Redwood Reader

Arcata has started looking into carbon credits as part of their Community Forest options. John Driscoll does a fine job of explaining the current proposal and the risks city planners face in the uncertainties of an emerging market. The fact that PG&E is interested in potentially buying carbon credits is helpful as well, and the City has been asked to look into it for other landowners, exactly as we had hoped would happen on a larger scale.
Once again, the main problem is that we do not have a measurable way of knowing the amount of carbon sequestered in the ground by fungi in their relationship with the trees. Another problem is the overwhelming temptation to evaluate the timber without subtracting the biological assets that come from growing big trees, from habitat to water to weather modification and recreational opportunities. Several recent studies have shown greater benefit from forest assets than is recoverable from timber.
We believe Arcata finds itself in the same situation as the European markets after Kyoto in that, as Bush said, the science on carbon sequestering is incomplete, and we have pointed out why. We have also suggested HSU take a leading role in this as they are well equipped to take advantage of the natural resource investigations needed for marketable solutions. We applaud the City for taking a look into this as a landowner and possibly helping other landowners find a way to grow large trees that are too valuable to cut. We also point out that much air pollution comes from foreign countries and that air filtration and cleansing are not just a local problem, but forest management is a local solution to a growing global problem. Community Carbon, Times Standard, May 30 2006, John Driscoll.
http://www.times-standard.com/fastsearchresults/ci_3879903
In two cases from opposite sides of the country, EPA is backing off its mandates to protect clean water in settlements with large corporate players. The first case involves a Canadian mining and smelting operation polluting the Colombia River on the Canadian side but flowing into the U.S. The ruling asserts EPA will allow polluters to do their own studies and cleanups of polluted waters, outside of normal regulation of states and tribes. While the principals are happy with their solution, EPA has backtracked on its responsibility to protect natural resources and prevent the spread of pollution through the established procedure. The company, Teck Cominco Ltd, will pay an initial 20 million dollars to study heavy metal pollution in the Colombia. The study is expected to cost 30 million eventually. No estimate on the cost of cleanup is yet proposed. The company originally claimed EPA had no jurisdiction over foreign activities, but lost in a court ruling brought by the State of Washington and the Confederated Colville tribes of Eastern Washington. The judge in that suit said EPA was mandated to deal with pollution in the U.S. regardless of its source. The federal government claims to be circumventing a lengthy litigation in making the deal with the company, but the plaintiffs say the deal undermines federal law and state and tribal concerns.
Zinc Firm to Pay for Colombia River Studies, John Heilprin, AP 6/02/06. http://www.latimes.com/news/science/wire/sns-ap-epa-columbia-zinc,1,4110751.story?coll=sns-ap-science-headlines The second case involves operators in Florida who are contaminating Lake Okeechobee with waste water from their operations. Despite warnings to pregnant women not to even breathe water vapor while showering, EPA will not require pollution discharge permits simply to transfer water regardless of pollution. The Florida Wildlife Federation, Friends of the Everglades and the Miccosukee Tribe have taken the case to court suing to prevent further damage to the lake. Local water district officials claim they are managing the water in a manner commonly used and are reducing pollution through filtration marshes, but that it needs to be able to pump polluted water into the lake to prevent catastrophic flooding. Thursday EPA said such transfers were common in irrigation, flood control, hydroelectric power and environmental restoration activities. There is a 45 day public comment period on the plan. Interestingly, no address was given for the comments in the article. EPA Rule Would Go With Polluted Flow
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/environment/la-na-lake2jun02,1,5457105.story?coll=la-news-environment, credited to David Fleshler, South Florida Sun-Sentinel, June 2, 2006.