Showing posts with label Environment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Environment. Show all posts

Apr 13, 2010

Michigan LCV launches two more accountability blogs


The Michigan League of Conservation Voters (LCV) launched two more accountability blogs to keep track of the environmental voting records of key members of the Michigan Legislature.

The two new blogs will keep track of two of the most conservative members of the Legislature, state Representatives Paul Opsommer, R-DeWitt, and Rick Jones, R-Grand Ledge.

“We’re doing what most environmental groups cannot do, which is call attention to environmental voting records,” said Executive Director Lisa Wozniak. “While both Representatives have taken strong stands on some key natural resources and public health issues, they have also cast a number of key anti-environmental votes over the last two years.”

Michigan LCV has been tracking all of Lansing’s elected officials for more than 10 years, and in each legislative session Michigan LCV publishes the Michigan Environmental Scorecard as a way to monitor performance on key issues, like the Great Lakes, children’s health and clean renewable energy. Opsommer earned a dismal 43 percent on the Michigan LCV score on the 2007-08 Michigan Environmental Scorecard.

Jones made statewide news last summer when he spread falsehoods about the just completed Michigan State Police headquarters in downtown Lansing in an effort to make it a campaign issue to attack Democrats with. He also has a dismal 43 percent score on the scorecard.

“Our message to both gentleman is simple: a mixed record such as theirs does not indicate – in any real way – a commitment to either support of a clean energy economy that will grow new jobs in Michigan or protection of our Great Lakes from a variety of threats,” said Michigan LCV Deputy Director Kerry Duggan . “In short, those whom we elect to office need to know that their votes speak louder than their words and consistency matters.”

The Michigan League of Conservation Voters is a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to passing strong environmental laws, electing environmental champions and holding lawmakers accountable for their actions.

Feb 22, 2010

The 2009 National Environmental Scorecard released today


Seven members of the Michigan Congressional delegation have perfect environmental voting record, based on the 2009 National Environmental Scorecard released today by the Michigan League of Conservation Voters (LCV) and the national League of Conservations Voters.

For the past 30 years, the National Environmental Scorecard issued by LCV has been the nationally accepted yardstick used to rate members of Congress on environmental, public health and energy issues, and this is the first scorecard for the 111th Congress

“We applaud those members of the Michigan delegation who fought in 2009 to bring clean energy jobs to the state and reduce our national dependence on foreign oil, such as Senators Levin and Stabenow and Representatives Kildee, Schauer, Peters, (Levin) and Kilpatrick” said Michigan LCV’s Executive Director Lisa Wozniak, in a press release. “The 2009 Scorecard clearly exposes some members of our delegation as putting corporate polluters and other special interests ahead of a cleaner, more secure energy future for Michigan.”

The 2009 Scorecard includes 11 Senate and 13 House votes dominated by clean energy and climate but also encompassing other environmental issues such as public lands, water and wildlife conservation. In Michigan, five House members and both senators earned a perfect 100 percent score in 2009, while one House member, Congressman Pete Hoekstra, received an abysmal 7 percent. The average House score in 2009 for Michigan was 67 percent and the average Senate score was 100 percent.

Representatives Stupak, Kildee, Schauer, Peters, Levin, Kilpatrick, Conyers and Dingell voted for the landmark American Clean Energy and Security Act, which would help bring more than 53,000 clean energy jobs to Michigan.

Senate:
Carl Levin (D-MI) 100%
Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) 100%

House:
Bart Stupak (D-01) 93%
Pete Hoekstra (R-02) 7%
Vern Ehlers (R-03) 50%
Dave Camp (R-04) 21%
Dale E. Kildee (D-05) 100%
Fred Upton (R-06) 36%
Mark Schauer (D-07) 100%
Mike Rogers (R-08) 21%
Gary Peters (D-09) 100%
Candice Miller (R-10) 50%
Thaddeus McCotter (R-11) 36%
Sandy Levin (D-12) 100%
Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (D-13) 100%
John Conyers, Jr. (D-14) 93%
John D. Dingell (D-15) 93%

Michigan League of Conservation Voters is a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to passing strong environmental laws, electing environmental champions, and holding lawmakers accountable for their actions

Apr 18, 2008

Author says U.S. is a dumping ground for unsafe products


LANSING -- The United States is the dumping ground for unsafe products and products manufactured with harmful chemicals, according to internationally acclaimed journalist and author Mark Schapiro.

Schapiro is the editorial director of the Center for Investigative Reporting, and spent more than two years writing his book, Exposed: The Toxic Chemistry of Everyday Products and What's at Stake for American Power. He was the featured speaker at the Ecology Center's annual membership meeting last week, as well as making a stop in Lansing to talk to lawmakers.

“The U.S. is becoming the recipient of products that are banned in other parts of the world,” he said. “That will only increase in the future. I never thought that would happen here.”

That is already happening with toys made in China, and the U.S. market has created a situation where products – such as cosmetics, personal care products and cleaning products -- with less stringent controls and regulation are made for the U.S. market and safer products go to places like the European Union. Schapiro’s book looks at the economic effect the EU’s decision to implement stricter controls is having on the U.S. In 2005 the EU passed the U.S. as the world’s largest consumer market, and it is also requiring the manufacturers of consumer products to eliminate potentially harmful chemicals.

“The European Union has taken a proactive approach to getting these harmful chemicals out of products,” Schapiro said. “The EU takes an approach that it wants to prevent hazards before it causes harm.”

In the EU market, it’s up to the manufacturers to prove the chemicals in their products are safe, but in the U.S. it’s the exact opposite. In other words, the burden of proof in the U.S. is on the consumer to prove something is unsafe. To prevent or remove a chemical from the market, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration or individuals in court must demonstrate that the chemical presents severe risk to humans. Schapiro also said the problem is compounded in the U.S. because the proof must be overwhelming and beyond a shadow of a doubt, and a perfect example of the absence of 100 percent proof is the debate over global warming.

“In science, it’s very hard to come up with absolutes,” he said. “That often leaves us in a state of paralysis.”

Schapiro said that while hundreds of potentially harmful chemicals are being phased out with safer alternatives and other chemicals are being vetted to see if they are safe in the EU, there has not been a chemical removed from the U.S. marketplace in 18 years. He also said more than 6,000 chemicals were grandfathered in when the law governing chemicals in consumer products went into effect in 1981, and those chemicals have not been completely vetted for safety.

“The fact is 90 percent of the chemicals in the market here have never been vetted,” he said. “The EU is requiring data on every chemical.”

Schapiro said he realizes chemicals are necessary, but he said there are safe alternatives that our chemists and engineers should be looking into. The fear with more regulation in the U.S. is that jobs will be lost and the cost of making the products will increase. Schapiro said that’s true in the short run, but profits are up in the EU. Schapiro said that’s because when given a choice between a similarly priced product made in the U.S. and one made in the EU, consumerswill choose an EU product over a U.S.-made product because they know the EU product is safer.

“We live in a world where chemicals do a lot for us in everyday life; there’s no question,” Schapiro said. “I spent a lot of time looking at the economic effects of the EU effort.

“A year after they made the decision to implement the regulations, they had their biggest profit ever in cosmetics,” he said. “There is no question that there is an initial cost to change, but there is a savings in the long run.”

The EU standard has had a positive effect because many companies are quietly – very quietly – abandoning the practice of making a separate version of a product for the EU market and another for the U.S. market, and they are now just making the safer and higher standard product for both markets.

To be sure, some companies are fighting the change tooth and nail. “We have seen a major increase in the lobbying effort by U.S. companies,” Schapiro said. “You have seen K-Street in Washington move wholesale to Brussels because that’s where the changes are taking place.”

But because of the higher EU standards many U.S. companies, such as Dow Chemical in Michigan, are scrambling to release data on the chemicals they use in their products, and Schapiro said that would benefit U.S. consumers.

“You have a major company right here in Michigan assembling a whole array of toxic data on chemicals they never had to before,” he said. “For the first time Americans are going to have a real choice on the products they use.”

“The bottom line is that the rest of the world is finding alternatives to these toxic chemicals,” Schapiro said.

Feb 1, 2008

Global warming debate at MSU heats up climate change question


Despite the world’s scientific community agreeing that climate change and global warming are occurring, there are still people who claim climate change is not happening. That will be the subject of a debate set for Wednesday, Feb. 6.

Students for a Free Economy will host the debate set for 7 p.m. Feb. 6 in Room 105 of South Kedzie Hall at Michigan State University. The event is free and open to the public.

The featured speakers are Christopher Horner, a senior fellow at the conservative think tank Competitive Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C. and attorney who has represented members of Congress on environmental issues before the U.S. Supreme Court. Horner is a frequent guest on national conservative talk shows speaking about global warming, and he is also the author of the book, “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism.”

On the other side is Peter Sinclair, creative director of Greenman Studio, a multimedia production company in Midland and presenter for former Vice-President Al Gore's Climate Project. The former Vice-President personally trained some 1,000 presenters in 2006 in Nashville who traveled across the country with copies of his 330-slide climate slide show customized to the state the presentation is held in based on his Academy Award wining film "Inconvenient Truth." The unpaid volunteers set up projectors in living rooms, church sanctuaries and VFW halls to show the presentation.

The event will begin with the two speakers' opening statements, followed by questions from the audience, and then the two speakers will give closing remarks.

Students for a Free Economy is a “nonpartisan educational organization dedicated to promoting the benefits of free markets, civil society and individual liberty” sponsored by the conservative Michigan think tank, The Mackinac Center for Public Policy, also located in Midland.

Oct 9, 2007

Labor goes green with BlueGreen Alliance


Labor union leaders and environmentalists have traditionally been on opposite ends of issues with environmentalists fighting for stringent pollution controls and regulations and unions taking the opposite position that those measures kill jobs. However, that is changing with the formation of the BlueGreen Alliance last summer.

Last June the 850,000-strong United Steelworkers (USW) and the Sierra Club, the nation’s largest grassroots environmental organization with 750,000 members, formed the strategic alliance to pursue a joint public policy agenda that includes four policy areas of global warming, clean energy, fair trade and reducing toxins in the environment. The effort began in Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Ohio and Washington with a planned expansion to 10 other states. Since May of this year Sue Browne has been the BlueGreen Alliance organizer here in Michigan, but she has been a member of the USW for 19 years.

“It’s a new alliance, but our concern over environmental issues have gone back 30 years,” she said.

The USW and the Sierra Club have worked together in the past on such issues as clean air, free trade and corporate responsibility. Anne Woiwode, the director of the Mackinac Chapter of the Sierra Club that covers all of Michigan, said the alliance is a concept that will pay dividends for both groups.

“I think it’s an excellent idea,” she said. “We are often put in a position where we are defined by our differences not our common goals.”

Dwindling natural resources coupled with the challenge of the global economy and the sticky issue of how to provide good jobs and a clean environment helped drive the decision for the alliance. Organizers believe good jobs and a clean environment have to go together. There is a push in the state to make Michigan a leader in clean, renewable energy, and the belief is it will grow jobs. One way to do that is with a Renewable Portfolio Standard that mandates a certain percentage of a power company's supply to consumers be generated from renewable fuel sources, and that is a goal of the alliance.

“One thing the BlueGreen Alliance has done is point out what we have in common,” Woiwode said. “One of those things is renewable energy, like wind and solar.”

Despite the good intentions of the alliance, there are a few issues and projects on the horizon that have the potential to derail the new alliance.

One issue is the fight over granting a mining permit for Kennecott Eagle Minerals Company to mine copper and nickel in the Upper Peninsula’s Marquette County. At recent public hearings held across the state last month union members spoke in support of the mine for the estimated 420 jobs it will bring, but environmentalist spoke against it claiming it will the drain the aquifer, destroy wetlands, destroy wildlife habitat, destroy fisheries, pollute the air and pollute the water.

“I think no matter who you are you don’t want mining to pollute the water and land,” Woiwode said. “It’s more of a question of how we do it, and we should be smart about it.”

Another potential wedge is the planned $1 billon expansion of the Marathon Petroleum Co.'s refinery in southwest Detroit that is expected to add 1,000 jobs with 800 temporary construction jobs, but it may also add more pollution to the area.

“I think there are always obstacles to overcome,” Browne said. “We have to look at the outcome.
“We have to get both sides together at the table to work out these issues,” she said.