Bother Me Tomorrow, Today I Find No Sorrow
Ralph Waldo Emerson – Essays – Read
Looking Out My Backdoor (Credence – Listen)
Moonset – Sunrise
Raven In Flight
A Closer Look
NJ Senate Environment Committee Chairman Runs Away From His Own Climate Bill
Fossil Corporate CEO’s Given A Propaganda Platform And Praised
Climate Activists Are Passive, Clueless, And Evasive
Yesterday the Senate Environment Committee met to hear testimony from “invited guests” on climate adaptation (see my set up story where I outlined the key issues).
I have been unable to access the hearing audio tape on the NJ Legislature’s website – I either lack the software or a fast enough internet connection to listen, so, I don’t know what went down.
But Tom Johnson of NJ Spotlight covered the hearing, and his story today is really a perfect example of how and why the climate emergency is not being taken seriously in Trenton and many other places. Unfortunately, I have to rely on that coverage.
So, let’s take a look and highlight the most egregious abuses and name names.
1. Corporate Fossil CEO’s Are “Invited Guests”, Given a Propaganda Platform, and Praised
What NJ Spotlight called “a trio of energy executives” were “invited guests”: Ralph Izzo, chairman, CEO and president of the Public Service Enterprise Group and Robert Pohlman, a vice president of corporate strategies for New Jersey Resources, the owner of New Jersey Natural Gas (it was not reported who was the third of this “trio”).
They are given a platform and uncritical coverage by Spotlight to spout their misleading and self serving corporate propaganda. Izzo even got a paragraph subheadline: “Izzo’s five steps for NJ”
(none of which “steps” included stricter regulation or mandates to replace or supplement the current policy, which is limited to corporate subsidies and incentives. And the cynical support for a price on carbon was truly disgusting).
“Coincidentally”, just 2 days prior, Tom Johnson wrote a gag inducing fawning piece on Mr. Izzo’s career and retirement.
Just coincidentally, of course, just like this was a “coincidence”:
Coincidentally, the state Department of Environmental Protection announced Thursday the allocation of an additional $6 million to offset the purchase of electric trucks in vulnerable communities.
If you think either of those events was a “coincidence”, you need help (just like it is a “coincidence” that PSE&G funds NJ Spotlight and several lame environmental groups).
In contrast to this disgusting Trenton corporate lovefest, when even the moderate corporate Democrats in Congress seek testimony from fossil industry executives on climate issues, it’s not to provide them a propaganda platform and to praise them.
And even the lame corporate media tries to hold them accountable. Examples of the typical recent storyline, which have only gotten worse with skyrocketing gas prices – and corporate profits:
And many people view NJ Spotlight as a “progressive” news source. Tom Johnson is cynical and should have retired a decade ago.
2. Chairman Smith Ran Away From His Own Climate Bill
If you read the NJ Spotlight headline (“policy change in the works” – “previews bill”) and the Spotlight story, you could only think that new climate legislation is pending – as in the future:
By the end of the year, the chairman of the Senate Environment and Energy Committee hopes to have a bill ready that will outline new policy directions to fight climate change in New Jersey.
But the fact is that Senator Smith already introduced major new climate legislation, S1602.
That bill would put teeth in NJ’s Global Warming Response Act and make the emission reduction goals enforceable in DEP air permits.
As I wrote in my set up story:
Curiously, Chairman Smith has yet to post his own GHG emissions reduction bill, co-sponsored by Senator Greenstein, S1602, which “Authorizes regulation of greenhouse gas emissions under “Air Pollution Control Act (1954)” and “Global Warming Response Act. (for analysis of that bill, see:
Senator Smith apparently refused to even mention that important bill. He ran away from his own bill!
NJ Spotlight failed to report on that important bill.
We have a longstanding pattern of failure that can not possibly be an oversight: they never reported – for 15 years – the legal fact that the Global Warming Response Act goals are aspirational and not enforceable. They never reported on my repeated calls on Smith to put teeth in the law. And they never reported when the bill was introduced in February.
Climate activists apparently failed to even mention, never mind support, that important bill. Instead, they repeated their campaign talking points calling for a moratorium on new fossil infrastructure and for DEP to deny permits on pending new fossil projects.
Of course, the corporate executives didn’t mention that bill in their corporate spin.
Yet, without the legislative authority in that bill, the emission reduction goals of NJ’s Global Warming Response Act will remain aspirational and not enforceable.
DEP will be unable to deny permits for the major new fossil infrastructure and enforce a moratorium on major new GHG emissions sources that the climate activists targeted.
NJ needs a real climate law, like New York State, see:
3. NJ Spotlight is Misleading Readers About Growth In Greenhouse Gas Emissions
According to a recent Empower NJ Report, the Murphy DEP has approved permits for major new GHG emissions sources that have increased GHG emissions by 19.3 million tons, or about a 20% increase in total Statewide emissions.
But NJ Spotlight ignored that.
NJ Spotlight not only ignored that, they reported exactly the opposite: that emissions have declined:
New Jersey has reduced greenhouse-gas emissions by 20% below 2006 levels since it adopted the Global Warming Response Act in 2007, but it is far short of the 80% drop in carbon emissions the law targeted by 2050.
After giving corporate fossil CEO’s a platform to spew their propaganda, and failing to accurately report critical facts, NJ Spotlight closed the story with this “balance”:
But Ken Polsky (SIC) and Anjuli Ramos-Busot, both representing Empower NJ, urged the committee to refrain from promoting those fuels as a waste of resources, saying they would continue to exacerbate the impacts of climate change.
As it has lobbied for the last couple of years, Empower NJ wants the state to ban new construction of fossil fuel projects. Polsky and Ramos-Busot urged the Murphy administration to prevent seven current seven fossil fuel projects from being approved and built.
In a scathing recent press release, Empower NJ blasted the Gov., see:
NJ Spotlight whitewashes that criticism.
And no one is even talking about the facts that NJ laws to promote and require renewable energy are not linked to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Gov. Murphy’s Energy Master Plan’s renewable energy goals are in no way linked to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The Gov.’s off shore wind renewable energy has not and will not displace fossil fuels.
As currently designed and under current laws, renewable energy will primarily if not exclusively serve growth in electricity demand and not displace fossil power (mainly gas fired power).
For a solid analysis of how renewables serve new demand growth, see:
Since all this is well known, the failure to mention any of it amounts to cowardice – and that is astonishing in the face of the accelerating climate emergency and obvious failure by State leaders.
Solar Development To Proceed On 600 Acres Of Farmland In Harmony Township
Local Officials Privately Negotiated $350,000 Annual Deal, Then Voted To Approve
It is an invitation to corruption to continue the current practice of allowing municipalities to negotiate these huge economic, energy, and land use issues in the absence of State policies and standards and a transparent and participatory public process.
Huge amounts of corporate developer money are causing skyrocketing land values in what’s left of rural NJ. As a result, many farmers are taking the money and selling out.
At the same time, State policy is promoting development and deregulating industrial scale solar installations, while state energy (BPU) and environmental (DEP) regulators abdicate their responsibility via deference to local “home rule” under the pro-development NJ Municipal Land Use Law (MLUL).
That is a formula for rapid destruction of what’s left of NJ’s forests and farms and rural character. Period.
And a recent case in point adds corruption to the mix.
In a remarkably corrupt situation in Harmony Township, NJ, a Superior Court Judge recently rejected a lawsuit filed by local residents and the NJ Highlands Coalition.
The lawsuit challenged the Harmony Township Land Use Board’s approval of a 70 megawatt industrial solar facility on 600 acres of farmland.
The facts of the case are remarkably corrupt, even by notoriously corrupt NJ standards. Here’s the Court’s summary:
Plaintiffs allege that approximately a year and a half prior to the hearing, Harmony Township, led by Mayor Brian Tipton negotiated and executed a lucrative Lease Option Agreement with HPS providing for annual payments of $50,000.00 to the municipality. Plaintiffs state that in exchange for these sums, the Lease Option Agreement grants HPS an exclusive option to lease the 180+ acre parcel from Harmony Township in accordance with the terms of a 30 year Solar Land Lease Agreement which, if exercised, provides for annual payments of $350,000.00 to Harmony Township.
After negotiating this “lucrative” deal – which was negotiated in the absence of any State policies, regulations, standards, public process or State oversight regarding negotiation of what are known as “host community benefits” – the Mayor and Committee member then voted to approve the land use application for the solar facility, an act that obviously reflects a blatant conflict of interest.
The Court found that NJ MLUL case law recognizes but “tolerates” these kind of conflicts at the municipal level:
A member of a board of adjustment, like any taxpayer, is understandably inclined to favor increasing public revenues to contain taxes. However, unlike other taxpayers, he has a specific duty not to sacrifice the proper use of land on the altar of reduced taxes. This conflict is tolerated because it inheres whenever a variance is sought that would increase public revenues. But when the applicant is the member’s employer, an additional conflict occurs which is avoidable and therefore not acceptable. As our Supreme Court has said, “…[I]t is most doubtful that participation by a councilman in a municipal action of particular benefit to his employer can be proper in any case.” Pyatt v. Mayor and Council of Dunellen, 9 N.J. 548, 557 (1952).
The Board of Education particularly benefits from the grant of these variances. Money realized from the sale of the schools and money saved by not having to maintain them will ease the Board’s revenue requirements. Also, individual Board members standing for re-election can point to these sales as an accomplishment.
The Court found, in addition to “tolerating” the municipal conflicts, that the Mayor and Councilman did NOT have personal conflicts.
Wow.
NJ has laws that provide standards and procedures for negotiating “host community benefits” for some detrimental land uses, like solid waste facilities. But current NJ law defines industrial solar arrays as:
under the MLUL, solar production systems were considered an inherently beneficial use, similar to a school, hospital or childcare center.
The Court then went on to expand the definition of “solar system” to include electrical substations. There was no capacity restriction mentioned, thus the substation could not only increase the size of the solar facility, but excess capacity could attract additional solar from nearby properties:
Distance to Substation
As with power lines, proximity of the land to a substation is a key consideration for potential developers. The closer the better—with the ideal range to be approximately 2 miles. The longer the distance, the greater the risk associated with the project. Obviously, the more risk associated with a project, the less likely it is that a developer will want to continue with the project. (YSG Solar)
I wrote Senator Smith the following letter, seeking legislation to prevent future similar abuses. Given Smith’s strong support of industrial scale solar, his recent flawed legislation which actually promotes solar on farmland, and his dead-set opposition to more land use controls, there is zero chance of success:
Dear Senator Smith:
I bring the attached Court decision to your attention, as it involves the “inherently beneficial use” municipal land use law policy I believe you supported for solar installations. It also involves solar siting on farms and conflict of interest issues, see:
Dalrymple v. Harmony Township Land Use Board, et al Docket No. WRN -L-148- 21
Reading that decision was like a road map to all that is wrong with the NJ Municipal Land Use Law (there were esoteric loopholes identified as well, such as the LLC loophole).
In my view, the conflict of interest issue was mis-focused on individual conflicts of interest.
The real conflicts are systemic, and twofold:
1) allowing local governments to privately negotiate and executive contracts that provide huge economic benefits (with no standards or public process), and to do so in advance of land use approvals; and
2) allowing local governments to approve land use decisions they benefit economically from (i.e. not just the standard property tax revenue benefits the Court based its decision upon, which revenues flow from uniform property tax rates, but revenues from discrete individual special lease and revenue agreements).
The Court’s conclusion that electrical substations are part of a “solar system” is really bad. This dramatically increases the scale and revenues from the “inherently beneficial use” solar systems the legislature considered.
I urge you to revisit the land use issues in light of this decision and consider legislation to address the issues of “host community benefits”. It is an invitation to corruption to continue the current practice of allowing municipalities to negotiate these huge economic, energy, and land use issues in the absence of State policies and standards and a transparent and participatory public process.
I urge you to conduct legislative oversight and hold hearings on these MLUL and energy policy issues.
Respectfully,
Bill Wolfe
We’ll keep you posted, if I receive a reply or if the Court’s decision is appealed.
Facebook “Data” Is Garbage
Given Location of School And DEP Air Toxics Data, Why No Chemical Sampling?
[Update: 4/25/22 – Spotlight TV did it again. Pouring gasoline on the fire, they mentioned Hiroshima/Nagasaki! DOH & DEP are deferring to local government (Woodbridge) and not communicating effectively, in direct contradiction to CDC Guidelines.
Watch the story. ~~~ end update]
[Update: 4/20/22 – Wow. I just checked the NJ Department of Health Cancer Registry data, and the rate of death (not incidence – 2019) for brain cancers in men and women ranges from 3.5 – 5.3, per 100,000. Wiki says Colonia HS enrollment is 1,300 or so (app. 300 grads/year). Assuming that population, from 1967 – today, about 15,000 students graduated. If over 100 people were correctly diagnosed as having died from brain cancer – a diagnosis that Facebook can not provide – that’s significantly higher than expected (all other things being equal, which they are not). Regardless of expected v. observed, in addition to possible radiological causes, chemical carcinogens must be considered. ~~~ end update]
It’s been a few weeks since the alleged cancer cluster at Colonia High School in Woodbridge NJ story broke. (I’ve criticized the coverage twice, see this and this).
So, there has been plenty of time for NJ Spotlight reporters to talk to real scientists and epidemiologists and get educated on important issues, like: 1) basic epidemiological methods and statistics, 2) comprehensive environmental sampling, 3) potential exposure pathways and health effects of chemicals, 4) available DEP data on things like ambient toxic air quality, proximity to known contaminated sites, 5) prior studies, like EPA school monitoring and ATSDR Public Health Assessment in Garfield NJ the Toms River NJ cancer cluster causality, 6) DEP air cancer risk policy, 7) potentially significant unknowns, like the a) presence and health effects of 500 unregulated chemicals that are known to be present in NJ drinking water and b) cumulative risks.
[Note: Here are CDC Guidelines for investigating suspected cancer clusters.]
EPA National Air Toxics – Known Carcinogens (Source: NJ DEP, link above)
The distribution of pollution and cancer risks also has important implications for the long delayed upcoming DEP environmental justice regulations, see:
Source: US EPA National Air Toxics
Sadly, it seems like NJ Spotlight reporter Jon Hurdle has failed to do so, because he has not written anything about any of that. DEP and NJ’s corporate polluters obviously don’t want any of that discussed.
Just the opposite: instead, in today’ followup story, he included this stunningly irresponsible and highly misleading quote from the man I’ve dubbed “the Facebook Epidemiologist”:
Lupiano said he interviews people who present themselves as candidates for his list to make sure their stories warrant inclusion. Several who probably should be on the list have been excluded because of missing or conflicting information, he said.
“I’m not willing to jeopardize the accuracy of my data,” he said. “Increasing the number is not my priority. Preserving the sanctity of the data is.”
There is no “accuracy” to that “data” – there is no “sanctity” to that “data”.
That “data” is garbage.
I fired off this note to Mr. Hurdle to explain – amazing that I am essentially defending DEP for a change:
Jon – it is irresponsible to print quotes like that.
Any scientist or qualified epidemiologist will tell you that “data” is garbage and has zero validity.
By printing a quote like that, you smear real science and scientists.
Why is there no chemical sampling being done?
Indoor air, ambient air, soil, subsurface gas (possible vapor intrusion), and groundwater should all be sampled for chemicals as well as radiological parameters.
Wolfe
[Update – wow. Did some Googling and learned that Ansel Adams did a portfolio at Manzanar. Look how he shot the same monument shot, slightly off center:
Ansel Adams, Monument in Cemetery, Mt. Williamson, 1943, Gelatin silver print, Reprinted from Library of Congress
Here’s my best attempts at an imitation of that!
~~~ end update]
I’m in the southeastern Sierra, at northern Owens Valley (high desert).
Had to come down from the higher elevations (8,000 feet), due to extreme weather (100 mph wind gusts, 11 degree cold, snow).
The sun is warm, the skies are blue, and the nights are cold and quiet, with the awesome snow capped mountains bathed in moonlight.
Yet still, just down the road, the horror remains. (Manzanar, WW II Americans of Japanese descent Concentration Camp)
[Update: I just got a question from a good NJ friend who basically asked me how I live with this.
This is my reply:
You should listen to Professor Brenner:
https://scheerpost.com/2022/04/15/michael-brenner-american-dissent-on-ukraine-is-dying-in-darkness/
He sees nihilism and US collective psychopathology (I think he’s driving at what Freud called “Thanatos”).
[Update 4/22/22 – David Sirota writes about the dangers of nihilism. ~~~ end update]
But the real importance of that interview is how he presented the US strategy in Ukraine, which is basically offensive, and the planned assault on the Donbass (see chart of data that backs that up).
The only other person I’ve heard make that argument is Scott Ritter, former UN Weapons Inspector who blew the whistle on Iraq.
My kids have asked me similar questions about lifestyle and meaning.
Frankly, while I’ve always felt that suffering is an essential part of the human condition, I try not to think about those things.
I agree with Professor Brenner, and on a much larger range of issues – from the collective suicidal failure to address the climate emergency, to the war on the poor and homeless, to putting people in cages and letting them die in the desert (which is the official US border and immigration policy, called “deterrence” and it goes back to Bill Clinton).
My vision for the future is bleak – as Leonard Cohen wrote/sang:
“I’ve seen the future, brother: it is murder” (listen)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFjVWYgSFcQ
But, I rely on more inspiring stuff from my youth: Neil Young:
“Don’t let it bring you down, it’s only castles burning”. (listen)
Wolfe
