: Lynne Gronback (Chair), Bill Kaiser (Vice Chair), May Becker, Peter Cada, Jeanette O'Connor, Alan Parry, Sheila Thomas -Ambat Absent: Lydia Wegman, Rebecca Ray, Alex Nicodem, Jeremy Marzuola, William Newby Staff: Tom Davis, Brennan Bouma I. Call to Order — Gronback called the meeting to order at 7 :30. II. Additions or Changes to Agenda — New members Matt Crook and Marshall Gray introduced themselves briefly. III. Approval of Minutes from February 13, 2017. O'Connor motioned to approve the minutes as written. Parry seconded. Minutes were approved unanimously. IV. CFE Review of Outside Agency Funding Request — Members formed small groups and reviewed different elements of the Piedmont Wildlife Center's funding request. Staff compiled the scoring and feedback of CFE members for submission to the BOCC. V. State of the Environment 2019 - The last State of the Environment (SOE) report was completed in late 2014. It took nearly two years and there were 14 draft versions before the final. Given the amount of work that has gone into this in the past, the CFE discussed the general pros and cons of producing an updated SOE report in the same model. Several questions were asked and some discussion followed each. Because they were not fully answered, the CFE agreed to revisit these questions to guide future discussions: • What are other Counties doing to track and report on the state of their natural environment? Crook offered that private corporations are moving away from paper reports and towards websites. • Who is the audience? It has been Orange County residents and elected officials • What other large reports does the County produce? State of the County Health Re ort, Community Health Assessment, The 2030 Comprehensive Plan, Chapel Hill Carrboro Chamber of Commerce State of the CommunLty Report, [added after meeting Public Health Dashboards] • What is the purpose and how has it been used? The purpose has been public education. It was used in a high school science class as an overview of where the students live. [added after meeting: cited in the Chapel Hill Carrboro Chamber of Commerce State of the Community Report] Is this just retrospective? Are goals stated? It's mostly retrospective based on a set of indicators and there are suggestions on how to improve. • How many hard copies would we need? How many times has it been downloaded? The schools got copies, the Commissioners got copies. Staff offered to look into the number of times it was downloaded. • Will climate be addressed? If we include it, it is a big question to answer. Possible Options to Consider: • Move to a climate action plan. Look at Carrboro's new plan as a model. • Just update the facts and leave the report context and formatting as -is. After the last report, there was an interest in adding sections on the climate and environmental justice. • Change analysis on a parcel level or using GIS telemetry Planned land use going forward Use the similar process currently being updated for the long range regional transportation plan. VI. CFE Committee Meetings- • Matt Crook will join the Air and Energy Committee • Marshall Gray will join the Water Resources Committee VII. Updates and Information Items- Continuing Action Items from previous CFE meetings; The series of public education articles produced by the CFE was discussed. Crook offered an idea to offer articles and updates to the BOCC and ask them to get the word out. The news media may be more interested in hearing from them. • Creek Week in Durham, March 18th - 25th, 2017 https / /keepdurhambeautiful org /our - events / durham- creek - week - events/ • DEAPR Earth Evening event, April 281h, 2017 • Triangle Land Conservancy's Brumley Forest Preserve Grand Opening, April 22nd, 2017 • PACE Financing (Attachment 9) • NC Science Festival, April 7th — 23rd, 2017 http://www.ncsciencefestival, org/ VIII. Adjournment- Cada motioned to adjourn, and Marzuola seconded. Meeting adjourned at 9:28 pm. Summary by B. Bouma, AMS Staff Next meeting; April 10, Solid Waste Admin Building, Chapel Hill The Climate Action Plan has six categories of recommendations to guide the community in pursuing a 50% reduction in per capita greenhouse gas emissions. Please see the plan on the Town's website (htth: / /www.townofcarrboro.org/ 928 /Community - Climate - Action -Plan) if you are interested in learning more about a particular recommendation. Community Integration • Create Grass Roots Partnerships to Engage Community • Expand Public Partnerships • Create Green Neighborhood Program • Integrate Climate Action with Local Living Economy • Expand Capacity • Facilitate Low Cost Financing for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects • Integrate Climate Action and Social/Equity Initiatives Building Energy Efficiency Measures • 50% challenge • Energy audit/performance rating • Energy performance beyond minimum requirements for new development • Create rental property task force /process • Create rental property registry /certification Transportation • 50% challenge • Enhance transit service • Improve vanpool/carpool options • Further promote walking, biking, transit • Limit idling in school loading zones • Improve bike /ped infrastructure Renewable Energy • Pursue community solar projects • Pursue downtown geothermal heating and cooling • Create rental property task force and process Ecosystem Protection and Enhancement • Pursue stormwater utility • Evaluate extent to which the deer population and climate change affect native plant ecosystems. • Accelerate /expand organic waste collection /composting • Tree preservation, protection and conservation • Improve regulations and community capacity to discourage invasive plants and encourage native plants • Pursue watershed restoration actions to protect local streams from changes in rainfall due to climate change Food Choices • 50% challenge • Develop local dietary consumption and associated GHG profile Triangle Regional Resiliency Project Background: IM10 In June of 2oi6, Sustainability Managers from Cary and Durham invited other local government sustainability staff from Orange County, Wake County, Chapel Hill, and Raleigh, to scope out a collaborative effort to assess the resiliency of the Triangle. Monthly meetings have been held at TJCOG to discuss shared interests and review a technical assistance proposal from the Asheville -based National Environmental Modeling and Analysis Center ( NEMAC). NEMAC is a national center based in Asheville that wrote the "U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit" for the Federal government. Staff from AMS and Emergency Services has participated to assess the value to Orange County. Project Overview: • Technical assessment of resiliency in a time of increasing uncertainty— demographic, economic, and climate changes • Extension of existing plans, not a plan itself • Six Main Phases: 1.) Explore Climate Threats; 2.) Exposure Assessment; 3.) Sensitivity, Adaptive Capacity, Vulnerability and Risk ; 4.) Options to Build Resilience; 5.) Final Report Preparations; 6.) Digital Access • One workshop per phase: Minimal guidance required • Costs and Distribution: • FY17 - Phases 1 -2 ($5,700 to be covered by Emergency Services) • FY18 - Phases 3 -6 ($13,300 proposed in AMS budget) Products: • Exposure assessments (maps in hard copy and electronic format) • Comprehensive list of prioritized options • Final Report and Website Value to Orange County: • Regional collaboration on a topic of shared interest (possibly the first regional resilience plan in the Southeast) • More specific climate change impacts on local level will allow for improved mitigation actions for floods, droughts, economic disruptions, etc. • Improves on Eno -Haw Hazard Mitigation Plan o Whole systems approach instead of topic -based silos o Forward looking • Options can be integrated into Hazard Mitigation Plan • Makes actions eligible for FEMA funding • Opportunity for public engagement Brennan Bouma, Sustainability Coordinator (919)245-2626 Kirby Saunders, Emergency Management Coordinator (919)245 -6135 Orange County Commission for the Environment CFE Committee Priorities (updated May 2016) Air and Energy Resources Committee (May Becker, Tom Eisenhart, Bill Newby) 1. GHG Emissions Inventory — Consider whether it is feasible and worthwhile to conduct a comprehensive update of the County 2005 greenhouse gas emissions inventory. 2. Green Building — Help the County develop an incentive program for green construction. 3. Climate Change — Educate county residents about climate change, alternative energy sources and efficiency, and steps to reduce their (and County government's) carbon footprint. 4. Energy Efficiency — Partner with Piedmont Electric Membership Corp and /or Duke Energy to take advantage of USDA program for low- interest loans for energy efficient upgrades for its members /owners. Water Resources Committee (Peter Cada, Rebecca Ray, Sheila Thomas - Ambat, Bill Kaiser) 1. Stream Buffers — Conduct a literature review of the science in support of maintaining vegetative buffers to protect water quality, aquatic habitat, and biodiversity. 2. Hydrilla Treatments — Continue to educate the public about hydrilla and other invasive species of concern; continue to monitor chemical treatments to assure they are not harmful to rivers. 3. Surface and Ground Water Quality — Increase the collection of data for surface and ground water quality; increase public education so it might lead to more funding for data collection. 4. Water Supply — Continue to educate county residents about our water supply and what steps can be taken to improve /maintain quality and quantity of future water supplies into the future. Land Resources Committee (Loren Hintz, Jeanette O'Connor, Lydia Wegman, David Welch, Lynne Gronback) 1. Comprehensive Conservation Plan — Collaborate on the development of a comprehensive conservation plan for Orange County for Legacy program and others to protect natural areas and wildlife habitat. Consider ways to ensure conservation land is distributed equitably throughout the county so that everyone has reasonable access to enjoy these areas. 2. Native Plant Habitats - Renew collaboration with NC Botanical Garden and others to identify significant roadside habitat for native plants; then ask NCDOT and other utilities to eliminate the use of herbicides to manage vegetation in those special roadside habitats. 3. Native Landscaping - Educate homeowners and businesses on reasons to choose a diversity of regionally native species for landscaping and other ways to promote biodiversity. � � � E � O N W 0 co m 0 CI4 co O CNI � 0 CI4 Itf 0 OL @ 0 ¢ q k 0 0 ƒ 0 v _ £ 0 ¢ J .§ k % k E 2 0 OL @ / E .� ¢ .s ¢ Q� 0 7 � r M 2 a) I y (D � ¢ ± E . j 0 '\ -0 y ¢ ¢ .$ / ¢ 0 % m O ± _ Eo AIo 80 a mm ns § § .eju .m % 2:1 E- ¢ cn k k E C k k 0 � $ L � % g E @ E .§ ® _ q � % \ o 0 d 2 _ o E ¢ .� m r 2 d / 7 \ k U = o E_ 2 9 r m E % § E 2 k § 0 3 % 0 m o - cn C _ (D 0� -- g 7 % LIO \ 0 _0 Jqjulm - Iej f C�. $ E § .2 Q_ Q / C) S _ � 2 @ r k 2 / E � 0 / LL 3 k LI0 em mnS- ijdS 0 7 � r M 2 a) I y (D � ¢ ± E . j 0 '\ -0 y ¢ ¢ .$ / ¢ 0 % m O ± 8 0 SuijdS _ Eo AIo 80 a mm ns § § .eju .m % E- ¢ cn k k k /cu 0 ¢ ® E2t % \ E @ e 8 0 SuijdS E % y ® (D 80 a mm ns % E- ¢ k k C ¢ % % e .§ � � % E_ o E C/) = % d d 7 8 0 SuijdS MENU Climate Change Skeptic Group Seeks to Influence 200,000 Teachers In partnership with: THE roundtruth PROJECT (http://thegroundtruthproject.org/) MARCH 28, 2017 by KATIE WORT ( TTP: / /WWW.P S.00 /WC /FRONTLINE /PERSON /KATIE -WORT /) Tow Journalism Fellow, FRONTLINE /Columbia Journalism School Fellowships The Heartland Institute says it will send the book "Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming" to every public school science teacher in the nation. (Brenna Verre, FRONTLINE) Twenty -five thousand science teachers opened their mailboxes this month and found a package from the Heartland Institute, a libertarian think tank that re- jects the scientific consensus on climate change. view last week. If so, the campaign would reach more than ( :// .- =*MM �,, ence teachers Accompanying the materials is a cover letter (https://www.document - cloud.org/ documents /35264.15 - Heartland- Institute - letter -to -e ucators.htmi) from Lennie .larratt, project manager of Heartland's Center for Transforming Ed- ucation. He asks teachers to "consider the possibility" that the science is not set- tled. "If that's the case, then students would be better served by letting them know a vibrant debate is taking place among scientists;' he writes. The letter also points teachers to an online guide to using the DVD in their classrooms. The Heartland initiative dismisses multiple (http://iopscience.iop.org/arti- c I e/1 0.10 88/1748-9326/8/2/024024/m eta) studies (http://journals.sagepub. - com/doi/10.1177/0270467616634958) showing scientists are in near unanimous agreement that humans are changing the climate. Even if human activity is con- tributing to climate change, the book argues, it "would probably not be harmful, because many areas of the world would benefit from or adjust to climate change" The campaign elicited immediate derision from the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), a nonprofit in Oakland, California that monitors climate change education in classrooms. "It's not science, but it's dressed up to look like science;' said NCSE executive di- rector Ann Reid. "It's clearly intended to confuse teachers" It's too early to know how the materials will be used in schools around the coun- try. There aren't uniform standards for teaching climate change, and the subject l / 1 / 1/1 in some states. Even when it is taught, Reid says, "what goes on behind the classroom door is really up to the teacher." The campaign comes at a time when Heartland's influence on national climate policy is at an apex. Myron Ebell, a leading climate change skeptic and a long- time ally (https://www.heartiand.org/about-us/who-we-are/myron-ebell) of the Heartland Institute, ran ( :// r / /r li /ar it / - - r - II- -li a - raria -I a i - ru a- ra i i / ) President Donald Trump's transition efforts for the Environmental Protection Agency. That process led to the appointment of climate change is ( :// a - i / / r - vir / / 1/ / / -li a - a - - rui - ra is - a- - i /u r 1 1 Scott Pruitt as administrator of the EPA. Pruitt, a former Oklahoma attorney general, has publicly questioned the scientific consensus around climate change, and has brought in like- minded officials com/2017/03/07/us/politics/scott-pruitt-environmental-protection-agency.htmi) - rui - vir al- r i -a who support dismantling policies that curb fossil fuel emissions. Trump took a major step toward that goal on Tuesday when he signed ......... ............................... (http://www.politico.com/ story /2017 /03 /onai- trump - climate- change - execu- iv - r r® 7 ) an executive order rolling back the Clean Power Plan, an Oba- ma administration initiative that aimed to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. "We're getting a lot of requests for expert opinion from the White House;" said Bast. "That's very new. We haven't had those calls for eight years. Even 12 years" Last week in Washington, D.C., Heartland held its annual conference challenging the idea that there is a scientific consensus on climate change. The conference focused on the future of energy and climate policy under Trump. Bast opened the meeting by saying, "This is a wonderful time to be a global warming realist ;' using the term that those in the movement use to describe themselves. "Those of us in the room who have been working on this issue for a decade or longer can finally stand up and say hallelujah and welcome to the party;' said Bast. He was met with applause from the 200 or so people in the audience. Their message has been embraced by some educators. A survey of 1,500 science teachers nationwide, funded by NCSE and published in the journal Science last year (http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6274/664), found more than half taught their students that humans are unequivocally causing climate change. But 31 percent of teachers told their students that the cause of climate change is still being debated. About one in 10 teachers teach children that humans had no significant role in climate change, the study showed. The author of the survey, Eric Plutzer, professor of political science at Pennsylva- nia State University, said those results reflect the fact that climate change can be challenging to teach: It doesn't slide neatly into any of the required sciences, comprising some biology, some chemistry and some physics. Science teachers themselves may not have encountered the science of climate change much in their own education. Bast said he was not shocked that four in 10 teachers mention or advocate con- trarian views, though he hesitated to take credit for it. "Science teachers are smart. Smarter than the average reporter. Smarter than the average environmental activist ;" he said. Bast said the organization has already received several messages from teachers who appreciated the information, or asked for a Heartland speaker to come to class. But the campaign is not being well received by everyone. Lori Baker, a sixth -grade science teacher at North Putnam Middle School in Roachdale, Indiana, found the package in her school mailbox and was dismayed by its contents. "I read quite a bit of the book, actually, and it was extremely frustrating. It's an attempt to sound science literate, but there's very little actual data;' she said. Baker pointed to the first paragraph of the foreword, written by Marita Noon, executive director of Citizens' Alliance for Responsible Energy, a nonprofit and lobbying group that advocates for the use of fossil fuels. In it, Noon writes that Obama's description (http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/21/us/climate-change-us- obama/) of climate change as the greatest threat facing mankind is "laughable" .................... ............................... at a time when "ISIS is beheading innocent people" "That as a foreword to something claiming to be scientific is pretty shocking;" ►: • M. Plutzer said the Heartland book is likely to be dismissed out of hand by teachers like Baker, who already view climate change denial as a fringe movement. But it may be welcomed by those already skeptical of the scientific consensus. "This could increase polarization within the science teaching profession, though prob- ably not a great deal" That polarization could easily be exacerbated at South Whidbey High School in Washington state, where biology and physics teacher Greg Ballog received the material. Ballog said that one of his colleagues is a "borderline climate denier;' which has already caused tensions in the school's science department. "I'm not going to show this stuff to him;" he said. "It's pretty slick. I think he might use it" This story was produced as part of a collaboration between FRONTLINE and The GroundTruth Project ( http- Ilthegroundtruthproject.org /) examining climate change and its impact on women and children. Correction: An earlier version of this story mistakenly said that a 2072 Heartland strategy document was leaked to the press. Rather, the document was acquired from Heartland under false pretenses before being publicly released. RELATED STORIES Meet Myron Ebell, the Climate Contrarian Leading Trump's EPA Transition NOVEMBER 14, 2016 (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/f ront Iinelar icle! ee ® yron ®e be II - e ®cli a e ®con rarian ®lea in ru rn ps ®epa® ra ns it ion /) CHAPEL HILL: OPINION MARCH 21,201710:48 AM Evidence of climate change increasing ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSION FOR THE ENVIRONMENT First of two parts Ninety -eight percent of climate scientists agree that our climate is changing. Changes since 1950 include atmosphere and ocean warming, winter snow cover decreasing, Arctic sea ice decreasing, sea level rising, increased melting of alpine glaciers, increased atmospheric water vapor, and changes in the timing of seasonal events (earlier thaws, later frosts). Accompanying these changes are extreme rainfall events and drought. Average global surface temperature has risen about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit in the past century. The last decade was the warmest measured over the past 136 years. In the Northern Hemisphere, 1983 -2012 appears to be the warmest 30 -year period over the last 1,400 years. Sixteen of the last 18 months were the hottest on record; 2014, 2015, and 2016 were consecutively the hottest years on record. Global ocean temperatures have steadily increased since the 1950s causing the ocean to expand, contributing to sea level rise. Rates of sea level rise have been greater during this time than the average rate during the previous 2,000 years. Over the last two decades the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have been melting, as have most alpine glaciers. If the entire Greenland ice sheet melts, global sea level would rise about 23 feet. Cause and effect Human influence on climate change is clear. Emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) are the highest in history and are the reason for the recent rapid rate of climate change. GHGs have increased to levels unseen in the last 800,000 years. During that time, GHGs and temperature were controlled by earth's orbit around the sun. However, orbital changes are not behind today's global warming; our current orbit indicates that the globe should be cooling not warming! Atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) has increased approximately 40 percent since the 1700s, from 280 to 400 parts per million (ppm). The optimum CO2 level is believed to be 350 ppm or less. Gi ORBITAL CHANGES ARE NOT BEHIND TODAY'S GLOBAL WARMING; OUR CURRENT ORBIT INDICATES THAT THE GLOBE SHOULD BE COOLING NOT WARMING! Ocean acidification, caused by the absorption of atmospheric CO2, is the evil companion of climate change. The pH of the ocean is currently 8.1, which is 30 percent more acidic than 300 years ago. The ocean's ecosystem would begin to crash if pH falls below 7.8. As acidification worsens, it would become more difficult for corals to construct reefs and mollusks to calcify their shells. Reef building is particularly vulnerable to climate change, and current loss is a sign of that change. If current trends continue, coral reefs would cease to grow and start dissolving. Over the last 30 years Australia's Great Barrier Reef has declined by 50 percent. Models Scientists use models to test hypotheses, make predictions, and frame new questions. When Global Circulation Models (GCMs) do a good job of replicating past and current observations, scientists have confidence that these models can forecast the future. GCMs are able to replicate the more rapid warming seen since 1950 as well as short -term cooling after recent volcanic eruptions (Mount Pinatubo 1991). GCMs also predict the extreme events we are currently experiencing such as major flooding and extended heat waves and drought. GCMs tell us about some of the drivers of large, sustained changes in global temperature observed over the last century. Models using only natural forcings such as solar variation and volcanic activity and excluding GHG emissions show essentially no temperature increase over the last 100 years. But when the effects of human activity are included, the fit with observed data is very good. To successfully replicate climate behavior over the past century, models must include warming driven by CO2 emissions produced by human activity. Coming next Wednesda Shop new A th<<ornvrof filer p) }1f P`"„ % ub 1091001 VA CHAPEL HILL: OPINION MARCH 28,201711:45 AM Climate change drives mass extinctions I News & Observer Climate change drives mass extinctions; are we next? BY THE ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSION FOR THE ENVIRONMENT This is the 2nd of 2 parts, Read the first part here: www.newsobserver.com / news /local/ community /chapel -hill- news /chn- opinion /article 13 96042 8 8.html Paleoclimate Climate change in the distant past informs us about climate change today. Evidence demonstrates that carbon dioxide drove climate change then just as is occurring now. In fact, there is a strong link between atmospheric CO2 and temperature throughout, the past 550 million years of earth history. During warm periods CO2 was high and when CO2 was low, long - lived and widespread continental glaciation prevailed. Scientists infer ancient climates or paleoclimates from climate imprints called proxies, sources of climate information from natural archives. Proxies represent any bit of evidence that can be used to infer climate, e.g., ice cores, tree pollen, stable oxygen isotopes, sediment cores, coral reefs, and calcareous shells. Oxygen isotope ratios may be the most important proxy and can be used to infer past water temperatures. Ultimately, past climates are reconstructed using a combination of different proxies. Perhaps the best ancient analog of modern climate change is the Paleocene- Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), a 200,000 -year period of natural global warming that took place 56 million years ago. During the PETM the earth warmed approximately 11 degrees Fahrenheit over 20,000 years. Today the globe is warming at least 10 times faster than during the PETM. Because the PETM involved rapid warming caused by an onslaught of greenhouse gases, the event can be used to predict potential effects of modern climate change. Among these effects are: ocean acidification and circulation reversal, higher ocean temperatures and sea levels, dissolution of calcifiers' shells, coral die -off, and extinction events. The geologic record demonstrates that when CO2 changes were big and rapid (like today) the consequences were catastrophic, in some cases leading to mass extinction. At least eight major mass extinctions have been recognized. During these events a significant proportion of the world's flora and fauna ( >50 prcent) were eliminated in geologically short amounts of time (tens of thousands to less than 1 million years). Conversely, it can take millions of years for biodiversity to recover from a mass extinction event. Gi THE GEOLOGIC RECORD DEMONSTRATES THAT WHEN CO2 CHANGES WERE BIG AND RAPID (LIKE TODAY) THE CONSEQUENCES WERE CATASTROPHIC, IN SOME CASES LEADING TO MASS EXTINCTION. Extinctions occurred during times of regional volcanism releasing huge volumes of CO2 accompanied by anoxia (oxygen deficiency), euxinia (sulfidic conditions), and ocean acidification. Reef building stopped, resulting in gaps in the geologic record that mark climate change and mass extinction. Two catastrophic mass extinctions are known to have occurred: the end of the Permian (252 million years ago) and the end of the Cretaceous (66 million years ago) periods. The Permian extinction was the worst in history wiping out an estimated 90 percent of all life in approximately 200,000 years. What emerges from the geologic record is that mass extinction has occurred multiple times and is likely to occur again. In fact, extinction is underway now and has been termed the Anthropocene extinction, beginning when human activity started to impact global earth systems. Only the starting point of the latest extinction event is in question. Many point to the start of the industrial revolution, while others would start the clock earlier during the Pleistocene (Ice Age). Evidence suggests humans caused the extinction of the Ice Age megafauna and Neanderthals in a geologic instant but at a rate that was too gradual to be perceived by the human perpetrators. Additional evidence suggests that right now human activities are causing further extinction. The contemporary extinction rate greatly exceeds the naturally occurring background rate. Whether humankind continues on a path to a potentially catastrophic mass extinction event or one similar to the many lesser extinction events that punctuated the last 550 million years remains to be seen. Homo sapiens, as the agent of extinction, risk being one of the�ctims of the pending extinction event. http: / /Www.newsobserver.com /news /local /com m unity /chapel -hi I I- news /chn -opi nionlarti cl el 41000668. htm I 1/3 1091 01VA ABOUT THE COMMISSION Climate change drives mass extinctions I News & Observer The Commission fort he Environment advises the Orage County Board of Commissioners on matters affecting the natural environment. This responsibility generally includes: advising on environmental policy, promoting education of the public and local officials on environmental issues, making recommendations on environmental initiatives, and understanding in special environmental studies and projects. The Commission for the Environment is a citizen advisory board comprised of 15 members, appointed by the Board of County Commissioners. The Commission for the Environment meets on the 2nd Monday of each month at 7:30 p.m., alternating meetings between the Orange County Solid Waste Administration building at 1207 Eubanks Road in Chapel Hill and the Whitted Building at 300 W. Tryon St. in Hillsborough. f �► u r► MORE CHAPEL HILL: OPINION SUGGESTED FORYOU 11 Times Airlines Made Their Planes Look Fly TravelChatter 10 -1 http: / /Www.newsobserver.com /news /local /com m unity /chapel -hi I I- news /chn -opi nionlarti cl el 41000668. htm I 2/3 109117W11 VA The Top Power Couples In The NFL SportsChatter Musicians' Most Embarrassing Onstage Incidents CelebChatter Climate change drives mass extinctions I News & Observer http: / /Www.newsobserver.com /news /local /com m unity /chapel -hi I I- news /chn -opi nionlarti cl el 41000668. htm I 3/3 OC t"AStitriQtQtt. Post IHea tth & Sclu eince As Trump halts federal action on climate change, cities and states push on By tevein IRmOsoin and IBinady IDemnniiis ,h 28 Jim Brainard is a Republican mayor in a Republican city in a Republican state. But that hasn't stopped him from taking aggressive steps in recent years to combat climate change and become more energy efficient. During his tenure, Carmel, Ind., has shifted its fleet to hybrid and biofuel vehicles, replaced streetlights with LED bulbs, installed hundreds of miles of bike paths and spent millions of dollars planting trees to absorb carbon dioxide and provide shade. Carmel now has 102 roundabouts — more than any community in the country, he says proudly — that have reduced traffic accidents as well as helped to conserve gasoline, reduce air pollution and save electricity by negating the need for traffic lights. "For a long time, taking care of our environment was a nonpartisan issue," Brainard said. "I have yet to meet a Republican or Democrat who wants to drink dirty water or breathe dirty air." But Tuesday afternoon, President Trump signed an executive order instructing the Environmental Protection Agency to roll backthe Clean Power Plan, the Obama administration's signature effort to combat climate change by limiting carbon emissions from power plants and requiring states to cut down on overall emissions. Trump maintains that Obama -era regulations have unnecessarily hampered businesses and that freeing companies from such burdensome requirements will provide an economic boost. Some mayors, governors and business leaders plan to press ahead with plans to clamp down on carbon emissions, saying it makes sense for the economy as well as the climate. "It doesn't impact anything we're doing," Brainard said. He'd rather not see the Clean Power Plan scrapped, but its absence won't alter the trajectory of Carmel, which sits just north of Indianapolis, or many other places around the country. "Cities aren't going to stop. They were working on things that save money and provide a better environment long before the federal government got involved with the Clean Power Plan, and they'll continue to do so." It's not only cities. About 30 states have established standards that require utilities and power companies to sharply increase their reliance on renewable energy over the next decade or more. Falling prices for wind and solar and low prices for natural gas have further undercut coal's share of the electricity market. According to the Sierra Club, 175 coal plants in the United States have shut down since 2010, and 73 others are scheduled to retire by 2030. The Energy Information Administration is more sanguine about coal's prognosis, but it still says that coal will be eased out of the electricity mix even without the Clean Power Plan. In a 2015 report, the EIA said that go,00o megawatts of coal -fired capacity would be retired by 2040 with the plan in place. Without the plan, coal capacity would still fall by 40,000 megawatts. "We're not building any new coal plants in this country, and the existing ones are having a harder and harder time competing with ever - cheaper renewables," said Mary Anne Hitt, the head of the Sierra Club's "Beyond Coal" campaign. "There's a ... structural disadvantage for coal in the marketplace. That's not something Donald Trump can wave away with the stroke of a pen." State -level programs to boost renewable sources of electricity have support, in some cases, across party lines. In the weeks after Trump's election, Republican governors in three Midwestern states — Illinois, Ohio and Michigan — committed to adding more renewable power and boosting energy efficiency. "If President Trump doesn't recognize it, we've seen that Republican governors do see an investment opportunity with efficiency and renewable energy," said Dick Munson, who works on clean energy programs in the Midwest for the Environmental Defense Fund. In Illinois, Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) signed the Future Energy Jobs Bill, which was negotiated with the state's Democratic - controlled legislature. The measure would channel more than $200 million a year into renewable energy investment. It also sets tougher standards for utilities, requiring them to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 56 percent by 2030. The Clean Power Plan would have required a comparatively modest cut of 34 percent. In Ohio, Gov. John Kasich (R) vetoed a bill that would have weakened that state's renewable standards. Major corporations such as Amazon and Whirlpool, as well as wind and solar developers, had urged him to stick to ambitious renewable goals. (Amazon chief executive Jeffrey P. Bezos owns The Washington Post.) "I believe it's real," Kasich said of climate change in a speech last fall at the University of Texas at Austin. "You can't read these stories about these things happening all over the world, on our coasts and the rising sea levels, without being concerned about it." Out west, California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) has made clear that he will eagerly push forward with his state's efforts to combat climate change and shift to cleaner energy sources. "Whatever they do in Washington, they can't change the facts," Brown said during a state of the state address days after Trump's inauguration. "And these are the facts: The climate is changing, the temperatures are rising, and so are the oceans. Natural habitats everywhere are under increasing stress. The world knows this." Months earlier, Brown had signed legislation requiring the state to cut greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 — an ambitious goal compared with past targets. Weeks earlier, the state had hired an outside legal team that includes former U.S. attorney general Eric H. Holder Jr. to help defend its environmental and other policies in the age of Trump. Some of the nation's biggest utilities also say that shelving the Clean Power Plan will have little effect on their long -term actions, which aren't aimed at four -year presidential cycles but involve looking decades ahead. "[Our] long -term strategy is focused on generating and delivering electricity in ways that meet the needs and expectations of our customers," Nick Akins, chief executive of American Electric Power, one of the nation's largest utilities, said in an email. "That includes diversifying our fuel mix and investing in renewable generation and other innovations that increase efficiency and reduce emissions. That won't change." AEP's 2016 carbon dioxide emissions were already 44 percent below 2000 levels, and Akins said the company expects further declines as it adds more natural gas and renewable power generation. It plans to invest about $1.5 billion in renewable energy over the next three years. Marijke Shugrue, a spokeswoman for another major utility, NRG, said the company "set our sustainability goals back in 2014 unconnected to the Clean Power Plan. Whatever happens to that, our goals still stand. It made sense before, and it still makes sense." The plan set a goal of reducing NRG's carbon emissions by 50 percent by 2030. Investors also understand that operating coal plants these days can be bad for the bottom line. After the owners of the 40- year -old Navajo Generating Station in Arizona announced Feb. 13 that they would close the station's coal -fired power plant, Moody's Investors Service called the decision "credit positive" for the owners. Closing the enormous 2,250- megawatt facility — the largest coal plant west of the Mississippi River — "reduces risks associated with the coal -fired units meeting environmental standards," Moody's said. In addition, the shutdown "brings economic benefits to ratepayers." At the Environmental Defense Fund, Munson expects renewable energy will continue to surge even in states that lack renewable portfolio standards. "Look at Texas," he said. "Not exactly a font of progressive policies." Even so, Texas is home to one - fourth of the nation's wind capacity, with more on the way. On Nov. 27, wind energy set a record there, providing 45 percent of the state's total electricity demand that day. Overall, wind provides 12.7 percent of the state's electricity, and projects underway will bring that to about 16 percent when finished. Yet it would still be a setback if Trump manages to stymie the Clean Power Plan, Munson said. "It was a symbol, and an important one, that suggests this is the path that our nation is going to take to tackle this challenge and do it in an investment- focused way," he said. "Backing away from that sends the wrong message." i PROPOSED FEDERAL CUTS TO US EPA: A GUIDE TO UNDERSTANDING THE POTENTIAL IMPACT ON NORTH CAROLINA'S ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS March 15, 2017 Prepared by the North Carolina Chapter of the Sierra Club with assistance from Robin W. Smith, J.D. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency plays a fundamental role in protecting the environmental health of North Carolina. It works with the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to set policies and regulations, then enforce those regulations. The EPA provides budgetary support to state environmental programs and to our universities for environmental research. North Carolina's environmental programs are heavily dependent on federal funding, along with annual appropriations set out in the state budget by the General Assembly. News reports published March 15, 2017, say the Trump administration is considering cuts of at least 25 percent to the EPA budget. The final federal budget, including the EPA budget, will require approval by Congress. The impact of possible EPA cuts on North Carolina environmental programs and enforcement would be considerable on its own. But it is important to note that these cuts would compound substantial funding reductions to N.C. DEQ made by the General Assembly over the past six years. Governor Cooper has proposed a state budget that would start to build back some of the DEQ programs cut over the past six years; the 2017 -2018 state budget is not yet finalized. The Baseline: Background on Six Years of State Environmental Funding Reductions Newly proposed cuts to the EPA, if adopted, would reduce already overburdened environmental program budgets at DEQ which have been through at least six years of cuts at the state level. In 2009 -2010, all state program budgets were reduced to address a budget shortfall caused by the 2008 recession. After 2011, the Legislature made more significant cuts to specific DEQ programs. Coastal management, water quality, and sedimentation pollution programs saw some of the greatest cuts. Page 1 of 7 ♦ Division of Coastal Management (DCM): 20 percent reduction in staff. DCM issues permits for major coastal development projects, reviews federal coastal projects, supports public beach access, and manages the state's coastal reserve sites for research and education. ♦ Division of Water Resources (DWR): Reductions of at least 18 percent in water quality and water resources program staff. The cuts resulted in a 41 percent reduction in water quality staff in DEQ regional offices. Staff in the regional offices do initial site visits for permit applications, provide technical assistance, and inspect facilities to ensure they comply with permits. ♦ Sedimentation Program: 45 percent reduction in sedimentation staff since 2008. Staff levels fell from 65 in 2008 -2009 to 36.9 in 2015 -2016. The sedimentation program implements state law requiring erosion control measures on active construction sites to prevent sediment from reaching rivers, lakes and streams. Potential Impact of Anticipated Cuts to EPA on N.C. Environmental Programs These cuts, if adopted, would slash budgets for enforcement, environmental protection programs and university research, as explained below. 1. PROPOSED CUTS TO EPA AND U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT According to published reports, the Trump administration has discussed cuts of as much as 30 percent to environmental enforcement programs in EPA and in the Department of Justice. Although N.C. DEQ does routine enforcement for the programs that have been delegated to the state, EPA in coordination with Department of Justice attorneys bring specialized and high priority enforcement cases. Examples of joint EPA and DOJ enforcement in N.C. include the following: ♦ 2016 partial settlement with Volkswagen for violations of the Clean Air Act caused by deliberately bypassing pollution control devices on vehicles the company manufactured and sold in the U.S. ♦ 2016 settlement requiring a $5.5 million cleanup of PCBs in the area surrounding the Ward Transformer site in Wake County. PCBs, or polychlorinated biphenyl, is a chlorine compound that was widely used in manufacturing until environmental toxicity was proven and it was banned in the U.S. in 1979. Although banned, it may remain in some products like electrical transformers. Page 2 of 7 ♦ 2015 consent decree in a case against Duke Energy for violation of the Clean Air Act in N.C. Settlement of the case included $4.4 million for mitigation of the air quality impacts in communities around the Duke Energy's polluting coal -fired power plants. 1 2014 settlement requiring installation of upgraded air pollution controls and emissions monitoring at nitrogen fertilizer plants in Aurora, N.C. ♦ 2014 consent agreement in an enforcement action against Duke Energy for Clean Water Act violations caused by the Dan River coal ash spill. In addition to penalties, EPA required Duke Energy to enter into a $3 million cleanup agreement. ♦ 2013 settlement with the City of Wilmington and New Hanover County for Clean Water Act violations including unauthorized discharges of untreated sewage. 1 2010 settlement of Clean Water Act construction stormwater violations by homebuilder Beazer Homes USA, Inc. at construction sites in 21 states including North Carolina. 1 2002 criminal conviction of the owner of Carolina Upgrading of S.C. Inc., a company that falsified more than 1,500 inspection /leak detection reports on underground storage tanks at gasoline stations and other facilities in Florida, Georgia, North and South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. ♦ 2002 guilty plea by Lakeview Packing Company, a hog slaughter and processing company, for Clean Water Act violations. The company intentionally discharged 30,000 gallons per day of process waste through a drain pipe into a marsh connected to a tributary of the Neuse River. 2. N.C. ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS CURRENT FEDERAL GRANTS (ACTUAL) TO N.C. ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS, AND PROPOSED CUTS (BASED ON PUBLISHED REPORTS) The charts below show the amount of the most recent federal grants received by DEQ environmental protection programs (as shown in the 0 "1: I� ................ � . ); the percentage of the total DEQ program budget the federal grant represents; and the federal reduction now reportedly under discussion. The charts below are approximations based on numbers in the N.C. state budget, available on the N.C. Office of Budget & Management website. A question mark indicates uncertainty about the impact of proposed federal budget reductions. Estimates are based on media reports of planned Trump administration budget cuts, in reference to the 2017 certified budget for N.C. environmental programs. All of the federal grant funds shown come through the EPA budget except for the coastal management grants. Page 3 of 7 AIR QUALITY N.C. Clean Air Act Implementation [Note: this program receives no state appropriations. The only state dollars come from fees.] Total Program Current Federal Percent Federally Proposed Federal Cost Grant Funded Funding Cut $0 Air Quality Monitoring $799,710 (re. media reports) $4,854,105 $2,482,845 +/- 50 percent -30% Other Air Quality Grants Program Current Federal Grant Proposed Federal Funding (re. media reports) Greenhouse Gas Emissions $229,932 $0 Clean Diesel Program $625,883 $0 Air Quality Monitoring $799,710 ? Nitrogen Dioxide Air Pollutant Monitoring $149,460 ? WASTE MANAGEMENT Solid Waste Management: Total Budget $11,886,783. Program Current Proposed Federal Federal Grant Funding (re. media reports) Comprehensive Environmental Response, $2,228,910 $0 Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Brownfields, Superfund ) Hazardous Waste $2,244,789 ? Page 4 of 7 Underground Petroleum Storage Tanks Cleanup Program Program Total Federal Percent Proposed Federal $6,662,950 Funding Grant Federally Funding (re. media Funded reports) Leaking Underground $4,248,490 $2,044,483 50% ? Storage Tank Cleanup Underground Storage $5,275,121 $2,204,007 40% ? Tank Regulation DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES Clean Water Act Implementation (Permitting and Enforcement) Total Funding Current Federal Grant Percent Federally Funded Proposed Federal Funding Cut (re. media reports) $14,160,554 $6,662,950 +/-50% -30% Other Division of Water Resources Grants Program Total Current Federal Grant Percent Proposed Federal Funding Federally Funding (re. Funded media reports) Safe Drinking $5,870,612 $3,316,895 > 50% -30 %? Water Act Nonpoint Source $4,114,787 $4,114,787 100% ? Water Pollution Wetlands Program $468,373 A minimum of >40% ? $203,826 (Wetlands Assessment) Groundwater $873,756 $86,341 10% ? Protection (Underground Injection Control) Page 5 of 7 Water Resources $4,450,002 $1,232,269 22% ? Planning' Funding Federal Grant Funding Federal Albemarle Pamlico $1,098,731 $1,098,731 100% ? Estuary Program Funded (re. media 50% -17% ?3 MISCELLANEOUS Purpose Division /Office Total Current Percent Proposed Funding Federal Grant Funding Federal Federally Federal Funding Funded reports) Grant Funded (re. media 50% -17% ?3 Implementation $2,466,307 reports) Beach Water Division of $330,812 $330,812 100% ? Quality Marine Fisheries Estuarine Reserves monitoring $929,923 +/-75% Unspecified cut Pollution $34,603 0 Prevention COASTAL MANAGEMENT Total Budget: $6,139,124 Federal Grants: > 50% Budget Purpose Total Current Percent Proposed Federal Funding Federal Grant Federally Funding (re. media Funded reports) Coastal Program +/- $2,466,307 50% -17% ?3 Implementation $2,466,307 Coastal Resource $376,000 $376,000 100% ? Enhancement Estuarine Reserves ? $929,923 +/-75% Unspecified cut ' The total planning budget appears to include both water quality planning and the river basin hydrologic modeling program. The federal grant goes only to water quality planning, so would represent a larger percentage of that program budget. I Federal grants for the coastal management program and the National Estuarine Research Reserves come through the U.S. Department of Commerce budget for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 3 Based on proposed percentage cut to total NOAA budget. Page 6 of 7 3. GRANTS TO N.C. UNIVERSITIES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AND CLIMATE CHANGE RESEARCH N.C. Sea Grant Program (North Carolina State University): The Trump proposed budget (as reported in the media) would, if passed, eliminate all funding for Sea Grant programs nationwide. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) budget funds Sea Grant programs in 33 states and territories to do research and provide extension services on coastal issues such as erosion and other coastal hazards, fisheries, aquaculture, and threats to coastal resources such as algal blooms. A NOAA grant provides about half of the total funding for the N.C. Sea Grant program. As reported by the News and Observer, N.C. Sea Grant N.C. Sea Grant received about $1.7 million in federal money last year, $1 million in state matching funds and about $774,000 in funding from other sources. The N.C. Sea Grant program employs 26 people and distributes millions of dollars for research on coastal issues by faculty at a number of UNC campuses. Other university -based research organizations that receive research grants through the NOAA and EPA budgets include the UNC Institute for the Environment (UNC -CH), the Institute for Marine Sciences (UNC -CH) in Morehead City, and individual departments /faculty at UNC -CH, NCSU, UNC - Wilmington, and other UNC system campuses. EPA has awarded millions of dollars in grants to university -based researchers in North Carolina on subjects ranging from water infrastructure funding and maintenance to nutrient pollution reduction; the health effects of exposure to airborne particulates, arsenic, and endocrine - disrupting chemicals; and climate modeling. Grants through NOAA's National Center for Coastal and Ocean Science also makes grants to university -based researchers. Research funded in North Carolina included mapping of wind energy resources off the coast; study of alternative ways to stabilize coastal shorelines; invasive lionfish; and development of training to identify harmful algae. Page 7 of 7