Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Topics

Topics

An Environmentalist's Wish List for 2008


The start of the New Year presents us with a great opportunity to take stock of the old year and to plan for the new. It's also time to make some wishes.

2007 brought some game-changing environmental events in New York. Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced PlaNYC2030, which set out to bring greenhouse gases and congestion pricing to the city. Governor Eliot Spitzer released his proposal to implement the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a multistate effort to reduce carbon emissions to 13 percent below 1990 levels by 2019. The state legislature passed, and the governor signed, the New York Ocean and Great Lakes Ecosystem Conservation Act, a new law that, for the first time, requires agencies to work together to promote the sustainable use and protection of New York’s ocean and Great Lakes ecosystems.

There are a ton of details and work to be done to implement all of these programs (and others that I didn’t mention). But New Yorkers can be thankful that their city and state took such major steps.

AND NOW WHAT?

Much remains to be done. So, as we head into the new year, here is my list of wishes.

PlaNYC 2030

While the wish list extends beyond PlaNYC2030, the mmayor’s incredibly ambitious proposal with 127 different housing, transportation, energy, open space and other initiatives still offers a fine starting point. Most of the goodies in it don’t require Albany's approval to move forward. But the cornerstone of the plan is congestion pricing -- charging people to drive into or around parts of Manhattan during the workweek. Implementing this system will be important to reduce traffic, improve air quality and raise funds for critical transit infrastructure investments throughout the region. And, if it works here, congestion pricing is likely to be adopted in other cities that are struggling with increased traffic and unmet infrastructure needs. Congestion pricing, though, does require approval in the state capitol as well as by the City Council.

My 2008 wish: The city and Albany should cut their deals, make their compromises and enact a congestion pricing plan emerges that raises even more net revenue for transit improvements than the mayor’s original proposal.

Transit Funding

If New York City gains another million residents, as the 2030 plan anticipates, it will need the transit infrastructure to get them around the city. And that means more than the East Side Access for the Long Island Rail Road riders, the Second Avenue Subway and the extension of the 7 lines -- as important as all three projects are. It means more service for all five boroughs — service and service that reflects the development patterns of the future, rather than the commuting patterns that existed decades ago when the IND and IRT were built. It also means fixing the chronic under-funding of the system from Albany (we have 84 percent of the state’s transit riders, but get only 63 percent of the state transit funding).

My 2008 wish: In addition to implementing the congestion pricing program, the city and the state shouldwill find ways to increase their funding contributions to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s five-year, $32 billion capital program that will be presented next March. And I hope that they do it in a way that doesn’t add more burdens to the already taxed (in more ways than one) straphangers.

E-Waste

Old televisions and computers contain a slew of toxins (including lead, mercury and cadmium) that should never get buried in landfills or burned in incinerators. But the city’s current electronics recycling program requires people to lug their electronics to odd locations on random days. No wonder most New Yorkers throw this stuff in the trash.

My 2008 wish: The city should adopt Intro. 104, the “Electronics Collection, Recycling and Reuse Law,” which would require manufacturers to take certain electronic products back for recycling after consumers are done with them. Not only would this help take toxics out our waste stream, but it also will save money for the city by reducing the burden on the city's Department of Sanitation and keeping some garbage out of landfills.

Stormwater and Sewage Overflows

Every year, roughly 27 billion gallons of untreated sewage gets mixed with stormwater runoff, and ends up bringing pathogens and other pollution into the city’s waterways. These combined sewer overflows put the public’s health at risk, damage our marine ecology and frequently make our waters unsuitable for recreational activities. Over the long haul, PlaNYC 2030 boldly aims to remake the urban landscape by keeping sewage and polluted stormwater out of our waters. But, in the short run, we need legislation to help us reach this goal.

My 2008 wish: The City Council should pass three bills (Intros. 628, 629 and 630) that, collectively, would help ensure that future administrations follow through on PlaNYC 2030’s ambitions. Together, the bills call for a sustainable stormwater plan for each of the city's waterways; mandate that new city capital projects use environmentally friendly technology and take stormwater issues into account; and require trees to be planted to help absorb stormwater before it goes into the sewage system.)

Jamaica Bay

One of the great things about New York is its proximity to amazing outdoor environments. Here’s a great example: Jamaica Bay, home to the only federal wildlife refuge accessible by subway, sits right under the flight path to Kennedy airport. This gem hosts nearly 20 percent of North America’s bird species each year, along with an amazing array of fish and shellfish. But Jamaica Bay is jeopardized by water pollution — most dangerously, nitrogen pollution from four city wastewater treatment plants.

My wish for 2008: Six years ago, the stars aligned to create an ambitious pollution fighting plan for Long Island Sound. The state Department of Environmental Conservation should adopt a comparable plan to protect Jamaica Bay for generations to come.

And one final wish: As environmentalists and other concerned New Yorkers work for these goals, may we all have a safe, clean, green and great 2008.

Rich Kassel, who writes Gotham Gazette's environment page, is a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), where he focuses on urban air pollution and transportation issues. He also chairs the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, a regional transportation advocacy organization and blogs on a variety of environmental issues on the NRDC Switchboard.

Because of a typographical error during editing, this article originally had an incorrect number for the MTA capital programs. The correct amount for the five-year program is $32 billion.  

Is 'Nalgene' Hazardous to Your Health?


Earlier this month, Mountain Equipment Co-op, the "REI of Canada," pulled its Nalgene bottles from its shelves, citing concern over potential health risks. It seems that those iconic bottles (Neat colors! Cool graphics! Originally used in laboratories!) that are ubiquitous in backpacks, dorm rooms and office refrigerators are made of a type of plastic that has been linked with infertility, lower sperm counts, enlarged prostrate glands, pre-cancerous lesions in breast and prostate tissue, and other symptoms of hormone disruption.

How many New Yorkers carry a Nalgene bottle with them wherever they go because they want a reusable, environmentally preferable alternative to bottled water? How many New Yorkers carry a Nalgene bottle for their children wherever they go because they fear that softer plastic baby bottles will leach hormone-disrupting phthalates, especially when filled with acidic juices? How many New Yorkers carry a Nalgene bottle wherever they go, just because the bottles are nearly unbreakable and are really colorful?

And, reading this now, how many New Yorkers suddenly feel like Charlie Brown does, whenever Lucy pulls the football away from him, one more time? Like Charlie Brown, how many Nalgene-carrying New Yorkers will learn about this latest health risk and want to shout ‘Aaaarrrrggghhhhh!"

The Polycarbonate Problem

Before you fill your Nalgene bottle with cement and jump in the Hudson River, here are some basics:

Most Nalgene bottles are made from polycarbonate. (You can distinguish polycarbonate from other plastics because the polycarbonate bottles have the number 7 in the little recycling triangle on the bottom). Polycarbonate is a form of plastic that is comprised mostly of bisphenol A (BPA), an endocrine disruptor that mimics the female hormone, estrogen. In animal studies, BPA has been associated with the abnormalities listed above, as well as with obesity and insulin resistance – a condition that commonly precedes the development of diabetes. If all that wasn't bad enough, BPA also has been shown in animal studies to cause changes in behavior. (Could it have been his Nalgene bottle -- and not the steroids -- that caused an enraged Roger Clemens to throw a broken bat at Mike Piazza during Game 2 of the 2000 World Series?)

Not surprisingly, industry-funded studies have failed to find these same effects. And, the jump from animal studies to human impacts is an imperfect one, so there is a lot of controversy around the toxic effects of BPA. Although we can't say with certainty that BPA causes the same problems in humans as it does in the laboratory animals, the weight of scientific evidence should prompt us to err on the side of caution and avoid BPA exposures where possible.

We also know that more than 90 percent of the general population carries residues of BPA in their bodies. How is that possible? After all, not everybody drinks from Nalgene bottles. But the BPA chemical is ubiquitous. Epoxy resins containing BPA line the cans of tomato sauce and leach into the sauce, thanks to the acidity of the tomatoes. It lines the insides of your Coke and juice cans—whoops, there's that acid-enhanced leaching again. Canned fruits? Yup, you'll find BPA in those cans too. Here are some other BPA sources: the insides of the cans of infant formula, some dental sealants and even that polycarbonate pitcher that came with your Brita filter.

What You Can Do

Eliminating exposure to BPA is probably close to impossible, given its ubiquity. But reducing exposure to this chemical makes sense, especially for children (their developing bodies are especially prone to the health impacts of endocrine disruptors like BPA). Avoiding polycarbonate bottles is one step in reducing exposure to endocrine disruptors. (An important note here: Although Nalgene has become the "Kleenex" of the polycarbonate world, all polycarbonate bottles contain BPA, so you should avoid bottles with that little "7" in the recycling triangle, whether they come from Nalgene, Starbucks or your Brita filter system.) If you use these bottles, recognize that high temperatures (e.g., your dishwasher), acidic liquids (e.g., juice), and any discoloration or cracking due to age are all likely to increase BPA leaching.

There are better options for storing drinks: an unlined stainless steel container (e.g. Klean Kanteen) or another type of plastic container, such as polyethylene or polypropylene, which doesn't contain BPA. (Look for the number 1, 2, or 5 in the recycling triangle on the bottom of the container.)

Second, recognize that more of our collective exposures are likely to come from BPA in cans especially if the contents are highly acidic such as a tomato-based product or soda. San Marzano tomatoes may be the best for cooking, but buying them in glass or those milk carton-like boxes will keep BPA out of the sauce. Likewise, canned pineapple may have been the only way to eat that fruit when we were kids, but now buying fresh is the BPA-free way to enjoy it.

Want to find out more? The Environmental Working Group, California, and a group called Environmental Defence in Canada all have good information on their websites.

Rich Kassel is a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), where he focuses on urban air pollution and transportation issues. He also chairs the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, a regional transportation advocacy organization, and is on the boards of the New York League of Conservation Voters and Transportation Alternatives. He blogs on a variety of environmental issues on the NRDC Switchboard at http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/rkassel.

 

Breathing Easier in 2030 and Beyond


(This is the last in a three-part exploration of some key air pollution issues in New York. To read the earlier columns click here and here.)

Almost a year ago in Queens, Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced the outlines of his sustainability plan. He presented a great slide show, and one of the highlights came when the mayor contrasted the current state of our air – we fail to meet federal air quality standards for ozone and particulate matter — with his goal of enabling every New Yorker “to breathe the cleanest air of any big city in America.” (Another highlight was seeing the amazing panorama of New York City at the Queens Museum of Art, where the event was held. If you’ve never seen it, you’ve got to go.)

But what did Bloomberg’s pledge really mean? Air quality has improved in the city over the years, and some of the worst air quality in the nation isn’t in the big cities: California’s Bakersfield, in the San Joaquin Valley, is home to the second-worst particulate pollution and the highest ozone pollution in the country, despite its complete lack of skyscrapers.

Even if the city were to do nothing, the air should keep getting cleaner, thanks to the implementation of federal programs to reduce pollution from cars, trucks and construction and farm equipment.

But one problem with federal programs is that they are very good at reducing pollution from some sources (especially vehicles, since the fleets turn over relatively quickly), but not so good with others, like power plants (thanks to loopholes that allow power plants to be modified without being cleaned up).

An even bigger problem may be that federal programs don’t focus on what happens when you combine millions of pollution sources in the same place, like New York City. In most cases, a new car will be much, much cleaner than the old car it replaces. But if you put 2 million cars on the same island, that island will have a lot of pollution.

HOW WILL PLANYC 2030 IMPROVE OUR AIR?

PlaNYC focuses on particulate pollution because it has the most serious health impacts and because New York, by the administration’s own admission, lags other big cities in programs to control it. According to the mayor’s plan, more than half of the particulate pollution (regulated as “PM2.5,” or particles less than 2.5 microns in diameter; about 1/60th the width of a human hair) we breathe is beyond the city’s reach. It’s governed by federal standards, blows in from states to the west or both. PlaNYC 2030 defines “clean air” in terms of the amount of fine particulate pollution per square mile—a neat metric to figure out how to compare the apples and oranges of pollution in New York City with its smaller brethren. To have the “cleanest air of any big city in America” (currently, Philadelphia and Dallas are the title holders), the officials estimate New York City needs to cut local particulate pollution by 39 percent per square mile.

PlaNYC 2030 includes a basket of strategies to achieve its 39 percent particulate reduction—split between buildings (23 percent) and vehicles (16 percent).

Interestingly, many of these strategies also will help achieve other goals in the plan. For example, implementing the city’s energy and global warming proposals for buildings will cut particulate pollution by 6 percent citywide. Switching to more efficient power plants that burn natural gas or biodiesel blends will add another 17 percent reduction. Together, these steps will hit the city’s 23 percent reduction target for particulate pollution, and play a major role to reduce global warming pollution in the city by 30 percent.

Cleaner Heating Oil

Here’s a simple step in the plan that makes so much sense that it’s hard to believe that it hasn’t happened on its own: reducing the sulfur content in home heating oil from today’s 2,000 parts-per-million to the 500 parts per million that is already used in most construction equipment. This would improve the efficiency and reduce the maintenance needs of the city’s boilers and reduce citywide particulate pollution by 2.5 percent.

Cleaner Transportation

Transportation has its share of win-win ideas too. For example, the city estimates that waiving the city’s sales tax on hybrid cars would reduce global warming pollution by 1 percent and reduce particulate pollution by 3 percent by 2030. This assumes 10 percent of the cars will be hybrids by2030, a pretty conservative assumption. Various elements of the transportation plan – not just congestion pricing in Manhattan but also improving the fuel efficiency of taxis and other for-hire vehicles, and cleaning up diesel trucks and buses -- each add significantly to the total. Of this list, retrofitting or replacing the school buses and sanitation trucks that ply every neighborhood should make a fast, significant difference in community-level air quality.

On the other hand, some of these programs cost significant money and are not under the mayor’s umbrella. For example, it’s a great idea to propose that the Port Authority clean up its ferries, but somebody has to pay the $75,000 to $90,000 per engine to accomplish that. The airports all contribute to local air pollution, but it’s up to the Port Authority and the Federal Aviation Administration to OK any program to cut emissions there. Retrofitting diesel trucks may be the most cost-effective idea in the whole plan: Every dollar of diesel retrofit yields more than $12 in health benefits, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Experience in other states, though, suggests strongly that private trucking firms will not invest without some public funding. California and Texas each have public funds of more than $100 million a year to fund these projects, but a similar fund for New York is not on the political radar screen yet.

MAKING IT HAPPEN

So what’s the bottom line? We can’t eliminate air pollution entirely, so aiming to have the cleanest air of any big city is the right target. PlaNYC is comprehensive, pragmatic and feasible, but implementing it will not be easy. That will require consistent advocacy and attention at every level of government. Some ideas, such as lowering the sulfur levels in home heating oil, are no-brainers but have not happened yet. Others – cleaning up city school buses, for one -- make a lot of sense but require more political will and funding than they ever have had. And, finally, the third set of ideas, including lowering ferry and airport emissions, require political leadership that goes far beyond the city.

PlaNYC 2030 lays out a good roadmap of how to ensure that the city’s air continues to improve. Despite the progress in asthma hospitalizations reported on last month (and thanks to all of you who commented on this piece), New York City kids continue to face asthma rates that can be more than double the national average. The city still fails to meet the federal pollution standards for particulate and ozone pollution. Our work is just beginning.

Want to learn more about the plan? Check out the city’s October 22 status report.

Rich Kassel is a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), where he focuses on urban air pollution and transportation issues. He also chairs the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, a regional transportation advocacy organization, and is on the boards of the New York League of Conservation Voters and Transportation Alternatives. He blogs on a variety of environmental issues on the NRDC Switchboard at http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/rkassel.  



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years