Pennsylvania

DSM endorses Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative

/ Nathaniel / Leave a comment

At its November meeting, the Don’t Spray Me! board voted to sign on to support the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a multistate compact designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. RGGI not only helps reduce PA’s inordinate emissions (4th highest state in the country) but also has increased jobs in the renewable energy sector and reduced energy costs.

In June, Gov. Tom Wolf issued an executive order (download here), directing the Dept. of Environmental Protection to propose rules for bringing our state into compliance with RGGI; but interests in the PA General Assembly are trying to block this important effort.

See also “It’s not too late: RGGI can help Pa. combat climate change,” guest column by State Sen. Katie Muth and Amanda Lapham of PennEnvironment, Daily Local News, Nov 27, 2020.

Climate change is very relevant to DSM’s concerns, because air pollution, including the fossil fuel emissions that exacerbate climate change, have been shown to weaken human respiratory systems and render people (including children) more susceptible to serious complications and death from diseases like Covid-19. See more here.

If you would like to show your support as a concerned citizen, please fill out the petition at bit.ly/RGGIforPA. Here is the text of the petition.

Proposed Rulemaking: CO2 Budget Trading Program (#7-559)

To the Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board:

We, the undersigned individuals and organizations, are submitting our public comment in support of Pennsylvania’s establishing a carbon dioxide budget trading program and joining the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), one of the nation’s most successful state-level programs for fighting climate change.

With each day that passes, climate change becomes a more urgent threat to our Commonwealth. Local impacts of the climate crisis in Pennsylvania include heat waves, worsening air quality that harms public health, more insect-borne diseases, more intense storms and flash flooding, and agricultural losses.

As the fourth largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the nation, Pennsylvania has a responsibility to reduce our emissions, and joining RGGI will put us on the right path. Over the past twelve years, this bipartisan program has had remarkable success for the participating Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states.

Since 2008:

  • CO2 emissions in from RGGI states have fallen by 47%, outpacing the rest of the country by 90%;
  • Reductions in other air pollutants, including SO2 and NOx, that can lead to premature deaths, heart attacks, and respiratory illnesses have resulted in an additional $5.7 billion in health and productivity benefits;
  • Electricity prices in RGGI states have fallen by 5.7%, while prices have increased in the rest of the country by 8.6%;
  • The combined economies of the RGGI states have grown by 47%, during the first ten years of the program, outpacing growth in the rest of the country by 31%.

If Pennsylvania joins the program, it could reduce its carbon emissions by 188 million tons over its first decade in the program — that’s equivalent to taking 35 million cars off the road. Moreover, joining RGGI will not only cut carbon pollution, but also reduce nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide pollution, yielding significant health benefits for Pennsylvanians. DEP projects that by joining RGGI, Pennsylvania will avoid hundreds of premature deaths and 30,000 hospital visits for respiratory illness such as asthma by 2030.

Critically, participation in RGGI will enable Pennsylvania to create jobs while reducing our greenhouse gases. DEP estimates that Pennsylvania would see a net increase of over 27,000 jobs by participating in the program.

To avoid the worst impacts of climate change, we must act now to transition away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy. RGGI is one of the best tools we have to do so and would create a solid foundation for other important policy steps, like expanding goals for renewable energy. For the sake of our climate, our environment, and our health, we urge Pennsylvania’s leaders to join RGGI without delay.

Graphic from PA DEP:

Advertisement

Tell Gov. Wolf to ban dicamba

/ Nathaniel / Leave a comment

Sign the petition: Ban Dicamba Now

Imagine Monsanto’s “perfect” herbicide: It kills everything, except the one soybean plant that farmers want.

The problem is that this herbicide doesn’t stay where it’s sprayed. It drifts — staying up in the air 72 hours later — and damages or destroys every plant it in its path, from trees and wildflowers to neighboring farms. 1

It’s dicamba, which is made by Monsanto and other companies. And thanks to its pairing with this new genetically-modified soybean, its use is skyrocketing.

Arkansas has already banned this pesticide. We can do the same in Pennsylvania and in other states across the country. Add your name to our petition today: T ell Gov. Tom Wolf it’s time to ban dicamba.

Nationwide, hundreds of reports have come in about dicamba drift harming neighbors’ trees and farms. 2 And that’s leading to a showdown in state governments, with pesticide manufacturers arguing against limits, and farmers and citizen advocates arguing for them . 3 That’s why it’s crucial that you tell Gov. Tom Wolf how you feel.

If enough states enact bans on dicamba, and enough people speak up about the need for caution, the EPA might consider doing the right thing nationwide. But we can’t do this without you — add your name to call on Gov. Tom Wolf to ban dicamba in Pennsylvania today.

Why should we be concerned about dicamba use? The EPA’s human health assessment shows that 1- and 2-year-old infants are the group most heavily exposed to dicamba on their food. 4

At the very least, the EPA should exercise caution before allowing toxic pesticides on the market.

Instead, the agency allowed a new version of dicamba to go to market without being tested by independent researchers , and despite its own research that this drifting pesticide would pose a danger to crops and human health when sprayed widely. 5

Nathaniel, it’s simple: When it comes to pesticides, we should exercise caution. We shouldn’t allow the use of potentially toxic pesticides unless and until they are proven safe.

Because dicamba can travel, we have no assurance that it isn’t also spreading to homes, schools and playgrounds.

Monsanto should have known this product could drift. The EPA fast-tracked a new version without completely testing its drift potential. But we have a chance to do the right thing here in Pennsylvania. Add your name today.

Thank you,

Adam Garber
PennPIRG

1. Caitlin Dewey, ” This Miracle Weed Killer Was Supposed to Save Farms. Instead, It’s Devastating Them ,” The Washington Post, August 29, 2017.
2. American Association of Pesticide Control Officials, ” Dicamba ,” September 6, 2018.
3. Daniel Charles, ” A Drifting Weedkiller Puts Prized Trees At Risk ,” KCUR, September 27, 2018
4. Olga Naldenko, ” EPA Chief Backs Another Pesticide Harmful To Kids ,” Environmental Working Group, October 30, 2017.
5. Olga Naldenko, ” EPA Chief Backs Another Pesticide Harmful To Kids ,” Environmental Working Group, October 30, 2017.

What is supposed to happen? Has it been happening?

/ Nathaniel / Leave a comment

Some questions derived from CDC mosquito control guidelines:

1. Where has the County engaged in source reduction, as recommended?

The only source reduction we know of has been undertaken by West Chester Borough to prevent water from standing in storm drains. Does anyone know of other examples?

2. Where has the County engaged in larval mosquito control, as recommended?

They have told us that they do so, but so far have said they do not have records for 2015-17 and do not have time to tell us where for 2018; our Right to Know request on this with the PA Department of Environmental Protection is pending.

3. Has the County maintained a database of aquatic habitats to identify the sources of vector mosquitoes and a record of larval control measures applied to each (last paragraph below)?

From point 2 above, it would seem doubtful; but the public has a right to know, and we will.

Source material: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Vector-Borne Diseases, “West Nile Virus in the United States: Guidelines for Surveillance, Prevention, and Control,” 2016, p. 33. (See the points we have put in boldface below. Download the full publication here).

Integrated Vector Management

Mosquito abatement programs successfully employ integrated pest management (IPM) principles to reduce mosquito abundance, providing important community services to protect quality of life and public health (Rose 2001). Prevention and control of WNV and other zoonotic arboviral diseases is accomplished most effectively through a comprehensive, integrated vector management (IVM) program applying the principles of IPM. IVM is based on an understanding of the underlying biology of the arbovirus transmission system, and utilizes regular monitoring of vector mosquito populations and WNV activity levels to determine if, when, and where interventions are needed to keep mosquito numbers below levels which produce risk of human disease, and to respond appropriately to reduce risk when it exceeds acceptable levels.

Operationally, IVM is anchored by a monitoring program providing data that describe:
• Conditions and habitats that produce vector mosquitoes.
• Abundance of those mosquitoes over the course of a season.
• WNV transmission activity levels expressed as WNV infection rate in mosquito vectors.
• Parameters that influence local mosquito populations and WNV transmission.

These data inform decisions about implementing mosquito control activities appropriate to the situation, such as:
• Source reduction through habitat modification.
• Larval mosquito control using the appropriate methods for the habitat.
• Adult mosquito control using pesticides applied from trucks or aircraft when established thresholds have been exceeded.
• Community education efforts related to WNV risk levels and intervention activities.

Monitoring also provides quality control for the program, allowing evaluation of:
• Effectiveness of larval control efforts.
• Effectiveness of adult control efforts.
• Causes of control failures (e.g., undetected larval sources, pesticide resistance, equipment failure)….

and p. 34:

Larval Mosquito Surveillance

“Larval surveillance involves identifying and sampling a wide range of aquatic habitats to identify the sources of vector mosquitoes, maintaining a database of these locations, and a record of larval control measures applied to each. This requires trained inspectors to identify larval production sites, collect larval specimens on a regular basis from known larval habitats, and to perform systematic surveillance for new sources. This information is used to determine where and when source reduction or larval control efforts should be implemented….