WolfeNotes.com

Promotion Of Logging And Other Major Flaws Would Massively Increase GHG Emissions

I just read an important Report from the John Muir Project (h/t CP) that exposes and documents the impacts of massive flaws in the Biden “bipartisan” infrastructure bill and the so called “progressive” budget reconciliation bill that I need to summarize here, see:

DEP Stormwater Regulations Are Based On the 100 Year Storm Event

Ida rainfall was a 200 – 500 year event

Statistical frequencies of storm events based on historical data are no longer valid

Billions of Dollars Spent on Resilience Literally Down The Drain

[Update below]

NJ Spotlight reporter David Cruz opened Pandora’s box is his interview of Jersey City Mayor Fulop.

Here’s the critical exchange: (emphasis mine)

Cruz intro: This block was the scene of a year long, multi-million dollar sewer pipe replacement project, the City’s attempt at resilient infrastructure. Not so resilient looking, right? …

Cruz to Fulop: Is that a failed project?

Fulop response: No, No. Ida, based on the rainfall we had here in Jersey City and the national weather standards we had a 200 year storm. But the thing about it is that you are seeing 200 year storms very, very frequently.

Cruz: So this is a project, once it was done, it was already obsolete, yea?

Fulop: Well, I don’t know if it was obsolete because the pipes are bigger and can handle more water.

I’ve seen other news reports from NY City that Ida was a 500 year storm.

Regardless of whether it was a 200 year storm or a 500 year storm, the DEP stormwater regulations that determined the engineering design of the Jersey City project (and the size of the pipes) was based on the volume of water from a 100 year storm event.

The Murphy DEP just updated the DEP’s Stormwater Management Best Management Practices (BMP) Manual in April of 2021.

Chapter 5 of the BMP Manual provides the methodology for calculating stormwater volumes and the 100 year storm event, based on the DEP stormwater regulations: (see: N.J.A.C. 7:8-5.7).

The Murphy DEP stormwater BMP update did not consider and was not based upon climate science.

The same 100 year storm event is the basis for other DEP regulations that govern infrastructure projects (flood hazard control act, stream encroachment regulations, flood maps, CAFRA coastal permits, NJPDES, etc). 

Here is the scientific and technical core of the issue (BMP manual, at page 17):

Climate science demonstrates that the future will not be like the past (i.e. 1961 – 1977), so statistical frequencies of storm events based on historical data are no longer valid.

DEP and FEMA know this. As I wrote (see: FEMA Flays Murphy DEP Stormwater Proposal)

FEMA flagged many significant and fatal flaws in the DEP proposal, FEMA wrote: (emphasis mine)

“To highlight, FEMA finds that the abandonment of the nonstructural stormwater management in design and the absence of restrictions in the increase in runoff volume post-development to be significant deficiencies.

FEMA is also concerned that the proposed rule does not consider future conditions of increasingly intense precipitation that is expected with climate change. 

The use of the term Green Infrastructure will not offset the proposed changes to the nonstructural stormwater management strategies and the multiple missed opportunities to reduce riverine and urban flooding impacts.”

The DEP has NOT revised the stormwater management regulations and the numeric standards and methods for calculating stormwater volumes to reflect climate science.

All the billions of dollars spent in NJ since Superstorm Sandy on “resilience” and adaptation projects is obsolete.

DEP knows this and still refuses to update their regulations to reflect current science and climate projections. 

Over 7 YEARS Ago, DEP proposed to upgrade some individual permits – not comprehensive Statewide regulations – for sewage treatment plans to accommodate the 500 year storm – a story I broke, as reported by NJ Spotlight:

• State Wants Sewer Plants to Plan for 500-Year Storms, Extended Outages

In an effort to prevent raw sewage from spilling into New Jersey’s waterways, the state is beginning to require sewer plants to plan for 500-year storms and to prepare for extended outages of up to 14 days. […]

“It’s extremely significant,’’ said Bill Wolfe, director of the New Jersey chapter of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, who first reported the changes on his blog, wolfenotes.com. “It will make a difference.’’

Why haven’t all NJ resilience projects been designed for the 500 year storm?

All the billions more in the pipeline under federal infrastructure legislation will also be obsolete, because Congress and federal agencies refuse to update federal standards and methods to reflect climate science.

Boom!

Conclusion: “Building Back Better” is a bullshit slogan

Here’s my note to Mr. Cruz:

David – just watched your interview with Mayor Fulop. Follow my point, it is critical.

You raised THE essential issues in your observation that the stormwater project was “obsolete” and that the rainfall was a 200 year event.

Fulop likely doesn’t understand stormwater run-off volumes and how they are calculated (known as the “runoff hydrograph”) and how that impacts the engineering design of a project, which must comply with DEP regulations

The DEP stormwater management rules provide the methodology.

In April 2021, the Murphy DEP just updated the DEP “Stormwater Best Management Practices” (BMP) manual – the “design storm” under that BMP and current DEP regulations is the 100 year storm.

So, all the billions NJ is spending on “resilience” and “adaptation is already obsolete!!!!!

DEP knows this and had done nothing to fix the problem –

and the Christie DEP weakened DEP regulations and DEP has not even brought us back to pre-Christie regulatory standards.

You opened Pandora’s box – please do a follow up!

[Update: 9/5/21 – National Climate Assessment findings agree: (WSWS)

Along with the climatic impacts, scientists have also long sounded the alarm over the abysmal lack of preparedness. “Much of the infrastructure in the Northeast, including drainage and sewer systems, flood and storm protection assets, transportation systems, and power supply, is nearing the end of its planned life expectancy,” the US National Climate Assessment stated in its latest report in 2019. “Current water-related infrastructure in the United States is not designed for the projected wider variability of future climate conditions compared to those recorded in the last century.” The authors stressed that “significant new investments in infrastructure” are needed to protect life and property.

Murphy DEP Dodge On The PennEast Pipeline Masks Major Regulatory Flaws

Widely Denounced Trump NEPA Rollback Actually Reflects Current NJ Regulatory Policy

Last week, the NY Times reported that the Trump administration was rolling back environmental impact statement review requirements for infrastructure regarding climate change impacts:

Trump Rule Would Exclude Climate Change in Infrastructure Planning

WASHINGTON — Federal agencies would no longer have to take climate change into account when they assess the environmental impacts of highways, pipelines and other major infrastructure projects, according to a Trump administration plan that would weaken the nation’s benchmark environmental law.

The proposed changes to the 50-year-old National Environmental Policy Act could sharply reduce obstacles to the Keystone XL oil pipeline and other fossil fuel projects that have been stymied when courts ruled that the Trump administration did not properly consider climate change when analyzing the environmental effects of the projects.

According to the NY Times, the Trump move was condemned by environmental activists and Democrats:

Environmental activists and legal experts said the proposed changes would weaken critical safeguards for air, water and wildlife. The move, if it survives the expected court challenges, also could eliminate a powerful tool that climate change activists have used to stop or slow Mr. Trump’s encouragement of coal and oil development as part of its “energy dominance” policy.

The Trump rollback – initiated by Executive Order – has been closely followed by media and when finalized got negative press across the county and was widely denounced as reckless and irresponsible (it is ironic that Phil Murphy is affiliated with CAP, who issued that criticism).

Yet, here in NJ, under Democratic Gov. Murphy – who claims to be a national leader in climate policy – current DEP regulations do not consider climate change.

Let me repeat: current NJ DEP regulations do not consider greenhouse gas emissions or climate change. Period.

While I have not been able to review the final Trump CEQ NEPA rule –  based on press reports, the Trump rollback appears to eliminate only the “cumulative impact” climate reviews under NEPA, not climate impacts entirely.

So, let’s examine the Trump NEPA rollback in light of current NJ law and DEP regulation.

First of all, NJ does not have a “State NEPA” that mandates environmental impact statements, like NY State’s SEQRA law. Secondly, NJ DEP regulations ignore climate change entirely.

That means that the current NJ DEP regulations are actually even weaker than the Trump NEPA rollback, because DEP does not consider climate change at all (direct, indirect, secondary, or cumulative impacts).

Which brings us to the recent PennEast pipeline DEP permit controversy.

Gov. Murphy has Tweeted and the NJ press dutifully has reported that NJ DEP denied the PennEast pipeline permits.

I have explained why that is false – DEP did not deny the PennEast pipeline permits.

(for those who like to verify claims based on evidence and get into the weeds, see the PennEast permit application documents, including DEP’s deficiency letter at the very end. I challenge anyone to find the climate impact review documents that regard greenhouse gas emissions from the proposed pipeline (and lifecycle upstream fracking and downstream combustion).

Clarity on this issue is absolutely essential, because, under current seriously flawed NJ DEP regulations, DEP would be unable to deny the PennEast pipeline.

This is true for 2 reasons:

1) current DEP permit regulations and permit review policies do not mandate review of climate impacts or establish any standards upon which to deny a permit based on greenhouse gas emissions or climate impacts; and

2) current DEP water quality certification regulations and permit review policies lack adequate science based technical criteria and standards upon which to deny a water quality certificate for a pipeline. For example, the recent DEP Raritan Bay Williams pipeline permits and WQC denial will be challenged and very likely overturned by the Courts. First of all, the NJ State permits that were denied are pre-empted by federal law and secondly, the denial of the WQC was based on DEP’s enforcement of a Guidance document. Williams’ lawyers are smart enough to know that – as I’ve written many times – in  Metromedia decision, the NJ Supreme Court ruled that Guidance documents are not enforceable.

NJ DEP has relied on the inability for PennEast to condemn State owned lands. That inability has made it impossible for PennEast to submit a complete permit application.

Rejection of that “incomplete” permit application allows DEP to dodge these fatal flaws in current DEP regulations – the same flaws for which the Trump administration was widely condemned. 

In addition to DEP dodging regulatory flaws, Gov. Murphy is able to dodge the fossil infrastructure moratorium issues and get false praise for having “killed” a pipeline.

The reason why a clear understanding of the basis for the PennEast permit status is important is because DEP has set no regulatory precedent, while avoiding any focus on loopholes in DEP regulations regarding water quality certification and lack of greenhouse gas emission standards. That means OTHER pipelines and fossil infrastructure can be approved under DEP’s flawed regulations.

If DEP were forced to make a regulatory decision on the merits, that would trigger the obvious need for a Gubernatorial moratorium and reforms to DEP regulations regarding pipeline reviews.

This moratorium and regulatory ratchet down would apply to ALL fossil infrastructure, not just PennEast.  

NJ Spotlight can’t seem to understand these issues and is listening to the selfish perspective of Tom Gilbert, who only cares about the PennEast pipeline.

Resolution posted on Environment Committee Agenda and Withdrawn 24 Hours Later

It sure didn’t take long for political power to be exercised.

On Monday morning, I received an email from the OLS staff aide to the Senate Environment Committee announcing the Committee’s agenda for Monday December 9, 2019.

As I scrolled down the list of bills to be heard, I was surprised to read the final item listed, Senate Resolution #151, sponsored by Senator Weinberg, which “Urges Governor to impose moratorium on fossil fuel projects.” (emphases mine):

I read the Resolution, immediately Tweeted it and emailed it to activists, and urged people to attend the hearing to support it.

I was planning on suggesting to the sponsor and Chairman Smith an important amendment to note the existence of a “climate emergency” and to urge the Gov. to invoke his “emergency powers” under the NJ Constitution. The failure to note an emergency and to include emergency powers is a significant flaw in the Resolution. I planned to write a post about that before the hearing as well.

But before I could do so, just 24 hours later, on Tuesday, I got an email from OLS noting a “revised” agenda for December 9, 2019.

The “revision” was the withdrawal of SR 151.

Who killed that Resolution? Where did the pushback come from? Let’s explore those questions.

The Committee Chair, Senator Smith in this case, controls the Committee’s agenda, within limits set by the Senate President, in this case Senator Sweeney. Sometimes the Senate President directs the Chair to post and move a specific bill, sometimes the Senate President directs the Chair to block a bill.

But for the most part, the decisions on which bills to post for Committee hearing is under the control and discretion of the Committee Chair. The Chair makes these decisions frequently in consultation with his Senate colleagues and leadership, the sponsor(s) of the bill, external “stakeholders”, and sometimes with the “front office” (i.e. the Governor’s Office).

It is unusual, but not unprecedented, for a Committee agenda to be revised after it is announced.

Most of these unusual revisions to the agenda are to add bills – rarely is a bill or Resolution withdrawn.

Highly controversial bills, around which there is no consensus, or that are not “ripe”, are typically posted for “consideration only” (not vote), so the “stakeholders” can present testimony and legislators can debate the merits more fully and make necessary amendments to the proposed bill.

In this case, SR 151 was not “downgraded” to “for consideration only” status, it was completely withdrawn. 

There are several possible logical explanations, most of them deeply disturbing. Here are some that I can think of:

1. Perhaps Gov. Murphy’s Office requested that the Resolution be withdrawn, to avoid pre-empting his own upcoming announcement of a moratorium or inclusion of a moratorium in the final BPU Energy Master Plan.

In that case, obviously the Gov. would want the Resolution withdrawn to avoid stealing his thunder and creating the impression that he was responding to the political pressure of the legislature, not his own initiative.

This is the best possible interpretation. It is possible, but not very likely, as Gov. Murphy has had many opportunities to impose a moratorium or even talk about the issue and he has signed major legislation that ignores climate and his DEP has issued numerous approvals of permits to major GHG polluters with no GHG emission restrictions whatsoever.

2. Perhaps Senate President Sweeney directed Chairman Smith to withdraw the Resolution or otherwise twisted Smith’s arm (e.g. threatening him with blocking bills that Smith supports, like the electric vehicle bill).

This is very likely, as Sweeney has championed gas power plants and pipelines.

3. Perhaps gas industry and PSE&G lobbyists intervened directly with Chairman Smith and flexed their huge political muscles, or did so indirectly through Sweeney or Gov. Murphy’s Office or BPU.

This also is very likely, because Smith is known to listen very closely to PSE&G (e.g. Smith met with PSE&G CEO Izzo to cut the deal on the nuke bailout legislation – and remarkably, Smith even acknowledged this publicly. NJ Spotlight:

Yesterday, Sen. Bob Smith (D-Middlesex), who helped draft the law, told the Star-Ledger’s Tom Moran he decided to set the incentive at $300 million because PSEG CEO Ralph Izzo told him it was the right number.

4. Perhaps Chairman Smith, upon pressure from the usual suspects (see #1 – #3 above), got cold feet.

Perhaps Smith didn’t want a repeat of the controversial “Troopergate”, where activists were given a platform to protest and were forcibly removed from a legislative hearing by NJ State Police.

This too is likely, as Smith had to know that many climate activists would attend the hearing to support the Resolution.

5. Perhaps, upon reflection, someone realized that the lame duck session was not the proper forum to ram through such a controversial Resolution.

I made that argument in opposition to the pending electric vehicle bill. But that argument would not apply in this case, due to the emergency nature of the climate catastrophe and the pending regulatory approvals of fossil infrastructure.

This is very unlikely, as principled consideration of things like “democracy” and legitimacy are far from the minds of transactional Trenton policymakers.

6. Perhaps the sponsor, Senator Weinberg requested that the Resolution be withdrawn. Obviously, she would be subject to the same political pressures as Chairman Smith is.

This is possible but unlikely.

I also must note that, once again, as in electric vehicles, there appears to be major political malpractice in posting the Resolution during lame duck – thereby giving fossil industry opponents process arguments. There also are legitimate process arguments about the legislature injecting itself so forcefully on a major policy issue during the ongoing BPU energy planning process.

So, given the significance of the climate and fossil moratorium issues, the unusual and embarrassing withdrawal of the Resolution, and the various possible explanations – most of them corrupt – will the NJ press corps make calls to the suspects and demand answers?

NJ Spotlight, where are you?

Pending Fossil Power Plants & Pipelines Would Wipe Out Any Benefits of Wind & Solar

Statehouse Fast For Moratorium Exposes Elite Charade On Climate Advocacy

[Update – 12/6/18 – State campaign kicked off  by 50 more groups – Greens Press NJ Gov. Murphy For Fossil Moratorium ~~ end update]

[Update below]

Some good news:

A handful of NJ climate activists have finally kicked off a statewide campaign that targets all the pending fossil power plants, pipelines and related fossil infrastructure and demands that Gov. Murphy use his power to declare a moratorium on State agency approvals.

The campaign is called #climatefastnj and was rolled out with a pre-Thanksgiving 2 week fast at the Statehouse.

The campaign is the first effort that I am aware of that lists all the pending fossil power plants and pipelines (see “The Problem“), puts climate chaos front and center, calls for a statewide solution (moratorium) and politically targets the Gov.’s Executive powers.

Importantly, the campaign also notes – but fails to quantify – the fact that if the Murphy DEP approves all the pending fossil infrastructure projects, that would wipe out any climate benefits of Gov. Murphy’s highly touted energy and climate policy: 3,500 MW of off shore wind, expansion of solar, and rejoining the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).

Accordingly, the Campaign is a serious challenge to Gov. Murphy’s leadership, climate rhetoric, and policy & program commitments (see also this).

BRAVO!

Thankfully, departing from the NJ media’s virtual blackout of NY Gov. Cuomo’s actions to kill proposed pipelines, there was some press coverage, but it tended to focus on the tactic (the fast) and lacked focus on the strategy: i.e. the campaign’s policy demand and strong climate justification for a moratorium. NJTV news covered it, while the Star Ledger (NJ.com) ran two brief stories that focused on the fast tactic, while downplaying the climate and fossil infrastructure policy issues (initially at the kickoff and followed up at the conclusion).

[Where’s NJ Spotlight? see Update below]

Now some very bad news: the campaign did not garner the support of NJ’s largest mainstream “green” groups that are purportedly working on climate change and opposing individual fossil pipelines and power plants, including Rethink NJ; NJ Conservation Foundation, Pinelands Preservation Alliance; NJ League of Conservation Voters; Environment NJ; Clean Water Action; ALS, COA, Sustainable NJ, NJ Future, Surfrider, and Sierra Club.

How could they not support the commitment and personal sacrifice to fast for 2 weeks?

How could they fail to pressure Gov. Murphy for a comprehensive Statewide policy solution to their individual pet projects and government and Foundation funded projects?

So much for solidarity.

Those groups pretend to be climate advocates, but they hide under their desks and give Gov. Murphy a pass. That’s because they put their own selfish organizational pet projects, priorities, and financial interests ahead of the public interest and real solutions to climate chaos – solutions that are feasible, realistic, and match the scale, scope, timing, and magnitude of the climate crisis.

Shame on them.

The moratorium campaign is long overdue.

As I wrote, it should have been organized before the 2017 Gubernatorial campaign, see:  Developing A Strategy To Move A Climate And Green Jobs Agenda (September 2016).

In that post, I urged a moratorium on new fossil infrastructure and a phase out of existing fossil, based on a four point strategy:

1. Form A United Front; 

2. Focus on Climate and Green Energy Jobs; 

3. Target Gubernatorial Candidates and Do It Now!; 

4. Ramp Up Tactics – Direct Action, Non-Violent Civil Disobedience

I hate to say I told you so, but I closed that post with this warning:

– the odds of this happening approach zero. The current groups, to be kind, do not work well together and the corporate foundations would never fund the work. So, the thought of even a coordinated campaign, never mind a United Front, is unthinkable right now.

The only way this dysfunction changes is either for the members of these groups or their funders to demand that their professional staff change, or for an alternative bottom up new grassroots organization emerge and bypass the dysfunction.

Way back in 2015, I explained why a moratorium was justified by the climate emergency and how a moratorium could be implemented via a Gov.’s leadership, see: Florio Administration’s Policy on Energy and Environment Still Relevant Today – Climate Emergency Justifies Fossil Moratorium

[NOTE: Curiously, former Gov. Florio is identified on the Rethink NJ website as a “supporter” of their campaign and given a quote. Rethink NJ failed to support the moratorium campaign. That would seem to invite questions from media about Florio’s leadership in integrating energy and environment policy and issuing the Executive Order #8 moratorium on garbage incineration as a model for phasing out fossil infrastructure. Remarkably, Florio has never been asked to respond to that kind of tough question.]

 More recently, in July 2018, I again called the “green” elites out for failure to pressure Murphy on climate. I again highlighted former Gov. Florio’s Executive Order #8 moratorium that blocked new garbage incinerators as a model for Gov. Murphy:

Gov. Murphy could issue a similar Executive Order establishing an Emergency Climate Change and Energy Task Force tied to the BPU Energy Master Plan revision process and the DEP Climate mitigation and adaptation planning & regulatory process (including RGGI).

The Order could impose a moratorium on any DEP and BPU approvals of any fossil  energy infrastructure approvals, such as the Pinelands, PennEast and Williams pipeline and the recently proposed new gas plant in the Highlands.

Problem solved.

So why aren’t NJ’s environmental groups advocating this aggressive approach?

As I outlined, NJ has a rich history of Governors using their Executive powers to declare moratoria. Current Gov. Murphy should be held to that leadership standard and called out to walk the walk on his climate rhetoric.

I reminded folks that Gov. Christie issued a Moratorium via Executive Order #1 in the first hour of his first day in Office and that Gov. Murphy has yet to repeal that action, which specifically set back NJ DEP’s climate programs:

In contrast to Murphy’s inaction, Gov. Christie hit the ground running and in his first day in office, issued a slew of executive orders to declare a regulatory moratorium (EO#1) and to provide “regulatory relief” (EO#2) and slash red tape (EO#3) and defer to local government (EO#4).

The moratorium killed, among others, the Corzine Administration’s proposed new rules on monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions.

I urge readers and my friends that are members of NJ’s largest green groups to pressure their Boards and professional staff to support the #climatefastnj moratorium campaign.

[End Note: in addition to a Moratorium, the campaign should include a demand for a timetable for phasing out existing fossil power, similar to California Gov. Brown’s policy.]

[Update: NJ Spotlight is the State’s leading media outlet for reporting on climate and energy issues. Accordingly, one would assume that Spotlight would have reported on a 2 week Trenton Statehouse fast and campaign targeting the Governor to demand a moratorium on fossil infrastructure.

One would be wrong.

That Spotlight failure to cover certain issues is consistent with a disturbing pattern I’ve recently written about, whereby elite Foundations fund media in a way that shapes news coverage, while at the same time funding environmental groups to influence the issues, strategies and tactics those groups pursue (work that is then reported by Spotlight as “news”).

Specifically, the Wm. Penn and Dodge Foundations are major funders of NJ Spotlight.

Those Foundations also fund almost all of the NJ environmental groups that failed to support the  #climatefastnj campaign. As I wrote, alluding to Penn and Dodge:

the corporate foundations would never fund the [moratorium campaign] work.

This is not a coincidence, but another glaring example of what author and former New York Times columnist Anand Giridharadas calls the Elite Charade.

NJ’s environmental politics are controlled and driven by an anti-democratic and corporate elite charade. ~~~ end update]