WolfeNotes.com

Tomorrow (Sunday) is the 5th anniversary of Superstorm Sandy. So, because we depend on public libraries for WiFi access, today we repost this October 29, 2012 post, written in real time just as the storm was hitting the NJ coast:

• A Dirge To McHarg and Mumford – Who Are Rolling Over in Their Graves

Amazingly prescient post, if I must say so myself  (and note how it includes a prior July 6, 2012 post on infrastructure vulnerability – the same infrastructure that was devastated by Sandy).

Tragically, very little has changed and there has been very, very little accountability for the failures of the Christie Administration to prepare and respond and recover from Sandy in light of climate change risks.

But Enck Rolled Over As NJ Gov. Christie Rolled Back Federal Protections

Is Enck laying foundation for US EPA Administrator in 2020?

former EPA Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck at NJ Superfund site (Cornel-Dubilier)

I just listened this morning to former EPA Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck on a panel at the northeast NPR radio station WAMC (“The Roundtable” – listen here). I only heard a portion, but during the conversation, the panelists praised Enck for an opinion piece that ran in The Hill today regarding EPA budget cuts, see: We cannot weaken the EPA as hurricanes are growing worse (for some reason I can not access the content of that piece, so confine my remarks to the radio show).

I like Ms. Enck as a person and respect her qualifications and long career record of public service, both in government and environmental advocacy organizations.

But, I was deeply disappointed by her failure to hold the Christie Administration accountable and enforce federal environmental laws in NJ during her 7+ year tenure as head of Region 2, which oversees NY, NJ and Puerto Rico.

At the outset, we had high hopes for Enck, and looked to her for a strong federal oversight backstop against the Christie Administration’s regulatory and enforcement rollbacks. But she has been a disappointment.

I spoke with Ms. Enck personally shortly after her appointment. She seemed aware of many NJ skeletons in EPA Region 2’s closet, but she asked me to work with her in confidence in reforming EPA and more aggressively overseeing NJ DEP. I told her I didn’t operate that way and did everything publicly. After that, she declined to work with me.

During her tenure, I wrote her numerous times, on Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and Safe Drinking Water Act compliance, stream buffer rollbacks, Superfund, RCRA, Dupont Pompton Lakes, Ford Ringwood, Barnegat Bay, BL England, Pinelands pipelines, NEPPS, EPA grant funding and more.

[update: Enck once called me to complain to explain that I got the facts and EPA’s position on enforcement and the taxpayer tab wrong on the Raritan Bay Slag Superfund site in this post. Read the update of that post to understand the disagreement. But an EPA RA calling a blogger?? Thin skin, no? ~~~ end update]

After some initial supportive replies and conversations, Enck simply stopped even responding and never really pulled the trigger or dropped the hammer on the Christie administration, despite an appalling record. (e.g. see this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and more).

It’s not as if Enck could not see all this coming.

During the 2009 campaign, candidate Christie said he looked forward to fighting the Obama EPA. In October 2009, Christie laid down the gauntlet:

“I’ve got a feeling that you will see, come January 2010, a lot of battles between the Christie administration DEP and the Obama administration EPA.” (watch YouTube)

The Christie administration basically created a model for the Trump administration, in terms of rolling back climate, renewable energy, environmental justice, and environmental protections via Executive Orders and regulatory policy; appointing industry hacks to run the Agencies (NJ BPU and NJ DEP); appointing industry scientists to DEP Science Advisory Board; slashing enforcement; dismantling environmental programs and intimidating career professionals; gutting and putting the burueaucracy on a short leash; allowing improper industry access to agency decision-making; and slashing budgets and diverting environmental funds to other purposes.

Many of these Christie policies impacted and possibly violated federally delegated and/or funded programs subject to Enck’s oversight.

On top of that, Enck looked the other way in the wake of Sandy, as the Christie Administration:

1) waived environmental review requirements for rebuilding infrastructure;

2) violated federal procurement laws in awarding contracts to political insiders;

3) failed to address climate change or renewable energy in rebuilding plans; and

4) blatantly ignored Obama Executive Orders on incorporating climate change in various federally funded and delegated programs.

Remarkably, in the wake of Sandy, Obama came to NJ to support Gov. Christie!

So, given that history, I found Enck’s aggressive critique of the Trump administration on today’s radio show somewhat opportunistic and hypocritical. Here’s why.

Specifically, today, Enck was highly critical of Trump administration $300 million electric grid rebuilding contract and failure to include renewable energy and local micro grids and climate adaptation & resilience in the Puerto Rico post hurricane rebuild plans.

Where was Ms. Enck when the Christie administration did virtually the same thing after Hurricane Sandy?

She also criticized the Trump administration proposed deep budget cuts at EPA.

Where was Ms. Enck when Obama proposed budget reductions at EPA? (e.g. see:

• Obama Budget Request Cuts $300M From EPA Funding

Where was Enck when Obama abandoned EPA scientist proposed Clean Air Act standard for ozone? At the time, even the NY Times critically noted:

“Reaction from environmental advocates ranged from disappointment to fury, with several noting that in just the past month the administration had tentatively approved drilling in the Arctic, given an environmental green light to the 1,700-mile Keystone XL oil pipeline from Alberta, Canada, to Texas and opened 20 million more acres of the Gulf of Mexico to drilling.

Today, Enck piled on and also criticized the recent highly publicized gag on EPA scientists speaking at the Narragansett Bay National Estuary Program (NEP) conference.

But far worse than EPA Administrator Pruitt gagging scientists from speaking at a public event, Enck did nothing as Gov. Christie’s original Barnegat Bay “10 point management plan” failed to even mention climate change and Gov. Christie’s Barnegat Bay Restoration Strategy – after 8 years of study – totally ignored climate change impacts. (Barnegat Bay is part of the same Nation Estuary Program as Narraganset Bay.)

If that’s not opportunistic and hypocritical, I don’t know what is.

Enck challenged those EPA scientists to defy the EPA managers’ gag order and speak at the conference anyway.

When did Ms. Enck ever put here career on the line by defying political marching orders, from Albany or Washington DC?

Finally, Enck repeated a right wing talking point by saying it was impossible to fire EPA employees, even for cause. That is just not true and it was a cheap shot.

Ms. Enck’s criticisms show that it’s a lot easier to throw rocks from the outside than to lead and take career and political risks on the inside.

I know – been there, done that (and got fired for it too!)

[Endnote: Enck now talks a big game on renewable energy and climate change.

But in terms of the over-rated Obama energy and climate record, as EPA R2 Administrator, she went along with Obama’s Washington DC political message and talking points, not the policy merits.

In addition to Naomi Klein’s critique of Obama’s “all of the above” energy policy – does anyone recall that Obama bragged about record construction of pipeline miles and US fossil energy production? – and climate record, here’s a more recent cogent critique from a Jacobin article:

In true technocratic fashion, Obama sought a fix through executive orders, administrative measures, and elite international negotiations. His Clean Power Plan relied on the power of the presidency to reduce emissions by further regulating power plants and raising fuel standards using the Clean Air Act and the Environmental Protection Agency. In his final year in office, he made much of brokering an international agreement at the COP 21 in Paris — the first global climate agreement since Kyoto in 1997.

But his achievement was overstated, and so was liberal panic over its demise. The agreement fell far short of what climate scientists and activists alike agree would be necessary to avoid a dangerous 2˚C or higher warming — not least because Obama himself had pushed for it to be non-binding. Even implementing the set of commitments made in Paris would have required sustained political action, regardless of who controlled the Oval Office.

Paradoxically, Obama also got more blame for regulatory attempts than he probably deserved. Stricter emissions regulations are just one reason the demand for coal has been declining: activists have campaigned for the closing of coal-fired power plants and the prices of both solar power and natural gas have been plummeting. But Obama provided a convenient scapegoat for coal country’s continued decline — after all, he’d done little to alleviate the crisis of unemployment and need in places once dependent on the resource. The path was clear for someone like Donald Trump to run on a platform of bringing mining jobs back — even if he had no actual way of doing so.

Is it ripe yet?

Message From The Front Porch (February 18, 2017)

We posted on this topic back on February 19, 2017, see additional photos at:

• Dog Democracy

Since then, its been all downhill.

I often get way out in front of an issue and then am compelled to rail on the mainstream corporate press and lame progressives, and then feel obligated to castigate them when events vindicate my analysis.

So, after yesterday’s US Senate Floor speech, I ask: Is it ripe yet?

Another funder driven biased story

Richard Mroz, founder of NJ Energy Coalition and current BPU President

NJ Spotlight ran a story today that again raises troubling issues about journalistic integrity, see:

• STATE WANTS TO HELP GET A FEW CNG-POWERED VEHICLES ON ROAD

Journalism can be biased by acts of commission and omission – this story has both faults.

The story has just one “source”, the NJ Board of Public Utilities. And there is no context provided so it reads like a BPU press release.

The story has just one quote, highly selective and highly spun, by BPU President Mroz:

“This is yet another positive step in implementing the state Energy Master Plan policies that supports alternative fuel vehicles comprehensively and are accelerating the adoption of alternative fuel vehicles, including electric and CNG vehicles,’’ said Richard Mroz, president of the BPU. “In making these grants we can gauge interest in cleaner and quieter-running CNG trucks and buses.’’

So much for commission.

The story also leaves out highly relevant facts, including:

1) BPU President Mroz is former gas industry lobbyist. He has a gross conflict of interest and has abused ethical norms by failing to disclose his conflicts and recuse himself from BPU decisions that benefit his former legal and lobby clients and members and associates at NJ Energy Coalition.

Specifically, Mr. Mroz was a founder, lobbyist, and senior advisor to the NJ Energy Coalition. 

Here is how Ed Salmon, the current Chairman NJ Energy Coalition describes the founding in testimony to the NJ Senate:

In August 2007, my partner Richard Mroz and I launched a new statewide organization – The New Jersey Energy Coalition. The Coalition’s focus is to provide a reliable third-party voice in the discussion on New Jersey’s energy needs. The Coalition was very involved in the New Jersey Energy Master Plan and has provided discussion and educational initiatives on energy conservation, energy efficiency, renewable energy, generation needs, and transmission challenges, to name a few.

Here is the 2007 launch press coverage – note that specific existing corporate energy facilities are mentioned, so the Coalition was far more than some generic “reliable third party voice”. They represented specific corporate interests and continue to do so. The Link to then existing NJEC is dead

Here are just some of the members of the NJ Energy Coalition, which include the law firm that represented South Jersey Gas and corporate interests in the Pinelands pipeline and BL England battles, including pipeline and natural gas companies that benefit from BPU approvals:

Cozen O’Connor: Cozen O’Connor is one of the top law firms in the country, employing over 600 attorneys in cities spanning two continents. This international firm has practices in litigation, business law and government relations.

New Jersey Natural Gas: New Jersey Natural Gas is a New Jersey Resources company dedicated to providing safe, reliable, and competitively priced natural gas services including transportation, distribution, and asset management.

NJ Petroleum Council: The New Jersey Petroleum Council is a state council of the American Petroleum Institute, that helps companies follow the status of regulatory and legislative issues impacting the oil and natural gas industries.

Orange & Rockland: Orange and Rockland is a gas utility headquartered in New York, and with its two subsidiaries serves over 750,000 people in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.

PennEast Pipeline Company: PennEast Pipeline Company is made up of six companies; AGL Resources, NJR Pipeline Company, PSE&G Power, South Jersey Industries, Spectra Energy, and UGL Industries. The company has plans to create the PennEast Pipeline that will provide customers with savings due to the reduced price of the transportation and the cost of natural gas.

Public Service Enterprise Group: Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG) is a publicly traded diversified energy company headquartered in New Jersey, and one of the ten largest electric companies in the U.S. PSEG’s principal subsidiaries are: Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G), PSEG Power and PSEG Energy Holdings.

RC Cape May Holdings: RC Cape May Holdings is an entity formed by Rockland Capital, Energy Investors Funds and other investors in order to acquire the BL England Power Station.

South Jersey Gas: South Jersey Gas serves customers in 112 municipalities spanning over 2,500 square miles, or one-third of the geographic area of New Jersey. This service area includes all of Atlantic, Cape May, Cumberland and Salem counties and parts of Burlington, Camden and Gloucester counties. The majority of new home construction on their mains choose to heat with natural gas.

Here is Mr. Mroz’s BPU bio: note boldface:

Before becoming President of the NJBPU he worked in private practice as a lawyer and lobbyist as Managing Director of Archer Public Affairs in Trenton, New Jersey and Of Counsel to Archer & Greiner P.C., in Haddonfield, New Jersey.

Here is how Archer Public Affairs describes their work (emphasis mine):

 HELPED ENERGY CO. SUCCESSFULLY RESPOND TO CRUDE OIL SPILL CRISIS

• Represented energy company regarding multi-million gallon crude oil spill at a refinery, a high-profile event because fumes reached neighborhoods for miles around.
• Served as liaison between the company and state government regulators.
• Conducted numerous conversations, conferences and correspondence with ground-level regulatory staff and high-level elected and appointed officials, keeping them apprised of issues and progress, and relaying information to the client as needed.
• Cleanup and state inspection went smoothly; government officials appreciated easy access to updates and information.
• Importantly, about a month before the spill, the firm had arranged a meet-and-greet with state officials, a recent contact that helped immeasurably during the emergent situation.

Here is “Sourcewatch” database on the NJ Energy Coalition which cites the group’s website:

Leadership

From the group’s website: [16]

• Dr. Edward H. Salmon, chairman – He also founded Salmon Ventures, “a strategic consulting firm based in New Jersey.”
• Richard S. Mroz, senior advisor – He “served as Chief Counsel to Governor Christie Todd-Whitman and was responsible for legislative affairs, negotiating the state budget, and advising the Governor and legal and policy matters. He also served as the Governor’s counsel and liaison for the state’s largest independent authorities including the Turnpike Authority, Water Supply Authority and New Jersey and the Environmental Infrastructure Trust.”

2) NJ Natural Gas is corporate funder of NJ Spotlight (a fact disclosed on NJ Spotlight website).

3) NJ BPU is doing an awful job in getting electric vehicle infrastructure installed.

4) methane is a potent greenhouse gas. Some scientific studies suggest that it is as bad as coal in global warming potential.

5) The $200,000 BPU grant is a corporate subsidy for the development costs of a CNG vehicle program.

6) No technical performance or cost effectiveness criteria for the program were even suggested by BPU. Nor was a comparative evaluation methodology with other alternative fuels suggested, especially renewables.

7) CNG investments compete with renewables

8) The Christie Energy Master Plan is controversial and has come under huge criticism for failure to address climate change and for promotion of fossil fuels, especially natural gas.

9) Governor Christie has diverted over $1 billion of Clean Energy Fund revenues to pay for his corporate tax cuts. These funds are used to subsidize energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. The Gov. has opposed subsidies to renewables but not to fossil fuels, especially gas.

10) The so called “cheap price” of gas is a false claim because it fails to include economic externalities that have been quantified and characterized by federal regulators as “the social costs of carbon”.

Other than that, it was a good story.

Heck of a job NJ Spotlight!

I’ve not been following the NJ Gov.’s race, but after reading today’s NJ Spotlight story about the Obama visit and endorsement, I thought I’d look at Murphy’s environmental issues agenda.

I was particularly pleased by the the Obama event’s valid and strong criticisms of Trump, including this statement by candidate Murphy:

“In 19 days, the world is going to be looking at New Jersey,” he said. “In 19 days, the world is going to look and see what kind of politics do we believe in, what kind of community do we believe in, what are our priorities, what are our values, what do we want to teach our kids what kind of message do we want to send to them?”

So, I thought I’d take Murphy up on his observation and see what kind of  politics and policies he believes in.

The headline to this press release immediately caught my eye: Labor & Environmental Leaders Give Strong Support to Sheila Oliver for Lieutenant Governor.

Obviously, it is important to know who Murphy views as an “environmental leader”.

That’s when I almost fell off my chair in reading this:

Kelly Mooij, Political Chair, New Jersey League of Conservation Voters Board:
“Phil Murphy chose an environmental steward in Assemblywoman Sheila Oliver, who joins the Democratic gubernatorial ticket as a candidate for lieutenant governor. Like Murphy, the former Assembly speaker from Essex County is a strong supporter of environmental protections and is prepared to lead New Jersey on key environmental issues like clean energy, climate change, and removing lead in drinking water … We believe Murphy and Oliver will work tirelessly to improve the quality of the air, drinking water, and open spaces for all New Jersey residents to enjoy.”

Does the Murphy campaign or the candidate himself know that Ms. Mooij serves as Vice President for Governmental Affairs at NJ Audubon?

And that NJ Audubon has a “partnership” with Donald Trump at his Bedminster Golf Course?

Aside from the many reprehensible outrages of Trump, that golf course has been the focus of significant critical national press attention, e.g. “Secret Service Spends $13,500 on Golf Cart Rentals on Trump’s Bedminster Golf Trip.

Read NJ Audubon’s own website, which brags about the Trump deal, as part of its “Corporate Stewardship” program: 

TRUMP NATIONAL GOLF CLUB SIGNS 10-YEAR AGREEMENT FOR WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ON ITS BEDMINSTER, NJ COURSE

.

I challenge the Murphy campaign to distance themselves from NJ Audubon and repudiate the Trump-Audubon deal.

Based on the recognition of and reliance on Ms Mooij as a “leader”, I question whether the Murphy administration will enact corporate friendly “corporate stewardship” policies that groups like NJ LCV and NJ Audubon support.

Where is the press corps on these controversial issues?

Where is NJ Spotlight, who almost exclusively covers environmental policy in NJ?