Complete list of press releases

WASHINGTON (August 19, 2009) –– A livestock ranchers group, the Public Lands Council (PLC), and national environmental group, Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), have sent a joint letter to Congressmen Mike Thompson (D-CA) and John Salazar (D-CO), applauding them for their leadership in introducing legislation to provide relief from the estate tax.  

The bill, the Family Farm Preservation and Conservation Estate Tax Act (HR 3524), would exempt farms and ranches from the estate tax so long as the land continues in farming or ranching. The exemption lasts as long as the land stays in production agriculture, but is subject to taxation if used for or sold for other purposes.  Additionally, land with conservation easements would be exempt from the estate tax.

“The Family Farm Preservation and Conservation Estate Tax Act recognizes that working farmland should not be subject to a burdensome tax that too often makes it impossible for families to continue farming and ranching on their land,” says Skye Krebs, President of PLC and rancher from Ione, Ore.  “This is common-sense legislation that allows America’s producers to carry on the legacy of ranching in the West, without being forced to sell our open spaces for development in order to pay the death tax.”

The letter notes that: “Nearly three quarters of the land in the lower 48 states of the U.S. is in private ownership, with the vast majority owned by farmers, ranchers and forest landowners.  These lands are vital to both healthy ecosystems and vibrant rural communities.  They provide clean water, climate benefits, food and fiber production, and wildlife habitat.” 

“It’s impossible to separate private working lands and healthy ecosystems in the western United States,” explains Dan Grossman of EDF. “Good private land stewardship preserves critical wildlife habitat and the nation’s natural resources.  When the estate tax forces ranchers to sell private land, the environment suffers too.” 

Below is an excerpt from the joint letter:

“EDF and PLC strongly support and endorse the Family Farm Preservation Estate Tax Act.  We are excited about this legislation and are committed to working with you and your staff to enact the bill…  

“The estate tax, as currently formulated, promotes the break-up, sale and development of family-owned farms, ranch and forest lands.  H.R. 3524 will remove the financial obstacles that impede the handing down of productive agricultural operations in tact to America’s next generation of producers and land stewards.”  

### 
 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Tony Kreindler, Environmental Defense Fund, 202-445-8108, tkreindler@edf.org
Sharyn Stein, Environmental Defense Fund, 202-572-3396, sstein@edf.org

(Washington – August 5, 2009) The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and the American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF) were scheduled to release their new report on the economic impacts of the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) today, and had planned a conference call to brief members of the media. Unfortunately, they canceled– and left their participating journalists without an ACES story for today. To fill that gap, Environmental Defense Fund has compiled some facts about ACES from the most recent studies and most reputable sources out there. There’s plenty of information available; hopefully this will help journalists meet their deadlines.

• The Energy Information Administration (EIA) says the cap on carbon pollution in ACES can be achieved for $83 per year per household – or a dime a day per person. One of the reasons for the affordability is that increases in electricity and natural gas bills of consumers are substantially mitigated through 2025 by the allocation of free allowances to regulated electricity and natural gas distribution companies.

• The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that ACES would cost the average household $175 a year by 2020, or about the cost of a postage stamp per day. The CBO also found that the poorest 20 percent of American households would actually see a net cash gain under the bill of about $40 in 2020. The study factored in the value of emissions allowances that will be rebated to consumers.

• The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) puts the cost of a carbon cap at $88-$140 per household per year over the life of the program – or about a dime a day per person. (Sound familiar?)

• The Energy Information Administration (see above) also says that ACES would reduce our dependence on foreign oil. The U.S. would reduce its consumption of oil by 344 million barrels in the year 2030 alone, a cut of more than 12 percent from predicted imports for the same year without the bill. To put that figure in perspective, 344 million barrels of oil are worth almost $26 billion today.

• The United States Global Change Research Program, better known as the NOAA report, found that America will face hundreds of billions of dollars in costs if we don’t take steps to stop climate change. The cost of inaction will include: sea level rise of as much as two feet that will destroy property along our coasts; stronger hurricanes and other storms that will damage cities; and severe droughts that will devastate agricultural sectors.

• LessCarbonMoreJobs.org shows thousands of U.S. companies that are already working in the energy efficiency or clean energy sectors, and are poised to grow under the carbon cap. EDF created this website to map out, state-by-state, where clean energy jobs are likely to be produced.

• NAM/ACCF’s study from last year, which was seriously flawed. It looked at the earlier Lieberman-Warner bill, but it ignored important provisions of the legislation and imposed artificial constraints on the economy’s ability to reduce emissions. The analysis presumed there would be no banking of emission allowances and only limited use of offsets. The study also artificially constrained the use of renewable energy and carbon capture and storage. NAM has a long history of opposing virtually every major environmental law that’s been proposed, often using similar bad arguments with flawed data. Of course, they have a chance to get it right this year- once they finally release their new study.

###

A leading national nonprofit organization, Environmental Defense Fund represents more than 700,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. For more information, visit www.edf.org.
 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Tony Kreindler, Environmental Defense Fund, 202-445-8108, tkreindler@edf.org
Sharyn Stein, Environmental Defense Fund, 202-572-3396, sstein@edf.org

(Washington – August 4, 2009) A just-released analysis from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) says the cap on carbon pollution in the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (H.R. 2454) can be achieved for $83 per year per household – or a dime a day per person. One of the reasons for the affordability is that increases on electricity and natural gas bills of consumers are substantially mitigated through 2025 by the allocation of free allowances to regulated electricity and natural gas distribution companies.

“For a dime a day we can solve climate change, invest in a clean energy future, and save billions in imported oil,” said Environmental Defense Fund Director of Economic Policy and Analysis Nat Keohane, PhD.

The EIA analysis considers only the costs of reducing global warming pollution, and does not take into account the many potential benefits of action.

The study also shows that the legislation passed by the House would reduce our dependence on foreign oil. The analysis says the U.S. would reduce its consumption of oil by 344 million barrels in the year 2030 alone, under the provisions of the bill. That’s a cut of more than 12 percent of predicted imports for the same year without the bill.

The EIA analysis has similar findings to two other impartial and substantive studies done recently, from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Congressional Budget Office.

“This analysis confirms what every other credible study has found, and it – once again – refutes the widely reported scare tactics about the cost of the cap and trade bill,” Keohane said “Opponents of action will always try to cherry-pick the numbers and use models with biased assumptions. The EPA, EIA and CBO are the non-biased standard for economic analysis.”

A leaked draft of the EIA report, which was covered in some early media stories, contained an error. The average yearly change in consumption per household for the years 2012-2030 is $83 — NOT $142. The correct figure is in the final draft of the EIA analysis, and is the one referred to above.

EIA’s analysis is online at http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/hr2454/index.html

###
 

A leading national nonprofit organization, Environmental Defense Fund represents more than 700,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. For more information, visit www.edf.org.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:

Richard Denison, rdenison@edf.org, 202/387-3500, x3348
Margie Kelly, margie@saferstates.org, 541/344-2282

(Washington, DC – August 4, 2009) A broad coalition of health and environmental organizations unveiled today a set of key requirements for reforming the nation’s antiquated chemical safety law, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The coalition, called Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, includes state and national environmental groups, associations of health professionals, advocates for health-affected individuals and environmental justice organizations.

“Our organizations representing more than four million Americans have come together to demand fundamental changes in the system our country uses to ensure that the tens of thousands of chemicals produced and used every day are safe,” said Andy Igrejas, director of the Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families coalition.

“The 33-year-old Toxic Substances Control Act is badly broken,” said Dr. Richard Denison, senior scientist with Environmental Defense Fund. “By failing to identify, let alone address, the long and growing list of chemicals in everyday products that we now know can harm people and the environment, TSCA has forced states, businesses, workers and consumers to try to act on their own to address what should be a national priority.”

The U.S. Congress is beginning to consider changes to TSCA, with amending legislation expected to be introduced this fall.

“Emerging science increasingly links exposure to toxic chemicals to the rising incidence of serious and chronic health problems among Americans,” said Rebecca Clouse, RN, Environmental Health Liaison for the American Nurses Association. “Adoption of our platform for reform would transform TSCA into a law that prevents toxic chemical exposures before they occur.”

Key elements of the Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families platform include:

• Immediately initiate action on chemicals we already know are extremely dangerous. Persistent, bioaccumulative toxicants (PBTs) to which people could be exposed should be phased out of commerce. Exposure to other toxic chemicals, like formaldehyde, that have already been extensively studied, should be reduced to the maximum extent feasible.

• Require basic information to identify additional chemicals of concern. Chemical manufacturers should be held responsible for the safety of their products, and should be required to provide full information on the health and environmental hazards associated with their chemicals. The public, workers, and businesses should have full access to this information.

• Protect all people and vulnerable groups, using the best science. Chemicals should meet a standard of safety for all people, including children, pregnant women, and workers. The extra burden of toxic chemical exposure on people of color, low-income and indigenous communities must be reduced. The development and use of information gleaned from biomonitoring should be expanded.

The Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families platform is attached and is also available at:

www.SaferChemicals.org

Alaska Community Action on Toxics - American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities - American Nurses Association - Association of Reproductive Health Professionals - Autism Society of America - Breast Cancer Fund - Center for Environmental Health - Center for International Environmental Law - Clean New York - Clean Water Action - Earthjustice - Ecology Center - Environmental Defense Fund - Environmental Health Fund - Environmental Health Strategy Center - Health Care Without Harm - Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy - Just Transition Alliance - Learning Disabilities Association - Moms Rising - Natural Resources Defense Council - Reproductive Health Technologies Project - Safer States - US Public Interest Research Group - Washington Toxics Coalition - WE ACT for Environmental Justice
 

A Platform for Reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act

A reformed Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) would serve as the backbone of a sound and comprehensive chemicals policy that protects public health and the environment, while restoring the luster of safety to U.S. goods in the world market. Any effective reform of TSCA should:

• Immediately Initiate Action on the Worst Chemicals: Persistent, bioaccumulative toxicants (PBTs) are uniquely hazardous. Any such chemical to which people could be exposed should be phased out of commerce. Exposure to other toxic chemicals, such as formaldehyde, that have already been extensively studied, should be reduced to the maximum extent feasible.
• Require Basic Information for All Chemicals: Manufacturers should be required to provide basic information on the health hazards associated with their chemicals, how they are used, and the ways that the public or workers could be exposed.
• Protect the Most Vulnerable: Chemicals should be assessed against a health standard that explicitly requires protection of the most vulnerable subpopulations. That population is likely to usually be children, but it could also be workers, pregnant women, or another vulnerable population.
• Use the Best Science and Methods: The National Academy of Sciences’ recommendations for reforming risk assessment at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should be adopted. Regulators should expand development and use of information gleaned from “biomonitoring,” the science of detecting human chemical contamination, to inform and impel efforts to reduce these exposures.
• Hold Industry Responsible for Demonstrating Chemical Safety: Unlike pharmaceuticals, chemicals are currently presumed safe until proven harmful. The burden of proving harm falls entirely on EPA. Instead, chemical manufacturers should be responsible for demonstrating the safety of their products.
• Ensure Environmental Justice: Effective reform should contribute substantially to reducing the disproportionate burden of toxic chemical exposure placed on people of color, low-income people and indigenous communities.
• Enhance Government Coordination: The EPA should work effectively with other agencies, such as FDA, that have jurisdiction over some chemical exposures. The ability of the states to enact tougher chemical policies should be maintained and state/federal cooperation on chemical safety encouraged.
• Promote Safer Alternatives: There should be national support for basic and applied research into green chemistry and engineering, and policy should favor chemicals and products that are shown to be benign over those with potential health hazards.
• Ensure the Right to Know: The public, workers, and the marketplace should have full access to information about the health and environmental hazards of chemicals and the way in which government safety decisions are made.

This September, the Ground Water Protection Council (GWPC) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) will host the first Water/Energy Sustainability Symposium to address challenges in meeting future water and energy needs. Environmental Defense Fund will serve as a sustainability partner. This innovative Symposium will bring together leaders from government, energy and water industries, academia, water organizations, and other stakeholders, to chart a collaborative course toward sustainability for both resources.

Large, predictable quantities of water are needed to produce our nation’s energy. The treatment and distribution of water relies on easily accessible, affordable energy. As experts in both fields search for ways to meet future demand for both of these resources, the interdependence of water and energy is clear - and the need for collaboration critical.

The Water/Energy Symposium, held in conjunction with the GWPC’s 2009 Annual Forum, will take place on September 13-16, 2009 at the Hilton Salt Lake City Center. Registration is currently open. To access the full agenda and registration information, visit http://www.gwpc.org/meetings/forum/forum.htm.

With the goal of informing policy makers at both the state and national level, the two and a half day event will feature more than 60 of the nation’s top experts from the public and private sectors. Hot topics including energy impacts on water use and water impacts on energy development; water and power generation; water needs for unconventional oil and gas, wind, solar, hydro and nuclear energy production; sustainable infrastructure and end-use efficiency; and integrated water-energy planning will be covered.

The Symposium is co-sponsored by the GWPC and DOE in collaboration with; National Ground Water Association, Association of State Drinking Water Administrators, National Rural Water Association, Petroleum Technology Transfer Council, National Oil Shale Association, Interstate Oil & Gas Compact Commission, Western States Water Council, Alliance for Water Efficiency, Water Research Foundation, Water Environment Research Foundation, Geological Society of America, National Association of Clean Water Agencies, Women’s Council on Energy and the Environment, Environmental Defense Fund, Western Governors’ Association, Groundwater Foundation, Water Research Foundaiton, and others.

(Washington, DC– July 30, 2009) Farmers in the Northern San Joaquin Valley will be eligible for more than $2.6 million in funds this year under two new farm bill conservation partnership programs this year to tackle some of the region’s most pressing environmental problems. The awards will be renewable for several years, likely bringing the multi-year total up to $12.3 million for the partnerships.

The funds will be available to Northern San Joaquin Valley growers and dairies for water quality improvement, reducing off-farm movement of pesticides and sediment, and improving fish and wildlife habitat, using practices approved by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).

The new partnership programs — the Agricultural Water Enhancement Program (AWEP) and Cooperative Conservation Partnership Initiative (CCPI) – will make funds available to growers and dairies working cooperatively in the Northern San Joaquin Valley to improve water quality and habitat on lands that grow specialty crops (fruits and vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits and horticulture and nursery crops, including floriculture). Eligible practices will include installation of sediment basins and irrigation tailwater recirculation systems, planting native shrub hedgerows for integrated pest management, and creating features such as riparian buffers for erosion control.

The AWEP and CCPI partnership programs were launched this year. They were championed in the 2008 Farm Bill by U.S. Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-Merced/Modesto/Stockton), chairman of the House Agriculture Committee’s Subcommittee on Horticulture and Organic Agriculture, and U.S. Rep. Jim Costa (D-Bakersfield/Fresno), a member of the House Agriculture Committee’s Subcommittee on Conservation.

“Congress is recognizing an important need of specialty crops farmers in Northern San Joaquin Valley,” says Parry Klassen, Executive Director of Coalition for Urban Rural Environmental Stewardship (CURES and www.curesworks.org), the applicant for the AWEP program. “Making this funding available during these tough economic times will help ensure that protections for our valuable water resources can be put in place quickly.”

“Congressmen Cardoza and Costa deserve credit for championing the programs that will benefit both the environment and the economy,” said Stacy Small, Conservation Scientist for Environmental Defense Fund and a co-author on the partnership proposals. “These conservation programs will put millions of dollars directly into the hands of Northern San Joaquin Valley growers to help solve environmental problems and offset the cost of meeting regulatory requirements.”

“I’m looking forward to encouraging regional growers to apply for the funds,” says Cliff Ohmart, Sustainable Winegrowing Director with the Lodi Winegrape Commission, who is coordinating the CCPI partnership in San Joaquin County. “I’m particularly excited that this will provide new financial resources for activities like upland habitat restoration that we had trouble getting funded before, as well as soil erosion control.”

“Producers in our region are eager to improve upon their current production practices, as they realize the critical role they play in contributing to the regions effort to improve water quality,” says Sherman Boone, chairman of the East Stanislaus Resource Conservation District  (ESRCD), a CCPI and AWEP partner that will be providing technical support and assistance to producers applying for these funds. “However, improvements to production practices often require costly infrastructure to be installed, which can be a difficult hurdle for producers who have been hit hard by the poor economy. We are excited to hear these funds have been made available to assist our local farmers and dairymen implement conservation practices here in the Northern San Joaquin Valley.”

“Stanislaus County Farm Bureau co-founded the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition and has been actively involved with trying to improve water quality when it comes to agricultural inputs,” said Wayne Zipser,
Executive Manager of the Stanislaus County Farm Bureau. “This available funding through the USDA will go a long way in helping farmers make the essential improvements in their management practices and infrastructure to help achieve water quality standards for all of our watersheds.”

The grants will come at a critical time for farmers and the environment along the San Joaquin River and its tributaries. In addition to a faltering economy and several years of drought placing additional burdens on growers, the San Joaquin and Sacramento River Systems have been jointly declared to be “America’s Most Endangered River” by the non-profit group American Rivers.

Given this new infusion of federal dollars, farmers will be able to quickly receive assistance to cut water pollution levels through on-farm irrigation water management practices and improve habitat out of funds set aside especially for this purpose from the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP).

“These partnerships are a solid mix of agricultural groups, environmental organizations, and government agencies working together to advance goals we all share: supporting California agriculture, while also achieving state objectives with respect to cleaner water and healthier landscapes,” said Eric Holst, managing director of the Center for Conservation Incentives at Environmental Defense Fund. “We believe these new initiatives hold tremendous promise and will jump start many similar projects — multi-stakeholder efforts that ensure that growers have the assistance they need to successfully address local, state, and regional conservation priorities — in California and across the country.”

To receive funding for the environmentally beneficial practices identified for these programs, growers should apply under the partnership in their area by contacting their local NRCS office: Stanislaus County, (209) 491-9320; San Joaquin County, (209) 472-7127. For a listing of offices statewide see http://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?state=CA.
###
 

(Sacramento – July 29, 2009) Nearly one out of five Californians (18 percent) named water supply and drought as the most important environmental issue, a nearly four-fold percentage increase from last year, according to the new annual Public Policy Institute of California Survey, Californians and the Environment. Despite this rising concern, the poll also showed that more Californians (50 percent) prefer that the state focus on water conservation and efficient use of the current supply than those who favor building storage systems and increasing the water supply (43 percent).

“While our water supplies are dwindling, this poll shows California voters still are keeping their cool, and they expect the legislative leaders to do the same,” said Kathryn Phillips, director of the California Transportation and Air Initiative for Environmental Defense Fund. “Voters want the legislature to weigh all its options and come up with a comprehensive, sustainable and long-term water supply solution. That solution must include incentives for efficiency, water for the environment, and a more robust water market that prices water right, discourages waste and rewards efficient uses.”

Legislative leaders have indicated that they are determined to get a package of Bay-Delta water-related measures through before the end of the session, an extraordinarily fast and ambitious schedule for such a complex set of issues. Moreover, the Schwarzenegger administration continues to express support for an estimated $10 billion bond measure to finance more fresh water storage, even though billions have been spent since 2000 on the problem without providing reliable water supply or environmental benefits.

“After the bruising budget battle, a quick and expensive fix isn’t the answer,” said Cynthia Koehler, senior consulting attorney for Environmental Defense Fund. “We cannot simply build our way out of the water problem. Some new infrastructure may be part of the solution, but that needs to be determined through careful analysis and clear public debate.”

“We can respond to the water challenge by becoming more water efficient, similar to California’s response to the energy crisis in 2000,” added Phillips. “At that time, Californians flexed their power and became more efficient users, even as they began finding better, less environmentally damaging and more reliable ways to develop new energy.”

“We shouldn’t toss out environmental protections critical to preventing the extinction of Chinook salmon and other species,” added Koehler. “Instead, we can learn to balance our water supply needs with needs for environmental protection by looking at long term and sustainable solutions.”

“California’s water supply system is built upon outdated rules and regulations that don’t work for many farmers and certainly isn’t working for the environment,” concluded Phillips. “While some farmers are getting full allocations of water, others such as those in west side Fresno County are not. We can rationalize our water use in California and we can work to provide incentives that reward efficiency, but these steps will require out of the box thinking, innovation and reforming how water was used and governed in the past.”

“We can build a robust water market that moves water from willing sellers to its most efficient use,” concluded Koehler. “We can protect our vital salmon heritage and wildlife by allocating sufficient flows for fish and other wildlife by ‘capping’ the amount that can sustainably be removed from the Bay-Delta. We can end the endless cycle of environmental litigation and we can have sustainable supplies of water for farms, cities and for wildlife.”

###

About Environmental Defense Fund
A leading national nonprofit organization, Environmental Defense Fund represents more than 700,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. For more information, visit www.edf.org 

 

(San Francisco – July 29, 2009) Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) has hired a former top aide to San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, Wade Crowfoot, as its new West Coast Political Director. Crowfoot most recently served as director of climate protection initiatives for the city and county of San Francisco. In that position, he advanced groundbreaking landmark energy, transportation and waste policies. He also directed state and federal environmental agendas for Mayor Newsom and served as his senior environmental advisor. 

In the newly created position at EDF, Crowfoot will:
• Work with environmental leaders across California to pass and implement key climate, water and oceans policies;
• Broaden and enhance EDF’s relationships with key political, business and environmental leaders in California, including its congressional delegation; and,
• Build effective coalitions of diverse organizations within and outside of California to better achieve results.

“Environmental Defense Fund will benefit from Wade’s political insight and environmental expertise to help us solve the West’s most pressing environmental issues,” said David Festa, EDF’s vice president of West Coast operations.

During Crowfoot’s tenure, San Francisco gained recognition as one of America’s greenest cities for:
• Reducing its carbon emission levels five percent below 1990 levels;
• Passing the country’s strongest green building standards for construction;
• Implementing energy efficiency programs to save enough energy to power more than 30,000 homes;
• Converting its municipal diesel vehicle fleet to biodiesel and pursuing strategies to make San Francisco the electric vehicle capital of America; and
• Achieving the highest municipal recycling rate in the country.

Crowfoot formerly served as Mayor Newsom’s Director of Government Affairs and has worked in senior level positions for other elected officials. He also worked as a specialist in the fields of public opinion research and urban economic development.
###

About Environmental Defense Fund
A leading national nonprofit organization, Environmental Defense Fund represents more than 700,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. For more information, visit www.edf.org.

(Washington – July 28, 2009) Successfully reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) from transportation is “critical to meeting national goals” to cut GHGs, according to a new report released today by a diverse group of federal agencies and advocacy groups, including Environmental Defense Fund. The study, Moving Cooler: Transportation Strategies to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions, is the first-ever comprehensive analysis of transportation efficiency and its relationship to greenhouse gas reductions and consumer savings. It is authored by one of the nation’s most respected transportation consulting firms, Cambridge Systematics.

“Moving Cooler provides an expanded array of options for policymakers to begin considering to ensure America can adapt to a rapidly changing world — especially given the impacts of decisions on future generations — when the climate crisis and the stability of U.S. energy supplies may present far more acute societal challenges,” said Michael Replogle, a member of the Steering Committee for the report on behalf of Environmental Defense Fund and an advisor to the U.S. Department of Transportation. “If America is to retain a globally competitive economy, it will need to address these issues squarely.”

The findings of Moving Cooler include:

• Maximum implementation of the complete portfolio of the six strategy bundles outlined in the report – except for road-use pricing (e.g., congestion pricing, pay-as-you-drive insurance, vehicle miles traveled) — could achieve transportation GHG reductions of up to 24 percent annually by 2050.
• With the addition of pricing strategies, annual GHG reductions of up to 47 percent could be achieved by 2050.
• Innovations in vehicle and fuel technology will have a substantial impact on GHGs, but these gains will largely be offset by increases in travel along with growth in the U.S. population.
• Transportation agencies and other decision makers could create effective combinations of transportation strategies that provide high-quality transportation services, while achieving meaningful GHG reductions.
• Additional investment in highway capacity and bottleneck relief could result in GHG reductions through 2030 and a negligible increase in GHGs through 2050.
• Higher levels of investment in public transportation and highways have returns of two or three times to one in terms of benefits in relation to the costs of these strategies.

“This landmark study found that in most cases, savings in vehicle costs exceed the costs of implementing the strategies considered, even without counting added co-benefits from reduced accidents, air pollution, and other indirect impacts,” said Replogle. “Many of these transportation strategies — such as pay-as-you-drive insurance and transit-oriented development — also support stronger economic development and reduce America’s dangerous dependence on imported oil.”

Transportation contributes roughly 28 percent of the total U.S. GHGs and transportation emissions have been growing faster than those of other sectors. Between 1990 and 2006, growth in U.S. transportation GHG emissions represented almost one-half (47 percent) of the increase in total U.S. GHGs. If the American Clean Energy and Security Act (H.R. 2454) — which the U.S. House of Representatives passed last month — becomes law, U.S. GHGs would need to be reduced 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050.

“We can’t get there from here without reducing emissions from transportation,” said Colin Peppard, Climate and Infrastructure Policy Director for Environmental Defense Fund. “Fortunately, many of the strategies analyzed in Moving Cooler – like congestion pricing and expanded transit services — could be implemented within a few years and could begin to generate reductions in greenhouse gases prior to 2020. These strategies would achieve reductions relatively quickly and reduce the cumulative greenhouse gas reduction challenge in later decades.”

Moving Cooler was commissioned by a diverse group of stakeholders representing environmental action groups, transportation experts, industry, federal agencies, trade associations, and leading foundations. They include the: American Public Transportation Association, Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, Intelligent Transportation Society of America, Kresge Foundation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Rockefeller Foundation, Shell, Surdna Foundation, Funders Network for Smart Growth, and the Urban Land Institute.

“Moving Cooler shows that vehicle efficiency is not the only way to reduce emissions from transportation,” said Environmental Defense Fund Vice President Andy Darrell. “Around the country, states and cities are experimenting with ideas like road-use pricing and transit tailored to the communities they serve. By supporting transportation innovations like those outlined in Moving Cooler, the federal government could achieve an outcome that’s good for the planet and good for business: fewer greenhouse emissions and less congestion.”

###
 

(Washington, DC - July 24, 2009) - A coalition including Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the National Wildlife Federation, National Audubon Society, Coalition to Restore Coastal Louisiana, and the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation today called on the Obama Administration to bring together a task force to speed up efforts to restore coastal wetlands, help communities reduce their exposure to hurricane damage, and resolve critical issues not addressed in the Army Corps of Engineers’ latest plan. 

The groups’ request are part of comments due today on the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration plan (LaCPR). By congressional order, the LaCPR requires the Army Corps of Engineers to put together a plan to protect the communities, infrastructure, and environment of coastal Louisiana. As part of its mandate, the Corps must consider a full range of flood control, coastal restoration and hurricane protection measures.

“As the LaCPR admits, the Corps does not have a plan and program to restore Louisiana’s protective coastal wetlands, nor is it able to provide the tools for people to stormproof their homes. Now it’s time for the White House to get involved, because the job is not getting done and this problem is bigger than any one federal agency,” said Courtney Taylor, a policy analyst and attorney for EDF’s Coastal Louisiana Project. “Given the challenges facing coastal Louisiana and resources the task force can bring together, this group is uniquely qualified to move coastal restoration forward, and finally get the results needed to reverse an economic and environmental mess.”

We recommend that the White House convene the congressionally-mandated Coastal Louisiana Ecosystem Protection and Restoration Task Force, and charge the Council on Environmental Quality with leading the task force. In 2007, Congress said the task force would include Secretaries of the Army, Interior, Commerce, Agriculture, Transportation Energy; the heads of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Coast Guard, Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority of Louisiana; and two representatives of the state of Louisiana selected by the governor.

In addition to calling for the task force to be convened, the coalition called for:

• Congress to appropriate funds for the Corps to complete the comprehensive coastal restoration study
• Federal agencies to study the situation and fill in any gaps still left in LaCPR
• Governments to invest in a non-structural programs like elevating homes and restoring wetlands.                               
• Congress to fund already authorized projects

(Raleigh, NC - July 22, 2009) A vote by the NC House of Representatives today documents the growing demand for cleaner energy and more efficient ways to use it. Legislators approved a bill that would allow Progress Energy to shut down at least one coal-burning plant and replace it with natural gas. The bill – S 1004, Amend Certain Electricity Generation Laws – now moves to the NC Senate. The following statement may be attributed to Kristen Coracini, energy specialist with the Raleigh-based Southeast office of Environmental Defense Fund.

“One less coal plant, dramatically less pollution. Step by step, North Carolina is cleaning up dirty air and reducing global warming emissions. It’s not easy. Every step counts.” 
 

###

WHAT: Green Innovation for Business – Austin “Unconference”

WHO: Environmental Defense Fund, in partnership with Ashoka. Hosted by the 3M Austin Center.

WHEN: Wednesday, September 16, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

WHERE: 3M Austin Center, 6801 River Place Blvd., Austin, Texas 78726

MORE: The “Green Innovation for Business Unconference” brings together professionals engaged in making their companies and industries more efficient and sustainable and on the cutting-edge of innovation. Unlike traditional conferences, these meetings do not include formal panels or speeches. They are organized in a participatory format in which all participants have an opportunity to share, problem-solve, network, collaborate and learn, focused on the topics of greatest interest to them—from packaging and product innovation to supply chain sustainability to advances in operational efficiency and beyond.

COST: Early Bird $45 (registration before Aug. 19) or Regular $75. Conference attendees are also invited to the complimentary post-conference reception at Austin’s The Oasis.

CONTACT: For more information about the conference and to register, please visit http://greeninnovators-aus.eventbrite.com/. For media inquiries, please contact Chris Smith, Environmental Defense Fund, csmith@edf.org or 512.691.3451
 

Contacts in U.S.: Elena Craft, Environmental Defense Fund-512.691.3452
Contacts in London: John Kaltenstein, Friends of the Earth, JKaltenstein@foe.org, Ramon Alvarez, Environmental Defense Fund, ralvarez@edf.org

Media Contacts: Chris Smith, Environmental Defense Fund, 512.691.3451, Nick Berning, Friends of the Earth, 202.222.0748

(London, U.K. – July 17, 2009)  Today, the Marine Environment Protection Committee of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) gave preliminary approval to a joint application from the U.S. and Canada for the designation of an Emission Control Area (ECA) that would extend 200 nautical miles off of their respective coastlines.

This ECA would provide the strongest clean air standards available under international law, slashing ozone-forming and particulate pollution from oceangoing vessels and saving up to 14,000 lives a year by 2020. Final adoption of the proposal could come in March 2010 at the next meeting of this Committee of the IMO, a London-based subsidiary body of the United Nations.

Container ships, tankers and other large sea-going vessels that dock at more than 100 U.S. port cities burn low grade “residual fuel” or “bunker fuel” that is a major source of air pollution. The emissions reductions in an ECA result from the required use of lower sulfur fuels (10,000 ppm in 2010 and 1,000 ppm in 2015) and control equipment for nitrogen oxides on new engines built after 2016. EPA analysis indicates that in 2020 alone, the ECA would save as many as 14,000 lives, prevent 4,800 hospital admissions, and prevent 4.9 million acute respiratory symptoms.

Today’s approval of this application is the result of the hard work of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which prepared a well-documented, winning application and effectively responded to technical concerns raised by other countries at the IMO. Below are supporting statements from two major U.S. environmental groups attending the IMO meeting:

John Kaltenstein, Clean Vessels Program Manager with Friends of the Earth, San Francisco, California: “Regulating international shipping off U.S. and Canadian coasts has been strenuously demanded by impacted residents and environmental groups for years. The IMO has shown that it can step up to the plate. Friends of the Earth will work to ensure that the proposal is adopted and that the public health and environmental benefits are soon realized.”

Ramon Alvarez , Senior Scientist with Environmental Defense Fund’s Austin, Texas office: “When finalized, this proposal will provide welcome relief to the children and families hard hit by pollution delivered by the thousands of ships that annually visit Houston, Los Angeles/Long Beach, New York/New Jersey and other ports every year.

Additional information on emissions from oceangoing vessels and the ECA proposal is available at: www.epa.gov/oms/oceanvessels.htm#emissioncontrol

(Washington, DC – July 7, 2008) Environmental Defense Fund praised the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee for largely rejecting this afternoon the Obama administration’s call to cut $600 million from six conservation programs administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (Agricultural Management Assistance Program, Environmental Quality Incentives Program, Farmland Protection Program, Healthy Forest Reserve Program, Wetlands Reserve Program and Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program). 

Unfortunately, the Senate panel did cut the largest USDA working lands conservation program, theEnvironmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) — which has a $1 billion backlog — by $250 million below farm bill levels, as the Administration requested.

“We understand the administration’s goal is to cut the deficit, but programs that help drive private investment in public benefits – like cleaner water, cleaner air and improved habitat for wildlife – are a great deal for taxpayers,” said Sara Hopper, director of agricultural policy for Environmental Defense Fund and a former staff member of the Senate Agriculture Committee. “USDA conservation programs assist farmers, ranchers, and private forest landowners who offer to spend their own time and money to improve the management of their land to benefit the environment. We are pleased that appropriations panels in both the House and Senate have rejected most of the proposed cuts to conservation programs, but we urge Congress to look for ways to restore the cuts it has made as it finalizes the legislation.”

Last month, the House Appropriations Committee also largely rejected the Obama administration’s call to cut six voluntary USDA conservation programs by $600 million. However, the panel cut EQIP by $270 million below farm bill levels. The full House is expected to vote on the $22.9 billion appropriations bill as soon as tomorrow, after the Rules Committee votes tonight on a structure for how lawmakers can consider amendments to the bill.
 

Contact: Elena Craft, Environmental Defense Fund, 512.691.3452-w or 512.632.4946-c

Media Contact: Chris Smith, Environmental Defense Fund, 512.691.3451-w or 512.659.9264-c or csmith@edf.org

(Washington, D.C. – July 1, 2009)  Today, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed rigorous clean air standards for large U.S.-flagged ships. The proposal would cut pollution from U.S.-flagged tankers, container ships and other large vessels that are big emitters.

Environmental Defense Fund welcomes this proposal, which demonstrates pivotal leadership in addressing shipping emissions as the International Maritime Organization (IMO) considers the U.S. application for a protective Emission Control Area that would slash pollution from both U.S. and foreign-flagged ships. The IMO meets July 13-17 in London, where it will begin evaluating the U.S. application for protective clean air standards.

“Ships are floating smokestacks that deliver soot and smog straight to the heart of our most crowded coastal cities, home to 87 million Americans, so we are very pleased with this most recent action,” said Elena Craft, EDF Air Quality Specialist. “Here in Houston for example, we urgently need improved clean air standards to protect the kids and families hard hit by pollution delivered by more than 8,000 vessels visiting our port every year.” 

In March, the United States applied to designate U.S. coastal waters as “Emission Control Areas” (ECAs) under international law. An ECA would provide the strongest clean air standards available under international law. It would dramatically improve clean air standards for all ocean-going ships in the exclusive economic zone of the U.S., an area that typically extends about 200 nautical miles from the coast. 

The container ships, tankers and other large sea-going vessels that dock at more than 100 U.S. port cities burn low grade “residual fuel” or “bunker fuel” that is a major source of air pollution. EPA analysis indicates that protective clean air standards that apply to all ships operating within the exclusive economic zone of the U.S. would annually save as many as 14,000 lives, prevent 4,800 hospital admissions, and prevent 4.9 million acute respiratory symptoms. Government officials estimate that foreign-flagged vessels make up 90 percent of the ship calls on U.S. ports.  

Today’s proposal bolsters the ECA application by proposing to apply clean air standards to U.S. flagged ships under the federal Clean Air Act.   

EDF strongly supports the well-documented ECA application submitted by the U.S. to the International Maritime Organization. EDF calls for EPA to consider expanding today’s complementary rulemaking proposal carried out under the Clean Air Act. The proposal should evaluate clean air standards that apply to both foreign- and U.S.-flagged ships operating in the exclusive economic zone of the U.S., as a backup plan to protect human health.  

Ocean-going ships are also responsible for about 3 percent of the world’s total greenhouse gas pollution.