Thursday, 02 Nov 2006

And I'll Blow Your Case Down

U.S. Supreme Court hears opening arguments in Clean Air Act case

Fans of respiration held their collective breath yesterday as the Supreme Court began hearing a case about Clean Air Act violations. The case addresses claims by Duke Energy and other companies that the U.S. EPA got lawsuit-happy in the Clinton era, trying to force poor, helpless utilities to add pollution controls when they upgraded their facilities -- and, Duke says, reinterpreting air-quality rules along the way. The EPA and environmental groups sigh that the guidelines have long been clear and that utilities should suck it up. In an odd twist, the feds -- who tried to convince the court not to take up the case -- find themselves on the same side as environmentalists (and are no doubt trying to make sure none of the cool kids see them sitting together). For their part, the Supremes huffed and puffed their way through the first day. "What I'm concerned about," said Justice Antonin Scalia, "is that companies can get whipsawed." And that's a bad thing?


For the last decade, a squadron of people representing usually vastly different interests worked to ensure protection for British Columbia's Great Bear Rainforest. In February, their dream became a reality, in the form of a groundbreaking agreement between First Nations, towns, businesses, and environmental groups. How are the parties working together now? And will the world's hunger for oil screw everything up? Gregory Dicum reports.

Huanhe or Another

China adds two more industrial accidents to the ledger

If it's Thursday, it must be time for a story about an industrial accident in China. And while we're at it, why not go for two? An ammonia leak at a fertilizer factory south of Beijing yesterday killed one worker, sickened six residents, and caused the evacuation of 20,000 people from their homes. Firefighters sprayed the area to fight the fumes, a creative solution that sent contaminated water flowing into the nearby Huanhe River. Dang. Perhaps figuring that one headline is better than two (get it? two heads are better than -- eh, never mind), Chinese authorities chose the same day to belatedly reveal that a truck overturned last week and spilled 33 tons of creosote into a river in Shaanxi province, contaminating a reservoir that supplies water for 28,000 people in two towns. Clean water was promptly hauled in for the bewildered residents, who were allowed to drink it only after they helped upright the errant truck. No, we kid. Unless maybe that's next week's announcement.


Do conservationists need to understand evolution? If you don't believe in evolution, is there a place for you in the environmental movement? If you don't believe in God, can you have a truly compelling motive for preserving species? Renowned science writer David Quammen, author of the new book The Reluctant Mr. Darwin, tackles these knotty questions and many more in an interview by Grist's David Roberts.

Cheaper By the Ruzzin

Voters in Boulder, Colo., will vote on carbon tax next week

Next week, Boulder, Colo., will seek to become the first U.S. city to impose a carbon tax on homes and businesses. If the progressive hotspot's voters say yes, the per-kilowatt tax will raise the average home energy bill by less than $2 a month (businesses' fees will vary, depending on energy usage). Proceeds will go toward energy audits and energy-efficiency awareness campaigns. "It's admittedly not as sexy as going out there and trying to buy a wind farm," Mayor Mark Ruzzin says, "but for cost effectiveness, we'll get much bigger bang for our buck." Saucy! Residents will save money in the short term -- approval would go hand-in-hand with the axing of a trash-collection tax -- and the longer term, as increased energy efficiency should reduce utility bills. The proposal is part of the city's adoption of Kyoto Protocol goals; Boulder aims to lower its greenhouse-gas emissions 24 percent by 2012 -- a goal, says Ruzzin, that's "significant" but "doable." Wow, so that's what optimism sounds like.