Wednesday, 26 Mar 2003

Urban Bright

In a groundbreaking move, New York state has developed guidelines for ensuring that low-income and minority neighborhoods are not disproportionately subjected to environmental health risks by developers. The environmental-justice guidelines were drafted by the state Department of Environmental Conservation to limit the ability of developers to build unpopular and potentially hazardous projects in communities that lack the necessary resources to oppose them. Under the new policy, a project with potential environmental-justice problems will receive additional scrutiny to determine how it will affect the proposed neighborhood. In addition, existing projects will be examined to determine their impact on local communities.

Lack of Interest

Three months ago, the U.S. Department of Agriculture settled a case against a Texas-based biotechnology company whose genetically modified (GM) feed corn contaminated natural corn and soybeans. The USDA represented the settlement as a sharp crackdown on violators of GM standards -- but in fact, the settlement involved a no-interest $3.5 million government loan, meaning the American people will subsidize the cleanup. The loan will save the company, ProdiGene, Inc., as much as a half-million dollars in interest and other savings. The terms of the settlement were not made public until the Center for Science in the Public Interest sought access to the information. The organization, which backs genetic modification in theory but is critical of the lack of federal oversight, said the secrecy around the settlement amounted to an attempt to hoodwink the public. The center's Gregory Jaffe said, "I think there was a conscious decision to create an illusion that this was a more severe penalty than it really is."

Giving the Devil His DU

As many people wonder about the long-term environmental effects of the war in Iraq, the U.N. has issued a report documenting the ongoing pollution problems posed by depleted uranium (DU) ammunition used by NATO forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina in the mid-1990s. The report, published by the U.N. Environment Programme, found DU contamination in groundwater and drinking water; in some locations, the air was also contaminated, suggesting that wind or human activity can disturb DU dust long after weapons are fired. DU is a heavy metal used primarily for penetrating tanks and other armored targets. It is suspected of causing cancer and other health problems. A least 300 metric tons of it were fired during the 1991 Gulf War, and it has already been used in the current campaign in Iraq.

Bad Medicine

South Africa's indigenous forests cover less than one-half of 1 percent of the country -- and the wooded land that remains is severely threatened by people who illegally gather medicinal plants to turn a profit. Michael Peter, director of the nation's Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, said the problem isn't traditional native herbalists but rather commercial gatherers, who sell their harvest for profit, do not respect time-honored conservation practices, and have "no traditional taboos or methodology." Although the forests are also threatened by road-building, illegal logging for furniture manufacture, and unsustainable firewood gathering, "the medicinal plant trade is the single largest cause of indigenous forest degradation in South Africa," said Peter.

Polluters Still Pay (at Least, for Senators)

The U.S. Senate yesterday voted down an amendment that would have helped fund the cleanup of Superfund sites by restoring a tax on polluting industries. The Democratic move to reinstate the tax was foiled by Republican senators with a 56-43 vote, with Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee being the only GOP lawmaker to defect from the party line. Since the tax expired in 1995, the Superfund has dwindled from $3.6 billion to an expected $28 million by the end of this year. Passed in 1980, the Superfund law requires polluters to pay for the messes they make, but that principle has been on shaky ground since the failure to maintain the tax. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J) said the "no" vote sent a strong message that Republicans "stand with the corporate polluters and not with American families."