It’s difficult to imagine a day like today in Boston without the aid of salt to make our roads safe to use. For those of us in the snowier parts of the country, road salt is a necessary and accepted part of our winter. It’s cheap, effective and it allows commuters, motorists and emergency vehicles to safely reach their destinations in harsh conditions. According to the Salt Institute, Americans used 22 million tons of road salt in 2008. In a different study by the National Research Council, Massachusetts tops the list of of states with the highest road salt-use at, 19.94 tons per lane-mile each year, surpassing even New York, with 16.6 tons per lane-mile. Under MassDOT salt policy, salt or sodium chloride is applied at 240 pounds per lane-mile. In other words, trucks in Massachusetts are dumping more than a ton of salt every 10 lane-miles in a single application! Salt does not evaporate or otherwise get removed, so one has to ask: what is the fate of all this salt that is dumped on our roads?

Unfortunately, most of it is washed off of roadways by rain runoff and snow melt and enters our rivers and streams or percolates through the soil into our drinking water supplies. That’s the situation that Cambridge, MA has been combating for years. This densely-populated city gets its water from two reservoirs, both located next to Route 128, making it particularly susceptible to salt contamination. Another town suffering from the same issue is Boxford, MA. The town launched a suit against the state highway department, MassHighway, to close its salt storage shed, contending that it was responsible for contaminating at least 30 local wells. Aside from the ecological damage of excess salt, there are also health and financial burdens associated with high salt levels in public and private water supplies. High salt levels can result in skin and eye irritation and pose a danger for individuals with sodium-restricted diets, according to the New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission.

MassHighway is already under court order to manage stormwater runoff after CLF’s successful suit in 2008. Hopefully this effort will divert some of the salt from our waters and, in turn, lead to better health for both the environment and the MA residents who live in it.

In a boost for clean air and clean water, the mismanaged and ill-conceived Circ highway planned for Vermont’s Chittenden County faces a potentially fatal blow.  The head of EPA in New England described the project as environmentally devastating.

“Even if the mitigation were fully implemented, the proposed project would cause or contribute to significant degradation of waters of the U.S. in violation” of federal law and should not be permitted, according to the EPA.

The EPA concluded the highway “will have a substantial and unacceptable impact on aquatic resources of national importance,” in that December letter to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a more forceful follow-up to the original letter and assessment EPA sent on November 15.  EPA makes a strong argument against issuing the environmental permits needed for the largest single destruction of wetlands in Vermont’s history.

EPA’s objections are bolstered by the support of a diverse coalition of organizations in Vermont, including CLF.  If the Corps issues permits despite these objections the EPA could block those permits with a veto.

CLF continues to support cleaner, lower cost and more effective solutions in place of a new highway that damages or eliminates hundreds of acres of wetlands, increases sprawl development, contributes to global climate change, wastes limited public funds and fails to meet modern transportation needs.   At a cost of tens of millions of dollars, the Circ only saves four minutes of travel time and offers less relief from traffic congestion in the areas most troubled traffic spots compared to cleaner and lower cost solutions that modernize existing roadways.

Today, the U.S. EPA announced that it will join CLF’s lawsuit against the Boston Water and Sewer Commission (BWSC) for violations of the Clean Water Act. The suit, filled by CLF in U.S. District Court in February 2010, states that BWSC has failed to control polluted discharges from its storm water system, allowing it to carry raw sewage and excessive levels of bacterial, copper and zinc into Boston’s waterways, threatening the health and well-being of the surrounding communities.

BOSTON, MA  December 22, 2010 – The Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) has issued the following statement in response to the motion filed today by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) stating that it will join CLF’s lawsuit against the Boston Water and Sewer Commission (BWSC) for violations of the Clean Water Act:

“The complaint against the Boston Water and Sewer Commission documents serious failures in the system that are allowing ongoing unlawful pollution of Boston’s waterways, including the Charles, Mystic and Neponset Rivers, in some the city’s most economically-challenged communities,” said Christopher Kilian, director of CLF’s Clean Water and Healthy Forests program. “The federal government’s entry into this case is a clear indication of the urgency of the matter and the priority EPA places on it. BWSC’s inability to maintain a system that ensures clean water is a violation of the law and an affront to the people of Boston. The United States agrees with CLF that BWSC must make a major commitment now to improve water quality, as other cities have done, and restore these resources to health for everyone’s benefit.” More>>

(Photo credit: Cynthia Liebman)

The view from the corner office at CLF Boston is not always glamorous.  For the past few days, the sights and sounds outside our building on Summer Street have been dominated by environmental remediation trucks.  With their humming, rattling pumps, hoses and generators, it’s admittedly been a little distracting to those of us on the other side of the windows.

However, it’s a welcome intrusion to those of us who know what’s going on under the surface of the street.  The trucks are performing vital maintenance on the underground storm sewers that pipe rainwater from our streets into rivers and out to sea.  When the catch basins under the street grates become clogged with debris and leaves, they no longer trap trash and pollutants as designed.  So regular clean-outs (often done with a large vacuum truck) are vital.  And the network of sewer pipes under the City of Boston (like many municipalities) is aging and needs repair as well.  Rumor has it that cameras are being installed to monitor for leaks or cracks in the pipes underground.

As an organization that’s spent decades fighting for clean water throughout New England, the maintenance of the water infrastructure right under our feet is one of those scenes that, quite literally, drives the original goals–and results–of our advocacy home.

In an effort to clean up the Charles River—and as the result of years of CLF advocacy—residents in Bellingham, Franklin, and Milford, MA may soon be obligated to comply with a proposed EPA mandate to reduce phosphorus runoff by 65 percent. As with most important initiatives to restore our environment, implementing this program will cost money, and there are constituencies opposed.  This Milford Daily News article chronicles some of the factors at stake and how residents have reacted to the news.

What’s most exciting about the public dialogue is to see that the discussions have advanced to real thinking about HOW to finance cleanups through stormwater utilities and other fee structures for reducing polluted runoff.  In Massachusetts, polluted runoff is the number one cause of water pollution.  Conversations about how to secure dedicated funding to solve the problem have generally only happened in a few communities under enforcement orders. They had to sort out issues of what’s fair, what’s practical, and what’s most palatable to residents in order to finance the fixes.  Now we’re seeing similar discussions in more communities where new stormwater regulations are proposed. These communities can serve as a model of forward-thinking investment in the clean waters that are critical to a thriving New England.

Learn more about CLF’s work to restore and protect New England’s waterways.

The Boston Globe ran an interesting essay in its Ideas section on whether we should do “randomized trials’ of new laws before applying them to our entire society and economy.

Louis Brandeis, a great Boston lawyer before ascending to the Supreme Court once eloquently and clearly presented the mechanism we have long had in place for doing something of the sort:

“It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.” – New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann, 285 U.S. 262, 311, 52 S.Ct. 371, 386-387, (1932) (dissenting opinion of Brandeis, J.)

Back in 1932 a knuckle-dragging Supreme Court invalidated a law enacted by the State of Oklahoma that required  people who wanted to manufacture, distribute or sell ice obtain a license first.  In the dissent quoted above Justice Brandeis blazed a path that continues today – a path based on the clear recognition that states should be generally allowed to enact their own laws subject only to clear preemption by federal law.

This history has served the environment well.  Over the last 40 years the great advances in clean air, clean water and toxics reduction have come from the states – with the Federal Government following along. Sometimes these efforts have been states going it alone and sometimes it has been coordinated action by a group of states.  Two key examples of that kind of collective action are the way that automobile emissions regulations were developed by California and then adopted by a range of states, led by the New England states and the development of a Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative by the states of the East Coast.

“The states as laboratories” does not have all the virtues of randomized trials like the experiments used in the pharmaceutical world but it does have the advantage of being very real.

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.

A logo is a funny thing. At first, you want to compare it to everything you’ve ever seen before. Ask 10 people and they will all see something different, but will grasp for the familiar in it. But over time, a logo takes on meaning of its own. Even with no words attached to it, we can identify the organization behind it. It says something startling about us that we can process the thousands of visual impressions we take in every day, mix in the messages we hear, and bring all those to mind when we flash on an image as simple as, say, a red line.

In our new logo, we hope you will see both the CLF you’ve come to trust, and the energy we have for tackling the environmental challenges ahead. The red line, or “zing,” as we’ve started calling it around here, is our version of the exclamation point. It says, “And we mean it.”

Our new logo is just one element of a whole new look and feel for CLF’s marketing and communications. We invite you to be among the first to get a glimpse at our brand new website, launched today. We hope you will tell us what you like and what you don’t, and come back often, as we are adding more content every day about our work and ways you can get involved. Starting today, you will also see our new look on Facebook and Twitter and coming soon in our print and digital publications, online communications, advertising and more.

We have some work to do before the zing means:  those people who cleaned up Boston Harbor, or that group that saved the cod, or the ones who made our cars cleaner. We’ll continue solving New England’s toughest environmental problems, and telling you about it here on our blog, on our website, in our publications, and in the media. In time, we hope, when you see the zing, you will say, “CLF: they’re the ones who protect my New England.”

The following is a special edition of CLF’s e-News.  To receive this kind of carefully screened (no spam here!)  information and to support CLF join today.

We at CLF watched last Tuesday’s elections with great interest, and in some cases, trepidation. Our ability to be effective in our work is greatly enhanced when there is real leadership on environmental issues at the state level, especially when federal leadership is lacking. With some exceptions, New Englanders chose with their votes to continue the environmental progress we are making in our region. Now that the dust has settled, we are pleased to bring you this special post-election edition of our e-news. Below, you will find a state-by-state forecast of how the election results are likely to help or hinder our and others’ efforts to address the most pressing environmental challenges affecting our region, namely reducing our carbon emissions from energy and transportation, planning for and mitigating the impacts of climate change, supporting clean energy development that creates good, local jobs, and protecting our natural resources – all in the interest of a healthy, thriving New England for everyone.

An overarching challenge that every governor and legislature will face is how to strike a balance between budget pressures and appropriately staffing and supporting environmental protection agencies. Maintaining a balanced budget can lead a state government into making “penny wise and pound foolish decisions,” like underfunding stormwater and sewage infrastructure projects needed to meet federal mandates and protect public health. In a closely related vein, building up jobs and the economy will mean that environmental permitting must be fair and timely; underfunded agencies without adequate staffing and resources will not be able to meet that goal.

Maine

The election of Paul LePage, a Republican who, for the first time in four decades, will be a governor of that party with majorities from his own party in both the Maine House and Senate, is potentially a shift of deep significance. On the campaign trail, Governor-elect LePage questioned the fact of climate change, indicated support for offshore oil and gas exploration and new nuclear power plants, stated that wind power was still too unreliable to focus much attention on and suggested folding the Departments of Environmental Protection, Marine Resources, Conservation and Inland Fisheries and Wildlife into the Department of Agriculture.

Currently the mayor of Waterville and general manager of Marden’s, a discount department store, LePage has indicated that his primary focus will be on making it easier to do business in Maine. His generally moderate record in Waterville and the long tradition of bi-partisan consensus around environmental issues in Maine provide some suggestion that forces may be at work that will temper negative campaign rhetoric. But it will be a challenge to advance a science-based agenda in Maine that looks to energy efficiency and clean renewable resources as the building blocks of both environmental protection and economic development.

Maine voters returned its two members to the U.S. House of Representatives, Rep. Chellie Pingree and Rep. Mike Michaud. Both have solid records as leaders on environmental issues.

For more on Maine’s election results, read CLF Maine Director Sean Mahoney’s blog post on CLF Scoop.

Massachusetts

Governor Deval Patrick’s re-election on a platform of clean energy and economic development was a hopeful sign for Massachusetts, with potential for positive reverberations beyond the Commonwealth. The Patrick campaign bucked conventional wisdom by emphasizing the need to make longer term investments, like building Cape Wind and putting in place long-term contracts that use such projects to provide electricity at a stable and predictable price.

The continued efforts to implement legislation enacted over the last two years – including the Massachusetts Green Communities Act, the Massachusetts Global Warming Solutions Act and the Massachusetts Oceans Act – will provide ample opportunities to press forward with that affirmative agenda of building a clean energy economy.

On the federal front, it is notable that the only newly elected member of Congress from Massachusetts (filling a seat to be vacated by retiring Rep. Delahunt), U.S. Representative-elect Bill Keating from the 10^th Congressional District, is a supporter of Cape Wind and received a state-wide award as “Environmental Legislator of the Year” when he was in the Massachusetts State Legislature, primarily for his water pollution work.

New Hampshire

The election resulted in a massive shift in the political landscape in New Hampshire. Prior to Tuesday, Democrats controlled both houses of the Legislature and the Executive Council under a Democratic governor. With the exception of Governor Lynch, who retained his office, Republicans swept other areas of the government. In the New Hampshire House and Senate, Republicans not only became the majority, but also achieved veto-proof majorities. In the Executive Council, which confirms nominations to offices in the executive branch and which approves government contracts, a Democratic majority not only was erased, but all five Council members are now Republican.

While it is important not to automatically assume that Republicans will oppose all effective and affirmative action on the environment, it is fair to note that New Hampshire’s Republican party adopted a platform that espouses positions that represent a retreat from state and regional efforts to tackle climate change. Whether there will be a serious attempt to translate these positions into policy remains to be seen.

On the federal level, Kelly Ayotte (R) won the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Judd Gregg. She defeated Democrat Paul Hodes, who vacated the Congressional District 1 seat to run for Senate. While in Congress, Hodes had been a strong ally on a variety of environmental issues. Republican Frank Giunta defeated incumbent Democrat Carol Shea Porter, also a strong ally on environmental issues, for the Congressional District 2 seat. Charlie Bass (R) won New Hampshire’s second Congressional seat (District 1), defeating Democratic candidate Anne McLane Kuster. Rep. Bass has shown leadership around key environmental issues before in Congress, including re-establishing passenger rail in New Hampshire, and has the potential to become an ally on future initiatives, including advancing renewable energy in the state.

Rhode Island

Rhode Island elected Independent Lincoln Chafee as governor. Among the three candidates running for governor, Lincoln Chafee was widely viewed as the candidate who was most likely to understand environmental issues and advance a pro-environmental agenda. Chafee advanced environmental issues as a U.S. senator and as the “new urbanist” mayor of Warwick, RI, where he championed a rail-based vision for development around T.F. Green Airport that is now coming to fruition.

David Cicilline, most recently mayor of Providence, was elected to replace Congressman Patrick Kennedy in the 1^st Congressional District. Cicilline’s strong record on environmentally sound urban development and energy efficiency as mayor of Providence suggests he will be an important voice in Congress. His successor as mayor of Providence, Angel Tavares, is widely expected to provide leadership in that key city that will build on the renaissance of the last decade.

Vermont

Vermont elected Democrat Peter Shumlin to serve as the state’s next governor. For many years, Governor-elect Shumlin served as President pro tempore of the Vermont Senate. As the leader of the State Senate’s majority over the past several years, Mr. Shumlin has led initiatives to address climate change, electric energy efficiency, renewable energy development, and to protect the state’s air, water and forests. However, the Shumlin administration has its work cut out for it to adopt strong environmental and energy policies in the face of record budget deficits.

Vermonters elected Republican Phil Scott, also a former state senator, to serve as the state’s lieutenant governor. While this post holds primarily ministerial responsibilities, Mr. Scott’s views on important environmental issues remain to be seen.

At the federal level, Vermonters voted to send Democrats Congressman Peter Welch and U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy back to Washington for another term. Both members of Congress are considered to be pro-environmental and in favor of progressive energy policies, with Rep. Welch serving as a leader in the House on energy efficiency. Senator Leahy has now become Vermont’s longest serving senator and will play a key role in the leadership in Congress.

Lastly, Democrats gained unprecedented majorities in both houses of the Vermont State House, giving Governor-elect Shumlin the opportunity to work with friendly faces on crafting a legislative agenda.

Connecticut

The election of Democrat Dan Malloy, who won by a slim margin, is a cause for great hope and optimism in climate and energy circles. During the campaign, Malloy, the former mayor of the City of Stamford, articulated progressive and powerful ideas about the importance of confronting global warming, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and building up both clean energy and broad transportation choices that build walkable and livable communities and presided over an exciting, sophisticated and innovative “microgrid” project.

The federal scene in Connecticut, including the election of Attorney General Richard Blumenthal to the Senate, was characterized by preservation of a powerful delegation who will provide a strong voice in Congress for sensible energy policy and for investment in urban neighborhoods, a voice that will be critically needed given the larger makeup of the new Congress.