At a time when our governors and our President were preparing to address their constituents, CLF was (and is) making news – news that raises a series of enduring questions: In our country, where is the line between federal and state authority? How clear is it? Who gets to draw it? Why would you draw it in one place instead of another?

These questions are so challenging because they are so fundamental; Americans have wrestled with these same questions for over 200 years. You’ll recall that our first national government, under the Articles of Confederation, was too weak to do the job. The Constitution granted greater power to the national government, but had to be balanced by the Bill of Rights, securing the rights of individuals and of states. The rest of our efforts to get the federal/state balance right has been marked by long periods of contentious negotiation and flashbulb moments of fractious history –national banking, secession and the Civil War, the busting of industrial trusts, the New Deal, and civil rights for all.

Protecting our health and our environment has been a part of the national and regional negotiations for decades. Recent events have provoked further discussion.

By the 1960’s and ‘70’s, when Congress began to address environmental protection and energy in a serious way, its constitutional authority to do so was relatively clear. It exercised that authority boldly, for the great benefit of generations of people and other species. However, as in much of our federalist system, there’s still a sharing of power between national and state governments, both by design and by default. The zone between federal and state authority is sometimes gray. It’s in that messy, gray area that many of our most controversial environmental issues are being debated.

These debates continue to this day. Take two of CLF’s hot issues recently in the news: Vermont Yankee and Cape Cod nitrogen pollution.

Vermont Yankee

The first is the adverse federal court decision CLF (and the State of Vermont) received on Vermont Yankee, the aging nuclear power plant in Vernon, VT. The decision affirmed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s broad authority over safety issues relating to nukes. It  preempted a role for states and handed a major victory to Entergy Corporation.

However, as Anthony Iarrapino points out in this blog post, the fight is far from over. There is a clear role for states in shaping our energy future; in the absence of federal action, states are leading the effort in promoting a clean energy future. Furthermore, as Anthony pointed out in his post, the court said:

“This Court’s decision is based solely upon the relevant admissible facts and the governing law in this case, and it does not purport to resolve or pass judgment on the debate regarding the advantages or disadvantages of nuclear power generation, or its location in this state. Nor does it purport to define or restrict the State’s ability to decline to renew a certificate of public good on any ground not preempted or not violative of federal law, to dictate how a state should choose to allocate its power among the branches of its government, or pass judgment on its choices. The Court has avoided addressing questions of state law and the scope of a state’s regulatory authority that are unnecessary to the resolution of the federal claims presented here.”

Even in the highly “federalized” area of nuclear power there is an undeniable role for states.

Cape Cod

The second is a settlement in principle of our litigation to clean up pollution from sewage on Cape Cod. This is a great step forward – one that  has attracted the focused attention of anti-environmentalists in Congress, as this article attests.

They preposterously allege collusion between environmentalists and the EPA in cases like this to expand federal jurisdiction beyond what Congress authorized in the Clean Water Act, thereby trumping state authority.  However, the federal/state line under the Clean Water Act is about as blurry as they come, in part because the facts relating to pollution and its impacts are extremely complex. As in all cases, the facts matter. Careful, dispassionate assessment of the scientific facts about discharges and pollution, and how the law applies to those facts – not political grandstanding by Members of Congress – is what’s necessary to achieve the visionary goal Congress as a whole committed to decades ago: the elimination of polluting discharges to United States waters, by 1985! It’s time we lived up to that commitment.

There is opportunity in messy, gray areas like the shifting federal/state interface: we can go forward or backward. That is, we can develop sensible allocations of authority between federal and state governments to achieve the public goals behind all of these public initiatives – a healthy environment and a healthy economy, or we can descend into politically motivated mudslinging that obscures the real issues and thwarts real progress.

At CLF we are committed to rational, fact-based discussion of the issues, and prudent forward motion that yields a thriving New England, for generations to come and for all. We know this terrain well. You can count on us to keep working it.

Courtesy of rkramer62 @flickr. Creative Commons.

Has anyone else heard Canada Geese overhead in the last few days? I have, at our apartment in Somerville, MA. It’s a delightful sound, of course, but it’s the middle of January! This is the time for dead-of-winter slumber and the deep freezes that keep New England’s natural communities healthy and continuing as they are. Geese overhead in January is not a good sign.

Gardening companies and plant nurseries know the calendar. Seed catalogs are arriving, right on time. New England growers envision their gardens, select varieties of vegetables and fruits and, with the bounce of hope and excitement that this brings to a gardener, place their orders.

But what will this growing season bring? Very possibly too much rain (if recent experience continues), pests we’re not used to because they won’t be killed by deep frost over a warmer-than-usual winter, or other alterations to the web of life that has evolved in our region over the past thousands of years.

In 1990, the USDA plant hardiness zones in New England ranged from the subarctic zone 3 across the northern tier to temperate zone 6 across much of southern New England. As of 2006, zone 3 had shrunk to barely a sliver, and zone 7 appeared in the south – the same zone as Northern Louisiana. And that was 6 years ago. What is it now? What will it be in 10 years? I highly recommend arborday.org, where you can watch a brief animation of the shift (click “play” and “reset”).

The big idea in Bill McKibben’s recent book, Eaarth, is that our planet has already changed – it’s not the same as the one we used to know. Growers in New England know this because they pay attention to it. In the coming years and decades, we’ll all see it. It will be unavoidable.

This change will help us focus our work at CLF. It must. Successfully adapting to a fundamental shift in climate – in a way that is affordable, promotes healthy communities, and promotes a resilient natural world – is vital for New England to thrive. What exactly that will require is not yet clear – to anyone. The strategic priority-setting process we have now embarked upon at CLF will set us on course to figure that out – continually, over time. It will require us to be as resilient as our natural world needs to be.

I believe we will keep ourselves on that course, in part because the reminders of the importance of doing so are obvious – like increased flooding and shrinking winters. And geese overhead in January.

In the mid-1990’s a Vermont ski area executive told me this joke.

“How do you make a small fortune in the ski industry in New England?” he asked.

“Start with a large one.”

He was talking about the challenges he faced then, which seemed normal at the time:  limited water for snowmaking, labor shortages, skyrocketing costs of doing business, aging baby boomer population, and inconsistent (though generally reliable) snowfall. The snow sports industry now faces a much more fundamental challenge: a shrinking winter.

But for a recent cold snap, a light dusting on MLK day, and a destructive storm in October, our winter here in New England has been largely without snow. The temperature has been high – in many instances, far higher than normal.

Consider recent temperature trends as reported by @JustinNOAA – the Twitter feed by NOAA’s Communications Director. On Friday, December 9^th, he Tweeted: “NOAA: 971 hi-temp records broken (744) or tied (227) so far this January.” The day before broke “336 hi-temp records in 21 states.”

Rising temperatures are a death knell for falling snow. On the final day of 2011, only 22% of the lower 48 had snow. Today, New England remains largely untouched by snow. A glance at NOAA’s snow depth map shows most of New England with 4 or less inches of snow. This was true of my New Year’s hike with my brother and his dog up Camel’s Hump. As the background of the photo shows, there was little snow across the surrounding Green Mountains.

With so little snow, New England is suffering. While ski mountains have been making snow (and areas like Sugarloaf and Stowe are reporting recent snow fall), other outdoor recreationists are suffering. Some seasons haven’t even started yet, weeks if not months into their normal season.

Snowmobilers, for instance, are facing one hell of a tough time. With so little snow in most of New England, they’ve been prevented from riding over familiar terrain. Ice fishermen, too, are facing lakes and ponds that, by this time of year are usually covered in a thick layer of ice by mid December. Today, many that are usually frozen by now remain open bodies of water.

The effects of this extends beyond our enjoyment to our economy. According to a story on NPR, reported by Maine Public Broadcasting, the unseasonably warm winter has meant millions of dollars in lost revenue for sporting good stores, lodging, and recreation. One store in the story has reported a decline in sales by around 50%.

Competitive cross-country and downhill skiers suffered, too. They’ve have had their race schedule reshuffled due to rain last week. According to the US Ski Team development coach Bryan Fish, quoted in the Boston Globe, “We’ve had the same challenges on the World Cup. It is always a challenge in a sport that relies on the climate.”

That is precisely the problem. People are drawn to New England to live, work and play for its climate: its warm summers, stunning falls and picture perfect winter landscapes, suitable for a wide range of outdoor activities. Walk down the halls of our states offices and you’ll see signs of that passion right here at home: people wearing ski vests, pictures of people snow shoeing, cabins nestled into densely fallen snow. If our climate changes – which the IPCC and others have repeatedly demonstrated it will – then New England will be a very different region than the one we all have come to know and to love.

That’s why I ask you to help us protect our New England winters. Help us protect the places where we enjoy ourselves.

To do just that, I suggest a few things:

1)      Help us transition away from inefficient, 20^th century energy to clean energy of the 21^st century. As a recent EPA report showed, power plants account for 72% of greenhouse gases – by far the largest contributor to global warming in the U.S. Here at CLF, we’re pushing for a coal free New England by 2020.

2)      Also according to the EPA, transportation accounts for the second largest portion of greenhouse gasses. Ride your bike, walk, or take public transportation to work, to do your errands or your other daily tasks. It makes a big difference.

3)      Support both national and regional or local environmental organizations. As I wrote in a NY Times letter to the editor recently, local environmental organizations “have known for years what the nationals are only now realizing: we’ve got to engage people closer to where they live.” Support local, effective environmental organizations who are creating lasting solutions in your area.

4)      Make yourself heard; write letters to your Senators, Congressmen and Representatives. Ask tough questions, and don’t settle for easy answers.

5)      And be sure to get outside. Plant a garden, even if it’s a small one in a city. Go for a hike, or for a bike ride. And take a friend or family member. Remind yourself and others why we need to protect our environment.

By doing all of these simple but important things, you can help us keep winter, winter.

The run-up to the holidays is always a busy time of year, and can make us all feel a bit overstretched. That’s certainly true at CLF.

In fact, at times this fall it has felt like we’ve been at a pre-holiday pace since Labor Day. In preparing an internal President’s Report in December, I realized I could only capture a fraction of our accomplishments – the tip of a large iceberg of great work that we love to do.

I worry sometimes, frankly, that we love it too much. My concern for all of us (in CLF and in every cause-driven organization) is that we take care of ourselves as we do what we do. This includes optimizing our efficiency, taking time off to recharge, leaving work at work, and of course selecting work carefully so that we spend our time and energy wisely. These are relatively objective elements of prudent and careful management.

It also includes the more subjective, human-oriented, affective things we all do – as human beings – to feel fulfilled, grounded and happy: asking for, receiving and giving help, supporting our partners and being supported by them, sharing common cause. There is nothing quite so energizing and gratifying as knowing that we’re in it together.

This past year was replete with examples of how we at CLF do this at the inter-organizational level. We partnered with other groups, we led coalitions, we leveraged our work for the benefit of similarly-aligned organizations with complementary skills, we developed strategy in cooperation with others and implemented it jointly. As I said in a recent letter to The New York Times, it’s “a great time to be in the environmental movement.” These partnerships are one of the reasons; they sustain us.

As we round the dark corner of the year and head into the light, I wish you all a wonderful holiday season and a joyous new year.

There is a saying that as goes Maine, so goes the nation. That is proving to be true, with one slight twist: As goes New England, so goes the nation’s environmental policy.

If you look at a wind map of the United States you’ll see that all prevailing winds east of the Mississippi eventually converge right here, in New England. That helps make New England the place so many of us love – warm summers, stunning falls, and cold, snowy winters – but it also makes New England the tailpipe of the nation.

Beginning in the mid-20^th century, researchers began documenting evidence of the effect of acid rain on Camel’s Hump in Vermont’s Green Mountains. They documented dramatic decreases in biomass, forest reproduction, seed germination, and other damaging effects among such species as red spruce, mountain maple, sugar maple, and beech – some of the trees whose brilliant fall colors draw millions of tourists to New England each fall. The cause? Acid rain.

Today, the problem continues, though in different ways. Antiquated coal plants built before 1970 have long enjoyed loopholes in the Clean Air Act that allowed them to emit toxic pollutants without modern controls. They have spewed a mix of mercury, arsenic, lead, and soot that harms all Americans by degrading our air and water quality, as well as our public health by increasing the rates of lung disease and causing asthma attacks, among other ailments. Even though many New England states have imposed modern controls on their plants, winds continue to carry pollution from the rest of the country that harms New England’s environment and its people.

That’s why today’s ruling from the EPA on the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) is so laudable. As my colleague Jonathan Peress said in a press statement, these standards “amount to one of the most significant public health and environmental measures in years.” They are also similar to standards we adopted here in New England years ago.

According to EPA estimates, these standards will prevent 11,000 heart attacks and 130,000 asthma attacks annually among Americans by 2016. The standards will also save at least $59 billion measured as a reduction in premature deaths, lower health care costs, and fewer absences from work or school. That is undoubtedly a good thing. It is also undoubtedly long overdue.

The affected coal plants are toxic dinosaurs. According to an AP survey, the average age of the plants is 51 years – some of them were even built when Harry S Truman was president. EPA’s new standards will finally allow the public health protections, signed into law by George H.W. Bush as a part of the Clean Air Act of 1990, to do their job. As Ilan Levin, associate director of Environmental Integrity Project, said in a piece on Climate Progress, “The only thing more shocking than the large amounts of toxic chemicals released into the air each year … is the fact that these emissions have been allowed for so many years.”

Here in New England, we have long understood the importance of controlling harmful pollution. CLF together with a close coalition pushed for strict state air pollution standards to clean up the dirtiest plants in Massachusetts. In 2001, the Department of Environmental Protection adopted regulations known as “The Filthy Five” that went beyond the Federal Clean Air Act of 1970, and tackled the issues of mercury and carbon dioxide. From our experience with stringent state standards in Massachusetts and Connecticut, we know the substantial benefits to public health and the environment that will result from these rules.

Concern that these standards will directly shut down plants is misguided. According to an AP survey, “not a single plant operator said the EPA rules were solely to blame for a closure.” Instead, a confluence of factors have already initiated a broad technology shift we’re already seeing here in New England: coal prices are rising and natural gas prices are declining against a background of strict state clean air rules. Given this, many (but not all) of New England’s plants have either already installed modern pollution controls, or are actively planning for retirement, in ways that will keep the lights on.

I applaud the EPA, and Administrator Jackson, for their good work on these standards. We will continue to support them, and they’ll need our help.

And in any event, how long are people to suffer while clean air requirements on the books go unenforced? 21 years (since 1990) is too long. The time has come. Finally.

Today’s New York Times contains a letter to the Editor I wrote in response to an article published in this weekend’s Sunday Review. See below for a copy of that letter, as it appears in today’s paper. You can also click here to view it on The New York Times website.

To the Editor:

Re “Environmentalists Get Down to Earth” (news analysis, Sunday Review, Dec. 18):

It would be hard to find “a tougher moment over the last 40 years to be a leader in the American environmental movement” only if your sole focus is the national debate. All the rest of us — at the local, state and regional levels — have known for years what the nationals are only now realizing: we’ve got to engage people closer to where they live.

That’s also where we’ll make positive changes on energy and other big issues. The article cites good examples: coal plants, fracking and clean water. Progress on those issues is not happening in Congress. In state and regional arenas, it is.

For those of us who have worked there these last 40 years, the time for our earthbound experience, savvy and skills has arrived. It’s actually a great time to be in the environmental movement. We’re pleased to welcome national organizations to the action.

JOHN B. KASSEL
President
Conservation Law Foundation
Boston, Dec. 18, 2011

Courtesy of Putneypucs @ flickr. Creative Commons

In talking with guests at CLF’s holiday party last week, I was reminded of something simple and powerful: In this movement, we’re all leaders.

Helping New England thrive is a group effort.  It’s also CLF’s vision. To make it happen we work with  our colleagues, our allies, and our friends – many of whom were present at the party.

These guests included elected officials, heads of state and government officials, business and nonprofit CEOs – even an international delegation. CLF staff and alumni were there. Board members, families and friends joined us.  And also many dedicated people who help New England thrive by doing their part – sometimes small but always heartfelt – every day, week or month.

Talking with many present, I was reminded of what I have often thought: To succeed, we need each other.

I was also reminded of the story of an 8 year old girl with courage and a voice, but struggling against acute asthma. At a hearing for a proposed project in western MA that would aggravate her asthma and further threaten her community, she was sitting with my colleague Sue Reid, vp and director, CLF Massachusetts. She had in her hand a one page handwritten statement she was prepared to deliver that said, among other things, “It’s not fair!” After the committee spoke, she turned to Sue and said: “This really isn’t fair!”

She was right. We have followed her lead, and are working hard for fairness and justice for her community. We all should learn from her, and be inspired by her. She is a leader in our movement.

Reflecting on our holiday season, this message seems appropriate: we are sustained by the work of our allies and friends. In this movement, it does take a village. And everyone truly is a leader.

To all those who have worked with us, to our donors, sponsors, and allies, and to our friends and family, thank you. Without your leadership, we couldn’t do what we do.

May have you have a wonderful Holiday season.

Regional is the new national. Solutions to the environmental problems that threaten our economy, our security and our health are not coming from Washington. Instead, they’re being forged by energetic and creative problem-solvers like CLF who work in regions and states and strive to create models for the rest of the country. This is CLF’s moment.

But we can’t do it small.

To be truly effective in the face of the unprecedented challenges facing New England, we need a movement behind us. We need neighborhoods standing up for their right to clean air and water, cities and towns demanding better transportation options, and a whole region clamoring for clean energy.

About a year ago, we started work to ensure that our story was clear and compelling and inclusive enough to engage a whole region in our mission. We began by asking employees and board members, partners and adversaries, long-time members and new friends what draws them to CLF. Resoundingly, we heard: “CLF protects my New England.”

This notion of protection is inherent in CLF’s brand: our region’s abundant natural resources, as well as its historic cities and towns, are in peril from the impacts of climate change and other realities of modern life. CLF has a long and successful history protecting New England’s environment – from a landmark lawsuit that prevented oil and gas drilling off of our shores to developing green car insurance that rewards people for driving less. At CLF, protection is not about keeping things the way they were. It anticipates the reality of a changing environment and is on the cutting edge of planning for it, to ensure that our region will continue to thrive. This kind of protection requires pragmatic, science-based approaches, fearless creativity, and a willingness to collaborate to find solutions to our most complex challenges.

To convey the many facets of CLF’s brand, built painstakingly over 44 years, we needed to refine, not redefine, our story. We started with articulating our mission:

CLF protects New England’s environment for the benefit of all people.  We use the law, science, and the market to create solutions that preserve our natural resources, build healthy communities, and sustain a vibrant economy.

And our vision:  A healthy, thriving New England – for generations to come.

Our new logo, with the emphatic red “zing,” is the ultimate distillation of CLF’s brand. It’s at once humble and outspoken, pragmatic and creative, patient and dynamic. And yet, it’s simple. Similarly, our new marketing and communications materials – both digital and print – are designed to let our stories stand out. There is lots of white space, an antidote to our tendency to accumulate. Our new design will discipline us to be economical with our words and keep our messages crisp and clear.

Economy of words is never more important than in a tagline. Our five are the answer to every question about why we do what we do:

For a thriving New England

There is no doubt that our ability to communicate our story effectively is key to achieving our mission. It is the currency with which we develop relationships with our members, with foundations who share our vision, and with influencers in the legislature and the media who help further our cause. With a great story to tell and, now, a great way to tell it, we are ready to seize this moment for CLF and galvanize all who would join us in protecting our New England.

I had my first whole-body x-ray at the Denver International Airport last night. The amiable attendant jerked his head up and over his right shoulder as he explained that the scan was read by someone far above in the cavernous hall. He then listened for a moment to his earpiece and asked if I was sure I had nothing in my right front pocket. I reached in and pulled out my boarding pass, to which my checked-bag ticket had been affixed with a very small staple. The guy upstairs had seen it, and in an instant we had our hands on the tiny, inoffensive item, and I was on my way.

At about the same time, 5,000 feet of water above their target, BP engineers had finally managed to insert a tube into the gusher spewing untold thousands of barrels of oil per day into the Gulf of Mexico and wreaking havoc on a scale we cannot yet comprehend. At best the tube is only a partial, and temporary, fix.

Which is true of many technological solutions to our energy — not to mention our national security — challenges. They are essential, especially in the near term, but they are not sufficient. Greatly expanded renewable energy generation is critical. In the near term, so is substituting more efficient and cleaner fossil-fuel generation, like combined-cycle natural gas plants, for coal generation, while we build a new energy system. That system will rely on carefully selected and implemented technologies that are far more sustainable than the ones we use now.

But the technologies will not save us and the planet — only we can do that. We must summon the will to change the way we build, move around, and live on this planet, including how we support ourselves, feed our families, create wealth and maintain a high quality of life, for everyone on the globe. It is a fundamental mind-shift that will restore a semblance of balance to our ecosystems, ensure long-term prosperity, and promote peace. I believe it is happening. To all who are part of this effort: keep it up.

In the meantime, we can’t bring 4 oz. of liquids onto an airplane, but thousands of gallons of oil foul the Gulf every hour. We should tolerate neither and work hard to change both.

Our global over-reliance on fossil fuels is the crisis of our time. The solution to that crisis is not just plugging the hole in the Gulf.  It is changing our global economy.