Complete list of press releases

(9 December 2003 — Raleigh, NC)  Environmental Defense today released a report that uses U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientific analysis to document the public health threat of mercury “hot spots,” created when local emissions of the dangerous neurotoxin fall to the ground and enter soil and water bodies.  “Out of Control and Close to Home: Mercury Pollution from Power Plants” analyzes EPA state-of-the-art air pollution modeling, not widely available, to show that mercury pollution often has harmful impacts locally, leading to contaminated water, poisoned fish, and brain damage in unborn children, infants and toddlers.  The report is available at www.environmentaldefense.org/go/mercurypowerplants.

According to the report, the top 10 states for mercury hot spots (ranked by the most severe hot spot in each state) are Indiana, Michigan, Maryland, Florida, Illinois, South Carolina, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas and Tennessee. 

“Mercury hot spots sound the alarm for strong national limits on dangerous mercury pollution,” said Michael Shore, Environmental Defense senior air policy analyst.  “EPA’s weak stance on mercury ignores the agency’s own scientific assessment and puts profits of the utility industry ahead of children’s health.  Affordable technology exists to protect our children from toxic mercury pollution and it is the government’s legal and moral responsibility to put those tools to work now.”

“America’s children can’t afford for the EPA to get a failing grade on the cleanup of toxic mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants.  Other polluters have already been required to reduce their mercury emissions by 90%, and coal-fired power plants should not be let off the hook.  States with mercury hot spots should vigorously pursue strong standards to protect water quality, ensure fish are fit to eat, and prevent brain damage in children,” said Shore.

In 9 out of 10 hot spots states, more than 50% of mercury contamination comes from local sources.  The problem of mercury-contaminated fish is widespread, with 43 states issuing advisories to limit consumption.  EPA is expected to announce new mercury standards this month.

(4 December 2003 — Washington)  The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is expected to announce three initiatives today that would lower air pollution’s impact on the elderly but leave hundreds of thousands of children exposed to toxic mercury.  Environmental Defense charges that the initiatives will force Americans into a deadly and unnecessary choice of protecting either the young or old from air pollution.  All three actions are proposals subject to public comment before taking legal effect. 

“Americans should not be forced into a ‘Sophie’s Choice’ between protecting their children or protecting their grandparents from the harmful health impacts of air pollution,” said Environmental Defense senior policy analyst Michael Shore.  “EPA must strengthen today’s proposals to protect the health of all Americans of all ages.  Anything less is unnecessary, unacceptable and unforgivable.”

“EPA’s action on mercury favors pollution over solutions and will leave thousands of children behind to suffer the deadly consequences of unnecessary mercury pollution,” said Shore.

EPA is expected to identify counties where some 170 million Americans live as out of compliance with the national ozone (smog) health standard.  These designations are required under the Clean Air Act and will be hotly debated in a number of states across the nation.

EPA’s Interstate Transport of Air Pollution rule will propose to cut sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides pollution for the eastern United States.  Curbing the interstate transport of dangerous pollution particles and ozone smog is essential to states’ ability to achieve healthful air quality.  But EPA’s proposal fails to make the level of pollution cuts needed to protect human health and needs to be strengthened.  

EPA is expected to propose mercury emission standards for coal-fired power plants nationwide that ignore achievable pollution reduction opportunities  - while reversing the finding that mercury is covered under the Clean Air Act’s toxic pollution control program.  Power plants are the nation’s largest, uncontrolled source of mercury, a known neurotoxin that impairs brain development in children. 

“EPA is on the right track in proposing to clean up pollutants that threaten the elderly, but the agency’s proposal is wrapped in toxic mercury that will leave hundreds of thousands of our children unprotected,” said Environmental Defense senior attorney Vickie Patton.  “EPA’s mercury proposal is the bad apple that will spoil the rest of today’s announcements.”

(4 December 2003)  Today, Bon Appétit, a major U.S. foodservice company, and Environmental Defense announced a ground breaking purchasing policy that will help protect human health by reducing the use of antibiotics in food animal production.  By June 2004, Bon Appétit will only purchase chicken that has been produced without the routine use of medically important antibiotics.  Bon Appétit will also apply a purchasing preference for meat, dairy and seafood that have been produced with reduced amounts of antibiotics. 

Some animal producers may include antibiotics in animal feed or water to promote growth or compensate for stressful conditions on modern industrial-scale farms.  Bon Appétit’s policy is intended to encourage meat suppliers to administer antibiotics only when they are clearly needed to treat sick animals or animals in immediate danger of being sick.

“Bon Appétit believes that the misuse of antibiotics in farm animals makes these critical drugs less effective for humans,” said Fedele Bauccio, CEO of Bon Appétit.  “Bon Appétit purchases a significant amount of meat, seafood and dairy a year, and we call on the producers that supply our company to protect human health by reducing the amount of antibiotics they use.”

“By working together, Environmental Defense and Bon Appétit plan to leverage the company’s purchasing power to help preserve the effectiveness of antibiotics for humans,” said Gwen Ruta, program director, Environmental Defense.  “This announcement, coming shortly after a similar announcement from McDonald’s reinforces the feasibility and affordability of responsible antibiotic practices.  Environmental Defense calls on other major purchasers to continue this trend by adopting similar policies.”

“A current estimate is that an astonishing 70% of all antibiotics and related drugs in this country are fed to chickens, cows and pigs,” Becky Goldburg, Ph.D., senior scientist, Environmental Defense.  “Policies like McDonald’s and Bon Appétit’s show that reducing antibiotic use is both feasible and affordable, and they point the way toward sensible national policies to end inappropriate antibiotic use in animal agriculture.”

Bon Appétit’s policy, which mirrors bipartisan legislation introduced in both houses of Congress this summer, states that the company will only purchase chicken, and will implement a purchase preference for other animal products, that have been produced without certain classes of non-therapeutic antibiotics, as committed and reported by its suppliers.  Non-therapeutic is defined as any use of an antibiotic as a feed or water additive for an animal in the absence of any clinical sign of disease in the animal for growth promotion, feed efficiency, weight gain, routine disease prevention, or other routine purposes. 

Therapeutic uses and non-routine disease prevention are explicitly excluded from the definition of non-therapeutic.  Every participating supplier under this policy must submit in writing their commitment to abide by Bon Appétit’s Antibiotic Use Policy.

Bon Appétit Management Co. is an onsite custom restaurant company offering full food service management by providing café and catering service to corporations, colleges and universities, and specialty venues. They have over 148 clients in twenty-one states. Founded in 1987 as a catering company, the hallmark of Bon Appétit’s expertise is serving fresh, high quality food that is prepared from scratch using authentic ingredients. They are also especially concerned with supporting sustainable food supplies and local producers. (www.bamco.com)

(3 December 2003 — Washington, D.C.)  A study released today by Environmental Defense and a coalition of environmental groups finds that 19 million people are at risk from a major release of deadly chlorine gas from their local sewage treatment plant.  The report, Eliminating Hometown Hazards, used public information to determine that 45 sewage plants continue to use chlorine gas in heavily populated areas.  A major incident, accidental or deliberate, at any one of these plants could kill or seriously injure any of more than 100,000 people.  The study and a complete list of the 45 facilities are available at www.environmentaldefense.org/go/hometownhazards.

“All facilities using large amounts of dangerous chemicals have a public responsibility to reduce the hazards they pose,” said Environmental Defense analyst Carol Andress.  “For wastewater treatment there is no excuse for using chlorine gas.  Safer alternatives are available, affordable and practical for facilities large and small.  If they’re not willing to protect the public from such a preventable hazard, they shouldn’t receive public money.”

Six facilities — Back River Wastewater Treatment Facility in Baltimore, Metro Wastewater Reclamation District in Denver, Detroit Wastewater Treatment Plant in Detroit, Secondary Wastewater Treatment Plant in Modesto, City of Niagara Falls Wastewater Treatment Plant in Niagara Falls, and Central Valley Water Reclamation in Salt Lake City — have reported that they could each seriously injure any of more than one million people.  Environmental Defense found that the Denver and Baltimore plants plan to use safer alternatives, but the other plants reported no such intention.  In total, more than 1,300 wastewater treatment facilities reported using chlorine gas in 1999, the most recent year that comprehensive data is available.  The report’s findings are based on public data as well as direct efforts to correspond with the largest plants. 

Among the report’s recommendations:

• End public funds for dangerous facilities.  Millions of public dollars are spent each year to help build or improve wastewater treatment facilities.  Congressional, state and EPA officials should ensure that, allowing time for transition, taxpayer money is not spent at facilities that pose an unnecessary risk.
• Maintain public access to chemical risks.  Public access to information about the potential consequences of a chemical release is one of the most effective tools for motivating risk reduction.  Public scrutiny of sewage plant practices has motivated many facilities to choose safer alternatives.  Access to information is already restricted, yet some in Congress want to eliminate even that. 
• Set federal standards for reducing hazards.  More than two years after 9-11, there are no federal requirements that require facilities using dangerous chemicals to employ the best possible industry practices to reduce hazards.  The Chemical Security Act of 2003 would require safer practices but has stalled in Congress where it has met opposition from the chemical industry. 

(2 December, 2003 — Washington)  Despite speculation that the EPA is poised to announce a damaging policy decision on the control of mercury pollution from coal-fired power plants, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Leavitt today addressed EPA employees and members of the press on his commitment to cooperative decision-making.  The pending mercury decision is the very antithesis of Leavitt’s so-called cooperative process.

“Environmental Defense shares Administrator Leavitt’s stated commitment to cooperative problem solving,” said Environmental Defense senior policy analyst Michael Shore.  “But EPA’s pending mercury decision will fly in the face of good public health policy.  It’s a bad ruling and there’s nothing collaborative about it.”

“There is no question that finding common ground is critical in addressing the nation’s pressing public health and environmental problems,” said Dr. John Balbus, a physician and director of the Environmental Defense Health Program.  “Unfortunately, EPA in recent years has abandoned opportunities to make sensible environmental progress.  Every extra pound of mercury put out by power plants in this country will stick around in the environment and add to the health risks our children face.  This decision favors pollution over solutions and exemplifies bad stewardship.”

In drafting its mercury policy, EPA:

(1) disbanded a collaborative effort among divergent interests to discuss different viewpoints and concerns,
(2) acted contrary to reasonable public policy by severely limiting technical analyses of policy options reflecting a range of mercury pollution reduction levels, and
(3) prepared to take action at odds with sound science by proposing a system to trade emission credits of mercury - the first time in our nation’s history that a toxic air pollutant would be indiscriminately traded. 

(2 December 2003 — Washington)  In a briefing today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that on December 4 the agency will recommended that hundreds of counties nationwide be declared out of compliance with the federal health-based standard for ground-level ozone (smog).  Available data indicate that over 170 million Americans live in areas with smog concentrations that harm public health and the environment.  This action is required under a court-ordered settlement with Environmental Defense, the American Lung Association, and others. 

“EPA has data showing millions of children with asthma and others with lung diseases need greater protection from smog pollution,” said Dr. John Balbus, a physician and director of the Environmental Defense Health Program.  “Only by identifying all the areas that fail to meet basic health standards and helping to create local and regional solutions can the EPA fully protect the public’s health.”

“Over the next few months, there’s going to be enormous pressure on EPA to weaken their recommendations but the agency must vigorously resist negotiating away millions of children’s rights to healthier air,” said Balbus. 

Smog causes millions of asthma attacks each year, harming children and adults with asthma.  Studies consistently show that asthma-related emergency room visits significantly rise on high ozone smog days.  Recent medical research indicates that ozone not only triggers asthma attacks but may be responsible for the development of asthma in children.  

Once final, EPA’s declaration of areas violating the health-based standard for ozone will require affected states to adopt control measures to abate the harmful pollution levels.  Cost-effective strategies to lower ozone-forming pollution include cleaner fuels, cutting smog-forming pollution from power plants and various industrial sources, and pollution retrofit programs for large diesel trucks, buses and construction equipment. 

(21 November 2003 — Washington, D.C.)  Environmental Defense today expressed extreme disappointment over an international agreement likely to be reached today at the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) regarding the environmental and social lending practices of Export Credit Agencies (ECAs).  The agreement would allow industrialized countries to continue to use public money to support billions of dollars in private-sector projects in developing countries without clear, strong environmental and social standards and without any requirements for transparency.

“This agreement confirms that export credit agencies are still among the world’s worst environmental laggards,” said Environmental Defense social scientist Aaron Goldzimer.  “After more than six years of discussions and at least nine drafts, the agreement reached today by OECD countries lacks credibility and falls far behind the norms of the World Bank and, in some respects, even private commercial banks.”

The agreement likely to be reached today:

• lacks a solid commitment to clear, minimum, internationally recognized standards, and instead allows countries to choose among varying sets of standards.  Further, there is a loophole where countries can adopt even lower standards without revealing this to the public;
• lacks requirements for transparency, public access to environmental information, and stakeholder consultation prior to project approval. There is some mention of releasing some environmental information, but again there is a loophole where countries failing to do this merely have to report their non-compliance to other countries at the end of the year, again without any public disclosure;
• has large loopholes in terms of its scope. Unless the project is in a sensitive area, the agreement only applies to projects in which the export credit agency’s participation is above SDR 10 million and that have a payback period of over two years.

“We have heard that several countries had strong misgivings about how weak this agreement is, but OECD countries - led by intransigent countries like Germany, Japan, Spain, and Austria - have fundamentally failed to address the problem,” said Goldzimer.  “They have failed to bring export finance up to at least the level of other public international financial flows.”

ECAs represent the biggest and most important source of official financial support for large extractive and infrastructure projects in developing countries.  Projects that ECAs have supported include the Three Gorges dam in China, Enron’s Dabhol power plant in India, and the Tehri dam in India

(21 November 2003)  Environmental Defense today praised the U.S. Senate for voting down an outmoded energy bill that would have increased America’s oil dependence while virtually ignoring its environmental impact.

“We hope this is a first step in the bill’s quick death,” said Environmental Defense legislative counsel John Bowman. “The bill fails to address energy efficiency, renewable energy and new energy technologies that might lead to decreased energy dependence and increased energy reliability. It ignores climate change and air pollution and perpetuates America’s reliance on fossil fuels.”

One obscure provision (that was not debated in either chamber) would have prevented the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from downgrading the clean air compliance status of cities and counties, letting communities with unhealthy air off the hook from tackling serious air pollution problems. 

The bill included a host of taxpayer giveaways to inefficient energy industries, including the coal and oil industry, the nuclear and ethanol industries, this taxpayer money could be put to better use in spurring the development of renewable energy resources, energy conservation and efficiency programs.

“On top of the billions of dollars in subsidies and tax breaks for energy companies, the real cost of this bill would be increased air pollution, oil spills, water pollution and continued delay of any real U.S. action to curb its impact on climate change,” said Bowman.

“We applaud the Senators who voted against cloture today and implore them to maintain their position should this measure be considered again,” said Bowman.  “No member of congress can credibly claim to care about the environment and vote for this bill.”

[To view the roll call on Senate.gov click here.]

(19 November 2003 — Washington) Environmental Defense today urged the U.S. Senate to defeat the pending energy bill, calling it a roadmap to environmental destruction without any real benefits to solving America’s oil dependency.

“The bill reads less like an energy independence policy and more like a copy of ‘How to Ruin the Environment for Dummies,’” said Environmental Defense spokesperson Steve Cochran. “It could be the single most aggressive assault on the environment in the last 30 years.  No member of Congress can credibly claim to care about the environment and vote for this bill.”

The bill increases America’s dependency on fossil fuels, ignores America’s impact on global warming, lets polluters off the hook, threatens our natural resources and will turn back the clock on decades of progress under the Clean Air Act.

“There are so many bad things in this bill it’s almost impossible to count them all,” said Cochran. “It should not become law.”

The bill:

• provides retroactive liability waivers to MTBE producers, providing a get-out-of-jail-free card to companies that may have contaminated water supplies;
• includes massive subsidies for fossil fuel-based energy, perpetuating America’s title as the world’s global warming pollution champion;

• completely ignores the impact of America’s energy policy on climate change, even after the Climate Stewardship Act nearly passed the Senate in October;

• will spur significant new oil and gas development in the Rockies, threatening sensitive habitat and worsening that region’s growing air and water quality crisis;

• includes no standard for renewable energy, despite President Bush’s positive renewable energy record as Texas Governor;

• virtually ignores fuel economy and consumption concerns, though high energy demand has created the current energy “crisis” and despite known and affordable solutions to curb consumption;

• postpones clean air deadlines for cities with “severe” air quality and will halt existing efforts to clean the air in some of America’s most threatened cities;

• assigns unilateral permitting and regulatory authority to the Secretary of Interior for all energy-related industrial facilities within the 200-mile U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, weakens states rights under the Coastal Zone Management Act and includes incentives for new offshore drilling in Alaska; and

• exempts land used for oil and gas exploration and development from Clean Water Act protection.

(17 November 2003 — Washington, DC)  Five years after launching www.scorecard.org, the web site that translates environmental data into an easy-to-find and easy-to-understand format for the public, Environmental Defense today released its yearly analysis of U.S. pollution trends.  The organization found that reported releases of industrial pollutants that can cause cancer fell by 20% in 2001, while releases reported for pollutants linked to birth defects and other developmental problems fell 24%.  The analysis was based on EPA’s most recently available Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) data from 2001.  A zip code search function at www.scorecard.org allows visitors to see an overall picture of the pollutants in their community.

“Scorecard is the spotlight that makes industrial polluters visible to the public,” said Dr. John Balbus, director of the environmental health program at Environmental Defense.  “While it’s encouraging that reported releases of toxic chemicals have declined since Scorecard launched, Environmental Defense wants to make sure that the light on polluters never goes out.  The more people know about the health risks they face the more pressure industry will feel to reduce harmful chemicals or replace them with safer ones.”  

After analyzing the 2001 EPA TRI data the organization found the following trends:

Cancer Causing Pollutants:

• Reported releases of recognized carcinogens in industrial pollution fell 20% from 2000 to 2001.  Among counties, Harris County in Texas had the largest releases of recognized carcinogens to air. 
• Among the forty states that had decreases in reported releases of recognized carcinogens between 2000 and 2001, Mississippi experienced the greatest reduction, with a 2.37 million lbs. decrease.  Among those states showing increases, South Carolina suffered the largest increase with 315,000 lbs.
• In 2001, the chemicals and allied products industries were the biggest source of airborne carcinogens, releasing over 20 million pounds into the nation’s air.

Developmental Toxicants:

• Reported releases of recognized developmental toxicants fell 24% from 2000 to 2001.  Mobile County, Alabama experienced the largest reported releases of recognized developmental toxicants.
• Among the 42 states with decreases in recognized developmental toxicants, Tennessee showed the greatest reduction with 12.7 million pounds.  Virginia had the largest increase in recognized developmental toxicants with 429,000 pounds.
• The chemical and allied products industries were also the largest source of airborne developmental toxicants, releasing over 22 million pounds.

All Toxic Pollutants:

• Mining and electrical power generation were the top sources of reported toxic chemical releases in the U.S., with Kennecott Utah Copper Mine once again taking the title of number one polluter in the U.S.  In 2001, the mine released 695 million pounds of toxic chemicals, more than total statewide releases for 30 states.

Lowered Threshold for Lead:

• In 2001, the TRI reporting threshold for lead and lead compounds was lowered, increasing the number of facilities reporting lead emissions and illustrating that lead is dispersed more broadly than previously documented.  For instance, it was previously known that cars are responsible for most lead use and pollution, but the new threshold nearly doubles the number of auto production-related facilities reporting lead or lead compound emissions to the air. 

“Environmental Defense is proud to have created a service that continues to educate millions of people about environmental hazards in their community, but there is still much work to be done,” said Dr. Balbus.  “With the health impact of thousands of chemicals in use today still poorly understood or not available to the public, programs that generate toxicity information like the High Production Volume chemical initiative are needed to be sure we’re adequately protecting the public’s health.”

(12 November 2003 — Washington, D.C.)  Environmental Defense today expressed extreme disappointment in the U.S. Senate’s inclusion of anti-clean air language in the Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies appropriations bill (S. 1584).  This language written by Senator Christopher “Kit” Bond (R-MO) on behalf of Briggs and Stratton, an engine manufacturer in his state, is intended to eliminate rules in California that would reduce emissions from lawn and garden equipment by 50%.  However, because the rider is so broadly written, it could eradicate the ability of any state in the nation to address air pollution from nonroad engines. 

Although the final language that passed was compromise language from Senator Bond, it still takes away states’ rights to address this pollution source.  Further, the pollution emitted from the vehicles impacted by Senator Bond’s compromise language is equivalent to the pollution from more than 78 million cars and SUVs. 

“This unnecessary attack on the Clean Air Act could wipe out important efforts by states to fight asthma, lung disease and cancer by cleaning the air,” said Environmental Defense legislative counsel John Bowman.  “It is particularly unnecessary, since after the initial introduction of the language, California changed its rules to address Senator Bond’s concerns.”

It is noteworthy that currently there are at least 14 states considering programs to reduce emissions from engines affected by the Bond Amendment.  These states are Alabama, California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin.

“The basis for a winning hand in the Senate is now on the table. We’re not out to score a point, we intend to win. Just seven more votes are needed to pass the bill in the Senate,” said Environmental Defense president Fred Krupp. “The history of environmental laws shows we gain momentum when these issues leave the back rooms for the sunshine of recorded votes.”

“Several dozen of the Senate’s most thoughtful and influential members in effect said: You’re wrong Senator Inhofe, global warming is real and we need to do something about it. More will do so when pressed by the voters in the 2004 elections,” said Peter Goldmark, director of the Environmental Defense global and regional air program.

The Act is the first proposal for a bi-partisan and comprehensive national policy to cut the greenhouse gas pollution disrupting the Earth’s climate. An independent M.I.T. analysis puts the low annual estimated cost of the measure at $15-20 per household in 2010.

For a vote tally click click here.

(27 October 2003 — New York)  Today Environmental Defense filed a legal challenge to the Bush administration’s sweeping rollbacks to the public health protections of the Clean Air Act’s new source review program.  These rule changes, which were published today, put public health in jeopardy by allowing thousands of power plants and industrial facilities nationwide to increase air pollution and evade long-standing clean air safeguards.  Environmental Defense is being represented by Earthjustice in the lawsuit. 

“The Bush administration has radically weakened the foundation of the Clean Air Act and we now must use legal action to defend the public’s basic right to clean, healthy air,” said Environmental Defense senior attorney Vickie Patton. 

The rules provide that changes at industrial facilities involving millions of dollars in equipment replacement and leading to substantially higher levels of air pollution are “routine” and no longer require improved air pollution control technology.  The facilities affected include thousands of power plants, refineries, pulp and paper mills, chemical plants, and other industrial facilities throughout the U.S.

“This rule opens the door for major polluters to foul the air even more and threaten public health nationwide,” said Dr. John Balbus, MD, director of the Environmental Defense health program.  “This pollution will wind up in the lungs of millions of Americans, increasing their risk for asthma attacks, heart problems and even death.  Americans already spend over $50 billion a year for the health related costs of air pollution.  Why would this administration want them to spend more?? 

The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) controversial rule was issued after an August 2003 General Accounting Office report found that EPA relied on anecdotal information provided by major air polluters to justify its rollbacks to the Clean Air Act’s new source review.  The original “new source review” program adopted in the 1977 Clean Air Act amendments required old, high-polluting sources such as power plants to prevent pollution increases that would worsen unhealthy air quality in urban centers or adversely impact national parks.  The rules being challenged today would broadly exclude existing industrial sources from the long-standing requirement to modernize pollution controls by imposing an arbitrary economic test that would exempt major pollution-increasing activity from clean air protections while ignoring public health considerations.

(27 October, 2003 — Washington)  Environmental Defense today called on all U.S. Senators to vote for the McCain Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act this Thursday.  The Act is the first proposal for a bi-partisan and comprehensive national policy to cut the greenhouse gas pollution disrupting the Earth’s climate.  An independent M.I.T. analysis puts the low annual estimated cost of the measure at $15-20 per household in 2010.  The vote is scheduled for Thursday, October 30, 2003.

“Under this responsible plan, about a nickel a day helps keep global warming away.  At a low estimated cost of less than 5-and-a-half cents a day per household in 2010, it gives Senators an easy choice between doing something or doing nothing about climate change.  Thursday’s Senate climate vote pits responsible action and low costs against denial and high consequences,” said Environmental Defense president Fred Krupp.  “Senators should vote for this moderate and affordable first step to protect our country and our children from greenhouse gas pollution.”

“Greenhouse gases accumulate slowly.  Action now to reduce emissions can stabilize the climate without economic disruption.  A do nothing, head-in-the-sand approach only means our children will pay the piper - and pay him much more.  The McCain Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act is the way to address global warming responsibly and minimize the risk of serious economic disruption later,” said Peter Goldmark, director of the Environmental Defense global and regional air program. 

More than 20 national environmental groups have signed onto a joint letter endorsing the Climate Stewardship Act and calling for its passage.  Contact Allan Margolin at (212) 505-2100 for a copy of the letter.

The October 30 vote will give Senators the chance to participate in a real debate about the only thing that counts on climate policy - getting greenhouse gas pollution to go down, not up. 

[The complete MIT study can be viewed or downloaded at http://web.mit.edu/globalchange/www/MITJPSPGC_Rpt97.pdf.]

Environmental Defense today called on U.S. Senate negotiators to follow the lead of the Bush Administration and the House of Representatives and approve a renewal of the longstanding bipartisan moratorium on offshore oil and gas drilling within Alaska’s Bristol Bay.

Bristol Bay, encompassing the richest salmon fishery on the planet, was first protected by Congress in 1989 after the tragic Exxon-Valdez oil spill demonstrated the ineffectiveness of spill cleanup technologies in rough Alaskan waters.  Earlier this year, the White House budget document for fiscal year 2004 called on Congress to continue the drilling moratorium for Bristol Bay, and the House of Representatives also included this protection in their own version of the Department of Interior funding bill for FY 2004.  A key Senate committee, however, later removed protection for Bristol Bay from the Senate’s version of the same funding bill, so a joint House-Senate conference committee is currently meeting to resolve this and other differences between the two bills.

“There is no place within America’s coastal waters that is more important to protection of our fisheries than Bristol Bay,” said Richard Charter, marine conservation advocate with Environmental Defense.  “The White House and the House of Representatives are right in calling for the continued preservation of Bristol Bay, and the Senate should now concur with the House position.”

This week’s pending Interior Appropriations conference committee decision, if signed into law, will determine whether the existing offshore drilling moratorium that protects unleased coastal waters off of California, Oregon, Washington, Florida, and the entire U.S. east coast will also continue to include Bristol Bay.  If protection for Bristol Bay is removed by Senate negotiators, this action would be seen as eventually endangering other sensitive coastal waters now protected by the drilling moratorium.